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

NEWS - Dissident Movement Debating



Subject: NEWS -  Dissident Movement Debating Violence Option

Rights-Burma: Dissident Movement Debating Violence Option

BANGKOK, (Oct. 25) IPS - The hostage-taking by dissident students at the
Burmese embassy here in early October, apart from souring Thai-Burma
ties, has kindled heated debate within the Burmese pro-democracy
movement over the use of violent means to further its cause. 

Some have condoned the action by the five armed students on Oct. 1 as
being misguided but understandable, given the standoff between the
military and pro-democracy, opposition forces. 

Others fear that resorting to violence could damage the overall
pro-democracy struggle which is largely non-violent in its actions
against the junta, which calls itself the State Peace and Development
Council. 

On Oct. 1, five members of the so-called "Vigorous Burmese Students
Warriors" (VBSW), armed with guns and grenades, stormed the Burmese
embassy and seized 38 hostages, demanding restoration of democracy in
Burma. 

The hostages were released after protracted negotiations with the Thai
government and after Thai deputy foreign minister Sukumband Paribatra
offered himself as a substitute for the captured foreign tourists and
Burmese embassy staff. 

Although the hostage-takers made political demands from the military
leaders in Rangoon, there is no doubt that they were never seriously
expecting a positive response from the regime. 

The main objective of the embassy seizure was to embarrass the Burmese
military rulers and make an international, well-publicized protest
against them. 

But even more than the students' action itself, what seems to have
infuriated the Burmese military more is the tacit support shown to the
pro-democracy movement by the Thai government -- which until recently
had been one of the staunchest allies of the Rangoon regime. 

During negotiations with the hostage-takers, Thai Interior Minister Maj
Gen Sanan Kachornprasart referred to them as "students fighting for
democracy" rather than terrorists. 

That episode has also upset a lot of Thai human rights groups too, which
have been at the forefront of efforts within Thailand and in Asia to
support the Burmese pro-democracy movement. 

They have voiced their disagreement with the violent means used by the
students. "We are afraid that all exiled Burmese students and refugees
living in Thailand will be blamed as pro-violence activists in the
aftermath of the incident," said Somchai Homlaor, secretary general of
Forum Asia. 

Human rights groups say that though they understood that the students
were under pressure to respond to the harsh dictatorship in Burma, the
use of violence would only be counterproductive. 

The All Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF), the largest and best
known of pro-democracy student organizations in exile, said none of the
students involved were members of their group. "We will always follow
the policy of non-violence in our struggle against the Burmese regime,"
said Dr Naing Aung, president of the front, soon after the incident. 

ABSDF members trace the action of the hostage-takers to the failure of
the 9-9-99 campaign, launched a few months ago to spark off an uprising
against the Burmese regime by Sept. 9 this year, to make any headway. 

"The members of VBSW were desperate that the 9/9/99 campaign could not
shake the Rangoon regime's power. They then decided to use violent
methods to draw the attention of the outside world," an ABSDF member
said on condition of anonymity. 

According to Burmese pro-democracy sources the Vigorous Burmese Student
Warriors, which carried out the embassy seizure, was formed as recently
as September 1999. Two of the key leaders of the group are Kyaw Ni or
Johnny, 31, and Myint Tein or Preeda, 30, identified as pivotal
assailants in the embassy raid. 

According to Thai intelligence sources the other three involved in the
seizure were not students but soldiers with a faction of the Karen
ethnic minority which has been fighting for independence from Rangoon
for the past five decades. 

The history of the Burmese student pro-democracy groups, in recent
times, goes back to 1988 when they spearheaded a popular uprising
against the General Ne Win regime, which responded with bloody
suppression of the movement. 

Hundreds of students who fled to the Thai-Burma border formed the ABSDF
with the help of the Karen National Union (KNU), the main political body
of the Karen ethnic minority group. 

"At that time, they were young extremists, wanting to be rebels. They
thought that their movement could topple the dictatorial regime before
long," recalled Sittipong Kalayani of the Chiang Mai-based Images Asia,
an NGO working with Burmese students for the past decade. 

The ABSDF split in 1989 itself due to ideological differences between
its leaders Moe Thee Zun, a left-winger and the more moderate Dr Naing
Aung. 

"Moe Thee Zun thought that 'the Burmese way to socialism' was not
genuine socialism. He wanted to pursue revolution by using armed force,"
Sittipong said. "In contrast, Naing Aung was a moderate with political
charisma." 

Both factions however started off with the perception that the Burmese
regime could be overthrown only by the use of armed action. Both
therefore formed student armies. 

The armies, always small in number and poorly equipped, made little
headway in any meaningful action against Burmese forces and slowly
dissipated into ragtag bands of armed students fighting alongside ethnic
rebel groups. The split in the ABSDF was also a factor in the fall of
the student army. 

In recent years however, both factions of the ABSDF have reconciled
their differences and reunited. Subsequently, the students' group has
renounced violence and spelt out a non-violent strategy for bringing
democracy in Burma along with other democratic forces inside the country
led by Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. 

The non-violent path of struggle has also been endorsed by NGOs and
human rights groups around the world backing the Burmese pro- democracy
movement. Most advocate sanctions against the Burmese regime and an
economic and political boycott to bring about change within Burma. 

But the international campaign against the Rangoon regime, despite a few
minor victories, has yet to make any real impact on the political
situation in Burma. 

Since the pro-democracy uprising in 1988 the regime has only changed for
the worse domestically, while improving its international image through
diplomatic support mainly from countries in the Association of
South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) like Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia and
Indonesia. 

Rights groups here say that they can understand the pressure that
Burmese students feel to make a genuine impact on the regime's hold on
power against the wishes of the Burmese people. 

"The pressure on the Burmese students may make them resort to violent
political means in the future," said Somchai. However, he also points
out that the path of violence can be avoided only if there is more
concerted international effort to oust the Burmese military rulers
through peaceful means. 

Meantime, Somchai urged the Thai government to treat the exiled Burmese
inside Thailand according to human rights principles and give them the
opportunity to express their political demands peacefully. "Only then
can we avoid any possible violence and also contribute positively to a
democratic Burma in the future," he said.