BKK Post, March 26, 1998. Editorial

[burma@xxxxxxxxxx]

March 26, 1998. Editorial
                           Yet another violent spasm

The government had the nunmbers to win the day, but the opposition 
allegations were weighty enough to raise doubts about its members' 
integrity.

If there is a file titled Protests/Thai Border at the Burmese foreign 
ministry, the chances are that it is no slim volume. The latest addition 
to any such file might be the weightiest yet since it was delivered in 
person by the deputy foreign minister; the subject of the protest being 
too serious to be left to the responsibility of a ministry functionary. 

The subject is one of great importance because it involves relations 
between two countries that are being strained by the Democratic Karen 
Buddhist Army, a thuggish organisation that has scant regard for the 
principles of democracy or Buddhism or the safety and rights of the 
majority of Karen. At issue here is Rangoonís insistence that it exerts 
no control over the renegade Karen in the face of overwhelming evidence 
to the contrary. 

It is no mere coincidence that the renegades have dedicated themselves 
to attacking the Karen National Union, which continues to stand against 
the State Peace and Development Council, the most recent incarnation of 
the State Law and Order Restoration Council. It is no coincidence that 
the renegades are free to operate along the border and carry the same 
weapons as their colleagues in the Burmese military. 

If Rangoon is serious in insisting it has no control over the renegades, 
it is admitting it is victim to the political equivalent of motor 
neurone disease. The point about the renegades is that they are small in 
number and would be militarily insignificant and far less bold if they 
did not enjoy support and sustenance from the generals in Rangoon. 
Furthermore, the internal intelligence system created by the junta in 
which Burmese spy on Burmese would show itself to be less than useful if 
it failed to report the consequences of the renegadesí cross-border 
operations. It would be difficult, after all, to fail to notice the 
detonation of artillery and mortar rounds, and rocket-propelled 
grenades. It would be hard not to notice the flames and smoke from the 
torched homes of 9,000 refugees. 

Such ignorance of reality, however, is typical of the generals who have 
inflicted themselves upon a cowed population over decades in which they 
have sacrificed a thriving economy on the altars of corruption, 
incompetence and military might. The incessant violations and acts of 
international criminality that have brought us thus far are but further 
reminders of the folly committed in bringing the junta into the 
Association of Southeast Asian Nations. 

No other member of the regional grouping behaves in such a manner with a 
neighbour and fellow member. Indeed, our border with Laos is sleepy and 
with Cambodia positively peaceful by comparison even though a mini-civil 
war of sorts is in progress. No other member would sanction and, in all 
likelihood direct, armed raids into neighbouring territory in which acts 
of violence are carried out and members of that countryís armed forced 
abducted and taken to Burma. 

By attacking civilian refugees in camps in Thailand, the junta and its 
armed proxies are ignoring the cause of the problem and merely 
concentrating on a symptom. The camps would empty immediately and the 
refugees go home willingly if they felt they would be safe and free to 
earn a living in Burma. 

The attacks on their camps tell them it is still not safe to return. Far 
from it; plans are under way to re-house the refugees in camps to be 
established up to 100km from the border and well out of the range of the 
guns of a junta that persists in the charade of putting out the welcome 
mat. 

Questions remain unanswered
Nattaya chetchotiros and Wit Nontharit

Last Saturday's victory in the censure debate does not qualify the 
government to wallow in self-congratulation and think of itself as 
"unsinkable".

The opposition failed because it could not produce enough evidence to 
prove the ministers subject to censure were "unclean".

But the information provided over the three days of the debate carried 
enough weight to impress upon the public that there is room to doubt the 
integrity of the Chuan Leekpai administration.

Sudarat Keyuraphan, the Palang Dharma Party's sole MP, said she voted 
for the government only because she wanted to give it the chance to 
continue its work on our economic problems.

Although she accepted the government had done a good job of tackling the 
economic crisis so far, Ms Sudarat clearly has questions whether this 
popular administration is without any flaws.

She believes along with the opposition that there is something odd about 
the interference in the rubber market and the whole Salween logging 
scandal.

"Although the irregularities involved things in the past, I really saw 
that there was a lack of transparency," she said.

The opposition traced alleged instances of corruption affecting the 
rubber trade back to the first Chuan government when Jurin Laksanavisit, 
a favourite of the prime minister, was a deputy commerce minister.

Mr Jurin, who is now a minister attached to the PM's Office, was accused 
of colluding with a fellow Democrat MP who was then the deputy 
agriculture minister, the minister's secretary and Chatchawal 
Sukijjavanij, a Commerce Ministry inspector-general, to make use of the 
rubber price regulation mechanism for personal profit.

Three New Aspiration Party MPs - Muk Suleiman (Pattani), Suchart Srisang 
(Maha Sarakham) and Kachit Chainikhom (Udon Thani) - individually 
accused the four of benefitting from a steep drop in the rubber price in 
1993 and 1994.

The three said Mr Jurin and his accomplices had bought rubber on the 
market at the cheap price of 13 baht a kilo and then stirred up protests 
by planters over the regulation scheme. The Chuan government responded 
by raising the price. 

According to the opposition, the four then sold 100,000 tons to the 
Rubber Replanting Aid Fund at a price of 17 baht a kilo for a profit of 
about 400 million baht. Mr Jurin was the chairman of the aid fund at the 
time.

The NAP MPs claimed the four also colluded with Chinese and Ukrainian 
investors to set up ghost companies which bought the rubber from the aid 
fund for resale to Malaysia and Singapore for 42 baht a kilo. They said 
the ghost companies made about 2.5 billion baht in profit.

Allegations of corruption against Mr Jurin are nothing new. This same 
issue was raised by Mr Muk during a censure debate at the time of the 
first Chuan government.

This time, however, the opposition was better prepared.

Mr Suchart was a Solidarity Party MP when Uthai Pimchaichon was the 
party leader and the commerce minister in the first Chuan government, 
and so had more detailed information.

Mr Kachit focused on Mr Jurin's "personal affairs" involving a trip by 
the then deputy commerce minister with a rubber trade delegation to 
Kunming in China.

Mr Jurin flatly denied any knowledge of and involvement in the alleged 
irregularities.

He argued he had chosen Mr Chatchawal as the rubber trade negotiator 
over the department director-general or his deputy because the job 
required frequent travel abroad.

As an inspector-general, Mr Chatchawal had enough time available, he 
said.

His responses failed to impress Mr Chuan however.

The prime minister insisted his present three-month-old government was 
completely free of corruption but said nothing in defence of the 
allegations made against his first administration.

The government could have argued that if ministers with the Democrat 
Party were really in the wrong, then their successors in the Banharn 
Silpa-archa and Chavalit Yongchaiyudh governments should have taken 
legal action against them.

Mr Suchart said he was satisfied that people who had phoned different 
radio programmes agreed that Mr Jurin had not cleared himself fully.

Ms Sudarat also said the government had failed to make things clear.

She believes politicians, some of whom are now in the government, were 
behind the illegal logging in the Salween National Park and Wildlife 
Sanctuary in Mae Hong Son.

She said the 42 state officials named as suspects were just part of an 
enormous racket which would cease to exist if it did not have the 
support of influential politicians.

The logging scandal became public when Prawat Thanadkha, a deputy 
forestry department chief, offered to donate 5 million baht believed to 
have been paid to him as a bribe to the Thai-Help-Thai Fund. The offer 
was rejected by the prime minister.

Police suspect the bribe was offered by investors logging illegally in 
the Salween forests.

Vichai Chaijitvanichkul, an NAP MP representing Udon Thani, said during 
the censure debate that the bribe was actually 70 million baht. But he 
failed to explain where the bribe had come from and where it had gone.

The opposition accused former premier Banharn, who also served as 
interior minister, and Sanan Kachornprasart, as the interior minister in 
the first Chuan government, of being responsible for the destruction of 
the Salween forests.

Their permission to open checkpoints along the Burmese border allowed 
loggers to cut trees on Thai soil before falsifying documents to make it 
appear the logs were imported legally from Burma.

Ms Sudarat demanded that the government clear itself of the rubber and 
logging allegations and spare no wrongdoers, be they in the coalition or 
the opposition.

"The prime minister is always saying he will not tolerate corruption," 
she said. "I want to see him punish the culprits."

She also said she would follow the progress of the government in its 
investigations closely.

"The support I have given does not mean the government is allowed to 
step forward without turning its back to look at its past mistakes and 
correct them," she said.

------------------------------------------------------------------------