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

BurmaNet News: February 17, 2000





=========== The BurmaNet News ===========
Thursday, February 17, 2000
Issue # 1464
=========================================

NOTED IN PASSING:  "I think in some ways the people of Burma are more 
ready for democracy now, a lot more ready now, than the people of Japan 
were ready for democracy in 1945, because in Japan there was never a 
struggle or movement for democracy. Democracy was simply handed to them 
on a plate as part of the arrangements after the war."

Aung San Suu Kyi (See IHT: 'START WITH UNITY,' DEMOCRACY LEADER URGES 
BURMA)


=========
Headlines
=========

Inside Burma--

IHT: 'START WITH UNITY,' DEMOCRACY LEADER URGES BURMA 
BURMANET: MORE ON ASSK INTERVIEW
DVB: NORTH KOREANS ARRESTED FOR ILLEGAL ENTRY 

International--

AFP: WORLD BANK TO CONTINUE TALKS WITH MYANMAR, BUT RULES OUT LOANS
LOS ANGELES TIMES: LAWYERS FOR U.S. SEEK END TO MYANMAR BOYCOTT
THE WEEK MAGAZINE (India): KIM DAVY IN KENYA? [KACHINS BUYING WEAPONS?]


Opinion/Editorial--

THE IRRAWADDY: TRIAL BY EXILE

Other--

ANNC: NEW BOOK ON BURMA OUT


=========================================



*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
BURMANET: BURMA TODAY IN BRIEF--February 15, 2000
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
 INSIDE BURMA
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

IHT: 'Start With Unity,' Democracy Leader Urges Burma 

International Herald Tribune

Paris, Thursday, February 17, 2000

Q & A /Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

By Bernard Krisher International Herald Tribune 

At the National League for Democracy headquarters in Rangoon, Daw Aung 
San Suu Kyi, the Burmese opposition leader and 1991 Nobel Peace Prize 
winner, spoke with Bernard Krisher, publisher of Cambodia Daily, last 
weekend after she addressed about 300 party members at the party's Union 
Day anniversary celebration. 

Q. What was the main message that you conveyed today, and what 
additional things would you like to say to your people? 

A. In commemorating Union Day, I talked about the fact that unity cannot 
be built without mutual trust and understanding, and that there is no 
hope for peace or prosperity unless there is unity. So you have to start 
with unity of a nation; that is the main message of Union Day itself. 

Q. How would you gauge the level of your support today inside Burma? 
A. I would not like to think of it in terms of my support as such. I 
think we should think of it in terms of how strong the forces of 
democracy are. I think I could say with great confidence that 90 percent 
of the people of Burma want democracy. 

Of course, of those who want democracy, those who really dare to go out 
and fight for it politically are in the minority because there is so 
much oppression by the military government and there is tremendous fear. 
But we have a very strong group of people at the core, as you could see 
today at the meeting. 

Since about the autumn of 1998, when we founded the Committee of the 
People's Parliament, it has been very difficult for us to hold any of 
our commemorative ceremonies. Usually these ceremonies are an 
opportunity for us to deliver political messages and to demonstrate our 
unity, but from the beginning in September 1998 of the Committee of the 
People's Parliament and throughout 1999 the authorities tried to 
intercept every one of our ceremonies. 

For example, last year you would not have been allowed in. They had 
roadblocks in front of our headquarters and they prevented all 
foreigners from coming. And they prevented certain representatives from 
other political parties from coming. Diplomats were also prevented from 
coming. Even members of our party had to produce their national 
registration cards and were asked to prove they were members of our 
party. 

Huge roadblocks kept our people away. This went on through all of last 
year. But still our people kept coming, and I think partly perhaps as a 
result of such perseverance among our members, the authorities have 
decided that there is not much to be gained by continuing this kind of 
policy. Last month, when we had our independence day ceremonies, they 
allowed in diplomats and foreigners and they did not use roadblocks. 
- 
Q. Some people argue that not all countries are ready for democracy. 
What is your argument to support your contention that the Burmese people 
are ready to live under a democracy. 

A. If you want to put it that way, then you can say that in a sense a 
democracy is never perfect; even in the United States of America 
democracy is not perfect. We could also argue that the Japanese were not 
ready for democracy in 1945, but they were given democracy and they have 
worked and lived with democracy. 

Sometimes - and this may be an arguable point - I think in some ways the 
people of Burma are more ready for democracy now, a lot more ready now, 
than the people of Japan were ready for democracy in 1945, because in 
Japan there was never a struggle or movement for democracy. Democracy 
was simply handed to them on a plate as part of the arrangements after 
the war. 

Now with regard to Burma, apart from the fact that Burma spent quite 
some time under British colonial administration, which did structure 
some forms of democracy, we became independent as a democratic nation, 
as a parliamentary democracy. 

So we have had experience of democracy in practice, and apart from that, 
even if we leave aside the long years under Burma's Socialist Program 
Party - when the desire of the people for a more open society, for a 
return to democratic institutions was never crushed - we have now been 
struggling for democracy actively for the last 12 years. 

Q. What is your feeling about Japanese policy toward Burma? 
A. We find that a lot of people in Japan who are very sympathetic to us 
and to our cause, if they get to know about it. There are very, very 
supportive groups of Japanese people and organizations. But there is not 
enough information about what is going on in Burma. 
Q. What about the Japanese government? 

A. The government is quite often influenced by business considerations. 
But it is not that alone. I am inclined to think there is a tradition 
among Japanese governments, whichever government they may be, to try to 
establish good relations with whoever is in power in whichever nation. . 
And perhaps that, as much as - and perhaps even much more than - the 
influence of the Japanese business lobby would incline the Japanese 
government toward trying to establish good relations with the military 
regime. 

Q. Do you think that investments in Burma might be jeopardized if 
democracy came to Burma? Would a new democratic regime continue to honor 
such investment agreements? 

A. We are not against business at all. This is the mistake a lot of 
people make. They think the National League for Democracy and the 
democratic forces in general are anti-business. We are not 
anti-business. We are for a free-market economy. It is part of our party 
platform. But now we don't have a genuine market economy. It isn't a 
free-market economy at all. It is very much biased in favor of those who 
are connected to the regime. 

So we object to investments now not because we are against investments 
per se, but because we don't think this is the right time. By investing 
now, business is supporting the military regime. The real benefits of 
investments now go to the military regime and their connections. They go 
to just a small, very privileged elite. And the people get very little. 

Q. How can people who wish to give humanitarian aid really help the 
needy Burmese people without going through the military regime? 
A. The first question to ask is how effective is this humanitarian aid? 
What do they mean, exactly, by humanitarian aid? What kind of aid is 
that? And how many people is it supposed to help? In general, whatever 
humanitarian aid that nongovernmental organizations may be able to give 
is a drop in the ocean compared to what is needed in Burma. What we 
really need in Burma is substantive change, the kind of change that will 
enable people to help themselves. 
- 
Q. What are the most serious economic problems in Burma? 
A. The economy is in a mess. There are a number of major problems which 
have brought the economy to such a state. There is no macroconomics view 
at all on the part of the military regime, and there are the obvious 
problems like the extremely unrealistic exchange rate of the kyat. And 
then there were all those unproductive industries which are legacies of 
the socialist regime and there is the inability of the civilian 
administration, the civil servants, to operate freely. Everywhere the 
military is dipping its finger in and not being efficient. 

Q. Do you think membership in the Association of South East Asian 
nations is having a positive or negative impact on Burma? 

A. ASEAN is not having any positive impact on Burma. 
Two years ago, before they admitted Burma as a permanent member, they 
made the point that once Burma was a member of ASEAN it would be more 
reasonable and they would be in a better position to influence Burma and 
guide it along the right lines. 

We argued that we did not think this was the case. What we thought was 
that once Burma had been made a full member of ASEAN, which is what they 
wanted, then they wouldn't try any more to be good boys - they would be 
more oppressive, and they would just go ahead and do what they wanted 
and they wouldn't really listen to any advice from the members of ASEAN, 
and I think that this turned out to be absolutely true. They have turned 
out to be most oppressive between 1998 and now. The oppression increased 
noticeably after they became a member of ASEAN.



*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

BURMANET: MORE ON ASSK INTERVIEW
February 17, 2000

On Saturday February 12, Bernie Krisher publisher of the Cambodia Daily 
attended NLD Union Day celebrations at the National League for Democracy 
headquarters in Rangoon and interviewed the party's General Secretary, 
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.  Krisher has provided BurmaNet with the unedited 
transcript which is reproduced here in full.  Material in lower case 
letters was used in the Feb. 17 International Herald Tribune (see 
preceding article). 

BurmaNet's interview with Krisher about the NLD's Union Day event 
follows the unedited text of the Aung San Suu Kyi interview.


*****


Q--What was the main message that you conveyed today and what additional 
things would you like to say to your people?

A--In commemorating  Union Day of Burnma I talked about the fact that 
unity cannot be built without mutual trust and understanding and there 
is no hope for peace or prosperity unless there is unity. So you have to 
start with unity of  a nation; that is the main message of union day 
itself.

Q--How would you gauge the level of your support today inside Burma?

A--I would not like to think of  it in terms of my support as such. I 
think we should think of it in terms of how strong the forces of 
democracy are. I think I could say with great confidence that 90 percent 
of the people of Burma want democracy. Of course of those who want 
democracy, those who really dare to go out and fight for it politically 
are in the minority because there is so much oppression by the military 
government and there is tremendous fear. 

But we have a very strong group of people at the core  as
you could see today at the meeting . Since about the autumn of  1998 
when we founded the committee of the people's  parliament, it has been  
very difficult for us to hold any of our commemorative ceremonies. 
Usually these ceremonies are an opportunity for us to deliver political 
messages and to demonstrate our unity but from the beginning from 
September 1998 the committee of  the people's parliament and throughout 
1999 the authorities tried to intercept every one of our ceremonies. For 
example, last year you would not have been allowed in. They had road 
blocks in front of our headquarters and they prevented all foreigners  
from coming. And they prevented certain representatives from other 
political parties from coming.

Diplomats were also prevented from coming. Even members of our party had 
to produce their national registration cards and were asked to prove 
they were members of our party. Huge roadblocks kept our people away. 
This went on through all of  last year. But still our people kept coming 
and I think partly perhaps as a result of such  perseverance among our 
members, the authorities have decided that there is not much to be 
gained by continuing to do this kind of policy.  Last month when we had 
our independence day ceremonies they  allowed in diplomats and 
foreigners and they didn't use road blocks.

Q--HOW DO YOU KEEP UP YOUR SPIRIT IN THE FACE OF ALL THIS FRUSTRATION 
AND HARASSMENT? WHAT KEEPS YOU GOING?

A--I THINK WHAT KEEPS MOST OF OUR PEOPLE GOING IS A SENSE OF HUMOR APART 
FROM THE CAUSE OF OUR COMMITMENT. A LOT OF OUR PEOPLE TAKE THEIR 
TROUBLES WITH A SENSE OF HUMOR BUT OF COURSE  BASICALLY IT'S  A SENSE OF 
COMMITMENT BECAUSE IT'S NOT NORMAL TO HAVE TO LAUGH, TO LIVE WITH THE 
KIND OF LAUGHTER THAT COMES OUT OF OUR PEOPLE. HAVING TO LIVE IN FEAR, 
THAT'S NOT A NORMAL STATE OF BEING AND THIS IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET 
OUT OF. WE'RE  NOT TRYING TO DESTROY OR ANNIHILATE THE MILITARY REGIME; 
THEY ARE  ALWAYS THREATENING TO ANNIHILATE US  BUT THAT  IS NOT THE 
PURPOSE OF OUR MOVEMENT. THE PURPOSE OF OUR MOVEMENT IS TO CREATE A 
SOCIETY THAT OFFERS SECURITY TO ALL OUR PEOPLE, INCLUDING THE MILITARY.

Q-- Some people argue that not all countries are ready for democracy. 
What is your argument to support that the Burmese people are ready to 
live under a democracy.

A.  If you want to put it that way then you can say that in a sense a 
democracy is never perfect; even  in the United States of America 
democracy is not perfect. We could also argue that the Japanese were not 
ready for democracy in 1945 but they were given democracy and they have 
worked and lived with democracy.  Sometimes--and this may be an arguable 
point-- I think in some ways the people of Burma are more ready for 
democracy  now, a lot more ready now,  than the people of Japan were 
ready for  democracy in 1945 because in Japan there was never a struggle 
or movement for democracy.

Democracy was simply handed to them on a plate as part of the 
arrangements after the war. It was not something they struggled for. Now 
with regard to Burma, apart from the fact that Burma spent quite some 
time under British colonial administration which did structure some 
forms of democracy, some democratic institutions such as the rule of law 
did come into being and they did start general elections, political 
parties and after independence, we became independent as a democratic 
nation, as a parliamentary democracy.

So we have had experience of democracy in practice and apart from that, 
even if we leave aside the long years under Burma's Socialist Program 
Party, when the desire of the people for a more open society, for a 
return to democratic institutions was never crushed, we have now been 
struggling for democracy actively for the last 12 years. So if people 
say we are not ready for democracy then how about the Japanese? If they 
were ready for democracy in 1945 we are many times more ready for 
democracy now.

Q--What is your feeling toward Japanese policy toward Burma

A--We find that a lot of people in Japan who are very sympathetic to us 
and to our cause,  if they get to know about it. There are very very 
supportive groups of Japanese people and organizations. But there is not 
enough information about  what is going on in Burma. 

Q--What about the Japanese government?

A--The government is quite often influenced by business considerations. 
It's just not that. I'm inclined to think there is a tradition among 
Japanese governments, whichever government they may be, to try to 
establish good relations with whoever is in power in whichever nation. 
It seems to me that this is part of the tradition of Japanese 
governments. And perhaps that as much as` and perhaps even much more 
than the influence of the Japanese business lobby would incline the 
Japanese government towards trying to establish good relations with the 
military regime.

Q. THIS IS THE PATTERN THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENTS HAVE FOLLOWED IN REGARD 
TO SOUTH KOREA AND SO IT MAY SEEM AWKWARD NOW THAT THEY ARE WARMED UP TO 
KIM DAE JUNG TOWARD WHOM THEY REACTED COOLY AFTER HE WAS KIDNAPPED FROM 
JAPAN AND TOOK NO ACTION TO HOLD THE REGIME THERE THEN ACCOUNTABLE FOR 
IT. 

A. YES AND INCIDENTALLY WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL TO KIM DAE JUNG.  WE FIND 
PEOPLE DO NOT ALWAYS ACT THE SAME ONCE THEY ARE IN OFFICE AS THEY DO 
WHILE WHEN THEY ARE IN THE OPPOSITION.BUT PRESIDENT KIM DAE JUNG HAS 
BEEN VERY PERMANENT IN HIS SUPPORT OF DEMOCRACY IN BURMA AND WE 
APPRECIATE THAT VERY MUCH. HE IS ONE OF THE VERY VERY FEW PEOPLE IN THIS 
WORLD WHO HAVE NOT CHANGED BECAUSE THEY HAVE COME TO OFFICE.

Q. YOU WILL NOT EITHER, I BELIEVE.

A. I HOPE NOT. ONE DOES NOT LIKE TO ... I THINK IF YOU STAY IN POLITICS 
LONG ENOUGH YOU DO DEVELOP A SENSE OF HUMILITY BECAUSE YOU SEE MANY 
STRANGE THINGS GOING ON.

Q. GETTING BACK TO JAPAN, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO TELL THE JAPANESE 
PEOPLE AND THEIR GOVERNMENT. WHAT MISTAKES DO YOU THINK THEY ARE THEY 
MAKING BY PUSHING INVESTMENTS AND SUPPORTING THE MILITARY REGIME? 

A. WHAT I THINK IS REALLY  AT STAKE HERE IS THE FUTURE OF THE 
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BURMA AND JAPAN. JAPAN SHOULD NOT THINK OF BURMA IN 
TERMS OF THE MILITARY REGIME BUT IN TERMS OF THE PEOPLE OF BURMA. IF THE 
JAPANESE GOVERNMENT WERE TO THINK OF THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE OF 
BURMA THEN THEY WOULD BE IN A GREATER POSITION TO ESTABLISH TRUE 
FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES.

Q. Do you think the investments in Burnma  might be jeopardized if 
democracy came to Burma? Would a new democratic regime continue to honor 
such investment agreements?

A. We are not against business at all. This is the mistake a lot of 
people make. They think the National League for Democracy and the 
democratic forces in general are anti-business. We are not 
anti-business. We are for a free market economy. It's part of our party 
platform. But now we don't have a genuine market economy. It isn't a 
free market economy at all. It is very much biased in favor of those who 
are connected to the regime. 

So why we object to investments now is not because we are against 
investments per se but because we don't think this is the right time for 
investing. By investing now, business is supporting the military regime. 
The real benefits of investments now go to the military regime and their 
connections. They go to just a small very privileged elite. And the 
people get very little. The trickle down effect is such a tiny trickle 
that it disappears by the time it gets down to the lower level.

Q. How can people who wish to give humanitarian aid really help the 
needy Burmese people without going through the military regime?

A. The first question to ask is how effective is this humanitarian aid? 
What do they mean exactly by humanitarian aid? What kind of aid is that? 
And how many people is it supposed to help? In general whatever 
humanitarian aid that NGOs may be able to give is a drop in the ocean 
compared to what is really needed in Burma. What we really need in Burma 
is substantive change; the kind of change that will enable people to 
help themselves.   

IT'S LIKE THIS WELL-KNOWN DICTUM THAT IT'S BETTER TO TEACH SOMEBODY TO 
LEARN TO FISH THAN GIVE THEM FISH TO EAT. SO WE WANT TO TEACH PEOPLE TO 
HELP THEMSELVES. WE WANT TO CREATE A SOCIETY WHERE PEOPLE ARE FREE TO 
HELP THEMSELVES. BUT THE KIND OF HUMANITARIAN AID THAT IS GIVEN NOW, 
SOME CLAIM  IT IS GIVEN IN SUCH A WAY AS TO STRENGTHEN THE CIVIL 
SOCIETY. BUT THERE ARE MANY QUESTIONS MARKS ABOUT IT. 

IF YOU HAVE TO COOPERATE, OR LET'S PUT IT A LITTLE MORE STRONGLY, IF YOU 
ARE FORCED TO COLLABORATE WITH THE MILITARY REGIME IN ORDER TO BE ABLE 
TO CARRY OUT ANY KIND OF PROGRAM IN BURMA, HOW MUCH ARE YOU REALLY 
CONTRIBUTING TO THE EMERGENCE OF A STRONG CIVIL SOCIETY? SO THESE ARE 
THE QUESTIONS WE ASK WHEN PEOPLE  TALK ABOUT  HUMANITARIAN  AID.

Q--SHOULD PEOPLE THEN JUST GIVE UP IN TRYING TO FIND A MEANS OF HELPING 
THE NEEDY?

A. NO. WHAT THEY SHOULD DO IS TO HELP CHANGE THE TOTALITARIAN SYSTEM. 
AND THEY CAN DO IT IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS. ONE IS TO MAKE THE LEADERSHIP 
IN JAPAN UNDERSTAND THAT THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT CAN HELP THE POOR 
PEOPLE OF
BURMA BEST BY PROMOTING THE DEMOCRATIZATION PROCESS RATHER THAN BY 
COLLABORATING WITH THE MILITARY REGIME. BY COLLABORATING WITH THE 
MILITARY REGIME THEY MAY BE ABLE TO GIVE LITTLE DRIBS AND DRABS OF 
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE BUT THAT IS NOT GOING TO HELP OUR PEOPLE 
SUBSTANTIALLY AT ALL. SO IF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY WERE UNITED IN 
TRYING TO BRING ABOUT THE CHANGES THAT ARE CALLED FOR IN THE UNITED 
NATIONS RESOLUTION ON BURMA, THAT WOULD HELP... COMPARE US TO CAMBODIA. 

QUITE RECENTLY I WAS TALKING TO A BUSINESSMAN WHO IS PART OF A SOUTHEAST 
ASIAN CONSORTIUM. HE SAID THE PROSPECTS OF BUSINESS IN CAMBODIA WERE SO 
MUCH DIFFERENT  THAN IN BURMA BECAUSE WITH ALL ITS PROBLEMS AND DEFECTS 
CAMBODIA IS NOW  HEADING TOWARD A FAR MORE OPEN TYPE OF  SOCIETY THAN 
BURMA IS. BURMA IS STILL A FAR MORE TOTALITARIAN AUTHORITARIAN STATE 
WHEREAS CAMBODIA ALLOWS A NUMBER OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISES, NGOS AND 
HUMANITARIAN ORGANIZATIONS TO OPERATE FAIRLY INDEPENDENTLY WHICH IS NOT 
THE CASE HERE. A MEMBER OF AN NGO IN BURMA CAN GET INTO TROUBLE SIMPLY 
FOR COMING TO SEE ME.

Q. WE WERE PHOTOGRAPHED COMING IN HERE AND I FEAR THEY MAY TAKE THIS 
TAPE OR FILM AWAY WHEN WE LEAVE, OR AT THE AIRPORT.

A. YOU MUST BE FIRM...YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO BE FIRM WITH BULLIES AND 
BASICALLY ALL AUTHORITARIAN REGIMES ARE BULLIES.

Q. What are the most serious economic AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN BURMA?

A. The economy is in a mess. If we have to replicate the report of the 
World Bank, then there are a number of major problems which has brought 
the economy in such a state. One of the first things which come to mind 
is the fact that this regime seems not to understand is the idea of 
macro-economics. There is no macro-economics view at all on the part of 
the military regime and there are the obvious ones like the extremely 
unrealistic exchange rate. Officially the dollar is 5 kyat 80 the dollar 
officially. But actually it is worth about 330. The dollar fell in 
recent months . At one time it was up to 380 which is more than 60 times 
the official rate. This is an extremely unrealistic exchange rate. And 
then there were  all those unproductive industries which are legacies  
of the socialist regime and there is  the inability of the civilian 
administration, the civil servants to operate freely. Everywhere the 
military is dipping its finger in and not being efficient.

Q. ARE THERE ANY CIVILIANS IN THE ECONOMIC SECTOR?

A. THERE ARE BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN  THE MILITARY REGIME NECESSARILY 
LISTENS TO THEM. THAT IS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS. WE HAD A FAIRLY WELL 
TRAINED CIVIL SERVICE BUT THE MILITARY AUTHORITIES DO NOT LISTEN TO THE 
ADVICE OF THE CIVIL SERVICE,  OF THE PROFESSIONALS. EVEN THE FOREIGN 
OFFICE. THEY ARE REPLACING ALL THE FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICIALS WITH 
MILITARY AND EX-MILITARY STAFF.

Q. GIVEN WHAT HAS BEEN HAPPENING IN THE REST OF ASIA--THE FALL OF MARCOS 
AND SUHARTO, FOR EXAMPLE, AND THEN THERE IS THE ADDED FACTOR OF THE 
INTERNET WHICH SPREADS INFORMATION THAT CAN'T BE SUPPRESSED BY THE MOST 
AUTHORITARIAN REGIMES.  HOW LONG DO YOU THINK  THIS REGIME WILL LAST? 

A. I DON'T THINK IT'S THAT FAR AWAY, LET'S PUT IT THAT WAY. I'M NOT AN 
ASTROLOGER. I CAN'T SEE INTO THE FUTURE BUT I DO NOT THINK THE DAY IS SO 
FAR OFF WHEN OUR PEOPLE CAN ENJOY JUSTICE, FREEDOM, PEACE ALL THAT 
PEOPLES ALL OVER THE WORLD LONG FOR MAINLY BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT THE 
MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE WANT TO HAVE. THEY ARE TIRED OF LIVING IN FEAR; 
THEY ARE TIRED OF LIVING IN A STATE OF INSECURITY AND THEY ARE TIRED OF 
THE ECONOMIC MESS. THERE ARE SOME, OF COURSE, WHO ARE DOING VERY WELL.  
YOU PROBABLY KNOW THERE IS A SMALL ELITE WHO ARE VERY PROSPEROUS EVEN 
WHEN THE REST OF THEIR COUNTRY IS WALLOWING IN POVERTY. IT IS THE SAME 
IN BURMA. 

THERE ARE THOSE WHO ARE DOING WELL UNDER THIS REGIME BUT THE GREAT 
MAJORITY ARE SUFFERING; PEOPLE WHO CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE DECENTLY. AND 
EARLIER YOU ASKED WHAT ARE THE MAJOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC PROBLEMS? I 
JUST GOT TO THE ECONOMIC PROBLEMS. NOW THE SOCIAL PROBLEMS: THE WORST 
THING IS THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM. WE ALWAYS SAID THAT WE WOULD MEASURE 
THE SUCCESS OF THE COUNTRY IN TERMS OF HEALTH AND EDUCATION OF THE 
PEOPLE. WE ARE NOT INTERESTED IN HIGH RISE BUILDINGS AND HOTELS AND 
MONUMENTS AND PARKS. 

THE WAY TO MEASURE HOW WELL  PEOPLE ARE DOING IS BY LOOKING AT THE STATE 
OF THEIR HEALTH AND THE STATE OF EDUCATION. AND BOTH ARE IN A TERRIBLE 
STATE. YOU MUST HAVE HEARD THAT MOST OF THE UNIVERSITIES ARE CLOSED. 
THEY HAVE OPENED SOME FACULTIES.

AND THEN THE  EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM EVEN AT THE SCHOOL LEVEL IS SO TERRIBLE 
BECAUSE THE TEACHERS ARE SO BADLY PAID. THERE IS NO PROPER EQUIPMENT IN 
THE SCHOOLS. THEY WILL PUT UP A SHOWROOM OF COMPUTERS  WHILE THERE ARE 
CHILDREN WHO CANNOT EVEN AFFORD TEXTBOOKS AND THERE ARE NO ADEQUATE 
TEXTBOOKS FOR ALL THE SCHOOLS IN BURMA. SO THE STATE OF EDUCATION IS 
TERRIBLE AND AS FOR HEALTH, IF YOU ARE ABLE TO WALK INTO ANY  HOSPITAL 
IN RANGOON YOU WILL BE SURPRISED--NO EQUIPMENT, NO MEDICINES. PEOPLE 
GOING INTO A HOSPITAL HAVE TO BUY THEIR OWN MEDICINE. THEY HAVE TO TAKE 
THEIR OWN EQUIPMENT AND THERE ARE EVEN CASES WHERE THEY HAVE TO SUPPLY 
THINGS LIKE SURGICAL GLOVES, BANDAGES, SURGICAL SPIRITS--EVEN THE MOST 
BASIC EQUIPMENT HAS TO BE SUPPLIED BY THE PATIENT. SO ALL THE HOSPITALS 
OFFER ARE EXPERTISE, THE EXPERTISE OF THE STAFF AND BECAUSE THEIR STAFF 
ARE ILL PAID--EVEN THAT IS HARD TO COME BY. 


Q. WOULD ASSISTANCE OF EQUIPMENT AND PHARMACEUTICALS  HELP?

A. NO. WE HAVE HEARD OF GOOD MEDICINE BEING DONATED TO THE HOSPITALS AND 
THESE MEDICINES END UP IN PRIVATE SHOPS BECAUSE THE WHOLE HOSPITAL 
SYSTEM IS CORRUPT SINCE THE HOSPITAL STAFF ARE POOR. THEY ALSO HAVE TO 
SOMEHOW MANAGE THEIR FINANCES. IF YOU WERE TO WANDER INTO A HOSPITAL IN 
RANGOON, ONCE THE AUTHORITIES HAVE CAUGHT ON THERE IS A FOREIGNER ON THE 
PREMISES, I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE THE HOSPITAL PRETTY SOON AND I 
ALSO DOUBT ANY OF THE STAFF WOULD DARE TALK TO YOU.

Q. HOW WILL THE LACK OF UNIVERSITY EDUCATION AFFECT THE NEXT GENERATION 
ONCE BURMA OPENS UP? WILL THERE BE CAPABLE PEOPLE AROUND TO HELP RUN THE 
COUNTRY?

A. WE WILL HAVE TO RETRAIN A LOT OF PEOPLE BUT WE SAY THE MOST IMPORTANT 
THING FOR BURMA IS TO DEMOCRATIZE QUICKLY. WE WERE TALKING EARLIER ABOUT 
HUMANITARIAN AID. WELL, WHAT IS A NEW SCHOOL BUILDING SOMEWHERE COMPARED 
TO THE FACT THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A FULL GENERATION OF UNEDUCATED 
PEOPLE.

SO YOU HAVE TO GET YOUR PRIORITIES RIGHT. IT IS NOT SO IMPORTANT THAT 
YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD A NEW SCHOOL SOMEWHERE WHEN THAT NEW SCHOOL 
WILL PROBABLY NOT  HAVE ANY EFFICIENT TEACHING STAFF BECAUSE THE 
TEACHERS ARE GOING TO BE ILL PAID AND THERE IS A WHOLEGENERATION GOING 
TO BE HALF EDUCATED. THE AIM THAT SHOULD BE BROUGHT ABOUT IS DEMOCRATIC 
CHANGE. THIS SHOULD BE THE PRIMARY AIM FOR ALL THOSE WHO DESIRE THE 
WELL-BEING OF THE PEOPLE OF BURMA. 

IF YOU ASK ANY JAPANESE PARENT: DO YOU WANT YOUR CHILD TO
SIT ON A MAT ON THE FLOOR IN AN LITTLE  THATCHED COTTAGE AND BE  TAUGHT 
PROPERLY OR WOULD YOU HAVE HIM SIT IN A NEW BRICK BUILDING WITH NOBODY  
TO TEACH, I THINK THEY WOULD ALL SAY AUTOMATICALLY: IN A  THATCHED 
COTTAGE  AS LONG AS THEY ARE GOING TO BE TAUGHT PROPERLY. SO  WE HAVE TO 
GET OUR PRIORITIES RIGHT: WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE GENERATIONS 
THAT ARE UNEDUCATED OR  ILL EDUCATED? WE HAVE TO RETRAIN ALL OF THEM. 
THE SOONER WE HAVE CHANGED, THE BETTER, BECAUSE THE EASIER IT WILL BE 
FOR US TO REHABILITATE THE WHOLE COUNTRY.

Q. Do you think ASEAN membership is having a positive or negative impact 
on Burma?

A. ASEAN is not having any positive impact on Burma. Two years ago 
before they admitted Burma as a permanent member they made the point 
that once Burma was a member of ASEAN it would be more reasonable and 
they would be in a better position to influence Burma and guide it along 
the right lines.

We argued that we did not think this was the case; what we thought was 
that  once Burma had been made a full member as ASEAN, which is what 
they wanted, once they got what they wanted then they wouldn't try any 
more to be good boys--they would be more oppressive and they would just 
go ahead and do what they wanted and they wouldn't really listen to any 
advice from the members of ASEAN and I think  that this turned out to be 
absolutely true. They have turned out to be most oppressive between 1998 
and now. The oppression increased noticeably after they became a member 
of ASEAN.

Q. BUT THE PHILIPPINES HAS COME OUT TO CRITICIZE BURMA.

A. BUT IS THIS MILITARY REGIME LISTENING? OF COURSE THE ASEAN NATIONS 
ALSO DO NOT SPEAK OUT WITH A UNITED VOICE. THEY OUGHT TO JOIN TOGETHER  
BUT THEY HAVE PROBLEMS IN THEIR OWN BACK YARD AS WELL.

Q. ON A PERSONAL LEVEL, DO YOU REGRET YOU DID NOT ATTEND YOUR HUSBAND'S 
FUNERAL?

A. I DON'T ANSWER PERSONAL QUESTIONS.

Q. HOW DO YOU SPEND YOUR DAY.

A. MAINLY WORKING, WHAT YOU CALL FULL-TIME WORK. THIS IS MY OFFICE (NLD 
HEADQUARTERS). I HAVE A STUDY AT HOME WHERE I DO A LOT OF MY PAPER WORK.

Q. HOW DO YOU COMMUNICATE WITH THE OUTSIDE WORLD?

A. WE HAVE TO FIND OUR WAYS OR MEANS. MY TELEPHONE IS CUT MOST OF THE 
TIME. I HAVE NEVER BEEN ALLOWED AN  INTERNATIONAL DIRECT DIAL TELEPHONE. 
IDD TELEPHONES HAVE TO BE APPLIED FOR. THEY WOULDN'T ANSWER MY  
APPLICATION. THEY DIDN'T ACTUALLY REFUSE MY APPLICATION. THEY JUST 
SIMPLY DIDN'T RESPOND. 

Q. HOW DO YOU REACT TO SOME OF THE RECENT DISSIDENT EVENTS ABROAD? THE 
OCCUPATION BY PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES OF THE BURMESE EMBASSY IN BANGKOK AND 
THE HOSPITAL TAKE OVER?

A. THESE TWO INCIDENTS ARE CONNECTED BUT IN THE FIRST ONE WE THOUGHT THE 
THAI GOVERNMENT BEHAVED VERY WELL AND WE COMMENDED THEIR RESTRAINT AND 
THE WAY IT WAS SOLVED PEACEFULLY BUT THE SECOND INCIDENT WAS NOT SO 
HAPPY. WE HEARD THERE WERE PEOPLE--THEY CALLED THEMSELVES THE MEMBERS OF 
GOD'S ARMY--WERE EXECUTED IN COLD BLOOD. AS THE NLD AND THE COMMITTEE OF 
THE PEOPLE REPRESENTATIVE OF PARLIAMENT, WE HAVE ASKED THERE SHOULD BE 
AN INQUIRY INTO THIS. BECAUSE YOU DON'T EXECUTE PEOPLE IN COLD BLOOD. 


###

BurmaNet Interview with Bernie Krisher on NLD Union Day event.

February 17, 2000


BurmaNet: What did you see in the NLD headquarters--what was the 
atmosphere like?

Krisher: It is a ramshackle building.  Our taxi stopped across the 
street from the headquarters and there were a bunch of men with cameras 
that wanted to take our pictures.  I didn't realize at first they were 
Military Intelligence so I just ignored them and we crossed the street.

The headquarters is a large, dilapidated building.  The event was held 
in a big long room with about enough room for 400 people.  By the time 
the event started, there were about 300-400 hundred there.  There were a 
few plastic chairs for the VIPs but most people were sitting on mats.  
There ws a little lectern at the front.  

Aung San Suu Kyi came in at 2:00pm.  There were about 6-8 foreigners, 
diplomats from the Australian, American, Japanese, British and French 
embassies.  A bunch of people  [also] came in who looked like 
journalists, stringers for the major wires, etc.

Most of the people seated on the mats were women with Suu Kyi buttons.  
Some brought children.  A few elderly men were on the sides.  It was so 
deja vu.  It was what I saw 20 years ago at Kim Dae Jung rallies in 
Korea, which were also mostly men.  It was mostly women there too 
because the men were too scared up, because they were more likely to be 
punished.

She [ASSK] sat on the mat with the crowd, unlike the other speakers who 
spoke from the dais.  There were about a half dozen men, officials for 
the party.  They all made speeches and then there was a satirical play 
put on by the youth.  Everyone was laughing during the play.  This went 
on for about an hour and a half.

Afterwards, we went up to the second floor where she has sort of an 
office.  There was a large room with many desks.  That is where she 
works, she comes in several times a week....When we left, the same 
people were taking photos from across the street, but no one detained or 
stopped us.

BurmaNet: You have worked in Cambodia and North Korea [Krisher organized 
a campaign to provide rice to N. Korea after floods wiped out crops in 
1995].  Can you compare Burma with what you've seen in North Korea and 
Cambodia?

Krisher:  Burma is the worst.  On the one hand, it has a little sense of 
Hong Kong and Malaysia.  You can see the British influence and how 
elegant the city must have been once.  The Burmese do have a culture and 
a sense of how to do business well and how to run a country.  In the 
shops, people speak English and are very polite.  It has among the best 
service staffs I've ever seen.  Under proper rule, it could become 
another Singapore.

However, the military--and this in unanimous--the people there feel the 
military are uneducated and have no concern for their country.  They are 
xenophobic and think NGOS are spies.  There are only 13 NGOs in the 
country and they are very restricted and limited.  Most are involved in 
anti-HIV and educational work.

The North Koreans do care for their people.  They don't know how to 
administer things too well but they care.  Before the floods they 
provided universal healthcare but that fell apart after the floods and 
famine, and after the Soviet Union fell apart.  When they had resources, 
the children were pretty well taken care of.  They were immersed in 
propaganda but they didn't close any colleges.  This has fallen apart in 
Rangoon.  

Some of the faculties are reopened but most of the college age students 
are a lost generation.  Most of the other countries in Asia do care for 
their children and people.  They try, sometimes ineptly, but they try.  
The generals don't.  They have little education and they have a complex 
about that.

Cambodia is almost paradise compared to Burma.  You almost feel there is 
no hope [in Burma].  It is just such a waste.



*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

DVB: NORTH KOREANS ARRESTED FOR ILLEGAL ENTRY 

Democratic Voice of Burma, Oslo, 
in Burmese 1245 gmt 14 Feb 00 
Translation by BBC Summary of World Broadcasts


Excerpt from report by Burmese opposition radio on 14th February 

There have been many cases of arrests of North Koreans, who entered 
through China, at border areas in southern, eastern, and northern Shan 
State. 

SPDC [State Peace and Development Council] security personnel arrested 
two North Korean nationals, Son Na-chan and Pau Ki-se [names as 
received], at the entrance of Namhkam during the second week of last 
January. The North Koreans entered through Shweli. Similarly, a North 
Korean national, Pak Chun-hee [name as received], was arrested at a 
restaurant in Ta Lau village in Tachilek Township during last November 
and another North Korean national was arrested in Thapin village in Keng 
Tung during December. 

North Korea is ruled under dictatorship and its people have been 
suffering from famine and hardship due to three years of drought. The 
North Koreans said they fled their country to escape from famine and 
hardship. The arrested North Koreans were deported back to China under 
Section-7 of the Immigration Act... 


*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
 INTERNATIONAL
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*


AFP: WORLD BANK TO CONTINUE TALKS WITH MYANMAR, BUT RULES OUT LOANS 

Agence France Presse 

February 15, 2000, Tuesday 

BANGKOK, Feb 15 

   The World Bank intends to continue its talks with the military regime 
in Mynamar but will not grant it any loans due to the political and 
economic situation in the country, a top official said here. 

"We wish to continue to discuss with the government. We try to convince 
both opposition and government of the necessity to improve the economic 
policy in order to improve the fate of the people," said bank 
Asia-Pacific director Jean-Michel Severino late Monday. 

"For the moment being we have no lending relationship with Myanmar for 
two sets of reasons. One is that we have disagreements with the 
government of Myanmar on its economic policies. 

"Second is that our shareholders, for political reasons, do not wish our 
institution to be engaged in a lending relationship with that country." 

Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has argued that only 
sanctions imposed by the international community will force the junta to 
launch reforms. 

In a report published in December, the World Bank said the junta must 
first commit to political reforms before the country could reach an 
economic level equivalent to its neighbours. 

It blamed the country's economic stagnation on the carelessness of the 
leaders rather than the fallout of the regional financial crisis which 
erupted in July 1997. 

The World Bank also said the policies followed by the junta had 
exacerbated poverty and damaged the country's social cohesion. 

Diplomats in Yangon say that the country's economy is being strangled by 
western sanctions, the junta's inability and the lingering effects of 
the Asian crisis. 

Under the international sanctions, foreign companies are actively 
dissuaded from investing in the country and all aid from the World Bank 
and International Monetary Fund (IMF) has been frozen. 

Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) won 1990 
elections but the junta has refused to recognise the sweeping victory 
and has imprisoned hundreds of party supporters. 

Since 1990 hundreds of party members including elected MPs have resigned 
after being detained by the junta. Foreign governments and NGOs also 
accuse the military of widespread human rights abuses in a bid to 
suppress the pro-democracy movement. 


*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

LOS ANGELES TIMES: LAWYERS FOR U.S. SEEK END TO MYANMAR BOYCOTT

Wednesday, February 16, 2000

 Trade: Massachusetts case before Supreme Court could affect laws in 
L.A.,other cities.
By DAVID G. SAVAGE, Times Staff Writer

    WASHINGTON--Clinton administration lawyers chose free trade over 
human rights Tuesday, saying cities and states may not boycott companies 
that do business with repressive regimes abroad.

     The United States must speak with "a single, national voice" in the 
global economy, the administration said, and it urged the Supreme Court 
to rebuke Massachusetts for refusing to buy from firms that do business 
with Myanmar, formerly known as Burma.

     If the high court agrees, its decision probably will strike down 
similar laws in at least a dozen cities, including Los Angeles, San 
Francisco, Oakland and Portland. 

     The Massachusetts case, to be argued next month, tests whether 
cities and states can consider moral standards when doing business.

     In 1996, it became the first state to formally boycott firms that 
do business with the military regime in Myanmar. 

     During the 1980s, many American cities, states and colleges 
announced that they would not do business with the apartheid regime in 
South Africa or with companies that operated there. But those laws, 
while unpopular with
corporate leaders, went unchallenged in court.

     Over the last decade, concerns over human rights, the environment 
or forced labor have figured in boycotts announced by cities and states. 
China, Cuba, Nigeria, Sudan and Switzerland have been targeted by 
boycott laws.

     States need not "trade with dictators," lawyers for Massachusetts 
said in defending its Myanmar law. "The states should be free to choose 
their trading partners . . . and to apply a moral standard to their 
spending
decisions," they argued.

     The law posed a high-stakes dilemma for businesses, since the state 
made purchases of more than $2 billion per year. As a practical matter, 
they were forced to choose between doing business with the state or 
Myanmar.

     Two years ago, the National Foreign Trade Council, a coalition of 
American and foreign firms, filed suit in Boston and contended that the 
state was unfairly discriminating against them. The European Union and 
Japan
also protested the Massachusetts law. 

     Last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals struck it down as 
unconstitutional, leading to a showdown March 22 in the Supreme Court, 
when the case will be argued.

     In siding with the corporations, administration officials said they 
feared the specter of 50 foreign policies, one for each state, and 
perhaps many more if more cities joined in.

     "The ultimate authority to act on behalf of the United States . . . 
in the international arena resides with the president and Congress 
alone," U.S. Solicitor General Seth Waxman said in his brief to the high 
court. Cities and states "impermissibly intrude into the national 
government's exclusive authority over foreign affairs" if they use their 
purchasing power to condemn human rights abuses abroad, he said.

     Massachusetts Assistant Atty. Gen. Thomas Barnico said he had not 
seen the administration's brief and refused to comment.

     Lawyers for California and 21 other states supported Massachusetts, 
as did a group of major cities, including Los Angeles and San Francisco.

     Georgetown law professor Robert Stumberg, who filed a brief 
supporting the state, said he was disappointed but not surprised by the 
administration's stand.

     "Massachusetts is not regulating anybody or saying you can't do 
business here," Stumberg said. "They are just saying: 'We the people of 
Massachusetts don't want to do business with you under these 
circumstances.'
"
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

THE WEEK MAGAZINE (India): KIM DAVY IN KENYA? [KACHINS BUYING WEAPONS?]


February 20, 2000

He has 46 passports and as many aliases; he speaks a dozen languages, 
including Hindu; and he can raise half a million dollars in no time with 
a couple of telephone calls. Small wonder, Jan Christien Neilson alias
Kim Palgrave Davy alias Peter Johnson roams free while his hirelings who 
airdropped arms over Purulia in West Bengal in 1995 are behind bars.

British arms runner Peter Bleach and five Latvian aircrew were jailed 
for life on February 2, but Davy ? a slightly-built man with piercing 
eyes ? has remained elusive. There were reports that he might surrender
to a court in native Denmark, but Bleach shrugged them off. "He is too 
big guys behind him to give up so easily. And the Indians have not done 
enough to chase him," Bleach told The Week minutes after the sentence
was passed.

Few Indians have seen Davy, who vanished from Mumbai airport where the 
arms runners were forced to land on the night of December 21, 1995. Now, 
the Ananda Marga sect, which has been absolved in the arms dropping
case, has demanded a judicial inquiry into his mysterious escape act. 
"We have good reasons to believe Davy was escorted away by Indian 
intelligence officials," said the sect's spokesman, Bhaveshananda 
Avadhuta.

According to Bleach's friend and former MP Sir Teddy Taylor, Davy has 
been seen in company of British and American intelligence officers and 
diplomats in Nairobi, from where they support Sudanese rebels against
Khartoum. "They may be protecting Davy," Taylor told The Week.

At Hotel Sarina and Hotel Safari Club in Nairobi, Davy has also been 
seen with John Garrang, commander-in-chief of the Sudanese People's 
Liberation Army (SPLA). These Christian rebels in south Sudan have 
successfully fought Marxist and Islamic regimes in Khrtoum over the
years.

The Americans, who have not hidden their love for the SPLA, apparently 
used Davy to fly weapons to Garrang on Soviet-made transport aircraft he 
purchased cheap. Unlike in Purulia, he did not airdrop the weapons since 
the SPLA controls a wide expanse of Sudanese territory. He could safely
land.

But Davy is no mere arms dealer. He has his hand in minerals, gold and 
precious stones. In early 1995, his Howerstock International Trading Ltd 
commissioned a Filipino  geological consultant, Declaro Zafra and
Associates, to survey the rich gold deposits in Kapoeta in south Sudan.

Zafra identified five distinct gold-bearing localities in Kapoeta and 
estimated the total recovery potential at some 12 million ounces. At 
$350 per ounce, it was worth $4,150 million. The rebels, who give armed 
cover during the survey, were to be paid royalties for each ounce mined.

Howerstock or any of the other companies owned by Davy had no presence 
in the mining world before he commissioned the survey. They were anyway 
too small to enter gold mining. Obviously, Howerstock was being funded
by a global mining giant. Howerstock operates the mines, recovers the 
gold and brings it out of south Sudan through Kenya, which has given it 
an assay certificate legitimising the shipments.

Howerstock gold initially brought down prices in the global market. But 
the giant backing Howerstock was only test-marketing the gold, and 
prices again stabilised once it became known that it would take a few 
years for full scale mining to start. The mining giant was treading
cautiously before heavily investing in a politically unstable country.

South Sudan offered Davy a weapon-mining-insurgent combination. Purulia 
has iron ore and coal mines in the vicinity, but no gold or diamond 
which he is interested in. But a weapon-mining-insurgent combination of
interests exists further east, in the Kachin State of Myanmar.

The state has a powerful rebel army ? the Kachin Independence Army 
(KIA), FORMED IN 1961, FOUGHT Burmese forces for decades and maintained 
control over the northen region bordering India and China. The rich jade
mines of Hpakam and Longkin are located in that area, which also has 
rubies and sapphires. The Kachin area is also supposed to have gold 
deposits.

In 1992-93, the Burmese army, beefed up with Chinese arms, launched a 
fierce offensive against the Kachins and compelled them to sign a 
ceasefire agreement. By 1995, it was clear that the military junta would 
not grant autonomy to the Kachins. The KIA chief Malizup Zau Mai went 
looking for arms and allies.

The Kachins could find some support in the eastern part of Arunachal 
Pradesh, even as India was trying to cultivate the junta. In April-May 
1995, the Burmese army was involved in a holding operation during the
Indian army's 'Operation Golden Duck' against a joint rebel column of 
the Ulfa and two other rebel outfits from Assam and Manipur.

So it could well be that a mining giant offered the Kachins weapons in 
exchange for permission to do gold and diamond prospecting in areas 
under their control. The Kachins were the ideal candidates for receiving
a Purulia-like airdrop.

The Ananda Marga may be interested in securing a few revolvers, or even 
rifles, but only an outfit like the KIA, which takes on the Burmese army 
in set piece battles, would need anti-tank weapons. Bleach admits that
the drop was not meant for the Ananda Marga, though Davy had been a 
Margi in the 1970s.

When the air traffic controllers asked the AN-26 to land in Mumbai, Davy 
burnt all his papers in a bin, but carefully left behind in the 
cockpitone of his old photographs with some Ananda Margis. This was 
perhaps to
confuse investigations.

But how did the weapons land in Purulia if they had been meant for the 
Kachins? Bleach says that when the parachutes came on board at Karachi 
for airdropping the weapons, the Latvian crew picked up a fight with
Davy because they had been under the impression that they were carrying 
"technical equipment" to Bangladesh. During the rest of the flight, Davy 
wielded an AK-56 rifle to keep the Latvians under control, but Bleach 
says, "They were really angry and did everything to mess up the drop."

Bleach says the real drop zone for the weapons "was much further east". 
Davy had tried for landing permission in Dhaka, and sent his sidekick, 
Perter Haestrup, to "buy of the guys at Dhaka" with $50,000 but that did 
not work.

Why did Davy want to land in Dhaka unless the aircraft was planning to 
drop the arms further east? Flying out of Dhaka would make it much 
easier to drop over Kachin hills, an area considered difficult for 
fliers because of the "hump" there. So, was he trying to open a new arms 
supply route to Kachin?

Subir Bhaumik
(He is BBC's eastern India correspondent.)



*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
 OPINION/EDITORIALS
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*


THE IRRAWADDY: TRIAL BY EXILE

Feb. 2000

Vol 8 No 1
Editorial

In the past year, Burma once again occupied precious little of the 
world?s attention. Events elsewhere, notably in Kosovo and East Timor, 
raised the possibility of international intervention in Burma, where 
similar abuses of the most basic human rights have been committed for 
decades; but few people seriously expected to see foreign troops on 
Burmese soil. In fact, apart from a few carefully stage-managed events 
hosted by the regime and the usual round of atrocities that take place 
in areas foreigners are never permitted to visit, very little action of 
any sort has been visible in the country for quite some time. The 
resounding silence of the 9-9-99 movement, effectively suppressed months 
ahead of the ninth of September, was evidence not of ?peace and 
stability?, but of the overwhelming force that has been brought to bear 
on those who oppose Burma?s military regime, and indeed, on the entire 
population of Burma. 

While the international community has tried various means of setting the 
wheels of political progress in Burma in motion, through organizations 
such as the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red 
Cross, and the World Bank, as well as through the initiatives of 
individual governments, such as those of Japan and Australia, Burmese 
forced to live in neighboring countries have grown increasingly 
impatient for change. These people, numbering in the hundreds of 
thousands, include dissidents, ethnic refugees, and illegal migrant 
laborers?all victims of a vicious cycle of political oppression and 
economic ineptitude that has only gained force over the past decade. 
Their numbers represent the magnitude of human suffering in Burma, and 
even as most Burmese within the country have been rendered mute by fear, 
the very existence of so many exiles sends a loud and unequivocal 
message to the rest of the world that life in Burma is far from what the 
generals who rule it portray.

Those who have voted with their feet have found themselves at the mercy 
of a world that seems at best ambivalent about their plight. For the 
countries most directly affected by this massive flow of humanity, 
genuine sympathy is mixed with legitimate concerns about national 
security; add to this the element of cynical exploitation that has 
characterized the actions of some individuals, and it becomes clear that 
mere survival may be more than many of these people can hope for. It is 
only the certainty that things are much worse where they have come from 
that makes this uncertainty seem infinitely preferable.

What becomes of the people who have left and continue to leave Burma 
varies dramatically: from the prime minister-in-exile to the girl who 
has been sold into prostitution, the fate of the stateless is subject to 
unimaginable vicissitudes. But in general, the vast majority remain 
vulnerable to every conceivable abuse and indignity. Even those who 
escape the worst will eventually chafe under the constraints of their 
situation if they feel deprived of any chance to develop as human 
beings. Enforced idleness and limited educational opportunities breed 
frustration that has in some instances been exacerbated by the 
heavy-handedness of authorities.

But by far the greatest source of exasperation amongst exiles has been 
the mounting evidence of their powerlessness against a regime that is 
deemed illegitimate by much of the world but which remains in control 
after more than a decade. 

Last year, we witnessed the beginnings of a disturbing trend that has 
already begun to escalate: the hostage-taking incident at the Burmese 
embassy in Bangkok in October has given rise to another, ultimately 
fatal, attempt to use violence to grab the world?s attention and get 
much-needed assistance. The seizure of a hospital in Ratchaburi, near 
the Thai-Burma border, demonstrates that sheer desperation, rather than 
any sort of strategy, has become the dominant factor in determining the 
actions of some who oppose the Burmese regime. 

Such episodes inevitably cause unnecessary hardship, not just for the 
innocent hostages who must live through the terror of being held at 
gunpoint, but also for the people who have already been victimized many 
times in the past by the familiar patterns of violence that made it 
necessary for them to flee Burma. In an effort to contain the spread of 
violence, new restrictions may be imposed on those whose status already 
makes them susceptible to arrest. Forced repatriation or re-settlement 
in third countries may bring some relief to their present hosts, but the 
benefits, if any, will be short-lived unless there is a concomitant 
effort to achieve a meaningful breakthrough in Burma. As long as the 
current regime remains the sole source of authority in the country, 
Burma will continue to export more than its fair share of suffering 
humanity. 

These are trying times for the vast community of Burmese living in 
exile, as conditions beyond their control continue to make it almost 
impossible for them to present the united front that they will need to 
restore democracy to Burma. But if Burmese exiles hope to return to 
their country one day without fear of imprisonment or worse, they must 
work harder not only to win the confidence of the international 
community, whose involvement will be essential to improving the lives of 
Burma?s fifty million people in the years ahead, but also find more 
effective means of cooperating with one another. This often comes down 
to a matter of leadership, and this may be an appropriate juncture at 
which to reiterate that leaders have a responsibility to step down when 
they are no longer capable of representing the interests of their 
constituencies, supporters and non-supporters alike. 

Ultimately, however, the greatest threat to the unity of Burmese 
struggling against institutionalized violence in their homeland is the 
use of violence to achieve this end. The small minority who resort to 
such tactics do incalculable damage to their cause, as even those who 
understand and sympathize with their motives are obliged to reject their 
methods if they clearly grasp the significance of what the people of 
Burma are trying to achieve. Burma has already been cheated of the 
fruits of its first struggle for independence by the tyranny of 
violence. For the second struggle for independence to truly succeed, 
violence must not be allowed to steal the show again. As recent events 
have shown, gains made through violence are reversible; the damage done 
to innocent lives, however, often is not. Burma does not need to go 
through another trial by fire to prove its desire for freedom. 


Email: waddy@xxxxxxxxxxxx, waddy2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
 OTHER
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

ANNC: NEW BOOK ON BURMA OUT


Kevin McGrath [mailto:mcgrathk@xxxxxxxxx]


THE SCREAM OF THE BUTTERFLY is Sean McGrath's autobiographical/fiction 
novel about a young American's physical and spiritual journey through 
the initiations of adolescence - and the need during his constant 
moving, for an anchoring love. His long and impetuous infatuation with a 
beautiful Eurasian girl named Tanya ends in obsession and rejection - 
and his futile search for the "reasons why," in many of the wrong 
places. His odyssey takes him for a visit with a mysterious monk in 
Burma, on an adventure with a 'lion man' conservationist who is killed 
by poachers in Kenya, to an encounter with mercenaries implicated in the 
assassination of the president of the Comoros Islands, an orientation 
session with a doomsday cult and experimentation with drugs and sex in 
the red light district of Bangkok.

During his college days in the United States he is reunited with Tanya 
whose eventual 'betrayal' leads to his addiction to amphetamines, 
rehabilitation in a psychiatric ward and a brief encounter with a 
radical revolutionary group. His spiritual awakening begins while on a 
Red Cross mission to the areas devastated by the  eruption of Mt 
Pinatubo and his volunteer work in the Cordilleras of the Philippines, 
leads to a psychic healer's clinic, an encounter with the Pope on World 
Youth Day in Manila, volunteer work for the UNHCR at Bataan Refugee Camp 
in the Philippines, an  FAO sustainable development project in Nepal - 
and culminates at a funeral pyre in the shadows of the majestic 
snow-capped Himalayas.

"It's a splendidly readable book- which is to say, it is not always 
pleasant, and thankfully not always politically correct, but always 
carefully and gracefully written. Its readers will be well rewarded with 
a view of the world, both harsh and haunting-in McGrath's memorable 
phrase, 'like eating honey off the edge of a knife.'"  * Jose Dalisay, 
Jr PhD  University of the Philippines

"(The narrator) makes sense of his own body's engagement in the voyage 
of enlightenment-how his mortal self holds out and yields to the rolls 
of love's betrayal, how the senses open as sentient doorways in meeting 
the sacred, how he is both the fragile anchor and pieced landscape where 
the wound and the scar of wandering glow, indelible as tattoos." * Danny 
Reyes


A web site (www.screamofthebutterfly.com) is available for more 
information.


*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*


The BurmaNet News is an Internet newspaper offering comprehensive 
coverage of Burma (Myanmar).  For a subscription to Burma's only free 
daily newspaper, write to: strider@xxxxxxx

Letters to the editor or enquiries should go to the same address or 
BurmaNet can be contacted by telephone or fax:
Voice mail +1 (435) 304-9274 
Fax +1 (810)454-4740 


*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* 


===END=============END=============END===


_____________________________________________________________
Who will win the Oscars? Spout off on our Entertainment list!
http://www.topica.com/lists/showbiztalk