------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: September 2, 1997 Issue #811 HEADLINES: ========== REUTER: UK - NO BURMA INVITE TO EUROPE-ASIA SUMMIT TACDB PRESS RELEASE: BURMESE STARVING ON WORK- SITE BKK POST: ALIEN WORKFORCE TO BE CUT BACK US STATE DEPT: CONDITIONS IN BURMA AND U.S. POLICY BKK POST: ASEAN MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS A VERY FEW THE NATION: CRUNCH TIME FOR ASEAN'S NON-INTERFERENCE THE NATION: US DENIES ISSUING SUU KYI PERMIT BURMANET SUBJECT-MATTER RESOURCE LIST -------------------------------------------------------------------------- REUTER: NO BURMA INVITE TO EUROPE-ASIA SUMMIT, UK SAYS September 1, 1997 By Chris Johnson SINGAPORE, Sept. 1 (Reuter) - British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook condemned the Burmese government on Monday for profiting from the drugs trade and said it would not be admitted to a summit of European and Asian nations next year. Cook told a meeting of business leaders in Singapore that Europe's recent decision to deny visas to senior Burmese officials made their inclusion at the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) in London in April ``impossible.'' ASEM is a forum linking the 15 members of the European Union with Japan, China, South Korea and some members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). ASEAN admitted Burma to its ranks this year, despite heavy Western criticism of Rangoon's record on human rights and its flourishing drugs trade. ``There is a common European position across all European countries not to grant visas to ministers from Burma, which will make it impossible for us to consider the inclusion of Burma in the ASEAN process next year,'' Cook said at the end of a four-nation tour of Southeast Asia. ``Burma is the largest single world producer of opium, and it has achieved that infamous position precisely because it is a government that does not act against the drug barons,'' he said. ``It is not only a deeply repressive regime, but it is also a deeply irresponsible regime in that it is one of the few governments in the world whose members are prepared to profit out of the drugs trade rather than to seek to suppress the drugs trade,'' he added. Cook told a news conference before leaving for home that Britain could bar Burma from the summit because ASEM was not a bloc-to-bloc meeting but a voluntary dialogue between nations. He said he had found ``deep common recognition'' of the problem of Burma in the Asian capitals he had visited ``both in terms of its government system and in terms of the connivance of the government in the drugs trade.'' But he said there was ``an honest difference of approach'' as to how to resolve the issue and persuade Rangoon's State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) to change. ``In Europe, we have taken the view that we cannot have dialogue with a government that is both as repressive as SLORC and as irresponsible in its connivance with the drug barons,'' he said. ``In Southeast Asia there is, particularly in ASEAN, a belief that the best way forward is for dialogue with SLORC. ``What I have found encouraging is that there is in every capital I have been to a recognition that there is a serious problem here that must be addressed. ``I think SLORC would be ill-advised if it took the willingness of ASEAN to have dialogue with them as a basis on which not to respond to the concerns they raise.'' Cook told the business leaders Burma's acceptance on the international stage would be based on its embrace of democracy and on action against the drugs trade. ``Until the military junta in Burma is prepared to recognise the democratic rights of the people, and most certainly until it is prepared to cooperate with the rest of the world in trying to take action against the menace of heroin, it will be extremely difficult for the governments of the developed world to recognise the government of Burma as an acceptable interlocutor and a partner,'' he said. ******************************************** TACDB PRESS RELEASE: BURMESE STARVING ON WORK- SITE September 1, 1997 From: tacdb@ksc.th.com Thai Action Committee for Democracy in Burma (TACDB) URGENT PRESS RELEASE! 70 Burmese Nationals Starving on the work- site for the next Asia Games in Bangkok. 1st September, 1997. BANGKOK- Plans for Thailand's stadium and grounds construction for the next Asian Games are being disrupted by a serious case of migrant worker exploitation. Over 80 Burmese nationals are starving at the site of the forthcoming Asia Games in Bangkok's district of Ramkhanheng. The group of undocumented workers, originating from the war-torn areas of Mon and Karen state in Burma, have not received wages for over six weeks and can no longer afford to feed themselves. U Win Aung, leader of the group said that workers have been subsisting on rice water and salt and that they hadn't been given any reason for the non-payment of wages by their supervisor. The National Stadium project in Ramkhanheng is a Thai government funded project which has been contracted out to STNC Construction Company, 113/26 Onnuch Road, Sukhumvit 77 Road, Suanluang, Praweite, Bangkok 10250, tel: (+662) 321 8102, fax: (+662) 821 8090. Workers are under the supervision of a sub-contractor, named Pi Chankaphan, and have been working on building the foundations for a five floor building behind the actual stadium for the last two months. Burmese workers refused to continue work on Saturday, while around 30 workers have already been forced to leave the work-site to find alternative employment without receiving the wages already owned to them. Sub-contractor, Pi Chankaphan, came to the work-site over the weekend and gave workers 132 Baht each in attempt to placate workers and avoid further absences from the work-site as pressure is now on to finish construction on scheduled time. A large number of Cambodian, Laotian and Thai workers are in a similar situation at the work-site. All workers were denied the chance of registering as legal migrant workers by the sub-contractor. Often, employers refuse to register workers because of the cost involved. The situation at the National Stadium is a serious blemish upon Thailand's regional and international image. One must question Thailand's sincerity in it's attempts to resolve the problems created by the presence of so many Burmese nationals within it's borders. Workers said that they would not return home to Burma unless they were forced to. U Win Aung stated that "... there is nothing to do for our survival in Burma, it is better for us to stay in Thailand.". He went on to say that "...we come from an area of Burma where there are very serious military operations being carried out.... hunger is better for us than torture and death.". Action should be taken to ensure the payment and protection of workers at the site as a matter of urgency. TACDB encourages people to visit the work-site with donations of food. Please contact TACDB on tel/fax: (+662) 216 4463 for further information. ------------------------------------------- Thai Action Committee for Democracy in Burma (TACDB), 328 Phayathai Road, Rajthevee, Bangkok 10400, THAILAND. tel/fax: (+662) 216 4463 email: tacdb@ksc.th.com ****************************************************** BKK POST: ALIEN WORKFORCE TO BE CUT BACK September 2, 1997 Chatrudee Theparat Increase in jobless figures expected The foreign workforce is to be cut to cope with an anticipated surge in unemployment. The Economic Screening Committee assigned the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare to work out the cuts yesterday. Between 700,000 and a million aliens, mostly Burmese, work here, and until last November, 370,000 had registered in 43 provinces. Of those, 81.7 percent are Burmese, 3.7 percent Lao, 8.14 percent Cambodian and the rest from the Indian sub-continent and China. Although most are labourers, many skilled workers and professionals, such as engineers, mechanics, accountants and architects, have been engaged in the commercial and industrial sectors. Official figures show the number of skilled foreign workers and professionals rose from 179,000 in 1995 to 185,000 last year. The cuts will affect skilled and unskilled workers, said Varathep Rattanakorn, government spokesman. The panel also decided efforts be stepped up to promote labour exports to offset the effects of a construction sector slump. The National Economic and Social Development Board was told at the meeting to devise an early warning system with concerned agencies and the private sector. Mr Varathep said businesses would be asked to cut costs before staff. Tens of thousands of new graduates are to be encouraged to further their studies, possibly with the same kind of funding the Education Ministry provides for students from low-income families Instead of being salaried workers, the committee also encouraged new graduates to start businesses, probably with funding to be arranged by the state, said Mr Varathep. The NESDB expects up to one mil., lion people to be jobless if economic growth shrinks to 2.5-3 percent this year but the ministry says the figure should not exceed 300,000. For 1998, the NESDB put the figure at 1. 13 million and the ministry 489,000. The NESDB also doubted the ministry's redundancy figure of 13,215 for January-August, pointing out it was based on the textile industry and did not take into account people laid off from the 58 suspended finance firms and the service sector. ********************************************* US STATE DEPT: CONDITIONS IN BURMA AND U.S. POLICY TOWARD BURMA August 21, 1997 From: zawzaw@activist.com CONDITIONS IN BURMA AND U.S. POLICY TOWARD BURMA (Plan for Implementation of Section 570 of Conference Report 104-863 to Accompany H.R. 3610 (Omnibus Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 1997) Submitted to the U.S. Congress, June 13, 1997 Released by the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, August 21, 1997 U.S. Department of State) The people of Burma continue to live under a highly authoritarian military regime that is widely condemned for its serious human rights abuses. The military regime in Burma, the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), has made no progress in the past six months in moving toward greater democratization and little, if any, progress toward fundamental improvement in the quality of life of the people of Burma. The SLORC continues to dominate the political, economic and social life of the country in the same arbitrary, heavy-handed way that it has since seizing power in September 1988 after harshly suppressing massive pro-democracy demonstrations. U.S. policy toward Burma seeks progress in three key areas -- democracy, human rights and counter-narcotics. We have taken steps to pressure the SLORC -- suspending economic aid, withdrawing GSP and OPIC, implementing an arms embargo, blocking assistance from international financial institutions, downgrading our representation to Charge, and imposing visa restrictions on senior leaders and their families. We are engaged in vigorous multilateral diplomacy to encourage ASEAN, Japan, the EU and other nations to take similar steps and other actions to encourage progress by the SLORC in these areas of key concern. The EU recently imposed visa restrictions similar to ours and is expected to withdraw GSP in March. In addition, Japan's suspension of much of its bilateral aid program remains in force. In addition, the President signed an Executive Order implementing a ban on new investment by U.S. persons in Burma effective May 21, 1997. The order prohibits persons from engaging in any of the following activities: -- entering a new contract that includes the economic development of resources located in Burma; -- entering a new contract providing for the general supervision and guarantee of another person's performance of a contract that includes the economic development of resources located in Burma; -- entering into a contract providing for the participation in royalties, earnings, or profits in the economic development of resources located in Burma, without regard to the form of the participation; -- facilitating transactions of foreign persons that would violate any of the foregoing prohibitions if engaged in by U.S. person; and -- evading or avoiding, or attempting to violate, any of the prohibitions in the order. MEASURING PROGRESS TOWARD DEMOCRATIZATION In the past six months the SLORC has shown no sign of willingness to cede its hold on absolute power. The generals have continued to refuse to negotiate with pro-democracy forces and ethnic groups for a genuine political settlement to allow a return to the rule of law and respect for basic human rights. The SLORC claims that the military-dominated National Convention is an appropriate forum for dialogue with the NLD and parties representing the country's ethnic minorities. But the National Convention, a body ostensibly tasked since 1993 with drafting a new constitution, is hardly a democratic forum as currently structured. The Convention is overwhelmingly made up of delegates hand-picked by the SLORC, which has carefully stage-managed the proceedings and ignored even limited opposition views. The NLD withdrew from the National Convention in November 1995 because of the undemocratic nature of the institution and was formally ejected by the SLORC in December. Despite having no legal mandate, the SLORC appears determined to draft a constitution that would ensure a dominant role for the military forces in the country's future political structure. However, the Convention has not met since mid-1996, and the SLORC's current plans for the body are unclear. The worsening narcotics situation in Burma reflects the SLORC's disregard for the rule of law. Burma is the world's largest source of illicit opium, and output increased by an estimated nine per cent in 1996 to 2,560 metric tons. Nevertheless, Burmese law enforcement actions against producers and traffickers remain limited. Leading trafficker Khun Sa, who "surrendered" to Burmese forces in early 1996, has never been brought to justice. Even as heroin production remains high, Burmese traffickers are also diversifying into methamphetamines, which are posing severe problems for neighboring states. As well, traffickers are increasingly investing in legitimate sectors of the economy, and there is reason to believe that the laundering of drug profits is having a substantial impact on the Burmese economy. MEASURING PROGRESS ON IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE In the same way, in the past six months the Burmese people have seen little progress in improving their quality of life. In fact, by many indices, their quality of life has worsened. The SLORC's severe violations of human rights have continued. There continue to be credible reports, particularly from ethnic minority-dominated areas along the Thai border, that soldiers have committed serious human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killing and rape. Disappearances continue, and members of the security forces beat and otherwise abuse detainees. Arbitrary arrests and detentions continue for expression of dissenting political views. Several hundred, if not more, political prisoners remain in detention, including 29 Members of Parliament elected in 1990. The SLORC reinforces its rule via a pervasive security apparatus led by military intelligence and sharply restricts basic rights to free speech, press, assembly, and association. Political party activity remains severely restricted. The activities of the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi are monitored and circumscribed by the regime. Since late September Aung San Suu Kyi has been prevented from addressing party supporters in front of her house, as the SLORC puts up blockades to prevent gatherings there. In November the motorcade in which she was riding was attacked by a gang of thugs encouraged by elements of the regime. Aung San Suu Kyi was not hurt, though one NLD leader was slightly injured by broken glass. In response to street protests by large groups of students in November and December, the SLORC closed the nation's universities. Most remain closed to prevent another outbreak of student protest. For three weeks in December Aung San Suu Kyi did not leave her compound. Since late December, she has been able to leave her compound after notifying authorities of her destinations. She meets relatively often with diplomats and supporters. Visitors are generally allowed to meet her at her compound if authorities are notified in advance. She has held two meetings of her supporters on her compound that were attended by 2,000 or more persons. NLD leaders have expressed strong concerns about SLORC repression and have called for increased international pressure on the SLORC, including sanctions. In February the Burmese Army launched a full-scale assault on the forces of the Karen National Union near the Thai border. Up to 12,000 Karen were forced to flee into Thailand, the vast majority of them civilians, including women, children and the elderly. Thousands of civilians were forcibly conscripted to serve as porters for the Burma Army in its offensive. Thousands of other citizens of Burma remain in exile because of fear of persecution and poor economic conditions. About 24,000 Rohingya Muslims from Arakan state remain in camps in Bangladesh. A few thousand students and dissidents remain in exile in Thailand. Approximately 100,000 individuals now reside in ethnic minority camps along the Thai-Burma border, among them thousands of new arrivals driven out by army attacks in the areas controlled by the Karen and Karenni ethnic minorities. Burma is a poor country, with an average per capita income of only $600 to $800, even after adjusting for the relative purchasing power of the Burmese currency. Progress on market reforms has been mixed and uneven. Since 1988 the Government has partly opened the economy to permit expansion of the private sector and to attract foreign investment. Some economic improvement has ensued, but major obstacles to economic reform persist. These include disproportionately large military spending, extensive overt and covert state involvement in economic activity, excessive state monopolization of leading exports, a bloated bureaucracy prone to arbitrary and opaque governance, and poor human and physical infrastructure. In addition, the SLORC does not have access to external credit from the IMF, World Bank and Asian Development Bank. Money laundering in Burma is a growing problem, and the laundering of drug profits is thought by some analysts to have a widespread impact on the Burmese economy. The Government restricts worker rights and uses forced labor on a widespread basis. The use of porters by the army -- with attendant mistreatment, illness, and even death for those compelled to serve -- remains a common practice. The military authorities continue to force ordinary citizens (including women and children) to "contribute" their labor on a massive scale, often under harsh working conditions, on construction projects throughout the country. Some of these projects -- such as the moat of the Mandalay fort -- were undertaken to promote tourism to the country. In the past year, the military has begun using soldiers instead of civilians at certain infrastructure projects, following the issuance of directives in 1995 to end the practice of forced civilian labor. Child labor continues to be a serious problem. As a largely underdeveloped country, Burma does not have some of the extensive environmental problems affecting air and water quality that plague many of its rapidly industrializing neighbors. However, with a rapid population growth rate, the country faces increasing pressure on environmental quality. Burma possesses the largest tracts of remaining tropical forest in southeast Asia, though aggressive international logging companies are eyeing these forests just as they are eyeing those in other Mekong countries. Some NGOs have charged that Burma's teak forests in the Thai-Burma border area are being rapidly destroyed by clear-cutting and deforestation. Because of the severe restrictions on Embassy travel to outlying parts of Burma, it is difficult to document the overall extent of the problem. Embassy officials have visited the showcase Bago Yoma Forest 150 miles north of Rangoon. The Ministry of Forest operates a research station and seed orchards in this area in what appears to be an example of sustainable forestry. The poor quality of life is also reflected in rising drug abuse. Burmese estimates put the addict population at approximately 60,000, but UNDCP and NGOs working in the health sector estimate the actual number is at least five times that figure. Intravenous use of heroin is contributing to the rapid spread of HIV/AIDS. Drug treatment services are not reaching most drug users because of a lack of facilities and a lack of properly trained personnel. DEVELOPMENT OF A MULTILATERAL STRATEGY The goals of U.S. policy toward Burma are progress toward democracy, improved human rights, and more effective counter-narcotics efforts. Failing national reconciliation, Burma will not be able to address systematically the many severe problems it faces, including narcotics trafficking and abuse, a low level of education and poor economic performance. In recent months we have forged a vigorous multilateral strategy to seek improvement in our key areas of concern. We consult about Burma regularly and at senior levels with leaders of ASEAN nations, Japan, the European Union, and other countries having major trading and investment interests in Burma. These efforts have helped build and maintain strong international pressure on the SLORC. The key to progress toward democracy and human rights is, first and foremost, a direct dialogue about the political future of the country among the SLORC, the NLD, and the ethnic minorities. In all our public and private messages to the SLORC, leaders of third countries and other interested parties, we stress the importance of beginning such a dialogue as the key to achieving significant progress in Burma. We work closely with our friends and allies in Asia and Europe to press the SLORC to begin dialogue. In response, leaders from ASEAN nations, Japan and the European Union have urged the regime, both publicly and privately, to move to dialogue with the democratic opposition. In order to urge the SLORC to make progress in our areas of concern, we have taken a number of steps -- suspending economic aid, withdrawing GSP and OPIC, implementing an arms embargo, blocking assistance from international financial institutions, downgrading our representation to Charge, and imposing visa restrictions on senior regime leaders and their families. We likewise have encouraged ASEAN, Japan, the EU and other nations to take similar steps and other actions to encourage progress by the SLORC in these areas of key concern. Many nations join us in our arms embargo, including European countries, Canada, Australia and Japan. The EU and Japan limit their assistance to Burma to humanitarian aid. Our efforts in the international financial institutions continue to be successful in blocking loans to the SLORC, which is probably the single most important form of pressure we have against the regime. Since 1988 we have taken an active role in pressing for strong human rights resolutions on Burma at the United Nations General Assembly and the UN Human Rights Commission, as well as having worked vigorously in the ILO to condemn the lack of freedom of association for workers and the use of forced labor by the SLORC. In November, at our urging, the EU and associated European states joined us in imposing a ban on visas for high-level SLORC officials and their families. In addition, the European Commission has recommended that the European Union withdraw GSP trade benefits from Burma's agricultural and industrial products because of forced labor concerns. EU Foreign Ministers are expected to adopt these recommendations in March, which would bring European trade policy in line with the U.S. ban on GSP. On several occasions in recent months, our embassies have made high-level demarches to leaders in the ASEAN countries, urging them to use their influence with the SLORC to press for positive change in Burma. We have also raised with the ASEAN countries our concerns that Burma not join that organization prematurely. ASEAN shares many of our goals with regard to Burma, but we disagree on the means to achieve those goals. ASEAN believes that "constructive engagement" of the SLORC is the most effective way to promote positive change in Burma. We will continue to raise our strong concerns with ASEAN and urge continued steps to encourage progress by the SLORC. [end of document] ****************************************** BKK POST: ASEAN MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS A VERY FEW August 30, 1997 Asean's policy of "constructive engagement" in its dealings with Slorc failed totally to produce the most basic concessions to human rights before Burma became a member of the regional alliance, and the policy appears to have not much more of a chance now the generals can boast Asean membership. It is unfortunate that the period following the admission of Burma into the Association of Southeast Asian Nations coincided with a host, not to say a plague, of distractions. Had the member states of the regional grouping been without distraction, they might just have begun to see that Asean's policy of constructive engagement had opened the door to a regime unable to behave itself. It was fortunate for the State Law and Order Restoration Council, which claims to represent Burma, that its elevation to full membership of the alliance was obscured in the news by an unlikely alliance. The stars of the show were our own economic bunglers, Hun Sen, the second and only co- premier of Cambodia, Pol Pot, whose personal Year Zero appears to have started, and George Soros, the international financial devil whose stunning gains cause Malaysia's prime minister to have stunning tantrums. With each of these players doing their bit in their own little way, the continuing bad behaviour of the generals who rule Burma and the collapse of the economy they have plundered since 1962 were consigned to the back burner, but snippets did filter out. Slorc had arrested and jailed two relatives of Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the opposition National League for Democracy, it accused her of taking money from Washington and seeking a permit to live in the United States. Ms Suu Kyi and the United States have denied both claims. In other words, it was business as usual: Slorc harassing members of the democratic opposition that won the 1990 general election by a landslide, the country's jails crowded with political prisoners, ethnic minorities being brutalised in border areas. In the immediate aftermath of its admission, Slorc showed by its behaviour that it was not about to moderate its behaviour and that Asean was whistling in the wind if it thought that it would. On the positive side, the Thai-Burma friendship bridge finally opened with Slorc imposing distinctly unfriendly restrictions on its use, and the junta showed that in terms of economic folly, it is without rival. But this is not to say that Slorc is not happy to have become the ninth member of the regional club. Far from it, because when you are broke, it is nice to have friends, as we are finding with the International Monetary Fund. It is also nice to be able to use the good offices of Asean to correct misconceptions that are somehow taken as fact by the international community. Rather than use membership as the pretext to make Slorc behave itself, SLORC is using Asean to justify its own warped behaviour. Lt-Gen Khin Nyunt, Secretary 1 of Slorc, believes Burma should raise its profile in Asean and host meetings to correct what he claims to be false impressions of the country. The head of military intelligence believes that through Asean the regime can counter fabrications by the wicked western media that has painted Burma as a foreboding place. "By playing host to some of the regular Asean meetings," he said, "we cannot only correct this false concept and show that pace and stability prevails here but this will also help promote tourism." The remarks of Lt-Gen Khin Nyunt and the regime's behaviour show that Asean's policy of constructive engagement has been a very good thing indeed, but only for a benighted and thoroughly brutal dictatorship. Asean said it would apply pressure once Burma was in the fold but it appears to have been distracted, and lamentably so. ************************************************* THE NATION: CRUNCH TIME FOR ASEAN'S NON-INTERFERENCE POLICY August 27, 1997 Regional/Puangthong Rungswasdisab The changing dynamics of relations within the region is forcing a re- appraisal of the grouping's core policies. Since 1991, "constructive engagement" has become increasingly adopted by Southeast Asian nations as the preferred mode of dealing with conflict and instability in the region. At the same time, there has been a shift in one of Asean's core principles - noninterference in a member's domestic affairs - at the senior official level, as the group has come under heavy criticism from some sections of the international community. The challenge Asean now faces is how to incorporate these ideological changes into practice. The implementation of constructive engagement depends on how each state interprets it in accordance with its national interest. The US view and practice of the policy towards China is different from Asean's policy towards Burma, while China has its own terms of engagement with other countries. India, on the other hand, prefers to use the term "cooperative peace", despite sharing the same pattern of inter-state relations adopted by most Asian countries. Jasjit Singh, director of New Delhi based Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, compared it to the ancient Indian parable about the blind men and the elephant, where each man has his own interpretation of what the object is. Asean's original terms of constructive engagement implied an effort to induce change in the domestic policies of another state through a policy of dialogue and persuasion, without any threat of sanction or coercion, and an acceptance of differences in political and socio-economic systems. The target countries of constructive engagement, Burma and recently Cambodia, no doubt favour such an accommodating principle. The West, and local and international human rights groups, have repeatedly criticised Asean for using the policy as a cover for their economic engagement with Burma and Cambodia. These groups advocate sanctions and some restrictions on trade and economic activity as the most effective method of bringing the stubborn states violating human rights into line. Since the policy was implemented in 1991, Asean has stood firm on its non-interference doctrine. But in a conference on "Constructive Engagement in Asia: Political and Economic Dimensions" held in Bangkok from Aug 20 to 21, Burmese expert Josef Silverstein of Rutgers University pointed out that a gradual shift of the doctrine was evident on the eve of Burma's joining Asean and in the wake of the collapse of the coalition government in Cambodia in early June. In a visit to Rangoon in June, Malaysian Foreign Minister Abdulla Badawi reportedly urged the leaders of the State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) to begin a dialogue with pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi in order to ease tensions in the country. Thailand's Foreign Minister Prachuab Chaiyasarn soon adopted Badawi's idea when he said on July 1 during the celebration of the Hong Kong handover to China that Asean could no longer employ constructive engagement in its relations with Burma and that he had proposed replacing it with a more comprehensive policy. But he gave no details. In an interview with the international Newsweek magazine, Malaysia's deputy prime minister, Anwar Ibrahim also acknowledged that Asean "must now move from being a largely reactive organisation". "We need to intervene before simmering problems erupt into full-blown crises like the one now unfolding in Cambodia. Perhaps it is now appropriate for Asean to seriously consider the idea of constructive engagement," he said. He wrote further that "our non-involvement in the reconstruction of Cambodia actually contributed to the deterioration and final collapse of national reconciliation." Asean then sent its special envoys down the road to mediate the Cambodian conflict. Anwar's statement was "a remarkably candid and unprecedented display of self-criticism, especially unusual at a time of euphoria marking the approach of the 30th anniversary of the founding of Asean," said Prof Amitav Acharya of York University in Toronto. Anwar also suggested steps in which Asean should become actively involved within Cambodia, including direct assistance to firm up the electoral processes, an increased commitment to legal and administrative reforms, the development of human capital, the general strengthening of civil society and the rule of law. These developments have thus placed Asean at a crossroad of the new notions of constructive engagement/intervention and the original non- interference principle. Amitav, however, argued that the noninterference doctrine which appeared to serve Asean so well at the peak of superpower rivalry and the ideological rivalries in Southeast Asia, is probably less important in the current situation when Asean members have established a degree of confidence and trust in their relations. "Asean cannot afford to have 'failed states' or 'pariah states' as members of the regional community. But helping its weaker members to develop economically and politically requires it to accept a more flexible notion of sovereignty and establish an acceptable middle ground between indifference and interference," Amitav said. However, in adopting a newly defined policy of constructive engagement, Asean will inevitably face a number of difficulties. Asean needs a consensus on the desirability of the constructive programme, the appropriate benchmarks that would justify Asean's intervention and financial support, Amitav said. Silverstein added that it is important for Asean members to incorporate the notions of the new policy in their relations with each other and non- member states, otherwise there will be no progress on the concerns raised by Malaysia's Foreign Minister Badawi. It is likely that Asean will face stumbling blocks if it pushes for credible elections in Cambodia and Burma, when most Asean members struggle to meet that standard. If a free and fair election would mean the loss of power for Slorc or Hun Sen's Cambodian People's Party, it is unlikely that the two regimes would agree to such an Asean proposal, said Prof Carlyle Thayer, head of the School of Politics at the Australian Defence Force Academy. Thayer also warned Asean that trying to bring a quick democracy to Cambodia would again bring Cambodia into a "vicious cycle" of military intervention in politics - coup, constitutional order, coup - which would only delay Cambodia's socio-economic development and stability. ************************************************** THE NATION: US DENIES ISSUING SUU KYI PERMIT September 2, 1997 [slightly abridged] Andreas Harsono, The Nation JAKARTA - A spokesman for the American State Department said it had no knowledge of reports that Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi used her high profile to obtain a green card to the United States. "We are very supportive of her, but I have not heard anything about a green card," James P Rubin said in an Aug 25 press briefing, a transcript of which has been made available to The Nation. Brig Gen David O Abel of Burma's State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) told The Nation on Aug 13 that Suu Kyi's allegiance is not to Burma but to "another country" and that she had used her position "to obtain a green card from America". A green card is a permanent resident permit. One usually obtains a green card before applying for US citizenship. In his daily briefing in the State Department building in Washington DC, Rubin said he had not heard any discussions of a green card for Suu Kyi. "I can tell you this, that Secretary [of State Madeleine] Albright believes very strongly in the work that Aung San Suu Kyi is doing. She has been a long-time supporter of her." "We, as you know, have taken additional sanctions in recent months to try to send the message that the elected leader of the party that won the elections should have a role to play in that country," Rubin said. *********************************************** 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: Campus activism: zni@students.wisc.edu Boycott campaigns: ai268@freenet.carleton.ca Buddhism: Buddhist Relief Mission: brelief@gol.com Chin history/culture: [volunteer temporarily away] Fonts: tom@cs.colgate.edu High School Activism: [volunteer needed] History of Burma: zni@students.wisc.edu International Affairs: Julien Moe: moe@interport.net 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 Aung San Myint: aungsan@giasd101.vsnl.net.in Pali literature: "Palmleaf": c/o burmanet@igc.apc.org Pipeline Campaign freeburma@irn.org Resettlement info: refugee_help@mail.serve.com Rohingya culture volunteer needed Shan history/culture: Sao Hpa Han: burma@ix.netcom.com Shareholder activism: simon_billenness@mail.cybercom.net Total - France Dawn Star: cd@utopia.EUnet.fr Tourism campaigns: bagp@gn.apc.org "Attn. S.Sutcliffe" volunteering: refugee_help@mail.serve.com World Wide Web: FreeBurma@POBox.com Geographical Contacts: Massachusetts simon_billenness@mail.cybercom.net [Feel free to suggest more areas of coverage] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FREE BURMA WEB PAGES: http://FreeBurma.org This single page serves only as an easy to remember URL and departure point to resources promoting the establishment of democracy in Burma. Please write to FreeBurma@pobox.com to add a site or for further information." - Glen, system administrator FREE BURMA COALITION: to get involved in the Free Burma Coalition, send a message to: zni@students.wisc.edu or visit their homepage, accessible through: http:// FreeBurma.org There is also an e-mail list-server especially for Free Burma activists BURMANET SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION: 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. It is produced with the support of the Burma Information Group (B.I.G) and the Research Department of the ABSDF. We are also grateful to many other friends around the world who send us articles to post. The BurmaNet News is e-mailed directly to subscribers and is also distributed via the soc.culture.burma and seasia-l mailing lists. For a free subscription to the BurmaNet News: send a message to: majordomo@igc.apc.org a. For the BurmaNet News only: in the message, type: subscribe burmanews-l b. For the BurmaNet News and 4-5 other messages a day: in the message, type: subscribe burmanet-l (NOTE: all lower case letters, last letter is a lower case "L", not the numeral one). Letters to the editor, comments or contributions of articles should be sent to the editor at: strider@igc.apc.org ***************************************************