BurmaNet News: December 20, 1999

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

---------------- The BurmaNet News ----------------
December 20, 1999 
Issue # 1416
---------------------------------------------------- 

========== 
HEADLINES: 
========== 

Inside Burma-
 MIZZIMA: MASSAGE PARLOURS MUSHROOMING IN BURMA
 NLD: REGIME CANCELS WEDDING RECEPTION TO SHUT OUT DAW SUU KYI

International?
 UTNE READER:  FREE BURMA, MAYBE
 AFP: OPPOSITION CLAIM IN NO CONFIDENCE DEBATE
 NATION: NAP LEADER CLAIMS SURIN HELPED FUGITIVE

Other-

 NATION: [LINTNER ON MYANMAR/BURMA]


*******************************************************
MIZZIMA: MASSAGE PARLOURS MUSHROOMING IN BURMA
  
Massage Parlours mushrooming in Burma 
By Sein Win 
Mizzima News Group 

North Okkalapa, Yangon, December 18, 1999: Burma did not have the 
culture of "massage parlour" till 1988. Due to self-styled open market 
economy of the present military regime, which came into power by bloody 
coup in September 1988, massage parlours are nowadays mushrooming in 
Burma. 

In Rangoon alone, there are at least in the region of 30 massage 
parlours. Normally they charge Kyat 1,000 or Kyat 1,500 (about US $ 4) 
for one "session". Most of them are attached with beauty parlours. It is 
a lucrative business. 

Most of the girls working in the parlours hail from countryside. 
Initially, there were those who came from places such as Mandalay, Shan 
State and Karen State. Now they came from all over the country. Girls 
join massage parlours instead of working as maidservants. They get Kyat 
200 per hour as wage. One girl has to massage at least five mail persons 
a day. 

"Haftha" or "protection money" imposed on the massage parlours is more 
than haftha imposed on gambling dens. Some of the operatives run the 
business in the name of intelligence agencies of the country. 
Intelligence agencies also run the business themselves. 

Moreover, those erstwhile insurgent organizations, which have become 
"peaceful", also run massage parlours. Ko Kant and Wa organizations, 
which entered into "truce" with the military regime in 1990s, are also 
known to be in this business. One massage parlour at Sanchaung Township 
in Rangoon, which belongs to Ko Kants was not even searched by 
authorities despite complaints lodged by local residents. The search 
parties just searched rest houses instead. 

The Ko Kant's massage parlour was saved at the instruction from the 
higher authorities. The higher authorities have reportedly imposed 
blanket ban on searching of the Ko Kants' massage parlour. They (the 
massage parlours) do not care the police. 

Birth room type rooms are there in the said massage parlours. The girls 
shun clothes while massaging their customers. This type of massage costs 
the customer more. For one hour, it charges Kyat 6,000. There is one 
massage parlour in the compound of No. 26 Military Intelligence Unit in 
Rangoon. Every massage parlour has connection with one or another 
intelligence organization. "Haftha" has to be paid on weekly or monthly 
basis. 

While normal business enterprises are not doing well, this type of 
business is prospering. Contract-based construction business, which 
flourished for some years, is now declining. Import-export business and 
travel and tour business are not doing well. 

Garment factory business (ready-made garment industry) is so far 
profitable. Manufacturing sector is just on the margin. 

However, one interesting development is increasing volume of Burmese 
Kyats in the banks. It is noticed that banks are advancing loans to some 
industries. But things are not as easy as well. Friendship with members 
of the Board of Directors of the bank or readiness to pay cut can only 
ensure loan sanction. 

Wages are not increased in private sectors. Lowest monthly salary is 
Kyat 5,000 and the highest is Kyat 15,000. Starting pay of a worker in a 
ready-made garment factory is Kyat 3,000. He can earn Kyat 6,000 (about 
US $ 19) a month only if he works overtime. And he has to work more than 
ten hours a day. 

(Currently, 1 US $ is equivalent to Kyat 320) 


*******************************************************
NLD: REGIME CANCELS WEDDING RECEPTION TO SHUT OUT DAW SUU KYI

National League for Democracy
No: (97/B), West Shwegonedine Road
Bahan Township, Rangoon

Statement 175 (12/99) (translation)

1.  We have received news relating to the cancellation of arrangements
for a wedding reception of the son of a certain Sergeant stationed at
Rangoon Division, Dala Township Police Force and the daughter of an NLD
member.

2. After the Thrizeya Reception Hall in Dala township had been hired for
the occasion, the bridegroom's father received a phone call from the
military intelligence on the night of 1st December, 1999 inquiring if
the bride-to-be had any relatives in the NLD.  He confirmed that the
wedding was to be held on the 5th December 1999 and said that he was not
sure about the relatives being NLD members. However, he didn't think it
was probable because the bride was a member of the civil service. He was
then told that at a meeting Daw Aung San Suu Kyi had mentioned that she
would be attending the ceremony and this information had been
transmitted by the central military intelligence to their township
section.

3.  The parties concerned were keen to avoid any misunderstanding so
they went and explained matters to the military intelligence. They
admitted that one of them was an NLD member and the spouse was a civil
servant. No NLD member had been invited. All invitations were out.  Then
the military intelligence required secrecy of all the things that had
transpired and insisted that they go themselves to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi
and prevent her from attending the wedding. This was agreed to because
they did not want any disruption to the arrangements. They were also
required to report back after completion of the task.

4.  Despite the above, on the morning of the 2nd December, the
bride-to-be tearfully informed her parents that wedding arrangements had
been cancelled and invitations had to be revoked.

5.  On 3rd December, the military intelligence told the Sergeant that
the case was not closed as yet and asked if they had met with Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi as yet. The Sergeant thought that since the wedding had been
cancelled on the 2nd and invitations recalled there was no need to
proceed further in the matter. But they insisted that Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi be contacted.

6. From the above it appears that the authorities are so consumed with
fear that they panic as soon as they get a bit of news and without
inquiry or justification will disrupt and prevent people from performing
their traditional cultural ceremonies regardless of the sorrow and
disappointment to the prospective bride and groom and their relatives
and parents.  This should not happen.

7.  This disruption to a wedding ceremony reflects a total absence of
fellow feeling and is an extremely mean exercise.


Central Executive Committee
National League for Democracy
Rangoon

17 December 1999


*******************************************************
UTNE READER:  FREE BURMA, MAYBE
December 1999

Free Burma, Maybe
Can cities and states boycott rogue regimes?

By Dan Orzech, Utne Reader 

Since the early 1990s, an international campaign modeled on the
anti-apartheid movement of the 1980s  has struggled to bring democracy
to the people of Burma.

Like the anti-apartheid campaign, the Burma movement has used divestment
and purchasing laws to pressure an oppressive regime into political
reforms. More than two dozen U.S. cities and counties have passed Free
Burma purchasing laws. One of the first of these measures was enacted in
1996 by the Massachusetts state legislature.

But a recent court decision threatens to pull the rug out from under the
Free Burma laws--and lots of other laws at the same time. As a result of
a lawsuit brought by the National Foreign Trade Council (NFTC), a
Washington, D.C., lobbying group, a federal judge ruled in November 1998
that the Massachusetts Burma law was unconstitutional. A U.S. appeals
court upheld the decision last summer.

"This is an attempt by a handful of large companies to repeal the legacy
of the South Africa anti-apartheid movement," says Massachusetts state
legislator Byron Rushing, author of the Burma bill. "If this court
decision had happened 10 years ago, Nelson Mandela might still be in
prison today."

The Burma purchasing law itself is pretty simple: It adds a 10 percent
penalty to bids for state contracts from companies that do business in
Burma. And it seems to be accomplishing its objective of cutting off
financial support for Burma's brutal military regime. A number of
companies, including Apple Computer, Eastman Kodak, and Hewlett-Packard,
pulled out of Burma soon after the law was passed.

But the law's success has corporations worried. While few companies are
looking to make big bucks in Burma--the country's gross national product
is less than $10 billion--some multinationals are concerned that the
Burma law is only the beginning. Already, a few cities have passed
similar purchasing laws focused on places like East Timor, Tibet, and
Nigeria. And New York City, along with New Jersey, California, and
Pennsylvania, adopted the tactic with impressive results last year,
targeting Swiss banks that had dealt in gold and other assets taken from
victims of the Holocaust during World War II. Shortly before a New York
City law penalizing them went into effect last year, three of
Switzerland's largest banks agreed to pay Holocaust survivors $2
billion.

"It's outrageous for the NFTC to claim that a boycott of companies is
unconstitutional," says Simon Billenness, an analyst at Trillium Asset
Management, a Boston investment firm, and coordinator of the New England
Burma Roundtable. "If it wasn't for a boycott of tea, we wouldn't have a
constitution in the first place."

So in July, one week after the Independence Day holiday weekend,
Massachusetts officials announced that they had appealed the case to the
U.S. Supreme Court. Texas, California, New York, and seven other states,
as well as 12 cities and counties, including Los Angeles, New York City,
and Philadelphia, filed amicus briefs in support of the appeal, as did
more than two dozen members of Congress, the AFL-CIO, Defenders of
Wildlife, Friends of the Earth, and a number of other environmental and
human rights organizations.

Why are so many different groups concerned about an obscure
Massachusetts purchasing law? The court decision, it turns out, could
have far-reaching consequences. Among the laws it could affect:

-- Environmental purchasing preferences, which include recycled content,
   alternative fuels and ink, and sustainable forestry standards.
   Forty-eight states have passed some form of these laws.
-- Purchasing laws targeting oppressive regimes in East Timor, Nigeria,
   and Tibet.
-- At least 43 "Buy American" or "Buy Local" laws.
-- Legislation enforcing the MacBride Principles, which require
   companies to hire both Catholics and Protestants if they do business
   in Northern Ireland. In the past decade, 26 cities, including
   Chicago, Philadelphia, Tucson, and Omaha have passed MacBride
   Principles laws.
-- Laws requiring fair labor standards for goods purchased by cities or
   states.
-- Action by New York City, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, California, and
   other states, which forced Switzerland's three largest banks to
   settle claims from Holocaust survivors.

Does the Massachusetts law violate the U.S. Constitution? "Private
individuals and corporations can base their purchasing decisions on
their own moral standards," says Professor Robert Stumberg of Georgetown
University's school of law. "Will the Supreme Court bar states from
doing the same thing? I doubt it."

And while the question has never actually come before the high court in
this form, says Stumberg, the Justice Department--under President Ronald
Reagan's attorney general Edwin Meese III, no less--concluded that the
South Africa laws, on which the Massachusetts Burma law is based, were
constitutional.

"It's a unique opportunity," says Billenness of the legal challenge.
"How often do you get the chance to defend democracy in the United
States and simultaneously help free an enslaved nation in another part
of the globe?"

-- Dan Orzech 
>From Utne Reader 


********************************************************************** 
AFP: OPPOSITION CLAIM IN NO CONFIDENCE DEBATE
Opposition claim in no-confidence debate 

BANGKOK: Thailand's political opposition claimed yesterday that an 
associate of Osama bin Laden was operating from a Thai base. 
Opposition leader and former prime minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh said 
he had evidence the unnamed suspect had funnelled arms to Myanmar 
activists who took over Yangon's Bangkok embassy in October. 

``From decades of involvement in intelligence penetration operations I 
have obtained tapes. There is a group linked to international 
terrorists, one member of which is in Thailand,'' said Mr Chavalit, a 
retired general, on the fifth day of a marathon no-confidence debate. 

``There is concrete evidence this man is wanted by a Cambodian court, 
and he has links with Osama bin Laden and he provided arms to the 
Myanmar embassy gunmen,'' he said. 

Bin Laden is accused of masterminding bombings at two US embassies in 
Africa last year. 

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

NATION: NAP LEADER CLAIMS SURIN HELPED FUGITIVE
Dec 20, 1999.

NAP leader claims Surin helped fugitive 

THE opposition fired its last salvo yesterday in claiming that an 
associate of alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden -- the Saudi national 
said to have supplied arms to the dissidents who stormed the Burmese 
Embassy in October -- is taking refuge in Thailand. 

Undeterred, Chavalit said he had acquired the tape from his connections 
in military intelligence, but stopped short of identifying his source 
other than saying he had relied on ''the old school network''. 

Continuing his attack on Surin, he said: ''There is a political group in 

Cambodia that Surin is aware of. He may not necessarily be associated 
with it but the group is mobilising foreign funds to finance its 
activities in Cambodia. 
''That's why the group is associated with international terrorism and 
Osama bin Laden,'' Chavalit said, with apparent reference to Cambodia's 
opposition party, the Sam Rainsy Party led by maverick Sam Rainsy. 
''It is believed that this group helped provide arms for those Burmese 
dissidents who seized the Burmese Embassy in Bangkok in October.'' 



*******************************************************
NATION: [LINTNER ON MYANMAR/BURMA]--Myanmar, bama, oh heck, simply Burma
December 19, 1999

The letter from ''A Samut Prakan

Resident'' makes some interesting points (The Nation Dec 11), but it was
not the British who ''named Myanmar Burma''. 

The once British colony has always been called Burma in English and bama
or myanmain Burmese. The best explanation of the difference between bama
and myanma is to be found in the old Hobson Jobson Dictionary, which
despite its rather unorthodox name remains a very useful source of
information: 

''The name (Burma) is taken from Mranma, the national name of the 
Burmese
people, which they themselves generally pronounce Bamma, unless speaking
formally and empathically.'' Both names have been used interchangeably
throughout history, with Burma being the more colloquial name and 
Myanmar
a more formal designation, somewhat similar to Muang Thai and Prathet
Thai in Thai. 

If Burma meant only the central plains and Myanmar the Burmese and all
the other nationalities, how could there be, according the Myanmar
Language Commission, a ''Myanmar language''? I have at home their latest
Myanmar English Dictionary (1993), which also mentions a ''Myanmar
alphabet''. Clearly, Burma and Myanmar (and Burmese and Myanmar) mean
exactly the same thing, and it cannot be argued that the term 
''Myanmar''includes any more people within the present union than the 
name ''Burma'' does. 

But the confusion is an old one and when the Burmese independence
movement was established in the 1930s, there was a debate among the 
young nationalists as to what name should be used for the country: bama 
or myanma. The nationalists decided to call their movement the Dohbama
Asiayone (''Our Burma Association'') instead of the Dohmyanma Asiayone.

The reason, they said, was that ''since the dohbama was set up, the
nationalists always paid attention t the unity of all the nationalities
of the country ... and the thakins (Burmese nationalists) noted that
myanma meant only the part of the country where the myanma people lived.
This was the name given by the Burmese kings to their country.
Bamanaingngan is not the country where only the myanma people live. Many
different nationalities live in this country, such as the Kachins,
Karens, Kayahs, Chins, Pa-Os, Palaungs, Mons, Myamars, Rakhines and
Shans. Therefore, the nationalists did not use the term myanmanaingngan
but bama naingngan. That would be the correct term. All nationalities 
who live in Bamanaingngan are called bama.'' Thus, the movement became 
the Dohbama Asiayone and not the Dohmyanma Asiayone (''A Brief History 
of the Dohbama Asiayone'', an official government publication published 
in Burmese in Rangoon in 1976). 

The Burmese edition of the Guardian monthly, another official
publication, concluded in February 1971: ''The word myanma signifies 
only the myanmars whereas bama embraces all indigenous nationalities.'' 

In 1989, however, the present government decided that the opposite was
true, and it is that view which many foreigners keep on repeating. The
sad truth is that there is no term in Burmese or in any other language
which covers both the bama/myanma and the ethnic minorities since no 
such entity existed before the arrival of the British. Burma with its 
present boundaries is a creation of the British, and successive 
governments of independent Burma have inherited a chaotic entity which 
is still struggling to find a common identity. But insisting that myanma 
means the whole country and in some way is a more indigenous term than 
bama is nonsense. 

Rangoon or Yangon is another reflection of the same kind of
misunderstanding. Rangoon begins with the consonant ''ra gaut'', or
''r'', not ''ya palait'' or ''y''. In English texts, Rangoon is 
therefore a more correct spelling. The problem is that the old ''r'' 
sound has died out in most Burmese dialects (although not in Arakanese 
and Tavoyan, which both have a very distinct rround, Rrrangoon, almost) 
and softened to a ''y'' sound in the same way as ''r'' often becomes 
''l'' in Thai. The usage of ''Yangon'' is as childish as if the Thais 
insisted that Ratchaburi had be spelt ''Latbuli'' in English, or Buriram 
Bulilam. 

Further, there is another dimension to the recent ''name changes'' in
Burma. It was not only the names of the country and the capital which
were ''changed''. In the minority areas names also changed, and here it
was a real change. A few examples from Shan State: Hsipaw became Thibaw,
Hsenwi became Theinli or Thinli, Kengtung became Kyaingtong, Mong Hsube
came Maing Shu, Laihka became Laycha, Pangtara became Pindaya and so on.

The problem here is that the original names all have a meaning in the
Shan language; the ''new'' names are just Burmanised versions of the 
same names, with no meaning in any language. This undermines the 
argument that the changes were done in order to make them ''more 
indigenous'' and not only reflecting the majority Burmans. 

Bertil Lintner 
CHIANG MAI

***END*************************************************


_____________________________________________________________
Get your favorite topic delivered daily. 
http://www.topica.com/t/11