[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

BKK Post: What Went Wrong With Our



Subject: BKK Post: What Went Wrong With Our FM?


************************Posted by BurmaNet************************
  "Appropriate Information Technologies--Practical Strategies"
******************************************************************

BKK Post
April 24, 1994

WHAT WENT WRONG WITH OUR FM? 
Thai Foreign Minister Prasong Soonsiri on Burma

by Aung Zaw

"We should give moral support to the people of Burma who fought for
democracy." One might be surprised and wonder who said this comment. Truly,
it was none other than Sqn Ldr Prasong Soonsiri during his election campaign
in August 1992. 

It was Prasong who as a pro-democracy activist during the May 92 bloodshed in
Thailand, called for a halt to trade with Khmer Rouge in Cambodia and a
review of Thailand's policy with Rangoon regime, the State Law and Order
Restoration Council (Slorc). Thailand's Constructive Engagement policy has
been criticised by Western countries, Burmese opposition groups and human
rights organisations because it was designed not to pressure, but to
persuade, the regime to change - and, as also to continue trade with Slorc. 

One may still remember when Prasong said "they [the Burmese people] deserve
the same support as the Thai people who fought for democracy in May."  The
member of Palang Dhama Party and former National Security Council chief,
Prasong also criticised the "Constructive Engagement" policy.  Then he went
further to say that the junta in Burma is only supported by handful of
people. How smart and intelligent Prasong was!

What is Prasong Soonsiri's current stance? Is he doing what he said or is he
retracted what he said? Everyone witnesses it so it is an obvious fact that
Prasong has beoame a defender of the Thailand's Constructive Engagement
policy since he took the Foreign Ministry office.  Now he says the opposite
of what he said a few months ago.

To remember the recent past: shortly after Prasong took over the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs post in 1992 he announced that Thailand will continue its
policy of Constructive Engagement" -  "I only want to say there will be no
change in bilateral ties (with Rangoon)." He stated that "just like good
friends who help each other, Thailand will help Burma to improve its image,".
One might be surprised how Prasong learned so quickly that Burma and Thailand
are good friends and that Thailand is obliged to improve the image of one of
the world's most repressive regimes.

One Thai source said, "we don't know what happened to him, we are confused."
One must admit that the Burmese opposition saw Prasong's comments during the
election as a positive sign and a new hope for pro-democracy movement in
Burma. "We thought that it was going to change," said a member of
jungle-based All Burma Students' Democratic Front (ABSDF). 

In the beginning of 1993 the Thai government allowed his holiness the Dalai
Lama and other Nobel laureates to come to Thai soil campaign for the release
of Aung San Suu Kyi. This event provided more hope for Burmese opposition
groups that Thai policy would change. It has not happened, however and people
have realised that the visit was tolerated just to boost Thailand's image and
nothing more. While the Nobel laureates were visiting the Burmese refugees
camps on the border Prasong repeatedly voiced Thailand's support for
"constructive engagement."  From that gesture, many observers understood
Prasong's message to Slorc's leaders that he will be with them all the way.

After one year, Prasong expressed his government's unchanged policy
concerning the Rangoon regime and he went on to invite Slorc to the Asean
meeting as a Bangkok's guest. In mid- September 1993, Prasong went to Rangoon
to attend the Thai-Burmese first Joint Commission meeting and meet Slorc's
leaders. He offered his assurances to Burmese leaders that if they were
interested in joining Asean, he would help them make the next step. He
extended an informal invitation to Slorc to attend the Asean summit as an
observer in Bangkok this year. "If Asean cannot reach a consensus (whether to
invite Burma), I will probably invite Burma as a special guest," said Prasong
who is going to chair the gathering.  His three-day official visit was
criticised by Burmese pro-democracy groups and Thai human rights activists,
including Nobel prize laureate Rigoberta Menchu who was visiting Karen
refugees camps along the side of border with Thailand. 

The Foreign Minister travelled again to Rangoon to formally invite his Slorc
counterpart, Ohn.  As Prasong obtained approval from the five other Asean
members to invite Slorc as a Bangkok's guest, Prasong has received an
invitation from Burma. Thus the Thai source close to Prasong office said "it
is just a game." However, the Burmese opposition source said recently that
"We can understand the FM Prasong's willingness to invite Slorc to Asean
meeting but there must be some conditions before the meeting regarding human
rights and political development inside Burma." While Prasong was in Rangoon
he had met Burma's top military leaders including powerful military
intelligence chief Lt Gen Khin Nyunt: Khin Nyunt told Prasong that after the
constitution was completed, Slorc would settle the issue of detained leader
Aung San Suu Kyi. In fact, the Slorc-sponsored National Convention has
adopted a basic principle to bar Suu Kyi from becoming president of Burma as
she is married to a Briton. 

It is confusing to observe past and present gestures by FM Prasong.  Does
anyone know what went wrong with Prasong? An ordinary Thai citizen said
"Prasong is an intelligent  man and he knows what is wrong and right." If so,
why he did not implement what he said during the election campaign? Did
politician-Prasong changed intelligent-Prasong's mind. Or he just wanted
resist the West's pressure to isolate the brutish Slorc or maybe he just
didn't want to miss an opportunity to exploit Burma's resources. Perhaps he
was worried about Chinese influence in Burma? One Burma-observer based in
Bangkok noted that some Thai senior policy-makers might have knocked
Prasong's head when he criticised the government's policy in August 1992. 

A Thai student who is aware of the plight of Burma is puzzled and asked what
happened to our FM? He sarcastically asked if Slorc bribed Prasong? Or did
Slorc's PR agents convince him that changes in Burma are genuine rather than
cosmetic. 

The Thai source said "he [Prasong] is a stubborn man and he will do what he
believes." The well informed-source also said that "some Thai government
officials did not want him to go to Burma again, and they even opposed the
idea of inviting Slorc to the Asean summit." It is believed that there is
still a debate among Thai officials over whether Slorc is still pariah. In
particular, many Thai human rights activists and intellectuals are aware of
Slorc's human rights records - even Prasong himself noticed that the Slorc
ignored the 1990 election result.  Over one hundred leading politicians and
students are still being detained  and at the international level some still
brand Slorc as an "illegal regime."  Ohn Gyaw, for instance, is Slorc's
English speaking civilian Foreign Minister and Prasong's counterpart but he
is self-appointed, not elected. Prasong, however, seems eager to allow
Burma's repressive regime to join the ranks. This is of course what they
described "constructive way to approach the monster."  

Prasong and some Thai businessmen have realised that this monster has many of
natural resources, including the water. As Thailand is suffering from a water
shortage, Thailand is planning to buy water from Burma.  At present, some
Thai prisoners are being detained in Burma's prison as they were charged with
marine terrority violations. To reduce their sentences and to obtain the
release of these Thai fishermen in the near future is another major issue for
Prasong.

Some how is one to understand why Prasong became a defender of the
Constructive Engagement policy he once criticised.  Since taking office in
1992, Prasong opposed isolating Slorc because "it will only harm the Burmese
people". So how constructive is his engagement? Is it helpful to the Burmese
people or only to Slorc?