------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: October 28, 1997 Issue #854 HEADLINES: ========== ASIAN WALL STREET JOURNAL: ASIA'S REFUGEE EPIDEMIC THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD: FAITH, HOPE & DESTINY REUTERS: AIDS BLOSSOMS IN THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE BKK POST: BURMA SHOULD LEARN FROM TALEBAN PACT BKK POST: INDONESIAN MODEL UNLIKELY TO PROVE A HELP ASIAN AGE: BURMA POACHING ENDANGERS RARE BIRDS, ANIMALS THE NATION: A PLEA TO HELP KAREN REFUGEES PREPARE ANNOUNCEMENT: AUSTRALIAN TV - THE HEROIN WARS ANNOUNCEMENT: VALPARAISO UNIVERSITY BURMA PANEL -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ASIAN WALL STREET JOURNAL: ASIA'S REFUGEE EPIDEMIC October 24-25, 1997 By Barry Wain The tatmadaw, as the Burmese military is known, arrived in the village unannounced, shattering the morning calm with barked orders. The message: Everyone had to leave-permanently. Over the next few weeks, the troops swooped on about 100 other settlements between the Pon and Salween rivers in Kayah state, scattering as many as 30,000 mostly ethnic Karenni and Shan farmers. They lost everything-homes, land and belongings. The wave of forced relocations, begun in April last year, was an attempt to deny support to an armed Karenni resistance group. Most of the villagers ended up in two designated camps, though about 7,000 trekked through forest and over mountains for a week with little food to seek shelter in Thailand. Other sections of the country's population periodically flee acts of repression, ranging from the practice of compelling civilians to be porters for the army, to drafting unpaid laborers to work on construction projects. And Burma isn't alone in victimizing its own residents, often minorities. "Through no fault of their own, millions of people have been driven from their homes in Asian countries by conflicts and persecution," says a special report by Amnesty International. "Many have been targeted simply because of their ethnic origin." Since the end of the Cold War, Asia has found comfort in the belief that the region has escaped the vicious tribalism that has resurfaced in the former Soviet Union. Yugoslavia and elsewhere. But a closer look shows that much of the complacency is misplaced. Disputes simmering for decades in some cases have uprooted communities and left them vulnerable. Among them: Tibet's refugee diaspora, generated by relentless Chinese pressure, stretches from India to Europe; Irian Jayans escape to Papua New Guinea to avoid fighting between the Indonesian army and an independence movement; and about 90,000 ethnic Nepalese are pressured to leave their Bhutan homeland for Nepal. According to Amnesty International, loosely-defined Asia currently shelters about 1.8 million refugees, meaning they have left their countries and are unable or unwilling to return. A further 1.7 million are internally displaced. Don't confuse either category with economic migrants, who flock_legally and illegally_to the once-booming economies that constitute the so-called East Asian Miracle. In fact, Amnesty International research confirms that Asians usually take the difficult decision to abandon their homes only under the most extreme circumstances. Moreover, ethnic and national divisions are behind the flight of many, and the issues of ethnicity and identity can affect their treatment down the line. The report, one of five regional assessments produced by London-based Amnesty International as part of a world-wide campaign for the human rights of refugees shows Asia with limited humanitarian instincts. While large chunks of the region are rapidly becoming wealthy, they have yet to translate their material gains into more tolerant and compassionate societies. To be fair, borders drawn arbitrarily by colonial authorities, without regard to racial realities, are an enduring nightmare for many independent governments. The role of outside powers in local wars and revolutions, in which boundaries were redrawn, has also contributed to the headache. Just the same, the record is dismal. The report says "an 'arc' of refugee crises has emerged across the heart of Asia," stretching from northeast India, through the Chittagong hill tracts in Bangladesh, and across into Burma and Thailand. Nation states are seeking to assert their authority and control over ethnic and tribal groups, many of which refuse to recognize lines on maps. As a result, frontiers have become battlegrounds, governments have engaged in long wars of attrition against ethnically-based insurgents, and interethnic tensions have flared into bloody warfare. "Desperate people flee to and fro across the border, trying to find at least temporary sanctuary," says the report. "Border areas are dotted with sprawling camps, filled with ethnic refugee communities from one generation to the next living in poverty and fear, uncertain if they will ever have a secure future." It is difficult to argue with the report's observation that the vast numbers seeking haven from harassment and violence starkly expose the widespread lack of respect for human rights in Asia. The hordes of dislocated and dispossessed are also testing to the full the system for protecting refugees in the region. Once they have taken the agonizing decision to run, most refugees head for the nearest shelter, which is often a poor neighboring country that lacks the resources to look after them. For their part, the wealthier states, notably Australia and Japan, are making it harder to win asylum for those lucky enough to reach their shores. Developed countries are also reluctant to provide support for those countries in Asia that happen to be in the flight path of refugees. The result is that some Asian governments are turning their backs on refugees or forcibly sending them home before it is safe to do so. The trouble is only a small minority of Asian governments have adopted the United Nations 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. Between them, they establish the right to international protection for persons at risk in their country of origin because of their race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. "Of all regions in the world," notes Amnesty International, "Asia has the worst record of ratifying the convention." That doesn't mean all Asian governments are heartless. Indeed, some places-such as Hong Kong, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines-saved countless lives in the aftermath of the Indochina wars by giving initial refuge to Vietnamese boat people, as well as to Cambodians and Laotians moving overland. Nevertheless, it is disappointing that Asian regional or sub-regional organizations have done almost nothing to address the serious and evolving challenges posed by the region's numerous refugees. By contrast, the Organization of African Unity, the Organization of American States and the Arab League have drawn up instruments designed to improve protection for refugees in their areas. True, regionalism is in its infancy. But the nine-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations, celebrating its 30th anniversary this year, might have been expected to investigate the possibilities, if only in its own interest. With Burma admitted to Asean this year, it still isn't too late. After all, an estimated one million members of Burma's ethnic minorities have been displaced, "by a government that believes it can kill, maim and arbitrarily imprison people with impunity," as Amnesty International puts it. Fellow Asean members should worry about the potentially destabilizing effects of future refugees pouring out of Burma, especially as experience suggests the movements are likely to be sudden and on a large scale. In addition. Asean governments increasingly are going to face protests from their own nongovernmental organizations, which will hold Rangoon to higher standards of behavior. ***************************************************** THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD: FAITH, HOPE & DESTINY October 27, 1997 Mark Baker Nobel Peace laureate and democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi is effectively a prisoner once more. But, writes MARK BAKER, there are signs that her patient defiance is finally tilting the balance of power in Burma. ON THE CORNER of a busy intersection a huge billboard proclaims "The People's Desire" in the livid red shades of old Maoist propaganda. "Crush all internal and external destructive elements as the common enemy," it screams, exhorting the masses to oppose the "stooges holding negative views". A hundred metres away, down the once gracious sweep of Rangoon's University Avenue, the people's real desire stays hidden from the world, behind the gates from where she once addressed thousands of supporters who flocked to her regular weekend rallies. Steel barriers now block the street to traffic. Soldiers in camouflage fatigues and flak jackets stand guard, while military intelligence agents question anyone who approaches. Two years after being released from six years under house arrest, Aung San Suu Kyi is effectively a prisoner once more. Her old house beside Inya Lake is under constant surveillance. Her telephone is tapped and often cut. Visitors must be screened and approved by the authorities. And on the rare occasions that she dares venture out Suu Kyi is tailed by squads of security men. "We never see her now and we can't go to hear her speak any more, but we know she is there and we know she is still fighting for us," says a young student activist who has been unable to study since universities and colleges were shut down after a wave of protests last November. "If people try to contact her there will be a knock on the door in the night. There are spies everywhere." In the schizophrenic demonology of the generals who rule Burma with a hard hand and a humourless heart, Suu Kyi is at once a dangerous stooge of the nation's foreign enemies and a naive political irrelevance: "The inexperienced lady." The truth is that the Nobel Peace laureate is neither. A decade after the daughter of General Aung San, the hero of Burma's independence struggle, came home to nurse her dying mother and stayed to head a peaceful revolution that ended in a bloodbath, she remains the great hope of Burmese democracy and the greatest obstacle to the ambitions of a corrupt and brutal regime. It is a fact eloquently demonstrated by the obsessive measures with which the military has sought to isolate and silence her. Now, more than seven years after the army usurped the landslide election victory of her National League for Democracy (NLD) and a year after she was barred from any public political activity, Aung San Suu Kyi's stoic resistance is still a potent force for change. And tentative signs are emerging that her patient defiance is beginning to tilt the power balance in Burma. At the end of last month, the NLD was allowed to hold its first national convention in seven years. An estimated 1,300 party delegates gathered from around the country and close to 800 were permitted to attend the two-day meeting in the grounds of Aung San Suu Kyi's home. In previous years, hundreds of NLD MPs and party workers have been rounded up on the eve of the scheduled congress, detained without charge and aggressively interrogated. Some of them still languish in Rangoon's notorious Insein Prison. In a perhaps equally remarkable development, 10 days before the congress, the ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) invited the NLD chairman, Aung Shwe, and two other party officials to a formal meeting with one of the regime's most important figures, the so-called "Secretary One", Lieutenant-General Khin Nyunt. The invitation was preceded by exploratory talks in July. In the end, the NLD pulled out of the proposed meeting at the last moment, arguing that the regime's refusal to include Suu Kyi was an attempt to divide the party. But the proposal of even a qualified dialogue has been seen by Rangoon-based diplomats and some Burmese political analysts as a significant move by a regime that has offered only hostility and harassment to their popular adversaries over the past two years -- and particularly since Suu Kyi pulled her delegates out of the sham convention drafting a new constitution early last year. In a further modest hint of progress, the SLORC on Friday approved another gathering of about 200 NLD luminaries and supporters at Suu Kyi's house for a "social event" to mark the end of the Buddhist Lent, albeit after surrounding the place with almost as many troops and turning away several hundred other guests. A senior diplomat said: "Things are definitely moving. It's a more positive environment than we've seen for a long time, although people remain cautious about predicting how far and how fast it will go." Tin Oo, the former Burmese army commander who is now one of Suu Kyi's most trusted deputies, agrees. "I am more optimistic now about the future," he says. "Some of the senior military officers now see the need for a political settlement with the NLD and are trying to move forward." No-one, however, believes that the SLORC, if indeed it is edging towards a deal, is doing so for reasons other than sheer necessity. Two powerful factors are now weighing heavily on the once intractable regime: a mounting international clamour for reform that is becoming impossible to ignore and the rapid disintegration of the Burmese economy. As the United States and the European Union strengthen trade and investment sanctions against Burma, the nine-member Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) -- the neighbours whose approval the regime craves -- are quietly stepping up the pressure for change. Having ignored Western protests and admitted Burma to the regional grouping three months ago, ASEAN is now prodding the SLORC to give credibility to its approach of "constructive engagement" by opening a dialogue with Suu Kyi. The present ASEAN chairman is the Philippines and its President, Fidel Ramos, a former martial law general turned champion of democracy who pressed the case for change during a visit to Rangoon late last week. The tougher stance ASEAN has taken against Cambodia in the wake of the July coup in Phnom Penh also appears to have emboldened its approach to the SLORC, as well as indications that the regime's recalcitrance could derail an important new dialogue with the Europeans. A senior diplomat said: "The SLORC is definitely feeling the pressure now. They are starting to get a lot of stick from ASEAN and there is a growing recognition that somewhere along the line they are going to have to compromise. Everyone is telling them that they have to improve their image and they have to more forward." Another pressing incentive is the country's deepening economic malaise. Burma continues to teeter on the verge of bankruptcy. Comparisons are now being drawn with the economic crisis that helped spark the big pro-democracy uprising in 1988 which catapulted Aung San Suu Kyi to political prominence and which was brutally suppressed with the loss of at least 3000 lives. Inflation is soaring, with the local currency, the kyat, worth barely half its black market value a year ago. The trade deficit is widening and foreign investment is drying up while military spending continues to swallow half the national budget. There are now also fears of widespread famine after recent severe floods destroyed the rice crop across large areas of the country. "The situation is disastrous," a Rangoon-based analyst said. "The economy is in dire straits, their foreign exchange holdings are virtually nil and they clearly are unable to manage the situation." The much-touted -- and delayed -- Visit Burma Year has been a monumental flop. Despite predictions of as many as 500,000 visitors, fewer than 50,000 are estimated to have turned up. Dozens of new luxury hotels, some built to launder drug-trade profits, are mostly deserted, with occupancy rates said to be averaging about 20 per cent. New domestic and international air services have been slashed and two foreign carriers recently quit their Burma routes. Despite the SLORC's continued boasts about rising foreign investment, independent sources say there has been a marked slowdown over the past year as international trade sanctions have begun to bite. Washington has banned all new investment in Burma by US companies and the EU last month extended its sanctions, which include the suspension of trade preferences and bans on non-humanitarian aid and defence assistance. Consumer campaign in the West, including targeting of Foster's and Ericsson in Australia, have persuaded more than a dozen transnational companies to quit the Burmese market. The SLORC, despite hints of political compromise, is maintaining a public posture of total opposition to any contact with Suu Kyi, who holds the post of NLD secretary-general. The state-run [Pauk Sa] newspaper declared in an editorial early this month: "The dialogue they are demanding, thinking it to be ambrosia, cannot be cooked up in a pot shared by the general-secretary," While moderates within the regime appear to be in the ascendancy, hardliners implacably opposed to dealing with Suu Kyi could still block progress towards a dialogue. There is a growing belief among some of the NLD's staunchest supporters that Suu Kyi herself now needs to adopt a more conciliatory stance to encourage the generals from their bunker. "She is also going to have to start showing some flexibility," a Western diplomat said. "She keeps pushing without giving anything and they'll stop being pushed in the end if they don't feel she is giving something as well." Tin Oo insists the NLD is ready to compromise and that it can allay the fears of many within the SLORC that a deal allowing the party back to power would open the way to reprisals against senior members of the regime. "We are ready to talk. Aung San Suu Kyi has always insisted that there can be real compromise. We can give and take, but the most important thing is that we talk and that those talks include Suu Kyi," he said. The 72-year-old former general, himself imprisoned for several years for his defence of democracy, remains quietly confident that the dictatorship can be ended without further bloodshed. "We have struggled for 50 years by force of arms to try to solve the problems of our country and that approach has failed," he said. "Now is the time for peace and reconciliation. The people are fed up and determined to have their rights and freedoms restored." *********************************************** REUTERS: AIDS BLOSSOMS IN THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE October 27, 1997 By Jonathan Thatcher MANILA, Oct 27 (Reuters) - HIV infections, already threatening to hit Asia on a massive scale, are growing fastest in some of its least accessible regions around the notorious Golden Triangle, a study released on Monday showed. ``Mobile populations in areas such as the Golden Triangle...are highly vulnerable to HIV infection,'' the Monitoring of AIDS Pandemic (MAP) network said, referring to the region infamous as the world's chief source of opium. MAP, which groups more than 100 HIV and AIDS experts from 40 countries, issued its findings during a conference in Manila on the human immunodeficiency virus, which can lead to acquired immune deficiency syndrome. The Golden Triangle comprises parts of Burma, Thailand and Laos but the report said also affected were nearby border regions of India and China as well as the Mekong delta in Cambodia and Vietnam. It pointed to three factors behind the rise -- unsafe sex with prostitutes, injected drugs and increased mobility of the population. ``Most distinctive are the HIV epidemics exhibiting high and increased prevalence...and high and increasing incidence...in Cambodia...and in Myanmar (Burma),'' it said. While in Cambodia it was mostly from unprotected sex with prostitutes, in Burma the spread of the disease has been boosted by users of injected drugs. The use of shared needles by drug users is a common source of HIV. In India, which has more HIV infections than any other country in the world, the problem is limited to specific areas. Almost 50 percent of known AIDS cases are in the state of Maharashtra, the capital of which is Bombay. Another 22 percent are in Tamil Nadu in southern India, the report added. The report follows warnings at the Manila conference that Asia could overtake Africa as the region worst-hit by the HIV virus. The seven million Asians thought to carry HIV could double by the end of the century, a United Nations official said. MAP Network co-chairman Daniel Tarantola said it was crucial to collect more information to assess the potential for large-scale epidemics. But while there was a danger of underestimating the problem, overestimating it could prove counter-productive. ``Deceived by overstated predictions, governments may turn their back and simply walk away from emerging epidemics when the predicted extensive spread of HIV in the population does not become a reality,'' Tarantola said. ********************************************* BKK POST: BURMA SHOULD LEARN FROM TALEBAN PACT October 27, 1997 The world's second largest opium producer has decided to go straight. The Taleban regime in Afghanistan has effectively produced opium and heroin for the world market. Now the fundamentalist regime has decided to switch tactics and work to eliminate the narcotics trade. It is asking for international help for the task. The decision by the men ruling Afghanistan to change their drugs policy was as unexpected as it was welcome. Only last month, a spokesman for the Kabul regime said the nation's opium crops were necessary because farmers needed the cash and the regime needed the taxes. Now the Taleban has reversed itself. With a single decree, the Taleban has forbidden both the cultivation and the sale of opium. The Taleban deserves credit, however, for approaching the opium problem with planning and logic. Reports from Kabul said the regime will not suddenly embark on a crop destruction programme. Rather, the Taleban wants to work both with the farmers who grow opium and with the UN officials who can help them escape their dependence. It seems clear the Afghan rulers intend to proceed judiciously against opium. Afghanistan is the world's second largest producer of opium. Last February, it harvested an estimated 2,800 tons -enough for 280 tons of high-quality-heroin, for starters Central Asia is the main source of heroin in Europe. Most of it comes from laboratories in Pakistan, using Afghan opium. The battle against opium farming, as Thailand has long demonstrated, is not particularly complicated nor expensive. That is mainly because opium itself is a low-quality crop, worth little by itself. Opium farmers are among the poorest farmers in the world. They are victims of drug gangs, which send buying agents to each farm and offer those who work the land a pittance for their crops, on a take it or leave it basis. The Taleban made the problem worse. Both international diplomacy and the Islam religion which motivates the Taleban forbid drugs trafficking. But Taleban finance and tax officials claimed they needed the opium tax imposed on their poppy farmers to finance the Kabul regime. Now, spurred by talks with the United Nations Drug Control Programme, the Taleban has changed its collective mind. Details are still unclear, but in general terms Afghanistan will embark immediately upon a crop-substitution programme along the lines of the successful Thai model. At the same time, the Taleban leaders have appealed to the UN for aid. The UN official in charge, Pino Arlacchi, estimates it will take five to six years to eliminate poppies as an important Afghan crop. The world community needs to get behind this initiative. Afghan farmers must be taught to grow alternative crops as quickly as possible. The regime and aid donors must ensure the alternative crops get to markets. And UN aid officials must begin planning immediately to make sure the small amount of poppy tax lost is made up in other ways. The cost and simplicity of such a plan ensure its success. Then, the world of nations should press for the world's largest opium and heroin producers to launch a similar campaign. The opium crops in Burma will be larger again this year than last, as they have been for a decade. The Burmese regime will continue its close cooperation with heroin traffickers, who will in turn continue to suppress the innocent opium farmers who are forced to do the back-breaking, poverty-inducing work of growing poppies. Burma is much more deeply involved with its major narcotics traffickers than was the Taleban. But the upcoming Afghan programme can serve as a model for Rangoon if that regime is willing to break its dependence on drug dealers. The main difference appears to be that the Taleban is truly concerned by the plight of its poor farmers. It is time the Burmese regime took the same responsible step. **************************************** BKK POST: INDONESIAN MODEL UNLIKELY TO PROVE A HELP TO BURMA October 25, 1997 Htun Aung Gyaw Social scientists view Burma as a strange country. And most decline to predict where its future lies. Since her release from house arrest in 1994, Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has called consistently; for dialogue with the government, but the State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) has rejected her requests. Recently, however, this impasse has shown signs being broken. After Burma was admitted to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) in July, Slorc held its first meeting with Ms Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD), and it offered a second meeting in September. But this second meeting never took place because the Slorc offer came at very short notice and took NLD chairman U Aung Shwe and central committee members by surprise. More importantly, however, the NLD, which won a landslide victory in the 1990 election, refused to attend the meeting because SLORC had not extended an invitation to Ms Suu Kyi and two vice chairmen. Even though the NLD boycotted the meeting, SLORC allowed Ms Suu Kyi's youngest son to visit his mother- the first visit she has had from any, family member since 1995. On Sept 27-28 the NLD held its ninth anniversary meeting, which was a success despite several minor problems. The event was significant in light of the more serious difficulties the NLD has encountered in recent years. The party tried to hold meetings each of the previous three years, but each time Slorc detained NLD representatives temporarily and blocked the meeting. This past September, however, Slorc allowed the meeting to go ahead, albeit with some restrictions such as a 300-person attendance limit. Even though police guarding the meeting entrance turned some representatives away, more than 700 representatives attended. That Slorc ignored this overcrowding implies that the junta may be softening its grip. If so, the change is likely due to Burma's membership of Asean. Military generals have ruled Burma since 1962. Over this 35-year period, they have controlled Burma's social, political, economic and education affairs. Before the outbreak of the 1988 nationwide demonstrations, then ruler Ne Win realised that in order to survive, his socialist regime needed to change its political course. He called for an extraordinary party congress in 1988 and admitted the failure of the long- and short-term economic plans. He suggested that the party hold a national referendum and find out if the Burmese people wanted a plural party system or a one party system. People were thrilled at this suggestion because it came from the most politically powerful man in Burma, someone known as "Number One". Unfortunately, the ruling Burmese Socialist Programme Party (BSPP) rejected his advice and allowed Ne Win to retire from government. Following on the heels of Ne Win's suggestion, this rejection proved a crucial mistake. The original suggestion of multi-party rule had come from so highly placed a source that people regarded it as an important opportunity. Their hopes for freedom; for which many had hungered since 1962, swelled. The BSPP's decision to reject Ne Win's political advice but to liberalise the economy anyway sparked a nationwide protest that ended 26 years of BSPP rule. Two long months of demonstration produced many underground organisations consisting of students, ordinary people, former politicians and former military officers. Among them was the daughter of Burma's national hero and martyr Aung San. Ms Suu Kyi joined the demonstration while visiting Burma from Britain to help her ailing mother. Still, the political figures of this opposition movement were not united. Although there was a power vacuum left by an apparently paralysed BSPP, none of the squabbling opposition forces could fill the void. The only institution in a position to fill the vacuum was the military. Hence, the strongest and best institutionalised group since Burma's independence, the army, took control for the second time since independence. Slorc's main objective is to promote the country's economy and to establish a relationship with the opposition modelled on the Indonesian arrangement. Accordingly, the military must assume the lead in politics. Slorc leaders believe that if they improve the country's economy, they will consolidate their hold on power. Yet a combination of the regime's gross human rights violations and Ms Suu Kyi's calls for economic sanctions, (heeded by the US and Scandinavian countries) have proven difficult obstacles to this consolidation. Recently Ne Win emerged once more onto the world stage. He visited Indonesia and met with President Suharto. The move took on particular significance because many believe that Ne Win urged Slorc leaders to adopt Indonesia's model. In fact, Indonesia and Burma have two striking similarities: both are controlled by the army, and both their armies emerged under Japanese occupation. In other respects, the two countries are completely different. Take, for example, the role of US support in forming their regimes. The US government spent billions of dollars and used its soldiers to protect states in the region from communist influence. Indonesia wiped out the communist influence with its own army and without US intervention. That's why it has received a lot of financial and technical support from the US and Japan. In Burma, on the other hand, the generals wiped out a democratically elected government by force and adopted socialism for its future course. They criticised Western countries as capitalist and neo-colonialist, and rejected Western aid. Instead, they worked more closely with the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc countries. Worse, under Ne Win the government nationalised big- and small scale industries, moves which shrank the country's production rate and size. Burmese-born native minorities such as Indian-Burmese and Chinese-Burmese were discriminated against and virtually wiped out. In June 1975, before the outbreak of the June student demonstration, BSPP central executive committee member Hla Han explained to veterinary students that in the past the country's population was only 14 million, but by 1975 the number had risen to over 30 million. The number of consumers more than doubled but rice production remained about the same. As a result, Burmese faced rice shortages. But Hla Han failed to address an obvious counter-example: Thailand's population soared even more than Burma's, yet Thailand became a leading rice producer and exported much of this produce to the world. On the other hand, before- Mr Suharto's reign, Indonesia had to import rice, but under his rule Indonesia has imported no rice whatsoever. Mr Suharto's regime encouraged technocrats, economists and native Chinese businessmen to help rebuild the country and successfully overcome the double-digit inflation of the late 1960s. Now Indonesia is one of the leading countries in Asean. The final and crucial difference between these countries is their leadership patterns. Indonesia is ruled by one person, Mr Suharto. Nobody can challenge his authority. He became an institution in Indonesia with the support of both the military and technocrats. In contrast, Slorc is run by a group of military generals who hold relatively equal rank and status. Slorc lacks a strong leader like Ne Win. The relative parity among Slorc's members creates trouble: as the Burmese saying goes: "Two lions cannot live together in a cave." In short, Indonesia's political stability has a great deal to do with the presence of a strong man, and the authority he exercises. But its stability depends on that one person, and the question of succession raises the spectre of turmoil and uncertainty. For both reasons, the Indonesian model is not a fit guide for Burma's democratisation process and future development. Ne Win introduced military rule in Burma and was known as the second father of the modern Burmese army. He is the only single man who still has influence over the Burmese army. If he wants to solve the present situation by using his influence within SLORC to convince the regime to agree to roundtable negotiations with the NLD without restrictions, any problems will likely be solved smoothly. But Ne Win is unlikely to do this even though it would win him the admiration of the Burmese people. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Htun Aung Gyaw was the first All Burma Students' Democratic Front chairman. He resettled in the US in 1992 where he completed his master's degree in Asian Studies at Cornell University in 1997. Htun Aung Gyaw is still active in politics. *********************************************** THE ASIAN AGE (NEW DELHI): BURMA POACHING ENDANGERS RARE BIRDS, ANIMALS October 27, 1997. By Bit Irom Kotha (Indo-Burma border), Oct. 26: Indiscriminate hunting of birds and animals along the Indo-Burmese border has put the existence of many a rare species into jeopardy. Hunting in the border areas increases as the harvest season draw closer. Many birds and animals from the Ango hill range of Burma badly ravage standing crops in villages of Manipur bordering Burma. Ksherrimayum Yaima, 53, village authority secretary of Kotha, the last Manipur village bordering Burma, told The Asian Age that wild animals and birds cause havoc in cultivated lands during this time of the year. Villagers have launched hunting expeditions at night to protect the crops from rampaging animals. In the past few weeks, over 30 wild animals, including boars, hog deers, hog badgers, bats and serows have been killed. The last victim of these expeditions was a porcupine that was killed on October 19 at Kotha village. Tigers are also hunted at times, he added. Tribals hunt animals and birds at Kangban, Leibi Maring, Lanlong Maring Kotha, New Samthal and Molcham villages along the international border using primitive as well as sophisticated weapons. The government has issued licences for single and double-barrelled guns. Villagers also used muzzle loaders for hunting. Hunting dogs are used during such expeditions. Wild fox have recently posed a serious threat by killing cattle and other domestic animals in the area. However, wild elephants from Ango hills of Burma have stopped their forays to bordering villages in Manipur as the density of population in such places has gone up. He candidly confessed that around a decade ago, villagers use to kill the elephants too. He claimed that the population of birds and wild animals along the border is on the rise as the tribals, who are now divided into Naga, Kuki and Paite camps, hardly find the time to undertake hunting expeditions. A couple of years ago, two pythons were trapped by the Kotha villagers and handed over to the Manipur government. ************************************************* THE NATION: A PLEA TO HELP KAREN REFUGEES PREPARE FOR WINTER October 27, 1997 R Young - Nonthaburi I recently visited Thailand's Ratchaburi province to see firsthand the situation at a Karen refugee camp called Tham Him. What I found was sadder than anything I had ever imagined; heart-wrenching not only because of the cramped conditions the 7,633 residents are forced to live under, but because 3,374 of them - almost half the entire camp population - were children under 12 years old. What is especially depressing is that much of this suffering could easily be alleviated if the Thai authorities allowed more aid to reach these people. With the cold months (November to February) almost upon us, many of the refugees are unprepared for the weather and desperately need warm clothing and blankets. Many children walk barefoot and need shoes. Compressed sawdust logs for cooking and heating, donated by an NGO, the Burmese Border Consortium, are strictly rationed to a mere nine kilogrammes per household and Thai authorities have banned refugees from gathering more firewood from the surrounding jungle altogether. UN relief organisations are prohibited from contributing to relief efforts because of fears that increased relief will only bring more refugees; and NG0s are limited from bringing other essential supplies for the same reason. In a time where Southeast Asian nations have come together to promote the development of the region as a whole, the leaders should not forget the people whose lives they seek to enhance. The children in Tham Him have no knowledge of politics or constructive engagement; they only know what it is to be hungry, to be cold, to be scared. To look in the eyes of a child who is malnourished because a government arbitrarily blocked much-needed supplies of food is beyond the a-cope of humanity. It is a blatant disregard for what is right and it must not go unnoticed. Donations of warm clothing, especially in children's sizes, can be made to: Burmese Border Consortium, 12/5 Convent Road, Silom, Bangkok, 10500 Thailand. ****************************************************** ANNOUNCEMENT: AUSTRALIAN TV - THE HEROIN WARS October 27, 1997 From: BURMA OFFICE Dear friends, SBS TV in Australia will be screening THE HEROIN WARS on the programme CUTTING EDGE at 8.30 P.M. on 4 November. TUESDAY 4 NOVEMBER-EVENING (IN AUSTRALIA) 8: 30 P.M. THE CUTTING EDGE THE HEROIN WARS A DOCUMENTARY IN THREE PARTS SCREENING OVER THREE WEEKS 30 years ago in the Shan State of Burma opium was a small-scale crop cultivated by the local women. "How did this quaint bucolic business in congealed sap become the narco-monster of today, flooding.. the world with heroin? A questioned asked by Filmmaker Adrian Cowell and addressed by him in this impeccably researched and searching series filmed from 1964 to 1996. Three decades ago, Adrian Cowell and Chris Menges started filming two s0-called Kings of Opium -- Law Sit Han and Khun Sa -- as they fought for control of the opium trade in Shan State. At stake was a third of the world's narcotic supply. At various time during the '70s, both drug lords made proposals to the U.S. Government to negotiate and end to opium growing. But, after much debate the U.S. decided that it would be more effective to declare an all-out "War on Drugs" by stopping Shan opium convoys. Shan guerrillas opposed to the Burmese military dictatorship ran the convoys and charged a tax on the profits in order to finance their purchase of armaments. Today the drug lords are infinitely rich and more powerful. The amount of opium produced in Shan State has increased by 1000% and police have captured less than 1%. Episode 1 -- describes the origin of the Shan guerrilla movement and their fight for independence: The campaign against the opium convoys and the behind-the-scenes manoeuvres that destroyed the opium negotiations. Tuesday 11 November Episode 2 -- looks at Hong Kong, known as SMACK CITY -- drug capital of South-east Asia, and examines its thirty years fight to control trade in narcotics. Tuesday 18 Episode 3 (Final) -- Returns to the guerrillas' continuing war for independence, which is financially dependent on the drug trade. Also features extraordinary footage or personal interview with Khun Sa. Is he a patriotic revolutionary, as he claims, or just another corrupt drug lord driven by addiction to power and wealth? ************************************************ ANNOUNCEMENT: VALPARAISO UNIVERSITY BURMA PANEL October 25, 1997 From: Zaw Hlaing Valparaiso International Students Association (VISA) Valparaiso University, is going to organize "Current Political Situation in Burma" under it's "Cultural Awareness Forum" on November 1, on Saturday at 1: pm. This is the first time that the forum is organizing for Burma. The forum had organized such program in previous years for other countries. The program will include introduction about current situation in Burma, 30 minutes documentary show and panel discussion, by Burmese student. Free snacks and drinks will be provided by VISA. It is the first time in Valparaiso University's history to have Burma discussion or supporting movement for the Burmese people's struggle for the restoration of democracy in its country. Zaw Zaw Valparaiso University ********************************************