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

BURMA/BOYCOTT



Los Angeles Times 
11th March 99  

Thursday, March 11, 1999 
READERS RESPOND 
Does Santa Monica's Myanmar boycott work? 



  was disappointed by your article on the effectiveness of selective
contracting policies on Burma ("Myanmar boycott divides experts," Feb. 28). 
     In his book "In Sight of Surrender", Les de Villiers concluded, after
reviewing 46 years of U.S. policy toward apartheid, that sanctions work. 
     Bear in mind that Burma has voted for a parliament. Though not allowed
to formally convene and still subjected to military harassment, those
parliamentarians have called on the world community to block investment
until there has been real progress toward democratization. We can debate
until we are blue in the face, but it would be arrogant not to support those
who were elected to office. 
     The fact is, few companies are "perfectly willing" to replace those who
have abandoned the Burmese military regime. Pepsi got out of Burma, and Coke
stayed out. 
     DAVID WOLFBERG 
     Venice * 
     In the last year, I've protested Santa Monica's foreign policy,
especially our sanctions against Myanmar -- or "Burma", in the old ethnical
convention of the British Empire. Unfortunately, the "divide" your article
portrays is only that between the supporters of economic sanctions and those
that think them ineffective -- who'd presumably favor a more warlike stance. 
     I've also carried the protest to the Los Angeles City Council. On the
day that city passed its policy on dealing with Myanmar, I was the only
speaker who opposed the legislation. Having seen Los Angeles' documentation
from the Intergovernmental Affairs Committee, I can tell you that
nongovernmental organizations involved may note be as "unsided" as they say. 
     BRIAN HUTCHINGS 
     Santa Monica