------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: Aug 2, 1995 THE NATION: 'PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT' THE NATION: ACADEMIC FREEDOM OR SECURITY? BKK POST: B19b FOR HOTELS BKK POST: EASING INSURANCE COVER IN BURMA BKK POST: POLICE RAID CHURCH, HOLD ILLEGAL BURMESE IMMIGRANTS THE NATION: DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT SEEM TO BE STRONGER THE NATION: SENATOR WANTS BURMA SANCTIONS THE NATION: ASEAN URGED TO GO SLOW ON MYANMAR ENTRY THE NATION: DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI'S INTERVIEW part 2 ---------------------------------------------------------- Produced with the support of the Burma Information Group (B.I.G). The BurmaNet News is an electronic newspaper covering Burma. Articles from newspapers, magazines, newsletters, the wire services and the Internet as well as original material are published. The BurmaNet News is e-mailed directly to subscribers and is also distributed via the soc.culture.burma and seasia-l mailing lists and is also available via the reg.burma conference on the APC networks. For a free subscription to the BurmaNet News, send an e-mail message to: majordomo@igc.apc.org In the body of the message, type "subscribe burmanet-l" (without quotation marks) Letters to the editor, comments or contributions of articles should be sent to the editor at: strider@igc.apc.org ------------------------------------------------------------- INFORMATION ABOUT BURMA VIA THE WEB AND GOPHER: Information about Burma is available via the WorldWideWeb at: FreeBurmaWWW http://199.172.178.200/freebrma/freebrma.htm. [including back issues of the BurmaNet News as .txt files] BurmaWeb: http://www.uio.no/tormodl Burma fonts: http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~lka/burmese-fonts/moe.html Ethnologue Database(Myanmar): http://www-ala.doc.ic.ac.uk/~rap/Ethnologue/eth.cgi/Myanmar TO ACCESS INFORMATION ABOUT BURMA VIA GOPHER: gopher csf.colorado.edu. Look under the International Political Economy section, then select Geographic_Archive, then Asia, then Burma. ---------------------------------------------------------- BURMANET SUBJECT-MATTER RESOURCE LIST BurmaNet regularly receives enquiries on a number of different topics related to Burma. The scope of the subjects involved is simplytoo broad for any one person to cover. BurmaNet is therefore organizing a number of volunteer coordinators to field questions on various subjects. If you have questions on any of the following subjects, please direct email to the following coordinators, who will either answer your question or try to put you in contact with someone who can: Arakan/Rohingya/Burma- [volunteer needed] Bangladesh border Art/archaeology/: [volunteer needed] Campus activism: Boycott campaigns: Buddhism: Buddhist Relief Mission, c/o NBH03114@niftyserve.or.jp Fonts: tom@CS.COLGATE.EDU History of Burma: zar1963@violet.berkeley.edu Chin history/culture: Kachin history/culture: 74750.1267@compuserve.com Karen history/culture: 102113.2571@Compuserve.com Karen Historical Society Mon history/culture: [volunteer needed] Naga history/culture: [volunteer needed] [Burma-India border] Pali literature: "Palmleaf" c/o burmanet@igc.apc.org Shan history/culture: [volunteer needed] Tourism campaigns: bagp@gn.apc.org "Attn. S. Sutcliffe" World Wide Web: FreeBurma@POBox.com Volunteering: Dr. Christina Fink c/o burmanet@igc.apc.org [Feel free to suggest more areas of coverage] ---------------------------------------------------------- ===== item ===== 'PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT' 1 AUGUST 1995, The Nation The Nation's Editor-in-Chief Suthichai Yoon and Editor Thepchai Yong talked to Aung San Suu Kyi last weekend at her heavily-guarded residence in Rangoon where she was put under house arrest for six years. Following is the first part of the edited text of the interview which will be broadcast on Nation News Talk on Channel 9 starting at 9 pm tonight. Will you travel to receive the honorary doctorate in political science that Thammasat University has conferred on you in recognition of your peaceful democratic struggle? I would year much like to come but I cannot say at this moment when I shall be able to come. So you have no plans to travel outside Burma at the moment. Not at the moment because there is lot of work to be done here and also lost of organization to take care of. Didn't you say earlier that you would go to Oslo to pick up the Nobel Peace Prize Award? Actually, the Norwegian ambassador invited me to come to Oslo to receive the award and I said personally the first foreign country I would like to visit is Norway because they have supported us so staunchly. But it was not a promise. It was that I would try to visit Norway at the first opportunity. How about stopping by in Bangkok on your way to Nor way? I could stop over on the way back as well.I promised Norway that it would be the first country I would try to visit. How does Thailand relate to you?. Your father founded the Burma Independence Army in Bangkok in 1941 and you must have travelled through Thailand a number of times and have friends there. I must admit that for the last six years through reading newspapers like The Nation and other publications in Bangkok which have been very supportive, there are many people in Thailand who really understand our situation and really want to help us. This, for me, has been a tremendous encouragement the there's so much support for our cause in Thailand. You have been so strong in many of the things you have written. And I heard that there is sometimes pressure on you to tone down your articles and yet your remain very strong. Newspapers in Thailand always keep an interest on Burma. For me, Thailand in general is a friendly and supportive country. there have been problems, of course. Our democratic forces have complained about the official Thai policy. And I know that there has been trouble with refugee camps. But on the whole, the people of Thailand are very sympathetic and supportive. What about the government of Thailand? We have had complaints in the past about official Thai policy. I would like to ask the government of Thailand to put the people of Burma first. The people are more important than the government. And even the government itself would not say it is more important than the people. Certainly, it's the people who are more important. What do you mean when you say people are more important than the government? Their aspirations, their hopes, their situation. When you think of investment and aid you should really look at how far they help the common people, the really poor people. We are not really interested in investment that will help the rich get richer. I hope you understand that such a situation can snowball and the time while the poor hardly find any change in their conditions. Some of the Thai officials believe that your release was due partly to the success of Thailand's constructive engagement policy toward Burma. I frankly do not know how successful the constructive engagement policy ant international pressure were. But of course, officially, nobody would ever admit that they have given in to pressure. We'll have to wait a few years more to know what happened within inner government circles in order to evaluate how successful the constructive engagement policy was. Did you hear about constructive engagement policy while you were under house arrest? Yes, all the time. What was your first reaction? I was rather surprised. My first reaction was something to be expected. It did worry me that they might carry it too far and would adversely affect the progress of democracy. How constructive has the constructive engagement policy been? The question is for whom has it been constructive. That we have yet to find out. Was it constructive for the forces of democracy? Was it constructive for the Burmese people in general? Was it constructive for a limited business community? Or was it constructive for Slorc?. This is the question: for whom was it constructive? Was it constructive for the forces of democracy or NLD at all? I have yet to find any hard evidence that it affected us directly although some have said that because of the constructive engagement policy I have been released. But nobody has said exactly why I have been released. So we can't take that for granted. Burma is being admitted by Asean into the family of nations. What kind of change do you want to see in Asean policy toward Burma? I would like the Asean nations to look closely at conditions among the ordinary Burmese people and not just to look at place like Mandalay and Rangoon. And even in Rangoon there are certain parts which seem more prosperous and yet there are other parts which have not changed the last 10-15 years. I can recognize those parts which remain exactly the same as they were a number of years ago. I would like Asean to think of our long- term relationship and long-term development of Burma and to consider the fact that you cannot have economic progress without peace and stability. And to achieve peace and stability there must be a climate of trust within the nation. There must be a government the people can trust if that country is not be peaceful and stable. In the long run you can't maintain peace and stability without trust and confidence. What kind of advice would you give to the government as Burma moves toward joining Asean? It is in our NLD booklet that we hope one day Burma will be a member of Asean because I do believe in this regional community of nations which is very good for the region and very good on the whole for the world to have such community. So one day I very much hope that Burma will be a member of Asean. But I understand that (former Singaporean prime minister) Lee Kuan Yew said a few months ago that it's going to be a number years before Burma is ready to be in a condition to join Asean. Would Burma's integration into the regional community accelerate the move toward democracy in Burma? I am not certain about that. I do not know just how effective the persuasive parts of the Asean nations are when it comes to internal change. I do notice that while promoting the policy of constructive engagement some Asean nations are careful to say that they do not interfere in the internal affairs of another country. If they do not interfere in the internal affairs of another country then how far can they help us achieve change. Would you consider it an interference if an Asean country starts commenting about the pace of democratic change in Burma? I don't think so because the world is getting smaller all the time. We have to accept that no country is really free from external influence. We are all subject to some degree to international opinions and external influence. There is, of course, a limit as to how far people can be allowed to interfere in the internal affairs of a nation. One does not expect them to come marching in or to introduce measures that would interfere with our sovereignty. But if we care about our regional peace and stability we should care about the kind of governments that are in place in those countries. Do you agree with sanctions? I have one reservation about sanctions alone. I do want to make sure that it does not hurt the ordinary people. Whoever thinks of sanctions should study the situation carefully to make certain that whatever sanctions to be implemented really affect those for whom it is intended. As I understand it the economic change that has taken place in Burma the last six years has not really filtered down to the general public. It remains an open question whether sanctions in any way will affect the general public either. How responsive is the military regime in Burma to outside pressure? They are not unaware of outside pressure. They are not completely oblivious to it. And I hope as they have more dealings with the international community and as they get more mature they will have a greater respect for international opinions. Are they getting more mature? That I cannot say. Apparently some of them said I have become more mature. I hope when they say that they are comparing me with themselves. Are there signs that the military will transfer power to a civilian government? It's too early to talk about such a thing. There are some things that we prefer to do quietly at the moment. And when the time is right and we think that we should comment on the rate of progress and on our efforts to achieve dialogue, we shall speak out then. Does that mean you will have talks with the government without making public statements until the time comes when you have some concrete outcome? I just mean that at this time I don't want to speculate openly on when we think there might be talks and how the talks might develop. If we have too many prior expectations it's difficult for us to get down to a working relationship. If one side lays down condition the other side will also want to lay down conditions. So to get dialogue going smoothly a period of quiet discussion is necessary. Does that mean you don't have a specific objective at the moment and you would let the talks continue and find out whether you can be satisfied with a certain level of compromise from the regime? I am not going as far as that. I am just saying that at this time moment we don't even yet have a specific target when we hope to start dialogue. You mentioned Nelson Mandela in some of your interviews. Do you foresee a South Africa solution for Burma? Not exactly a South Africa solution because we are not South Africa. I was just using South Africa as a model for the way in which you can achieve settlement through dialogue. There was a time when nobody would have believed that such a thing could be possible. I would like to use South Africa as an example as opposed to the Yugoslavian situation where people just would not consider sitting down talking with the result that everything is in ruins and nobody has gained from it. In South Africa, Mandela and others who at one time were very active and rigid in some of their views over the apartheid problem became very flexible over the years and decided in the end that negotiation was the only way. How do you see your role in the next step of the political solution in this country? Now I feel that my role is once more to unite the democratic forces and to revive those parts of our movement which have been intimidated in the last six years. Will you demand the release of political prisoners as a condition? We have urged in my first statement the authorities to release political prisoners as soon as possible. But we are not starting out with conditions. We are starting with a clear objective of getting people to sit around the table so we can start talking about conditions. Is that happening? No. As you can see at the table we are sitting around like one, it's just you and me. Are there signs that they are willing to talk? I am not able to say whether they are unwilling or willing. Let me say that at the moment the positions seem very neutral. I have not seen overt signs of unwillingness nor willingness. But it is still a little too early in the day. Is there any open line of communication at the moment? There is a line of communication. I have kept my military intelligence personal at the gate. So I am not out of touch with the authorities. You have told your supporters not to expect too much, too quickly. What are their expectations now? I think they understand what I mean. One of the saddest things about Burma is that a lot of my supporters do not trust the authorities. There is a climate of suspicion in Burma. Everybody is afraid that somebody else is an informer. To build up a climate of trust is going to be one of the most difficult jobs. And the people understand perfectly well when I say don't raise your expectations too high, don't be in such a hurry. A lot of them, in fact, have told me to be careful because they can't really believe that I have been released. If your supporters can't trust the authorities do you trust the authorities? They will have to show that they are trustworthy. We would need indications of their trustworthiness before we can trust them. IT's mutual process. Do they trust you? You must ask them the question.I would like to know the answer too. They have dealt with me for six years and they know a lot about me. I would be grateful if you ask them: Do you trust her? You have surprised a lot of people by saying that you have no ill feelings or resentments toward your former captors. Has that come as a surprise? Most of our people who have lived under far worse condition than I in In Sein jail and other jails have no ill feelings either. It's fortunate that my colleagues are all very fine and honourable people they always look forward to the future and not the past. And because they are so strong in themselves and so committed, they have been able to bear all the troubles of the last six years and yet have no sediment of ill will.(TN) CONTINUED TOMORROW ===== item ===== ACADEMIC FREEDOM OR SECURITY? 1 AUGUST 1995, The Nation Yindee Lertcharoenchok tries to analyze the whole controversy surrounding Thammasat University's initiative to invite Burma's opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi here. The uproar caused by Thammasat University's plan to confer an honorary doctorate degree on Burmese-pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi only confirms the existing disunity among the various sectors of the Thai society in their stance and perspective towards Thailand's western neighbour. But the whole controversy is more of a "hypothetical" speculation and "premature" overreaction as the university itself has not yet officially extended an invitation to Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, who was unexpectedly released on July 10 after nearly six years under house arrest. The idea to invite the popular Burmese democracy leader re-emerged after she accepted the Nobel Peace Prize committee's invitation to travel to Norway at an unspecified date to pick up the award she won for her peaceful struggle to restore democracy and human rights in Burma. In 1991, Thammasat University also conferred an honorary doctorate degree in political science to Suu Kyi, who was still under house arrest at that time, and has since waited for her to receive it in person. The mixed reaction, the subsequent public debate and criticism has, however, put the university in a spot. In a press statement released July 28, university rector Noranit Sethabutr was quoted as saying they had revived the plan to confer the degree to Suu Kyi in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of Thai Peace Day on Aug 16. This was the day the kingdom reclaimed its sovereignty from Japanese invaders during World War II. "But the [university] has yet to coordinate efforts and contacts with Suu Kyi have yet to be established. The conferring day could be any time from Aug 15-17," he said. While Suu Kyi promised Norway that it would be the first country she will visit, she also made it clear that she has no intention, for the time being, to leave Burma. In fact, the Burmese junta known as the State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) had incessantly demanded that she leave Burma in exchange for her release from house arrest. The Burmese opposition leader, whose unconditional release last month has injected new life into the pro-democracy Burmese movement inside and outside Burma, has repeatedly declared that her immediate tasks are to consolidate democratic forces and to engage Slorc leaders in political dialogues. She has also asked her supporters, many of whom gather daily in front of her home to get a glimpse of her or to listen to her, to stay united and be patient as the path towards national reconciliation and restoration of democracy and human rights in Burma is long and full of obstacles, and that her release is just the beginning of their fight to achieve common goals. Likewise, even though Suu Kyi has expressed her wish to visit Bangkok to receive the honorary degree, she is obviously in no hurry to do so. "I cannot say at this moment when I shall be able to come [to Thailand]," she said in an interview over the weekend. When asked whether she feared she would not be allowed back to Burma if she left the country, she said: "Yes. That's why I am not in a hurry to go to Thammasat University." Interestingly, the academic initiative to invite Suu Kyi here has confirmed that Thailand's foreign diplomacy is plagued with profound disunity and disagreement among various policy-making agencies. For the first time, the controversy has made public the existing differences between those who support Slorc and those who are sympathetic to the pro-democracy movement. While non-government human rights agencies have warmly welcomed the university's move, the Thai military does not hide its disagreement with the move. In fact, it has come out strongly, arguing that Suu Kyi's trip here could jeopardize Thai-Burmese relations and Thailand's economic interests in Burma. The Thai government and some MPs, meanwhile, have either been non- committal or ambiguous with the idea and only a few prominent politicians have openly dared support it. Top military officers have actually voiced their opposition to it and have warned against a possible backlash. Outgoing Army commander Gen Wimol Wongwanich, Navy chief Adm PrachetSiridej and Army assistant chief Gen Chettha Thanajaro have called for either the outright dismissal, revision, or "through extensive discussion and consulations", adding that if Suu Kyi' trip goes ahead Thai national interests could be a stake. Chettha, who is tipped to succeed Wimol and who is known to have established close ties with some Slorc leaders, went as far as categorizing the 50-year-old daughter of Burmese independence hero Aung San "as just an ordinary person" whom the Thai military has no significant relations with. While Prachet claims that Slorc "is unhappy" with the academic invitation, which "could affect the relations between the two governments," Wimol has made serveral unsound arguments, and voiced his fear that Suu Kyi might not want to return to Burma. He also criticized the West for being hypocritical and for observing double standards. "What will we [Thailand] do if we invite her here and then she does not want to go back, and her visit arouses hatred towards [Thai] businessmen in Burma? Thai investments could be affected because we believe the superpowers who claim to oppose dictatorship and support democracy, although they themselves have engaged in talks with a communist country whose record of human rights abuses is deplorable. Whatever we have to do, we must not forget our interests," stressed Wimol. Most elected MPs and ministers have deliberately avoided giving an answer when asked for their views on Suu Kyi's trip. As elected members of the legislature, they cannot be seen as being overtly supportive of either Slorc or their Burmese counterparts, who have been denied the right to rule. Two deputy prime ministers, Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, who has established close friendship with Slorc, and Amnuay Viravan are seen as not wanting to antagonize the popular Thai sentiment or the government and military's pro-Slorc stance, as well as their connections with the Burmese military. Amnuay said "university councils have the academic freedom to confer a degree to any person they deem eligible". However, he suggested holding a dialogue with Slorc to explain that Suu Kyi's trip here does not constitute Thai interference in Burma's internal affairs. "This matter should not affect the Thai-Burmese economic relations," he emphasized. Chavalit, who broke the international isolation of Slorc by being the first foreign dignitary to visit Rangoon in Dec 1988, has cautioned the university and called for careful consideration over the whole issue. He is probably afraid that Thammasat's plan could jeopardize his personal efforts to mend the sour bilateral relations, which is due to the recent surge in Burmese hostility towards Thailand. Prime Minister Banharn Silpa-archa has tried to avoid the debate altogether. As head of government, he made the worse possible statement by saying he had not yet been informed of the matter and, as such, had asked for time to study it. The most sensible comment, perhaps, came from former prime minister Chuan Leekpai, who is known for his support for democratic reforms in Burma, and whose opposition to the coup here in Feb, 1991 had catapulted him to the premiership in 1992. Chuan, who made a bold decision to allow the visit here in early 1993 of a Nobel Peace Prize team to campaign for Suu Kyi's release, said Thailand, as "a free and democratic country", has the full sovereign right to invite anybody but all parties involved have to consolidate a common position and make it known to Slorc. "Unlike Burma, Thailand, as a free and democratic country, has the sovereign right to invite anybody here. Aung San Suu Kyi's visit here could upset the Burmese junta, but all concerned parties here have to formulate a common stance on the issue, and explain and clear it up with the Burmese junta. The invitation is extended by an academic institute, which has the right to do so," he added. The Thai army's reaction is understandable. The military, which has been influential in guiding the direction of Thailand's foreign diplomacy towards its neighbours, evidently shares the same mentality with its Burmese counterparts in claiming that national security would be on the line. It is aware of its importance as the only channel of communication with Slorc, which often ignores the proper diplomatic channels, and, therefore, does not want to destroy such a relationship. Recalling Slorc's "extreme outrage" towards Thailand after the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize team visit here, the The military obviously wants to avoid the same scenario, which as described by army and government officials as "the worst" as far as the Thai government's relationship with Slorc is concerned. Likewise, the military does not want to jeopardize its ongoing efforts to restore the previously close ties with Slorc, which had been strained following a series of recent border disputes and conflicts, including allegations that Thailand has been providing sanctuary to ethnic Burmese guerrilla forces. Both the Thai government and military are also aware that Slorc, whose members have gone on official visits to Southeast Asian nations, has deliberately ignored Thailand despite repeated invitations. As to what happened in the past week, it seems several sectors in Thailand, including the Banharn administration, the military and the academic have embarked on debating a "non-issue" and have also overreacted by coming out with hypothetical comments. They are probably ignorant of Suu Kyi's political agenda and programme, as well as Slorc's stance towards the person it considers as an "arch enemy". In the past, Slorc was the one which had tried to push her out of the country on the belief that Suu Kyi's absence from Burma would eventually plunge her into public oblivion and weaken the pro-democracy movement. It had repeatedly offered to free Suu Kyi from house arrest on condition that she left Burma. For her part, Suu Kyi has made it known that her desire is to have peace and national reconciliation, which will then pave way for the smooth restoration of democracy in Burma. She has no wish to leave the country and the Burmese people as long as her work has not been done. The world "interference" has often been interpreted and exploited to serve one's interests. In the case of Thailand, the government has been overcautious in establishing any contact with the Burmese pro-democracy movement for fear of antagonizing Slorc. But it seems to have forgotten that Slorc had twice ordered its ambassador to Thailand, U Tin Winn, to pay a courtesy call on Gen Chavalit to congratulate him for his ministerial appointment in the present and previous governments. As one of the country's most prestigious learning institutes, Thammasat University has every single right and the freedom to decide and confer an honorary degree to those it deems qualified. Thailand, like other independent nations, has the sovereign right to allow or exclude anybody from its soil just like what Slorc does to those who want to visit Burma. The Thai government has to fully support the academic institute whose objective is nothing more than honouring a Burmese national who has been fighting for her country's political cause. (TN) ===== item ===== B19b FOR HOTELS 1 AUGUST 1995, Bangkok Post Foreign investment in hotels in Rangoon has reached 19.7 billion baht with most of the facilities to be operating by next year when Burma expects a tourism boom. About 100,000 tourists went to Burma last year and officials expect 500,000 in 1996 which has been designated "Visit Myanmar Year". (BP) ===== item ===== EASING INSURANCE COVER IN BURMA 1 AUGUST 1995, Bangkok Post Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry will make insurance coverage for Japanese investment in Burma more easy to obtain. Since Monday last week, inspection periods have been shortened for projects worth less than $11.4 million (285 million baht). Previously, insurance was granted only after very close scrutiny. The decision was made despite a call by Burmese dissident leader Aung San Suu Kyi for countries to wait for tangible improvements in democracy and human rights before up-grading relations with Burma's military rulers. (BP) ===== item ===== POLICE RAID CHURCH, HOLD ILLEGAL BURMESE IMMIGRANTS 1 AUGUST 1995, Bangkok Post Police waiting outside a church to check the identification papers of its Burmese parishioners hauled 45 away for being illegal immigrants, the church's pastor said yesterday. Pastor Allen Barnes said he was seeking assurances from police that there would be no repeat of the action against people arriving for Sunday Burmese-language services at his Calvary Baptist Church on Sukhumvit Soi 2. About 20 police who arrived at the church compound about 7.30 a.m. some 45 minutes before the Sunday service, started checking the identification papers of arriving worshippers without consulting with church officials, said Barnes, who came to Thailand three years ago from Chico, California. Parishioners who arrived early to socialise before the service locked themselves inside the worship centre when they saw police checking identification papers, he said. Between 250 and 325 people usually attend the services, which started about two-and-a-half-years ago, said Barnes. When Barnes, who lives in the church compound, was summoned to the scene, he asked police "if they couldn't do this some other day." "They said No," he said, "but assured us they would not go inside the worship centre." Forty-five Burmans and Karens were found to be illegal immigrants, and were taken away, Barnes said, adding that most were now in the police Immigration Detention Centre at Soi Suan Plu. (BP) ===== item ===== ASEAN URGED TO GO SLOW ON MYANMAR ENTRY 2 AUGUST 1995, The Nation AUSTRALIAN Foreign Minister Gareth Evens urged the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) on Monday to proceed cautiously with plans to eventually admit military junta-led Myanmar into its ranks as a full member. Evans emphasized that Australia fully supports the goal of most Asean countries to bring all 10 nations of Southeast Asia under the regional grouping s umbrella by the end of the century, but warned against moving too fast with regard to Myanmar. We re talking about five years away and I would certainly hope that we see within that timeframe a process of reconciliation occurring within Burma that will make such a step possible, he told a group of reporters. In the meantime, I would hope that there is no rush to embrace that country by Asean, there is a willingness to proceed step by step and only in response to significant forward movement, he said. Evans said he would be arguing the point in his talk with the seven foreign ministers amid the current series of annual meetings in Brunei. Myanmar acceded today to Asean s core Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, which is a precondition for observer status and eventual full membership. Evans said Australia was delighted at the July 10 release by Myanmar s Slorc of pro-democracy leader Suu Kyi from a almost six years of house arrest, but proof will be in the months ahead as to what this actually signifies. We hope very much there will be a commencement.. Of a serious process of dialogue between Suu Kyi and the Slorc regime about ways in which a more satisfactory arrangements might evolve, he said. (TN) =====ITEM===== SENATOR WANTS BURMA SANCTIONS 2 AUGUST 1995, The Nation A US senator has introduced a bill calling for US sanctions against Burma, citing continued political repression there, it was announced here on Monday. Senator Mitch McConnell introduced his bill on Friday, sating he had seen no apparent progress in the promotion of democracy and human rights in Burma, despite the recent release of political opponent and Nobel peace prize winner Suu Kyi. It was not immediately known when the bill will get a hearing. Winston Lord, assistance secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affair, last week expressed opposition to unilateral economic sanctions against Burma, saying they could not be effective unless they had broad international support. Since the release of Aung San Suu Kyi from prison, there is no support for sanctions from the international community, Lord told a Senate hearing. Lord also expressed concern that provisions of the proposed sanctions would violate international accords. (TN) ======ITEM===== DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT SEEM TO BE STRONGER 2 AUGUST 1995, The Nation The Nation s Editor-in-chief SUTHICHAI YOON and Editor THEPCHAI YONG talked to Aung San Suu Kyi last weekend at her residence in Rangoon where she was detained for six years under house arrest. Following is the second part of a transcript of the interview. Did the six years of house arrest change you or your attitude to the pursuit of democracy? It s not just me. I was very happy to find that so many of my colleagues have come out without any ill will and they really had a tough time. I was under house arrest while they were in jail. All right, this is not the most beautiful housing the world but is a lot more comfortable than Insein jail or any other jail in the country. Condition at some of the prisons are very uncomfortable. But they have come out without any ill feelings. To me it does not seem at all a surprise that I have no ill feelings. Why should I when they don t? We are all very much of the same mind. Do the authorities appreciate your absence of ill feeling toward them? I hope they do. They also should learn not to habour ill feelins. What kind of political role do you think the military would want to see you play? They might not all have the same opinion. It s possible that some military leaders think I should play a certain kind of role, while others think I should play another kind of role. I cannot speak for them at all. They did try to stop me from continuing my political role and offered me the freedom to leave the country. But I never accepted that. I made it quite clear in my statement in January that I intend to go on playing an active role. Are you suggesting that there may be a split within the military leadership? No. No. I don t think so. There may be differences of opinion as to what they want to see me do. I think on the while they all agreed that it would be better for them if I left politics. But since I have not done so that may now have a new idea as to what they wish to me do. But I have made it very clear that I intend to go on playing an active political role. Are there absolutely no conditions for your release? No conditions. I would not have accepted any conditions anyway. And I think they knew that. Do you fear that if you leave the country you would not be allowed back again? Yes. That s why I am not coming to Thammasat University in a hurry. Did the military say anything about your leaving the country? No. No. No. We don t talk about that. It s for me to decide when I leave. And I think they know that I am not going to leave. Does that mean you will stay here to try to find a mode of negations that will bring about a solution? Do you have a time-frame in mind? Not at the moment. But there may come a time when we would like to see more progress by such as such a period. But I hope it will not come to that. So you have been talking to NLD leaders and supporters? Almost everyday. Yes, we are in constant contact. Do you feel encouraged by their attitude? Yes. Yes. You must have heard the general view that the NLD in the last six years was a completely spent force and no longer viable as a political party. I do not think this is true at all. Of course, it has been dampened considerably by all the restrictions imposed on it during the last six years. But we still have the supporter of the people. Is NLD enjoying the same level support it did before? Not the same level of overt support. A lot of our members were expelled. I was expelled, too. Some left out of fear. So overtly, perhaps there is not as much support for the NLD as before the election. But we as the democratic movement, not necessarily the NLD as a party, seems to have a stronger supported among the people these days than before 1990. Do you think the military should have a role in whatever future solution that you may come up with? The military, of course, after all, we need an army. What about political role? It s up to the people to decide. It s the people of Burma who must decide what role they wish to assign to which force within the country. Personally, what do you think the role of the military should be? I have always said that I wish the military to be an honorable professional army because that is the best way they can protect their interests as well as the interests of the country. But what is the important is how to people see their role. In the end, whatever role id assigned to whatever body it will survive in the long run if the people approve of it. You have criticized the National Convention drafting the new constitution. Do you think the constitution is so far on the right track? The draft constitution is certainly not heading on the track to democracy. So I think they should be open to negotiations. What basic principles do you want to see in the constitution? The basic principle of any genuine democratic government is that the people should be able to decide whom they want to be at the helm of the nation and when they can remove these people. Every truly democratic government must have the mandate of the people and proper institutions to ensure that this mandate is given in the right way. If invited, would you and NLD be willing to be part of the National Convention? It all depends very much on how the government will incorporae us or other people and where the Nation Convention is heading. The National Convention is only a title. There are all kinds of national conventions. It depends very much on the kind of national convention to which we are invited. We can see lot of constitution work going on in and around Rangoon, new hotels especially. What does it mean to Burma? New hotels. That s exactly what it means to Burma. And I am surprised that they are building so many hotels, nothing but hotels. And that I must frankly say is a little worrying. I would like to see new schools, new hospitals, new nurseries, libraries, new bookshops. But everywhere there are hotels. You must have been surprised seeing all these new building after emerging from six years of house arrest. Not really, because I had been led to expect more change. There are many parts of Rangoon which remain totally unchanged. If you go around in a car you will se that the greater parts of Rangoon remain totally unchanged had been led to expect, just from listening to the news, that most of Rangoon have changed, in the sense that they are putting up new hotels. I am getting tried of hotels. Everywhere I go I find hotels. That one is a hotel. That is a motel. It seems rather unbalanced to me that there should be so many hotels. What can be done to give it a proper balance? This is what all those who want to help Burma should think about. When we think of development, we should think of the broader human development of the country rather than economic development in narrow terms of more investments, tourists and hotels. You environment is also being threatened. This is the same lesson we have learned in Thailand and other countries. I have heard that but, of course, haven t seen it with my own eyes. Is it happening here in Burma? I have heard it is happening along the border where we have so many teak forests. In Rangoon, trees have been cut down in the interest of hotels. Now that you have been freed, what stand should the world community take toward Burma. First of all. The release of other political detainees. I am the only one who has been released in the last three weeks. There are hundreds of other political detainees left. And secondly, to encourage dialogue and negotiations. This is not just for the sake of Burma but for the sake of establishing an international code of behaviour that problems are settle through negotiation. This would be an advantage to every country if we set a precedent that human beings sit down and talk to each other and solve their problems through negotiations and not through repression. Your message to all the potential donor countries and investors is don t rush. Not to rush and to please encourage a climate of dialogue and negotiation. What if the military leaders continue to ignore you? They would allow you talk to the press and to your people but they themselves will not move? We will cross the bridges when we come to them. Are you prepared for disappointments? Of course, we are prepared. But we will certainly not reveal all our strategies. We can t put all our cards on the table at this moment. Have you made preparations for such eventually? My father used to say have to hope for the best and prepare for the worst. And I always live according to that principle. Are you yourselves prepared to run the country either as president or prime minister? The advantage of being somebody in a democratic party is that you don t really have to prepare yourself as an individual for such responsibility because you are not going to be a dictator. You are going to be working as part of a team. So I do not think I have to prepare myself inparticular. We have a team which has the trust and confidence of the country, we have the ability to shoulder whatever responsibility the people wish to give to us. Are the military leaders on the right track in getting the minority groups to the negotiating table. Yes. The ceasefire are a very good idea. Ceasefire mean adecrease in human sufferings. But those are not permanent peace settlement. And that everybody has to admit that ceasefire is ceasefire. It is not permanent peace. This is just the ery first step. We will have to go on and work for permanent peace. And we must hope there will not be a regression and that ceasefire agreements will not be broken. How would you handle the problem of the minorities if you have a say, especially along the Thai-Burmese border? In the end, there were have to be negotiated settlement. They will have to talk. There are only two ways of settling conflict- either you shoot each other or you talk to each other. And I prefer the talking. What would be the proper framework for a real union of Burma to be really established? First of all, we have to build up a climate of trust. This is what is missing in Burma. Until we build up a climate of trust we can t even start effective negotiations. It is easy enough to sit around the table but if every body is suspicious of everybody we will never be able to come to any settlement acceptable to all. So we have to show the ethnic people that there is a government which they can trust and which sympathizes with their aspirations and their problems. And then I think we have to take it from there. It is possible that some of the ethnic groups may already have their own suggestions as to what kind of framework they wish to be in place before they can negotiate effectively. And it is also possible that particular framework is something that will have to be negotiated. Would you make the issue of the minorities a priority in your negotiation with the military leaders? The first thing is to start talking to each other. Then, of course, I accept that without the participation of the ethnic people we will not be able to really get lasting peace. So they certainly must come in. When you sit with the military leaders what tops your agenda? That depends on when we sit down. If next week? If we sit-down next week then I ll have to ask them to release all the political prisoners. Did the six years of house arrest have any effect on your physically and mentally? Physically, I have had problems with my neck even though it had nothing to do with my house arrest. I spent a lot of time reading. Mentally and emotionally, I think it has strengthened me. This is what all of us who were in prisons during the last six years have found out. Very few have been weakened but the majority of us have become stronger. We have had to in order to survive. So perhaps we should be thankful to them (the authorities). Did your separation from your family at any point weaken your resolve? No, it did not weaken my resolve. I have to admit that I had to train myself not to think about them too much. There was nothing I could do to help. It was a matter of discipline that I did not let my mind dwell on matters of which I could do nothing. Did you have any idea at all as to how long the house arrest would last? No. They out saying it was going to be one year and them three years. Then it was five years. Then the interpretation of the law said it was to be six years. By that time I did not set any time limit and told myself to take it as long as it was necessary. What was your normal day like? Later by the time I got used to it I would get up at 4.30 am, meditated for an hour and listened to the radio for a couple of hours. There were different stations I listened to, like the BBC World Service, The VOA and the DVB. So I started the day with a full grasp of what going on in the world outside. Then I divided up the rest of the day between reading and doing house work. What was the worst part of life under house arrest? I worried most about my colleagues- how they were and how their families were. The good part? The good part was that I had a lot of time to read. Were you allowed to get mail during the six years? In the beginning I was allowed to get letters from my family but later after he 20th of July 1990 when they extended by period of detention it was obvious that they weren t going to respect the results of the 1990 election I no longer accepted letters and parcels from my family. Did you feel at any stage that some harm might come to you? No. Let me out it this way, It didn t worry me. I was objectively aware of the fact that I was in a very vulnerable position. Tey could do anything they like to me at any time. My greatest protection was the affection and the support of the people of Burma. The international community too, of course. But in the end it was really the support and a affection of the people of Burma and respect they had for my late father which they extended to me which gave the bast protection. Do you feel safe going around Rangoon? I think I am quite safe. I do not know. I cannot guarantee my safety. You have written in your book Freedom from fear that It is not power that corrupts but fear of losing power. What is your own fear today? Fear of letting down people who have faith in me. I would rather go down my self than letting them down. But I do not think I will let them down though I will not be able to do everything they want. But I have never promised them anything. I simple said I would try my best. Are you worried that you might not be able to live up to the expectations of the people? No. I don t think there is any point of worrying about that. I will try my best. People should not be encouraged to have too strong a feeling about one person. I have always said that we should not develop this kind of feeling which is in country to the interest of democracy. What message do you convey to the people when you go out to meet them? I ask them for their support. I tell them with their support I am confident I will be able to reach the goal they want to reach. And without their support that will not be possible. (TN) ===== item ===== ~THE NATION/1.8.95 DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI'S INTERVIEW WITH THE NATION'S CHIEF EDITOR- Second Part Q. Did the six years of house arrest change you or your attitude to the pursuit of democracy? A. It's not just me. I was very happy to find that so many of my colleagues have come out without any ill will and they really had a tough time, I was under house arrest in while they were in jail. All right this is not a most beautiful house in the world but is a lot comfortable than In Sein Jail or any other jail in the country. Conditions at some of the prisons are very uncomfortable. But they have come out any ill feelings. To me it does not seem at all a surprise that I have no ill feelings. Why should I when they don't? We are all very much of the same mind. Q. Do the authorities appreciate your absence of ill feelings toward them? A. I hope they do. They also should learn not to harbor ill feelings. Q. What kind of political role do you think the military would want to see you play? A. They might not all have the same opinion. It's possible that some military leaders think I should play a certain kind of role, while others think I should play another kind of role. I cannot speak for them at all. They did try to stop me from continuing my political role and offered me the freedom to leave the country. But I never accepted that. I made it quite clear in my statement in January that I intend to go on playing an active role. Q. Are you suggesting that there may be a split within the military leadership? A. No. No. I don't think so. There may be differences of opinion as to what they want to see me do. I think on the whole they all agreed that it would be better for them if I left politics. But since I have not done so they may now have a new idea as to what they wish to me do. But I have made it very clear that I intend to go on playing an active political role. Q. Are there absolutely no conditions for your release? A. No conditions. I would not have accepted any conditions anyway. And I think they knew that. Q. Do you fear that if you leave the country you would not be allowed back again? A. Yes. That's why I am not coming to Thammasat University in a hurry. Q. Did the military say anything about your leaving the country? A. No. No. No. We don't talk about that. It's for me to decide when I leave. And I think they know that I am not going to leave. Q. Does that mean you will stay here to try to find a mode of negotiations, that will bring about a solution? Do you have a time-frame in mind? A. Not at the moment. But there may come a time when we would like to see more progress by such an such a period. But I hope it will not come to that in the right way. Q. if invited, would you and NLD be willing democracy? ~to be part of the National Convention? It all depends very much on the government will incorporate us or other people and where the National convention is heading. The National Convention is only a little. There are all kinds of National Conventions. It depends very much on the kind of national convention to which we are invited. Q. We can see lots of construction work going on in and around Rangoon, new hotels especially. What does this mean to Burma? New hotels. That's exactly what it mean to Burma. And I am surprised that they are building so many hotels, nothing but hotels. And that I must frankly say is a little worrying. I would like to see new schools, new hospitals, new nurseries, new libraries, new bookshops. But everywhere there are hotels. That I think is a little worrying. Q. You must have been surprised seeing all these new buildings after emerging from six years of house arrest. Not really, because I had been led to expect more change. There are many parts of Rangoon which remain totally unchanged. If you go around in a car you will see that the greater parts of Rangoon remain totally unchanged. I had been led to expect, just from listening to the news, that most of Rangoon had changed. This is not the case at all. Only a few areas of Rangoon have changed, in the sense that they are putting up new hotels. I am getting tired of hotels. Everywhere I go I find hotels. That one is a hotel. That is another hotel. That is an inn. That is a motel. It seems rather unbalanced to me that there should be so many hotels. Q. What can be done to give it a proper balance? This is what all those who want to help Burma should think about. When we think of development, we should think of the of the broader human development of the country rather than economic development in narrow terms of more investments, tourists and hotels. Q. Your environment is also being threatened. This is the same lesson we have learned in Thailand and other countries. A. I have heard that but, of course, haven't seen it with my own eyes. Q. Is it happening here in Burma? A. I have heard it is happening along the border where we have so many teak forest. In Rangoon, trees have been cut down in the interest of hotels. Q. So you have been talking to NLD leaders and supporters? A. Almost everyday. Yes, we are in constant contact. Q. Do you feel encouraged by their attitude? A. Yes. Yes. You must have heard the general view that the NLD in the last six years was a completely spent force and no longer viable as a political party. I do not think this is true at all. Of course, it has been dampened considerably by all the restrictions imposed on it during the last six years. But we still have the support of the people. Q. Is NLD enjoying the same level of support it did before? A. Not the same level of overt support. A lot of our members were expelled. I was expelled, too. Some left out of fear. So overtly, perhaps there is not as much support for the NLD as before the election. But we as the democratic movement, not necessarily the NLD as a party, seems to have a stronger support among the people these days than before 1990. Q. Do you think the military should have a role in whatever future solution that you may come up with? The military, of course, has a role to play in the country because, after all, we need an army. Q. What about political role? A. It's up to the people to decide. It's the people of Burma who must decide what role they wish to assign to which force within the country. Q. Personally, what do you think the role of the military should be? A. I have always said that I wish the military to be an honourable professional army because that is the best way they can protect their interests as well as the interests of the country. But what is important is how the people see their role. In the end, whatever role is assigned to whatever body it will survive in the long run only if the people approved of it. Q. You have criticized the National Convention drafting the new constitution. Do you think the constitution is so far on the right track? A. The draft constitution is certainly not heading on the track to democracy. So I think they should be open to negotiations. Q. What basic principles do you want to see in the constitution? A. The basic principle of any genuine democratic government is that the people should be able to decide whom they want to be at the helm of the nation and when remove these people. Every truly democratic government must have the mandate of the people and proper institutions to ensure that this mandate is given. Q. Now that you have been freed, what stand should the world community take toward Burma? . A. First of all, the release of other political detainees. I am the only one who has been released in the last three weeks. There are hundreds of other political detainees left. And secondly, to encourage dialogue and negotiations. This is not just for the sake of Burma but for the sake of establishing an international code of behaviour that problems are settled through negotiation. This would be an advantage to every country if we set a precedent that human beings sit down and talk to each other and solve their problems through negotiations and not through repression. Q. Your message to all the potential donor countries and investors is "don't rush." A. Not to rush and to please encourage a climate of dialogue and negotiation. Q. What If the military leaders continue to ignore you? They would allow you to talk to the press and to your people but they themselves will not move? A. We will cross the bridges when we come to them. Q. Are you prepared for disappointments? A. Of course, we are prepared. But we will certainly not reveal all our strategies. We can't put all our cards on the table at this moment. Q. Have you made preparations for such eventuality? A. My father used to say you have to hope for the best and prepare for the worst. And I always live according to that principle. Q. Are you yourselves prepared to run the country either as president or prime minister? A. The advantage of being somebody in a democratic party is that you don't really have to prepare yourself as an individual for such responsibility because you are not going to be a dictator. You are going to be working as part of a team. And we have a good team. So I do not think I have to prepare myself in particular. We have a team which has the trust and confidence of the country. We have the ability to shoulder whatever responsibility the people wish to give to us. Q. Are the military leaders on the right track in getting the minority groups to the negotiating table. A. Yes. The ceasefires are a very good idea. Ceasefires mean a decrease in human sufferings. But those are not permanent peace settlement. And that everybody has to admit that ceasefire is ceasefire. It is not permanent peace. This is just the very first step. We will have to go on and work for permanent peace. And we must hope there will not be a regression and that ceasefire agreements will not be broken. Q. How would you handle the problem of the minorities if you have a say, especially along the Thai-Burmese border? A. In the end, there will have to be negotiated settlement. They will have to talk. There are only two ways of settling conflict either you shoot each other or you talk to And I prefer the talking. Q. What would be the proper framework for a real union of Burma to be really established? A. First of all, we have to build up a climate of trust. This is what is missing in Burma. Until we build up a climate of trust we can't even start effective negotiations. It is easy enough to sit around the table but if everybody is suspicious of everybody we will never be able to come to any settlement acceptable to all. So we have to Show the ethnic people that there is a government which they can trust and which sympathizes with their aspirations and their problems. And then I think we have to take it from there. It is possible that some of the ethnic groups, may already have their own suggestions as to what kind of framework they wish to be in place before they can negotiate effectively and it is also possible that particular framework is something that will have to be negotiated. Q. Would you make the issue of the minorities a priority in your negotiation with the military leaders. A. The first thing is to start talking to each other. Then, of course, I accept that without the participation of the ethnic people we will not be able to really get lasting peace. So they certainly must come in. Q. When you sit- down with the military leaders what tops your agenda? A. That depends on when we sit down. Q. If next week? A. If we sit down next week then I'll have to ask them to release all the political prisoners. Q. Did the six years of house arrest have any effect on you physically and mentally? A. Physically, I have had problems with my neck even though it had nothing to do with my house arrest. I spent a lot of time reading. Mentally and emotionally, I think it has strengthen me. This is what all of us who were in prisons during the last six years have found out. Very few have been weaken but the majority of us have become stronger. We have had to in order to survive. SO perhaps we should be thankful to them(the authority). Q. Did your separation from your family any point weaken your resolve? No, it did not weaken my resolve. I have to admit that I had to train myself not to think about them too much. There was nothing I could do to help. It was a matter of discipline that I did not let my mind dwell on matters of which I could do nothing. Q. Did you have any idea at all as to how long the house arrest would last? A. No. They started out saying it was going to be one year and then three years. Then the interpretation of the law said it was to be six years. By that time I did not set any time limit and told myself to take it as long as it was necessary. Q. What was your normal day like? A. Later by the time I got used to it I would I get up at 4.30 am, meditated for an hour and listened to the radio for a couple of hours. There were different stations I listened to, like the BBC World Service, the VOA Burmese Service, the Democratic Voice of Burma. So I started the day with a full grasp of what was going on in the world outside. Then I divided up the rest of the day between reading and doing house work. Q. What was the worst part of life under house arrest? A. I worried most about my colleagues how they were and how their families were. Q. The good part? A. The good pan was that I had a lot of time to read. Q. Were you allowed to get mail during the six years? A. In the beginning I was allowed to get letters from my family but later after the 20th of July 1990 when they extended by period of detention it was obvious that they weren't going to respect the results of 1990 election I no longer accepted letters and parcels from my family. Q. Did you feel at any stage that some harm might come to you? A. No. Let me put it this way, It didn't worry me. I was objectively aware of the fact that I was in a very vulnerable position. They could do anything they liked to me at any time. My greatest protection was the affection and the support of the people of Burma. The international community too, of course. But in the end it was really the support and affection of the people of Burma and respect they had for my late my father which they extended to me which gave the best protection Q. Do you feel safe going around Rangoon? A. This is what all of I think I am quite safe. I do not know. I cannot guarantee my safety. Q. You have written in your book "Freedom from Fear" that it is not power that corrupts but fear of losing power." What is your own fear today? A. Fear of letting down people who have at faith in me. I would rather go down myself than letting them down. But I do not think I will let them down though I will not be able to do everything they want. But I have never promised them anything. I simply said I would try my best. Q. Are you worried that you might not be able to live up to the expectations of the people? A. No- I don't think there is any point of worrying about that. I will try my best. People should not be encouraged to have too strong a feeling about one person. I always said that we should not develop this kind of feeling which is in contrary to the interest of democracy. Q. What message do you convey to the people when you go out to meet them? A. I ask them for their support. I tell them with their support I am confident I will be able to reach the goal they want to reach. And without their support that will not be possible. =============================================================== <>