[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

Views from the Karen Naitonal Leagu



Subject: Views from the Karen Naitonal League

Dear all,

Below is "Views from the Karen Natinal League (KNL)" regarding a response made
by Deputy Chief of Mission of the Myanmar Embassy in Washington DC.

Help: I try "strider@xxxxxxxxxxx" to get posted on the Burmanet, but it often
fails because it might not be the right way.  If any of you know how to get
posted on the Burmanet, please, please help me post this article.

thanks,

Saw Kapi

============================

January 27, 1999

Views from the Karen National League (KNL)

Re:  	Response of the Burmese Embassy Deputy Chief of Mission to the Bangkok
Post and LA Weekly article of ?UNOCAL Implicated in Burma Strife?.  

	I believe that his well-written missive requires some elucidation on our
part.

	First of all, I don?t think spin masters need be created to generate
sympathy for the anti-government groups.  After all, no government on earth is
free from opposing or dissident parties or organizations.  It is only that
there are some governments that will not permit or tolerate even peaceful and
non-violent expressions against them, and we do not have to elaborate on this.

	It would certainly sound simplistic to say that UNOCAL and TOTAL hire Burmese
soldiers who engage in violent campaigns against ethnic minority groups in the
region, although the fact remains that their business makes it quite lucrative
for the Burmese government who has the duty to provide security and also
deploy more troops in the area whenever deemed necessary, and of course they
are not always a mercenary force on the rampage.  On the other hand, the
recently scheduled ASEAN-EU meeting in Bangkok was postponed to the end of
March due to controversy over the participation of Burma and Laos,  and this
might be indirectly linked to the distressingly poor Burmese government human
rights track record, not just on the hapless border ethnic minorities, but
also on the domestic Bamar people, including the NLD leaders and members.

	We were treated to a brief discourse on how the Tatmadaw came into being, and
yet the name of the very leader who led the 30 patriots and who was later
assassinated, along with his cabinet members, was blatantly omitted.  To say
that only the Tatmadaw is patriotic, and with the ?advent of peace? is now
devoting most of its time to nation building, is somewhat absurd.  The peace
accord with the 16+ armed groups is rather misleading, to say the least.  Some
of these groups are just biding their time to jump back into their former
resistive mode.  Consider now the Burmese military government, beginning with
the Burma Socialist Program Party (BSPP), then SLORC, and currently SPDC, that
has had almost 37 years to reconstruct the country, left almost in total
destruction after World War II, and all it has managed to do is to have the
nation (with better natural resources and a bit smaller population than, say,
the neighboring Thailand, which is also slightly smaller in area than Burma)
relegated by the UN to the demeaning ?least developed country? status.

	No one will deny that the Tatmadaw is an efficacious fighting machine that
has had wide experience, albeit against its own people in the country.  What

the Tatmadaw ought to be reminded now is that it is not just the soldiers who
love their country and are patriotic.  There are countless others from
different walks of life, both inside and outside Burma, who can easily lay
claim to their patriotism.  It is unlikely that the Tatmadaw will ever admit
to its own frailties, one of them being its defective economic policy.  The
Deputy Mission Chief himself has already implied, perhaps not in so many
words, that the country is in need of humanitarian assistance, and mentioned
Representative Tony Hall urging others to do the ?life saving work that is
desperately needed? for the Burmese people.  The concern of those familiar
with the modus operandi of the prevailing Burmese government is that such aids
will benefit only the top few percent and the rest of the population would
never know the difference.  Besides, as one recent E-mail communication puts
it, ?Hall is one of the more than 500 Congressmen voices, is not particularly
engaged on the Burma issue, and there is no reason to believe that his ?one
man show? in any way reflects a change of policy in D.C.?  In the final
analysis, it is up to the Burmese people themselves.  If only the generals
will be a little flexible and begin to look for ways to cooperate with other
Bamar and ethnic minority opposition forces, domestic as well as those in
foreign soil, instead of always trying to cow and oppress them, there may be
some hope for improvement in the country.

	About the KNU and the Karens (Kayins, if you insist), one has to be a Karen
to feel the ethnicity.  There is general concurrence that colonial rule and
Christian missionaries, the former including avaricious but fairly decent
British merchants, and the latter mostly of well-meaning but sometimes
slightly misguided American clergy people, are indirectly  (in very rare
instances, directly) responsible for most of the post World War II ethnic
imbroglio in Burma.  The inapt nineteenth century Burmese monarchs themselves
who were too crass and vain to maintain good diplomacy with potential
colonialists, and thereby losing their country to them should also shoulder
part of the blame.  Without colonial rule, ethnic problems might not have
risen, and even if they have, they might not have grown to this proportion. 
Now it is too late to solve these problems by force.  The stronger Tatmadaw
may win the battles, but the war will still continue.

	The KNU might represent less than one percent of the Karen population and yet
I?m quite sure that the vast majority of the remaining 99+ % of the Karens are
sympathetic, if not actively supporting, the KNU cause.  And the KNL is fully
behind the KNU, not because of the continuance of armed resistance against the
military government or the Burmans per se.  The days of ethnic hatred against
Burmans, in general, are no more, and the remaining antagonism toward certain
elements representing the Burma Army can vanish when insidious and inimical
activities are discontinued.  Supporting of the KNU rests mainly on the policy
of resistance against an oppressive government using troops that, at times,
would go berserk and commit atrocities akin to that of ?ethnic cleansing?, and

this, in spite of their claim of never harming innocent citizens who are
their
own ?kith and kin?.

	The present names of the states, Kawthoolei, Shan, Mon, Kachin, Chin, Arakan
or Yakhaing, Kayah, etc. are quite nominal.  What the ethnic minorities (Lu
Neh Su Myah) want is genuine autonomy without the threat and tight control of
the Central government, military or otherwise.

	Finally, I must acknowledge the fact that it is because of democratic
principles in this country that I am able to present the above views.  I
shudder to think of being in Burma (Myanmar, if you wish) now and voicing
my opinion.

BaSaw Khin
Director of Research Division
Department of Political Affairs
Karen National League (KNL)