BurmaNet News: July 30, 1996

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

-------------------------- BurmaNet -------------------------------
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


The BurmaNet News: July 30, 1996 
Issue #477

Noted in Passing: 		                       
                         Aung San Suu Kyi's situation should not be a benchmark 
	           standard for human rights in Burma said Aung Myo Min-
	           ABSDF (see: TT: BURMESE DISSIDENTS DISMAYED 
	           BY US SENATE'S DECISION) 

HEADLINES:
=========
TT: BURMESE DISSIDENTS DISMAYED BY US SENATE'S DECISION 
WSJ: U.S. TIGHTENS UP BURMA POLICY
AFP: SUU KYI DEFIANT AMID CALLS FOR HER ARREST. 
NATION: SUU KYI DENIES POWER LUST
BKK POST: HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES IN BURMA
BKK POST: FIRMS LIKELY TO CONTINUE GAS PROJECT
IHT: ASIAN FIRMS BRIDGE BURMA GAP.
THE GUARDIAN: BBC WILL 'CONTINUE TO TELL TRUTH'
ANNOUNCEMENT: HUNGER STRIKE IN JAPAN ON AUGUST 8
ANNOUNCEMENT: BURMESE CULTURAL PERFORMANCE
LETTER: BURMA AS THE NEW BOSNIA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TT: BURMESE DISSIDENTS DISMAYED BY US SENATE'S DECISION 
July 28, 1996 (Thailand Times)

The decision by the US Senate to water down a measure to impose heavy 
sanctions on Burma and its military government was met with dismay 
yesterday by Burmese dissident groups based in Thailand.
	
"I think the Slorc will be jumping with glee," said Teddy Buri, the
spokesman for the National Coalition of the Union of Burma (NCUB),
referring to Burma's ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council.
	
"Ourselves, we are very disappointed because we expected something
much stronger," Buri said. He added that the NCUB, a Thai-based 
coalition of Burmese dissident groups, would continue to press the 
United States for sanctions.
	
The US Senate on Thursday rejected tough economic measures on
Burma, adopting instead a compromise backed by the White House 
which would permit sanctions only if the ruling junta launched a 
harsh crackdown on its critics.
	
The senate amendment would allow the president to ban new
investment in Burma if the military authorities "harmed, rearrested 
for political acts, or exiled"  opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
	
However, dissident groups said it was a mistake to use Aung San
Suu Kyi's status as the standard for improvement in Burma.
	
"It's not right to focus only on Aung San Suu Kyi, human rights
abuses against the Burmese people are taking place all across the
country," said one human rights workers here.
	
"Aung San Suu Kyi's situation should not be a benchmark standard
for human rights in Burma," said Aung Myo Min, a foreign affairs 
official for the All Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF), a 
leading dissident group.
	
"For the Burmese people the country is like a prison, the United
States should not only act if Aung San Suu Kyi is arrested," he said. 
"We are very disappointed they decided to water down the Burmese bill."

The White House had opposed the tough measures, arguing that
squeezing concessions out of the junta through economic restrictions was
impossible unless it was possible to form a common front internationally.
	
Burmese dissident groups had been counting on the United States to
lead an international charge to pressure the junta into bringing about
democratic reform and improving the human rights situation in Burma.

The United States has been pushing the ASEAN countries, who are
among the largest investors in Burma, to use their influence to bring the
Burmese junta to the negotiating table with Aung San Suu Kyi.
	
However, ASEAN has resoluted stuck to its "Constructive engagement" 
policy towards the junta, maintaining that close contact with
the junta was the best way of bringing change to the military-ruled country.

*********************************************************

WSJ: U.S. TIGHTENS UP BURMA POLICY
July 29, 1996

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. is firming up a Burma policy aimed at 
providing some protection to Aung San Suu Kyi's democracy movement 
without hurting U.S. investors already established in that country.

The policy is detailed in an administration-endorsed amendment to an 
appropriations bill that the U.S. Senate approved Thursday night. The 
provision, sponsored by Sen. William Cohen, a Republican from Maine, 
would authorize the U.S. president to ban any further U.S. investment in 
Burma if he finds that the ruling junta has "harmed, rearrested for 
political acts or exiled" Ms. Suu Kyi or has committed large-scale 
repressive or violent acts against other democratic leaders.

The amendment also would deny U.S. visas for junta members and calls for 
the U.S. to work with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and other 
interested nations on a "multinational strategy" to improve human-rights 
practices in Burma.

A United Front

U.S. State Department spokesman Nicholas Burns said the bill would be a 
"helpful instrument" for U.S. diplomacy "should the authorities in Burma 
cross a certain line." He told reporters Friday that the "Clinton 
administration and Republicans and Democrats in Congress are unified that 
the U.S. should have these tougher measures available against Burma, 
should that be necessary."

Several U.S. energy companies, including Unocal Corp. and Texaco Inc., 
lobbied hard to substitute the Cohen bill for a harsher one proposed by Sen. 
Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican. The McConnell bill would ban 
outright all U.S. investments in Burma.

Sen. McConnell was disappointed that the bill would allow the president to 
waive any of the sanctions for reasons of national security. Still, "it's 
better than nothing" he said, and pledged to work for approval of the Burma 
provision in a Senate-House conference.

The senator may have one or two other hurdles to overcome to keep the 
Burma provision in the final legislation. Rep. Robert Livingstone, a 
Louisiana Republican and chairman of the House Appropriations 
Committee, is strongly opposed to the inclusion of sanction measures in 
appropriations bills, and he is expected to be one of the conferees.

U.S. Receives a Cool Reception

Whether the legislation would have any effect on Burma's ruling generals 
or on the Asean countries -- which prefer a policy of "constructive 
engagement" with Rangoon -- is another question. In last week's Asean 
ministerial talks in Jakarta, U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher 
found little support among his hosts for the U.S. call for concerted 
international action to ease the plight of Ms. Suu Kyi and her followers.

The U.S. is already a step or two behind the European Union in its efforts to 
rachet up the pressure on Rangoon. The recent death of honorary Danish 
consul James Nichols while in Burmese custody has sparked a movement to 
boycott European companies doing business with the regime.

Already, two major European companies have abandoned their Burma ties 
under pressure from human-rights activists. Earlier this month the 
Danish brewer Carlsberg AS abandoned plans to build a brewery in Burma; 
a day later, Dutch brewer Heineken NV announced that it, too, would 
withdraw.

Private Talks

Mike Jendrzejczyk, the Washington director of Human Rights Watch/Asia, 
said that despite the public rhetoric, U.S. efforts to consult with Asean 
governments on Burma policy haven't been entirely unwelcome. He said the 
governments involved are quietly discussing "contingency plans" if another 
violent crackdown on Burmese democrats occurs.

The Senate Burma provision wouldn't effect U.S. companies already 
operating in Burma. According to Investor Responsibility Research Center, 
a  Washington-based group that advises investors, these companies include 
McDermott International Inc., B.J. Services Co., Halliburton Co., Dresser 
Industries Inc., Baker Hughes, Inc. and Triton Energy Corp. By far the 
company with the most to lose from any disruption is Los Angeles-based 
Unocal. The exploration company owns a 28.26% share of a $1.2 billion 
joint venture to develop the giant Yadana natural gas field, southwest of 
Rangoon in the Andaman Sea.

According to a Unocal briefing paper, the company already has paid more 
than $6.6 million to the Burmese government for drilling rights.

***********************************************************

AFP: SUU KYI DEFIANT AMID CALLS FOR HER ARREST. 
July 29, 1996

The Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi told supporters 
outside her residence in Rangoon yesterday that going to jail for one's 
beliefs was a sacrifice worth making, as the official media called for 
re-arrest.

Addressing a crowd of about 4000 in heavy rain outside the house 
where she was held for six years, Ms Suu Kyi said: "We go to jail as a 
sacrifice for our beliefs...this is something to be proud of...not to be 
embarrassed about."

The comments followed a call for the arrest of the Nobel peace laureate, 
who heads the main opposition National League for Democracy, in 
yesterday's Mirror.

An open letter accused Ms Suu Kyi and her "rabble" of blatantly voilating a 
law passed last month that prohibits political activity judged to obstruct the 
military Government's national convention to frame a new constitution. 

"One woman and her cohorts are taking advantage of the broad-mindedness 
of the authorities by blatantly defying the law to hold public meetings every 
weekend," said the letter, sent in the name of a "patriot".
	
"It is time to take legal action by arresting this woman and her 
cohorts as well as the rabble who go to listen to her speeches.
	
The law, passed after more than 250 party delegates were rounded 
up in advance of a party convention in May, effectively bans any mass 
political gathering not sanctioned by the state and threatens jail terms 
of up to 20 years.
	
A commentary in the Mirror also advocated legal action against 
the activist and her supporters for directing false accusation against 
the Government.
	
"Suu Kyi not only violates prescribed laws but insult the Government, 
belittles the military, calls for economic sanctions and acts as a foreign 
stooge," said the commentary signed by Pe Zaw Gyee.

On Friday, about 10,000 representatives of 21 non-governmental 
social and service organisations, including the Red Cross and the writers 
Association, staged a rally in Rangoon in support of the Government.

************************************************************

NATION: SUU KYI DENIES POWER LUST
July 29, 1996

RANGOON - Burma opposition leader Aung San Sub Kyi, who has
called for an international economic boycott against the ruling
military junta, has denied official accusations that her party is
motivated by hunger for power.

Suu Kyi was responding to official accusations that her National
League for Democracy [NLD] is in cahoots with external elements
and that its elected officials who have been stopped by the junta
from taking office are seeking to grab power.

"We have never demanded power, we are only asking for the right
of elected candidates to be able to take up their
responsibilities according to the mandate given by the people," she said.

She was speaking to more than 4,000 people who turned out to hear
her weekly public talk on Saturday. The one hour meeting ended
without incident.

The majority of elected candidates belong to Suu Kyi's NLD, which
nearly made a clean-sweep of the 1990 general elections, the
results of which have been ignored by the ruling junta. AFP

********************************************************

BKK POST: HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES IN BURMA
July 29, 1996

THE military regime in Burma faces steadily stronger pressure
from the international community. The EU parliament has appealed
for total isolation of the regime, the Nordic countries want
economic sanctions and recently the USA and the EU Commission
gave an unusually sharp warning to the junta.

The abuses in Burma include political murder and systematic
torture: Political arrests, surveillance and harassment. The
abuses hit the country's opposition, and ethnic minorities.
Thousands of children are forced into slave labor... The regime
set aside the will of the people by annulling an election and
persecuting its winner (1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San
Sub Kyi). It is good that the pressure is increasing, but we
would prefer to see that world society no longer hesitated in
imposing a full boycott of the regime.

China claims ... The West is reacting against Burma for
"ideological reasons." It is of some comfort that few nations
today would agree that criticizing torture, slavery, terror
against minorities and narcotics sales are "ideological meddling.

*********************************************************

BKK POST: FIRMS LIKELY TO CONTINUE GAS PROJECT
July 29, 1996
by Boonsong Kositchotethana
Kanchanaburi

 CHANCES appear remote for the French and American energy groups,
Total and Unocal respectively, to withdraw their involvement in Burma's 
Yadana gas project in spite of stepped-up calls for sanctions to force 
political changes in that country.

Industry Minister Chaiwat Sinsuwong and Mr Pala Sookawesh,
governor of the Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT) which will
import the bulk of the offshore Burmese gas, subscribe to the view.

Mr Chaiwat said his recent discussion with Total executives
indicated that they are  not worried about the campaigns by some
European human rights groups to force its withdrawal from the $1
billion Yadana scheme.

"I too don't think of any problems," he said.

PTT chief Pala said Yadana, with confirmed recoverable gas
reserves of 5.7 trillion cubic feet (tcf), is like a "jewel in
the crown" which everybody wants to possess.

"I think France has its way of dealing with things and does not
easily yield to pressure, he said. "Look at nuclear power plants.
While there is a worldwide opposition to it, they continue to
build new ones," he said.

Mr Pala said there are other international energy companies, like
the Japanese, which are eager to take over the Yadana interests
of Total and Unocal if the two were forced to pull out.

Total has 31.24% shareholding in Yadana, Burma's largest known
offshore gas field, with Unocal having 28.26%, PTT Exploration &
Production Plc of Thailand (part of PTT) holding a 25.5% and
Burmese state owned Myanmar Oil & Gas Enterprise having 15%.

Human rights groups in the West have been critical of Total and
Unocal's particiaption in the project, saying it was tantamount
to supporting the Burmese junta's dictatorial policy.

While in Kanchanaburi on Saturday to inspect the route of the
pipeline that will transport the Yadana gas to Thailand, Minister
Chaiwat reiterated Thailand's adherence to ASEAN's "constructive
engagement" policy towards Burma.

"We will not get involved in Burma's internal affairs and would
rather cooperate with them economically," he said, defending the
Thai stateowned energy agency PTT's involvement in the project.

Burmese democracy campaigner Aung San Suu Kyi called in a
videotape smuggled out of the country two weeks ago for
international sanctions to be imposed on Burma to force 
political changes. 
     
"What we want are the kind of sanctions that will make it quite
clear that . economic change in Burma is not possible without
political change," she said in the videotape, made public by
members of the European Parliament.

Mr Chaiwat stressed the need for Thailand to secure energy from
external sources like Yadana to meet the domestic fuel demand for
power generation which is rising at a rate of 1,000-1,200
megawatt a year.

"If we don't use gas, we need to use oil which is more expensive
and not-as much environmentally friendly."
     
The minister and the PTT governor talked about Thailand's
intention to increase its gas purchase volume from Burmese and
other sources including Burma's Yetagun, located south of Yadana
in Andaman Sea. PTT is due to sign Yetagun gas deal with the
group led by US oil firm Texaco shortly.

Mr Pala said the 260-kilometre pipeline on the Thai side, to be
built from Ban Etong, Thong Paphum district Kanchanaburi, to the
Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand's 4,600 -MW power
station in Ratchaburi, will have the capacity to take additional
gas from other offshore Burmese fields.

PTT has contracted to import 525 million cubic feet per day
(MMcfd) of Yadana gas and some 200 MM cfd from Yetagun. The Thai
section of the pipeline 42 inches in diameter can deal with 1,000
MMcfd of gas throughput.
     
Mr Chaiwat said all works related to the development of Yadana,
320 km south of Rangoon, both on the Burmese and Thai sides are
proceeding well.

He quoted Burmese Energy Minister Khin Maung Thein as assuring
him during his recent trip to Rangoon that all supports for the
Yadana development including the construction of a port in Tavoy
in southern Burma, and the 340km pipeline, are in place.

The Burmese minister also brushed aside the most concerned threat
possible attacks by  ethnic Karen and Mon guerrillas against the
parties involved in pipe-laying,on the 65-km stretch, which
passes through the country's southeastern region close to the
western Thai borders.

Maximum security, he said, will be deployed against any possible
attempts to sabotage the pipeline.
     
Five members of the Yadana pipeline route survey team were killed
and 11 others wounded by heavily armed attackers in Kanbauk, near
the  western end of the pipeline, in  March 1995. The attackers
are believed to be part of the anti-Rangoon resistance force and
all the victims were Burmese.

Since then there have been no reports of similar incidents.

Thai liaison officials after talks with their Burmese
counterparts said there were moves indicating reconciliation
between the Rangoon regime and the ethnic groups.

According to the PTT governor, PTT,' rough its consultants is
undertaking an additional environmental impact assessment study,
particularly on the aspects of forest and wildlife in the Thong
Paphum district where the gas pipeline will be laid.   

Pala said PTT has been mindful of concerns about the impact on
environment from the construction of the pipe line over a 
watershed area with  "A-l"conservation status in the western Thai region.
     
The PTT chief said the most sensitive area is a 6-km stretch,
from the kilometre post of 18-24, which a previous study
classified as "jungle" in the truest sense.

********************************************************

IHT: ASIAN FIRMS BRIDGE BURMA GAP.
July 27, 1996 (The International Herald Tribune)

When Heineken NV recently announced it was withdrawing from a $30 
million brewery investment in Burma, its Singapore partner said it would 
take over the share of the Dutch brewer.

A couple of days later, Mr Thein Tun, one of Burma's wealthiest 
businessman, said he was negotiating with Malaysia's Asia-Euro Brewery 
Sdn Bhd to continue a separate brewer Carlsberg AS abandoned after months 
of pro-tests by human rights activists.

As groups in the United States, Europe and Australia critical of the 
Burmese military regime intensify pressure on companies and consumers 
to boycott Burma, other firms - especially those from Asia - seem only 
too happy to step into the breach.

A Western businessman "who frequently visits Burma said that if 
companies from the US and Europe were forced out of Burma, "more Asian 
companies will step in because they want to capitalise on the attractive 
business opportunies there."

Since the Burmese armed forces seized power in 1988 and strated 
to open the State-controlled economy to market forces, foreign investors 
- including Australians - have committed over $US 3 billion ($3.8 
billion) to a range of projects there.

Heineken and Singapore-based food and beverage company Fraser and 
Neave Pte are partners in Asia-Pacific Breweries Pte.

Through Asia Pacific Breweries they had planned to take a 60 percent 
stake in a brewery they would build in Rangoon with Mynamar 
Economic Holdings Pte, a public company which the Dutch brewer 
acknowledged was effectively controlled by the Burmese military.

Now, Fraser and Neave will buy Heineken's equity in the Burma 
projects for an undiscloded price.

Mr Simon Koh, an analyst in the Singapore office of brokers Deutsche 
Morgan Grenfell, said the move should prove beneficial to Fraser 
and Neavce's profitability in the long term because there were only two 
foreign brewing licensees in Burma.

"There will be start-up costs, but in a few years' time Fraser and Neave 
will have a larger (market) share," he said.

Burma, with its rich mineral, timber and fisheries resources, is rated by 
some analysts and businessmen as a new frontier for development in 
South-East Asia.

However, Western lawmakers are considering economic sanctions to 
make the Burmese military ease political repression and talk seriously to 
Ms Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace prize laureate who heads the 
opposition National League for Democracy.

She has called on foreign investors to withhold projects that benefit and 
strengthen the State Law and Order Restoration Council junta, rather than 
the people of Burma.

But Burma's ASEAN neighbours, as well as China and Japan - two 
other key economic players in Burma - refuse to go along with puntitive 
measures.

The ASEAN countries, China and, to a lesser extent, Japan, argue 
that a policy of "constructive engagement", rather than isolation, is 
likely to be more effective in bringing about economic and political 
change in Burma.

Western human rights groups vehemently disagree.

Western activists aiming to make Burma "the South Africa of the 
90's" have now set their sights on multi-national oil comapanies with a 
major presence in Burma, including Unocal, Texaco and Atlantic Richfield 
of the US, and Total of France.

However, Ms Carol Scott, director of corporate communications at 
Unocal's office in Singapore, said a shareholder proposal sponsored by 
Burma activist groups that would have required the company to review its 
international code of conduct was "defeated by over 95 per cent of our 
shareholders" at Unocal's annual meeting in June.

Unocal and Total have a joint venture with Myanmar Oil and Gas 
Enterprise, a Burmese State-owned firm, to develop a huge natural gas 
project in the Gulf of Martaban, south of Rangoon, at a cost of $US 1 
billion.

Starting in mid-1988, it will supply gas to Thailand by pipeline, 
and eventually to Burma as well.

Texaco, in partnership with Myanmar Oil and Gas as well as Nippon 
Oil of Japan and Premier Oil of Britain, is developing Burma's 
second-largest offshore gas field, also for sale to Thailand.

Ms Scott said that the joint venture in which Unocal was involved 
had already spent about $US 2 million on :"self-sustaining social and 
economic projects" in Burmese villages along the gas pipelineroute and 
more spending on schools, health clinics, roads and beidges was planned.

"Isolating Burma from the US through sanctions will only hurt the 
Burmese people," she said, adding that Unocal's involvement projects in 
Asia in the past 30 years had "taught us that promoting prosperity 
promotes a more open society".

**********************************************************

THE GUARDIAN: BBC WILL 'CONTINUE TO TELL TRUTH'
July 20, 1996
by Sam Younger, Managing Director, BBC World Service

" This is to inform you that the news about the reform of the BBC World 
Service touches our people here with cold hands", write Burmese students. 
They describe vividly how the BBC can be heard everywhere in Burma. 
The military regime has "shut our eyes, as a country in the dark. People 
listen to the BBC every morning and night. Please keep the BBC World 
Service, dont' split it, please let the Burmese people rely on BBC".

Whenever the future of the World Service becomes an issue there is intense
interest among listeners and supporters worldwide. And although there is a
growing audience in the UK, you have to travel overseas to appreciate fully 
how much goodwill it generates for this country [Britain]. By providing a 
trusted source of information in closed societies, the World Service is 
literally a lifeline. Even in the media-saturated United States, where 
World Service programmes are now increasingly available on FM as well 
as short wave, there is a dedicated and growing audience. Concerned about 
the future, this American listener writes: "It is the best news organisation in 
the world. I pray that the BBC World Service will always remain where and 
what it is". Over the years, the main topic that has made the headlines has 
been funding - indeed, the Burmese service itself was nearly a victim of 
financial cutbacks in the early 1980s, but was reprieved. Today funding 
is still a central issue. This year's cuts have only affected the money the 
World Service is allocated for capital investment. Next year, further 
reductions are planned by the [British] Government, not just in the 
capital budget but also, more worryingly, in the budget for broadcasting 
operations. We face a prospective shortfall of L5 million. The closure of 
some language services will be the only solution if the planning figures 
are not changed. Today's concern, however, is not just about funding. 
It also centres on the very structure of the World Service and how it fits 
into the BBC as a whole as the corporation prepares itself for the digital 
age. Should the World Service be exempt from the restructuring of the 
BBC - should it stand alone and beat its own path into the 21st century?

And should our listeners, whether in Burma or the United States or here 
in Britain, be so concerned? That they are concerned, and have made 
their views known so vigorously, is a measure of the esteem in which 
the service is held. Much has been written, and quite rightly, about the 
need to preserve the ethos of the World Service: in particular, the need 
to protect the relationship within Bush House [WS headquarters] between 
the newsroom and their colleagues in more than 40 language services - 
like a "United Nations that actually works", as one distinguished former 
colleague described it. When the restructuring was announced last month, 
the answer was not immediately clear. Much detail had to be worked out 
to establish arrangements that would work effectively for our listeners. 
More work has to be done, but some of the most important aspects have 
already been agreed and I believe they can work. The World Service 
will remain a specific entity in its own right, responsible for the key 
relationship with the Foreign Office, and will have full managerial 
and editorial control of all programme commissioning. News and 
daily programmeswill be commissioned by the current editor from 
a team that will remain adistinct unit dedicated to World Service 
output. It will be involved in key editorial appointments, and in staff 
training and development. Similar arrangements for non-daily news 
programmes and the rest of our English programmes are being worked 
out. But as with news, the arrangements will have to guarantee the 
distinctive nature of our programming and the supply of information 
to non-English services, whose programmes will continue to be produced 
as well as commissioned by the World Service.

Over the long term, I believe the changes could help us to improve the 
programme quality and reduce costs. So long as [British] governments 
sustain their commitment  to the World Service, listeners can be quite 
sure that their eyes will remain open.

***********************************************************

ANNOUNCEMENT: HUNGER STRIKE IN JAPAN ON AUGUST 8
July 29, 1996

More than 20 students and members form Democratic Burmese
Students Organization (DBSO-Japan) and 8.8 Group of Japan will stage 
a 48-hour long hunger strike in Hibia Park in Tokyo, Japan on August 8, 
1996 at 8.00 a.m. Other members from Burma Youth Volunteer 
Association (BYVA-Japan), Burmese  Association in Japan (BAIJ), and 
National League for Democracy (NLD-Japan-Liberal Area) will also join 
after they finish the demonstration on that day. Over one hundred 
Burmese and Japanese will partake the strike.
 
 Demands:
 
1. To ban all Japanese companies doing business with the junta so-
called State Law and Restoration Council (SLORC).
2.  To boycott "Visit Myanmar 1996".
3.  To stop ODA aids to Burma.
 
Respect:
 
They will sacrifice their daily food for encouragement of democracy 
movements in  Burma and world communities. 

*********************************************************

ANNOUNCEMENT: BURMESE CULTURAL PERFORMANCE
July 29, 1996

Burmese Arts and Photo Exhibition and Cultural Concert
Please come and experience traditional and cultural performances of  
Burmese and ethnic groups including twelve-month festival dance
( Tse Hnit La Yarthi), Burmese oil-lamp dance (Hse Mee Khwet), 
Marionette dance (Yote Thae), duet dance (Myaing Hta Hna Parr Thwar), 
Pagan Dance, royal maid dance (Sindaw Minthamee),  "Thingyan" 
folk dance, ethnic Mon's Solo dance (Mon Dabindine) and folk dances, 
ethnic Shan's Sword dance (Shan Dah Thy) and ethnic Pa-O folk dances 
as well as historical drama.

Please enjoy paintings by Burmese artists and photo exhibition.
Please come have a taste of Burmese dishes and enjoy the Burmese 
gift show.

Concert

Date	: 8-10 August 1996
Time	: 6:00 p.m. (18:00)-9:00 p.m. (21:00) daily
Place	: (Goethe) Thai-German Cultural Foundation

Arts and Photo exhibition

Date	: 8-14 August 1996
Place	: In the exhibition room of Thai-German Cultural Foundation

Tickets for the Culture Concert: 

Traditional Burmese dance/opera, Burmese food, 
Photographic and Arts exhibition.

General	: 188 Baht
Student	:   88 Baht

Tickets available at:

		1. "Nai In" Bookstore-Ramkamhaeng, Taa Prachan
		2. "Duang Kamol" Bookstore-Siamsquare
		3. Asia Bookstore-Sukhumvit Soi 21
		4. Thai-German Cultural Foundation (Goethe Institute)


Organized by  :
Thai Action Committee for Democracy in Burma (TACDB)
For more information,  please call (662) 216-4463 (TACDB)

********************************************************

LETTER: BURMA AS THE NEW BOSNIA
July 28,1996

I normally do not post messages to this newsgroup, but recently I have 
read several articles that I feel require some sort of response.  It all 
began with the former Prime Minister of Singapore stating that only the 
Burmese military was able to unify the country. Recently, Thai officials 
said they were afraid that if the military lost control, Burma would 
disinigrate into another Bosnia.  In addition, if SLORC collasped, China 
and India would carve up Burma.  It would be easy to dismiss these 
comments as special pleading by leaders of countries with strong business 
ties with Burma's military junta, but appears that this may become the 
"official" ASEAN line to justify its policy with regards to Burma.  
Consequently, I feel a rebuttal of this line of reasoning is in order.

To begin with, it would be more accurate that say that Bosnia has become 
another Burma.  It is laughable to see Thai and Singaporean leaders so 
concerned with a possible ethnic conflict in Burma when the fact is that 
there has been a civil war in Burma since 1948, well before the Bosnian 
civil war.  One wonders why the Thais in particular are suddenly so 
concerned since they have aided many of the ethnic insurgents over the 
years.

Of course, the main issue here is not the historical accuracy of the 
analogy, but the underlying assumption that the Tatmadaw is the only 
unifying force in Burma and that if SLORC is replaced by democracy the 
country will slide into chaos.  However, this assumption is also flawed. 
As Maritn Smith pointed out, following the 1962 military coup, the pace 
and scope of insurgency increased rather than decreased.  The current 
uneasy peace that prevails in Burma is due to the fact that the Tatmadaw 
has finally been able to win the military struggle against its opponents, 
but it still has not been able to politically unify the country.

In fact, I would argue that SLORC's continued control of the country 
depends on creating disunity and divisions within the country.  Despite 
its proganda about the "Non-disengration of the Union", SLORC has in 
fact done everything possible to encourage the balkanization of the country.  
I base this observation on policies that SLORC has embarked upon since 
its illegal seizure of power.

The most obvious example is the ceasefire agreements with the various 
insurgent groups.  SLORC has refused to negoiate with any umbrella 
organizations thereby splitting the opposition.  In addition, these 
ceasefire agreements simply write off large chunks of territory from 
central government control.  For instance, I have been told that in the 
territory controlled by the Wa, the kyat is not accepted.  Instead people 
use Chinese yuan or British colonial silver currency.  Allowing a foreign 
currency to replace the local curency is strange behavior for a regime 
that is dedicated to preserving national unity.  Furthermore, in 
assigning territory to the insurgents, SLORC has created ethnic tensions. 
SLORC has given the Kokang insurgents control of a Kachin-majority area 
outside of Kokang.  In addition, SLORC has given territory in the Mong 
Hsu ruby mines to different ceasefire groups.  While this might be 
viewed as a case of sharing wealth, in actual practice it puts the former 
insurgents in economic conflict and encourages them to think of their own 
economic interest rather than national unity.

SLORC also seems to be fomenting internal conflicts by allowing a large 
influx of immigrants from China.  Almost all the Burmese I have talked 
to in Thailand, the US or Burma have commented on this influx and 
deeply resent it.  Although this phenomenon has been widely commented 
on, it does not seem to have been analyzed in great detail.  In my own 
opinion, this influx only makes sense as a policy of SLORC's to provide 
a scapegoat in the future.  Despite the fact that Burma is rich in natural
resources, the scale of the Chinese influx makes no sense economically.  
China's economy is much better than Burma's.  In almost all cases, people 
move to a better economy rather than a poor one.  There are undoubtably 
numerous economic opportunities in Mexico, but very few US citizens are 
crossing the Mexican border illegally.  Unless there were special 
incentives, I suspect that Chinese in Yunnan would try their luck in 
Shanghai rather than Mandalay.  In the Kachin State, non-Han minorities 
from Yunnan have also been encouraged to move to Burma.  Lisus who 
have been displaced by dam projects in Yunnan have been settled around 
Myitkyina with help from both the Chinese and Burmese government.  
These new immgrants are loyal to SLORC and have been in conflict with 
the local population, even with some of the local Lisus.  Undoubtedly, this 
is what SLORC wants since these local conflicts increase disunity among 
the people and deflect anger from the military.

If I may digress a bit at this point, let me also suggest that ASEAN's 
attempts to counter Chinese influence in Burma by means of "constructive 
engagement" is also flawed.  The simple fact is that SLORC rules by 
means of the gun.  Since China supplies SLORC with guns, China has the 
ultimate influnce over SLORC's behavior. Unless someone else is willing 
to supply guns to the brutal regime in Rangoon, no amount of investment 
by ASEAN or Western countries will change SLORC, nor will it weaken 
China's influence.  If it has to choose between increased investment or 
guns, SLORC will choose guns. It is simply a matter of survival.  
Consequently, as long as the military controls Burma, China will continue 
to "carve up" the country as the ASEAN countries fear.  China's control 
over SLORC was clearly recognized by a Burmese acquaintence of mine 
in Rangoon who jokingly referred to SLORC as the "Chinese government" 
or the "Sino-Burmese" government.

If anyone still doubts that SLORC continued control of the country 
depends on divisiveness, they should consider the persecution of the 
Rohingyas in 1992 or the SLORC-aided KNU/DBKA split.  SLORC 
must continue to foment conflict between ethnic and religious groups 
in Burma in order to stay in power.  If everyone else in the country is 
divided, then the unified military, aided by its access to outside funds 
and political support, is the strongest force in the country.

Actually the Bosnia anology might be appropriate.  As I understand it, 
the conflict in Bosnia was caused by power-hungry, self-serving men who 
incited ethnic and religious conflict as a way of increasing their own 
power.  The outside world failed to react early to disastrous policies of 
these individuals and in some cases actually aided them.  By the time 
anyone attempted to stop the carnage, it was too late.  Those that truly 
wish to avoid a repeat of Bosnia in Burma should do everything possible 
to support the democratic forces in Burma rathter than support the 
military that is sowing the seeds of discord.

*********************************************************