The BurmaNet News: July 15, 1999

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

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

The BurmaNet News: July 15, 1999
Issue #1215

Noted in Passing: "The success of a market economy is facilitated by a
supportive economic environment, rather than by the harshness of the
political climate." - Amartya K. Sen, Nobel laureate in economics (see THE
HINDU: DEMOCRACY VITAL FOR ECONOMIC WELL BEING)

HEADLINES:
==========
GROOT-BIJGAARDEN: BURMA'S SUU KYI INTERVIEWED 
THE IRRAWADDY: TRIALS OF AN ICON 
RADIO MYANMAR: KHIN NYUNT URGES TEACHERS TO SAFEGUARD 
REUTERS: MYANMAR - EU BREAK ICE, THAW TO TAKE TIME 
THE HINDU: CHANGING WINDS IN MYANMAR? 
TRAVEL GAZETTE: MYANMAR-TRADE URGES MARKETING PUSH 
THE HINDU: DEMOCRACY VITAL FOR ECONOMIC WELL BEING 
****************************************************************

GROOT-BIJGAARDEN DE STANDARD: BURMA'S DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI INTERVIEWED 
July, 1999 by Marc Helsen 

[Translated from Dutch; excerpted.  Publication is from Belgium.]

Ever since August 1998, when her party issued an ultimatum to the junta
regarding the introduction of democracy, the Burmese Government has been
turning up the pressure. The military are trying to isolate Aung San Suu
Kyi as far as possible, as I recently discovered in the capital, Rangoon.
After I had done all the various things it takes to get my interview with
her, I was arrested by the secret police and stripped of all my equipment:
1,000 photos and the report from a five-week-long reportage in Southeast
Asia. I was then expelled as an enemy of the country. "Stay out of Burma,"
Aung San Suu Kyi tells unsuspecting tourists, "you are merely keeping the
present regime in power."

[ ... ]

[Helsen] Eleven years ago the democratic movement demanded its rights in
Burma. What is the situation today?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] It is very bad. The economic recession has hit the man
on the street very hard. There has been a vast increase in prices, and the
standard of living has dropped. Health care, education, incomes, all this
is going downhill. The Burmese people are worse off than ever before. In
addition, there is no political freedom, nobody has rights. The entire
system of government is corrupt. The officials are corrupt, of course, the
military regime likes to point out all the new hotels that are springing up
everywhere, and the new roads and bridges. But that is of no concern to the
people, who are interested in the costs of day-to-day living, their health,
and feeding their children.

Our party has been suffering from tremendous constraints on our freedom and
from persecutions, especially since last year, when we requested the
government to recognize the parliament. The present cabinet will not
recognize the parliament, which was elected, because that would open the
door to democracy, and that is something the military do not want at all,
even though they trumpet the claim that their reason for seizing power in
Burma to begin with was to bring in democracy.

But despite the fact that many of our people are being harassed, and
persecuted, and the fact that so many NLD members are in jail, I think that
the NLD has remained strong. Precisely because the people are behind us. It
is because we are so badly persecuted that we receive such strong support.

At the same time the people are afraid, albeit perhaps not as scared as
foreigners might think. Not long ago one minister in the present government
told a foreign correspondent that the worst thing I had done was tell
people that they had no need to feel afraid. Something like that merely
leads to unrest, he said. Well now, if that is the way they look at things,
then it merely goes to show that our efforts to inspire the public with
courage are proving successful.

[Helsen] It also means that the powers that be are afraid.

[Aung San Suu Kyi] Absolutely, otherwise they would never bring up the
matter. And the claim that our party is more active today than ever before
is proven by the fact that so many of our people are in jail, being
persecuted, or under pressure to cease being politically active.

[ ... ]

[Helsen] Over the last few years the regime has relocated hundreds of
thousands of people. What is the thinking behind this tactic?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] People are still being forcibly rehoused. Sometimes they
need people to go and build a bridge or a road somewhere. Sometimes they
merely want to clean up a business so that it all looks good to tourists.
Or they transform residential areas into agricultural ones. If they need a
parcel of land, for whatever reason, then the people [who live there]
merely have to get out. Often they are dumped in some field, without any
shelter. They just have to make the best of their situation.

[Helsen] Does forced labor still exist?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] Every day Burmese people are being forced to do odd jobs
for the government. In the foreign districts of Rangoon, each week every
family has to allot one member to work under supervision. Anyone who fails
to cooperate is subjected to heavy fines. Frequently it is the easiest way
for the local authorities to earn some money. According to the government,
this system fits in with Buddhist traditions of voluntary labor to benefit
the community. In the prison camps inmates have to work terribly hard as well.

[Helsen] I do not know of many military regimes that voluntarily cede power
to allow democracy to lay down some roots. Will the Burmese pro-democracy
movement not be forced sooner or later to engage in an armed conflict?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] The NLD will never take up arms. After all, if we take
an overview of world history, we see that many military regimes have called
it a day even if there was not already some form of armed resistance. Of
course, a lot of them stay in power, but one of the trademarks of military
regimes is that they do not last, because members of the military have not
been trained to lead a civilian administration.

[Helsen] So you swear by nonviolent opposition?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] Definitely. Nonviolent opposition has led to results in
a large number of countries. It will also be the case here.

[Helsen] Burma is attracting a great many tourists. Their numbers are
rising each year. What should such people know before they buy their air
ticket?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] What is their main reason for coming here? Are they
coming here to have a good time? To take a vacation? There are plenty of
other destinations where you can take a relaxing break. People should think
about the political consequences of their trip to Burma. Do they wish to
support the military regime? Travel agents and airlines are definitely not
in the hands of ordinary people. The vast majority of income from the
tourist industry goes to the military regime and its supporters. That is
why we do not encourage tourism in Burma -- far from it!

[Helsen] Back to your fellow citizens. How poor is Burma?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] Forty percent of our children are chronically
undernourished. The number of children that never goes to school is rising.
Deaths among children are also on the increase, and more mothers are dying
in childbirth. If you take a look at the statistics, you see that the
country is becoming poorer and poorer. Food prices go up every day. The
people are eating less and less.

[Helsen] What drives you in your struggle for democracy?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] We do not believe that the present regime is benefiting
our country in any way. We will not secure peace, gain security, or make
progress. We are merely going backwards, while the rest of the world is
forging ahead. That is why we need an honest, transparent administration.
That would not provide total security, because there are problems in
democratic countries, but it would be a first step. And we are convinced
that the way to progress points in the direction of democracy. Without
democracy life will not improve for us.

[Helsen] Are you receiving enough support from Asian and European countries?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] We can expect little assistance from Asian countries,
because many of them have a regime that is not much of a stickler itself
where respecting human rights is concerned.

[Helsen] Could foreign investment improve the situation of the common
Burmese citizen?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] Not under the junta. Because we do not know what happens
to the money. The government does not give any explanations and the profits
disappear into the pockets of the members of the government and their
families.

[ ... ]

[Aung San Suu Kyi] Let me put it this way. The majority of Burmese leaders
today are extremely rich. Twelve years ago they were not at all well off.
Let that be an indication.

[Helsen] To a foreigner, the junta looks like a set of criminals who are
solely bent on filling their pockets. How would you describe them?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] The people in power today are a few senior generals who
rule thanks to the Army. Their only interest is in hanging on to power, not
in what they could do for this country. That is why they do not wish to
talk with us -- because they are clinging on to power, and negotiations
could only move in the direction of democracy.  If you investigate the
state the country is currently in, then you cannot conclude anything other
than that the government is giving nothing to the inhabitants of its
country. Power brings luxury. That is one of the reasons why we are opposed
to investments in Burma, which merely help the top members of the military
to make more and more money.

[Helsen] Some monks also told me that they had to look out for informers,
who are infiltrating their monasteries, dressed as monks.

[Aung San Suu Kyi] The military intelligence services are omnipresent. I am
certain that they are also active in the monasteries.

[Helsen] Do you not fear that Burma, with all its ethnic minorities, would
not succumb to anarchy under a democracy?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] No, why should it? Before the military seized power,
Burma had a democracy and was far better off than it is now. Of course,
problems will arise, but I believe that in a free society, where people are
allowed to have opinions and where we can express our differences of
opinion, we are capable of forming a stable union of Burma, without lapsing
into violence. Our differences should be our strength. But I have never
said that it will be easy.

[Helsen] If the military loses its grip, will the people not take their
revenge?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] Some of them, perhaps, but they will not be the
majority, and the NLD will never encourage them to do so.

[Helsen] Everywhere I go I hear that you have a good sense of humor. Do you
also use that as a weapon?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] [laughing] No. At least not that I am aware of. But I
think that humor is necessary to survive in our situation. many of my
colleagues like a good laugh as well.

[Helsen] I come from Belgium. What do you think of when I say "Belgium?"

[Aung San Suu Kyi] [roaring with laughter] Of Asterix and Obelix!

[Helsen] Do you have a message for the people in Belgium, or for Europeans
in general?

[Aung San Suu Kyi] Yes, certainly. Belgium occupies a key position in
Europe. We would like to see your fellow countrymen become more aware of
what is going on in our country today. Of course, they should have the
final word in Brussels. We would like to see Brussels realize that nobody
can survive on an island, and do everything it can to change the situation
in Burma. For us, the Burmese people, it is a question of life or death! We
need change, and fast.  I hope that Brussels sends out a strong signal in
favor of the restoration of our democracy and the freeing of political
prisoners. Unfortunately, passing UN resolutions is not enough; they also
have to be implemented.

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

THE IRRAWADDY: TRIALS OF AN ICON
June, 1999 

Vol7 No5

Editorial

It is time to start trusting Aung San Suu Kyi's instincts as a politician
and stop putting blind faith in her image as an icon of the pro-democracy
movement.

Aung San, Burma's national hero of independence, once commented on the
perils of becoming a political icon. Eighteen months and six days before
his assassination at the hands of a political rival, he made this
remarkable prediction:

"How long do national heroes last? Not long in this country. I do not give
myself more than another eighteen months of life."

His daughter, Aung San Suu Kyi, has been more careful about predicting any
future turn of events in the current standoff between her National League
for Democracy and Burma's military regime, the State Peace and Development
Council. Concerning her country's prospects for democracy, she stated only
that she did not believe it would take another ten years to achieve. "But I
can only say that this is my opinion," she added. "I am not a prophet, I am
not an astrologer, and it's just my opinion that it won't take another ten
years."

Notwithstanding Suu Kyi's doubts about her powers of prognostication, she
is nonetheless extraordinarily sensitive to her father's legacy. She
probably realizes, then, that the accuracy of his prediction (even if it
was more coincidental than prescient) may have some bearing upon her own
future as a political leader. 

Although there is no immediate fear of Suu Kyi meeting the same end as her
father, the regime's relentless exercises in character assassination may be
beginning to have some effect. Suu Kyi is no doubt correct in believing
that the crude caricatures of her that appear in the state-run media serve
only to strengthen people's sympathy for her party. But there is a danger
that the supposedly more sophisticated audience of the international mass
media is starting to seriously believe that the woman who has come to
represent the Burmese pro-democracy struggle has become an obstacle to
overcoming the country's present political stalemate.     

Aung San Suu Kyi's status as the symbol of Burma's pro-democracy movement
has done a great deal to keep her country's plight in the public eye. But
there are some who suspect that this role has become a distinct liability
for her. As one Rangoon-based European diplomat remarked recently, "She may
be worried that diminishing her demands might diminish her international
status and Gandhi-esque aura and the whole impetus of her movement might be
damaged."

Charges of "inflexibility" have been leveled against Suu Kyi on a regular
basis, most recently in connection with her party's handling of three
dissenting members who were labeled "lackeys" of the SPDC's Military
Intelligence Service for calling on the NLD to take a less
"confrontational" approach to relations with the regime. The timing of this
episode coming close to the ninth anniversary of the NLD's 1990 election
victory and a year after the formation of the Committee to Represent the
People's Parliament certainly suggests that it was stage-managed by the
MIS. But what was more interesting about this little drama was the palpable
frustration of some journalists with Suu Kyi's refusal to play along.

In a recent interview with Asiaweek, Suu Kyi took great pains to insist
that last year's decision to form the CRPP and the well-publicized standoff
with the authorities over her attempt to drive outside of Rangoon were not
part of a performance. She also rejected suggestions that her apparent
failure to do anything "dramatic" this year was tantamount to an admission
that her party's policies are losing support. She claimed that the CRPP's
moves towards preparing a constitution and forming closer ties with ethnic
groups represent more important steps than last year's events. "But people
are not interested in the real politics of it," she complained. "They just
want dramatic events."

The desire for drama is often strongest amongst those who make their living
from writing stories about current events. While there are undoubtedly many
in the international press who would be happy to help Suu Kyi shed her
"Gandhi-esque aura", it is clear that even her most determined
demythologizers expect her to put on a show, if not one of her own making,
then one scripted by the SPDC.

The NLD has rightly refused to be drawn into trying to justify its
existence by participating in an empty dialogue with the regime. But some
international organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red
Cross, have evidently decided that their almost sacrosanct reputations are
too important to sacrifice for the sake of an honest assessment of the
situation in Burma. The ICRC's decision to resume prison visits in Burma
despite the fact that it's representatives will be given access to only a
fraction of the hundreds of prisons in the country amounts to little more
than an attempt to be seen as performing an important role in the country.
The result is a boost for the SPDC's image and another blow to political
prisoners who have simply been shifted out of sight, and as far as some are
concerned, out of existence. 

The NLD cannot afford to participate in such a charade. If Suu Kyi's image
as a political figure of rare integrity is far from inviolable, the
survival of her party is even less certain. Even at the risk of seeming
inflexible, the NLD must stick to its guns, not simply to preserve Suu
Kyi's image, but to prevent its own disintegration. 

In the final analysis, it is easier to be a martyr -- a Gandhi or an Aung
San -- than a living politician responsible for making decisions that may
not always meet with approval or understanding. Even Nelson Mandela, whose
successful struggle against apartheid has earned him a permanent place
amongst the world's greatest leaders, raised eyebrows amongst pro-democracy
supporters when he invited Khin Nyunt to attend the inauguration ceremony
of his successor. Whether Mandela will take on the role of mediator in
Burma will probably depend upon whether he believes it is possible to
negotiate with the regime in good faith. If he decides that his friendly
overture towards the junta is not worth pursuing, it would be difficult to
blame him. 

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

RADIO MYANMAR: BURMA'S KHIN NYUNT URGES TEACHERS TO SAFEGUARD NATION 
4 July, 1999

[Translated from Burmese; excerpted.  Radio Myanmar is a state-run radio
station.]

Lt. Gen. Khin Nyunt, Myanmar Education Committee chairman and State Peace
and Development Council [SPDC] secretary-1, accompanied by ministers,
departmental heads, and responsible personnel departed Yangon by military
aircraft on 3 July morning and arrived Mandalay at 1230. The secretary-1
and party next proceeded to Upper Myanmar Central Institute of Civil
Services [CICS] in Pyinoolwin, Mandalay Division.

The opening ceremony of Special Refresher Training Course No. 2 for Basic
Education Teachers was held at the Yadana Hall of the Upper Myanmar CICS at
1345. Lt. Gen. Khin Nyunt, Myanmar Education Committee chairman and SPDC
secretary-1, attended the ceremony and delivered an address. Lt. Gen. Khin
Nyunt said the SPDC in its endeavors in developing the nation from all
sectors is launching education promotion programs for emergence of an
international level education system which is in conformity with the future
political, economic, and social conditions of the nation. [ ... ]

He continued to say the patriotic intellectuals and intelligentsia, who are
the main forces for national defense and nation-building tasks, are greatly
required as the nation has gained peace and good political, economic, and
social conditions, and the new nation is being built with the united
strength of the entire national people. [ ... ] The secretary-1 remarked
the education promotion programs are being implemented with national
character and aims to continuously bring out intellectuals and
intelligentsia who will defend and build the new nation and to develop the
human resources. He noted training is being given to students to strengthen
their solidarity and union spirit to enhance amity among national brethren.

He said if the objective conditions of Myanmar and the world are studied it
can be seen that vitalization of solidarity and union spirit among Myanmar
youths is essential for safeguarding the independence and for the
perpetuation of sovereignty.

He noted respective officials are striving day and night in all sectors to
uplift the living standards of the people, to ensure peace for the future
nation, and to enable people to enjoy job opportunities and rights within
the law. They are also striving for the maintenance of peace and stability
and law and order in the nation.

Khin Nyunt explained, although the government is endeavoring with goodwill
for the uplift of the social standards and economy of the people, some
opportunists, who wish to gain power by a short cut way and with the wrong
objective of causing difficulty to the government, are pushing the people
into poverty and the nation into instability. He added, the destructive
elements relying on some neocolonialist countries are blatantly
perpetrating their confrontational policy and utter devastation policy. The
policies of confrontation, utter devastation, and economic sanctions
exercised by the destructive elements are totally against the interests of
the nation and the people as they are made with evil intentions and with
antagonism towards the government to drag the people into poverty and
suffering. [ ... ]

He said, at the present post Cold War world some neocolonialist countries
are using their puppet regimes and interfering in the internal affairs of
smaller nations. They are trying to impose their democracy and human rights
standards to the smaller nations without regard to the differences in the
history, culture, traditions, religious customs, and national
characteristics of these nations. [ ... ]

Khin Nyunt finally urged the trainee teachers to lead their pupils and
national peoples to uphold the Three Main National Causes--the
non-disintegration of the Union, the non-disintegration of national unity,
and perpetuation of sovereignty. In conclusion, he underscored the need for
the teachers to safeguard the nation from the dangers of traitors and
destructionists.

Next, the secretary-1 cordially greeted the trainees. [ ... ] 

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

REUTERS: MYANMAR-EU BREAK ICE, THAW TO TAKE TIME 
13 July, 1999 by Rajan Moses 

YANGON, July 13 (Reuters) - After years of wrangling with military-ruled
Myanmar over its democracy and human rights curbs, the West has finally
broken some ice by meeting the country's reticent generals.

The sudden change of tack by the West, represented by the European Union,
with support from the United States, caught some of Myanmar's bitter
critics offguard.

But Myanmar watchers believe the July 6-7 talks were a significant initial
step, with the prospect in the long run to break new ground in Yangon's
dealings with the West and the local opposition led by Nobel peace laureate
Aung San Suu Kyi.

Some Yangon and Bangkok-based diplomats said the delegation discussed
cash-strapped Myanmar's rising humanitarian needs. It also examined a
stalemate that has obstructed dialogue between the military and Suu Kyi's
National League for Democracy since her release from house arrest four
years ago.

The EU, like the United States, maintains sanctions on Myanmar aimed at
forcing the ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) to allow
greater freedoms.

``This is the first time an EU delegation has visited Yangon officially. It
seems to be a change of tactic... to make a more friendly approach,'' said
a diplomat who met government officials and Suu Kyi last week in Yangon.

``It's difficult to predict how things will go in Myanmar as usually
changes never happen quickly in that country. So the EU-Myanmar talks must
be seen in that light.''

The middle-level EU delegation met protagonists Suu Kyi and the powerful
intelligence chief Lieutenant-General Khin Nyunt.

The EU's primary objective in holding the meeting with Myanmar's military
rulers was to improve recently deeply soured ties between both sides, EU
officials have said.

The Myanmar issue has dogged EU relations with the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations since Yangon joined the group two years ago. The EU bans
senior Yangon officials from its borders, a restriction that forced
cancellation of a bloc-to-bloc ministerial meeting earlier this year.

Another diplomat said the EU had changed its tack on Myanmar because it
believed humanitarian aid could move the generals into sparking some
internal political change.

``We have to wait and see if there will be some positive results from these
talks. The focus will be on humanitarian cooperation first,'' the diplomat
said.

The SPDC has so far refused to hold a dialogue with Suu Kyi and curbed her
activities. It has said that, for talks to begin, the NLD must first drop
its demand for the convening of a People's Parliament of elected
representatives from a 1990 election the NLD swept but the military ignored.

The NLD recently waved an olive branch by seeking lower level talks as a
first step leading to a summit at which Suu Kyi would be present. The SPDC
has spurned the request so far.

NLD vice chairman Tin Oo told Reuters last week that the EU delegation's
visit was a positive step. Although the talks were initial, any such
movement was welcome, he said.

Analysts said the EU would now have to hold more rounds of bilateral talks
within its own grouping before moving forward to more substantial dealings
with Myanmar. That could take time.

As for the SPDC, analysts said the future hinges on how well it can weather
severe economic pressures, including a sharp cut in the flow of investment
into the country in the past year amid the Asian financial crisis.

Myanmar has precarious financial reserves, just enough to finance two
months of imports, according to the central bank. Myanmar also wants World
Bank and International Monetary Fund assistance to help it beat tough
economic times.

If economic needs become dire, then the chances of some softening and minor
concession granting on the political front by the generals could occur,
analysts said.

But a senior military officer said: ``We don't want outsiders, especially
the West to dictate to us. We are not ready yet to practise Western style
democracy. But we have enough food to feed our people and can withstand the
stumbling blocks placed on us.''

Despite the hardline talk, government officials, including Foreign Minister
Win Aung, see the EU initiative taken this time with Myanmar as
ground-breaking.

``They have to go back and hold further discussions among themselves. Let's
see what the EU will come up with,'' said the senior military official.

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

THE HINDU: CHANGING WINDS IN MYANMAR? 
11 July, 1999 by P.S.Suryanarayana 

Myanmar, which has come to mean different things to different countries
depending on their geopolitical distance from Yangon, is now being wooed by
a vocal section of the larger international community, although the
political future of Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi still remains unresolved. This new
external reality is manifest in the latest talks a delegation from the
European Union (E.U.) has held separately with the military regime and its
presumptive democratic nemesis, Ms. Suu Kyi, in Yangon.

Predictably, however, the E.U.'s talks with the junta's First Secretary,
Mr. Khin Nyunt, could be seen as only an exploratory exercise. All the
same, there is a qualitative difference between this E.U. mission and the
recent acceptance by the European Commission of Myanmar's passive presence
at the much-postponed E.U.-ASEAN dialogue in Bangkok.

As a member of the Association of South-East Asian Nations, Myanmar was
entitled to attend ASEAN's talks with the E.U./E.C. combine. Not
surprisingly, ASEAN willingly risked several postponements of its dialogue
with the E.U., under the rubric of a Joint Cooperation Committee (JCC), in
the face of the E.C.'s refusal for long to engage in talks in the context
of the South- East Asian solidarity with Myanmar at such deliberations
between the two blocs. In the event, the Bangkok meeting took place on a
compromise that Myanmar would be present without any say in the
discussions, especially because Yangon (a late-entrant to ASEAN) was not a
party to the original agreement on the formation of the JCC.

For the E.U., which justified its opposition to Myanmar on suspicions about
its dismal human rights record, it is now a departure from a tolerance of
the junta's passive presence at the Bangkok talks to a direct engagement
with Yangon's governing State Peace and Development Council. This
diplomatic shift in the E.U.'s mood, not yet translated into a substantive
policy, can eventually narrow the differences between the perceptions of
Myanmar by its neighbours, especially those in South-East Asia as well as
India, and those by the larger international community, particularly the
E.U. and the U.S.

The perceptional hiatus between ASEAN and the West was most pronounced at
the time of the former's admission of Myanmar into its fold against the
wishes of the latter. In one sense, the mainstream ASEAN members, all
founders of the bloc, had by then decided that it would be better to engage
Myanmar's military rulers in a dialogue and establish economic linkages
with it than to allow China, a regional superpower, to extend its sphere of
influence to its neighbour, Yangon. No such direct geopolitical compulsions
animated the earlier calculations of the E.U. and the West. Nonetheless,
the U.S. and its allies, at the same time, chose to draw a changing
communist China out onto centre-stage of international affairs.

Now, Myanmar's geopolitical value to the West has never been comparable to
that of China. It may not ever be so, either, for the foreseeable future.
Relevant to this reality is the difference between the wider Western
concern at China's ideological regime, despite its changing political
plumes, and the E.U.-orchestrated view of an essentially non-ideological
but equally non-democratic militarist dispensation in Myanmar. In recent
months, the intensification of the West's engagement with China, in spite
of the waxing and waning of that interaction, began to expose the
incongruity of the E.U.'s steadfast opposition to Myanmar in the face of
mainstream ASEAN's willingness to do business with Yangon.

According to Western diplomats in South-East Asia, there can be no virtue
in discouraging a democratic movement behind the Myanmarese Bamboo Curtain.
The first step towards a restoration of democracy in Myanmar is seen to be
a greater respect for human rights there. This, in turn, can be promoted
through a calibrated engagement with Yangon. A reasoning of this magnitude
accounts for the E.U.'s latest mission to Myanmar with a firmly stated
purpose of encouraging Yangon to address the human rights issue in
particular. If, at the same time, the E.U. has kept its channels of
communications open with Ms. Suu Kyi, the reason has as much to do with
style as with substance.

A normative feature of the West's diplomatic engagement with what it sees
as renegade (not rogue) regimes is the economic dimension. This has fuelled
speculation behind-the-diplomatic scenes of the feasibility of reviving the
informal but stalled international scheme of "dollars for democracy" in
Myanmar. With Myanmarese diplomats and the regime itself insisting that
democracy remains the eventual goal, the question now in these new
circumstances is whether Ms. Suu Kyi will continue to remain "the voice of
hope" for pluralist politics even as the West undertakes a voyage of
rediscovery of SPDC. Much will symbolically depend on Ms. Suu Kyi's ability
to keep the 'democracy' flag flying at home as the SPDC leaders confer with
their ASEAN counterparts later this month in the presence of the U.S. and
the E.U., besides China as well as India.

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

TRAVEL TRADE GAZETTE ASIA: MYANMAR-TRADE URGES MARKETING PUSH 
18 June, 1999 by Tom Racette 

The country needs to do more overseas promotions so as not to lose out to
other destinations, writes Tom Racette.

Tourism continues to suffer from stagnant arrivals and a lack of government
effort to capitalise on Myanmar's unique potential.

>From April 1998 to March 1999, total international arrivals reached
120,999, reflecting an increase of only 1.3 per cent over the previous year.

Due to the ruling junta's fear of opening up Myanmar to mass tourism, the
destination has no marketing presence overseas.

The official Myanmar News Agency recently quoted State Peace and
Development Council secretary one, Lt-Gen Khin Nyunt, saying: "National
traitor destructive elements are spreading fabricated news on Myanmar in
collaboration with some foreign broadcasting stations, and so tourism has
not developed as it should be due to their plot."

However, one foreign tour operator said the destination was no longer the
butt of negative media coverage, due to problems in other parts of the
world. He added Myanmar was selling despite its long-standing political
problems.

San Francisco-based Indochina Services managing director, Mr Paul Tomasch,
said his company had increased the number of pages in its brochures for
Myanmar and clients had included the country in their travel programmes.

"It has improved from last year. We are talking about small numbers, but
the bookings have gone up by more than 100 per cent in the US."

He added Americans were avoiding Myanmar, but the destination had been put
back on the travel map again and identified as a safe country to visit.

"A couple of months ago, we still had people calling and saying they were
boycotting us because we had an office in Myanmar and supported the junta.

"But with more and more places appearing to be unsafe in the eyes of US
travellers, their first priority is the safety aspect."

Regardless of media reports, Mr Tomasch said it was only a matter of time
before arrivals started to climb. "Myanmar, according to all Myanmar
specialists, had huge potential and would take off eventually. 

"I guess it will take a couple of years, but (Myanmar) is definitely worth
promoting. Adventure travel is the platform Myanmar must use to promote
itself in the US."

Mr Tomasch added there was huge demand in the US for hiking in the Shan
state, diving in the Mergui Archipelago, biking and jeep safaris, and
cultural experiences. "American travellers to Myanmar are well travelled
and sophisticated. They are not price conscious."

Marketing Myanmar Committee chairman, Mr Duncan MacLean, said several
people in the Ministry of Hotels and Tourism understood the benefits
tourism could bring to the country. But their suggestions were often
disapproved by more senior government officials who preferred not to cater
to mass tourism.

"It is true we are losing business to other destinations, and it will
remain the same until things open up. We need to look at reducing the
hurdles and barriers that send tourists to other countries and encourage
them to come to Myanmar."

Recently, the Ministry of Tourism proposed the government form a Tourism
Promotion Authority to market Myanmar overseas.

Mr MacLean said: "It is definitely an ongoing project, but how long it will
take we don't know."

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

THE HINDU: DEMOCRACY VITAL FOR ECONOMIC WELL BEING 
14 July, 1999 by P.S. Suryanarayana 

SINGAPORE, JULY 13. Viewing economic development as freedom, Prof. Amartya
K. Sen, Nobel laureate in economics, said here today that the concept was
wider in scope than the perception of the right to development as a
fundamental human right. He was answering a question from this
correspondent at a lunch-reception hosted by the Indian High Commissioner
to Singapore, Mr. Prem Singh.

Prof. Sen said there was a connection between these two perceptions, one
being the means to the other. 'Development as freedom' is the theme of
Prof. Sen's book to be published in September.

Delivering the "Asia and Pacific lecture" last night, under the auspices of
the Singapore Institute of South East Asian Studies and the Japan Center
for International Exchange, Prof. Sen advocated the architecturing of a
democratic dimension as an integral part of a new "Eastern strategy" for
reviving economic growth in crisis-hit countries. An "Eastern strategy" so
"broadened" could still be rooted to its moorings and could also be applied
elsewhere in the world, he suggested.

Describing democracy as a friend of the poor, the Nobel Laureate said, "The
recent problems of East and South East Asia bring out, among many other
things, the penalty of limitations on democratic freedom ... . Involving
the neglect of two important instrumental freedoms - protective security
and transparency guarantee."

Elaborating, he said, "Once the (recent) financial crisis in this region
led to a general economic recession, the protective power of democracy -
not unlike that which prevents famines in democratic countries - was badly
missed in some countries in the region. The newly dispossessed did not have
the hearing they needed in say Indonesia or (South) Korea. Even a fall of
five or 10 per cent of total national income (or of GNP) can decimate lives
and create misery for millions, if the burden of contraction of growth) is
not shared together but allowed to be heaped on those - the unemployed or
those newly made economically redundant - who can least bear it."

Another "connection between the lack of democracy and the nature of the
recent economic crisis" in parts of East and South East Asia was manifest
in the absence of "public participation in reviewing financial and business
arrangements". He emphasised that a "big difference" could have been made
by a democratic process that would have enabled the people to "challenge
the hold of selected families or groups" over the national economy in
Indonesia or Korea as the case was.

Commending the "great practical significance" of this magnitude as could be
guaranteed by "democratic governance", Prof. Sen said that the "economic
incentives", which "the market system" could provide as remedies for a
crisis, should be complemented by "political incentives" for the people.
"The often-repeated belief that authoritarian regimes are better in
fostering economic growth (a claim largely based on selective evidence) has
not received any serious general empirical support in extensive
inter-country comparisons," he said. He also underlined that, "Two decades
of empirical work brings out very clearly that the success of a market
economy is facilitated by a supportive economic environment, rather than by
the harshness of the political climate" in any given country.

Making a comparative assessment of India and China in this context, the
Nobel Laureate said, "China has done more to make use of the efficiency of
the market than India has. .... China has done a great deal more in general
human development (too) ... . India's underdevelopment in basic education
and health care - aside from reducing the quality of life of its people -
is also a very big barrier to its use of the opportunities of global trade
and exchange."

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