[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

The BurmaNet News: December 22, 199



Subject: The BurmaNet News: December 22, 1998

------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------
 "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
----------------------------------------------------------

The BurmaNet News: December 22, 1998
Issue #1163

Noted in Passing: "Giving a banana to the monkey and then asking it to
dance is not the way. We are not monkeys." - SPDC Foreign Minister Win Aung
(see FEER: YANGON TO UN: THANKS, BUT ...)

HEADLINES:
==========
FEER: YANGON TO UN: THANKS, BUT ...
AWSJ: A TIME FOR COMPROMISE IN MYANMAR 
THE NATION: BURMA ASKED NOT TO TOUCH DISSIDENTS 
BKK POST: CONFRONTATION REMAINS IN DISPUTED ZONE 
SCMP: THAIS BUY INTO SHAN REBEL POWER PLAY 
THE NATION: ASEAN-EU COMMITTEE WILL MEET 
MIZZIMA: ACTIVISTS DISCUSS THE CONSTITUTION OF FUTURE
****************************************************************

FAR EASTERN ECONOMIC REVIEW: YANGON TO UN: THANKS, BUT ...
25 December,1998 

"We welcome any assistance from anywhere that is offered with goodwill and
sincerity. And we will consider it when it comes. But for us, giving a
banana to the monkey and then asking it to dance is not the way. We are not
monkeys."

That's Myanmar's new foreign minister Win Aung talking to Asiaweek's Roger
Mitton at last week's Asean conference in Hanoi (see The Nation, page 28).
Both Win Aung and economic czar Gen David Abel heavily discounted -- but
did not completely write off -- a possible deal with the World Bank,
working with the United Nations, to offer Myanmar $1 billion in return for
a promise to soften its stance toward the country's main political party,
the National League for Democracy, led by Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.
Said Abel: "There is some substance to the report, but nothing concrete has
yet been offered in financial terms." Both denied that any figure had been
raised -- and, said Abel, even if it had, it would need to be a lot bigger
than $1 billion and come without any political conditions. Abel reckons the
country needs more than $3 billion, but even so, "we cannot trade off our
country's sovereignty for $1 billion or $10 billion or $100 billion." And
if you think that economic hard times might force them to the table, think
again. "We are not in difficult times," insists Abel. "We might not have
the good things in life, but we are better off than we were 10 years ago
and we can still continue." Abel conceded that he had met with the U.N's
special envoy Alvaro de Soto, who recently visited Yangon. "De Soto told me
that perhaps the World Bank would like to come back. I said, Why not? We
are open to talk."

Abel revealed that before he conferred with de Soto, "I had met two senior
economists from the World Bank and we had talked about a resumption of the
World Bank's programs in Myanmar."

The duo had said they would need to go back to their principals and then
respond to Abel. So far, nothing.  

****************************************************************

ASIAN WALL STREET JOURNAL: A TIME FOR COMPROMISE IN MYANMAR
19-20 December, 1998 by Barry Wain 

Yangon - The government has the guns while the opposition occupies the
moral high ground. Each is equally determined to force the other to
surrender. For a decade, the military junta, known these days as the State
Peace and Development Council, has insisted that it alone knows what is
best for Myanmar.  Facing off, Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for
Democracy, after winning more than 80% of the seats in a general election
in 1990, believes it has a mandate to run the country previously known as
Burma.

>From a distance, the confrontation is usually seen as a contest between
brutal, intolerant generals and a serene, almost saintly Ms Aung San Suu
Kyi, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. But, up close, it looks more like an
irrational standoff between rivals too proud and stubborn to give an inch.

While the nation of 47 million, one of the world's poorest, suffers from
bans, boycotts and embargoes, army officers and civilian politicians remain
locked in moral combat. Much to the consternation of the international
community, they won't even talk to each other.

Compromise is long overdue. It is time to end what Georgetown University's
David I Steinberg calls a "zero-sum game that is being played to the
detriment of the society as a whole."

A solution to the extremely complex problem will have to be fashioned
primarily in Myanmar, rather than abroad. But other countries are
inevitably involved, and they could do more to help.

Committed to writing a new constitution through a National Convention, a
process that seems to drag on interminably, the SPDC promises an eventual
return to democratic rule. In the meantime, the military is obsessed with
stability, harassing and jailing opponents and otherwise maintaining an
iron grip to prevent what it sees as a danger of the state disintegrating.

For its part, the NLD has withdrawn from the National Convention, branding
it a sham. In an attempt to pressure the regime into a "dialogue," the
party has widened its objection to all forms of economic and commercial
engagement with Myanmar, even foreign aid for humanitarian purposes.

Japan and the Western World long ago stopped most assistance to the
country, including multilateral financing through institutions such as the
International Monetary Fund. The US banned new investment last year, and
the European Union in October tightened its restrictions.

"Attitudes have hardened on the part of many -- the military, the
opposition and the US," says Mr Steinberg, director of Georgetown's Asian
Studies Program. "Now all seem intransigent."

It is crucial to understand that the impasse has benefited the SPDC at the
expense of the NLD. While both have inflicted damage on the other, the
military has increased its control of the country.

Justifying sanctions, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright says in the
latest edition of Foreign Affairs magazine, "Having driven the economy into
the ground, the regime desperately needs foreign investment, loans and aid."

The economy is needed in a parlous condition, but it is in better shape
than when the military shot thousands of democracy demonstrators and seized
power in 1988. Market reforms, though modest when measured against the
task, have delivered some goods.

As for relying on outside help, it is instructive to remember that
military-led Myanmar closed itself off completely for a couple of decades.
Today, Yangon gets aid and arms from China, and a certain amount of
investment, mainly from other Asian neighbors.

Although the government pays a price in annual criticism by the United
Nations, that is more than offset by admission in the past two years to the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the Asean Regional Forum on
security. In brief, sanctions aren't working.

Realizing that, and concerned that it is losing in a war of attrition, the
NLD changed tactics in May, when it observed the eighth anniversary of its
election victory and assessed progress toward a multi-party democracy. The
struggle had produced not much more than "idealistic platitudes," in the
words of Ma Thanegi, a veteran activist.

A painter and writer who worked as an aide to Ms Aung San Suu Kyi and spent
three years in jail, Ms Ma Thanegi is among those fading away in
disillusionment, ill health or repression. "Let's drop the platitudes and
find realistic ways to help the people of Burma, not condemn them to
poverty in an senseless pursuit of Utopia," she wrote.

Trying to avoid being further marginalized and hoping to bring things to a
climax, Ms Aung San Suu Kyi has set out on several occasions to meet her
supporters in the countryside, knowing she would be stopped by the army.
The NLD has also set up a "committee to represent the parliament" elected
in 1990, which is reviewing and amending existing legislation.

Apart from detaining hundreds of NLD members until they pledge not to
participate, the government has organized mass rallies to denounce the NLD
action. Far from agreeing to a dialogue with Ms Aung San Suu Kyi, the SPDC
has vilified her in personal terms and indicated that the party might be
outlawed.

Why not talk to her? Officials give a legalistic explanation, that she
isn't registered as secretary general of the NLD. But it is obvious that a
yawning chasm of dislike and distrust separates senior military officers
and Suu Kyi, the daughter of national hero and army founder Aung San.

Ms Aung San Suu Kyi is foreign-educated and married to a British academic.

"She doesn't understand the mentality of the Myanmar people," says Lt-Col
Hla Min, a government spokesman. "She comes in with the American way,
arm-twisting and trying to make the other side talk."

A plausible theory is that the government won't have anything to do with Ms
Aung San Suu Kyi while aging former head of state Gen Ne Win is still
alive. She once described him as "the man my father told his comrades not
to trust."

"They hate her with a passion," says one Western ambassador. Adds another
ambassador, "She is younger, smarter and better educated. There is a sense
that she isn't playing the game in Burmese cultural terms."

The gap must be bridged. Although the SPDC is willing to talk to other NLD
leaders, the party won't agree unless Ms Aung San Suu Kyi is included.

One way forward, to build trust and confidence, is for the NLD to start the
discussions without her, making it clear that she will join at a later
stage. Instead of trying to split the NLD leadership, the military should
swallow its pride and accept the reality of her status and support.

A way also has to be found for the NLD to rejoin the National Convention,
which otherwise lacks credibility. Moreover, proposed constitutional
provisions effectively barring Ms Aung San Suu Kyi from office probably
will need to be dropped, perhaps in the post-Gen Ne Win era.

Other governments should be encouraging reconciliation in Myanmar, not
keeping alive the fiction that the NLD is about to take over.

****************************************************************

THE NATION: BURMA ASKED NOT TO TOUCH DISSIDENTS
22 December, 1998 

THE Foreign Ministry asked Burma on Monday not to go ahead with its
dry-season suppression of dissidents, ministry spokesman Kobsak Chutikul
said on Monday.

Kobsak said the suppression was Burma's internal affair and that Thailand
would never allow any group to use its soil as a base to attack others.

He said he based his information on an intelligence report that the Burmese
government had reinforced its forces in preparation for an assault on
Burmese dissidents during this dry season and that minority groups which
had fought for years for independence had formed an alliance, comprising
about 18,000 members, to fight against the Burmese government.

"This information makes us believe that there will be an intensification of
Burma's suppression on the dissidents. We call on Rangoon to stop the
suppression [which could lead to Burmese troops] crossing the border on to
Thai soil, with detriment to our sovereignty and the local people," Kobsak
stated.

He reaffirmed the Thai stance that no foreign armed force would be allowed
to enter Thai territory.

Referring to the possible influx of Burmese on to Thai soil following the
suppression, Kobsak said Thailand would provide temporary shelters for them
on a humanitarian basis.

Deputy Permanent Secretary for foreign affairs Saowanit Kongsiri has asked
the Burmese ambassador to convey Thailand's concern about reports that the
Burmese government is concentrating troops near the border in a move
against the dissidents. 

****************************************************************

THE BANGKOK POST: CONFRONTATION REMAINS IN WESTERN DISPUTED ZONE
20 December,1998 by Wassana Nanuam 

Three years have passed since the beginning of the stand-off between Thai
and Burmese troops in a 32-square-kilometre disputed area on Doi Lang in
Mae Ai district of Chiang Mai. And there is no sign that the confrontation
is coming to an end, as Bangkok and Rangoon have not yet entered
demarcation talks.

On the peak of Doi Kiew Hung, some 775 Thai soldiers from an army battalion
have been posted in six areas to ensure security in the disputed zone on
the Thai side.

At each of these six points, a large Thai flag is erected to declare the
sovereignty of Thailand over the land. Several small cottages are there for
Thai troops to use as their living quarters and strongholds to keep a close
watch on Burmese soldiers and to gather military information.

Military operations at Doi Lang cost the army almost ten million baht per
month or some 100 million baht a year, according to an army source.

According to the commander of the 3rd Cavalry Regiment's special task force
Col Akradet Songworawit, all Thai soldiers there must follow orders and
discipline strictly to avoid doing things which may spark hostilities with
Burmese troops, as Doi Lang has become a "sensitive" area.

"We must carry out our military mission. But personally, we must keep our
relationship (with Burmese troops) as Burmese and Thai soldiers are good
friends. The disputed area is only 32 square kilometres. But we cannot give
up as it means our dignity. That's why we are here," he said.

According to him, both sides know each other's moves using binoculars to
see what the other side is doing from their strongholds.

"For this reason, we must be careful and not do anything to provoke the
Burmese troops or cause misunderstandings that we will resort to weapons to
solve the problem. Thai soldiers are forbidden from standing on hills
carrying guns. They must keep watch in bunkers or trenches, or there will
be misunderstanding." Col Akradet added.

A shift of both Thai and Burmese soldiers posted at Doi Lang lasts four
months to allow them to relax, he said.

According to Col Akradet, Thai troops in the disputed area are, in fact,
outnumbered by Burmese soldiers as five Burmese battalions led by Col Seng
Khoo have been posted deep into the border to support one Burmese battalion
at Doi Lang.

However, the two sides are not confined to eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation
all the time. Thai and Burmese soldiers sometimes meet as friends during
sepak takraw matches and dinners while talks by unit commanders are
frequently held.

However, all of their contacts must be with the permission of the
authorities without the use of alcoholic drinks and drugs to prevent
disputes or brawls.

Thai troops have also agreed to buy food supplies and seek medical
treatment for Burmese soldiers if requested.

"Burmese soldiers usually ask us to buy food for them because we can access
markets more easily than they can. It is about humanity. We treat each
other as neighbours," Col Akradet said.

"As soldiers, we have duties to carry out here to protect the sovereignty
and dignity of the country. I insist that the relationship of Thailand and
Burma is good. But we must distinguish between the relations and military
missions and must be careful about everything because both sides have
weapons and are so near that there may be misunderstanding or accidents,"
said Lt-Col Sanchai Jooman, commander of the 138th Cavalry Battalion.

The confrontation between Thai and Burmese troops at Doi Lang began when a
number of Burmese soldiers, who were deployed to take over Doi Huay Ha from
the defeated Mong Tai Army (MTA) late in 1995, allegedly encroached on the
ridge of Doi Huay Ha, or Doi Lang which was claimed by Thailand as its
territory.

After the encroachment, the Thai army set up a special command task force
under the 7th Infantry Regiment on Doi Kiew Hung to guard the disputed area
since January 2, 1996.

Since October 1, 1998, a special task force of the Third Cavalry Regiment
has been in charge there while the 138th Cavalry Battalion has been working
as an operations unit.

According to Col Akradet, the border dispute was caused by the use of two
different maps by Thailand and Burma.

Burma has used a map of 1958 (from the survey of October 19, 1911) which
marks the border along Doi Pha Hom Pok, Soi Maklang, the ridge of Doi Lang,
Doi Lak Teng, Doi Lak Taeng and Doi Laem.

Thailand has used a map of December 1986 which marks the border along Doi
Pha Hom Pok, Doi Maklang, the ridge of Doi Huay Ha, and Doi Laem.

However, the situation is under control due to an agreement between Bangkok
and Rangoon which requires Thai and Burmese troops to work in the disputed
area in peace and try their best to avoid conflicts, prohibits more
military deployments to the area, and authorises only the Thai-Burmese
border demarcation technical committee to seek resolutions, he said.

Col Akradet added that both Thai and Burmese troops who strictly abide by
the pact and have a good relationship are longing for negotiations of Thai
and Burmese authorities for peace so that they can return home to meet
their beloved families.

****************************************************************

SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST: THAIS BUY INTO SHAN REBEL POWER PLAY
21 December, 1998 by William Barnes 

A Thai dam builder has asked tribal Shan rebels in the Golden Triangle war
zone if it can build a hydroelectric barrage across the Salween River.

The Shan States Army has already given the developer, MDX, permission to
survey the area, Shan sources say.

The moves will increase suspicions that one of the reasons Rangoon is so
determined to crush the rebels is to gain a free hand to exploit the area's
natural resources.

The Burmese army has thrown hundreds of troops into the area in an attempt
to knock out a faction of the Shan States Army that has been demanding
autonomy. A third of a million people have been thrown off their land and
hundreds killed.

Both Thailand and enterprises in the Chinese province of Yunnan have
previously shown a keen interest in developing the Shan state's
hydroelectric potential.

Such enthusiasm has alarmed environmentalists, who have pointed out that
the authoritarian Burmese Government is hardly likely to bother itself much
with the impact on the environment.

Thailand signed a memorandum of understanding with Burma in mid-1997 to
take 1,500 megawatts of hydroelectric power by 2010.

Burma's ethnic rebels have a long history of squeezing taxes from Thai
entrepreneurs logging and trading across the border. But although the money
might be tempting, the risk is that the guerillas will find themselves in
the same position as the Mon in Burma's southern panhandle, Tennasarim.

The New Mon State Party agreed -- under pressure -- to allow an
international consortium to build a controversial offshore gas pipeline
across its territory. The deal allowed the Burmese army to flood the area
with troops, effectively killing off lingering Mon resistance.

"The cash might look good, but the cost may be what hard-won liberty you
have left," one Shan exile said.

MDX, Ital-Thai and Japan's Marubeni have teamed up to examine the
hydroelectric potential of Burma.

But the biggest obstacle to the construction of any infrastructure project
in the country is more likely to be the Asian economic crisis -- which has
seen demand for electricity slump -- than any guerilla group.

Meanwhile, the Shan States Army is joining forces with Karenni rebels to
fight an expected Burmese military offensive. The Army, a remnant of the
forces of former opium warlord Khun Sa, said the two groups would appeal to
the Thai army to work with them to stem the drug trade along the
Thai-Burmese border.

Observers said any military alliance would be largely symbolic, given that
the Shan and Karenni people and their armies live and operate in different
provinces.

****************************************************************

THE NATION: ASEAN-EU COMMITTEE WILL MEET NEXT MONTH
22 December, 1998 

ASEAN and the European Union will hold their first meeting from Jan 24 to
27 in Bangkok after over a year of the EU refusing to let Burma participate
in the joint economic cooperation forum.

The Thai Foreign Ministry, as chair of the Asean-EU forum, informed the EU
last week of the meeting dates.

The conference, at the official level of the Asean-EU cooperation
committee, was suspended after Burma was officially accepted as a member of
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in July 1997.

The EU, which strongly condemned the Burmese junta for its human-rights
abuses and refusal to transfer power to the election-winning National
League for Democracy, opposed Burma's membership of Asean.

Asean and the EU agreed late in October on a new meeting arrangement which
would allow the participation of both Burma and Laos, the two new members
of Asean.

The technical meeting, held under the 1980 Asean-EU cooperation agreement,
is a regular platform for the two parties to discuss cooperation programmes
and to review cooperative direction and priority projects.

Although Burma and Laos will attend the January meeting as full members of
Asean, they will not benefit from or be allowed to join in any cooperation
programmes as the European side did not agree to the two countries,
particularly Burma, signing a protocol acceding to the 1980 Asean-EU
agreement.

"The two countries [Burma and Laos] will attend the meeting not as
observers but as a sovereign states and a members of Asean. They will be
allowed to express their views at the meeting," said a Thai Foreign
Ministry official.

Anucha Osathanond, director-general of the Foreign Ministry's Asean Affairs
Department, will chair the meeting. The EU will be represented by the
European Commission, whose delegation will include senior officials from
several EU countries.

Under the new meeting formula, Asean and the EU will put up their logo
flags representing their respective groupings instead of national flags of
all members.

According to the Foreign Ministry official, the first day of the meeting
will be a preparatory meeting. The second day will be split up into four
subcommittee meetings on trade, economic and industrial cooperation,
forestry, and science and technology. The last day will be a wrap-up session.

In the Oct 26 statement, which was issued after an agreement on Burmese
participation, the European Council said that although country had become a
member of Asean, the EU "cannot agree to Burmese accession to the EU-Asean
agreement".

It added that the EU had given due weight to the EU-Asean relationship when
it "decided to accept a Burmese presence, under special conditions to be
agreed upon".

Burma's representation in future Asean-EU meetings and activities will be
discussed and reviewed on a case-by-case basis, the statement said.

****************************************************************

MIZZIMA NEWS GROUP: BURMA PRO-DEMOCRACY ACTIVISTS DISCUSS THE CONSTITUTION
OF FUTURE BURMA
18 December, 1998 

New Delhi

BURMA PRO-DEMOCRACY ACTIVISTS BASED IN INDIA JOIN WITH THEIR COUNTERPARTS
IN THAI-BURMA BORDER IN DRAFTING A CONSTITUTION FOR THEIR COUNTRY. 

A two-day pre-seminar on the constitution for a future Federal Union of
Burma was held in New Delhi on 17th and 18th December. About 130 of Burma's
democracy activists belonging to 17 different groups based in New Delhi and
in the Indo-Burma border areas participated in the seminar. During the
two-day seminar, the activists discussed the constitution drafted and
proposed by National Council of the Union of Burma (NCUB). Burma had two
constitutions (widely known as 1947 Constitution and 1974 Constitution)
after it achieved independence from British in 1948.  Both were abandoned
one after another by the military governments in 1962 and 1988
respectively. The country is currently being ruled by a military regime
without a constitution.

The NCUB, an umbrella organization of anti-government groups, have been
writing a constitution for a future Burma since 1995, taking up the task
from Democratic Alliance of Burma (DAB) which in fact started the job in
1989 in a Thai-Burma border area. Debates and discussions among the exiled
pro-democracy activists on the NCUB's proposed constitution for a future
democratic Burma are on-going. International constitutional experts have
joined with them in four seminars held in Thailand, Germany, Philippines
and the Thai-Burma border in the past.

The fifth international seminar, which will be joined by legal and
constitutional experts from India and abroad for two days, was planned to
hold in New Delhi at Constitution Club on 19 December, 1998. However, the
police commissioner in Delhi informed the organizers on the 20th that the
seminar could not be held in the venue as planned. Apparently, the
Government of India does not want to risk embarrassment with the military
government in Rangoon.  However, the organizers said that they planned to
go ahead with the seminar at a social institute in Delhi.

****************************************************************