------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: May 1, 1997 Issue #709 Noted in Passing: “Perhaps if the government slaughters five million people in Burma.” --Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad on what would stop Burma from being admitted to ASEAN (see REUTER: MAHATHIR SAYS ASEAN TO ADMIT BURMA DESPITE PRESSURE) HEADLINES: ========== BORDER REPORT: REFUGEES ARRIVING AT KANCHANABURI, BKK POST: BURMESE TORCH MON VILLAGES SLORC : INFORMATION SHEET NO. A-0037 AFP: JAPANESE MPS IN RANGOON REUTER: MAHATHIR SAYS ASEAN TO ADMIT BURMA BKK POST: KAREN REBELS BACK DOWN ON GAS THREAT REUTER: BURMA SAYS TRAITORS BECOMING ``TERRORISTS'' THE NATION: WHICH DIRECTION FOR ASEAN? WALL STREET JOURNAL: SPOTLIGHTING SLORC THE NATION: MINISTERS TO MEET ON ASEAN BIDS THE NATION: ROJANA SIGNS BURMA PROJECT DEAL REUTER: BUDWEISER SUSPENDED EXPORT BEER TO BURMA XINHUA: MOTOR VEHICLES IN MYANMAR'S CAPITAL EXCEED ANNOUNCEMENT: FORUM BURMA 97, SWEDEN ANNOUNCEMENT: "BEYOND RANGOON" REVIVAL IN ADELAIDE ----------------------------------------------------------------- BORDER REPORT: REFUGEES ARRIVING AT KANCHANABURI, RATCHABURI AND PROVINCES TO THE SOUTH April 29, 1997 The 9th Division have apparently agreed to amalgamate the camps presently set up in the provinces of Kanchanaburi and Ratchaburi. Huay Sut and Bo Wi are due to be consolidated at one site in Ratchaburi. The fate of Pu Muang is not yet clear. The new place is named Tham Hin and is about 16 kilometers from Huay Sut and about 10 kilometers from the border. Agencies at the border visited the site and found it satisfactory. A deadline of two weeks has been put on the move by the Thai authorities. The total population could be as high as 7,200 if all three sites are merged. Meanwhile, Htee Lai Pah and Thu Ka are due to be combined at a new site named Maw Raka. This is located between Huay Malai, near Sanklaburi, and the Burma border. The UNHCR visited the site and found it satisfactory. No timetable has been put on the move yet. The total population could be as high as 3,800-4,000. However, it is not clear whether all of the refugees will agree to move to the new site. Some from Htee Lai Pah may elect to go to No Pho in Umphang. KANCHANABURI PROVINCE Po Muang The population is now around 2,400 consisting of about 557 families. All the refugees are still sheltered under plastic and they now complain that the plastic has deteriorated due to the action of sun and rain. As of the 25th of April they were apparently unaware of any plan to move them to a new site. On the 2nd April Major Sai Aung, Commander of the SLORC 112th regiment, sent a letter to Colonel Manat of the Thai 9th Division asking for assistance in receiving food supplies from Thailand. The letter was in English and had to be translated by refugees in the camp. Later, on the 4th of April, Colonel Manat was said to have arranged two truck-loads of food supplies to be sent to the SLORC base across the border. On the 22nd April a group of around 30 Thai officials including army officers entered the camp and met with the camp committee. They asked the committee to tell them how many adult men were in the camp, and they also inquired about general conditions in the camp. RATCHABURI PROVINCE Huay Sut The population is approximately 2,700, with around 570 families. The camp has been informed of the planned move to the new site, and the refugees have been instructed to be prepared to move on Monday 28th April. Apparently the refugees will not be allowed to set up thatched dwellings when they arrive at the new site. It is hoped that they will be allowed to build simple low bamboo platforms to raise themselves off the ground. Roofing will still be plastic sheets. Ban Bo Wi The population is approximately 2,100, with around 417 families. The Thai Public Health Service visited the camp recently and offered Norplant contraceptive implants to the residents. Around 20 women agreed to have the implant done. There was some concern that without proper education and instruction in the refugees’ own language, some women might accept the contraceptive without fully understanding how it works, its side effects, or how to remove it, if necessary, in the future. PRACHUAP KIRI KHAN PROVINCE Htee Yaw Kee There are reportedly over 930 refugees at this site, adjacent to Pranburi, Hua Hin. The Thai authorities officially do not recognise that there are any refugees at this place, but they have unofficially been given leave to remain on Thai soil until June. The majority of the refugees are now on the Thai side of the border near Suan Thanon, but a smaller number (246) are still on the Burma side of the border. The Burmese army is reportedly 2 days away. Division 44 has now left the northern part of the Tenasserim river and arrived at the southern part of Mergui/Tavoy district. Division 22 is now leading the fighting along the Tenasserim river. As previously reported, this small community of dislaced people face considerable mortality due to illness. (42 diarrhoea related deaths, 4 malaria related deaths) Mu Kho Paw There are said to be around 150 refugees at this spot which is located near the border, adjacent to Thap Sakae, Prachuap Kiri Khan Province. The Thai authorities do not want an NGO presence, and have refused permission to deliver assistance. The displaced persons are located on the Thai side of the border, close to Ban Moo Gon Paw. The area has been under heavy attack with the SLORC taking the Muslim Headquarters and the ABSDF 8888 base on the 21st and 22nd of April. Currently fighting seems to be focussed in this area. CHUMPHON PROVINCE Kho Theh Loo There are 278 people in this area, north of Chumphon, under the control of the Thai 4th Army. Thai authorities expect that they will move back during the rainy season, but otherwise local relations seem to be good. Internally displaced people It was reported that there are around 700 displaced people originating from Ler Pa Doh, Da Baw Klo, Ta Mu and Te Rwa Hta - all in Ler Muh Lah township, which is now totally occupied by SLORC. This group of people reportedly settled at the edge of the Te Rwa Hta Stream two weeks ago. Their food supply is very low, and is now entirely restricted to plain boiled rice. They have now moved out of the deep jungle to Pee Te Law Po Kee which is three days walk from the border. KNU officials in the area have sent men to try to guide these people to safety. If they can reach the border, the most convenient point for them to cross would be near Pa Dae, and the Thai authorities could then settle them at Htee Yaw Kee. *************************************************** BKK POST: BURMESE TORCH MON VILLAGES April 30, 1997 Prachuap Kiri Khan - Two Mon villages with around 300 makeshift shelters were set ablaze after Burmese forces overran a Mon military base at Tab Guncha on Monday. Around one thousand Mon refugees from Ban Chong Chi and Ban Tan Guncha villages fled the attack and crossed over into Thailand to seek refuge in Bangsaphan's Tambon Chaikasem where local public health officials provided aid to the refugees, said a border official. Some 2,000 Burmese troops were involved in Monday morning's large-scale military drive against Mon rebel forces. The fighting lasted for nearly four hours before the rebels decided to desert their military base. "Mon forces could not resist the attack as Burmese forces were better equipped with heavy weapons. The two villages were reduced to rubble," noted a Mon leader. (BP) ******************************************************* SLORC : INFORMATION SHEET NO. A-0037 April 30, 1997 From: OKKAR66127@aol.com Information Sheet ****************** No. A-0037 Date. 30-4-97 The U.S Charge d’ Affaires Mr. Kent Wiedemann visited Mrs. Aris at her University Avenue residence on the morning of 29th April. Mrs. Aris, U Aung Shwe and U Tin Oo visited the British Ambassador Mr.Gordon at his residence in the afternoon of 30th April. ********************************************************** AFP: JAPANESE MPS IN RANGOON April 29, 1997 BANGKOK, April 29 (AFP) - Visiting members of the Japanese upper house held talks Tuesday in Rangoon with leading Burmese military junta members, state-run Radio Rangoon reported in a dispatch monitored here. Six Japanese legislators led by Ichiyo Ishikawa called separately on Burmese military junta's powerful secretary general, Lieutenant-General Khin Nyunt and National Planning and Economic Development Minister Brigadier General David Abel, the report said. They discussed bilateral relations and economic cooperation between the two countries as well as the foreign investment situation in Burma, it said. David Abel also explained the development of junta's economic reform program and bilateral trade between Burma and its neighbouring countries, according to the radio. ******************************************* REUTER: MAHATHIR SAYS ASEAN TO ADMIT BURMA DESPITE PRESSURE April 30, 1997 [slightly abridged] KUALA LUMPUR, April 30 (Reuter) - Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said on Wednesday the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) would admit Burma into the grouping ``unless something unusual happens.'' ASEAN would shrug off pressure from Washington to keep Burma out, Mahathir told reporters at the end of a conference on Malaysia's development strategies. ``Unless something unusual happens, I think Burma will be admitted. Whatever pressure is exerted on them, we feel we are independent enough,'' Mahathir said. Malaysia is this year's chairman of ASEAN, which also groups Brunei, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. Mahathir is keen to have Burma, Laos and Cambodia admitted this year, the 30th anniversary of the grouping, thus completing ASEAN's original ambition of including all 10 Southeast Asian nations. ``There will be problems but remember the business community in America does not support the government's action. Governments come and go,'' Mahathir said. Asked what would stop Burma from being admitted, Mahathir said: ``Perhaps if the government slaughters five million people in Burma. If we are really concerned for people and we want the people to enjoy a good life and freedom, they should be admitted.'' ASEAN foreign ministers will meet in Kuala Lumpur on May 31 to decide when to admit the three new members. ******************************************* BKK POST: KAREN REBELS BACK DOWN ON GAS THREAT April 30, 1997 Bangkok, AP US sanctions save Unocal from sabotage Ethnic rebels who are fighting Burma's military government said yesterday they would not attack a gas pipeline, partly owned by American oil company Unocal, because the United States had imposed economic sanctions against Burma. The Karen National Union (KNU), which has been fighting for autonomy for the Karen people since 1949, had vowed to destroy the $1.2 billion (31 billion baht) gas pipeline owned by Unocal, the Burmese government, Total of France and the Petroleum Authority of Thailand. A rocket attack by KNU insurgents in February 1996 killed five Burmese pipeline workers. "Our friends have asked us to reconsider, and the United States has put a lot of pressure on with sanctions," Ner Dah, the KNU's assistant secretary for foreign affairs, said. But Mr Ner Dah said that if destroying the project helped end military rule in Burma, the rebels would resort to attacking it. "If it is good for democracy, and if it is the will of the people, then we will do it," he said, noting that Burmese pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi has also voiced opposition to the project. President Clinton announced on April 22 that he was banning new American investment in Burma because of stepped up repression against Mrs Suu Kyi and the country's democracy movement. The sanctions do not affect investment projects which are already underway but Unocal had wanted to pursue further oil and gas exploration in Burma. It lobbied vigorously against punitive action against the Burmese. The pipeline, which runs through an area the Karen consider part of their homeland, is due to deliver gas to Thailand in 1998 and eventually provide Burma's cash-strapped government with $200 million a year in profits. The Karen, Mon ethnic people and human rights groups have accused the Burmese army of human rights abuses in securing territory for the pipeline, and Unocal and Total of complicity. They say the army has burned down villages, tortured and executed ethnic people, raped women and press-ganged people into working as forced labour. (BP) ******************************************************* REUTER: BURMA SAYS TRAITORS BECOMING ``TERRORISTS'' April 30, 1997 [abridged] RANGOON, April 30 (Reuter) - Burma's army chief of staff said traitors within the country are turning into ``terrorists'' with foreign backing, official media reported on Wednesday. Lieutenant General Tin Oo, also Secretary Two of the ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), was speaking to farmers on Tuesday. ``There are still internal axe-handles who are pushing the nation to become a minion while saying they love it,'' Tin Oo was reported as saying. ``Similarly, there are also big nations using pressure to try and interfere in the internal affairs of the small nations to make them their disciples.'' Tin Oo and other top leaders in the military government regularly refer to Nobel Peace laurerate Aung San Suu Kyi and her opposition movement as ``axe handles'' or traitors and say they are ``lackeys'' or ``minions'' of the West. ``Relying on alien nations for their survival as a last straw, these internal traitors are gradually becoming terrorists,'' Tin Oo said. *********************************************** THE NATION: WHICH DIRECTION FOR ASEAN? April 30, 1997 Walden Bello The regional grouping is at the point where it must choose between deepening its economic cooperation or enlarging its borders, writes Walden Bello. Like the European Union, Asean faces the choice of either ''enlarging" or ''deepening". And the choice it makes will have major consequences on the prospects of two of its key projects, the Asean Free Trade Area (Afta) and the Asean Regional Forum (ARF). The deepening strategy is dictated by the vision of regional economic cooperation articulated in the group's founding document, the Bangkok Declaration of 1967. Deepening would focus the regional body's energies on making Afta a reality. This is the complex and challenging process of bringing down tariffs among the Asean countries to zero by the year 2003 in order to create a market of some 400 million that could serve as the basis of a coordinated regional industrialisation. As we all know, Asean in its first 20 years failed miserably as a body to bring about greater regional economic integration. Scheme after scheme failed, from the ambitious Asean Industrial Projects, which sought to assign large-scale complementary capital-intensive projects to different countries to develop, to the Asean Industrial Complementation Scheme, which planned to divide different production phases of the automobile and other industries among member countries. Afta, which was launched in 1992, is Asean's latest attempt at serious integration via trade policy, a task made urgent by the competition offered by the Apec pan-Pacific free trade area plan pushed by the United States and Australia, which make coordinated regional integration at the Asean level simply impossible. Will Asean succeed this time? The continuing strong hesitations of the different Asean elites to open up their respective markets have so far made their declared commitments to bring down tariffs to agricultural and industrial goods nominal, leaving many observers sceptical about Afta meeting the 2003 free trade deadline. Another major problem is US opposition to Afta trade liberalisation that does not take place as part of a larger Asia-Pacific-wide trade liberalisation. Afta, according to US Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky, is an example of how ''governments are pursuing strategic trade policies, and in some cases preferential trading arrangements, forming relations around us, rather than with us, and creating new exclusive trade alliances to the potential detriment of US prosperity and leadership." Enlargement strategy Probably the most serious threat to making Afta a reality is the "enlargement" of the Asean project that some elements in Asean have designated as a priority. Enlargement would bring enormous complications to Afta. Unlike the Western European members of the EU that are contemplating bringing in new economies into the union, the members of Asean have still to carry out the first phase of economic integration via a free trade area. Yet they have moved quickly to bring in four economies, Vietnam, Burma, Cambodia, and Laos, which are quite different from the original six, in that all four not only are at a much lower stage of development and three out of the four are marked by a much greater role of the state in the economy than the original Asean members. True, Vietnam has already been admitted, but this is not the time to complicate Afta's future even more. Cambodia, Laos, and Burma should be admitted into Asean, yes, but only after there are, among other conditions, substantive steps taken in the enormously complicated phase of economically integrating the existing members. The enlargement strategy is dictated by political considerations, and in pursuing it, Asean courts a repeat of its earlier history. For it was regional realpolitik that sabotaged Asean's earlier efforts to move towards meaningful integration. From the late '60s to the early '70s, the Asean governments were preoccupied by the Cold War and the Vietnam War, where they were allied with the US. And in the late '70s, in a move that went against the spirit of the Bangkok Declaration, Asean allowed itself to become an anti-Vietnamese alliance. Its programme for economic cooperation was placed indefinitely on the back-burner as it became the most active backer of the opposition coalition in Cambodia (of which the Khmer Rouge was the main component), following a common strategy with China and the United States. Today, regional realpolitik is again driving the enlargement agenda. Bringing in Vietnam in 1995 was largely a strategic move to strengthen Asean's military capabilities vis-a-vis China ­ one which was, incidentally, in step with the United States' evolving strategic policy of ''containing" a country that was seen by Washington as a rival regional hegemony. Burma and authoritarianism The current enlargement effort is centred on bringing in Burma. It has been mainly pushed by President Suharto, who has deployed all his resources as the ''grand old man" of Asean, the only chief of state who was in power when the formation was established in 1967. Realpolitik is a major consideration in Suharto's moves, and this is the realpolitik of authoritarianism. Suharto is increasingly worried about the pressures for democratisation in Indonesia, which he sees as being influenced by the rising pressures for greater democracy throughout the region. Bringing in more non-democratic regimes would strengthen the authoritarian pole in the balance of power within Asean: it would serve to neutralise the formal democratic regimes within Asean ­ the Philippines and Thailand ­ and prevent them from following foreign policies that would be more sympathetic to democratic movements on the ground. Moreover, bringing in more authoritarian regimes would create a solid front against external criticism of the repressive practices not only in Indonesia but in the majority of the Asean states. Ideologically, ''Asean brotherhood" is being defined as a brotherhood of authoritarian states ranged against liberal democracy, human rights, and other ''western biases". It is not surprising, then, that the other authoritarian governments, notably Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei, have lined up strongly behind Indonesia. This anti-democratic realpolitik is working. Isolated, weak-kneed, and almost ashamed of their democratic credentials, the Thai and Philippine governments have, predictably, allowed themselves to be pushed into endorsing the majority position on Burma. And, with Burma in Asean, opposition at the state level to the democratic current would be even stronger. Burma and the future of the ARF The authoritarian realpolitik promises to damage not only Afta but another key project, the ARF, which the body wished to make the principal mechanism for the resolution of conflict and security issues in the Asia-Pacific region. The ARF has a structure that might be best characterised as one of concentric circles. The core, or inner circle, is the Asean member countries, who have the initiative in setting the agenda. The next circle is made up of the seven ''dialogue partners", which include, among others, the United States, Australia, and Japan. An outer circle is made up of Russia and China, Asean's ''consultative partners", followed by the periphery composed of ''Asean observer states", namely Papua New Guinea, Laos, Burma, and Cambodia. Making Burma a member of Asean would mean bringing an extremely controversial actor from the periphery to the very centre of ARF decision-making, and this can only bring a great deal of opposition and criticism from many of the key dialogue partners ­ opposition which is justified, since the Burmese junta is a totally illegitimate regime that is in power in defiance of the clear cut results of a democratic election. Burma's central role in the ARF will become the issue in the ARF, and this can only distract the forum from the pressing peace and security concerns, such as the Spratly Islands dispute and the effort to gain the nuclear powers' assent to the creation of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the region. All this can only contribute to undercutting the ARF as an effective multilateral security mechanism. Such a situation would play into the hands of the powers that are suspicious and even unsympathetic to the ARF, like the United States. Washington has often dismissed the ARF as a ''talk shop", and its strategy has been to undercut its development as an effective multilateral structure for conflict resolution, preferring to limit the forum to serving as a weak adjunct to Washington's preferred security mechanisms in the Asia-Pacific region: its bilateral treaties with East Asian countries, and its 100,000 troops deployed to the area. In sum, granting Burma membership in Asean is an ill-advised move the regional body cannot afford at this point, since it would distract its members' attention from the complex and challenging Afta project and weaken the ARF. It is partly for the reasons laid out above, incidentally, that the network of institutes of strategic studies in Asean that were so influential in the formation of the ARF are said to have recommended against the entry of Burma at this time. Governments would be well advised to listen to their arguments instead of plunging into a dangerous and foolish strategy of enlargement that can only set back the realisation of Asean's vision of becoming a prosperous bloc of integrated economies that serves as the hub of a peace and security framework for the Asia-Pacific region. Walden Bello is co-director of Focus on the Global South, a programme of Chulalongkorn University's Social Research Institute, and professor of sociology and public administration at the University of the Philippines. (TN) ******************************************************* WALL STREET JOURNAL: SPOTLIGHTING SLORC April 29, 1997 Review & Outlook Human rights advocates are cheering United States President Bill Clinton's decision to ban future American investment in Burma. The sanctions announced last week are a response to unrelenting political repression by Rangoon's ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council. Sanctions are not the cure- all that some human-rights activists seem to believe they are; Slorc has a habit of shrugging them off. But at least they are an expression of displeasure that draws international attention to the offending country, perhaps causing some other regimes to consider what kind of behavior might damage their own reputations. A measure passed in the U.S. Congress last year called for sanctions against Burma if political repression intensified or if Aung San Suu Kyi--the opposition National League for Democracy leader who spent six years under house arrest after her party won democratic elections in 1990--was re-arrested. Many lawmakers and citizens groups in the U.S. argue that last week's announcement was long overdue. Amnesty International calls 1996 Slorc's worst year for human rights abuses since the military junta seized power in 1988: Thousands of political prisoners were arrested, student demonstrators were severely restricted, and what appears to have been a Slorc-organized mob attacked Ms. Suu Kyi's motorcade in December. Moreover, Ms. Suu Kyi has been under effective house arrest (her movements severely limited "for her own safety," officials say) since November. Yet it is political realities in the U.S., rather than Rangoon, which seem to be behind President Clinton's announcement. When he made it, a bipartisan group of U.S. Senators was preparing to introduce a bill that could have compelled the president to enact sanctions. Further pressure probably came from a wave of local-level sanctions against Burma. Several cities and states, including Massachusetts and Connecticut, have passed laws forbidding government from doing business with firms that invest in Burma. Whatever the motive, it is encouraging to see Washington standing up for the people of Burma, who have found so few official friends in their own part of the world. Asia is home to the most fervent preachers of "constructive engagement," the idea that doing business in a country while ignoring its domestic politics is the best way to help a persecuted population. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations invokes the argument in defense of bringing Burma, Cambodia and Laos into their club this summer--a schedule that will not be delayed by the U.S. announcement, according to Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. The American oil company Unocal, a partner in a $1.2 billion project to build a natural gas pipeline in Burma, is another advocate of the creed. The pipeline project will be unaffected by the sanctions, but the company says other projects it had in mind will be blocked. Outside Asean, constructive engagement in Burma's case clearly isn't winning any new converts these days. Anyone who sincerely wants their policy to result in less repression can clearly see that engagement thus far has not encouraged Rangoon's generals to loosen their iron grip on the population. In some circles and on Western campuses, it must be said, it's become fashionable to denounce doing business in this particular repressive state. But none of this suggests that unilateral sanctions are the answer. American investment in Burma is too limited for sanctions to put a serious economic squeeze on Rangoon. True, the U.S. is the country's fourth-largest investor, after France, Singapore and Thailand, with approved investment at the end of last year totaling $243 million. Burmese government figures claim American investments swelled to $582 million for the month of February as companies rushed to get a foothold before Washington introduced sanctions. But even if that is accurate, the continuing trend has been for businesses to move out of the country to sidestep bad press, consumer boycotts or sanctions. In recent months Apple Computer withdrew from Burma, and last week Anheuser-Busch pulled out. Where U.S. sanctions could have some impact is outside Burma. The U.S. announcement is only the latest censure of Slorc in a long list of international actions that includes removal of trade benefits by the European Union, suspension of development aid from the Asian Development Bank and a condemning resolution passed by the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva. The U.S. sanctions might encourage other countries to take even stronger action. The more democratic members of Asean are also uncomfortable associating with this international pariah. They could seize this moment to tell their fellow members that the group can save itself inevitable embarrassment--and win some international respect--by using Asean membership as a carrot to induce improved behavior by Slorc. Whatever happens next, Mr. Clinton's announcement is welcome in at least one respect: By finally acting on the long- discussed investment ban, Washington proves that these were no empty threats. Just as important, though, if the sanctions are to have any hope of success in nudging Burma in the right direction, they must include a set of guidelines and goals that set out what Slorc must do to have them lifted. A clear standard of acceptable behavior, with muscular world-wide backing, could further the cause of human rights not only in Burma but in other countries where citizens live in fear of their own governments. ********************************************** THE NATION: MINISTERS TO MEET ON ASEAN BIDS April 30, 1997 Don Pathan, Yindee Lertcharoenchok PHUKET ­ Asean foreign ministers will converge here on May 31 to work out a ''recommendation" for their leaders on the timing of the admission of Burma, Cambodia and Laos into the regional grouping, Thai Foreign Minister Prachuab Chaiyasarn said yesterday. He said the heads of government of the seven Asean countries would then have to make a final ''political decision" on the issue and make either an official collective Asean announcement or individual announcements of the entry date of the three candidates. ''The leaders will make the political decision based on the recommendation submitted by their foreign ministers. Foreign ministers will not make the decision, it is entirely up to the leaders to decide," Prachuab said. But while Asean members remained committed to welcoming Burma, Cambodia and Laos into Asean this year, it was uncertain if they would be admitted in July when Asean foreign ministers hold their annual ministerial meeting (AMM) in Kuala Lumpur. Asean's newest member, Vietnam, was officially accepted into the grouping at the AMM in 1995. According to Foreign Ministry Permanent Secretary Saroj Chavanaviraj and Philippine Undersecretary Rodolfo Severino, it was possible that the three countries would be admitted either in July or in December when Asean leaders hold their summit meeting. ''Either they will join in July or not in July ­ both are possible. Asean has its own way of deciding one way or the other," Saroj said. When asked of the possibility of the three candidates not joining Asean this year, the Thai secretary responded: ''Only if something very dramatic happens." At the end of their informal summit meeting last December, Asean leaders announced that the three observer countries would be granted full Asean membership simultaneously. Asean foreign ministers stated earlier this month that they would decide and announce the timing of the admission of the three countries when they meet at a hastily called special meeting on May 31 in Kuala Lumpur. The obvious shift in the objective of the May meeting coincided with a call by the United States for Asean members to reconsider the admission of Burma. The US, which is a leading political, economic and strategic partner of all Asean members, announced unilateral economic sanctions against Burma, citing a regression in the political and human rights situation in the country. Philippine Foreign Minister Domingo Siazon said Asean members respected the US decision on sanctions and would consider the US request. But he said that Burma's relations with Asean had ''strategic implications" ­ in the same way the US has pursued a comprehensive relationship with China. He said Washington last year had shifted its policy towards China from essentially a one-dimensional relationship focused on human rights to that of a more comprehensive relationship that involves other factors such as non-proliferation and strategic issues. ''They [the US] will understand that our relations with Myanmar [Burma] cannot exist in only one dimension [of human rights] but there is also a strategic relationship," he said. Philippine Undersecretary Severino said Asean was committed to seeing all 10 Southeast Asian countries in the grouping, as that was of ''strategic interest in Southeast Asian solidarity". Siazon urged the US, a democratic society, to tolerate and respect the differences in views and to respect the Asean decision in the same way Asean respected Washington's decision. ''We [Asean] believe that the United States of America has always prided itself as one having supported democratic governments everywhere, and we would expect them also to expect differences in views among democratic governments," he said. Asean heads of government will meet in Malaysia twice this year ­ in August to celebrate Asean's 30th anniversary and in December for the summit gathering. Burma, Cambodia and Laos could be admitted at either occasion, thus fulfilling Asean founding fathers' dream of seeing all 10 Southeast Asian nations in the group. (TN) ******************************************************* THE NATION: ROJANA SIGNS BURMA PROJECT DEAL April 30, 1997 Sasithorn Ongdee, The Nation Rojana Industrial Park Plc has signed a US$24 million (Bt624 million) joint venture contract with the Department of Human Settlement and Housing Development of Burma to develop an industrial estate on 630 rai in Rangoon economic zone. Rojana holds a 60 per cent stake while the remaining 40 per cent will be held by the state agency. The joint venture company has an initial registered capital of $23.33 million. Jirapongs Vinichbutr, the managing director of Rojana, said the industrial estate is expected to be completed within two years. European, Japanese and Asian investors are expected to be the target group. The Burmese government will set leasing fees at an expected average of $45 per square metre. Jirapongs said it is a pilot project in Burma for Rojana. If the company achieves its targets, it will be able to ask for another 500 rai lot for expansion. Besides general public utilities, the company plans to build a small power plant to supply electricity to the manufacturing facilities located in the industrial estate. Rojana Industrial Park last year generated revenue of Bt649.5 million, down 24.5 per cent from a year earlier. However, net profit fell only 5 per cent with an earnings per share of Bt 21.41. (TN) ******************************************************* REUTER: BUDWEISER SUSPENDED EXPORT BEER TO BURMA April 25, 1997 CHICAGO, April 25 (Reuter) - Anheuser-Busch Cos Inc confirmed Friday that it suspended exports of its Budweiser brand beer to Burma after the United States government enacted trade sanctions against the country. "Anheuser-Busch suspended its exports of Budweiser to Burma April 22 when the U.S. government enacted trade sanctions," said Stephen Burrows, president and chief operating officer of Anheuser-Busch International Inc, a subsidiary of the St. Louis-based brewer. "Budweiser had been exported for two years to the country without any company investment or employees working in Burma," he added in a statement. Burma activists had said earlier that Anheuser had pulled out of that country. *************************************** XINHUA: MOTOR VEHICLES IN MYANMAR'S CAPITAL EXCEED April 20, 1997 The number of motor vehicles, which are registered in Yangon, the capital of Myanmar, has now exceeded 300,000, up from about 50,000 in the past ten years. According to a recent economic indicator published by the Myanmar Central Statistical Organization, the number of the registered motor vehicles in the Yangon municipal area as of October last year reached 328,356, increasing by 15.4 per cent over the same period of the previous year and by over six times that ten years ago. ******************************************************* ANNOUNCEMENT: FORUM BURMA 97, SWEDEN April 27, 1997 From: burma_c@algonet.se (Burma Center, Sweden) April 25 a nationwide Swedish Burma-cooperation was launched at a conference initiated by the Jamshog College. A statement regarding the current refugee situation along the Thai-Burma border was drafted by the organizations present. It is expected that all Swedish NGO´s seriously promoting democracy and other human rights in Burma will endorse the statement as well as participating in future Forum Burma work. For further information: peterekdahl@mbox301.swipnet (Forum Burma 97, Jamshog College) and/or burma_c@algonet.se (Burma Center, Sweden) *********************************************************** ANNOUNCEMENT: "BEYOND RANGOON" REVIVAL IN ADELAIDE April 30, 1997 From: uneoo@physics.adelaide.edu.au The Adelaide Stirling's Community Aid Abroad support group has organized the Burma refugee benefit film at their local theatre. The group has been trying to raise Burma awareness in Adelaide and our friends are invited to come and see the educational film "Beyond Rangoon". Following is detail of program: -------------------------------------- COMMUNITY AID ABROAD FILM NIGHT (Proceeds to aid the Burma Refugee Program) AN ADVENTURE FILM BASED ON TRUE EVENTS IN BURMA Time: Sunday 4th May 1997, 7:30 p.m. Place: Aldgate Windsor Theatre Admission: $10, Concession/Students $5 ------------------------------------ I am told by the organizers that the Aldgate Windsor Theatre is at the Corner of Churinga Road and Edgeware Road; a bit behind the Shopping Centre and make a careful look for the Theatre (not a prominent Building). To get to Aldgate from Adelaide, take the Stirling Exist from the freeway. ******************************************