------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: November 7, 1995 Issue #272 Noted in Passing: I would think that if Slorc falls, any company which has made a contract with it should be aware that the democratic government is not obliged to follow that contract. - US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (quoted in: BKK POST: 'HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY FIRST': INTERVIEW) HEADLINES: ========== INDEPENDENT LETTER: RE: DR. SEGAL & SLORC'S MYANMAR S.H.A.N : THAIS DISMISS NARESUAN FROM SERVICE NATION: KAREN REBELS URGE UNITED STAND IN TALKS WITH SLORC BKK POST: KARENS PLAN PEACE TALKS WITH RANGOON JUNTA NATION: BURMA ENACTS NEW LAW TO REGULATE GEMS TRADE NATION: ANOTHER BLOW TO BURMESE HOPES BKK POST: SIRI PLANS TO HOLD BORDER DISCUSSIONS IN RANGOON BKK POST: SLORC SHOULD RETHINK PROPOSED CHARTER BKK POST: 'HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY FIRST' NATION: SINGAPORE TRADE MISSION FOR BURMA BKK POST: TRADERS THREATEN PROTESTS AGAINST MOEI DREDGING ---------------------------------------------------------- Produced with the support of the Burma Information Group (B.I.G) and the Research Department of the ABSDF {MTZ} 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://sunsite.unc.edu/freeburma/freeburma.html [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. If you have questions on any of the following subjects, please direct email to the following volunteer 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 Campus activism: zni@students.wisc.edu Boycott campaigns: [Pepsi] wcsbeau@superior.ccs.carleton.ca Buddhism: Buddhist Relief Mission: brelief@gol.com Chin history/culture: plilian@asc.corp.mot.com Fonts: tom@cs.colgate.edu History of Burma: zni@students.wisc.edu Kachin history/culture: 74750.1267@compuserve.com Karen history/culture: Karen Historical Society: 102113.2571@Compuserve.com Mon history/culture: [volunteer needed] Naga history/culture: Wungram Shishak: z954001@oats.farm.niu.edu Burma-India border [volunteer needed] Pali literature: "Palmleaf": c/o burmanet@igc.apc.org Shan history/culture: [volunteer needed] Shareholder activism: simon_billenness@mail.cybercom.net Tourism campaigns: bagp@gn.apc.org "Attn. S.Sutcliffe" World Wide Web: FreeBurma@POBox.com Volunteering: christin@ksc.net.th [Feel free to suggest more areas of coverage] *********************** INDEPENDENT LETTER: RE: DR. SEGAL & SLORC'S MYANMAR AND STRIDER'S POSTING From: Bertil Lintner November 5, 1995 As a journalist, I agree with Strider. There is a major story here: Ms Segal has swindled money from Peregrine and the Slorc, or both. Her cerdibility as a "letter writer" on any subject, or as a witness in Congress, is zero. What we need to know is why Peregrine fired her, and I do believe that Peregrine owes the press this information. Over the past years, there have been numerous rumours about Ms Segal and her involvement in Burma, which do not seem to be confined to shrimps. In a printed handout (of which I have got a copy) she states that Peregrine Myanmar (when she was the person in charge in Rangoon) had unique access to the army's pension funds. These "funds", as we all know, is a euphemism for laundered drug money. What does Peregrine have to say about this? We in the media are waiting for an answer, not just an apology. In their own interest, Peregrine should respond to this, rather than have to appear in court in Hongkong, where I believe they are registered. Sincerely, Bertil Lintner Bangkok ******************************** S.H.A.N : THAIS DISMISS NARESUAN FROM SERVICE 3 November 1995 The Royal Thai Army is reported to have disbanded the Naresuan Force that had been overseeing the border security with Burma, raising fears among the Shan Resistance that the Thais may finally succumb to Rangoon's wishes. Naresuan is the name of the Thai King who flourished in the late 16th century. Taken hostage by King Bayinnaung of Pegu as a boy, he grew up in the Burmese court. After Bayinnaung's death, he revolted and freed Siam from Burmese domination. The date - 25 January 1593 - of his successful duel with the Burmese crowned prince, whom he killed with his sword, is celebrated today as Thai Armed Forces Day. In 1600, he supported the Shan prince Khamkainoi's struggle for independence from Burma. Being attacked by the Burmese again in 1605, Khamkainoi called for assistance from Naresuan, who promptly led a Legion into the Shan State. Unhappily for both the Thais and the Shans, he caught a fever and died in Mongharn, a Shan village in today's Mongton Township, opposite Chiangmai Province of Thailand. A Stupa was built in his memory there, His death left the Shans under Burmese power until 1882, when Shans united to overthrow the Burmese yoke. As a result, Shans were free from Burma for 66 years until 1948, when they decided to join hands together to form a union. In 1960, after reports abounded about Naresuan's spirit protecting the Shan Resistance, the stupa was demolished by the Burmese. Fragments of the bricks from the stupa were brought to the Thai town of Muang-ngai in Chiangmai Province by the aggrieved members of the members of the Resistance and were received by His Majesty the King and the then Governor of Chiangmai, Nirandorn Chaiyanarm in a ceremony on 25 January 1965. A new stupa was finished on 19 September 1970. The late Shan leader, Gen Kornzarng, often visited the place during his trips to Thailand. The border security henceforth, the reports says, shall be directly relegated to the 4th Infantry Division of the Third Regional Army. *********************************** NATION: KAREN REBELS URGE UNITED STAND IN TALKS WITH SLORC November 5, 1995 Reuter Burma's Karen rebels, who have been battling the central government for autonomy for generations, called for unity among the Karen people while they negotiate with Rangoon to end their war. The Karen National Union (KNU), said in a statement the opportunity for peace could be wasted if unity were lost. "This is the most important time for the KNU as we negotiate with the Slorc," the statement said. The guerrillas have met representatives of the ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) several times this year, and another round of talks is due this month in the southeastern Burmese town of Pa-an, guerrilla sources said. "We must be careful as we present our opinions to the Slorc and we appeal to all Karen people to remain united and not be misled. If we are not united we will surely lose this opportunity," the statement said. The statement, published on Friday, was distributed among the 70,000 Karen refugees living in camps along the Thai side of the Thai-Burmese frontier as well as inside Burma, a guerrilla source said. A serious split developed in the KNU late last year when several hundred Buddhist fighters mutinied against their mostly- Christian leaders and joined forces with the government army. The mutineers then assisted government forces in a successful assault on the KNU's headquarters at Manerplaw in southeastern Burma on the border with Thailand. (TN) *************** BKK POST: KARENS PLAN PEACE TALKS WITH RANGOON JUNTA November 11, 1995 THE Karen National Union is ready to send a delegation to Rangoon for peace talks with the State Law and Order Restoration Council this month a Thai security officer in Mae Sot District of Tak said yesterday. The source, who wished to remain anonymous, said KNU president Gen Bo Mya wanted peace to be restored in Burma. Meanwhile, the KNU distributed leaflets to Karen people in refugee camps along the Thai-Burmese border stating their position and framework for the negotiations. According to the leaflets, the KNU said it encouraged Karen people to give their opinions about the talks. Recently, a Rangoon delegation met KNU representatives at the Thai-Burmese border for preparatory talks. Peace talks were previously held between the two warring sides in 1949, 1960 and 1963 but all ended in failure. ***************************************** THE NATION: BURMA ENACTS NEW LAW TO REGULATE GEMS TRADE November 5, 1995 The Burmese junta has enacted a new law to regulate the trade and export of precious stones. The "Myanmar [Burmese] Gemstone Law", introduced and signed by Mines Minister Lt Gen Kyaw Min, requires all gem traders to register before Nov 15 for tax exemption. Those who fail to do so face prosecution. It is viewed as an amnesty to those who illegally possess precious gems, as many of the stones have been smuggled out through the border for sale overseas. The new legislation also identified areas which will be granted for concession and the qualifications needed by private sector investors. It also stipulated the establishment of a state organ to assess and evaluate gems. (TN) *************** THE NATION: ANOTHER BLOW TO BURMESE HOPES November 5, 1995 By Mya Maung, who is a Professor of Finance, School of Management, Boston College. The latest illegal action of the Burmese generals to destroy the democracy movement was the denial by the Election Commission to reinstate Burma's focal point of democracy, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, as the General Secretary of her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD) that won the 1990 multiparty election by a landslide. To begin with, the expelling of Daw Suu Kyi from the roster of NLD's executives was made arbitrarily by the Election Commission back in 1990 after the arbitrary incarceration of the young woman in 1989. The Election Commission itself is an illegal institution created by the Burmese generals to impose their will on the people of Burma. There is no rule of law in Myanmar (the new name of Burma chosen by the illegitimate government) under the governance of the State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) that has been ruling against wish of the Burmese people by not honouring the result 1990 multiparty democratic elections. In order to understand this latest illegal action of not allowing Daw Suu Kyi to claim her rightful position of the General Secretary of NLD, one must understand the nature and functioning of both the domestic and international politics of Burma during the past five years. Domestically, the Slorc made up of 21 Burmese generals has virtually decimated the NLD and its headquarters in central Burma by passing arbitrary orders and laws, arresting and sentencing to jail terms the leaders, elected candidates, and hundreds of NLD members. Meanwhile, using its superior military power and armed forces equipped with modern weapons bought mostly from China, the main ethnic minority rebel groups, the Kachins, Karens and Mons, have been subdued and forced into entering "bilateral" ceasefire agreements. Internationally, the most important factor that has helped the junta to legitimize its rule has been the willingness of nations from around the world to invest, trade, and establish economic ties with Burma. Not only trade delegations from around the world but also high- ranking government officials, including Chinese Prime Minister Li Peng and Foreign Minister Qian Qichen, Thai Foreign Minister Prasong Soonsiri, Singapore's Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, Vietnam's Prime Minister Vo Van Kiet and the UN officials and the US diplomats and representatives, have paid official visits to Burma between 1993 and 1995. At the invitation of the ASEAN, Burma accepted and attended as a guest at the ministerial meeting in July 1994 and in July 1995 hosted by Thailand and Brunei respectively. The ASEAN also extended the invitation to Burma to attend the forth coming Summit Meeting to highlight the de facto recognition of Slorc as the legitimate government of Burma. On July 10, 1995, having established the so-called national peace by intimidation and military force, the junta surprisingly released Burma's most famous prisoner of conscience, the 1991 Nobel Peace Laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, from house arrest along with the two ex-chairmen of NLD, U Tin Oo and U Kyi Maung. Her release was surprising for several reasons. In January 1995, the junta bluntly stated that she would not be released. The despite the UN and Western condemnation of her arbitrary incarceration and other human rights violations by the Slorc, diplomatic and trade delegations of nations from around the world have been establishing economic ties and investment projects in Burma. The only thorn left on the side of the Burmese generals for gaining legitimacy was the incarceration of the 1991 Nobel Peace Laureate. Releasing her releases whatever international pressure [there was] against the regime. After the release, the ASEAN welcomed with open arms Burma's accession to the 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation as a first step toward becoming a full-blown member of the ASEAN. Japan, the historical creditor and aid donor of Burma, has also shown eagerness of resuming official aid to Myanmar based upon this action. It seems apparent that the ulterior motive of the Burmese junta in releasing the prisoners is to improve its international image to attract more foreign direct investments and recapture the suspended bilateral and multilateral aid since 1988 from the West, Japan, and International Organizations such as the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, and the IF. As Daw Suu Kyi aptly remarked after her release with respect to human rights conditions and democratization in Myanmar: "I have been released, that's all. Nothing else has changed under military rule." Apparently, the US Senator McConnell and a few of his colleagues have heeded the statement made by the freed prisoner when he proposed his bill of economic sanctions against Myanmar as an Amendment No 2744 (Free Burma Act) to the Senate's 1996 Foreign Operations Appropriations Act, 1996. It was temporarily approved by the US Senate on September 21, 1995. But it immediately ran into trouble as the main opponent to the bill, Senator John McCain protested for a lack of debate and considerations of its impact on the most-favoured nation status of China, Thailand, and other ASEAN countries, causing McConnell to withdraw his bill. The familiar US foreign policy of not imposing sanctions against a ruthless regime unless there is international support triumphed as McConnell's bill to free Burma was thrown out by the Senators and the spokesmen of the Clinton Administration, including Winston Lord and Kent Wiedmann, who opposed economic sanctions against Burma as "counterproductive." Against this background, the highly confident and defiant Burmese military regime bluntly stated through its ambassador to Thailand that it saw no need to engage in any dialogue with Daw Suu Kyi on political reforms. The justification for this position was made in light of its success in holding the National Convention to draw up the catch- 22 constitution that guarantees "a leading role for the Burmese army in the future politics and government of Myanmar." The US foreign policy of engaging with the Slorc is also greatly influenced by its concern over the steadily increasing export of heroin of some 200 tons a year to the outside world and sixty per cent of which has been reported to find its way to the United States from the Golden Triangle of Burma. Since 1994, the Burmese junta has been successful in using its highly publicized opium eradication programmes and military campaign against the Mong Tai Army of the infamous drug warlord, Khun Sa, to receive technical cooperation from the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) of the US government and financial support from the UN drug agencies. Thus, the painful and protracted political impasse on democratization of Burma and the military stranglehold on power will continue with no immediate prospect for the imposition of economic sanctions against Myanmar by the United States or any other nations. However, despite the SLORC's claim of phenomenal economic growth and rise in foreign direct investments, the economic plight of ordinary people has been continuing with no end in sight. Prices of basic necessities have been rising at a rate of three to four times higher than the grossly underestimated government report of only 30 per cent. The Burmese economy has been under siege by black marketeering and shortages of basic necessities, including the main Burmese staple, rice, as well as cooking fuel, water supply and energy. In its August 1995 issue, the private Burmese economic journal, Myana Dana, reported that the price of top quality rice, Pawsun Mhway, rose above Kt 100 per pyi and the price of the lowest quality rice, Nga Sein, climbed to Kt80 per pyi. However, in November 1995, the prices of these two quality rice dropped back down to Kt90 and Kt50 per pyi that are still far above their 1994 average prices to indicate a continuing worsening of living conditions for ordinary people. The shortage of rice for domestic consumption has been occurring, despite the government report of phenomenal increase in the paddy and rice output and a forecast of 1 to 1.5 million tonnes of rice export to the drought-affected Indonesia in the forthcoming year of 1995/96. The main cause of rice shortage for domestic consumption and escalating price has been the highly inefficient system of procurement of paddy and distribution of rice riddled with corruption and black marketeering. Notice also that rice export is monopolized by the state to earn foreign exchange. >From all indications, the generals are not likely to concede to her political leadership nor are they willing to transfer power to the legitimate winners of the 1990 elections, the NLD candidates. In the 1990 elections, the junta had already cleverly passed an arbitrary law by stipulating that those who enjoy the privilege from a foreign government will be allowed to be a political leader, directing at Suu Kyi's marriage to an Englishman, Michael Aris. Thus, the domestic political impasse on democratization and marginalization of the most dangerous political foe to the Burmese junta will continue to succeed in deterring any serious international sanctions as human rights violations have taken a second seat to commercial interests of Asian and Western countries in dealing with Burma. Future political turmoil, repression, and devastation are not completely out of the question in a land where there is no rule of law and no real economic growth for the people who live in terror and fear under the rule of the guns. (TN) *************** BKK POST: SIRI PLANS TO HOLD BORDER DISCUSSIONS IN RANGOON November 5, 1995 Former Third Army commander Gen Siri Thiwaphan plans to discuss with senior Burmese military officials three main issues which have strained relations between the two countries during a visit to Rangoon over the next three days. The topics expected to be discussed are the opening of Thai- Burmese border checkpoints, the construction of the Thai-Burmese Friendship Bridge over the Moei River and the row over the murder of Burmese fishermen in Ranong. The discussions are aimed at paving the way for an official visit to Rangoon by Foreign Minister Kasem S. Kasemsri next weekend. Gen Siri, as chairman of the advisory board to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, flies out today to lead the ministry's first delegation to Rangoon under the current government. The 20-member delegation includes officials and businessmen and will participate in a religious ceremony in Nakalaiku temple. Thai and Burmese businessmen will meet tomorrow and on Tuesday Gen Siri is expected to pay a courtesy call on top officials of the ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc). They are SLORC's chairman Senior Gen Than Shwe, vice chairman Gen Maung Aye and the First Secretary-General and Military Intelligence chief Lt Gen Khin Nyunt. Gen Siri said: "I am going to sound out their views and exchange understanding, not to make any agreement." And he expressed confidence that meeting with his old friends Gen Maung Aye and Lt Gen Khin Nyunt will help smooth the talks. The results of the meeting will be reported to M.R. Kasem who is due to visit Burma on November 12-13, he said. Gen Siri and Gen Maung Aye worked closely together when the former was the Third Army commander and the latter Eastern Army commander in 1989-91. Burma closed its border with Thailand at Tak and Chiang Rai provinces in March alleging Thai support for ethnic rebels, while the Ranong border checkpoint was closed after the murder of at least five Burmese fishermen allegedly by Thai colleagues. The construction of the bridge over the Moei River was also suspended in June for what Rangoon saw as Thailand's land encroachment onto a small island in the middle of the river. (BP) *************** BKK POST: SLORC SHOULD RETHINK PROPOSED CHARTER November 5, 1995 By U Thaung At the United Nations recently, Burma's Foreign Minister U Ohn Gyaw remarked: "A national convention has been convened to draft a new constitution which would be in harmony with present-day realities and reflect the aspirations of the entire nation." Meanwhile, at home in Burma, the State Law and Order Restoration Council announced the adjournment of the National Convention meeting called last week. It's good that the National Convention meeting has been put off. It would be better if the National Convention meeting were abandoned. But the best possible scenario would be for the Slorc to scrap altogether the idea of establishing a 25 per cent military dictatorship parliamentary system. It's a utopian constitution which has nothing to do with the realities of the nation and the aspirations of its people. It's impractical, unworkable, nonsensical, and unlikely ever to win popular acceptance. The proposed constitution stipulates that to be eligible for the presidency, a candidate must have 20 year's residency and have not come under "foreign influences". That is ridiculous. Why don 't the Slorc just include in the draft what they really want to say, which is: "Any woman whose address happens to be 54, University Avenue, Rangoon, is automatically disqualified from ever attaining the presidency." Since 1993, the national convention had to be postponed again and again because the army was not able to control the delegates_even though they were hand picked. Out of the 700 delegates, only the military and civil service delegates sat quietly and remained in line with the army. The rest rebelled. Some delegates deserted, running into exile in places as far away as America and Australia. Against the will of the army, the Lahus and the Was submitted a proposal at the convention to introduce a federal system with democratic rights. The Shans went further. They rejected the 25 per cent military parliament. They demanded sovereign power to be vested in an elected legislature. The result? Repeated adjournments of the convention. The concept of the military having a leadership role in politics is not to be found in any civilised country in the world today. The Burmese military leaders must learn to accept that an officer in the army, a railway engineer, an agricultural officer, a teacher, a lower division clerk - all are civil servants. None have the right to dictate to the government. Working for the government in supposedly perilous fields, soldiers have been able to claim better benefits. The Burma Army did so when civil war raged in 1948. In 1949, the Parliament of the Union of Burma granted generous increases in the pay and benefits of military personnel. A captain's pay was increased from Ks 525-600 plus to Ks631-806 allowance, while other government servants of the same rank_ Sub-Divisional Officer, Treasury Officer, Assistant Engineer_ were all working with a pay scale of Ks 350. Since the 1962 military takeover, the military pay scale were raised at the will of the army, and benefits to military officers augmented. A law was passed giving generous contributions of civilian tax payers' money to any business invested in by military officers. The greed of the Burmese military is like a man who drinks salt water. he gets no satisfaction; he just gets thirstier. Today military officers are the elite. They are a class that is second to none. Civilians, on the other hand, are a low class of people, ranked a hundred times lower than the military. Out of this situation the military demand the right to a 25 per cent military parliamentary system. They want eternal hegemony. No way, the Burmese people will never embrace such a constitution. Throughout history, the Burmese have battled for better constitutions. They understand that a constitution is a contract between the ruling class and the working class. The people will never surrender 25 per cent of their rights to the army just because the army is armed to their teeth for the purpose of overpowering the people. The Burmese people have been fighting for better constitutions since colonial rule began. A decade after the 1897 annexation, the British established a small Legislative Council of nine members picked by the governor. This was rejected by the Burmese people. As a result of reform, the legislature was enlarged from nine to seventeen, with two elected representatives in 1909. Although the two delegates were elected from the British Chamber of Commerce and Rangoon Traders Association, it was the beginning of a representative system for Burma. The Burmese masses did not accept the system, and political movements started in 1908 in the form of religious reform. The Young Men's Buddhist Association began the struggle for political power to be placed in the hands of the people. The December Boycott of 1920 was the first confrontation with the colonialists. The people won that showdown, and in 1923 the British had to submit a new constitution with a legislature of 103 seats, of which 79 were filled by election. Still unsatisfied, the people asked for more power, and in 1936 a new constitution with 92 direct elected representation out of 132 seats was achieved. Dissatisfied, the Burmese wanted complete political power and absolute freedom, and the struggle for sovereignty continued during the war. The first chance for the Burmese to write their own constitution came during the Japanese occupation, that granted supposed sovereignty. It was a sham independence, but Burmese leaders were able to write the document freely: (54) 7. (a) With a view to ensuring the stability of the State, the armed forces shall be outside politics. It is interesting to learn that the Burmese leaders foresaw the mentality of army officers since 1943, and barred the Burmese military from politics. When the 1947 constitution was written following the guidelines of U Aung San for the establishment of a new republic, the Burmese leaders drafted a true democratic system, with the power of the state deriving from the people: Every Union citizen who has attained the age of majority has the right to stand for election to Parliament. Any Union citizen who is eligible to be elected to the Union Parliament is qualified to be elected President. It was not only people's rights that were defined. The constitution also fixed the limits of the army's authority: 97. (1) The right to raise and maintain military, naval and air forces is vested exclusively in the parliament. The Burmese have been struggling for a truly representative rule throughout their history. They have foreseen the greed of the armed forces. And they say "no" to bogus constitutions, and "no" to a 25 per cent military parliament in Burma. (BP) *************** BKK POST: 'HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEMOCRACY FIRST': INTERVIEW November 5, 1995 Rep DANA ROHRABACHER (R-California) Member of Asia-Pacific subcommittee in House of Representatives The Republicans are deviled on the issue of imposing sanctions against the Burmese military government in Rangoon, while some Democrats are coordinating with those Republicans who are in favour of it. Assistant Editor RALPH BACHOE spoke with a few of them during his recent visit to Capitol Hill. RB: You have been out of the limelight for some time in regards to the Burmese situation. What have you been up to? DR: I've been fairly active over the years. But there is only so much we can do from Washington. Obviously the United States government isn't going to arm an insurgency movement in Burma. It's limited to what the United States can do to give direct support to the students. What we really can do is basically make sure that our position is understood and that we don't give political or economic support to the dictatorship. I am trying to make sure, over the years, that the students and the democratic resistance in Burma received recognition for their movement and that the dictatorship was recognised as a tyranny that don't represent the will of the people. What you can do is limited as long as you are not going to use guns or provide guns. RB: Should the Republicans come to power, what would their stance be on Burma? DR: I don't think there will be any changes. I think the Burmese issue is totally bipartisan. Bill Richardson and myself, Senator Moynihan and Mitch McConnell on our side. Sen McCain, Bill Archer, Nancy Johnson on the other side. It's Republicans and Democrats. There's no party line on Burma. Just like there's no party line on dictatorship. I think the Burma issue goes to the core of what American policy is going to be toward dictatorship. And because it is clearly one of the most cruel dictatorships in the world. What is American policy going to be, and what should it be, toward a dictatorship? We have another situation in China, for example. And now these things bring into conflict the political, which is your commitment to democracy and political freedom. And the economic, the desires of your people to make money. That's the way it is in China and that's the way it is in Burma. And it is a bipartisan thing because it crosses party lines. RB: So you mean to say there is actually not very much the US can do about it? DR: I think there is. I think the United States should be pro-active in supporting democratic movements. It doesn't mean we have to give them guns. But we could be providing communications equipment for people struggling against dictatorship. We could provide certain types of support in terms of financial and medical care. If I'm calling the shots it would be totally different. I think human rights and democracy have to be very high on the priority list. But there are many Republicans who don't believe that. There are many Democrats who don't believe that. There are some Republicans and some Democrats who believe that human rights should be a high priority and some other who don't. As far as I'm concerned we should be basically supporting a pro- democratic activist foreign policy. And that would mean supporting the people in Burma with any means outside of providing guns. RB: Now that McConnell's bill has been shot down what future plans do you have in mind to revive it? DR: I am working on legislation to introduce a similar bill here in the House to Senator McConnell's over in the Senate, which will basically embargo any future investment by American companies in Burma. And the power of my bill will be aimed at future investment rather than trying to get the people who have already invested to get out. Those deals [between Slorc and Texaco and Unocal] have already been made. People have put money into them. I don't think it's fair for us to change the rules in the middle of the game after Texaco and Unocal have already invested hundreds of millions of dollars. RB: While pressure groups have been putting the squeeze on companies like Texaco and Unocal, this is the first time I've heard of an American who is literally saying "let bygones be bygones" to companies already committed to business in Burma, and that there would be no more new-comers after this? DR: My goal is not to punish the people who have already gone in, but for us to set a policy so that no one else would go in and do business with this dictatorship. And Texaco and Unocal have told me that the amount of money flowing from this investment to the dictatorship won't really start in any big way for another five years anyway, when the project is complete. That's when the money will really start flowing. Hopefully by then, the Slorc dictatorship would be just a bad memory. I am optimistic. I think we do need a new consciousness among democratic peoples on this issue of exploitation of natural resources by these dictatorships. And in Laos for example, I'm working with the Royal Family which is now in exile to try to set up a foundation that would be aimed at protecting the rain forest in Southeast Asia, particularly in Laos,but it also applies to Burma. And the fact is that the Royal Family is in exile and the communist dictatorship there now is just like the anti-Communist dictatorship in Burma, stealing their people blind. They are destroying their natural resources for their own profit and selling them at bargain basement prices. So I am working with the Royal Family of Laos to see if we can set up a foundation whose goal would be to preserve those natural resources from exploitation by dictatorships, especially in Southeast Asia. RB: Should Burma ever regain democracy in the near future, say if a person like Aung San Suu Kyi takes over, and the democratic forces start running the country again, what would the American government's reaction be should they negate all those contracts that have been signed with Slorc? DR: My position is that any business that makes a contract with a dictatorship does so at its own risk. As far as I'm concerned, if Slorc falls, the democratic government should look very closely at the contracts that have been signed to make sure that they benefit the people of Burma. One of the greatest tragedies we have in the world today is that we have dictatorships like that in Burma which are making contracts and selling the natural treasures of their country, the birthright of their people at bargain basement price to other countries. It's all right for a democracy to sell its lumber for example if it is making a trade-off like helping to finance and education system, build roads and so on. But for a dictatorship simply to sell its natural resources like its great forests, its gems or even its oil or gas and then use the money basically to provide the military with the means to suppress the people, that is the greatest sin of all. I would think that if Slorc falls, any company which has made a contract with it should be aware that the democratic government is not obliged to follow that contract. And the ASEAN governments should back up the democratic government in that. (BP) **************************************************************** NATION: SINGAPORE TRADE MISSION FOR BURMA November 6, 1995 Agence France-Presse Singapore said yesterday that it was sending a 75-member business mission to Burma to explore new investment and trade opportunities. The delegation, comprising business professionals from both the government and private sectors, will begin today the week-long visit sponsored by the Trade Development Board (TDB). Private business organizations involved in the hotel, entertainment, exhibition, construction, engineering and public works industries and trading and financial services will be included in the mission, the TDB said. Singapore is the second largest foreign investor in Burma after Britain. At the end of August its investment commitments in Burma totalled US$528 million in 31 projects. Burma has sought more investments from Singapore, which has pursued a policy of "constructive engagement" with Rangoon's military regime and promoted business ties to encourage the country to open up to the world. (TN) *************** BKK POST: TRADERS THREATEN PROTESTS AGAINST MOEI DREDGING November 6, 1995 Traders and residents from Mae Sot have warned they might protest if the Government bows to pressure from Rangoon to dredge the channel in the Moei River which is closer to Thai territory. Sources close to the disgruntled traders told the Bangkok Post they were not happy with the way in which the Thai authorities appeared to be bending towards the demands of their Burmese counterparts. Rangoon has recently demanded that Thailand dredge the channel in the Moei River which demarcates the border between the two countries in addition to its two earlier demands: that Thailand dismantle a rock-heap embankment and 16 shophouses allegedly built on the river bank on the Thai side. Rangoon has made it clear that any failure to heed all of its demands will result in a lack of cooperation regarding Thailand 's proposals to reopen the border in Mae Sot and Mae Sai of Chiang Rai and to resume construction of the Thai-Burmese Friendship Bridge in Mae Sot. The Thai traders are concerned that dredging the river channel will force some 120 riverside stalls catering to tourists to be relocated and cause them to lose revenue, said the sources, adding the authorities have not yet found an alternative site for them. The sources also pointed out that dredging the channel would change the natural characteristics of the border which constitutes a breach of the Thai-Burmese border treaty signed in 1868. They further argued that the rock-heap embankment was conducted on the Thai side and would not cause any land erosion on the Burmese side, as claimed by Rangoon. (BP) ***********************************************