The BurmaNet News: July 23, 1998 (P (r)

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

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

The BurmaNet News: July 23, 1998
Issue #1055 (Part 2 of 2)

HEADLINES:
==========
(Part 1)
NLD: INSTRUCTIONS TO MP'S NOT TO SIGN 
THE NATION: JUNTA KEEPS 6 KYAT TO A DOLLAR
AP: MYANMAR SCHOOL FINALLY GIVES EXAMS 
JDW: MYANMAR MAKING SMALL ARMS IN IMPORTED FACTORY 
SCMP: SINGAPORE WEAPONS FACTORY FOR JUNTA 
BKK POST: TRAFFICKING OF CHILDREN ON THE RISE 
BKK POST: MORE WORKERS LIKELY TO EMIGRATE 
(Part 2)
XINXUA: MYANMAR FM LEAVES FOR ASEAN MEETING 
THE NATION: ASEAN TO TACKLE THAI PROPOSAL 
THE NATION: DAYS OF SWEET TALK OVER FOR ASEAN? 
BKK POST: SURIN STARTS TO MOVE THE MOUNTAIN
BKK POST: WE ARE RIGHT TO CRITICIZE NEIGHBORS 
THE NATION: US STANDS WITH BURMA, IRAQ, NIGERIA 
****************************************************************

XINHUA: MYANMAR FM LEAVES FOR ASEAN MEETING 
22 July, 1998 

YANGON (July 22) XINHUA - Myanmar Foreign Minister U Ohn Gyaw left here
Wednesday for Manila, the Philippines, to attend the 31st annual meeting of
foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and
its related meetings due to begin Friday.

Myanmar, along with Laos, was admitted into the fold of ASEAN last July
which also groups Brunei, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore,
Thailand and Vietnam.

The ASEAN Ministerial Meeting (AMM), which follows the ASEAN Standing
Committee Meeting and Senior Officials Meeting in the Philippine capital,
is expected to focus on the ongoing regional financial crisis.

Earlier this month, senior finance officials of the ASEAN met for the first
time in Yangon and discussed the crisis prior to the AMM.

Since integration into the ASEAN, Myanmar has been working closely with
other ASEAN members, forming respective committees and groups in all
sectors and taking an active part in various meetings and activities of the
association.

Myanmar has also attended since then a series of regional meetings relating
to ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) scheme, investment, agriculture, forestry,
transportation, drug control, education, tourism, environment, financial,
labor and home affairs.

On these occasions, Myanmar joined in signing accords on regional
cooperation in finance and tourism as well as the setting-up of a foundation.

Myanmar, together with Laos, is also receiving technical assistance from
the grouping at the Kuala Lumpur meeting of the AFTA Council in October
1997, for the fulfillment of its obligations to the AFTA.

For the establishment of AFTA, Myanmar has presented its commodities list
for tariff reduction.

According to official statistics, investment in Myanmar from other five
ASEAN countries -- Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore and
Thailand -- added up to more than 3.3 billion U.S. dollars in over 140
projects at the end of March this year, accounting for about 45 percent of
the 7-billion-dollar total foreign investment.

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

THE NATION: ASEAN TO TACKLE THAI PROPOSAL 
22 July, 1998 

MANILA -- Asean foreign ministers will meet informally tomorrow to discuss
Thailand's proposal of flexible engagement after senior Asean officials
failed to reach a consensus despite intense discussions.

Philippine Foreign Under-secretary Lauro Baja said yesterday that some of
the officials, meeting informally on Monday over dinner, were wary of the
proposed policy shift.

However, he said that the issue would be tackled head on by the foreign
ministers, who he said "have greater latitude, greater freedom of thought
than the senior officials".

Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan is expected to lead the discussion and
present the Thai rationale behind the flexible engagement.

Thailand and the Philippines have openly advocated a shift from
non-intervention to "flexible engagement", which would provide Asean member
countries with greater opportunities to become involved in issues occurring
in another member country.

Surin proposed last month that Asean should review its long-standing policy
of non-intervention. The proposed shift comes as Southeast Asian countries
are becoming more aware that problems in one nation, such as currency
devaluations, political unrest or environmental degradation, often affect
their neighbours.

Baja said that senior Asean officials had exchanged views on the question
of Asean cohesion, relevance and competitiveness in the light of changing
needs of the region.

He said he did not expect a consensus on the new approach, which Manila
says would bring the 31-year-old organisation's practices closer to those
of the European Union.

At the meeting yesterday Saroj Chavanaviraj, Thai permanent secretary
foreign affairs, clarified that Asean had already practiced flexible
engagement in handling the financial crisis and haze problems and so should
be able to discuss political issues that had implications for the region
and the grouping.

"If a problem emanating from one country affects the other countries, of
course it is the habit of Asean to discuss an agreement" among Asean
members, Indonesian Foreign Ministry official Nugroho Wisnamurti said,
adding that Indonesia would not tolerate anybody intervening in the East
Timor issue.

Asked if the "flexible" approach was relevant in the Asean context, Baja
said: "That is a policy question which only the ministers can decide when
they meet on July 23" at a working dinner prior to the formal meeting.

Thailand, worried about political turmoil on its borders, and the
Philippines brought the issue to a head.

Indonesia, Vietnam, Burma, Laos, and Malaysia have sharply criticised the
proposal, although the Philippines claims it was Kuala Lumpur's maverick
Deputy Premier Anwar Ibrahim who sowed the seeds of the idea.

Senior officials, consisting of deputy foreign ministers and
under-secretaries, met at a two-day, closed-door session to prepare a joint
communique for the Asean foreign ministers, scheduled to meet at the
central Manila Hotel on Friday. Bag said the ministers would make a
statement in the communique on the regional crisis, with specific reference
to Japan. He would not elaborate.

Tokyo's slide into recession is a major concern for Asean, a major trading
partner of Japan, though diplomatic sources say there is resistance to a
proposal for Asean to openly criticise the Asian economic power.

Meanwhile Thai Foreign Ministry spokesman Kobsak Chutikul said in Bangkok
that the Thai proposal was not intended to demolish Asean's cardinal
principle of non-interference. "The wording might be a bit confusing, but
we just want to find a new acceptable mode of behaviour for Asean," he
claimed.

He said the proposal might need further deliberation up until the sixth
Asean Summit m Vietnam in December. According to Kobsak the proposal was
within the context of Asean Vision 2020 and Plan of Actions to strengthen
the grouping which the summit would have to endorse.

"Our economic success used to be the backbone of our strength, but now it's
gone. So we need other things to maintain our strength in international
negotiations" Kobsak said.

"Through frank and open dialogues among ourselves we can strengthen Asean's
solidarity and maintain viability," he suggested.

"If we can engage in dialogues with non-Asean countries about sensitive
issues, why shouldn't we be able to talk among ourselves?" he asked.

The Asean meeting will be expanded next Monday to include Asia's main
security players, including the United States, China and Russia, followed
by two days of talks between Asean and its main trading partners, including
the US, Canada, Australia and the European Union.

Asean began to stretch its non-intervention policy last year when it
postponed Cambodia's bid for membership because of a coup, led by
co-premier Hun Sen.

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

THE NATION: DAYS OF SWEET TALK OVER FOR ASEAN? 
22 July, 1998 by Girlie Linao And Deutsche Presse-Agentur Correspondents

AFTER DECADES, ASEAN'S WAY OF SWEET-TALKING MAY BECOME HISTORY UNDER A PLAN
TO GIVE THE REGIONAL GROUPING TEETH 

The days when sweet-talking was the only way Southeast Asian countries
commented on each others' human rights records and forms of government may
soon be over.

After 31 years of carefully avoiding abrasive discussions on the affairs of
member countries, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) is now
grappling with a controversial proposal to drop its non-interference policy
and start speaking out.

With economic chaos, political instability and security problems plaguing
the region, proponents of more frank exchanges say Asean members can no
longer sit back and quietly watch neighbouring governments make mistakes
which drag other countries down.

"Flexible engagement," they note, will allow member states to talk openly
about national economic and political issues before they explode into
damaging regional crises like the financial contagion.

"Perhaps it is time that Asean's cherished principle of non-intervention is
modified to allow Asean to play a constructive role in preventing or
resolving domestic issues with regional implications," said Thai Foreign
Minister Surin Pitsuwan.

"After 31 years, we are now adults and we should be able to discuss our
problems frankly," agreed Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Domingo Siazon.

Surin and Siazon say the Group of Nine needs to be more pragmatic and
cooperate on such regional issues as drugs, refugees, environmental
disasters, transnational crime and disease control.

The financial crisis, the Indonesian forest fires, the Cambodian coup, and
the volatile political situation in Burma were all evidence that it is time
for Asean to grow out of what Siazon calls "a policy of benign neglect".

"The proposal is part of the process of change," Siazon said. "In the
future, it will probably move towards something similar to the European
Union system, where you actually address each others' problems openly and
sometimes even confront each other, but in the process, lead to a better
synthesis and have a better product."

While political and economic analysts hail the effort as a sign that Asean
is emerging into a dynamic regional organisation, they predict the proposal
will face tough opposition when discussed at the 31st Asean Ministerial
Meeting in Manila on Friday and Saturday.

They note that some members of Asean vehemently oppose any step towards
intervention.

"Asean's principle has always been you can agree to disagree without being
disagreeable," said George Manzano, an economist at the University of Asia
and the Philippines. "Asean works like a group of friends. They are not
confrontational."

Among those against any shift are Burma and Indonesia, which are cautioning
their fellow Asean members against haste in deserting the long-established
tenets of non-interference.

"Indonesia clearly does not agree with it," said the country's Foreign
Minister Ali Alatas. "Let's look at what we really want to achieve in
Asean. Look at the essence of what we want to accomplish, don't play with
words."

Burma has angrily reacted to attempts by Thailand and the Philippines to
test the policy and warned that rising tension in the junta-ruled state
could lead to violence.

"These speculations are based on false premises and are entirely contrary
to reality," its Foreign Ministry said on state television.

While it was Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim who first called
for a review of Asean's policy of non-intervention last year, Kuala Lumpur,
along with Singapore, has kept quiet about the proposal and seems bent on
preserving the hands-off system.

"We want to know first what Thailand and the Philippines mean [with
flexible engagement]," said a source at Malaysia's Foreign Ministry.

"Does it mean that Asean members can go in and look at other members and
tell these countries what to do? We have to discuss this further."

"As for Malaysia, we've been very comfortable with Asean's non-interference
policy for these past years," the source added.

Simon Tay, a nominated Member of Parliament in Singapore, said the island
republic seems to be more open to frank talks in Asean, but only on such
dramatic issues as the Cambodian coup and the haze.

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

THE BANGKOK POST: SURIN STARTS TO MOVE THE MOUNTAIN 
22 July, 1998 by Kanjana Spindler

COMMENTARY 

"Over the last several months Thailand's foreign policy has exhibited a
more muscular posture," a senior Western diplomat noted recently in his
"nonspeech" at an informal farewell dinner. This long overdue release of
Thai diplomatic energy was due to the "unique situation that both Surin and
Sukhumbhand wanted their jobs", he said.

What this statement means is obvious. Having the right people for the right
jobs. That's one definite way to move things forward. But both the foreign
minister and his deputy often risk criticism for actions taken that might
create a change. Take Thailand's proposed policy of "flexible engagement"
for Asean to adopt in place of the old "constructive engagement" policy,
for example.

This, for Asean, radical new policy initiative "born out of frustration of
the Burma situation", as Foreign Minister Surin is said to have mentioned
to one ambassador, comes not without strong objections and criticisms. The
policy proposal is on the informal agenda of the Asean Ministerial Meeting
(AMM) which start in Manila on Friday. Apart from the Philippines, which
openly supports it, and Malaysia, which last year called for a review of
Asean's policy of non-intervention, the rest of Asean are adamant in
holding on to the non-intervention approach.

It's heartening for me to hear from one Thai foreign ministry official that
"flexible engagement" is proposed to be Asean's "new [ ] of behaviour".
"Whereas before it was considered impolite to intervene, now this approach
is inappropriate because the economy has entirely collapsed," explained the
official, pointing out that the "engagement" would only be in matters that
are good for member countries.

It is even more heartening to learn that the 31st AMM will "most probably
be a turning point in Asean's history". In his press briefing on the AMM
last week, Philippines Foreign Minister Domingo Siazon came up with a long
list of issues of concern that he said Asean has to address. The issues are
wide-ranging -- from the financial turmoil in the region and the social
impact of the crisis to tackling Cambodia, nuclear proliferation and
transnational crime (drug trafficking, arms smuggling, money laundering,
piracy, and trafficking of women and children). Why all these issues?
Because "good economics cannot persist without good governance", said Mr
Siazon.

So, by the sound of it "flexible engagement" will take up some good space
during the meeting this week although it won't be the main issue. Sources
in diplomatic circles say they don't think it will get off the ground this
time even though the issue is something that concern everybody.

"From the beginning I had a feeling that it's not going to fly," voiced one
diplomat although adding that the Thai foreign minister's action is a
natural development, especially considering what's happening in Burma.
There's one small criticism, however. He thinks that the proposal should
have been floated on a more private basis, as "friendly pressure", he
thinks, will bear more results than public pressure.

It's time for Asean to wake up. Consensus, consultation and
non-intervention were all very well during Asean's birth pangs as simply an
anti-communist bloc. But moving from a one-dimensional grouping to
grappling with the multi-dimensional realities of today will require a more
activist Asean -- both internally and externally.

It doesn't matter who starts to try and move the mountain, but move the
mountain it must if Asean is to have any continuing relevance in the
critical times ahead.

* KANJANA SPINDLER IS ASSISTANT EDITOR, EDITORIAL PAGES, BANGKOK POST. 

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

THE BANGKOK POST: WE ARE RIGHT TO CRITICIZE NEIGHBORS 
22 July, 1998 

Thai-Burmese relations have been strained since the Thai Foreign Ministry
expressed concern over Burma's domestic politics and called on the military
junta and the opposition to exercise restraint. Rangoon saw this as
interference in its internal affairs.

Sukhumbhand Paribatra, the Thai deputy foreign minister, said the concern
was expressed in good faith and there was no intention to offend Burma.
Thailand, he said, wanted to see peace and stability in its neighbour.
Thailand will be affected directly if anything happens in Burma, he said.

Political tensions rose in Burma recently when the National League for
Democracy (NLD) led by Aung San Suu Kyi issued an ultimatum demanding that
the military government open talks with the opposition and open parliament
by Aug 21.

The government retaliated by preventing Ms Suu Kyi and opposition leaders
from leaving Rangoon.

Prior to this, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) had
adhered to the policy of "constructive engagement" in dealing with Burma.
The Western world, led by the United States and Europe, has condemned human
rights violations in Burma.

Since Asean admitted Burma as member last July, Thailand has upheld the
"constructive engagement" policy even though Bangkok has been more vocal in
expressing its concern over the situation in Burma. This has been seen by
observers as flexibility in Thailand's policy towards Burma.

The "constructive engagement" policy has failed to persuade the Burmese
government to promote political freedom and democracy. Rangoon has tried
for several years to draw up a constitution. As its neighbour, Thailand has
the right to express its concern.

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

THE NATION: U.S. STANDS WITH BURMA, IRAQ, NIGERIA 
22 July, 1998 

EDITORIAL

A case of unlikely bedfellows? Or an unholy alliance? Whatever it was, the
battle lines at the International Criminal Court conference over five
grueling weeks in Rome was clear -- global pariahs on one side and the rest
of the world on the other.

The court -- the last major international institution to be established
this century -- will finally put some teeth into the slew of international
human rights laws. First mooted after World War II, the court will bring to
justice those who have committed war crimes, genocide, crimes against
humanity and aggression. Which is why countries like Burma, Iraq and
Nigeria are understandably worried. But what has surprised many is that the
US has jumped into the same boat as these international outcasts.

In fact, Washington took the lead in the bid to kill the court. It had
sought exclusion from the treaty of states which refuse to sign -- in
short, if dictators do not ink the pact, they are virtually untouchable. It
also wanted an escape clause -- states which had ratified can opt out of
prosecutions for crimes against humanity and war crimes but not genocide.
The reason: the US is more likely to fall foul of the first two.

Moreover, it wanted the court under a tight leash -- that the prosecutor
would only act under the orders of the UN Security Council where the US and
four other nuclear powers can exercise their veto rights. But the most
outrageous of all US demands was a guarantee that none of its soldiers or
citizens, would ever come before the court.

One would ask: why should Americans be exempted from the jurisdiction of
the court? What happens to the principle that everyone is equal before the
law and that there should be no exception when it comes to the
administration of justice. Isn't this, as we are reminded often enough by
the Americans, the linchpin of democracy?

Now, however, the world's major democracy is telling everyone that while it
takes the high moral ground in pursuing human rights around the globe, it
is not at all interested in global democracy.

But the spectacle of the US taking the side of global pariahs shouldn't
surprise anyone. When it comes to undermining justice, the Mafia often
links arms with neighbourhood thugs. No doubt, the US is the most powerful
country in the world -- it has always called the shots, so there is no
reason why it should now succumb to the dictates of global rules. The
problem is a growing number of global citizens no longer buy such
pax-Americana nonsense.

Even if the world were to make concessions to the US, the Americans are not
likely to ratify the treaty. Powerful Senator Jesse Helms, chairman of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, declared that the pact would be "dead
on arrival" if there were any hint that it might apply to the US. Given
this, the world is better off with a- strong and credible court. But
instead of doing that, the 156 delegation in Rome opted to offer sweeteners
to entice recalcitrant countries to come on board.

The court will now not include the use of nuclear weapons as a war crime as
India had sought. While it will have an independent prosecutor who is not
under the dictates of the Security Council, the court will need to seek
permission from either the nation where the alleged crime was committed or
the suspect's home country before it can proceed. Still, all this is not
good enough for the Americans.

Last Friday, 120 countries voted in favour of the court, while the US and a
handful of others voted 'No'. It was one of the few occasions that the US
did not have its way. The ultimate winners are, of course, the citizens of
the world, especially the NGOs which had fought long and hard for the
establishment of the court, and without whom there wouldn't be a treaty,
let alone a viable and independent ICC.

It's clear that the world will have to get by without the Americans. One
day, and hopefully soon, the US will come around and join the global
community in building a global regime where human rights laws are respected
and upheld by all countries -- big and small, rich and poor, powerful and
weak. And until then, every time Washington talks about human rights and
democracy, we will have to take it with a pinch of salt.

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