The BurmaNet News: July 27-28, 1998 (r)

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

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

The BurmaNet News: July 27-28, 1998
Issue #1058 (Part 2 of 2)

Noted in Passing: "Burma is on the edge of an explosion because the junta's
inability to manage the economy and the society is finally outpacing their
capacity to frighten people into submission."  - Prime Minister Sein Win
(see NCGUB: JUNTA'S INCOMPETENCE MAY CAUSE EXPLOSION)

HEADLINES:
==========
VOA: STANDOFF 
THE NATION: SUU KYI MAINTAINS STANDOFF 
NCGUB: JUNTA'S INCOMPETENCE MAY CAUSE EXPLOSION 
BKK POST: SUU KYI IN SECOND CLASH WITH MILITARY 
SPDC: INFORMATION SHEET NO. A-0521(I) 
REUTERS: ALBRIGHT SAYS US FEARS FOR MYANMAR'S SUU KYI 
REUTERS: MYANMAR JUNTA BLASTS US FOR SUU KYI COMMENTS 
SCMP: RISE UP AGAINST JUNTA, BURMESE URGED 
STRAITS TIMES: SIAZON CALLS FOR OPEN DIALOGUE 
THE NATION: AUSTRALIA URGES BURMA TO MAKE PROGRESS 
ASAHI (JAPAN): JAPAN TO JOIN CALLS FOR DEMOCRACY
ASIAWEEK (LETTER): HANDING OVER 
ASIAWEEK: DIVIDED WE STAND 
THE NATION: TOWARDS AN ENHANCED INTERACTION
ASIAWEEK (LETTER): REINVENTING AUNG SAN
****************************************************************

THE STRAITS TIMES: SIAZON CALLS FOR OPEN DIALOGUE IN MYANMAR 
26 July, 1998 

MANILA -- The Philippines yesterday urged Myanmar's ruling junta and the
opposition to engage in a dialogue without any preconditions to resolve
their differences.

"It takes all partners in a process of conflict to move towards
convergence, of course unless you are a mountain that you don't move,"
Foreign Secretary Domingo Siazon said.

He said he knew reconciliation talks were being held "at the lower level"
between the State Peace and Development Council, and the opposition
National League for Democracy led by Aung San Suu Kyi.

But negotiations must be held without conditions to succeed, he said.

"If you are prepared to negotiate, you should say I'm prepared to meet you,
the devil you may be... But no conditions, let's talk," he said at the end
of the Asean ministerial meeting.

Asked if Asean would now comment more openly on Yangon, he said: "We have
been in enhanced interaction mode in Myanmar for sometime now.

"We have very extensive talks with the authorities in Myanmar concerning
many issues, including the process of their national reconciliation and
these exchanges have been going on."

Ms Suu Kyi has been in opposition to the junta since army generals refused
to hand over power to her party which swept parliamentary elections in 1990.

Asean admitted Yangon as a member last year, defying Western pressure
against the move because of alleged human-rights violations by the junta.

The group said it hoped that integrating Myanmar would induce the junta to
introduce reforms.

Human-rights advocates allege that human rights abuses have got worse.

Reports from Yangon said the government yesterday lashed out at Ms Suu Kyi
for trying to spark political unrest by leaving the capital to visit
supporters.

In an official statement, the junta also accused her party of "creating
waves to rock the boat" in collaboration with foreign embassies and news
organisations.

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

THE NATION: AUSTRALIA URGES BURMA TO MAKE PROGRESS IN POLITICAL FIELD 
27 July, 1998 by Rita Patiyasevi 

MANILA -- In a bilateral meeting Australia yesterday urged Burma to
establish a human rights commission, like the one in Indonesia, and use it
to work towards development.

Australia's Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, in Manila for the Asean
summit, said his Burmese counterpart Ohn Gyaw did not react negatively to
the proposal.

"I made a point to tell Ohn Gyaw that I thought such an organisation in
Burma would be a very useful step forward. I am glad to say he did not
respond in a negative way to that particular proposal," he said, adding it
would have to be followed up with Burma in the next few months.

Speaking at a press conference, Downer said he had expressed Australia's
concern for the-lack of political progress, constitutional evolution, lack
of dialogue between the opposing National League of Democracy (NLD) and the
State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) as well as Burma's human rights
record.

"I made it clear to Ohn Gyaw that not only does Australia want to see a
proper constitutional process, we do very much want to see a constructive
dialogue between the NLD and SPDC and are disappointed that that has not
happened," he said.

With regards to human rights, Downer said he had proposed that Burma "take
a leaf out of the book of Suharto's Indonesia" and establish "an
independent national human rights commission, a body like Komisi Nasional
Hak Asisi Manusia [Komnasham] in Indonesia".

He added that the panel had been important in terms of monitoring human
rights in Indonesia and that he had been impressed with their work during
the Suharto regime.

Downer said Canberra had "a great desire to build a relationship with Burma
now that it was an Asean member" but did not see a way of doing so until
progress was made.

"I was told that the constitution reform process is going ahead inch by
inch and.  I pointed out that nothing seems to have happened since I met
Ohn Gyaw in Kuala Lumpur over 12 months ago," he said.

The minister added that he had made it clear to his counterpart that even
though Australia did not have a development programme with Burma, there
were areas in which constructive assistance could be provided, like crop
substitution for poppy fields.  However, he added Burma should start the
political process and hold a dialogue with NLD first.

Ohn Gyaw's answer was to tell the minister about SPDC's commitment to
tackling the drug problem and crop substitution.

Burma and other members of the grouping signed a declaration of Drug Free
Asean on Saturday to signify determination in eradicating use, production
and trafficking of illegal drugs in the Southeast Asian region by the year
2020.

Downer said, to his knowledge it was not SPDC's policy to promote drug
trade even though there were allegations that some military members had
been involved in the business.

Burma's membership in the grouping despite its lack of political
development has been blamed for constraints in the relationship between
Asean and other dialogue partners namely the European Union and the United
States.

The US said many Asean nations were doing their best to encourage SPDC move
things forward but so far there have been no signs of progress, he said.

However, the minister added that he did not believe sanctions would have
any effect.  Speaking on the issue of nuclear tests conducted by India and
Pakistan, Downer said he hoped there would be a strong statement about the
issue at the Asean Regional Fonun (ARF) today.

"There is a very deep concern about India and Pakistan's nuclear test, so
we would expect a strong statement to be made by the chairman at the end of
the meeting on the matter," he said.

Downer said Australia was still outraged over the French nuclear tests
conducted in the South Pacific in 1995.

"The Indian and Pakistan nuclear tests have been a very serious development
for the region and the world.  It has led to a serious deterioration in the
security environment in South Asia," he said.

At the ARF meeting Australia hopes to present the non-proliferation agenda
in two ways -- encouraging India and Pakistan to sign the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty, which means a lot to Australia because it had taken the
issue up in July 1996, and the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty II (START-II).

"We would also like to see negotiations come in from the conference on
disarmament in Geneva on a South Asian nuclear cut out treat which would be
an important development on the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty]," he said.

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

ASAHI EVENING NEWS: JAPAN TO JOIN CALLS FOR DEMOCRACY IN MYANMAR 
26 July, 1998 by Kishiko Hisada 

Japan is poised to aggressively urge Myanmar (Burma) to promote
democracy--a policy switch that coincides with the moves of some Southeast
Asian nations to depart from their traditional policies of
non-interference, Foreign Ministry sources said.

At key meetings of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) this
week in the Philippines, Tokyo will agree with the Philippines and Thailand
who want to end their policies of not interfering in the internal affairs
of other ASEAN members, the sources said.

Japan is not a member of the association, but is often included in talks
because of its heavy investment in the region. Japan's participation this
week will take place at ASEAN Post-Ministerial Conferences and the ASEAN
Regional Forum, which run in tandem with the ASEAN members' meetings.

The Philippines and Thailand insist that the regional group needs a
"flexible engagement" policy.

By backing this proposal, Japan aims to put more pressure on Myanmar to
promote democratic reforms.

But the proposal will face opposition from other ASEAN members, notably
Indonesia and, of course, Myanmar, the sources said.

Japan has called for Myanmar to improve its democratization and human
rights record in the past. But these requests have been ignored.

In recent months, tensions have increased between the government and the
National League for Democracy (NLD) in Myanmar. The military junta there
has prevented Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi from traveling
freely since June.

Some ASEAN nations say the group needs to scrap its non-interference stance
to protect its interests.

"If we do not speak out about Myanmar, ASEAN will be blamed by the United
States or the EU," sources quoted Philippines Foreign Minister Domingo
Siazon as telling a recent luncheon meeting of ASEAN ambassadors at Manila.

Siazon criticized the Myanmar government for failing to honor its pledges
and begin talks with the NLD, which is headed by Suu Kyi.

Against this background, Siazon and Thai Foreign Minister Pitsuwan Surin
have called for a review of ASEAN's non-interference policy.

They contend that member nations should be allowed to give advice or
warnings to other members when their domestic affairs could adversely
affect the interests of the association.

The Japanese government is expressing its support for ASEAN's speak-out
policy in the aftermath of the collapse of the Suharto regime in
Indonesia--once a successful, development-driven, authoritarian system.
Now, Indonesia itself is reviewing its traditional hands-off policy toward
Asian nations such as Myanmar.

The Japanese government sent a confidential letter from Prime Minister
Ryutaro Hashimoto to Myanmar officials in May to urge the military leaders
to convene parliamentary sessions in the summer for democracy. In addition,
Kazuo Asakai, the Japanese ambassador to Myanmar, asked Myanmar ministers
to guarantee political freedom this month.

"We hope that such a move (flexible engagement policy) will lead to the
promotion of democratization and improvement of the human rights situation
in Myanmar," said Sadaaki Numata, spokesman at Japan's Foreign Ministry,
earlier this month.

Some observers said Japan is expressing support for the new policy because
it does not want to be viewed by the United States as lagging behind the
Philippines or Thailand in calling for democracy in Myanmar, the sources said.

According to Japanese diplomats, Tokyo will express its support despite the
fact that ASEAN members nations are far from united on the issue.

In addition to Myanmar and Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam oppose the
proposed policy change apparently because their domestic situations could
come under criticism from other nations, observers said.

In fact, the majority of ASEAN foreign ministers, including Myanmar's,
opposed the "flexible engagement" policy at an unofficial dinner of the
ASEAN meeting on Thursday. However, the Japanese government will continue
to support the change in policy because it realizes that the Philippines
and Thailand will not abandon their attempt to scrap the non-interference
policy.

The collapse of Suharto regime led the Japanese government to review its
policies toward Myanmar.

The government has decided to aggressively demand improved democracy and
human rights in Myanmar in return for Japanese aid. But Tokyo will not go
so far as to stop aid to the country if democracy is not accomplished. This
tactic is often used by the United States in the form of economic sanctions.

"The flexible engagement policy will benefit ASEAN from a long-term
perspective," said Takashi Shiraishi, a professor of Southeast Asian
studies at Kyoto University.

Indonesia's turmoil has seriously affected the entire Asian economy. "It is
being realized that economic and political affairs cannot be divorced and
that it is thus natural for ASEAN nations to give advice to other member
nations on internal affairs for the sake of the Asian economy as a whole,"
Shiraishi noted.

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

ASIAWEEK: HANDING OVER 
31 July, 1998 by Chao-Tzang Yawnghwe in Coquitlam, British Columbia Canada 

"We're not in power forever. We have to go at one time or another. Once the
Constitution is in place and elections can be held, we will hand power to
whoever is elected." -- Adm. Maung Maung Khin [July 17]

Letters & Comment

Burma's Deputy Prime Minister Maung Maung Khin (pictured) says it took time
for democracy to become a way of life in England and America [THE NATION,
July 17].

True to an extent in England, but not in the U.S. In Burma, we had a period
of democratic, parliamentary government prior to 1962. Before World War II,
there was a form of liberal, representative government, although Burma was
a colony. Democracy therefore is not a strange and alien transplant from
the West.

Further, democracy in Burma was not overthrown by communist rebels. Neither
was it rejected by the people, as the 1960 and the 1990 elections showed.
It was killed by the very people who had taken an oath to defend the 1947
constitution, one based on democracy and federalism: the military.

Vice-Admiral Maung Maung Khin's argument that the junta will hand over
power once a new constitution is in place and the elections are held is not
believed by anyone in Burma on two counts: (a) the people do not want a
constitution dictated to them by a bunch of generals, and (b) the present
crop of ruling generals did not hand over power following the 1990
elections after promising to do so, unlike Gen. Ne Win in 1960. Their
credibility is lower than zero.

There is one main requirement for democracy to be restored: the willingness
of the generals to participate in the transition process. If they are
smart, they would invite Suu Kyi, veteran leaders, experienced and
respected former civil servants and experts to oversee the transition
process, which would be undertaken by the only body mandated to do so:
parliament. If Gen. Khin Nyunt possesses the courage to do the right thing,
he will go down in history -- together with Aung San and Suu Kyi -- as a
bona fide hero.

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

ASIAWEEK: DIVIDED WE STAND 
31 July, 1998 by Roger Mitton in Bangkok

To intervene or not in the affairs of a member state? The question is
vexing ASEAN

It all began a year ago. Malaysia's brashly outspoken deputy premier Anwar
Ibrahim boldly urged members of the Association of Southeast Nations
(ASEAN) to scrap its policy of non-interference in each other's affairs and
move toward "constructive intervention." Anwar's remarks were targeted at
Cambodia, where a violent putsch by Second PM Hun Sen had resulted in
co-premier Prince Norodom Ranariddh fleeing. The raw power grab so revolted
many ASEAN governments that the admission of Cambodia was deferred. In a
nutshell, Anwar's view was that if ASEAN were more engaged in troubled
countries like Cambodia, then such upheavals might be avoided. At the time,
the proposal met with a stony silence. But now it is being vigorously
debated, and was to be raised at least informally during the annual ASEAN
foreign ministers meeting on July 24 and 25 in Manila.

Why the new willingness to address such a thorny issue? The regional
economic crisis (and the political fallout, like the fall of Indonesia's
Suharto) is a big reason. It has shown how what happens in one country can
easily affect neighbors (as did the haze). Abiding concern about the
behavior of Myanmar's military junta is another major factor. And more
people are simply mentioning the subject. In June, Thai Foreign Minister
Surin Pitsuwan, a good buddy of Anwar's, twice called for a review of
ASEAN's non-intervention credo. Says Withaya Sucharithanarugse, director of
the Institute of Asian Studies at Chulalongkorn University: "From [Thai PM]
Chuan [Leekpai] down to the department heads at the foreign ministry, they
are serious about it -- they are not just floating the idea."

Support is limited. ASEAN Secretary-General Rodolfo Severino, after seeing
Surin, said the grouping's members "should talk frankly" with each other.
Philippine Foreign Secretary Domingo Siazon also got into the act, taking
the plunge on Myanmar. With sensitive political anniversaries approaching,
he said, the country could witness a confrontation between the government
and groups like the National League for Democracy led by Nobel laureate
Aung San Sun Kyi. Should that matter to the rest of ASEAN? Yes, says
Philippine Foreign Undersecretary Lauro Baja.

He notes that the European Union refuses to conduct a dialogue with ASEAN
unless human rights in Myanmar improve. Concludes Baja: "Myanmar's policy
is affecting the relations of other ASEAN countries with their dialogue
partners."

The generals in Yangon are of course livid over the remarks by Surin and
Siazon. They fired off a terse statement warning against any change in the
Association's long-standing policies of non-interference: "It would not
serve ASEAN's interests to tamper with them." Myanmar's information
minister said that his country does not play up adverse conditions in other
member countries, and expects reciprocal treatment. Clearly referring to
Surin and Siazon, the junta rebuked "certain ministers" in ASEAN for being
"presumptuous," to which Siazon responded: "No, this is not presumptuous."

It is certainly divisive though. More officials of ASEAN governments agree
with the generals than they do with the likes of Surin and Siazon, not
least because nearly every ASEAN member is vulnerable to criticism on some
front. In the Philippines, Siazon does not have the backing of his own
president. Joseph Ejercito Estrada favors the existing policy of
non-intervention: "ASEAN countries should be left alone to decide their own
fate. The Philippines has enough domestic problems of our own -- why should
we interfere in the problems of other countries?"

Indonesia's veteran foreign minister, Ali Alatas, came out against Surin's
proposal on July 14. Two days later Vietnam gave it the thumbs down. And
the day after that, Malaysian Foreign Minister Abdullah Badawi joined the
naysayers. The ASEAN way, he said, is to "discuss within ourselves without
adopting a confrontational approach and not putting to shame or
embarrassing the other party. If we make official statements, it can result
in people becoming displeased, and give rise to tension." Abdullah said he
would make Malaysia's stand clear during the ministerial sessions in Manila.

Brunei also dislikes the idea. Myanmar leader Lt.-Gen Khin Nyunt's presence
at the Sultan's birthday bash on July 15 was a pretty good indication that
the two autocrats are getting along well these days and that any notion
that Brunei might back Surin's plan is pie-eyed. Even little Laos has
privately expressed displeasure. The negative vibes have led Surin to
soften the language of his proposal to "flexible engagement."

Which makes it sound awfully similar what ASEAN has already been practising
for some time. While intervention has been a no-no, ASEAN has propounded a
policy of "constructive engagement," especially regarding new members like
Myanmar. The line pushed is for gradual reform by the junta. A Singapore
official explains: "We never expected sudden change. We knew it would take
a long time. But through attending the many meetings ASEAN holds, through
business links and so on, we feel there is more chance of change than with
isolation."

In the West this approach has been criticized as resulting in no gains. But
ongoing Western jibes -- led by the U.S., which has even imposed sanctions
on Myanmar -- at constructive engagement now meet with barely concealed
indignation from many ASEAN states. Admits a Western diplomat: "We
ourselves espouse constructive engagement with undemocratic countries
Clinton did it most recently when justifying his visit to China, and
Canadian PM Jean Chretien said the same to support his policy of engaging
Cuba. So we can hardly knock ASEAN for doing the same with Myanmar, Laos
and Vietnam."

Given that Thai foreign policy has always been geared to be supportive of
Washington, some people feel Surin's proposal is a sop to the Americans.
Says Withaya: "Yes, it has that kind of stigma."

Others think an intervention policy is unnecessary anyway given that ASEAN
members have been commenting on each other's affairs all along. Notes
Chaiwat Khamchoo of Chulalongkom University's political science department:
"Already, member states can say what they want without having to change the
principle of non-intervention." For example, when Suharto hinted in
February that current Indonesian President B.J. Habibie would become his
v.p., Singapore Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew implied the choice might be
bad for Indonesia.

The upshot, says Siazon, is that "you will not get a policy shift now [over
intervention], but the time has come to start talking about it openly."
That process is well underway.

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

THE NATION: TOWARDS AN ENHANCED INTERACTION 
27 July, 1998 by Kavi Chongkittavorn 

Never mind.  The Asean foreign ministers did not endorse the flexible
engagement approach proposed by Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan.  But the
fact that they debated intensely and got mad over it was m itself a big
success.  It was, so to speak, like a much-needed adrenaline shot to
rejuvenate the 31-year-old organisation's sagging credibility.

Asean will be more open by necessity simply because of the gravity of the
problems the regional grouping is confronting now and in the future.  At
the end of their two-day meeting last week, they urged the West and Japan
to play the lead and help pump in more investments into their economies.

Of course, these industrialised countries would like to do it if certain
conditions, especially economic and political reforms, are met in the
recipient countries.  They are not going to waste millions as in the past
to help shore up dictators and cronyism.

This has become a fact of life now.

Despite the sharp differences Thailand and the Philippines have with the
remaining Asean members over the flexible engagement, they have somehow
managed to come up with a compromise phrase -- the so-called "enhanced
interaction".  This is remarkable because, in the end, no matter what terms
the member countries are willing to use, it all boils down to one thing --
we need to be open and true to each other.

At the very least, Asean as a whole could benefit from some of the
insightful criticism levied against the West by some of the Asean leaders.
For instance, in the past weeks, both Singapore and Kuala Lumpur have
trained their oratorical skills at one another. Even though both countries
have opposed the Thai approach, their media are accusing each other of lack
of sincerity and malfeasance.  Malaysia's influential magazine, Massa, in
its latest edition, devoted nine pages to criticising Singapore for
tainting Malaysia and dredging up history to sully relations.  Surely, it
had nothing to do with flexible engagement!

Philippine Foreign Minister Domingo Siazon hit the nail on the head by
saying that the Thai approach has been practised a long, long time ago by
the Asean countries.  Therefore, Asean should not be enraged by the call
for active and frank discussions on issues of mutual concerns such as
social unrest, human rights and the environment.

Now that the Manila meeting has come to an end, what should Thailand do
next?  It is important that the government continues to stick to its
principles.  It is equally important that the Thai public must be informed
of this policy and its plan of actions.  The Foreign Ministry needs to
further explain and educate authorities concerned and the people on the
streets that the flexible engagement is not about interference in domestic
affairs of neighbouring countries, especially Burma.  Or for that matter,
to destabilise our neighbours.

The initiative represents the government's conviction to protect Thailand's
fundamental values of respect of human rights, promotion of democracy and
transparency.  It is something the country stands for and is working hard
to attain under the new constitution.  What the Thais have gone through in
the past 12 months have made them realise that openness and transparency
are key ingredients in moving the country ahead and quickening economic
recovery.  Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan was right in saying that these
issues would come up anyway when Asean engages with the outside world.

In addition, to protect national interest, frank engagement and open
dialogues with friends on important issues are essential, particularly on
those that have direct impact on Thailand.  It would be ridiculous for
Thailand to remain silence when nearly one million refugees and illegal
workers from Burma are now residing in Thailand.

For instance, Thailand was able to take up issues related to refugees with
Cambodia and Laos without the hostile attitude of Burma.  They could settle
their problems amicably even though it did take some time.

>From now on, Surin said that the Thai government will raise and express
views on issues without fear of being misunderstood by, or antagonising
other member countries.  He believed that there is more awareness within
Asean that differences of perspectives would not affect Asean solidarity as
many have feared.

Far from divisive, the Manila meeting has marked the beginning of a renewal
process of Asean as Thailand and other members "continue the search for a
more cohesive caring and compassionate community."

It would be interesting to see what direction the pragmatic Singapore, the
host of the next Asean meeting will take next year, if the regional
economic situation remains as it is and that the Asean call for the
national reconciliation inside Burma has gone unheeded or that the country
remains the main obstacle to the betterment of Asean and EU relations.

Finally, it is the first time really that Thailand has stood up and
implemented disciplined diplomacy regarding democracy and human rights,
after almost eight months of lip service.  The government has realised that
it has to be forthright in these issues.  Lest other Asean countries
misunderstand, Thailand is serious about democracy and transparency and
striving hard to accomplish these noble aims.  The Thai government has the
public support in promoting such values and policy.

Some analysts and cynics have already questioned whether [ ... ] Thai
foreign policy will hold and pass the test of time.  At the moment, there
has been growing domestic pressure on Prime Minister Chuan Leekpai to call
for an [ ... ] election and they suspect that once Thailand has a new
government, the foreign policy that we know of today will change again.

With confidence, these elements will hold and stand the test of time.  Even
if the future Thai government would comprise leaders from entrepreneurial
parties, they have to observe and respect this policy direction. To do the
opposite would be an insult to the Thai public and the burgeoning
democracy, and betray the constitution.

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

ASIAWEEK: REINVENTING AUNG SAN? 
31 July, 1998 from Omar Farouk Darwin 

Letters & Comment

It is extremely late in the day for Aung San Sun Kyi to start "reinvesting"
her father as a "liberal and a democrat" ["Aung San," COVER STORY, June
12]. Suu Kyi seems oblivious of the fact that the Socialist regime of Gen.
Ne Win had exploited Aung San's political legacy to impose authoritarian rule.

The nationalist-socialists dusted off Aung San's "Blueprint for a Free
Burma," which was drafted in Tokyo in 1942. Aung San had written: "The
Burmese temperament demands always a strong, capable leadership and does
not want merely a figurehead. There shall be only one nation, one state,
one party, one leader. There shall be no parliamentary democracy, no
nonsense of individualism. Everyone must submit to the State, which is
supreme over the individual."

Whether the father of Burma's Independence believed in the blueprint is
open to question. But 20 years later, the document became state policy. In
1962, radical leftists and Aung San's army comrades justified seizing power
from U Nu "as being in line with the original desire of the nationalist
leader." Indeed, the Burma Socialist Program Party, which tyrannized the
nation from 1962 to 1988, claimed the blueprint to be in accord "with the
tone and temper of the Burmese Way to Socialism."

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