Bangkok Post(16/4/99)

[mandalay@xxxxxxxxxx]

<center><bold>Rangoon's actions warrant sanctions</bold>=20

</center>

	Let's face it. The problem of Burma is really much deeper, less simple
and more international than most people assume.

	Bypassing the superficial and simplistic levels, constructive engagement
has been tried (really not in good faith) and has failed. It is now badly
discredited and has been called "increasingly bizarre". The idea that
drug smuggling, refugee troubles and forest fire smog are mere "internal
matters" is nonsense.

	It is generally accepted that Slorc (SPDC) is reprehensible and change
and peace are necessary. The debate between human rights and Slorc's
violent intransigence begins to seem like a dispute between intelligent,
sensible compassion and senseless, stupid brutality.

	But there is another, more thoughtful debate: Pro-democracy human rights
groups demand to isolate Burma and pressure Slorc to step down, or at
least open a dialogue with the NLD and minorities or so-called
insurgents. But more conservative businessmen insist: "Sincere friendship
and promises of rewards will encourage the Myanmar (Burma) government to
change and open up. Isolation is counter-productive and may make Slorc
worse. Good business and economic progress will help and result in
political development, democracy and prosperity for (almost) all. Asean
to the rescue, but politically we will not interfere."Interfere is a
smear word contrived to associate human rights issues with rude,
intrusive violation of privacy, knowing how offensive it is to eastern
Asian values. Unocal, Total and Mitsubishi are major investors in Slorc
and promote this propaganda to resist international pressure and
criticism. They even have professional lawyers composing articulate,
fortified, anti-sanction, pro-investment arguments. "Sanctions are
counter-productive. They hurt people, not regimes. Consider nearly four
decades of failed US sanctions against Cuba and other countries (ie,
Libya, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq)... their leaders remain entrenched," says a
lawyerly article signed by Unocal's president.

	Aside from the question of what use constructive engagement is, the
comparison with Burma does not apply. None of these regimes have a
strong, active, organised, internal opposition, an internationally
famous, charismatic, courageous opposition leader like Aung San Suu=20

Kyi.

	Historically, sanctions are essentially sieges and most sieges have been
successful. Recent examples of successful sanctions are Nepal and South
Africa. Lately, Slorc has been extremely insecure. But however unpopular,
unwanted and hated, it is very actively supported in secret by their
allies in China, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia.

	The former dictators Suharto and Ne Win are very close friends and
clearly act like regional godfathers. Slorc also avoided early bankruptcy
by its highly evident involvement in the drug trade. Khun Sa and other
warlords live in luxury, impunity and safety while illicit money
laundering accounts for a large part of Slorc's mysteriously large
income, and 45 to 65 percent of the national budget goes to the
military.

	To call the problems mere national, internal affairs is another absurd
myth. International sanctions will thwart Slorc's survival tactics and
are an alternative to "open warfare". They are the only way to teach
Slorc lessons in civilised conduct.


                       Marilyn Vanderheyden and Jim E. Lucas

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