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

The BurmaNet News: June 28, 1999



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

The BurmaNet News: June 28, 1999
Issue #1302

HEADLINES:
==========
REUTERS: ENVOY REJECT HUMAN RIGHTS CHARGES 
IRRAWADDY: POET HARASSED FOR ARIS POEMS 
NATION: BURMA CHAMPIONS ASEAN VALUES? 
BKK POST: KARENS CLAIM RESPONSIBILITY FOR BLAST 
BKK POST: SHAN BUSINESS FIRM SET UP 
XINHUA: AUSTRALIAN IMPRISONED FOR DRUGS 
KOREAN HERALD: NGOS URGE STRATEGY 
RSF: INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR TORTURE VICTIMS 
NATION: ILO VOTE KILLS SUPACHAI'S CHANCES 
IRRAWADDY: US DENIES VISAS TO BURMESE ACTIVISTS 
****************************************************************

REUTERS: MYANMAR ENVOY REJECTS HUMAN RIGHTS CHARGES 
24 June, 1999 

KUALA LUMPUR - Myanmar Foreign Minister Win Aung on Thursday rejected
persistent charges of human rights violations in his country. 

"I would like to flatly deny these accusations," he told reporters in Kuala
Lumpur after meeting Malaysian Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar. 

"We don't have mass disappearances, we don't have mass killings or mass
graves, mass exodus, mass boat people. 

"People are not tortured and the country leads a normal life. Anybody can
come and see with their own eyes," he said. 

Win Aung, who is on a three-day visit to Malaysia, said such accusations
were made by those out to tarnish Myanmar's image. 

Myanmar's military government is frequently accused of widespread human
rights and labour abuses. 

The United States and the European Union have imposed sanctions because of
Yangon's rights record and the International Labour Organisation recently
banned the country from receiving aid or attending meetings until it halted
forced labour.  

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

THE IRRAWADDY: POET HARASSED FOR ARIS POEMS
May, 1999 

Vol. 7, No. 4

Poet Tin Moe has been under government scrutiny since he penned two poems
about Michael Aris for Aung San Suu Kyi.  He was also pressured to sign a
document stating that he would not write any chants to be performed for
this year's water festival. 

In a related story, the printer of paper fans for the commemoration of
Aris' death has been detained and his printing press and computers
impounded by authorities.
 
****************************************************************

THE NATION: BURMA CHAMPIONS ASEAN VALUES? 
25 June, 1999 by Kavi Chongkittavorn 

REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE 

Burma is taking Asean by the horns and is incrementally becoming the
defender of Asean values. Two recent trends show how.

At the recent meeting of the Asean standing committee in Bali, Indonesia,
the Burmese delegation circulated a piece of paper containing the five
principles to guide Asean. They were taken verbatim from the speech of
Singapore Foreign Minister S Jayakumar of 1997, on the eve of the welcoming
ceremony of Burma as the ninth member of Asean in Kuala Lumpur.

It quoted Jayakumar as saying Asean is guided by the principles of equality
and noninterference in domestic affairs. In addition, Asean cannot condone
the use of force to change an established government or an internationally
recognised political order and the need to have open economies based on
free markets. Finally, all Asean members have made Asean the cornerstone of
their foreign policy.


Asean officials were flabbergasted. It was the first time that a member
has done anything like that. No one knew the motive of Burma, but suffice
it to say that Burma wants to remind Asean of its state of being and its
principles that have governed Asean for the past three decades.

Burma has joined Asean for two years and its membership has become the main
source of friction among Asean members and the rest of its dialogue
partners. Canada, one of the biggest donors to Asean, has joined the
European Union in hardening its position against the Asian grouping. It has
recently informed Asean that it will not welcome Burma to attend the
upcoming joint Asean-Canada committee meeting. So far, Burma has not
contributed to the strengthening of the Asean fabric and polishing up of
its international image.

On the contrary, since Asean admitted Burma, the grouping's reputation has
plummeted to ground zero. It is now reaching the point where it can affect
the post ministerial meeting between Asean and its Western dialogue
partners next month.

Therefore, Burma's wise tactic of citing the words of Jayakumar has helped
because it has disarmed the rest of Asean even though it was Singapore's
interpretation of Asean, and not shared by all members.

Over the weekend in Geneva, at the conference of the International Labour
Organisation (ILO), by a vote of 333 in favour to 27 against, Asean,
including Thailand, voted against the resolution condemning Burma's
long-standing policy of practising forced labour. The resolution also
banned Burma from participating in any ILO activities and assistance until
Burma changes its labour policy. Both Thai representatives of trade unions
and employers' groups had the good sense and wisdom to join the rest of the
world to vote for the resolution.

Before the voting, Thailand was thinking of abstaining but somehow it chose
at the very end to support Burma's terrible suppression. Thailand will have
to pay a high prize for its decision. One immediate effect would be the
dwindling support for Dr Supachai Panichpakdi's bid for the World Trade
Organisation's top job.

Everybody knows that Thailand has a weakness on labour-related issues. Even
though the country has tried to improve its labour standards in the past
years, foreign trade unions and non-governmental organisations have
continued to urge Thailand to do more. The voting in Geneva has also
confirmed one facet of Thailand -- the inconsistency of the Chuan
government's foreign policy. It wavers under pressure and those declared
principles of human rights, democracy and civil societies remain mere
slogans. When need be, Thailand fails to show leadership.

Burma's assertiveness and Asean's collective defence of the new member's
ill-record were unprecedented and came at the time when plenty of questions
have been asked about the future of the organisation. It also comes at the
end of Singapore's Asean chairmanship. Next month, Thailand will serve as
the new chairman. Bangkok will prepare Asean's year-long activities and
programmes. It is not difficult to see the linkage between Burma's game
plans and Thailand's upcoming chairmanship.


Apparently, Rangoon is pre-empting Asean from undertaking any new steps
that are outside of Singapore's five principles.

The Asean foreign Ministers will have a retreat on Sentoza Island ahead of
their annual meeting next month in Singapore on two important topics: the
future of Asean and the future of Asean Regional Forum. Indonesian Foreign
Minister Ali Alatas and Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan have been tasked to
present their views on these two issues respectively.

As the most senior Asean foreign minister, Alatas will outline the crucial
developments that have taken place in the region, including the
democratisation process in his own country. It is anybody's guess what
would be his assessment of the future and direction of Asean now that the
grouping's largest member has already become more open and freer.

Will the latest development in Indonesia have any impact on Jakarta's Asean
policy and the future of Asean as a whole? Alatas probably has the answer.

When Surin presents the future of the ARF at the ministerial retreat, at
the top of his mind will be steps to ensure Asean's leading role in the
region-wide security forum. But mere words probably would not help much;
concrete measures have to be taken by Asean members to move the ARF process
forward. But then again, can Asean do that given its current widening gaps
of perceptions and developments in terms of political and security areas?

The newly-formed Asean Eminent Persons Group, which met early this month,
has been tasked to prepare a report on the Asean's future for the
grouping's leaders at the summit in Singapore next year. The group will
discuss the Asean Vision 2020, post-Asian crisis economic scenarios, food
security, civil societies and Asean Monetary Fund.

Many questions linger. Can the Asean wise men ignore the democratisation in
Indonesia and focus only on ways to promote economic cooperation even if
the current economic problems are rooted in political dictatorship and
cronyism? Is it possible for Asean to promote its international role by
remaining a political dinosaur and working only through economic
integration? Can Asean compete with a more liberal Mercusor -- grouping
Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay -- or other outward-looking
organisations?

It is ironic that Burma has quickly become the standard bearer of Asean in
the absence of real leadership in the grouping. If positive developments in
the region, highlighted through democratisation and openness, have been
ignored, one wonders how long Asean members have to speak and use the
rhetoric coming from Rangoon before real changes can take place.

These are challenges confronting Asean when it prepares for the transition
into the 21st century. Thailand has a special responsibility to usher Asean
along. If Thailand has to pretend and act while the democratisation of the
Thai political system and economic recovery cannot help Asean transform
itself into a better organisation, then why should Thailand stick around. 

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

THE BANGKOK POST: KARENS CLAIM RESPONSIBILITY FOR MINE BLAST 
27 June, 1999 


The anti-Rangoon Karen National Union has claimed responsibility for the
mine attack on a bus on a road opposite Mae Sot on Wednesday.

Seven people were killed and many injured in the attack.

A KNU source said the highway explosion was a warning to transport business
operators to take the group's protection fee demand seriously.

"We are capable of attacking any points along this 200km route," the source
said.

"Burmese soldiers cannot give anybody protection.

"It our demand is not met, we will attack large trucks transporting crucial
goods and oil," the source added.

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

THE BANGKOK POST: SHAN BUSINESS FIRM SET UP 
25 June, 1999 by Cheewin Sattha 

MAE HONG SON

Rangoon has allowed the first-ever company to be set up in Homong, the
former hometown of drug kingpin Khun Sa.

The Shan State South Co will run logging, gems mining and export businesses.

The firm was created after Rangoon agreed to allow a Shan ethnic group, led
by Col Maha Ja, to operate businesses in Homong.

Two years ago the Khun Sa-led Mong Tai Army surrendered to Rangoon and
Homong, its stronghold, was taken over by Burmese troops. It is now
governed by a joint committee of Burmese soldiers and Shan leaders.

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

XINHUA: AUSTRALIAN IMPRISONED FOR DRUGS IN MYANMAR 
25 June, 1999 

YANGON - An Australian and three Myanmar youths were respectively sentenced
to 10 years' imprisonment in connection with narcotic drug cases by a local
township court in Yangon east county early this month. 

The sentence was passed by the Tharkayta township court on June 4, the
Myanmar official evening newspaper the City News reported Thursday. 

The Australian and the other three persons were arrested on February 15
this year while the authorities searched the house of one of the three
Myanmar offenders in Tharkayta and found some narcotic drugs including
heroin in their possession. 

This is the first time that a foreigner has been punished under Myanmar's
narcotic drug laws.

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

KOREAN HERALD: NGOS URGE STRATEGY TO BRING DEMOCRACY 
24 June, 1999 

Ending their two-day international conference on the democratization of
Myanmar, participants called yesterday for a more comprehensive and
balanced strategy for bring democracy to the Southeast Asian nation.

The strategies must include both soft and hard policies, said a statement
summarizing discussions at the conference attended by dozens of prominent
leaders of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) from around the world.

The conference, entitled "New NGO strategy for the democratization of
Burma," was organized by the Forum of Democratic Leaders in the
Asia-Pacific (FDL-AP), a Seoul-based nonprofit international organization
established in 1994 to promote democracy and human rights in the
Asia-Pacific region and beyond.

Siding with Burmese democracy fighters, the FDL-AP refuses to recognize the
state name of Myanmar, which was decreed by the country's military junta in
1989. Until then, the country was known as Burma.


Two main dilemmas for NGO policy strategy are whether it will be easier to
implement policy through internal or external means, and whether the direct
benefit of the citizens or the legitimization of the government should come
first, the statement noted.

"It is seen though that the strategies must include both soft and hard
policy. An essential question is what the Burmese wish of the NGOs, in
other words, their role in the democratization of Burma," it said.

As part of the comprehensive approach, the participants agreed that NGOs
should be more active in operating in Myanmar, while giving due respect to
the military regime and promoting greater cooperation with larger
international organizations.

The NGO leaders shared the view efforts should be strengthened to educate
and provide material support to Burmese citizens to help transform Burmese
society into a civil society.

In parallel with the "soft" approach, they also pledged to continue pushing
for tough measures against the military regime in Myanmar, including
continued implementation of economic sanctions and support for
pro-democracy groups in the country.

NGOs must be harsh on the military junta to force them to accept the softer
options of the National League for Democracy (NLD), Myanmar's major
opposition force, said the statement.

Although NGOs have made a small but positive change in Burma in terms of
the exposure of the Burmese situation to the world, the participants
admitted many limitations remain for NGOs.

Such limitations include not only the military junta's relentless exercise
of power but self-induced restrictions, including an unwillingness to
search out problems such as poverty, a lack of communication and knowledge
about Burmese society and thus an inability to form alliances within the
country.

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

REPORTERS SANS FRONTIERES: INTERNATIONAL DAY FOR TORTURE VICTIMS 
25 June, 1999 

PRESS RELEASE/REPORT - BURMA, SUDAN, SYRIA AND TURKEY

[Excerpts related to Burma.]

International Day of Support for Torture Victims

Nine journalists were tortured by the Turkish police in 1998. Another
suffered the same fate in March 1999. In Syria, 11 journalists languishing
in the country's jails were victims of typical forms of ill-treatment. In
Zimbabwe, two journalists suffered burn marks and psychological damage
after being tortured for two days in January by soldiers. In May a foreign
correspondent based in Khartoum, Sudan, was unable to put any weight on his
right foot because of burns inflicted while he was being held in solitary
confinement. In Burma, an imprisoned journalist spent several weeks in a
cage meant for a dog. Under General Sani Abacha's dictatorship in Nigeria,
at least four journalists were jailed in inhuman and degrading conditions.

Yet article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that
no-one may be subjected to "torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading
penalties or treatment." The same clause appears in article 7 of the United
Nations' International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. And article
2 of the United Nations' Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment stipulates that countries that
have ratified the convention it should "take effective legislative,
administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent acts of torture from
being committed in any territories under their jurisdiction."


Many countries do not respect the provisions of those agreements. Some of
them -- Turkey, Sudan, Syria and Burma -- practise torture on a massive
scale, particularly against journalists. Not only are the governments of
the countries concerned violating the inalienable right of all human beings
not to be subjected to cruel acts; they are also contravening their
obligation to respect the right to inform and to be informed.

RSF is calling on Turkey and Burma to ratify the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights and asking Nigeria, Sudan, Syria and Zimbabwe,
which have already ratified the covenant, to respect their international
undertakings in this respect. RSF is also calling on Burma, Syria and
Zimbabwe to ratify the United Nations' Convention Against Torture, asking
Nigeria and Sudan, which have already signed the convention, to ratify it,
and asking Turkey, which has ratified the convention, to respect the
commitment it made by doing so.


Report

Burma, Sudan, Syria and Turkey: torture as a means of repression

[ ... ]

Sudan and Burma: damning accounts of torture

Many Asian countries are suspected of using torture to silence journalists
but we have very few accounts to confirm that such practices exist.
Nevertheless, it has been established that torture and ill-treatment are
used in Burmese prisons against political prisoners, including journalists.
In mid-November 1995, Win Tin, editor of the daily Hanthawathi, who has
been serving a ten-year jail sentence since July 1989, and four others
being held at Insein prison, all members of the National League for
Democracy (NLD, the party of Nobel peace prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi),
have suffered ill-treatment. Prison officers started by questioning the
five men about letters they smuggled out of the prison to Professor Yozo
Yokota, the United Nations' special rapporteur on human rights in Burma,
which gave details of their appalling prison conditions and the cruelty
they had suffered. They are forced to sleep on the concrete floor, with no
mattresses or blankets, in "military recesses", tiny cells that usually
serve as dog kennels. The five men have also been banned from receiving
visits from their families, which are normally allowed once a fortnight.
They have therefore been deprived of the food and medicines the visitors
used to bring for them.

Laws that make torture easy

Imprisonment outside the usual legal framework is a factor that makes
torture more liable to occur. Imprisonment that is illegal in the eyes of
international law also exists in Burma. Under the law to protect the state,
any citizen may be kept in custody or under house arrest without being
charged or tried for anything up to three years. The same is true of Sudan,
where a law on national security grants exceptional powers to the police
and army. Another factor that encourages the practice of torture is the
existence in Sudan of many "ghost houses", secret and illegal detention
centres over which the legal authorities have no control. People held there
do not have access to the services of either doctors or lawyers.


[ ... ]

For further information, contact Manuel Jardinaud at RSF, 5, rue Geoffroy
Marie, Paris 75009, France, tel: +33 1 44 83 84 84, fax: +33 1 45 23 11 51,
e-mail: asie@xxxxxx Internet: http://www.rsf.fr

The information contained in this press release/report is the sole
responsibility of RSF. In citing this material for broadcast or
publication, please credit RSF.

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

THE NATION: ILO VOTE KILLS SUPACHAI'S CHANCES 
25 June, 1999 by Yindee Lertcharoenchok 

Last week the International Labour Organisation passed an unprecedented
resolution which virtually expels Burma from the body. Thailand
unexpectedly joined other Asean members in voting against its passage. The
Nation's Yindee Lertcharoenchok looks at the Thai stance and its implications.

Deputy Prime Minister Supachai Panitchpakdi must have been unaware of his
imminent loss in the up-hill struggle for the World Trade Organisation's
top job when his Democrat led government last week joined a minority bloc
to vote against the passage of a crucial international resolution
condemning Burma's use of forced labour.

The Thai decision not only shocked many of its Asian and Western allies,
particularly Japan, which had lobbied to the last minute to water down the
ILO document before its eventual passing, but also infuriated many Thai
government officials, especially those who had advised Thailand to vote
otherwise.

On June 17, the ILO annual assembly in Geneva overwhelmingly adopted an
unprecedented resolution which constitutes a de facto expulsion of Burma
and a refusal of all ILO technical assistance to the Southeast Asian
country because of the systematic use of forced labour by the Burmese junta.

Although the ILO has no mechanism to officially expel its members, the
resolution, which was approved by a large majority of government, employers
and workers delegates from 174 ILO member states, virtually bans Burma's
representatives from attending meetings, symposia and seminars organised by
the ILO. The precedence of the document, which received 333 votes for, 27
against, and 47 abstentions, could force other United Nations agencies to
consider and adopt similar exclusive measures against the Burmese regime.
(Each of the 174 country members have four votes -- two for the government,
one each for the employers and the workers.)

The ILO decision followed joint action and complaints by trade union and
employer organisations within the ILO and the conclusion of the ILO
Commission of Inquiry that the ruling Burmese regime continued "to inflict
the practice of forced labour, nothing but a contemporary form of slavery,
on the people of Burma".

Despite Rangoon's denial of such practices and refusal of entry into Burma,
the ILO Commission, based on eye-witnesses' accounts, produced more than
6,000 pages of documents which concluded that "the obligation to suppress
the use of forced or compulsory labour is violated in Burma in national law
as well as in actual practice in a widespread and systematic manner, with
total disregard for the human dignity, safety and health and the basic
needs of the people."


The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, which represents 213
trade union organisations in 145 countries, had also provided fresh
evidence of forced labour and estimated that "more than 800,000 Burmese are
subjected to forced labour".

Apart from Brunei which is not an ILO member, and Laos which was not
present at the meeting, the other eight Asean members, including Burma, all
voted against the resolution. In total, delegates of only 11 countries --
representing government, employers or workers -- were against the ILO
document. Interestingly, both the Thai employers and trade workers
delegates voted in support of the document.

The Thai government's stance on the ILO resolution is a clear departure
from the position adopted late last year when the Foreign Ministry decided
that Thailand would give a supporting voice if the UN General Assembly in
New York was to call for a vote on its resolution on Burma. The annual UN
resolution has been adopted by consensus for the past 10 years. It remains
unclear why the Foreign Ministry took a different approach at the ILO,
despite the fact that there had been strong internal recommendations that
Thailand should vote in support of the ILO document. At most, it should
have abstained from voting.

Talking to reporters in Bangkok after the historic voting, Foreign Minister
Surin Pitsuwan gave away very little of his view, saying only that he hoped
the ILO resolution will not result in Burma's further isolation from the
international community. Foreign Ministry spokesman Don Pramudwinai was
more outspoken and openly attacked the world labour body.

He said Thailand and other Asean members denounced the ILO decision and
warned of adverse effects from Burma's isolation. Surin is said to have
been on an overseas trip when the final Thai stance was taken at the
ministry and delivered to its mission in Geneva.

Officials at several Thai government agencies, including the Prime
Minister's Office, expressed surprise when asked about the passage of the
ILO resolution and its implications. Many subsequently voiced strong
disapproval over the Thai position and the lack of inter-agency
consultations before such a crucial decision was taken.

As one high-ranking Thai official put it, the Thai stance at the ILO
reflected "a seriously wrong judgement" on the part of the Foreign
Ministry's top leadership which seems to have adopted "short-sighted and
narrow views" of Thai diplomacy and its relations with Burma. They also
seem unable to read and differentiate short-term versus long-term interests
and national versus Asean interests. At serious stake is Thai credibility
in the eyes of the world community, particularly major western trade
partners -- the United States and the European Union -- which have been
strong critics of poor Thai labour standard and practices.

"We [Thailand] have committed a wrong policy. If we believe that Burma will
feel grateful and pay us back for vote against the resolution, they (Burma)
have never done so," noted another upset senior Government House official,
who heavily criticised the Foreign Ministry for failure to consult other
key agencies before committing the country to such an important
international matter.


As it turns out, Thailand stands to lose badly from its poor ILO decision.
Records have shown time and again that Thailand's apologetic defence of the
Burmese junta's political repression and human rights violations has
regularly put the country in the firing line both at home and abroad. Its
unequivocal association with the dictatorial and unrepentant Burmese regime
has jeopardised not only the Thai international standing and credibility
but also Thai national interests.

By refusing to bless the ILO resolution, Thailand virtually anoints itself
as a permanent sanctuary for an estimated one million Burmese illegal
immigrants and refugees who fled to Thailand because of political and
military suppression and all forms of human rights abuses -- forced labour
and relocation. The Burmese ruling generals have never accepted the
presence of these Burmese living-in exile and thus refuse to cooperate in
their repatriation.

Moreover, Thailand's highly-publicised policy of flexible engagement with
Burma in which the country reserves the rights to defend the national
interests over the solidarity and interests of Asean grouping proves to be
mere lip service and a laughing stock among Asean countries, most of whom
have openly been opposed to its adoption from the very beginning.

As Thailand chose to side with the ILO minority opponents, most of whom
have had damaged labour and human rights records, it only confirms Western
criticism of the Kingdom's poor labour rights standard and practices which
include the exploitation of child and cheap alien labour.

Deputy Prime Minister Supachai must be forgiven if he loses in the WTO bid
because of internal sabotage by his political colleagues and civil servants
who played wittingly or innocently into the hands of those countries which
oppose his WTO candidacy on the grounds of bad labour policy in Thailand.

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

THE IRRAWADDY: US DENIES VISAS TO BURMESE ACTIVISTS 
May, 1999

Vol 7. No. 4

Burmese pro-democracy activists living in exile in neighboring countries
have reported recently that US consular authorities have informed them that
they would no longer be permitted to enter the US using unofficial Burmese
passports. 

Many Burmese, including prominent leaders of political organizations, use
the passports to enable them to remain in their host countries. Members of
political organizations deemed hostile to Burma's military regime are
automatically denied the right to carry official Burmese passports. 

The refusal to issue visas to prominent dissidents was met with dismay by
activists who occasionally visit the US at the invitation of institutions
active in promoting dialogue amongst pro-democracy groups. The US also
imposed a visa ban on junta officials.

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