ASEM's Burmese Challenge by Glennys

[brelief@xxxxxxx]

Monthly Column 

Burma Today Weekly No.8 
26th February 1998 

ASEM's Burmese Challenge 
by Glennys Kinnock, 
member of Parlaimentarians for Democracy in Burma  
 

 I travelled to Burma on a tourist visa in 1996 and I was able to meet
Aung San Suu Kyi. I left with proof on videotape of her staunch support
for the economic and political isolation of Burma. Changing planes in
Bangkok, I learnt that her car had been attacked and that she would no
longer be allowed to hold public meetings outside her house. Tragically,
nothing has changed in the last 18 months other than the acronym behind
which the military junta camouflages its particularly brutal brand of
government.  

 Burma is ruled by a military junta as tyrannical and secretive as any
the modern era has seen, and has been engaged in a systematic repression
of human rights. What sets the SPDC apart is slave labour and massive
displacement of whole sectors of the population. Indeed, no modern
state, however totalitarian, has relied so much on forced labour. The
truth is that tyrants only understand one language and that is the
reason why our object is a return to democracy in Burma. We have to call
for tough and workable economic sanctions.  

 On a recent visit to the United States, I learnt about their remarkably
successful grass roots disinvestment movement - modelled on the
campaigns intended to isolate apartheid South Africa. Selective
purchasing laws have been brought in by cities across America.
Unfortunately, in the European Union strong measures continue to be
blocked because of the determination of certain Member States to put
business and commercial advantage above values and principles.  

 The combination of the growth of the narcotics trade, and the economic
and social consequences of the Asian financial crisis clearly sounds
alarm bells around the region. In addition, the message has gained
ground that good governance - rather than unelected strongmen - is more
likely to deliver economic growth and political stability. As a result,
the political culture seems to be shifting and this is a recognition of
the practical value of a more transparent, democratic approach. This
approach sits uneasily beside Burma's Generals who have managed to
cripple their country's economy long before the financial crisis in
Asia.  The rise of the Burmese "narco-state" can largely be put down to
the financial and economic crisis which confronts the country's rulers,
and which, put bluntly, that there are less funds available to be
siphoned off by the military into their private bank accounts.  

 The country's foreign reserves have now been run down to levels which
foreign experts estimate will cover only a few weeks' imports. Sanctions
imposed by the US - which the EU should surely now emulate - are hitting
hard, repelling foreign investment, pressuring firms already operating
there to pull out, and blocking vital financial assistance from the
World Bank and International Monetary Fund. I hope that European
companies such as Total, with its $1 billion gas pipeline investment
which sustains a regime employing forced labour to build the
infrastructure such projects require, will decide that the time has come
to do the decent thing and pack up and leave.  

 This is also a critical time because the Asian crisis is clearly
affecting investment levels from Burma's previously stable neighbours. A
massive 39% of proposed investment projects in Burma are from ASEAN
countries, now seem unlikely to materialise. South Korea's Daewoo Group,
for instance, has either halted or suspended its 35 industrial projects
in the country, and this looming economic crisis is surely yet another
lever which can and should be exploited to force democratic reform.  

 Tragically the deficit is being filled by Burma's drugs barons, who
apparently enjoy increasingly favourable trading conditions and now
export a massive 61% of the world's production of heroin, a fact which
the British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, highlighted on his visit to
South East Asia. The most famous of these barons, Khun Sa, has given up
the rigours of the jungle for a villa in Rangoon, but his troops
apparently still operate in opium country, on the Thai border. With
illegal funds still pouring into his bank account, the newly respectable
Khun Sa has now become an important investor with Government backing. He
has major shares in a number of casino projects, and is developing an
amusement park in Rangoon which required the forced removal of people
from the site and the destruction of a cemetery.  

 The Government has actually dropped a policy of confiscating bank
deposits and foreign currency of dubious origin - instead, it has opted
for a 25% "whitening tax" levied on questionable repatriated funds. This
financial complaisance is completed by helpfully low key policing:
according to one study, Burmese police seize only 0.25% of annual
amphetamine production, 0.01% of opium, and less that 0.05% of heroin
exports.  

 It's hardly surprising that, in these circumstances, the drugs trade is
literally "blooming," and the consequences can, of course, be felt here
in the West as well as among Burma's direct neighbours. In the words of
Asia Week, "shadowy figures long associated with the drugs trade have
insinuated themselves into the political and business fabric of the
nation." 

 The financial crisis in Asia has also led to the expulsions of foreign
workers. This particularly affects illegal Burmese workers - fleeing
their own vicious regime and its tendency to commandeer them into forced
labour - have been particularly affected. Thailand, desperate to reduce
its mounting unemployment, has said it will repatriate about 300,000
illegal workers over the next six months, 85% of which have come from
Burma. Bangladesh is now reported to be taking a similar approach,
despite the obvious dangers for political refugees pushed back over the
borders into war zones where fighting between the military and ethnic
groups continues. Equally, Amnesty International has raised concerns
about the situation of Burmese Chin refugees in India.  

 All of these factors mean that there is growing disquiet among Burma's
neighbours. ASEAN's actions in Cambodia do, however, demonstrate that
its members will challenge national sovereignty if domestic unrest is
likely to have regional consequences.  

 Dealing with either the drugs or the refugee problem will involve
putting pressure on the military junta, but we know and Asian countries
realise that will not be enough: for a start, dependence on drugs
revenue is clearly far too great to enable them kick the habit. There is
only one way forward for Burma at this time, and that is for the junta
to enter into political dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi with a view to
establishing a transition to civilian democratic rule.  

 Burma's neighbours certainly have the clout to force political dialogue
onto the agenda - the question is whether they have the will. It is the
role of the West to make sure that this opportunity is grasped, and the
forthcoming ASEM summit on April 4th provides us with an ideal
opportunity to make this point in forceful and decisive terms.  

 It was James Wolfensohn, the President of the World Bank, who recently
said that "Asian leaders must recognise the link between good economic
performance and open government," and Burma provides a dramatic
illustration of this point. Last week in Strasbourg, the European
Parliament called yet again for an end to all links between the European
Union and Burma based on trade, tourism and investment in Burma by
European companies. It's only by responding to that call, and by taking
the opportunity provided by ASEM to influence Burma's neighbours, that
Europe will help deliver open government to the people of Burma - and,
for that matter, halt a drugs trade with global repercussions. For the
sake of the impoverished and oppressed people I met on my journey to
Burma, I only hope this opportunity will be grasped.   

-- 
PD Burma-Japan
Schu Sugawara
schus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


http://www2.gol.com/users/brelief/Index.htm