[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
BurmaNet News Aug 2 1995
------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
----------------------------------------------------------
The BurmaNet News: Aug 2, 1995
THE NATION: 'PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT'
THE NATION: ACADEMIC FREEDOM OR SECURITY?
BKK POST: B19b FOR HOTELS
BKK POST: EASING INSURANCE COVER IN BURMA
BKK POST: POLICE RAID CHURCH, HOLD ILLEGAL BURMESE IMMIGRANTS
THE NATION: DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT SEEM TO BE STRONGER
THE NATION: SENATOR WANTS BURMA SANCTIONS
THE NATION: ASEAN URGED TO GO SLOW ON MYANMAR ENTRY
THE NATION: DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI'S INTERVIEW part 2
----------------------------------------------------------
Produced with the support of the Burma Information Group (B.I.G).
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.
The BurmaNet News is e-mailed directly to subscribers and is also
distributed via the soc.culture.burma and seasia-l mailing lists and
is also available via the reg.burma conference on the APC networks. For
a free subscription to the BurmaNet News, send an e-mail message to:
majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx
In the body of the message, type "subscribe burmanet-l" (without
quotation marks) Letters to the editor, comments or contributions of
articles should be sent to the editor at: strider@xxxxxxxxxxx
-------------------------------------------------------------
INFORMATION ABOUT BURMA VIA THE WEB AND GOPHER:
Information about Burma is available via the WorldWideWeb at:
FreeBurmaWWW http://199.172.178.200/freebrma/freebrma.htm.
[including back issues of the BurmaNet News as .txt files]
BurmaWeb: http://www.uio.no/tormodl
Burma fonts:
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~lka/burmese-fonts/moe.html
Ethnologue Database(Myanmar):
http://www-ala.doc.ic.ac.uk/~rap/Ethnologue/eth.cgi/Myanmar
TO ACCESS INFORMATION ABOUT BURMA VIA GOPHER:
gopher csf.colorado.edu.
Look under the International Political Economy section, then
select Geographic_Archive, then Asia, then Burma.
----------------------------------------------------------
BURMANET SUBJECT-MATTER RESOURCE LIST
BurmaNet regularly receives enquiries on a number of different topics
related to Burma. The scope of the subjects involved is simplytoo
broad for any one person to cover. BurmaNet is therefore organizing a
number of volunteer coordinators to field questions on various
subjects. If you have questions on any of the following subjects,
please direct email to the following coordinators, who will either
answer your question or try to put you in contact with someone who can:
Arakan/Rohingya/Burma- [volunteer needed]
Bangladesh border
Art/archaeology/: [volunteer needed]
Campus activism:
Boycott campaigns:
Buddhism: Buddhist Relief Mission,
c/o NBH03114@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fonts: tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
History of Burma: zar1963@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Chin history/culture:
Kachin history/culture: 74750.1267@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Karen history/culture: 102113.2571@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Karen Historical Society
Mon history/culture: [volunteer needed]
Naga history/culture: [volunteer needed]
[Burma-India border]
Pali literature: "Palmleaf"
c/o burmanet@xxxxxxxxxxx
Shan history/culture: [volunteer needed]
Tourism campaigns: bagp@xxxxxxxxxx
"Attn. S. Sutcliffe"
World Wide Web: FreeBurma@xxxxxxxxx
Volunteering: Dr. Christina Fink
c/o burmanet@xxxxxxxxxxx
[Feel free to suggest more areas of coverage]
----------------------------------------------------------
===== item =====
'PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT'
1 AUGUST 1995, The Nation
The Nation's Editor-in-Chief Suthichai Yoon and Editor Thepchai Yong
talked to Aung San Suu Kyi last weekend at her heavily-guarded
residence in Rangoon where she was put under house arrest for six
years. Following is the first part of the edited text of the interview
which will be broadcast on Nation News Talk on Channel 9 starting at
9 pm tonight.
Will you travel to receive the honorary doctorate in political science
that Thammasat University has conferred on you in recognition of your
peaceful democratic struggle?
I would year much like to come but I cannot say at this moment when I
shall be able to come.
So you have no plans to travel outside Burma at the moment.
Not at the moment because there is lot of work to be done here and also
lost of organization to take care of.
Didn't you say earlier that you would go to Oslo to pick up the Nobel
Peace Prize Award?
Actually, the Norwegian ambassador invited me to come to Oslo to
receive the award and I said personally the first foreign country I
would like to visit is Norway because they have supported us so
staunchly. But it was not a promise. It was that I would try to visit
Norway at the first opportunity.
How about stopping by in Bangkok on your way to Nor way?
I could stop over on the way back as well.I promised Norway that it
would be the first country I would try to visit.
How does Thailand relate to you?. Your father founded the Burma
Independence Army in Bangkok in 1941 and you must have travelled
through Thailand a number of times and have friends there.
I must admit that for the last six years through reading newspapers
like The Nation and other publications in Bangkok which have been very
supportive, there are many people in Thailand who really understand our
situation and really want to help us.
This, for me, has been a tremendous encouragement the there's so much
support for our cause in Thailand. You have been so strong in many of
the things you have written.
And I heard that there is sometimes pressure on you to tone down your
articles and yet your remain very strong. Newspapers in Thailand always
keep an interest on Burma. For me, Thailand in general is a friendly
and supportive country. there have been problems, of course.
Our democratic forces have complained about the official Thai policy.
And I know that there has been trouble with refugee camps. But on the
whole, the people of Thailand are very sympathetic and supportive.
What about the government of Thailand?
We have had complaints in the past about official Thai policy. I would
like to ask the government of Thailand to put the people of Burma
first. The people are more important than the government. And even the
government itself would not say it is more important than the people.
Certainly, it's the people who are more important.
What do you mean when you say people are more important than the
government?
Their aspirations, their hopes, their situation. When you think of
investment and aid you should really look at how far they help the
common people, the really poor people. We are not really interested in
investment that will help the rich get richer. I hope you understand
that such a situation can snowball and the time while the poor hardly
find any change in their conditions.
Some of the Thai officials believe that your release was due partly to
the success of Thailand's constructive engagement policy toward Burma.
I frankly do not know how successful the constructive engagement policy
ant international pressure were. But of course, officially, nobody
would ever admit that they have given in to pressure. We'll have to
wait a few years more to know what happened within inner government
circles in order to evaluate how successful the constructive engagement
policy was.
Did you hear about constructive engagement policy while you were under
house arrest?
Yes, all the time.
What was your first reaction?
I was rather surprised. My first reaction was something to be expected.
It did worry me that they might carry it too far and would adversely
affect the progress of democracy.
How constructive has the constructive engagement policy been?
The question is for whom has it been constructive. That we have yet to
find out. Was it constructive for the forces of democracy? Was it
constructive for the Burmese people in general? Was it constructive for
a limited business community? Or was it constructive for Slorc?. This
is the question: for whom was it constructive?
Was it constructive for the forces of democracy or NLD at all?
I have yet to find any hard evidence that it affected us directly
although some have said that because of the constructive engagement
policy I have been released. But nobody has said exactly why I have
been released. So we can't take that for granted.
Burma is being admitted by Asean into the family of nations. What kind
of change do you want to see in Asean policy toward Burma?
I would like the Asean nations to look closely at conditions among the
ordinary Burmese people and not just to look at place like Mandalay and
Rangoon. And even in Rangoon there are certain parts which seem more
prosperous and yet there are other parts which have not changed the
last 10-15 years. I can recognize those parts which remain exactly the
same as they were a number of years ago. I would like Asean to think
of our long- term relationship and long-term development of Burma and
to consider the fact that you cannot have economic progress without
peace and stability. And to achieve peace and stability there must be
a climate of trust within the nation. There must be a government the
people can trust if that country is not be peaceful and stable. In the
long run you can't maintain peace and stability without trust and
confidence.
What kind of advice would you give to the government as Burma moves
toward joining Asean?
It is in our NLD booklet that we hope one day Burma will be a member
of Asean because I do believe in this regional community of nations
which is very good for the region and very good on the whole for the
world to have such community.
So one day I very much hope that Burma will be a member of Asean. But
I understand that (former Singaporean prime minister) Lee Kuan Yew said
a few months ago that it's going to be a number years before Burma is
ready to be in a condition to join Asean.
Would Burma's integration into the regional community accelerate the
move toward democracy in Burma?
I am not certain about that. I do not know just how effective the
persuasive parts of the Asean nations are when it comes to internal
change.
I do notice that while promoting the policy of constructive engagement
some Asean nations are careful to say that they do not interfere in the
internal affairs of another country. If they do not interfere in the
internal affairs of another country then how far can they help us
achieve change.
Would you consider it an interference if an Asean country starts
commenting about the pace of democratic change in Burma?
I don't think so because the world is getting smaller all the time.
We have to accept that no country is really free from external
influence. We are all subject to some degree to international opinions
and external influence.
There is, of course, a limit as to how far people can be allowed to
interfere in the internal affairs of a nation. One does not expect them
to come marching in or to introduce measures that would interfere with
our sovereignty. But if we care about our regional peace and stability
we should care about the kind of governments that are in place in those
countries.
Do you agree with sanctions?
I have one reservation about sanctions alone. I do want to make sure
that it does not hurt the ordinary people. Whoever thinks of sanctions
should study the situation carefully to make certain that whatever
sanctions to be implemented really affect those for whom it is
intended.
As I understand it the economic change that has taken place in Burma
the last six years has not really filtered down to the general public.
It remains an open question whether sanctions in any way will affect
the general public either.
How responsive is the military regime in Burma to outside pressure?
They are not unaware of outside pressure. They are not completely
oblivious to it. And I hope as they have more dealings with the
international community and as they get more mature they will have a
greater respect for international opinions.
Are they getting more mature?
That I cannot say. Apparently some of them said I have become more
mature. I hope when they say that they are comparing me with
themselves.
Are there signs that the military will transfer power to a civilian
government?
It's too early to talk about such a thing. There are some things that
we prefer to do quietly at the moment. And when the time is right and
we think that we should comment on the rate of progress and on our
efforts to achieve dialogue, we shall speak out then.
Does that mean you will have talks with the government without making
public statements until the time comes when you have some concrete
outcome?
I just mean that at this time I don't want to speculate openly on when
we think there might be talks and how the talks might develop. If we
have too many prior expectations it's difficult for us to get down to
a working relationship.
If one side lays down condition the other side will also want to lay
down conditions. So to get dialogue going smoothly a period of quiet
discussion is necessary.
Does that mean you don't have a specific objective at the moment and
you would let the talks continue and find out whether you can be
satisfied with a certain level of compromise from the regime?
I am not going as far as that. I am just saying that at this time
moment we don't even yet have a specific target when we hope to start
dialogue.
You mentioned Nelson Mandela in some of your interviews. Do you foresee
a South Africa solution for Burma?
Not exactly a South Africa solution because we are not South Africa.
I was just using South Africa as a model for the way in which you can
achieve settlement through dialogue.
There was a time when nobody would have believed that such a thing
could be possible. I would like to use South Africa as an example as
opposed to the Yugoslavian situation where people just would not
consider sitting down talking with the result that everything is in
ruins and nobody has gained from it.
In South Africa, Mandela and others who at one time were very active
and rigid in some of their views over the apartheid problem became very
flexible over the years and decided in the end that negotiation was the
only way.
How do you see your role in the next step of the political solution in
this country?
Now I feel that my role is once more to unite the democratic forces and
to revive those parts of our movement which have been intimidated in
the last six years.
Will you demand the release of political prisoners as a condition?
We have urged in my first statement the authorities to release
political prisoners as soon as possible. But we are not starting out
with conditions. We are starting with a clear objective of getting
people to sit around the table so we can start talking about
conditions.
Is that happening?
No. As you can see at the table we are sitting around like one, it's
just you and me.
Are there signs that they are willing to talk?
I am not able to say whether they are unwilling or willing. Let me say
that at the moment the positions seem very neutral. I have not seen
overt signs of unwillingness nor willingness. But it is still a little
too early in the day.
Is there any open line of communication at the moment?
There is a line of communication. I have kept my military intelligence
personal at the gate. So I am not out of touch with the authorities.
You have told your supporters not to expect too much, too quickly. What
are their expectations now?
I think they understand what I mean. One of the saddest things about
Burma is that a lot of my supporters do not trust the authorities.
There is a climate of suspicion in Burma. Everybody is afraid that
somebody else is an informer.
To build up a climate of trust is going to be one of the most difficult
jobs. And the people understand perfectly well when I say don't raise
your expectations too high, don't be in such a hurry. A lot of them,
in fact, have told me to be careful because they can't really believe
that I have been released.
If your supporters can't trust the authorities do you trust the
authorities?
They will have to show that they are trustworthy. We would need
indications of their trustworthiness before we can trust them. IT's
mutual process.
Do they trust you?
You must ask them the question.I would like to know the answer too.
They have dealt with me for six years and they know a lot about me. I
would be grateful if you ask them: Do you trust her?
You have surprised a lot of people by saying that you have no ill
feelings or resentments toward your former captors.
Has that come as a surprise? Most of our people who have lived under
far worse condition than I in In Sein jail and other jails have no ill
feelings either.
It's fortunate that my colleagues are all very fine and honourable
people they always look forward to the future and not the past.
And because they are so strong in themselves and so committed, they
have been able to bear all the troubles of the last six years and yet
have no sediment of ill will.(TN)
CONTINUED TOMORROW
===== item =====
ACADEMIC FREEDOM OR SECURITY?
1 AUGUST 1995, The Nation
Yindee Lertcharoenchok tries to analyze the whole controversy
surrounding Thammasat University's initiative to invite Burma's
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi here.
The uproar caused by Thammasat University's plan to confer an honorary
doctorate degree on Burmese-pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi only
confirms the existing disunity among the various sectors of the Thai
society in their stance and perspective towards Thailand's western
neighbour.
But the whole controversy is more of a "hypothetical" speculation and
"premature" overreaction as the university itself has not yet
officially extended an invitation to Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace
Prize laureate, who was unexpectedly released on July 10 after nearly
six years under house arrest.
The idea to invite the popular Burmese democracy leader re-emerged
after she accepted the Nobel Peace Prize committee's invitation to
travel to Norway at an unspecified date to pick up the award she won
for her peaceful struggle to restore democracy and human rights in
Burma.
In 1991, Thammasat University also conferred an honorary doctorate
degree in political science to Suu Kyi, who was still under house
arrest at that time, and has since waited for her to receive it in
person. The mixed reaction, the subsequent public debate and criticism
has, however, put the university in a spot.
In a press statement released July 28, university rector Noranit
Sethabutr was quoted as saying they had revived the plan to confer the
degree to Suu Kyi in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of Thai
Peace Day on Aug 16. This was the day the kingdom reclaimed its
sovereignty from Japanese invaders during World War II.
"But the [university] has yet to coordinate efforts and contacts with
Suu Kyi have yet to be established. The conferring day could be any
time from Aug 15-17," he said.
While Suu Kyi promised Norway that it would be the first country she
will visit, she also made it clear that she has no intention, for the
time being, to leave Burma. In fact, the Burmese junta known as the
State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) had incessantly
demanded that she leave Burma in exchange for her release from house
arrest.
The Burmese opposition leader, whose unconditional release last month
has injected new life into the pro-democracy Burmese movement inside
and outside Burma, has repeatedly declared that her immediate tasks are
to consolidate democratic forces and to engage Slorc leaders in
political dialogues.
She has also asked her supporters, many of whom gather daily in front
of her home to get a glimpse of her or to listen to her, to stay united
and be patient as the path towards national reconciliation and
restoration of democracy and human rights in Burma is long and full of
obstacles, and that her release is just the beginning of their fight
to achieve common goals.
Likewise, even though Suu Kyi has expressed her wish to visit Bangkok
to receive the honorary degree, she is obviously in no hurry to do so.
"I cannot say at this moment when I shall be able to come [to
Thailand]," she said in an interview over the weekend.
When asked whether she feared she would not be allowed back to Burma
if she left the country, she said: "Yes. That's why I am not in a hurry
to go to Thammasat University."
Interestingly, the academic initiative to invite Suu Kyi here has
confirmed that Thailand's foreign diplomacy is plagued with profound
disunity and disagreement among various policy-making agencies.
For the first time, the controversy has made public the existing
differences between those who support Slorc and those who are
sympathetic to the pro-democracy movement.
While non-government human rights agencies have warmly welcomed the
university's move, the Thai military does not hide its disagreement
with the move.
In fact, it has come out strongly, arguing that Suu Kyi's trip here
could jeopardize Thai-Burmese relations and Thailand's economic
interests in Burma.
The Thai government and some MPs, meanwhile, have either been non-
committal or ambiguous with the idea and only a few prominent
politicians have openly dared support it.
Top military officers have actually voiced their opposition to it and
have warned against a possible backlash.
Outgoing Army commander Gen Wimol Wongwanich, Navy chief Adm Prachet
Siridej and Army assistant chief Gen Chettha Thanajaro have called for
either the outright dismissal, revision, or "through extensive
discussion and consulations", adding that if Suu Kyi' trip goes ahead
Thai national interests could be a stake.
Chettha, who is tipped to succeed Wimol and who is known to have
established close ties with some Slorc leaders, went as far as
categorizing the 50-year-old daughter of Burmese independence hero Aung
San "as just an ordinary person" whom the Thai military has no
significant relations with.
While Prachet claims that Slorc "is unhappy" with the academic
invitation, which "could affect the relations between the two
governments," Wimol has made serveral unsound arguments, and voiced his
fear that Suu Kyi might not want to return to Burma. He also criticized
the West for being hypocritical and for observing double standards.
"What will we [Thailand] do if we invite her here and then she does not
want to go back, and her visit arouses hatred towards [Thai]
businessmen in Burma? Thai investments could be affected because we
believe the superpowers who claim to oppose dictatorship and support
democracy, although they themselves have engaged in talks with a
communist country whose record of human rights abuses is deplorable.
Whatever we have to do, we must not forget our interests," stressed
Wimol.
Most elected MPs and ministers have deliberately avoided giving an
answer when asked for their views on Suu Kyi's trip.
As elected members of the legislature, they cannot be seen as being
overtly supportive of either Slorc or their Burmese counterparts, who
have been denied the right to rule.
Two deputy prime ministers, Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, who has
established close friendship with Slorc, and Amnuay Viravan are seen
as not wanting to antagonize the popular Thai sentiment or the
government and military's pro-Slorc stance, as well as their
connections with the Burmese military.
Amnuay said "university councils have the academic freedom to confer
a degree to any person they deem eligible". However, he suggested
holding a dialogue with Slorc to explain that Suu Kyi's trip here does
not constitute Thai interference in Burma's internal affairs. "This
matter should not affect the Thai-Burmese economic relations," he
emphasized.
Chavalit, who broke the international isolation of Slorc by being the
first foreign dignitary to visit Rangoon in Dec 1988, has cautioned the
university and called for careful consideration over the whole issue.
He is probably afraid that Thammasat's plan could jeopardize his
personal efforts to mend the sour bilateral relations, which is due to
the recent surge in Burmese hostility towards Thailand.
Prime Minister Banharn Silpa-archa has tried to avoid the debate
altogether. As head of government, he made the worse possible statement
by saying he had not yet been informed of the matter and, as such, had
asked for time to study it.
The most sensible comment, perhaps, came from former prime minister
Chuan Leekpai, who is known for his support for democratic reforms in
Burma, and whose opposition to the coup here in Feb, 1991 had
catapulted him to the premiership in 1992.
Chuan, who made a bold decision to allow the visit here in early 1993
of a Nobel Peace Prize team to campaign for Suu Kyi's release, said
Thailand, as "a free and democratic country", has the full sovereign
right to invite anybody but all parties involved have to consolidate
a common position and make it known to Slorc.
"Unlike Burma, Thailand, as a free and democratic country, has the
sovereign right to invite anybody here. Aung San Suu Kyi's visit here
could upset the Burmese junta, but all concerned parties here have to
formulate a common stance on the issue, and explain and clear it up
with the Burmese junta. The invitation is extended by an academic
institute, which has the right to do so," he added.
The Thai army's reaction is understandable. The military, which has
been influential in guiding the direction of Thailand's foreign
diplomacy towards its neighbours, evidently shares the same mentality
with its Burmese counterparts in claiming that national security would
be on the line.
It is aware of its importance as the only channel of communication with
Slorc, which often ignores the proper diplomatic channels, and,
therefore, does not want to destroy such a relationship.
Recalling Slorc's "extreme outrage" towards Thailand after the 1993
Nobel Peace Prize team visit here, the The military obviously wants to
avoid the same scenario, which as described by army and government
officials as "the worst" as far as the Thai government's relationship
with Slorc is concerned.
Likewise, the military does not want to jeopardize its ongoing efforts
to restore the previously close ties with Slorc, which had been
strained following a series of recent border disputes and conflicts,
including allegations that Thailand has been providing sanctuary to
ethnic Burmese guerrilla forces.
Both the Thai government and military are also aware that Slorc, whose
members have gone on official visits to Southeast Asian nations, has
deliberately ignored Thailand despite repeated invitations.
As to what happened in the past week, it seems several sectors in
Thailand, including the Banharn administration, the military and the
academic have embarked on debating a "non-issue" and have also
overreacted by coming out with hypothetical comments.
They are probably ignorant of Suu Kyi's political agenda and programme,
as well as Slorc's stance towards the person it considers as an "arch
enemy".
In the past, Slorc was the one which had tried to push her out of the
country on the belief that Suu Kyi's absence from Burma would
eventually plunge her into public oblivion and weaken the pro-democracy
movement. It had repeatedly offered to free Suu Kyi from house arrest
on condition that she left Burma.
For her part, Suu Kyi has made it known that her desire is to have
peace and national reconciliation, which will then pave way for the
smooth restoration of democracy in Burma. She has no wish to leave the
country and the Burmese people as long as her work has not been done.
The world "interference" has often been interpreted and exploited to
serve one's interests. In the case of Thailand, the government has been
overcautious in establishing any contact with the Burmese pro-democracy
movement for fear of antagonizing Slorc.
But it seems to have forgotten that Slorc had twice ordered its
ambassador to Thailand, U Tin Winn, to pay a courtesy call on Gen
Chavalit to congratulate him for his ministerial appointment in the
present and previous governments.
As one of the country's most prestigious learning institutes, Thammasat
University has every single right and the freedom to decide and confer
an honorary degree to those it deems qualified.
Thailand, like other independent nations, has the sovereign right to
allow or exclude anybody from its soil just like what Slorc does to
those who want to visit Burma.
The Thai government has to fully support the academic institute whose
objective is nothing more than honouring a Burmese national who has
been fighting for her country's political cause. (TN)
===== item =====
B19b FOR HOTELS
1 AUGUST 1995, Bangkok Post
Foreign investment in hotels in Rangoon has reached 19.7 billion baht
with most of the facilities to be operating by next year when Burma
expects a tourism boom.
About 100,000 tourists went to Burma last year and officials expect
500,000 in 1996 which has been designated "Visit Myanmar Year". (BP)
===== item =====
EASING INSURANCE COVER IN BURMA
1 AUGUST 1995, Bangkok Post
Japan's Ministry of International Trade and Industry will make
insurance coverage for Japanese investment in Burma more easy to
obtain.
Since Monday last week, inspection periods have been shortened for
projects worth less than $11.4 million (285 million baht). Previously,
insurance was granted only after very close scrutiny.
The decision was made despite a call by Burmese dissident leader Aung
San Suu Kyi for countries to wait for tangible improvements in
democracy and human rights before up-grading relations with Burma's
military rulers. (BP)
===== item =====
POLICE RAID CHURCH, HOLD ILLEGAL BURMESE IMMIGRANTS
1 AUGUST 1995, Bangkok Post
Police waiting outside a church to check the identification papers of
its Burmese parishioners hauled 45 away for being illegal immigrants,
the church's pastor said yesterday.
Pastor Allen Barnes said he was seeking assurances from police that
there would be no repeat of the action against people arriving for
Sunday Burmese-language services at his Calvary Baptist Church on
Sukhumvit Soi 2.
About 20 police who arrived at the church compound about 7.30 a.m. some
45 minutes before the Sunday service, started checking the
identification papers of arriving worshippers without consulting with
church officials, said Barnes, who came to Thailand three years ago
from Chico, California.
Parishioners who arrived early to socialise before the service locked
themselves inside the worship centre when they saw police checking
identification papers, he said.
Between 250 and 325 people usually attend the services, which started
about two-and-a-half-years ago, said Barnes.
When Barnes, who lives in the church compound, was summoned to the
scene, he asked police "if they couldn't do this some other day."
"They said No," he said, "but assured us they would not go inside the
worship centre."
Forty-five Burmans and Karens were found to be illegal immigrants, and
were taken away, Barnes said, adding that most were now in the police
Immigration Detention Centre at Soi Suan Plu. (BP)
===== item =====
ASEAN URGED TO GO SLOW ON MYANMAR ENTRY
2 AUGUST 1995, The Nation
AUSTRALIAN Foreign Minister Gareth Evens urged the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) on Monday to
proceed cautiously with plans to eventually admit military
junta-led Myanmar into its ranks as a full member.
Evans emphasized that Australia fully supports the goal
of most Asean countries to bring all 10 nations of
Southeast Asia under the regional grouping s umbrella by
the end of the century, but warned against moving too
fast with regard to Myanmar.
We re talking about five years away and I would
certainly hope that we see within that timeframe a
process of reconciliation occurring within Burma that will
make such a step possible, he told a group of reporters.
In the meantime, I would hope that there is no rush to
embrace that country by Asean, there is a willingness to
proceed step by step and only in response to significant
forward movement, he said.
Evans said he would be arguing the point in his talk with
the seven foreign ministers amid the current series of
annual meetings in Brunei.
Myanmar acceded today to Asean s core Treaty of Amity and
Cooperation, which is a precondition for observer status
and eventual full membership.
Evans said Australia was delighted at the July 10
release by Myanmar s Slorc of pro-democracy leader Suu Kyi
from a almost six years of house arrest, but proof will
be in the months ahead as to what this actually signifies.
We hope very much there will be a commencement.. Of a
serious process of dialogue between Suu Kyi and the Slorc
regime about ways in which a more satisfactory
arrangements might evolve, he said. (TN)
=====ITEM=====
SENATOR WANTS BURMA SANCTIONS
2 AUGUST 1995, The Nation
A US senator has introduced a bill calling for US
sanctions against Burma, citing continued political
repression there, it was announced here on Monday.
Senator Mitch McConnell introduced his bill on Friday,
sating he had seen no apparent progress in the promotion
of democracy and human rights in Burma, despite the
recent release of political opponent and Nobel peace
prize winner Suu Kyi.
It was not immediately known when the bill will get a
hearing.
Winston Lord, assistance secretary of state for East
Asian and Pacific Affair, last week expressed opposition
to unilateral economic sanctions against Burma, saying
they could not be effective unless they had broad
international support.
Since the release of Aung San Suu Kyi from prison, there
is no support for sanctions from the international
community, Lord told a Senate hearing.
Lord also expressed concern that provisions of the
proposed sanctions would violate international accords.
(TN)
======ITEM=====
DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT SEEM TO BE STRONGER
2 AUGUST 1995, The Nation
The Nation s Editor-in-chief SUTHICHAI YOON and Editor
THEPCHAI YONG talked to Aung San Suu Kyi last weekend at
her residence in Rangoon where she was detained for six
years under house arrest. Following is the second part of
a transcript of the interview.
Did the six years of house arrest change you or your
attitude to the pursuit of democracy?
It s not just me. I was very happy to find that so many
of my colleagues have come out without any ill will and
they really had a tough time. I was under house arrest
while they were in jail. All right, this is not the most
beautiful housing the world but is a lot more comfortable
than Insein jail or any other jail in the country.
Condition at some of the prisons are very uncomfortable.
But they have come out without any ill feelings. To me it
does not seem at all a surprise that I have no ill
feelings. Why should I when they don t? We are all very
much of the same mind.
Do the authorities appreciate your absence of ill feeling
toward them?
I hope they do. They also should learn not to habour ill
feelins.
What kind of political role do you think the military
would want to see you play?
They might not all have the same opinion. It s possible
that some military leaders think I should play a
certain kind of role, while others think I should play
another kind of role. I cannot speak for them at all. They
did try to stop me from continuing my political role and
offered me the freedom to leave the country. But I never
accepted that. I made it quite clear in my statement in
January that I intend to go on playing an active role.
Are you suggesting that there may be a split within the
military leadership?
No. No. I don t think so. There may be differences of
opinion as to what they want to see me do. I think on the
while they all agreed that it would be better for them
if I left politics. But since I have not done so that may
now have a new idea as to what they wish to me do. But
I have made it very clear that I intend to go on playing
an active political role.
Are there absolutely no conditions for your release?
No conditions. I would not have accepted any conditions
anyway. And I think they knew that.
Do you fear that if you leave the country you would not
be allowed back again?
Yes. That s why I am not coming to Thammasat University in
a hurry.
Did the military say anything about your leaving the
country?
No. No. No. We don t talk about that. It s for me to decide
when I leave. And I think they know that I am not going to
leave.
Does that mean you will stay here to try to find a mode
of negations that will bring about a solution? Do you
have a time-frame in mind?
Not at the moment. But there may come a time when we
would like to see more progress by such as such a period.
But I hope it will not come to that.
So you have been talking to NLD leaders and supporters?
Almost everyday. Yes, we are in constant contact.
Do you feel encouraged by their attitude?
Yes. Yes. You must have heard the general view that the
NLD in the last six years was a completely spent force
and no longer viable as a political party. I do not think
this is true at all. Of course, it has been dampened
considerably by all the restrictions imposed on it during
the last six years. But we still have the supporter of
the people.
Is NLD enjoying the same level support it did before?
Not the same level of overt support. A lot of our members
were expelled. I was expelled, too. Some left out of
fear. So overtly, perhaps there is not as much support
for the NLD as before the election. But we as the
democratic movement, not necessarily the NLD as a party,
seems to have a stronger supported among the people
these days than before 1990.
Do you think the military should have a role in whatever
future solution that you may come up with?
The military, of course, after all, we need an army.
What about political role?
It s up to the people to decide. It s the people of Burma
who must decide what role they wish to assign to which
force within the country.
Personally, what do you think the role of the military
should be?
I have always said that I wish the military to be an
honorable professional army because that is the best way
they can protect their interests as well as the
interests of the country. But what is the important is
how to people see their role. In the end, whatever role
id assigned to whatever body it will survive in the long
run if the people approve of it.
You have criticized the National Convention drafting the
new constitution. Do you think the constitution is so far
on the right track?
The draft constitution is certainly not heading on the
track to democracy. So I think they should be open to
negotiations.
What basic principles do you want to see in the
constitution?
The basic principle of any genuine democratic government
is that the people should be able to decide whom they
want to be at the helm of the nation and when they can
remove these people. Every truly democratic government
must have the mandate of the people and proper
institutions to ensure that this mandate is given in the
right way.
If invited, would you and NLD be willing to be part of
the National Convention?
It all depends very much on how the government will
incorporae us or other people and where the Nation
Convention is heading. The National Convention is only a
title. There are all kinds of national conventions. It
depends very much on the kind of national convention to
which we are invited.
We can see lot of constitution work going on in and around
Rangoon, new hotels especially. What does it mean to
Burma?
New hotels. That s exactly what it means to Burma. And I
am surprised that they are building so many hotels,
nothing but hotels. And that I must frankly say is a
little worrying. I would like to see new schools, new
hospitals, new nurseries, libraries, new bookshops. But
everywhere there are hotels.
You must have been surprised seeing all these new
building after emerging from six years of house arrest.
Not really, because I had been led to expect more change.
There are many parts of Rangoon which remain totally
unchanged. If you go around in a car you will se that the
greater parts of Rangoon remain totally unchanged had
been led to expect, just from listening to the news,
that most of Rangoon have changed, in the sense that
they are putting up new hotels. I am getting tried of
hotels. Everywhere I go I find hotels. That one is a
hotel. That is a motel. It seems rather unbalanced to me
that there should be so many hotels.
What can be done to give it a proper balance?
This is what all those who want to help Burma should
think about. When we think of development, we should
think of the broader human development of the country
rather than economic development in narrow terms of more
investments, tourists and hotels.
You environment is also being threatened. This is the
same lesson we have learned in Thailand and other
countries.
I have heard that but, of course, haven t seen it with my
own eyes.
Is it happening here in Burma?
I have heard it is happening along the border where we
have so many teak forests. In Rangoon, trees have been
cut down in the interest of hotels.
Now that you have been freed, what stand should the world
community take toward Burma.
First of all. The release of other political detainees. I
am the only one who has been released in the last three
weeks. There are hundreds of other political detainees
left. And secondly, to encourage dialogue and
negotiations. This is not just for the sake of Burma but
for the sake of establishing an international code of
behaviour that problems are settle through negotiation.
This would be an advantage to every country if we set a
precedent that human beings sit down and talk to each
other and solve their problems through negotiations and
not through repression.
Your message to all the potential donor countries and
investors is don t rush.
Not to rush and to please encourage a climate of dialogue
and negotiation.
What if the military leaders continue to ignore you? They
would allow you talk to the press and to your people but
they themselves will not move?
We will cross the bridges when we come to them.
Are you prepared for disappointments?
Of course, we are prepared. But we will certainly not
reveal all our strategies. We can t put all our cards on
the table at this moment.
Have you made preparations for such eventually?
My father used to say have to hope for the best and
prepare for the worst. And I always live according to
that principle.
Are you yourselves prepared to run the country either as
president or prime minister?
The advantage of being somebody in a democratic party is
that you don t really have to prepare yourself as an
individual for such responsibility because you are not
going to be a dictator. You are going to be working as
part of a team. So I do not think I have to prepare
myself inparticular. We have a team which has the trust
and confidence of the country, we have the ability to
shoulder whatever responsibility the people wish to
give to us.
Are the military leaders on the right track in getting
the minority groups to the negotiating table.
Yes. The ceasefire are a very good idea. Ceasefire mean a
decrease in human sufferings. But those are not permanent
peace settlement. And that everybody has to admit that
ceasefire is ceasefire. It is not permanent peace. This
is just the ery first step. We will have to go on and
work for permanent peace. And we must hope there will not
be a regression and that ceasefire agreements will not be
broken.
How would you handle the problem of the minorities if you
have a say, especially along the Thai-Burmese border?
In the end, there were have to be negotiated settlement.
They will have to talk. There are only two ways of
settling conflict- either you shoot each other or you
talk to each other. And I prefer the talking.
What would be the proper framework for a real union of
Burma to be really established?
First of all, we have to build up a climate of trust.
This is what is missing in Burma. Until we build up a
climate of trust we can t even start effective
negotiations. It is easy enough to sit around the table but
if every body is suspicious of everybody we will never be
able to come to any settlement acceptable to all. So we
have to show the ethnic people that there is a government
which they can trust and which sympathizes with their
aspirations and their problems. And then I think we have
to take it from there. It is possible that some of the
ethnic groups may already have their own suggestions as
to what kind of framework they wish to be in place before
they can negotiate effectively. And it is also possible
that particular framework is something that will have to
be negotiated.
Would you make the issue of the minorities a priority
in your negotiation with the military leaders?
The first thing is to start talking to each other. Then,
of course, I accept that without the participation of
the ethnic people we will not be able to really get
lasting peace. So they certainly must come in.
When you sit with the military leaders what tops your
agenda?
That depends on when we sit down.
If next week?
If we sit-down next week then I ll have to ask them to
release all the political prisoners.
Did the six years of house arrest have any effect on your
physically and mentally?
Physically, I have had problems with my neck even though
it had nothing to do with my house arrest. I spent a lot
of time reading. Mentally and emotionally, I think it has
strengthened me. This is what all of us who were in
prisons during the last six years have found out. Very
few have been weakened but the majority of us have
become stronger. We have had to in order to survive. So
perhaps we should be thankful to them (the authorities).
Did your separation from your family at any point weaken
your resolve? No, it did not weaken my resolve. I have to
admit that I had to train myself not to think about them
too much. There was nothing I could do to help. It was a
matter of discipline that I did not let my mind dwell on
matters of which I could do nothing.
Did you have any idea at all as to how long the house
arrest would last?
No. They out saying it was going to be one year and them
three years. Then it was five years. Then the
interpretation of the law said it was to be six years. By
that time I did not set any time limit and told myself
to take it as long as it was necessary.
What was your normal day like?
Later by the time I got used to it I would get up at 4.30
am, meditated for an hour and listened to the radio for
a couple of hours. There were different stations I
listened to, like the BBC World Service, The VOA and the
DVB. So I started the day with a full grasp of what going
on in the world outside. Then I divided up the rest of the
day between reading and doing house work.
What was the worst part of life under house arrest?
I worried most about my colleagues- how they were and how
their families were.
The good part?
The good part was that I had a lot of time to read.
Were you allowed to get mail during the six years?
In the beginning I was allowed to get letters from my
family but later after he 20th of July 1990 when they
extended by period of detention it was obvious that they
weren t going to respect the results of the 1990 election
I no longer accepted letters and parcels from my family.
Did you feel at any stage that some harm might come to
you?
No. Let me out it this way, It didn t worry me. I was
objectively aware of the fact that I was in a very
vulnerable position. Tey could do anything they like to
me at any time. My greatest protection was the affection
and the support of the people of Burma. The international
community too, of course. But in the end it was really the
support and a affection of the people of Burma and
respect they had for my late father which they extended
to me which gave the bast protection.
Do you feel safe going around Rangoon?
I think I am quite safe. I do not know. I cannot
guarantee my safety.
You have written in your book Freedom from fear that It
is not power that corrupts but fear of losing power.
What is your own fear today?
Fear of letting down people who have faith in me. I would
rather go down my self than letting them down. But I
do not think I will let them down though I will not be
able to do everything they want. But I have never
promised them anything. I simple said I would try my
best.
Are you worried that you might not be able to live up to
the expectations of the people?
No. I don t think there is any point of worrying about
that. I will try my best. People should not be encouraged
to have too strong a feeling about one person. I have
always said that we should not develop this kind of
feeling which is in country to the interest of democracy.
What message do you convey to the people when you go out
to meet them?
I ask them for their support. I tell them with their
support I am confident I will be able to reach the goal
they want to reach. And without their support that will
not be possible. (TN)
===== item =====
~THE NATION/1.8.95
DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI'S INTERVIEW WITH THE NATION'S CHIEF EDITOR-
Second Part
Q. Did the six years of house arrest change you or your attitude
to the pursuit of democracy?
A. It's not just me. I was very happy to find that so many of my
colleagues have come out without any ill will and they really had
a tough time, I was under house arrest in while they were in
jail. All right this is not a most beautiful house in the world
but is a lot comfortable than In Sein Jail or any other jail in
the country. Conditions at some of the prisons are very
uncomfortable. But they have come out any ill feelings. To me it
does not seem at all a surprise that I have no ill feelings. Why
should I when they don't? We are all very much of the same mind.
Q. Do the authorities appreciate your absence of ill feelings
toward them?
A. I hope they do. They also should learn not to harbor ill
feelings.
Q. What kind of political role do you think the military would
want to see you play?
A. They might not all have the same opinion. It's possible that
some military leaders think I should play a certain kind of role,
while others think I should play another kind of role. I cannot
speak for them at all. They did try to stop me from continuing my
political role and offered me the freedom to leave the country.
But I never accepted that. I made it quite clear in my statement
in January that I intend to go on playing an active role.
Q. Are you suggesting that there may be a split within the
military leadership?
A. No. No. I don't think so. There may be differences of opinion
as to what they want to see me do. I think on the whole they all
agreed that it would be better for them if I left politics. But
since I have not done so they may now have a new idea as to what
they wish to me do. But I have made it very clear that I intend
to go on playing an active political role.
Q. Are there absolutely no conditions for your release?
A. No conditions. I would not have accepted any conditions
anyway. And I think they knew that.
Q. Do you fear that if you leave the country you would not be
allowed back again?
A. Yes. That's why I am not coming to Thammasat University in a
hurry.
Q. Did the military say anything about your leaving the country?
A. No. No. No. We don't talk about that. It's for me to decide
when I leave. And I think they know that I am not going to leave.
Q. Does that mean you will stay here to try to find a mode of
negotiations, that will bring about a solution? Do you have a
time-frame in mind?
A. Not at the moment. But there may come a time when we would
like to see more progress by such an such a period. But I hope it
will not come to that in the right way.
Q. if invited, would you and NLD be willing democracy? ~to be
part of the National Convention?
It all depends very much on the government will incorporate us or
other people and where the National convention is heading. The
National Convention is only a little. There are all kinds of
National Conventions. It depends very much on the kind of
national convention to which we are invited.
Q. We can see lots of construction work going on in and around
Rangoon, new hotels especially. What does this mean to Burma?
New hotels. That's exactly what it mean to Burma. And I am
surprised that they are building so many hotels, nothing but
hotels. And that I must frankly say is a little worrying. I would
like to see new schools, new hospitals, new nurseries, new
libraries, new bookshops. But everywhere there are hotels. That I
think is a little worrying.
Q. You must have been surprised seeing all these new buildings
after emerging from six years of house arrest. Not really,
because I had been led to expect more change. There are many
parts of Rangoon which remain totally unchanged. If you go around
in a car you will see that the greater parts of Rangoon remain
totally unchanged. I had been led to expect, just from listening
to the news, that most of Rangoon had changed. This is not the
case at all. Only a few areas of Rangoon have changed, in the
sense that they are putting up new hotels. I am getting tired of
hotels. Everywhere I go I find hotels. That one is a hotel. That
is another hotel. That is an inn. That is a motel. It seems
rather unbalanced to me that there should be so many hotels.
Q. What can be done to give it a proper balance?
This is what all those who want to help Burma should think about.
When we think of development, we should think of the of the
broader human development of the country rather than economic
development in narrow terms of more investments, tourists and
hotels.
Q. Your environment is also being threatened. This is the same
lesson we have learned in Thailand and other countries.
A. I have heard that but, of course, haven't seen it with my own
eyes.
Q. Is it happening here in Burma?
A. I have heard it is happening along the border where we have so
many teak forest. In Rangoon, trees have been cut down in the
interest of hotels.
Q. So you have been talking to NLD leaders and supporters?
A. Almost everyday. Yes, we are in constant contact.
Q. Do you feel encouraged by their attitude?
A. Yes. Yes. You must have heard the general view that the NLD in
the last six years was a completely spent force and no longer
viable as a political party. I do not think this is true at all.
Of course, it has been dampened considerably by all the
restrictions imposed on it during the last six years. But we
still have the support of the people.
Q. Is NLD enjoying the same level of support it did before?
A. Not the same level of overt support. A lot of our members were
expelled. I was expelled, too. Some left out of fear. So overtly,
perhaps there is not as much support for the NLD as before the
election. But we as the democratic movement, not necessarily the
NLD as a party, seems to have a stronger support among the people
these days than before 1990.
Q. Do you think the military should have a role in whatever
future solution that you may come up with?
The military, of course, has a role to play in the country
because, after all, we need an army.
Q. What about political role?
A. It's up to the people to decide. It's the people of Burma who
must decide what role they wish to assign to which force within
the country.
Q. Personally, what do you think the role of the military should
be?
A. I have always said that I wish the military to be an
honourable professional army because that is the best way they
can protect their interests as well as the interests of the
country. But what is important is how the people see their role.
In the end, whatever role is assigned to whatever body it will
survive in the long run only if the people approved of it.
Q. You have criticized the National Convention drafting the new
constitution. Do you think the constitution is so far on the
right track?
A. The draft constitution is certainly not heading on the track
to democracy. So I think they should be open to negotiations.
Q. What basic principles do you want to see in the constitution?
A. The basic principle of any genuine democratic government is
that the people should be able to decide whom they want to be at
the helm of the nation and when remove these people. Every truly
democratic government must have the mandate of the people
and proper institutions to ensure that this mandate is given.
Q. Now that you have been freed, what stand should the world
community take toward Burma? .
A. First of all, the release of other political detainees. I am
the only one who has been released in the last three weeks. There
are hundreds of other political detainees left. And secondly, to
encourage dialogue and negotiations. This is not just for the
sake of Burma but for the sake of establishing an international
code of behaviour that problems are settled through negotiation.
This would be an advantage to every country if we set a precedent
that human beings sit down and talk to each other and solve their
problems through negotiations and not through repression.
Q. Your message to all the potential donor countries and
investors is "don't rush."
A. Not to rush and to please encourage a climate of dialogue and
negotiation.
Q. What If the military leaders continue to ignore you? They
would allow you to talk to the press and to your people but they
themselves will not move?
A. We will cross the bridges when we come to them.
Q. Are you prepared for disappointments?
A. Of course, we are prepared. But we will certainly not reveal
all our strategies. We can't put all our cards on the table at
this moment.
Q. Have you made preparations for such eventuality?
A. My father used to say you have to hope for the best and
prepare for the worst. And I always live according to that
principle.
Q. Are you yourselves prepared to run the country either as
president or prime minister?
A. The advantage of being somebody in a democratic party is that
you don't really have to prepare yourself as an individual for
such responsibility because you are not going to be a dictator.
You are going to be working as part of a team. And we have a good
team. So I do not think I have to prepare myself in particular.
We have a team which has the trust and confidence of the country.
We have the ability to shoulder whatever responsibility the
people wish to give to us.
Q. Are the military leaders on the right track in getting the
minority groups to the negotiating table.
A. Yes. The ceasefires are a very good idea. Ceasefires mean a
decrease in human sufferings. But those are not permanent peace
settlement. And that everybody has to admit that ceasefire is
ceasefire. It is not permanent peace. This is just the very first
step. We will have to go on and work for permanent peace. And we
must hope there will not be a regression and that ceasefire
agreements will not be broken.
Q. How would you handle the problem of the minorities if you have
a say, especially along the Thai-Burmese border?
A. In the end, there will have to be negotiated settlement. They
will have to talk. There are only two ways of settling conflict
either you shoot each other or you talk to And I prefer the
talking.
Q. What would be the proper framework for a real union of Burma
to be really established?
A. First of all, we have to build up a climate of trust. This is
what is missing in Burma. Until we build up a climate of trust we
can't even start effective negotiations. It is easy enough to sit
around the table but if everybody is suspicious of everybody we
will never be able to come to any settlement acceptable to all.
So we have to Show the ethnic people that there is a government
which they can trust and which sympathizes with their aspirations
and their problems. And then I think we have to take it from
there. It is possible that some of the ethnic groups, may already
have their own suggestions as to what kind of framework they wish
to be in place before they can negotiate effectively and it is
also possible that particular framework is something that will
have to be negotiated.
Q. Would you make the issue of the minorities a priority in your
negotiation with the military leaders.
A. The first thing is to start talking to each other. Then, of
course, I accept that without the participation of the ethnic
people we will not be able to really get lasting peace. So they
certainly must come in.
Q. When you sit- down with the military leaders what tops your
agenda?
A. That depends on when we sit down.
Q. If next week?
A. If we sit down next week then I'll have to ask them to release
all the political prisoners.
Q. Did the six years of house arrest have any effect on you
physically and mentally?
A. Physically, I have had problems with my neck even though it
had nothing to do with my house arrest. I spent a lot of time
reading. Mentally and emotionally, I think it has strengthen me.
This is what all of us who were in prisons during the last six
years have found out. Very few have been weaken but the majority
of us have become stronger. We have had to in order to survive.
SO perhaps we should be thankful to them(the authority).
Q. Did your separation from your family any point weaken your
resolve?
No, it did not weaken my resolve. I have to admit that I had to
train myself not to think about them too much. There was nothing
I could do to help. It was a matter of discipline that I did not
let my mind dwell on matters of which I could do nothing.
Q. Did you have any idea at all as to how long the house arrest
would last?
A. No. They started out saying it was going to be one year and
then three years. Then the interpretation of the law said it was
to be six years. By that time I did not set any time limit and
told myself to take it as long as it was necessary.
Q. What was your normal day like?
A. Later by the time I got used to it I would I get up at 4.30
am, meditated for an hour and listened to the radio for a couple
of hours. There were different stations I listened to, like the
BBC World Service, the VOA Burmese Service, the Democratic Voice
of Burma. So I started the day with a full grasp of what was
going on in the world outside. Then I divided up the rest of the
day between reading and doing house work.
Q. What was the worst part of life under house arrest?
A. I worried most about my colleagues how they were and how their
families were.
Q. The good part?
A. The good pan was that I had a lot of time to read.
Q. Were you allowed to get mail during the six years?
A. In the beginning I was allowed to get letters from my family
but later after the 20th of July 1990 when they extended by
period of detention it was obvious that they weren't going to
respect the results of 1990 election I no longer accepted letters
and parcels from my family.
Q. Did you feel at any stage that some harm might come to you?
A. No. Let me put it this way, It didn't worry me. I was
objectively aware of the fact that I was in a very vulnerable
position. They could do anything they liked to me at any time. My
greatest protection was the affection and the support of the
people of Burma. The international community too, of course. But
in the end it was really the support and affection of the people
of Burma and respect they had for my late my father which they
extended to me which gave the best protection
Q. Do you feel safe going around Rangoon?
A. This is what all of I think I am quite safe. I do not know. I
cannot guarantee my safety.
Q. You have written in your book "Freedom from Fear" that it is
not power that corrupts but fear of losing power." What is your
own fear today?
A. Fear of letting down people who have at faith in me. I would
rather go down myself than letting them down. But I do not think
I will let them down though I will not be able to do everything
they want. But I have never promised them anything. I simply said
I would try my best.
Q. Are you worried that you might not be able to live up to the
expectations of the people?
A. No- I don't think there is any point of worrying about that. I
will try my best. People should not be encouraged to have too
strong a feeling about one person. I always said that we should
not develop this kind of feeling which is in contrary to the
interest of democracy.
Q. What message do you convey to the people when you go out to
meet them?
A. I ask them for their support. I tell them with their support I
am confident I will be able to reach the goal they want to reach.
And without their support that will not be possible.
===============================================================
<<End>>