The BurmaNet News, June 11, 1997

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------       
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"       
----------------------------------------------------------       
       
The BurmaNet News: June 11, 1997       
Issue #746

HEADLINES:       
==========     
THE NATION: HOPE FOR THE ENEMY
SLORC: INFORMATION SHEET NO.A- 0053
DANISH NEWSAGENCY RITZAU: JUNTA DENIES PARAQUAT
THAILAND TIMES: KNU PLANS TO RESUME PEACE TALKS 
REUTER: SINGAPORE, PHILIPPINES DEFEND ASEAN EXPANSION
REUTER: MALAYSIA'S PETRONAS MAY BUY TEXACO'S BURMA
REUTER: HEARING FOR UNOCAL BURMA SUIT DELAYED
BUSINESS TIMES: WILL EUROPEAN UNION FREEZE OUT BURMA?
TT: THAILAND SHOWS PROOF OF BURMESE OFFENSE
BKK POST: OFFER TO REDUCE WIDTH OF PIPELINE
BKK POST: ACTIVISTS MOUNT PRESSURE ON PTT TO REROUTE
BKK POST: BURMA DECISION BAD FOR IMAGE
-----------------------------------------------------------------     

THE NATION: HOPE FOR THE ENEMY
June 8, 1997

Forgive not forget? "once the truth has been admitted, forgiveness is more 
possible. Denying the truth will not bring about forgiveness, neither will it 
dissipate the anger in those who have suffered."

* The following are extracts from interviews with Aung San Suu Kyi,in 
Aung San Suu Kyi, The Voice of Hope. Conversations with Alan 
Clements. Published by Penguin. Bt297. Available at Asia Books.

Q - Alan Clements: In examining the crisis in Burma it is easy to focus 
on the vast divisions between those struggling for democracy- the National 
League for Democracy (NLD) and the ones oppressing democracy- Slorc. 
Perhaps it's a premature question, but are there actual places of goodwill 
and trust between both sides - areas when you can find some sense of 
genuine connection?

A - Aung San Suu Kyi: I would like to think there are but we have not 
been given an opportunity to find out. This is why we say that dialogue is 
so important. How can we find out if there are places where we can meet, 
issues on which we can work together, unless we talk to each other? But I 
heard a rather shocking report about an interview with one of the Slorc 
ministers by a foreign journalist. The minister said, 'You can do anything 
with money. If you hold a ten dollar note above a grave, a hand will come 
out and reach for it. And if you held out a hundred dollar note, the whole 
body would come out.' That seems to indicate that they have no principles 
whatsoever. If they think that everyone can be purchased with money, 
that's a shocking revelation. 

Q - How would you define the collective psychology of Slorc?

A - My impression of them as a whole is that they do not know what 
communication means. They don't communicate, either with the people or 
with the opposition. And I wonder whether they even communicate with 
each other. If everybody in Slorc shares this minister's attitude, that money 
is what decides everything, then I have this rather unhappy image of them 
simply shoving dollar bills at each other.

Q - Many peace settlements are occurring around the world in the Middle 
East, in the former Yugoslavia, possibly in Northern Ireland and of course, 
the miracle that's occurring in South Africa. Slorc has a precious 
opportunity to follow suit - a reconciliation could occur. Now, you have 
repeatedly called for dialogue, but what is it that's preventing Slorc from 
saying 'Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, let's say hello, have lunch together, and 
see where it goes from there?'

A - That is exactly what I meant when I said they do not know how to 
communicate. I think they're afraid of dialogue. I think to this day, they do 
not and cannot understand what dialogue means. They do not know that 
it's a process that is honourable that it can lead to happiness for everybody- 
including themselves. I think they still see dialogue as either some kind of 
competition in which they might lose or as a great concession which would
disgrace them.

Q - In South Africa, Archbishop Desmond Tutu is leading the Council for 
Truth and Reconciliation. Already the former defence minister under the 
apartheid regime has been indicted for his complicity in the murder of 13 
people while in power. Now, if we were to put ourselves in the minds of 
some of Slorc's main players I would think that fear would be a legitimate 
concern. In other words, they have good reason to be insecure. Won't the
people seek revenge after democracy is won?

A - I think here they [Slorc] underestimate both the people and us as a 
movement for democracy. Obviously, there is some hatred among the 
people, especially among those who have suffered. However, we are 
confident that we can control this hatred. But there is no hate among the 
leaders of the NLD. The authorities find this difficult to understand. There 
are many in Slorc who feel strongly, against Uncle Kyi Maung, Uncle Tin 
Oo, and even U Win Htein (Aung San Suu Kyi's personal assistant, who 
spent six years in Insein Prison and was re-arrested on 21 May 1996),
because they are ex-military men who are actively involved in the
democratic process.

I think Slorc's reading of the situation is this: if these men, who themselves 
were in the military, are opposing them, they must be doing so out of 
vindictiveness. I do not think it occurs to them that these ex-military 
officers are supporting the democracy movement because they believe in 
certain principles. It goes back to what I just told you about waving a dollar 
note above a grave: people who think that anybody can be bought, that 
human minds and hearts are mere commodities, subject to the laws of 
supply and demand, such people would not be able to understand other 
human beings who work for a cause and are prepared to sacrifice
themselves for that cause.

Mind you, none of these people we are talking about have done well out of 
joining the movement. They've suffered and their families have suffered, 
but they're still going on. And it's not as though they are unaware that they 
could be subjected to even more suffering.

Q - Is Ne Win [Burma's "retired" dictator] really the person you want to 
open a dialogue with? 

A - I don't know. I really don't know. That is what some people say. But I 
have no hard evidence either for or against the theory that he is still the 
power behind the throne. 

Q - There is a lot of pent-up anger among some people in this country 
towards the Slorc. When, and if your struggle for democracy succeeds, and 
perhaps you assume a major leadership role in a democratic Burma, can 
you guarantee that Slorc will not face criminal charges? 

A - I will never make any personal guarantees. I will never speak as an 
individual about such things. It is only for the NLD to speak as an 
organisation - a group that represents the people. But I do believe that truth 
and reconciliation go together. Once the truth has been admitted, 
forgiveness is far more possible. Denying the truth will not bring about 
forgiveness, neither will it dissipate the anger in those who have suffered.

Q - Can you envisage a Truth and Reconciliation Council in Burma after 
she gains her freedom? 

A - I think in every country which has undergone the kind of traumatic 
experience that we have had in Burma, there will be a need for truth and 
reconciliation. I don't think that people will really thirst for vengeance 
once they have been given access to the truth. But the fact that they are 
denied access to the truth simply stokes the anger and hatred in them. That 
their sufferings have not been acknowledged makes people angry. That is 
one of the great differences between Slorc and ourselves. We do not think
that there is anything wrong with saying we made a mistake and that we 
are sorry.

Q - You've said that the core psychological quality which drives a 
repressive authoritarian regime is 'insecurity'. How could someone who 
fundamentally operates from fear, which is really a mistrust of oneself, 
ever expect to bring genuine trust to a truthful dialogue? 

A - That's a very thought-provoking question. Perhaps what they should try 
to do is to love themselves better. Not in the selfish sense, but to have metta 
(a Buddhist term for loving-kindness) for themselves as well as for others. 
As you put it, if fear is motivated by lack of trust in oneself, it may
indicate 
that you think there are things about yourself which are not desirable. I
accept that there are things about me, as for the great majority of us, which 
are undesirable. But we must try to overcome these things - and improve 
ourselves.

Q - It probably goes without saying, but it seems rather obvious that among 
many Slorc generals, you are dealing with some primitive emotions - a 
stone-age level of consciousness ... Are some people just too far gone, that 
no matter what, they remain unredeemable?

A - According to Buddhism, there are people whom the Lord Buddha 
himself could not redeem. So who are we to claim that we would be able to 
redeem everybody? Since we don't know who's redeemable and who's not, 
we have a duty to try. We can't just write off somebody as beyond the pale. 
We should give people the benefit of the doubt.

Q - Do you believe in intrinsic evil? 

A - I have spoken about this to a number of people and I always quote 
something that Karl Popper said when he was asked, 'Do you believe in 
evil?' He said 'No, but I believe in stupidity.' And I think this is very near 
to the Buddhist position. I don't think there is a word for 'evil' as such, in 
Buddhism, is there? 

Q - Do you think that once democracy is won, Slorc fears [that] people will 
seek revenge? 

A - I would think it's quite natural that some of them [SLORC] should fear 
that a democratic government would in some way persecute them, or allow 
others to persecute them. 

Q - Do you have safeguards to minimise this possibility, that you've 
discussed among your colleagues? 

My colleagues and I are simply not interested in vengeance. 

Q - Slorc has a 400,000-strong army that has been trained to oppress its 
own people, or so it seems by their repeated behaviour. Obviously, within a 
democratic Burma you will need an army. Assuming democracy is 
achieved, what will happen to Slorc's army, of course with the generals 
removed?
 
A - It will be a better and more honourable army and one that will be loved 
by the people ...

Q - But Daw Suu, up to now that army is very much in the habit of 
oppressing its own people ... they seem trained to do so ... 

A - I don't think soldiers are generally trained to oppress. They are simply 
trained to obey and if they are trained to obey something that is good, then 
they can change very quickly.

Q - Clearly, your vision of a democratic Burma includes a genuine 
reconciliation with your oppressors Slorc. What do you think is required of 
the individual to confront his adversary and possibly win his friendship 
and understanding - not seeking to defeat him?

A - Well, it has to begin with oneself, doesn't it? You have to develop inner 
spiritual strength, and those who have it do not feel hatred or hostility, 
because they do not easily feel fear. It's all connected. If you can look upon 
someone with serenity you are able to cope with the feelings of hatred. But 
there cannot be serenity if there is fear. However, let me say, ordinary 
people like us, within the NLD, are nowhere near that level where we can 
look upon everybody with perfect love and serenity. But I think a lot of us 
within the organisation have been given the opportunity to develop 
spiritual strength, because we have been forced to spend long years by 
ourselves under detention and in prison. In a way, we owe it to those 
people who put us there.

Q - If in fact Slorc were to allow a parliament to convene based on the 
results of their free and fair elections in 1990, what do you envision would 
come?

A - If Slorc were to convene a parliament according to the results of 1990, 
we would certainly show appreciation for the gesture and we would 
certainly like Slorc included in the process of national reconciliation.

OUT TAKES
---------

Alan Clements: I've heard that your weekend public talks are videotaped by 
Slorc. Is that true? 

Aung San Suu Kyi:  Oh yes, I'm sure.

The reason I ask is that I was told by, quote, a 'reliable source', that a
Slorc 
general's wife is eager to see your tapes.  
Oh, how nice!

People the world over have  come to associate your name and life with 
bravery and fearlessness. Nevertheless, you consistently defer such 
compliments by saying that your NLD colleagues have suffered and been 
much more courageous than you ... 

You know, when I was a child I was afraid of the dark, whereas my 
brothers were not. I was really the cowardly one in the family. This is 
probably why I find it very strange when people think I'm so brave.

Is the Slorc responding positively to your [weekend] talks? 

They always respond. Always. That is why when some people ask me 'If 
Slorc's policy was to try to marginalise you, what would you do?'

I reply that they are not marginalising us. They are not even trying.

They keep me on the spot all the time. In a way, they are my unpaid PR. 

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

SLORC: INFORMATION SHEET NO.A- 0053
June 10, 1997

According to the news information by the Associated Press and printed in the
10th June " The Nation " newspaper of Thailand. The Southeast Asian
Information Network (Sain), claimed that 10,000 litres of pesticide called
Paraquat has been sold to Myanmar and even a larger sale is being
negotiated. We do not know what the real intention is behind this allegation
but this inaccuracy of information also reflects the reliability of this
information network.

This pesticide called Paraquat has been banned in some countries because it
is considered dangerous to the environment and human beings. But it is still
being widely used in U.S, U.K, Germany, Thailand and the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations has not put a ban on this
chemical. Neither, the government of Myanmar nor the private sector has any
plans to buy or import Paraquat. Moreover, Myanmar is mainly an
agriculture based country. The environmental issue is of great concern and
the import of any kind of pesticide must have the approval of the Pesticide
Law of Myanmar which is based on F.A.O code of conduct. Even if the
Pesticide Law permits the import and use of certain chemicals it may still
require formulation change in some pesticides for environmental safety.

Anyhow, the network's concern for the safety of the farmers and food
consumers is much appreciated but according to (A.P) a Sain representative
was quoted saying that, " This is the lowest form of business to export
others the poisons you have outlawed at home and to a brutal military
regime. " Unfortunately, this statement clearly indicates that this network
gives priority to bias reporting more than it should on the quality or
accuracy of the information which any respectable organization is obligated
to do so.

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

DANISH NEWSAGENCY RITZAU: JUNTA DENIES PARAQUAT IMPORTS, WHILE ZENECA
CONFIRMS SALE
June 10, 1997

This is an unofficially translated version of the Danish Newsagency Ritzau
story.

The military regimein Burma are now apparently denying the import of the
pesticide paraquat which the Danish firm EAC is co-responsible for producing
in Thailand.

Neither the  the Myanmar (Burma) junta, nor the private sector have plans to
buy or import the paraquat, according to an official statement from the
military government in Rangoon which was received by fax by the newsagency AFP. 

EAC owns 49 % of the factory Zeneca Agro Asiatic Ltd in Bangkok which is
producing paraquat and marketing it under the name Gramoxone.  The rest of
the shares are owned by the British Zeneca. The firm itself confirmed that
it sells 10,000 liters of paraquat annually to Burma.

At the same time when the military government denied the import existed, the
sale to Burma was defended by Steve Renshaw of Zeneca AGro.  He rejects the
accusations from human rights groups that the use of the poisonous herbicide
puts farmers health and life at risk.

"We see no reason to defend the sale of 10,000 liters of the product to
Myanmar because we trust that it is used according to the rules" said Steve
Renshaw to AFP.

Zeneca shipped the latest cargo of Gramoxone to Burma in January where it
was received by the distributer in Rangoon, Forward Company Ltd.

Apparently the company has taught Burmese farmers and civil servants about
the use of agro chemicals as recently as two- weeks ago.

EAC in Copenhagen does not understand the statement from the Burmese
military Government:

"I know of an export of 10,000 liters. But there has been no massive export
push as mentioned in the press" said Chief of EAC department Niels
Frederiksen from the directors secretariat at EAC.

The mother company Zeneca in London does not understand the message from the
Burmese Generals either.

"As far as I know the substance has been sold to Burma in small amounts
through joint venture companies. So I do not understand it," says Steve
Brown from Zeneca to Ritzau.

EAC was criticised heavily recently when it was discovered that Zeneca Ango
Asiatic exports the substance to Burma which are now facing international
boycott actions.  However, the export is not illegal according to Danish
legislation as Denmark has not put sanctions against Burma in place. 

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

THAILAND TIMES: KNU PLANS TO RESUME PEACE TALKS WITH SLORC
June 10, 1997
By Assawin Pinitwong

TAK: The Karen National Union (KNU) yesterday made tentative steps towards
dialogue with the Burmese junta, but reiterated its demand that Burmese
troops must halt their offensive against the Karen people before a ceasefire
can be signed, a border official said.

The official, who declined to be named, said KNU leader Gen Bo Mya met a
representative from the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) to
map out the possibility of future negotiations.

He said the junta had demanded Bo Mya's presence at the meeting, despite the
KNU's desire to send Supreme Commander Gen Tamla Baw.

The officer quoted Bo Mya as saying that the KNU has always longed for peace
with the SLORC and wishes that the junta would lay down its arms and sit
around the negotiating table.

Bo Mya said the KNU will begin a new round of peace talks with the junta as
soon as it puts a halt to its military activity and human rights abuses
against the Karen people.

The officer quoted Gen Bo Mya as saying that the Karen rebels, who have been
fighting for autonomy for nearly 50 years, are confused about what the
official SLORC line is on how to deal with's ethnic minorities.

He hinted of the rifts that are widely believed to have appeared in the
junta between the hardline Army Chief Gen Maung Aye and SLORC Secretary 1
Gen Khin Nyunt.

Yesterday's offer of negotiations comes after four previous rounds of talks
between the two sides ended in stalemate .

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

REUTER: SINGAPORE, PHILIPPINES DEFEND ASEAN EXPANSION
June 10, 1997
 By Uday Khandeparkar

 MANILA, June 10 (Reuter) - Singapore and the Philippines on Tuesday
defended a decision by the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN)
to admit international pariah Burma into their club, saying it would make
the group stronger.

 ``There would be a lot of common interest...to make ASEAN an important
economic bloc and also one with political influence,'' visiting Singaporean
Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong told a news conference, dismissing objections
by Western governments because of human rights abuses in Burma.

 The group decided 10 days ago to admit Burma, Laos and Cambodia into ASEAN.

 ``We know that the U.S. and Europe are unhappy with Myanmar's (Burma's)
admission but we have always taken a position that the internal situation of
a country is that country's concern,'' Goh said on the second day of his
three-day official visit.

 He said ASEAN believed it was better to engage Burma in constructive
dialogue so it could reform by looking at its neighbours.

 ``We don't believe that sanctions will work. We haven't heard anybody come
out with a better alternative than constructive engagement,'' he said.

 Goh said ASEAN members held a view that a country's internal affairs were
its own concerns.

 ``We know that many people are unhappy with human rights or so-called human
right abuses in countries within ASEAN. But we want to work together and we
do things our way.''

 Western countries led by the United States had put pressure on the group to
deny membership to Burma because of its human rights record.

 ASEAN currently comprises Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines,
Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam and the new members are expected to be
formally admitted next month.

 Philippine President Fidel Ramos, who jointly addressed the news conference
with Goh, also defended the group's decision to admit Burma as a member.

 ``We look at ASEAN as a family where you have strong, capable, economically
affluent and at the same time some poor and weak members who must be kept
together within the family,'' he said.

 ASEAN had grown into one of the most successful regional groupings because
of its policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of its neighbours.

 ``We want to uplift everyone regardless of economic or political situation.
As far as the internal politics within each country, well, we did not begin
ASEAN by examining that and excluding those that had a different system from
ours,'' he said.

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

REUTER: MALAYSIA'S PETRONAS MAY BUY TEXACO'S BURMA STAKE
June 10, 1997
By Raj Rajendran

KUALA LUMPUR, June 10 (Reuter) - Malaysian national oil firm Petronas is
studying the purchase of Texaco Inc's 42.9 percent stake in Burma's Yetagun
gas field, president and chief executive Hassan Marican said on Tuesday.

Texaco (TX) is the largest shareholder and operator of the field, which
has estimated gas reserves of one trillion cubic feet and lies 125 miles
off Burma's western coast in the Indian Ocean. It is being commercially
evaluated.

Marican said Texaco had appointed an investment banker to look for
buyers of the U.S. oil giant's stake.

``We have been approached by the investment banker. Yes, we are looking
and studying the opportunity,'' he told reporters on the sidelines of an
industry conference in Kuala Lumpur.

Texaco has said it might sell the stake.

Earlier this year, the United States imposed sanctions to protest what
it called political repression by the ruling military junta, banning
fresh investment in Burma by U.S. companies.

U.S. firms have been under pressure to withdraw from Burma by human
rights activists. High profile names which have pulled out of Burma
include U.S. soft drinks giant PepsiCo Inc (PEP).

But oil companies have also faced particular pressure because they tend
to be the biggest investors in Burma.

Unocal Corp (UCL) has a 47.5 percent stake in the US$1.2 billion Yadana
field, which plans to pipe gas to Burma and Thailand.

Texaco's Yetagun field is due to come on stream in 1999 and the
consortium has already signed a 30-year deal to sell 200 million cubic
feet per day of gas to Thailand.

At Texaco's annual shareholder meeting in May, the company said it might
sell the Yetagun stake, citing financial rather than human rights
concerns.

Later the same month, the U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets
Control (OFAC) said existing contracts entered into by U.S. companies in
Burma could proceed.

There are around 20 U.S.-based companies with direct investment or
employees in Burma. The largest are Unocal, Texaco and Atlantic
Richfield Co (ARC), the Washington-based Investor Responsibility
Research Centre said in May.

Oil companies have generally argued that unilateral sanctions have not
worked in the past and the best way to promote change is through
investment.

The U.S. efforts to raise human rights to the top of the Asian agenda
received a severe blow earlier this month when the Association of South
East Nations (ASEAN) decided to accept Burma, Cambodia and Laos as full members.

They are scheduled to join Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines,
Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam as members of the grouping at a summit
in Kuala Lumpur next month.

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

REUTER: HEARING FOR UNOCAL BURMA SUIT DELAYED
June 9, 1997

LOS ANGELES, June 9 (Reuter) - Lawyers for activists hoping to block 
Unocal Corp's development of a natural gas project in Burma postponed a 
hearing scheduled for Monday in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs asked a judge to push the hearing back to
September or October, but the judge did not set a specific date.

The $1.2 billion pipeline project is to carry natural gas from offshore
Burma to Thailand beginning next year.

The government of Burma, also known as Myanmar, has come under 
international criticism for its alleged human right abuses.

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

BUSINESS TIMES: WILL EUROPEAN UNION FREEZE OUT BURMA?
June 10, 1997
By Shada Islam 

EUROPEAN Union foreign ministers meeting in Luxembourg last week issued a
laconic two-paragraph reaction to Asean's decision to admit Myanmar. Europe
hoped for "continued close cooperation" with Asean, the brief statement said. 

Both sides shared the common values of democracy and human rights which
Myanmar would now also be expected to respect, the statement added. But the
conciliatory public line masks continuing divergences within the EU on how
to deal with Myanmar. And behind the scenes, EU
officials and diplomats say they are worried that the Asean move on Myanmar
could jeopardise the growing relationship between the two regions. 

"Clearly we can't interfere in Asean's decisions on membership," an EU
diplomat stressed. "But, we can't hide the fact that Myanmar's entry into
Asean will create problems." 

At the meeting in Luxembourg, Germany and France argued in favour of a
cautious European line on Myanmar. Their other EU partners went along with
the idea, but EU insiders stress that Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands
continue to favour stronger European action against the
country. 

Britain, which once sided with the softly-softly line taken by Germany and
France, now has a Labour government which is publicly committed to more
active protection of human rights. European diplomats and officials
specialising in relations with Asia warn that given these differences of
opinion in the EU, Myanmar's membership of Asean will present Europe with a
"difficult challenge" in the coming months. 

The difficulties ahead will be both political and of a more practical
nature, they say. European governments will be under pressure from their
human rights groups, trade unions and parliamentarians to stop any direct or
indirect dealings with a military government that they routinely accuse of
violating human rights. 

"The European Parliament won't hesitate to criticise us if there's any
friendly gesture towards Myanmar," warns an EU diplomat. European
Commissioner Manuel Marin told Asean in Singapore in February that the
European Parliament would never ratify Myanmar's protocol of accession to
the EU-Asean cooperation treaty. 

This means in effect that Myanmar will not be able to benefit from any
aspects of the EU-Asean agreement. Others in the EU say that Myanmar's entry
into Asean will present Europe with a host of practical challenges. 

"Don't forget that all 15 European governments have agreed that there will
be no high-level contacts with the Burmese military authorities," an EU
official said. "Also, Burmese government officials cannot be given visas to
travel to Europe." 

EU officials have met Yangon's military leaders at international gatherings
in the past, including a meeting of the Asian Regional Forum last year. Next
month, a "troika" of EU foreign ministers will go to Kuala Lumpur for talks
with Asean -- which by then will include Myanmar as a member. 

But there's a difference between sitting in the same room as Myanmar
representatives and actually talking to them about future regional
cooperation, EU officials say. 

"A great deal will depend on the attitude adopted by Asean itself," one
European diplomat commented. "If Asean insists that we talk to Myanmar, then
there could be a problem. But, frankly, we want to avoid a clash." 

The hope in Brussels is that both sides will be able to find a modus vivendi
allowing Europe to deal with the group's seven original members, while
keeping Myanmar out of the link-up. 

"Our hope is that everyone will be flexible on this issue," another European
diplomat stressed. "For us, cooperation with Asean is very important." 

Asean's decision to admit Myanmar comes at an important time in relations
between the two groups. Both sides have agreed to expand their political and
economic ties. A new programme of action is set to be approved by senior
officials from both sides in Bangkok in autumn. 

While they clearly were not able to persuade Asean to keep out Myanmar, EU
governments have made it clear that Yangon will not be asked to join the
wider Euro-Asian dialogue known as ASEM. Ten European and East Asian leaders
are set to meet in London next spring for the second ASEM summit. Britain,
which will host the meeting, has said Myanmar will not be invited.

The writer is a Brussels-based journalist who contributes to BT 

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

THAILAND TIMES: THAILAND SHOWS PROOF OF BURMESE OFFENSE
June 10, 1997
By Assawin Pinitwong

TAK: Thailand last night revealed what is thought to be a concrete evidence
confirming Burma's violation of agreements concerning the disputed Khok
Chang Phuak islet near the Moei River during a meeting of the Thai-Burmese
Technical Committee, border E security sources said.

Photographs showing the relief of the area before Burma demolished a wooden
fence surrounding the channel excavation site near Tambon Tha Sai Laud were
given as proof to support Thailand's claim of encroachment, the source said.

Over 100 Burmese villagers had reportedly been conscripted by the Myawaddy
authorities to pull down the 400-meter fence.

A Thai source said the photographs clearly showed that Burma broke bilateral
agreements, because part of the fence which sealed off the dredging site was
constructed 150 meters inside Thai territory. This was abundantly clear when
the photographs were compared with those taken by the Royal Thai Survey
Department, the source said.

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

BKK POST: OFFER TO REDUCE WIDTH OF PIPELINE
June 10, 1997
Suebpong Unarat

PTT worried about cost of delay

The Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT) is willing to reduce the width of
its gas pipeline through fertile forests from 20m to 12-15m, Korn
Dabbaransi, the Industry Minister, said yesterday.

The decision was reached at talks at Government House attended by Mr Korn,
Chucheep Harnsawat, the Agriculture Minister, and and PTT representatives.

Opposition has recently intensified against the pipeline project which will
start taking delivery of natural gas from the Yadana and Yetagun fields in
Burma in mid-1998.

Opponents, including local environmentalists and NGOs, say the 260km
pipeline will threaten the ecology and endangered wildlife species in
Kanchanaburi.

Laying of the pipeline began in February but the PTT, the project leader, is
afraid opposition will delay its 16.5-billion-baht project, forcing it to
pay a daily penalty of 40 million baht to the Burmese junta.

The PTT has said the pipeline will go through only 6km of fertile forests.

Mr Korn said the narrower route would necessitate felling fewer trees.
Moreover, PTT would cut as few trees as possible, removing some during
construction and replanting after.

The Forestry Department would determine the trees to be felled and those to
be removed to be replanted later, Mr Korn said, adding the PTT has agreed to
the proposal and to shoulder the increased cost.

The PTT would employ a more advanced engineering technique and would not
build the pipeline through forests during the rainy season to minimise the
impact, he added. (BP)

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

BKK POST: ACTIVISTS MOUNT PRESSURE ON PTT TO REROUTE PIPELINE
June 10, 1997
Wut Nontharit

Grassroots activists from Kanchanaburi have asked for support from the House
Environment Committee to have the Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT)
reroute its gas pipeline to avoid fertile forests.

Wisant Pongwitayapanu led a group yesterday to submit a letter to Ong-art
Klampaibool, the committee's spokesman, on the request for support at
parliament.

He said the 260-km gas pipeline running on the Thai side from Thong Pha Phum
district to a power plant in Ratchaburi province would pass through one of
the most fertile watershed forests in Asia.

"The pipeline is in a quake-prone zone and could also face terrorist attacks
mounted by ethnic minorities. Kanchanaburi people would be forced to live in
fear," he said.

The group proposes PTT lay the pipeline underwater stretching from the
Yadana gas field in the Gulf of Martaban up to Bang Saphan district in
Prachuab Khiri Khan province from where the gas could be delivered via a
connecting land-based pipeline to Ratchaburi.

The pipeline on the new route would be 30% shorter and cost less, Mr Wisant
said.

He also urged the House committee to examine PTT's spending on the project,
alleging that money had been given to villagers living along the pipeline
route and that PTT officials had been taking village headmen and members of
local administration organisations from these areas on entertainment tours
of Pattaya over the past two years.

The group also demanded the PTT reveal details of its contract signed with
the Burmese government to prove whether the building of the pipeline on the
Thai side would really have to be accelerated to meet the July 1998 deadline
as it had claimed.

Mr Ong-art said the House committee would discuss the complaint as an urgent
matter next week and invite the industry minister, the PTT governor and the
Forestry Department chief to testify.(BP)

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

BKK POST: BURMA DECISION BAD FOR IMAGE
June 10, 1997

At a recent meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Asean foreign ministers unanimously
agreed to accept Burma, Laos and Cambodia as new members of the regional
grouping. Upon his return to Thailand, Foreign Minister Prachuab Chaiyasarn
said he hoped people in the seven Asean countries would support Burma's entry.

Mr Prachuab's statement showed that Thailand was not afraid of any
repercussions from a US trade sanction against Burma, announced in May to
show Washington's displeasure with the ruling Burmese military junta.

Reacting to the Asean decision, House foreign affairs committee member
Noppadol Pattama (Democrat) said the grouping should delay the integration
of Burma until the junta agreed to improve human rights and promote
democracy in the country.

The junta's relentless suppression of pro-democracy groups, students and
ordinary people has caused economic hardship in the country. Thousands of
Burmese cross the border to look for jobs in Thailand every year. More than
20,000 Burmese students are also taking refuge in our country.

For years, Thailand has had to take care of these illegal Burmese
immigrants, who work in factories, farms, and the fishing industry. They
have taken away jobs that would have otherwise gone to Thai citizens.

The Thai government's support for Burma's entry runs counter to world
opinion. It creates a negative image of our country. The disadvantages of
our pro-Burma policy far outweigh its advantages because Thailand has to
take care of hundreds of thousands of illegal Burmese who are living and
working illegally in the country.(BP)

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