The BurmaNet News February 11, 1997

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

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

The BurmaNet News: February 11, 1997
Issue #635

HEADLINES:
==========
THAILAND TIMES: BURMA SENDS 10,000 GOVT TROOPS TO BORDER
THAILAND TIMES: S KOREAN LAWMAKER DEMANDS APOLOGY
BKK  POST: MINISTERS URGED TO TACKLE CRITICAL ISSUES
THE NATION: EU WARNING ON ASEAN TIES
THAILAND TIMES: SLORC INDICATES NEGATIVE SIGN FOR BRIDGE
BKK POST: NSC BACKS RELOCATION OF REFUGEES
THE NATION: MEMORIES AND TEARS IN HUAY KALOK
BKK POST: KARENS LIVE UNDER THREAT OF ATTACKS
BKK POST: PIPELINE DELAY SEEN AS COSTLY FOR PTT
ABSL: 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNION DAY OF BURMA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

THAILAND TIMES: BURMA SENDS 10,000 GOVT TROOPS TO REINFORCE DKBA AT BORDER
February 10, 1997
by Assawin Pinitwong 

TAK : Burma yesterday reinforced 10,000 troops to the aid of pro- Rangoon
the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army stationed along the border opposite this
province, in a move considered at preparation for possible retribution by
the Thai army, according to a Karen source.

The source from the Karen National Union (KNU), an ethnic minority group
fighting for autonomy from the military government, said that the troops
armed with heavy munitions including mortars, were now positioned near the
Burmese village of Thingan Nyi Naung, opposite this province.

A total over 3,000 people from inner Burmese towns of Moulmein, Kawkareik,
Paan, and Kyodo have been drafted by the Burmese army to work as porters for
the reinforcing troops, the source said. In the latest round-up, 42
villagers were picked up by the army in Myawaddy yesterday.

The Burmese army has a long history of forced conscription of civilians to
carry its troops' supplies to the frontline.

Saw Win, a Burmese villager who managed to escape yesterday's round-up, said
that he was queuing at a bus station in Kawkareik along with hundreds of
others when several army trucks moved in and surrounded the area. The man
said he ran as fast as possible to the safety and later reached the border
area opposite Mae Sot.

He said that many of those rounded up were members of the town's Muslim
community who were traveling to their hometowns to observe a religious festival.

The KNU source said the government reinforcement was the largest such move
to date in the border area.

Related News Excerpt- NATION: SLORC TROOPS ON MOVE, Feb. 10, 1997

The Karen National Union (KNU) expects intensive attacks will be launched
against rebel strongholds opposite the Thai border districts of Umphang and
Tha Song Yang, a KNU official, speaking at the Thai border town of Mae Sot said.

The official noted that the attacks would be the first since late 1995, when
Burma's junta and the KNU started negotiations for ceasefire. The two sides
have held four rounds of talks. (TN)

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

THAILAND TIMES: S KOREAN LAWMAKER DEMANDS APOLOGY FROM BURMESE GOVT
February 10, 1997
AP

SEOUL: A South Korean lawmaker who was denied entry to Burma demanded an
apology yesterday, accusing the Rangoon government of slighting his country.

Kim Sang-woo, a member of the National Congress for New Politics, the
nation's largest opposition party, called on the South Korean government to
file an official complaint to Burma.

The legislator was thrown out of Burma on Thursday after being temporarily
detained at the airport in Rangoon. He said he was bruised when Burmese
officials "grabbed, pushed and shoved" him onto the last flight of the day
to Bangkok, Thailand.

"I take the treatment as a serious slight on South Korea, " Kim, 42, said in
a statement yesterday.

Foreign Ministry officials were not available for comment. But national news
agency Yonhap, quoting un-named ministry officials, reported that South
Korea has started an investigation through its diplomatic mission. 

Without specifically saying why Kim was refused entry, Burma's military
government said Friday that Kim "blatantly interfered in the internal
affairs" of the country during his last visit to Rangoon in June 1996.

Kim said he made Thursday's trip to find out firsthand about Burma's
political situation. He planned to meet with Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of
the country's embattled democratic opposition.

Kim also was carrying a letter from Kim Dae-jung, South Korea's top
opposition leader, to Suu Kyi.

Burma is ruled by a military regime which seized power in 1988 after
violently suppressing pro-democracy street demonstrations. It held a general
election in 1990, but refused to turn over power to the winner, Mrs Suu
Kyi's National League for Democracy.

The military government has been criticized by the US State Department as
one of the world's worst human rights violators.

Kim said that upon his Thursday arrival in Rangoon he was taken to an
airport office, where immigration officials threatened him with arrest
unless he left.

He said he held proper travel documents and was given no reason for being
barred entry. His request to contact his ambassador also was ignored, Kim
said. The last flight to Bangkok was held past departure time for Kim.

When Kim refused to leave, Burmese officials grabbed him and took him to the
plane by force, the legislator said.
 
Burma has refused entry occasionally to other foreigners seen as sympathetic
to the democratic opposition. It applies arbitrary restrictions to Suu Kyi,
and has sometimes even denied diplomats accredited to Burma access to her.

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

BKK  POST: MINISTERS URGED TO TACKLE CRITICAL ISSUES
February 9, 1997

Singapore meeting put under pressure

Human Rights Watch today called on Asian and European foreign ministers
meeting in Singapore next week to address four critical human rights issues.

The private and global human rights group wants the ministers, in their
final summit communique, to condemn attacks on international humanitarian
and human rights workers; support calls for a worldwide ban on land mines;
back measures to protect migrant workers from discrimination; and support
United Nations' access to Burma.

Speaking from New York, the organisation said joint Asian-European
leadership was key to solving the issues.
				
European and Asian foreign ministers will meet on February 13 for the 12th
ministerial meeting between the European Union (EU) and the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). The next day an Asia-Europe (Asem) meeting
will be held. It will include 25 foreign ministers from Asean countries, the
EU, China, Japan and South Korea.

Discussions on the agenda for the meetings have taken place. Asean
governments have already signaled that certain subjects, such as East Timor,
would be ruled out, but others such as Burma might be included.

"This is an opportunity to make progress on some crucial issues," said
Sidney Jones, executive director of Human Rights Watch/Asia.

"With the killings of UN human rights personnel in Rwanda, the kidnapping of
UNHCR workers in Tajikistan and the killing of staff of the International
Committee of the Red Cross in Chechnya, it is critical for all governments
to signal their condemnation of these attacks and their determination to
protect the lives of humanitarian and human rights workers everywhere. The
Singapore meetings would be a great place to start."

On the land mines issue, some European and Asian governments, such as
Cambodia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Austria and Belgium, have strongly
supported the international campaign to ban the weapons that have maimed and
killed millions of civilians long after the end of the conflict for which
they were originally used.

Others, such as France, the United Kingdom, China and Korea have failed to
support a Canadian initiative to hold a conference in December 1997 that
would lead to a treaty banning anti-personnel mines worldwide.

"The Singapore meetings bring some of the strongest advocates of a global
ban together with some of the world's major manufacturers of mines," said Jones.

"If the latter could be convinced to support the ban, they would be making
an extraordinary contribution to human welfare and economic development in
some of the world's poorest countries."

Human Rights Watch urged the EU and Asean governments to discuss concrete
steps to improve the human rights situation in Burma.

Asean is considering bringing Burma into the organisation as a full member
this June, and both European and Asean governments, including France, the
United Kingdom, Thailand and Singapore, have major investments in Burma.

The harsh military government there, however, continues to engage in forced
labour, use children as soldiers and as porters for military equipment, and
arbitrarily detains its political opponents.

Moreover, it has thus far denied access to the Special Rapporteur on Burma
appointed by the UN Commission on Human Rights, as well as representatives
of other UN bodies, including the ILO.

"European investors and Burma's Asian neighbours have a joint stake in
seeing this country become more open and more transparent. A critical first
step in that process is to have regular visits by UN representatives. If
even that simple step is rejected, what kind of political or economic
partner is Burma going to be?" said Jones.

She noted that there was growing opposition to Burma's proposed Asean
membership among non-governmental organisations and political figures in
Asean countries such as Thailand, the Philippines, and Malaysia.

Human Rights Watch noted that every country attending the Asem summit in
Singapore faced problems with migrant workers, and increasingly, the problem
crossed regional boundaries: Vietnamese nationals in Germany and Filipina
maids in Italy have faced discrimination and physical abuse, as have
migrants who move across boundaries within Europe or within Asia.

The Singapore meeting could produce, at a minimum, mechanisms for addressing
common problems such as discrimination in the labour market, racist violence
and xenophobia, family reunification, and abuses committed against migrants
by police and immigration authorities.

It could also produce a commitment by all countries present to ratify the
Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their
Families, a UN treaty that is not yet in force because too few countries
have become party to it.

The Philippines, which is a party, could take the lead on this issue, the
group said. (BP)

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

THE NATION: EU WARNING ON ASEAN TIES
February 10, 1997

The European Union has warned that future relations with Asean would be
affected by Burma's entry into the regional grouping, according to a
diplomatic source.

At a meeting with Commerce Minister Narongchai Akrasanee in Brussels
recently, Deputy EU Commissioner Manuel Marin said it will be difficult to
implement agreements between the EU and Asean if Burma is a member, the
source said.

The EU-imposed sanctions include visa bans on Burmese leaders after the
junta cracked down on the democratic movement.

The source said Asean and the EU are prominent world groupings and their
relations must be respected. "The EU reiterated that it will not interfere
with Asean's decision to bring Burma into its fold," the source added. (TN)

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

THAILAND TIMES: SLORC INDICATES NEGATIVE SIGN FOR BRIDGE WORK
February 10, 1997

Bangkok : Burma's ruling military junta has refused to resume construction
works on the Thai-Burmese Friendship Bridge, saying that the "western
culture" which would flow into the country via Thailand would pose a
"security threat,' according to a reliable source close to Thai army.

"Burmese army chief Gen Maung Aye is known to be a staunch conservative and
an anti-West," said the source.

The military government also said that the bridge would be advantageous to
the flagging Thai economy, but would do little to improve Burma's dire
economic situation, the source added.

Construction of the bridge began in 1994 with the financing from Thailand.
Over 95 percent of the work has been completed now. 

According to the source, army chief Chettha Thanajaro last week phoned a key
member of the State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) to discuss the
issue, but received a negative response from Rangoon to resume the work.

Following that telephone conversations, the source said, a disappointed
Chettha decided to postpone the meeting he had planned with Maung Aye in Tak
province later last week.

The army chief had earlier expressed his confidence that the Burmese side
would respond positively to his request about the bridge construction. 

It is likely that the postponed meeting will take place later this month,
the source said.

Burma ordered a halt to the construction of the bridge in June 1995,
objecting to a causeway, built by Thais, linking Tak's Mae Sot district to a
controversial islet in the middle of Moei river that marks the two countries
boundary. Rangoon had accused Thailand of trying to alter the border
demarcation.

Both countries' authorities had agreed to build the bridge, aimed at
broadening bilateral trade at the Thai-Burmese border.

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

BKK POST: NSC BACKS RELOCATION OF REFUGEES
February 8, 1997

The National Security Council is fully supportive of the proposal to move
all Karen refugees camps 10 kilometres away from the border.

NSC deputy secretary-general Kachadpai Buruspat said relocation would
prevent possible attacks on the camps by members of the pro-Rangoon
Democratic Karen Buddhist Army.

The proposal came from Army Commander-in-Chief General Chettha Thanajaro
after last week's attacks on three Karen refugee camps in Tak by renegade
Karens.

Mr Kachadpai called for talks between the authorities concerned to explore
the possibility of relocation. He claimed the relocation would not result in
the creation of new problems.

He suggested that the Interior and Agriculture ministries find a suitable
site for new camps in a way that local people would not be affected and that
they would not cause environmental problems. There are about 50,000 Karen
refugees in Tak and 20,000 in Mae Hong Son.(BP)

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

THE NATION: MEMORIES AND TEARS IN HUAY KALOK
February 8, 1997
Yindee Lertcharoenchok

Questions abound but there seem to be few answers on how foreign intruders
managed to sneak into Thai territory to burn down two Karen refugee camps,
writes The Nation's Yindee Lertcharoenchok in Mae Sot. 


What remains today are the charred stilts and grey ashes of houses which
once made up the Huay Kalok refugee camp, a master showpiece that Thailand
has used to demonstrate to the world community how well the Kingdom treated
nearly 100,000 displaced Karens fleeing wars in Burma. 

Like Manerplaw, a romantic name which Western world leaders came to
associate with the headquarters of Burma's Karen guerrilla movement and
Burmese political exiles, Huay Kalok or Wangka in Mae Sot district of Tak
province has become a common name on the lips of anyone who thinks of a
Burmese refugee camp. 

Visitors to the site often departed with a good impression and memory of the
warm welcome extended to them by camp residents who, on the other hand,
subtly relate their miserable agony as well as their strong belief in a
better day through beautifully-rhymed songs. 

Even a group of Nobel Peace Prize laureates led by South Africa's Archbishop
Desmond Tutu, who toured the Thai-Burmese border in early 1993 to campaign
for Burma and the release of their fellow Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi,
was strongly moved by the plight of the refugees there and later cited the
place in their appeal before the United Nations Human Rights Commission in
Geneva. 

In the good old days outsiders visiting Huay Kalok were forced to pay an
entrance fee of Bt10 for their passage by local Thais, who rented out their
flat lands to harbour the Karen war victims. Even at that time, the
sprawling open camp of about one square kilometre could hardly be identified
as a fugitive shelter. 

It looked more like a big Thai border village, equipped with nearly all the
amenities except electricity. It had a primary school, a high school, a
hospital, a mosque, two Christian churches and a Buddhist temple, etc. 

Most important of all, camp residents enjoyed freedom and the luxury of
living in peace, something they never experienced while they were in Burma
where they always feared for their lives and were under constant threat due
to the fighting there. Also, the physical and mental harassment by the
Burmese Army was just too much to bear. 

They simply felt much safer and protected on Thai soil than back in their
homeland. 

To them, Huay Kalok was ''a home" and one of the most secure camps compared
to a dozen others stretching along the Moei and Salween rivers which, in
certain parts, serve as a natural boundary between Thailand and Burma. 

Still the Karens envy the Thais as a very lucky people, who despite their
ethnic diversity which includes some tribes of hill people primarily in the
North, live in harmony without racial problems or discrimination against one
another. 

Today, visitors to Huay Kalok can hardly recall how it looked before that
tragic night of Jan 28 when a group of about 100 troops of the Burmese Army
and the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) launched a lightning raid to
burn down the camp which houses about 6,700 Karen civilians. 

Thanks to the lack of wind, the fire that started about 10 pm did not
completely destroy all eight sections of the camp. Still it destroyed about
690 out of 1,020 houses, leaving some 4,000 people homeless. 

Only the Buddhist temple and houses in the neighbourhood, together with a
primary school, survived the torching. 

It was done deliberately. The DKBA cited religious discrimination when they
revolted and broke away in December 1994 from the Karen National Union (KNU)
which is under Christian leadership. About 14 kilometres to the north,
another group of Burmese and DKBA intruders staged a simultaneous attack on
Huay Bong or Don Pa Kiang in Mae Ramat district. Huay Bong, which was
located four kilometres from the border and sheltered some 3,800 refugees,
was equally unfortunate as the aggressors razed about 800 of the existing
1,500 houses. 

In Tha Song Yang district, about 60 kilometres north of the Mae Sot district
seat, Mae Hla, the largest Karen refugee camp which shelters over 25,000
civilians, was also the target of a raid that very same night. 

Unlike the attacks on Huay Kalok and Huay Bong where assailants faced
virtually no resistance from local Thai forces, the offensive on Mae Hla,
which began at 6 am the next day, encountered some tough defending by the
KNU and the Thai border patrol police who managed to encircle some 100
Burmese and DKBA troops. 

However, in the late afternoon, the aggressors, with heavy artillery support
from Burmese troops on the other side of the Moei River, managed to break
through the defensive lines and sneaked back to Burma. 

The heavy shelling and the ensuing clash forced the refugees to flee into
the jungle, seeking shelter in the rugged hilly terrain. Although a small
number of houses were destroyed, the fugitives are still too frightened to
pass the night in the camp, which straddles two kilometres along the Mae
Sot-Mae Sariang Highway and four kilometres from the border. 

Although both the Burmese Army and the DKBA are to be strongly condemned for
their crime against humanity and the feigned ignorance of international
territorial laws, the Thai Army and the Thai government are to be equally
blamed for their failure to protect Thai sovereignty against repeated
intrusions and to protect the lives of unarmed civilians living on Thai soil. 

While the DKBA claimed that their violence was intended to drive home the
refugees taking refuge in Thailand, the Burmese junta, in a statement
released shortly after the aggressions, said the DKBA's action was a
retaliation to the KNU's incursion into Burma in December which killed six
people in an attack on a DKBA village. 

The Burmese statement was partially true, but left out a very crucial fact
that KNU forces did raid a DKBA-controlled border area around that time to
kidnap some Thais who were carrying out an illegal logging business in
Burma. The Thai businessmen, who got the timber concession from the DKBA,
failed to pay a protection fee to the KNU, which considers itself still in
control of the logging site. 

Whatever the motives, a big question remains to be answered. How come the
Thai Army and security agencies failed to prevent such an act of terrorism,
even though local authorities had been repeatedly warned of imminent DKBA
attacks months ahead of the actual incidents? 

Moreover, why did a Thai Army unit, which was stationed on the Moei River
bank facing the Burmese Kawmoora camp, fail to resist or fight the armed
aggressors when they crossed the water and trespassed six kilometres deeper
into Thailand to attack Huay Kalok camp? 

Interestingly, refugees in Huay Kalok insisted that the Burmese and DKBA
troops, who dressed in black uniforms and darkened their faces with
charcoal, were transported to the vicinity of the camp in three Thai
vehicles that belonged obviously to some Thai businessmen. 

They were also adamant about the involvement and collaboration of the
Burmese Army saying that all orders and messages given through
walkie-talkies were in Burmese and not Karen. Also, they recalled, the
assailants shouted and threatened the frightened Karen refugees in Burmese. 

Before they set fire to the camp, they plundered like thieves, carting off
the meagre belongings of the refugees, including about Bt400,000 in cash, a
few hundred watches and other valuables they could find. 

Although no Thai houses in the adjacent Huay Kalok village was damaged in
the brutal raid, all the villagers were also frightened. Several villagers
who tried to seek shelter in neighbouring bunkers ran, instead, into the
aggressors who then robbed them. 

The brutal acts of aggression on Huay Kalok camp is a big slap in the face
of the Thai Army under the leadership of Gen Chettha Thanajaro, who has
forged close ties with the Burmese military junta. 

The 14-year-old shelter, the oldest Karen refugee camp, is just like a house
next door as it is located closest to the Mae Sot district seat and the
local Task Force 34, which oversees border security in Tak province, than
any other camp along the border. 

For better protection, nw Thai authorities are now talking about moving the
hapless refugees from Huay Kalok and Huay Bong to a site deeper into
Thailand. In fact, a relocation will not guarantee that the refugees will be
safe from more attacks from the powerful aggressors, who seem to want
nothing less than the total flight of all Karen fugitives into Burma or the
total annihilation of all the refugees. 

A visit to Huay Kalok today brings tears to those who saw its golden years.
And for a Thai visitor, it is even more painful as the charred remains speak
for themselves. It is a glaring reminder of what foreign armed elements had
done on Thai soil. 

Thousands of refugees, men, women, children and babies, are now living in
temporary makeshift shelters, made out of plastic and burned zinc sheets or
thatches, with just the clothes on their back. They still long for their
lost property and belongings. 

Many of them cannot sleep soundly at night for fear that they might be
attacked again. They pass the cold nights sleeping on the damp chilly ground
with their remaining belongings all packed up and ready to be taken away in
case of more armed raids. 

Emergency assistance from the Burmese Border Consortium, other Thai and
foreign relief agencies as well as individuals continue to pour in to
alleviate the immediate suffering of the needy. It is heartening to see
those fortunate ones, whose houses narrowly survived the torching, extending
a hand to help the less fortunate ones. 

Although Thailand has persistently refused to recognise the Burmese fleeing
wars in Burma as refugees, the fugitives of various ethnic stock such as the
Mon, Karen, Karenni, and Shan consider themselves qualified for refugee
status in accordance with international conventions. 

Their aspirations and hopes for better treatment have never faded and their
strong commitment to their cause is clearly reflected in a sign the refugees
in Huay Kalok pasted up on a charred tree, on the perimeter of the camp, in
their own handwriting and in their own English: 

''We request UNHCR monitor the refugee situation in Karen camps, not only in
Bangkok. 

''Attack of refugee camps is outlaw, according to international refugee rights. 

''We are not refugees only according to Thai law. Does international do the
same? 

''UN is formed by countries of the world to take care of the world and its
inhabitants. 

''We want to be Humans." The sign ends with ''Klox The Nine Stars".(TN)

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

BKK POST: KARENS LIVE UNDER THREAT OF ATTACKS
February 10, 1997

Move camps to safer place, says pastor
AFP, Mae Sot

Housed in camps along the Thai frontier within mortar range of Burmese
territory, almost 80,000 Karen refugees lead a precarious existence in
constant fear of cross-border marauders.

Rosalynn James, 60, arrived at the Wangkha camp outside of the Thai border
town of Mae Sot 12 years ago, fleeing before a Burmese govnerment offensive
against Karen rebels in eastern Burma.

Now she sits with her two daughters in the ashes of what was once her home
in the ruins of Wangkha, a week after Karen renegades with
charcoal-blackened faces slipped across the border and torched half the
hutsvin the camp.

Around her, neighbours are bringing sheaves of grass and leaves from nearby
fields to rebuild their homes despite their fear of a return of the
attackers who are believed to be backed by Burma's military junta.

James, an ethnic Karen school teacher originally from Rangoon, said: "I
don't know what we are going to do now, I'm just waiting for orders; whether
to stay or whether to go somewhere else".

Embarrassed by intrusions on Thai soil by guerrillas from Burma, Thailand
has proposed moving the 18 Karen camps along the frontier further inland and
away from the menaces of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA).

It is a solution favoured by the refugees, who have been living for two
years in fear of mortar attacks and late-night assaults by the DKBA, which
broke away from the main rebel force, the Karen National Union (KNU), and
made peace with the Rangoon junta.

"What we would like to see is to have the camps relocated to a safer place
far from the border and away from the range of heavy weapons, especially the
mortars," said Robert Htwe, a pastor who heads the Karen Refugee Committee.

The January 28 attacks was the first time Wangkha, home to about 6,500
refugees, had been directly targetted in its 12-year existence.

Some 10,000 people were left homeless in attacks on Wangkha and two other
camps further north the same night. Some 1,700 huts were reportedly torched
during the assault.

For two years, the residents of Wangkha have watched nervously as other
border camps were torched and shelled, all the while receiving an endless
stream of threats from across the border warning of more attacks.

"They are living in fear. They have no chance of running away because they
have no place to go," Htwe said.

Camp residents say that while the DKBA marauders set fire to the huts,
soldiers of Burma's State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) were
waiting outside the camp.

"You can see that the people are scared, especially at night," James said.
"They go hide in the fields outside the camp every night because they are
afraid the Slorc might come and take them away to be porters."

Although the Burmese military junta denies any current links with the DKBA -
who helped Slorc troops wipe out the KNU headquarters at Manerplaw two years
ago - border sources say Rangoon is clearly backing the attacks.

They say the Burmese junta is keen to see the refugees back in the belief it
would improve Burma's international image. (BP)

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

BKK POST: PIPELINE DELAY SEEN AS COSTLY FOR PTT
February 10, 1997

The Yadana gas project has been fraught with controversy not only in Burma
but also in Thailand. Local environmental activists oppose the pipeline
which they suggest would cut a wide swathe through pristine rain forests in
Kanchanaburi.

The failure to have the pipeline laid on time (mid-1998) would cost the
Petroleum Authority of Thailand dearly, to the tune of 10 billion baht a
year, and deprive it of much needed energy.

Pala Sookawesh, governor of the PTT, the sponsor of the Thai section of the
Yadana pipeline project, talks to Boonsong Kositchotethana ahead of the
public hearing on several issues set for tomorrow.

Q: Some environmental activists and non-government organisations have
charged that the 17-billion-baht gas pipeline would extensively damage the
fertile forest in Tong Pha Phum, Kanchanaburi, which it would go through. Is
there any truth in this?

A: The primary reason for the PTT's selecting the route, which would pass
through the 1A watershed, is because it would create less damage to the
environment, compared with the alternative routes.

The optional route along the Ban I Tong-Tong Pha Phum road, which has 300
sharp curves, would have a much greater impact on the environment since the
line would cut through the sides of several fertile forests.

The PTT has therefore chosen to lay the pipeline in the forest area where
decade-old mining trails exist or there is open space. Moreover, the PTT has
studied ways and means to minimise the environmental impact and has opted
not to lay the pipeline along the stream which would disturb the eco-system.

Indeed, the pipe-laying will have only a temporary effect on the environment
which can be restored to its original condition. There will be no permanent
effect because the pipeline will be laid underground and its sur face
graded. There will be no road built along the pipeline.

The total length of the pipeline, from Ban I Tong to Ratchaburi, is 260
kilometres. And the stretch that will go the declared forest area is about
50 km. But the truth is that only six km will go through the fertile area.

That six km stretch is from 19-26 km pipeline post (KP). For that sensitive
part we have adopted several measures and techniques to minimise the impact.

Narrowing the width of the pipeline's parameter for construction from 20
metres to 10 metres. The normal width is 30 metres.

Pulling the pipeline into the area rather transporting the pipes to the site
by trucks.

Avoid cutting big trees by bypassing the route where they are situated.

Not building the road along the pipeline. No ground activities will be
carried out after the completion of the pipe-laying.

Q: There are also suggestions that construction of the pipeline would
disturb the natural habitat of some rare animals - the colourful Rachinee
(Queen) crabs and the tiny Kitti bats. Is that correct? 

A: The pipeline route does not pass through their habitats. A field
investigation by Surapon Duangkhae, deputy director-general of the Wildlife
Fund Thailand, indicates that the habitat of the crabs is some two km away
from KP 33 of the pipeline. Kitti bats were found to look for food from a
cave in Sai Yok reserve, which is about one km from the pipeline's parameter.

The PTT has joined with the government, organisations, conservationists, and
local people to establish conservation projects for the crabs.

One possible impact on the bats is that the PTT will advise pipe-laying
contractors not to carry out work while those bats fly out of the cave to
look for food in the early morning and evening.

Q: Is it necessary for the PTT to lay the pipeline over that sensitive area?
Is there any chance of bypassing the area for the time being? 
A: All the areas of the pipeline routes are in the forest and wildlife
protection zones. But, as I have explained, we have chosen the route with
least impact, and restoration of the area will be carried out.

Q: The PTT has already awarded all the contracts related to the pipeline
based on the route, despite objections from environmentalists. Why did the
PTT do that ? 

A: The Yadana gas pipeline has already received approval in principle by the
cabinet, pending the National Environmental Board's endorsement of a further
environmental impact assessment study of forest and wildlife that the PTT
has been asked to complete.
We have urgently been undertaking the study in cooperation with the Forestry
Department and wildlife protection experts.

Given the stipulated timeframe and the take-or-pay nature of the Yadana gas
purchase contract signed with the group led by Total, the PTT needs to carry
out preparatory work while undertaking the study.

Q: What are the immediate steps the PTT intends to take to minimise the
environmental impact which the pipeline would create? 

A: The PTT will lay down measures to minimise the effects with contributions
from all organisations concerned. The project's environmental consultant is
Team Consulting Co. The Royal Forestry Department has joined the PTT to
survey endangered animals and forests in the process of the additional
environment impact assessment study. Comments, suggestions and opinions from
the conservationist groups, obtained from the February 11-13 technical
hearing, will be incorporated in the study.

The major point is that pipe-laying would not permanently affect the
environment since there would not be any road construction along the pipeline.

Q: What kind of assurance, or guarantee, you can provide to the public that
the pipeline would not harm the environment in the period prior to and after
construction? 

A: The PTT is happy to reveal information regarding the pipeline before,
during and after the laying work is completed. We also welcome members of
the media, government agencies and organisation to make site inspections at
any time.

Q: With growing opposition from environmental activist groups, there are
concerns that the PTT would not be able to finish the pipe-laying on time
for the delivery of Yadana gas from Burma. What is your view on this? 

A: The PTT does not consider moves of those organisations as an act against
it. They perform their roles. However, the PTT also has the role of ensuring
energy supplies for the kingdom. We can work something out to ensure maximum
benefit to the country as a whole. (BP)

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

ABSL: 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNION DAY OF BURMA
February 7, 1997

All Burmese Democratic Forces
Friend,
        We, Burmese Democratic forces based in India, will be celebrating
the 50th anniversary of the Union day of Burma on 12th  February, 1997 in
New Delhi, India. We'll be very grateful if you send felicitation of your
organization in time.

Committee of News and Information
(Union Day Celebrating Committee)
New Delhi, India.

Contact address
Ko Myat Thu
President 
All Burma Students League
makakha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Nyi Nyi Lwin
All Burma Students League
3, Krishna Menon Marg
New Delhi - 110011
Ph : 3017172/3016035
Fx : 3793397

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