------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: May 10, 1997 Issue #717 HEADLINES: ========== THE NATION: BURMESE POLITICIAN RESIGNS WASHINGTON POST: SLORC RESPONSE TO EDITORIAL THE NATION: ASEAN EXTENDS TARIFF DEADLINE THE NATION: MP BACKS CAMBODIA'S ASEAN BID THE NATION: THAILAND EYES TRANSPORT PACT WITH BURMA THE NATION: THE NEW BURMA ROAD BUILDERS JAPAN TIMES: ALL QUIET ON THE THAI-MYANMAR BORDER ----------------------------------------------------------------- THE NATION: BURMESE POLITICIAN RESIGNS May 9, 1997 AP Rangoon - Another member of Burma's democratically elected parliament, which the military government never allowed to meet, has resigned, the state-run New Light of Myanmar reported yesterday. Since last year, more than 30 members of parliament have resigned, all belonging to Aung San Suu Kyi's political party which won 82 per cent of the seats in a 1990 election. Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner, has said the military government is coercing the representatives into resigning as part of a crackdown against her democratic movement. The stepped-up repression prompted US President Bill Clinton to invoke economic sanctions against Burma's military regime on April 22. (TN) ******************************************************* WASHINGTON POST: SLORC RESPONSE TO EDITORIAL May 8, 1997 I have lived and worked in the U.S. long enough to appreciate the American penchant for truth and spirit of fair-play. I therefore find the Washington Post editorial, " When Sanctions Make Sense" (April 24, 1997) most appalling. In your headstrong rush to support the Clinton administration's decision to impose economic sanctions on Myanmar, you not only ignore historical precedent but also fail to check the facts in portraying Aung San Suu Kyi as " democratically elected ". This is nothing less than a disservice to your readers, and to your countrymen at large. Your support for sanctions is apparently based on the assumption that there are widespread human rights violations in Myanmar and that you have the moral responsibility to act to end those abuses and support legitimately elected governments. Should the Post not have checked the facts before endorsing the unsubstantiated allegations? Central to any assessment of the proper policy toward Myanmar is an understanding of the conditions that prevail there today. The government is endeavouring to strengthen the unity of the 135 national groups that make up the country, rebuilding its infrastructure, and setting the country on the path of economic development. It launched a series of economic reforms aimed at transforming the inefficient planned economy into a market-oriented one. Private investment and domestic entrepreneurial activity has been opened to direct foreign investment. Since the promulgation of the foreign investment law in 1988, foreign investment has climbed to US $6.05 billion. The economic reforms have led to discernible GDP growth, reflecting increased employment opportunities and better living standards. The pace of economic activity has quickened, and, in addition to attracting foreign investment, the new economic atmosphere has encouraged more and more expatriates to return to resettle and to do more business.( The U.S. is currently the fourth largest investor in Myanmar, with investments totalling $582.07 millions as of March 31, 1997.) The Government has negotiated successfully the return to the legal fold of 15 armed groups that had been challenging successive governments, leaving only one, the KNU, in armed opposition. The Government continues to leave the door open to that group which after four rounds of talks last year, unilaterally ended the negotiation. Who cannot, save those who see only a hole in a doughnut, welcome such unprecedented achievements? With regard to the reference that Aung San Suu Kyi is a " democratically elected leader " I should like to put the record straight. Aung San Suu Kyi was never a candidate for the 1990 elections which were held to choose representatives to draft principles for a new constitution. To claim that she was elected would tantamount to deceiving the public. In keeping with the election laws which were established at the time of our independence from Britain, and which are known to all political parties, no citizen married to a foreigner is eligible to be a Representative. Thus Aung San Suu Kyi who is married to Mr. Michael Aris, a British citizen and who resided in Britain all her adult life, save for the 2 years period prior to 1990 was not eligible to stand for election. I am sure you will agree with me that every country has its own good reasons to lay down elections laws as it sees fit. The U.S. Constitution, for example, clearly stipulates that " No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States. .." or " No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the United States..."and "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States ". Given the findings of the considerable research carried out on sanctions, I find your conclusion " rarely has a nation been more deserving of economic sanction ", contrived. First and foremost, the Clinton administration's decision smacks of hypocrisy coming as it does at a time when the President has not been able to act on analogous situations. It is unconvincing why Myanmar should stand so starkly apart from other regimes. The political system in some of the U.S. allies is not notable for their concern with individual liberties. Secondly, the chances that unilateral sanctions imposed by the United States would have a measurable impact on Myanmar is nil. Eighty percent of Myanmar's trade is with other Asian countries and any void that US may leave in the wake of the sanctions will be quickly filled by Asian investors. It should be noted that unilateral sanctions are particularly ineffective. One needs only look at US policies toward Cuba, Iraq and Libya. What about South Africa? Myanmar is not South Africa. There are crucial differences. Myanmar is undergoing important change and transformation. The white minority government of South Africa tried to maintain the status quo. Myanmar on the other hand, is moving rapidly towards a market economy and regional integration. The Government is moving away from self-imposed isolation of the 60s, 70s, and 80s, and is seeking to uplift the living standard of the people by opening its doors. Most importantly, in contrast to the broad support enjoyed by advocates of sanctions against South Africa under apartheid no consensus can be found on Myanmar sanctions even in the U.S., leave alone the world. The US lawmakers and the media should not forget their responsibility as molders of public opinion. From the Branch Davidians to Heaven's Gate, recent history is replete with examples of what can go wrong when a few are allowed to poison the minds of others. In recent years, as a result of the concerted campaign carried out by the US media and Members of the Congress such as Senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Mitch McConnell and Representatives James Leach and Dana Rohrabacher, the situation in Myanmar has been viewed through jaundiced eyes. It is time to question the wisdom of the current punitive stance towards Myanmar by the Members of Congress and the media. If you continue to act as Applewhite by poising the minds of the public , you will only be doing a disservice to your nation . At a time when there is significant change and transformation in Myanmar, when it is opening its doors, creating opportunities for other countries to make a difference not only in the economic field but also in other spheres, it is important for the U.S. not to be influenced by the rhetoric of dissidents. The sooner the U.S. realizes this, the better its chances of achieving progress on bilateral issues as well as in bringing about positive change in Myanmar. *********************************************** THE NATION: ASEAN EXTENDS TARIFF DEADLINE FOR NEW ENTRIES May 9, 1997 Kyodo The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) has agreed to allow Cambodia, Laos and Burma to postpone until 2008 the cutting of their respective tariff rates to less than five per cent to integrate the three into the Asean Free Trade Area (Afta) trading bloc, a Thai government official said. The Asean member states are seeking to fully establish by 2003 the Afta regime, under which signatories would offer preferential tariff treatments to each other by holding down mutual tariffs on all products to less than five per cent. However, the Asean members agreed to apply more lenient terms to Cambodia, Laos and Burma in terms of the timing of meeting the requirement that Afta members' import duties be reduced to the range between zero and five per cent, the Commerce Ministry official said in Bangkok late on Wednesday. "If Asean can reach a political decision to admit Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar [Burma] in July, the time frame for Afta [tariff rule] implementation of the three new members would be Jan 1, 2008, as economic officials agreed in a preliminary discussion," the official said. The official was referring to a secret agreement in March among Asean member states and the three countries to allow the three to put of the timing of the tariff cutbacks, at a meeting of trade officials on the Indonesian island of Bali. Having the three countries pledge to implement tariff cutback plans by a definite deadline has been deemed a crucial prerequisite by Asean member states, before Asean agrees to grant the trio membership. The three are currently drawing up respective lists of products which they will agree to submit to tariff cutback obligations, starting in 1998, on the assumption that Asean will agree to admit the trio during a meeting of association foreign ministers slated for July in Kuala Lumpur, Asean sources said. The official warned, however, that the three may postpone the timing of implementing their tariff cutback programmes further if Asean members fail to agree to admit them during the July conference. "The time frame would be rescheduled if Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar fail to enter Asean in July," he said. Asean members, except Vietnam, plan to implement the tariff cutback programmes under the Common Effective Preferential Tariff scheme for Afta by 2003. The scheme is to be implemented over a 10-year period that started on Jan 1, 1993. Vietnam, which joined Asean in 1995, has been given more lenient terms than other members in implementing its tariff cutback programme, planning to do so by 2006. Cambodia, Laos and Burma are scheduled to submit their lists of products to be subjected to tariff cutback programmes for endorsement by Asean economic ministers, who will meet in Malaysia in October, the official said. "Only a political decision" remains to be made, an analyst said in reference to the expected accession by the three into Asean. Voicing concern about human rights abuses in Burma, the United States slapped economic sanctions on Burma in April, banning new American investments in the country, although some have seen the move as aimed at derailing the plan to admit Burma into Asean as early as July. Asean foreign ministers will meet informally in Kuala Lumpur on May 31 to discuss accession of the three countries in view of an assessment report now being prepared by the Asean Secretariat, the Asean sources said. Leaders of Asean, which currently comprises Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, want to bring in the three countries simultaneously by the year 2000, the sources said. (TN) ******************************************************* THE NATION: MP BACKS CAMBODIA'S ASEAN BID May 9, 1997 Marisa Chimprabha, The Nation CAMBODIA'S membership in Asean should not be tied to Burma even though it has been suffering from internal political conflicts and violence often involving two coalition parties, Democrat party said yesterday. "Each Asean observer, including Laos, which has applied for full membership in the grouping has its own conditions and level of preparedness," he said. "So, their future membership in Asean should not be considered as agreed on at an informal meeting of Asean leaders last year," he said. As a package, a refusal by Asean to accept one country means the others could be rejected as well. Sukhumbhand led a 10-member private study mission to Phnom Penh from May 4 to May 7 comprising senior academics and policy-makers from Malaysia, the Philippines, Indonesia and Singapore. The mission met Cambodia's co-premiers Prince Norodom Ranariddh and Hun Sen as well as senior Cambodian Cabinet members including Interior Minister Sar Kheng and Foreign Minister Ung Huot. Tensions in Cambodia reached a high point in April after an explosion on March 30 killed 19 demonstrators and some of Prince Ranariddh's Funcinpec Party MP defected to Hun Sen's Cambodia People's Party, prompting daily attacks between the two parties. Sukhumbhand said the team went to Phnom Penh out of concern for the situation, as they considered themselves "friends of Cambodia". According to statement by the team, recent developments have given rise to growing concerns that Cambodia may be in danger of relapsing into another round of prolonged and purposeless violence. "Accusations and countercharges set against a background of the coming 1998 elections pose questions concerning the country's continued stability. During the ongoing political conflict Cambodia stood alone given the UN's shrinking role following its massive peace-keeping operation here and the reluctance of Asean countries to assist in resolving domestic problems. "In the past few days, Cambodia's predicament has been complicated by the fact that some Asean leaders have publicly questioned her preparedness to become a new Asean member on account of the worsening domestic situation," the statement said. Sukhumbhand said some Asean countries now cited the internal conflicts in Cambodia as a possible obstacle to its membership despite the fact that the real problem is Burma's internal political situation and poor human rights record. "As Asean is considering the three observers as a package, the grouping should not try to use Cambodia's internal conflicts as a possible cause for not accepting the three. Cambodia should not become a victim of Burma which is still administered by a military junta," he said. Sukhumbhand told The Nation although Cambodia has been in political conflict, its leaders and officials were working hard to restore peace and stability. (TN) ******************************************************* THE NATION: THAILAND EYES TRANSPORT PACT WITH BURMA May 8, 1997 THAILAND will probe Burma's readiness to establish a framework agreement on cross-border transport during a two-day visit, beginning today, by Transport and communication Minister Suwat Liptapanlop. Deputy Permanent Secretary Sathien Vongvichien said that the agreement should be in place in anticipation of the growing contacts between both countries, particularly with the completion of the Friendship Bridge across the Moei River at Mae Sot-Myawaddy. Sathien said the agreement would be almost identical to the one which government officials will sign with Laos, except with a possible allowance for travel to and from a third country. He said the bridge, which was completed just two days ago, will not be operational until a mechanism to administer and maintain the bridge is in place. Thailand and Burma last year put in place a cross-border trade agreement. Sathien said that during the visit, Suwat will discuss a plan to set up joint committees at government and local levels to deal with traffic, customs, insurance and jurisdiction issues. Other topics include proposals to improve and extend road and railway connections between the two countries. Thai officials will also discuss improving the road from Myawaddi to Pha Ang and Rangoon with their Burmese counterparts. The Mae Sot-Myawaddi route is part of the Asian Highway being promoted by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. The government last year approved a Bt300 million soft loan to Burma to improve the road between Thachilek and Keng Tung provinces which will link up with Thailand in the Mae Sai district of Chiang Rai. Sathien said the government will propose that Burma boost the frequency of flights between Bangkok and Rangoon from 12 to 14 times per week as part of an effort to boost air transportation links among the six Mekong River countries. ****************************** THE NATION: THE NEW BURMA ROAD BUILDERS April 25, 1997 Thailand's Italthai is a leading player in a regional triad of forces that involves investment, collaboration and repression. Steve Thompson reports on the infrastructure plans and dealmaking taking place in Rangoon. Important development have become clear in recent months that have dangerous implications for Burma's environment. These concern the rapidly increasing investment by large Thai companies in Burma, and the collaboration between the State Law and Order Restoration Council and the Thai coalition government led by Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh. Playing a role also are Asean leaders, and the Asian Development Bank who are trying to promote investment in Burma as part of their constructive engagement policy. Italian Thai Development PLC, one of Thailand's biggest multinational corporations, has in the past year pledged over half a billion dollars (Bt26 billion) in investment capital in Burma. The company, under executive Premchai Karnasutra and Chaiyuth Karnasutra, has become by far the largest Thai investor in Burma. If projects that it is now bidding for or investigating are approved, Italian-Thai will become the biggest single foreign investor in Burma, with approximately a billion dollars in funds committed to projects it will be contracted to implement. Currently the Singapore based Kuok Group is the biggest investor, with US$660 million in holdings, mostly in tourism related sectors. The company, called Italthai for short, along with a few others such as the agro-industrial giant Charoen Pokpand group, appears to be acting as a central player in executing the Thai government's policy of constructive engagement with the Burmese Slorc regime. Italian Thai Development's investments in Burma focus on large scale transport, energy, and industrial developments. It also has interests in the development of tourism there through its majority shareholding in the Amari Group hotel chain. Since early 1995 Amari Group has been building a $12 million five star hotel in Pagan. Many Burmese farmers and villagers have been summarily ordered by Burmese military personnel to relocate from their family lands so that the tourism hotel can be built. The company made an "up-front payment", otherwise euphemistically known as a 'signing bonus" of over US$2.5 million to the Slorc to undertake the project. The hotel can be considered Italthai's pilot project in Burma. Secret payment Its next venture with the Slorc started on Aug 09, 1996 with the foundation laying ceremony of the $149 million Mandalay International Airport. Italian-Thai is both the contractor and the investor. The project attracted controversy when the Thai Democrat Party implied in a censure debate that then Prime Minister Banharn Silapa-archa took a huge "secret payment" from Italian-Thai for approving a government backed loan for the project. Eyewitnesses have reported the use of forced prisoner labour at the site. Italthia signed its biggest deal with the Slorc in December 1996 as the scandalplagued Banharn government was being replaced by one led by Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh to build a massive cement production complex. It is understood to involve the construction of two natural-gas fueled cement plants with a capacity of producing 90,000 tonnes of cement per year. Details are scarce but it seems that the plants will have a dual function - both producing portland cement and at the same time using the heat to generate electricity. According to press reports the project is worth a total of $400 million. The Thai-language Poojad Karn newspaper claims the deal is worth $521 million. Another major deal involves the construction of a deep sea port and an industrial estate covering hundreds of hectares at Tavoy on the long southern arm of Burma. In the first half of 1996 a memorandum was signed between the Thai and Burmese governments, followed by a memorandum of understanding between Slorc and Italian-Thai to develop the site. A contract between the Slorc and Ital-Thai for the construction of the port was expected to be signed by the end of March 1997. The government of the Industrial Estates Authority of Thailand has said that the heavy cargo handling port would cost an estimated $80 million, and the industrial estate some $200 million. The logging connection The industries to be developed at the site would use natural gas from the controversial Burma-Thai gas pipeline, or electricity generated from it. Environmentally unfriendly industries, including timber processing facilities and a petrochemical complex would be built at the site. A new road between the site of the Tavoy port and the Thai border at Bong Ti is planned. This follows a route cut by logging companies - and used by Slorc troops in its February offensive to occupy the southern heartland of the autonomy seeking ethnic Karen people. Perhaps not coincidentally, the Thai government has run into a storm of international protests after it forced back unarmed Karen male civilians into the path of the advancing Burmese Army at Bong Ti, the planned border crossing for the road. The Thai army then "voluntarily repatriated" hundreds of helpless women and children who had fled the area at a place called Suan Phung 40 kilometres further South. Suan Phung is yet another recently proposed border crossing for a road. Thai authorities, despite the furor about the repatriation, have reiterated their intention to continue it "when it is safe". Italian-Thai, in partnership with MDX Power PLC of Thailand and the vast Japanese conglomorate Marubeni, is currently undertaking a 15 month feasibility study to build a 100 to 200 megawatt hydro-electric dam on the Kok River in the Shan State. If built, most of the electricity from the dam will be delivered to the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. Although no recent cost estimate for making the dam is publicly available, a 100MW dam would cost a minimum of $120 million. However, a 1992 preliminary study for a dam on the site done, by the Japanese quasi-governmental Electric Power Development Corporation, calculated that it would cost $375 million. The dam would flood a wide, fertile and scenic upland valley. Yet another major infrastructure project Italian-Thai is bidding for is the proposed Hanthawaddy International Airport at Pegu. The Slorc apparently aims to replace the Rangoon Airport as the country's main terminal with the airport at Pegu. It would cost $150 million and be similar in many other respects to the Mandalay Airport. Pegu is 90 kilometres from the capital of Rangoon, which along with other factors has led to scepticism about the projects' viability. There is some question as to whether the dam, the port, and the Pegu airport deals will be finalised due to competition from other bidders, security considerations, and the uncertainty of securing financing. The Hanthawaddy International Airport construction contract is being sought by a number of other large concerns from the region. The Nam Kok Dam site is in an area of the Shan State that ethnic Wa guerrillas claim as part of their territory. Despite having a ceasefire with the Slorc, over 100 Wa and Slorc troops have died in recent clashes at Doi Lang, a mountain that rises above the Nam Kok valley. The Tavoy port development however seems highly likely to proceed due to the advanced stage of the negotiations. Nevertheless, the logic of the whole development is questionable due to the serious competition the project is likely to face from no fewer than three other similar port developments planned for the southern coast of Burma and the adjacent stretch of coast in the south of Thailand. The site of the massive Southern Seaboard port development in the southwest of Thailand has been the subject of political intrigue as various interest groups have maneouvred to secure agreement to have the lucrative, but ecologically disruptive, programme located in their area. The Slorc has begun construction of the huge Thilawa Port complex at Rangoon, with financial and technical assistance from Chinese and Singaporean companies. It has been alleged that some of the finance for the Thiwala Port development has come from Asia World Ltd, a Burmese company part owned by the son of drug kingpin Lo Hsing-han. Another planned project in even more direct conflict with the Tavoy deep- sea port and estate development, is a proposed container port at Thanbyuzayat in the Mon State area, just 200 kilometres north of Tavoy. This port would be connected to Thailand by a road to Three Pagodas Pass. A concession for the construction of the road has already been granted by the Slorc and work is underway. The combined cost of the Thanbyuzayat Port and the road linking it to Thailand is set at $100 million, nearly the same cost as the Tavoy Port alone. The port and industrial estate development programme may become a casualty for reasons other than the practical competition. The struggle to gain the contracts for the lucrative infrastructure projects is highly political. Actively behind the Thanbyuzayat port link is that national Hiranyapreuk, and influential businessman who was a personal advisor to former National Security Council chief Gen Charan Kulavanijaya. Meanwhile, the progress of the Southern Seaboard developments is in the interest of the Democrats, the main opposition party, which has its electoral stronghold in the south of Thailand. The Democrats exposed the connections between Italthai and the deposed Prime Minister Banharn Silapa-archa leading to the collapse of his administration. These and other groups have obvious motives to try to block the Italthai development projects at Tavoy and elsewhere. The influence of Italthai within the now ruling Chavalit coalition may also have waned despite its links to powerful parties within the coalition government itself. Italian-Thai has been battered by a string of embarrassing disclosures relating to corrupt practices in the past six months. These include the Nong Ngu Hao contract, the Mandalay Airport loan, a highway construction project in Bangkok, and a land development project in the Philippines in which Ital-Thai is said to hold a 70 per cent stake. The Slorc, which happily does business with tainted figures such as the drug warlords Khun Sa and Lo Hsing-han, the Canadian mining magnate Robert Friedland and assorted disreputable logging company tycoons, is unlikely to be put off by the record of a group such as Italian Thai Development. Burma may be becoming more attractive to Thai investors following the installation of the Chavalit government in Thailand in December of 1996. Since then the Thai government has sought to play up its rapidly expanding trade and investment links with Burma. Italthai's investment makes up a substantial proportion of this investment. More investment in Burma is actively being encouraged by government agencies as a key aspect of both the new governments' strategy of appeasing the Slorc, and its efforts to establish itself as the prosperous hub of the Greater Mekong Subregion. The Greater Mekong Subregion is a grouping of Thailand, Burma, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos and China's Yunnan Province. Italthai, having well established contacts with Slorc leaders, into whose hands it has already placed millions of dollars in "signing bonuses," is well to secure more contracts. More opportunities Opportunities that Italthai could capitalise on are not lacking following the Slorc's reopening of the Thai-Burma border. Relations between the two governments have thawed remarkably quickly since Chavalit came to power, and especially since the Thai military graphically and publicly demonstrated its willingness to push back fleeing Karen refugees to Burma. Discussions between the Thai Army Chief General Chettha and the Slorc Army Chief Gen Maung Aye days after the push-back have resulted in resumption of work on the 90 per cent complete Myanmar-Thailand Friendship Bridge at Myawaddy, opposite the Thai town of Mae Sot. The generals' also spoke of Thai assistance to the Burmese government to build a highway from the bridge at Myawaddy that would go all the way to Rangoon. The 400 kilometer Rangoon-Myawaddy Highway would be a continuation of the Trans-Asia Highway that for decades has stopped at Burma's closed borders. Another major contract in the offing involves the construction of a section of the "Loop Road" that would link Thailand and China with Burma and Laos. Work on the road had been halted by the Slorc after Shan guerrillas attacked the border town of Tachilek and Slorc officers accused Thai officials of sheltering them. The Slorc has now agreed to accept a $12 million low interest loan proffered by the Chavalit government for the completion of the road, after two years of setting unacceptable conditions to previous Thais administrations. The road is just one of nine huge transport infrastructure projects involving Burma and adjoining countries that the Asian Development Bank has been promoting to international financiers. There are also two equally huge energy infrastructure projects. There fall within an ambitious plan for opening up and exploiting the natural resources in the whole sub-region called the Greater Mekong Subregion Development Programme. The Bank and officials of some of the regional governments have been seeking some $15 billion for the development projects. Up to $8 billion worth of this would be invested in Burma. Some projects are already underway with foreign funding, such as the Yadana Gasfield and associated Burma-Thai gas pipeline development, the Thiwala Port Development, and the Kunming to Lashio roadway. These development plans have received the backing of key leaders in the Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean) such as Indonesian President Suharto and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. They have been vigorously pushing for the inclusion of Burma into the Asean fold, and have also begun a push to invest in Burma. Combined with the weak moderating pressures from the Western nations, all these moves by the ADB, by Asean, and by the Chavalit coalition will favour investment by Italian-Thai and other multinational corporations. All of these parties have shown that they are eager to exploit Burma's supposed wealth of natural resources, it's low-cost labour pool, and its potential as a transit route to other countries. Their moves will also favour those aiming to maintain their own political and financial power by making large fortunes from development projects. And naturally, they will also favour the increasingly repressive Burmese military government. On the other hand, they bode ill for the long-suffering Burmese people, especially those in opposition to the repressive rule of the military. Both the non-violent political opposition, which easily won national elections held by the Slorc, and the numerous ethnic groups, some of whom have renounced armed struggle and some who have not, are facing growing pressure from the Slorc. In the six months in which most of Italian-Thai's deals have been made, even highly visible opposition leaders have been publicly threatened, attacked, arrested and otherwise harasse including Nobel Peace Prize winner Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Renewed student unrest over deteriorating conditions has again led to demonstrations in Rangoon. To quell them the military brought tanks onto the streets, shut down the universities, and launched a new wave of large scale arrests by heavily armed troops. Ethnic groups that have signed ceasefire agreements with the Slorc have expressed growing dissatisfaction with the non-fulfilment of promise made to them during ceasefire negotiations. In the same short period Slorc has abandoned peace talks with the Karen National Union and launched a massive military offensive against it. According to army chief Gen Maung Aye, the reason for the offensive was because the Burmese government wants to establish order along the Thai- Burma border before its admission into Asean in July. It is evident that the increasing repression, the increase in the number of official contacts between regional military and national leaders, and the increase in big budget investments are closely connected. Investments from Thailand and the Asean countries are quickly rising, and may already be higher than the investments from the richer Western countries. Unfortunately for the people of Burma, the triad of investment, collaboration and repression appears to be working to seal their fates. And those who are profiting from the repression are the Slorc generals and their "true friends" - people like Chavalit, President Suharto, Italthai executive Premchai and Chaiyuth Karnasutra and their less visible Italian partners. ******************************************************* JAPAN TIMES: ALL QUIET ON THE THAI-MYANMAR BORDER May 7, 1997 by James Whitlow Delano (BurmaNet Editor's Note: The camp referred to in this article is called "Beh Gloh" by Karens, "Mae La" by Thais, and both names are used by foreigners. Most of the refugee camps have both Karen and Thai names.) "We couldn't make radio contact with the KNU [Karen National Union] rebels," said the human rights monitor. "It's the monsoon, so there may be no trucks coming to Thailand from Burma [Myanmar]." "Besides," she added, "it's possible that the Thai border guards wouldn't let a foreigner pass, anyhow. You're not Asian, are you? That would make it easier." "No," I answered. As I stepped out of the telephone booth, I realized I wouldn't be able to enter the KNU's free state, which still provides sanctuary for the KNU and the All-Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF). Instead I boarded a predawn bus bound for the border town of Mae Sot. In Mae Sot I caught a /songthaew/ carrying refugees back to camp from the Mae Sot central market. Songthaews are canopied Japanese pickups used throughout the countryside as public transportation. About halfway to my destination, Mae La, a Myanmar family flagged down the songthaew. Faces covered with yellow /thanaka/, the women climbed in first, removing their giant conical sun hats. Thanaka is a paste made from tree bark, used as makeup and sunblock. The eldest woman cradled a struggling cock under her arm. The youngest woman flashed a shy smile, her flawless skin contrasting with the deep lines marking her grandmother's withered face. The men, wearing /longyi/ (sarongs) loaded dusty sacks of rice and potatoes between passengers' knees. When the paved road gave to dirt in a steep jungle canyon, passengers squinted and held batik handkerchiefs to their noses and mouths. Dust in our wake filtered through the jungle trees crowding the road. The teak trees, in yellow-green bloom, stood out from the canopy. The songthaew came to its first scheduled stop at a Karen-style village. "Mae La?" I asked, gesturing toward the village. "Bek Loh," the tiny grandmother said, and climbed out. I made note of Bek Loh and decided to return there after Mae La. White cliffs rose behind the village. Vegetation swarmed over every surface. Hundreds of raised Karen-style huts lined the road; broad, dry leaves shingled gently pitched roofs. Banana trees stood between the houses. Mae La overlooks a bend in the Moei River. The forbidden state of Kayin ("Karen" in Burmese) lay on the opposite shore. Forested mountains rose from the horizon above gray pitched roofs faintly visible through high bamboo. I followed the road along the river. It was well covered by Thai military placements; two smiling Thai soldiers waved down from their machine gun nest commanding a sweeping view of the valley spreading out on both sides of the border. There were no refugees in Mae La. It was a Thai village. At a Buddhist school, a Karen woman teacher named Moola sent a young boy to find a motorcycle to take me to the refugee camp -- at Bek Loh. The Karen have been offering armed resistance since the autonomy promised in the Panglong Agreement of 1947, which also gave Burma independence from the British, was not honored by the Burmese. (The name Myanmar was not adopted until 1989.) The current government, the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), took advantage of a rift between Christian and Buddhist Karen by extending support to the Buddhists in January 1995. Violating a ceasefire, their combined forces made a great advance. The KNU is now barely holding on after 50 years of resistance. The motorcycle arrived as the clouds, now gray, were building. We sped toward Bek Loh, passing a concrete watchtower. A jeep was parked out front with a machine gun mounted on it. How far, I wondered, would the Thai military go to defend foreign refugees? Large raindrops pounded harmlessly on giant leaves used as umbrellas by two old Karen women. Men, disregarding the rain, walked along the road burdened with rattan backpacks. A swashbuckling KNU rebel sporting a flowing black bandanna on his head exploded from the forest and swung himself up on the back of the songthaew with one hand, pointing his automatic rifle skyward with the other. The motorcycle ran out of gas in front of the soldiers guarding the main entrance to Bek Loh refugee camp. Almost apologetically, I approached the soldiers, expecting to be denied entry into the camp. Two were playing cards while a third reclined on a bamboo cot. Barely acknowledging my presence, they motioned me to pass. The words "refugee camp" call to mind sprawling shanty towns of corrugated steel and plastic sheeting, festering in squalor. Bek Loh was different. In a way, the camp was merely an overgrown Karen village like those which, in much smaller versions, dot the Karen homeland along the Myanmar-Thai border, spreading into the Irrawaddy River delta and throughout the Bago Yoma Mountains of central Myanmar. The sun broke through and sent steam rising from my rain- drenched clothing. Shops opened onto a market street selling anything from foodstuffs to battery-powered electronics. Restaurants offered hot food and fabric stores sold brightly colored longyi. No foul odors filled the air. Myanmar me drew water from a well while women and children bathed in a stream. Women carried baskets on their heads, some with babies in longyi slung across their backs. Some Muslim men in white skullcaps and long robes crossed a log bridge on the way to afternoon prayers. An old white-haired man with a mustache left a circle of tattooed men watching a saber-less cockfight. In halting English, he invited me to tea at his house. Taking my shoes off, I climbed onto Puka Su's open veranda. There were no doors to lock or windows to close. Teak posts supported the roof. We sat cross-legged on the split bamboo floor looking out over a grove of banana trees. I asked about the life he'd left behind in Myanmar. "I left Rangoon in 1947," he said. "I have eight children, four in Thailand and four in Burma." Yellowing 1970s snapshots of his full-grown children hung in frames behind us. "The guerrilla war was hard," he said, "and now I am too old to fight. Bek Loh is about 10 years old but I've been here for two. There may be 10,000 people here, but who knows?" There is little outside work for the refugees in nearby Thai communities, but still the refugees of Bek Loh could count themselves among the more fortunate. Bek Loh is the only refugee camp in the Mae Sot area administered by the Thai government's Interior Ministry. As a result, there is greater security, better health services and government schooling for children. As tensions grow once again in Myanmar, Puka Su and tens of thousands of other refugees make the most of their sanctuary along the Myanmar-Thai border. It is uncertain how long the refugees will be welcome or what their fate will be if forced to return to Myanmar. Until the oligarchs of Myanmar loosen their grip on that nation, the refugees will try to remain in Thailand, the occasional mortar attacks being the lesser evil. (A refugee camp is not recommended as a tourist destination. Travelers may help refugees through human rights groups and relief organizations such as Earth Rights International in Kanchanaburi and the Karen Refugee Committee in Mae Sot. It is best to visit in conjunction with one of these groups.) ****************************************************