------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: August 6, 1995 THE NATION: SLORC OPENS A DOOR BUT THE THICK WALL REMAINS IN PLACE THE NATION: THAILAND'S POLICY ON BURMA MUST BE GIVEN NEW DIRECTION THE NATION: BURMESE TROOPS AND KARENNI FIGHTERS SAID TO HAVE CLASHED THE NATION: A NEW DAWN ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 ===== SLORC OPENS A DOOR BUT THE THICK WALL REMAINS IN PLACE 6 AUGUST 1995, The Nation By Don Pathan The release of Aung San Suu Kyi from her six-years house arrest came as a surprise to the international community, not to mention the people of Burma. But while foreign governments welcomed the good news, Western nations were saying that they would like to see further political progress in the country. "It is impossible to think that Slorc was not aware that freeing Suu Kyi would become a source of instability for them," said a Rangoon-based foreign diplomat. At present, the State Law and Order Restoration Council's, as the Burmese government is known, next task was to look for a way to turn Suu Kyi's release, which was a well-publicized event, into something personally beneficial. The process seems to have started already when Rangoon decided to allow a large group of foreign press, including some journalists who were previously black-listed, to cover the release. Slorc's decision to allow such a large group of foreign press to cover the event was supposed to show the world that Burma was ready to put up with such coverage that was an integral part of a modern political state. In other words, it was a way of saying to the international media that Burma had nothing to hide, and that the country was ready to follow_to a certain extent_the international norm from which it had isolated itself from the last two decades. What is even more surprising was that just before midnight on the day of Suu Kyi's release, Burmese television aired the first footage from Suu Kyi's residence on University Avenue. The unedited report filmed by a Japanese TV crew showed two prominent National League for Democracy leaders, U Tin Oo and U Kyi Maung, leaving her residence. Ironically, the same footage was taped and shown at the Burmese embassy in Bangkok a few days after her release. Suu Kyi's picture on TV came as a surprised to just about everybody who were waiting for a visa to Burma. For a country that has been holding out against international condemnation over the last six years, it was important for Slorc that the world saw them as having complete control over the new political landscape that they had created by releasing Suu Kyi. Also, it was just as important that the international community acknowledged that Slorc was dealing with the whole situation from a position of power. Aside from the release itself, one of Slorc's first major schemes was to invite Suu Kyi, who they previously referred to as "the lady", to attend this year Martyrs' Day ceremony to commemorate Burma's assassinated national heroes who liberated Burma from British rule. Although the invitation came as a surprise to some_her presence was appropriate because one of the hero being commemorated was her father, Gen Aung San_Slorc had to make sure that her appearance would be low-key. Most importantly, they had to make sure that her entrance into Burma's political arena took a direction that would not in any way jeapordize their existence. As a result, Suu Kyi first public appearance in six years had to be isolated from the thousands of spectator who waited patiently outside the park where the official ceremony was being conducted. Moreover, extra precautions were taken on the day to prevent any possible disturbance from the public, with armed guards posted throughout the city. Foreign journalists were also invited to attend, although they were kept away from Suu Kyi and all the Rangoon-based foreign diplomats. And on the next day the government newspaper, The New Light of Myanmar, showed on its front page a picture of Suu Kyi's laying a wreath, but the caption and the story failed to elaborte on her presence. "It is logical for Slorc to play such an event [Suu Kyi at the Martyrs' Day ceremony] up because it would show that they were ready to participate in the new era they had created by releasing Suu Kyi," said the Rangoon-based foreign diplomat. Moreover, a picture of her husband and son, Dr Michael Aris and Kim, taken on the day of their arrival in Rangoon, appeared on the paper the next day. For the Japanese business community, who were eagerly waiting the green light from Tokyo to invest in earnest, Slorc's handling of whole situation came as a blessing. At the recent Asean ministerial meeting in Brunei, a senior Japanese official hinted that the Japanese government was considering resuming official aid to Burma. "We have been encouraged by the recent development there," said Japan's Deputy Foreign Minister Hiroshi Fukyda after meeting with his Burmese counterpart U Ohn Gyaw. Earlier this year, Japan gave humanitarian aid, to the sum of one billion yen, to minority groups in Burma in an attempt to convey a message to Slorc that it had to improve its human rights record, as well as its democratic reform. But to dismiss all these recent developments_Suu Kyi's release, the acceptance of foreign press and the Martyrs Day ceremony_as something incidental is to undermine Slorc's power of manipulation in Burma, as well as the junta's rigid control over its people. It is worth nothing that the Burmese press is still heavily censored, people are prohibited from holding group meetings without permission and some human rights activists and political prisoners are still in prison. Moreover, Rangoon University, once a centre for the democracy movement, is strategically fenced off in certain areas to prevent students from gathering [to unite and protest]. The campus grounds has been off-limits to foreign visitors since the 1988 uprising and a sign at the entrance threatened legal action against any unauthorized person found on the campus. Nevertheless, Slorc knows only too well that removing their protective wall, separating them from the outside world has its price. Soliciting much needed foreign capital will always come with conditions. After all, there is a fine line drawn between foreign policy and foreign interests. Slorc is well aware that taking money from donor countries comes with a list of conditions. This is not to say that these conditions would force them to turn into angles overnight. If anything, it means that, for the first time, they would be held accountable to outside powers_the people that they had isolated themselves from for the last two decades. How the military junta handles the external pressure remains to be seen. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see how this group of military generals, who are not use to taking orders, behave themselves. Suu Kyi's release was also much welcomed by Burma's neighbouring countries, particularly Thailand and Singapore, who had hoped that such action would some how elevate the Association of Southeast Asian Nation's (Asean) profile as an organization that can actually accomplish things. In this case through their so-called constructive engagement with Slorc. But while Asean was quick to take credit for her release, representatives from the member countries were very cautious about making any contact with Suu Kyi's camp fearing retaliation from Slorc, as seen when Asean invited her to attend a luncheon but later did a U-turn because of objections from Slorc. Furthermore, supporters of the constructive engagement policy had hoped that her release would at least quietened some of the critics of the policy. It was often criticized as a thinly disguised agreement aimed at protecting business interests in Burma. Nevertheless, with or without the presence of the foreign press, Burma is still a very restricted country. The local press is censored and there is no freedom of speech. Arbitrary arrests, as well as other from abuses, were still being reported by human rights groups. At the moment, it remain to be seen whether Slorc can adjust when its protective wall finally comes down. Though Slorc has acknowledged that engaging in an international arena requires them to behave a certain way. Nevertheless, it remain to be seen whether the country continues along this line or retreats back into isolation. And if it does go forward, will the rest of the world continue to ignore the injustice and suffering that has become any everyday occurrence in Burma, and go on with its business-as-usual attitude? (TN) THAILAND'S POLICY ON BURMA MUST BE GIVEN NEW DIRECTION 6 AUGUST 1995, The Nation Thailand's controversial policy of "constructive engagement" has been criticized not only by the West but also by Thai academics and opposition politicians. Rita Patiyasevi gives the low-down on the domestic criticism of the policy. Thailand's tow-track policy towards Burma has often landed the country in deep water. Inconsistency among Thai policy-makers has destabilished conditions along the Thai-Burmese border and subsequently deteriorated the government's relationship with the ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council. Time and again, academics, opposition politicians and non-government organizations have strongly criticized Bangkok's policy of "constructive engagement", giving rise to the question of who actually benefits from the policy. As such, Thailand has been urged by many to seriously review its controversial policy with Burma and to clarify the direction of its future relationship with its western neighbour. The futility of maintaining a policy that establishes positive relations with Slorc while at the same time forging shady relations with minority groups fighting for greater autonomy from Rangoon was underlined almost immediately after the junta seized power in a coup in 1988.Thailand gained the dubious distinction of being the first country to recognize Slorc's illegal rule when the then army chief Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh visited Burma in December 1988. That same time, Gen Chavalit came in for strong criticism from Thai student leaders and NGOs for arranging the repatriations of several hundred Burmese students without any guarantee of their safety back home. In all, more than 100 students were sent back to an unknown future in exchange for access to Burma's natural resources, according to several academics and human rights agencies. In 1990, when Slorc refused to acknowledge the victory of the opposition National League for Democracy in the May 1990 general elections, the Thai military sent a soccer team for a friendly match in Rangoon with Gen Chavalit as the guest of honour. After the unexpected release of Burma's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi from nearly six years of house arrest, it is perhaps the right time for a change in Thailand's approach towards its western neighbour. The Thai policy is badly in need of reform and a sense of unity and direction. The Foreign Ministry should be in control of the direction of the new policy towards Burma and should not leave it in the hands of the military and the National Security Council, several members of which have either developed a completely distorted picture of Burma or have cultivated vested interests in the country. Critics and academics have often debated and tried to formulate a new approach to replace the "constructive engagement" policy. In many forums, like one held over a week ago at Thammasat University, panel speakers agree the "constructive engagement" policy only benefits selective groups of people. "The [constructive engagement] policy might have contributed to some positive economic changes in Burma, but economic gains should not be the sole rationale for the policy," said Palang Dharma MP Suthin Noppakhet. "No doubt every country wants to progress but the practise of obtaining benefits in complete disregard of the rights of the Burmese people should be discouraged." Suthin, the former chairman of House committee on foreign affairs and human rights, over the last two years has called on the government to revise its policy, arguing it would be more effective to deal with Slorc through dialogue. "Dialogue does not constitute interference and it should be something that both sides can accept," he said. He disagreed with previous governments' stance of non-interference in other country's internal matters, saying it was time for Thailand to reconsider the idea for the sake of a more peaceful co-existence between the two countries. "The Foreign Ministry must take the lead and adopt a pro-active stance and not wait to tackle problems when they occur," he said. Suthin called for a transparent foreign policy and changes in the attitude of Thai politicians and authorities. He also urged law enforcement officers to stop sexually harassing young Burmese girls, many of whom are forced into prostitution and later arrested by Thai police. "How can we call this constructive engagement," he said. Foreign Minister MR Kasem S Kasemsri, while rejecting accusations that the is trying to pursue a "double-edged policy" towards Burma, last week instructed the Thai Ambassador to Rangoon Poksak Nillubon to pay a visit on Suu Kyi. The visit, which took place only after Kasem cleared the matter with his Burmese counterpart U Ohn Gyaw, was a positive step and can be seen as a indicating gradual progress in Thailand's attempt to establish contacts with Burmese opposition or pro-democracy groups. In the past, Thailand as well as other Asean members, avoided any such contacts for fear of antagonizing Slorc, which considers the activities of Suu Kyi and other the domestic affair of Burma. Kraisak Chonhavan, a personal adviser top former prime minister Chatichai Choonhavan, criticized Slorc, saying Suu Kyi's freedom was a publicity stunt which would allow Burma a smooth entry into Asean. Although resource-rich Burma is attractive economically, the Thai government should integrate it into the regional grouping only when Burma makes significant improvement in human rights and democracy issues. "There remain some 50 well-known political prisoners and hundreds of others who are still locked in jail," he said, quoting figures from the London-based Amnesty International. Kraisak has urged the government to adopt a more humanitarian attitude towards Burmese refugees, citing the Indian policy towards the Burmese fugitives there. In India, exiled Burmese are provided access to academic studies and enjoy a certain freedom in conducing peaceful political activities. "Over 30 temporary refugee camps along the border should be transformed into permanent ones with possible access to the International Committee of the Red Cross, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other private relief agencies," he said. "Over thousands of Burmese students here should be given the right to pursue higher education, to freely travel and work," he added. Suu Kyi's release was only the first-step in democratic reform in Burma. Slorc, in fact, has not taken any other steps since it began its rule in 1988 to show that it is serious in bringing about political, it not democratic, reform, in Burma. Slorc, from the very beginning, neither had the public mandate nor the right to rule and it should be told so. Thailand as well as the other members of the international community has to prove its commitment to democratic changes in Burma and continue to provide strong moral and political support to the Burmese opposition. (TN) BURMESE TROOPS AND KARENNI FIGHTERS SAID TO HAVE CLASHED 6 AUGUST 1995, The Nation Burmese troops and Karenni fighters have traded attacks in Burma's eastern Kayah state 10 kilometres from Mae Hong Son, it was reported on Friday. A number of Burmese troops from Sop Huay Mae Yu launched a surprise attack on a Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP) frontline base and were met with fierce resistance, Channel 7 said. Seven Karenni were killed and four wounded in the hour-long clash. Casualties on the Burmese side were not known, the report said. The KNPP fighters struck back at Burmese troops at Sop Huay Mae Yu, killing 12 soldiers and wounding several. The Karenni suffered no losses in the two-hour encounter ands seized food supplies and arms, it said. (TN) A NEW DAWN 6 AUGUST 1995, The Nation The ruling Burmese junta is slowly projecting the country as an economically attractive destination. Don Pathan reports on the changes and the public mood towards the changing environment after a two-week visit to the country. After two decades of self-imposed isolation, signs are beginning to emerge throughout Rangoon suggesting the ruling State Law and Order restoration Council would like to crawl out of its shell to join the post-Cold War global trend towards privatization and pursuing a market-led economy. Throughout the city, billboards and constructions are becoming increasingly prominent. Many hotels and shopping centres are being constructed and they are expected to be completed within the next few months. A Rangoon-based foreign diplomat pointed out Slorc is not building these hotels and shopping plazas for the 1996 "Visit Myanmar Year." He said Slorc is looking 20 years ahead and is currently taking advantage of cheap labour and low construction costs. While no one is disputing the rate economic growth, critics are quick to point out that the economic growth id benefiting only an elite. Indeed, with an inflation rate of 32 per cent annually and a sense of uncertainty, many Burmese are finding it increasingly difficult to move up the social ladder. Burmese democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi herself has questioned whether the economic growth of the past six years has reached a few of the privileged or Burma as a whole. Moreover, she said the numerous constructions are quite worrisome. "When we think about development, we should think of the broader human development of the country rather than economic development in the narrow terms of more investment, tourists and hotels," said Suu Kyi. Furthermore, she added that despite the growth, the people of Burma still have a strong desire for political reform. "The overt demand for democracy has quietened down but this has nothing to do with what the people fear inside," said Suu Kyi. Nevertheless, the military junta has given strong indications it is ready to rejoin the outside world and follow in the footsteps of some of its wealthier neighbours, namely Thailand and Singapore. "The Burmese authorities, particularly the finance and commerce ministries, have been making trips abroad to meet with potential investors," said Siam City Bank representative in Rangoon, Aroon Buranatanyarat. One of the first indications of their intention of joining the international bandwagon came at the recent annual Asean Ministerial Meeting in Brunei. Slorc took the world by surprise when they acceded to the association's founding treaty. Indeed, the accession to the 1976 Asean Treaty of Amity and Cooperation would bring the region one step closer to its ultimate goal of "one Southeast Asia". Among other sceptics, however, Burma's accession would allow Slorc an arena, namely the Asean Regional Forum (ARF), to present their arguments to their Western counterparts who have consistently over the past six years condemned Rangoon's human rights records. But whether Asean will allow Burma to use the grouping in such a way remains to be seen. Judging from Slorc's behaviour over the past six years when international pressure did not seems to trouble it, Asean might be seeing some difficult days ahead. While a tradition of frankness among Asean members has yet to be developed, it would be interesting to see how long the association will remains silent if Rangoon decides to take advantage of the opportunities made available by becoming a member of Asean. Currently, Rangoon is being comforted by Asean and the Japanese pledge of a 1 billion yen in "humanitarian assistance" earlier this year and a 4 billion yen debt-relief grant just two months later. Rangoon is likely to sustain this positive momentum by completing the new constitution they have been sitting on since 1993. Among other things, the constitution will definitely provide a clause ensuring Slorc's reign continues. But as it stands, several major points are being contested by Suu Kyi's supporters. For one thing, the requires that the head of state be "familiar" with military affairs. Moreover, it specifically bars anyone married to a foreign citizen or who has lived outside of Burma for a number of years. Both of these provisions, needless to say, apply to Suu Kyi. While the idea of transforming the Burmese political system is still far from the minds of the Slorc generals, they know very well that acceding to Asean's founding treaty will mean Rangoon can no longer enjoy the business-as-usual attitude of the old days. And as the country opens itself up politically and economically, sooner or later Burma will see that its people will discover new aspirations and inevitably, develop new expections of their leaders. However, this is not to say that with an open economy, Burma will immediately put an end to its oppressive ways. If anything, it would make Slorc more accountable to accepted international standards. Meanwhile, Washington's threats of economic sanctions will most likely be toned down, despite the rhetoric of some congressman calling for a punitive economic embargo. But regardless of what the United States may do, plenty of investors in the region are ready and able to take advantage of Burma's vast resources in case American firms pull out. To be consistent with other Western countries who previously called on Asean to go beyond constructive engagement, Washington will adopt a more precautionary stance towards Rangoon and play the waiting game. Furthermore, the presence of foreign journalists in recent weeks suggest the authorities may have begun to ease up their firm rule over the people. Nevertheless, the press is still strictly censored, the law still prohibits people from meeting in groups and forced labour is still being reported by international human rights groups. Many investors have complained of corruption and red-tape, while some Thais are suggesting they are steadily falling behind Singaporeans in getting lucrative business contracts. Aroon stated that Burma's conservation laws may seem too rigid to some foreign investors but insisted the government must be firm because they "don't want to make the same mistake their more-developed neighbours have made with regard to natural resources." The official exchange rate for the Burmese currency is six kyats for one US dollar. However, one greenback can easily attract as much as 100-110 kyats on the black-market. Moreover, gasoline is rationed at four gallons a week per car. But throughout the city, one can find easily find illegal stations where gas is sold from a bottle or a plastic container. The black-market activities do not go unnoticed. The government tolerates it because it has no choice. But for foreign investors who are not used to this type of uncertainty, doing business in Burma can be a different kind of challenge. (TN)