[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
[theburmanetnews] BurmaNet News: Ju
Reply-To: theburmanetnews-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [theburmanetnews] BurmaNet News: June 7, 2000
______________ THE BURMANET NEWS ______________
An on-line newspaper covering Burma
______________ www.burmanet.org _______________
June 7, 2000
Issue # 1548
The BurmaNet News is viewable online at:
http://theburmanetnews.editthispage.com
*Inside Burma
SHAN HERALD AGENCY FOR NEWS: THE FIRST MASSACRE OF THE YEAR IN SHAN
STATE, 62 KILLED
SHAN HERALD AGENCY FOR NEWS: KHUN SA - FROM MUTINY TO SURRENDER
SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER: KARENS IN BURMA 'SUFFER IN SILENCE'
INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION EXCHANGE CLEARING HOUSE: BURMA:
RSF REVIEWS LONG HISTORY OF REPRESSION
*Regional
AFP: THAILAND ISSUES STRONG PROTEST TO MYANMAR OVER ROYAL SLIGHT
BBC: CHINA AND BURMA SIGN DEAL
THE PEOPLE'S DAILY (CHINA): CHINA KEEN TO PROMOTE BILATERAL RELATIONS
WITH MYANMAR
*International
NCGUB: MP CAMPAIGN UPDATE AS OF JUNE 6, 2000
CHRISTIAN SOLIDARITY WORLDWIDE: BURMA RESOLUTION TABLED IN PARLIAMENT
NEW LIGHT OF MYANMAR: SECRETARY-1 LEAVES TO ATTEND FUNERAL SERVICE OF
FORMER JAPANESE PM
JOINT ACTION COMMITTEE JAPAN: KHIN NYUNT ARRIVED AT TOKYO
AFP: PRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGNERS PROTEST MYANMAR GENERAL'S JAPAN TRIP
*Opinion/Editorials
NATION: OPEN LETTER TO BURMA'S LONDON EMBASSY
__________________ INSIDE BURMA ____________________
SHAN HERALD AGENCY FOR NEWS: THE FIRST MASSACRE OF THE YEAR IN SHAN
STATE, 62 KILLED
June 6, 2000
Burma army troops, in retaliation for the resistance, had turned on
the population and hundreds of people were being killed since last
month's resumption of hostilities, said sources coming across the
border into Thailand. Survivors claimed 62 people were mowed down by
junta bullets in one spot alone.
Sources, who are traders and making a living along the Taunggyi-
Tachilek road, told S.H.A.N. that during their stopover in Kali,
Kunhing Township, Loilem District, they heard several people talking
about the killings south of the road.
According to survivors who escaped the massacres, 62 Shan and
hilltribes people, who went back from their relocated sites in
Kunhing to live near their deserted village of Wanhpai, Kenglom
Tract, were rounded, lined up and shot to death on 29 or 30 May. (A
different source said it was 23 May)
"The Burmese (military) knew about their whereabouts, but until then
had not taken action against them for their return without
permission", said the traders. At least a total of 40-50 people were
believed to have been killed in other places, they said. Hsaimong,
Hsaharng and Nati, 3 other village in Kenglom Tract were also
mentioned.
A source who was close to Brigade 7 (Shan State Army "North") with
headquarter in Kali confirmed about the killings, and added that many
other villages along the Salween were also killed. (The SSA "North"
Brigade 7 was also questioned by Burmese authorities about
Yawdserk's SSA "South"'s movements on 24 May, said the source.)
The sources, however, were not sure whether or not the killings were
related to the projected dam on the Salween. "But they occurred
after fighting between Yawdserk's SSA and the junta troops resumed
towards the end of April near Kunhing," they said.
Yawdserk declared unilateral ceasefire on 23 January. He complained
later that Rangoon troops took advantage of the truce to force many
of his units to make separate deals with the junta.
Another traveller who just came back from Kunhing told S.H.A.N. the
SSA was attacked on 28 April in Kenglom. The Shans' retaliation on 9
May destroyed 4 trucks, killing 7 and wounding 5, according to the
SSA's statement.
[Reporter: Moeng Zay]
____________________________________________________
SHAN: KHUN SA - FROM MUTINY TO SURRENDER
6 June 2000
No: 6 - 2
On the 5th anniversary of the rebellion that shook the mighty Mong
Tai Army to its very foundation, S.H.A.N. makes an attempt to
recount what really happened.
The year 1995 began as one that appeared propitious for Khun Sa, who
had just declared independence over a year ago.
The raid on Tachilek by his troops on 20 March, and the day-long
fight of the Shan officer trapped inside Burmese encirclement until
his ammo was exhausted and he committed suicide, all under the
watchful eyes of the local and international media, only served to
enhance Khun Sa's image.
Reuters even wrote an article speculating whether Khun Sa was
emerging as the real leader of the Shan State. Bangkok Post said his
MTA was "the only rebel group left with teeth."
His 25,000-strong MTA was operating almost all over the 160,000
square kilometers of Shan State, leaving only territories under the
control of Kokang and Wa. Even top secret Burmese intelligence
reports conceded that the MTA was even stronger than the United Wa
State Army. Fed up with decades under military rule, even the Burman
population on the western outskirts of Shan State were offering to
lend a hand if the MTA were to operate there. "No group can be worse
than the present one," they said.
All in all, every outward sign indicated 1995 was going to be a great
year for Khun Sa. Even some close observers thought the MTA's
shortcomings could wait until after the final showdown with Rangoon.
It turned out they should have known better.
Unknown to most people, the MTA was reeling under the border closure
imposed by Thailand. Prices and consequent expenditure had rocketed
skyhigh in Homong. To make things worse, his imposition of
exorbitant tax rates had driven many "business establishments" to
the rival UWSA and the safe sanctuaries offered by Burmese
authorities.
To add to these misfortunes, the MTA renewed its war against the Was
for no apparent reason. Pao Sin, a Wa officer, told S.H.A.N.
later, "We thought we had stopped killing each other, but the MTA
began the war again by ambushing our troops twice. The first ambush
alone killed 16 of our men."
This internecine war also cost the MTA dearly in terms of morale and
resources.
The first sign of unhappiness came with the desertion of Maj. Ngo
Harn to the SSA in April, accusing Khun Sa of administering poison
to his superior, Sao Sai Lek, who had died in Homong on 5 January.
Sao Sai Lek had recently arrived from the north at Khun Sa's
invitation to join the MTA. A fighter since 1960, he was widely
respected by Shan patriots. He was only 54 when he passed away.
Luckily, Khun Sa got off easily, when Sai Lek's surviving brother,
Maj Sai Lu, testified to the National Congress, a joint body of
people's representatives and the resistance, that his brother's
death was only through natural causes. No unhappy ramifications
followed.
Khun Sa's next ill-advised move was to send out a controversial order
in May to Maj. Gunyawd, then an acting brigade commander, to attack
the Shan State Army, a group that had signed a ceasefire pact with
Rangoon in 1989. "I was flabbergasted," said Gunyawd later. "We had
just made an agreement with the SSA leaders for a merger. Already
many of their commanders were preparing to come and join hands with
us."
S.H.A.N., along with many others at the Thai border, learned only too
late about what had happened. The reasons for these two
controversial moves, i.e. the order to attack the Was as well as the
one to attack the SSA, therefore remain a mystery until today.
(However, it must be added that for some observers who were
convinced Khun Sa had always been Rangoon's agent, the reasons were
clear. Nevertheless, there has not yet been any convincing evidence
for their allegation).
Gunyawd, much to Homong's frustration, chose to disobey the
controversial command. An order inevitably went out for his arrest.
Somehow, Gunyawd, well-liked both among the troops and the populace,
got wind of the order and made his escape with 60 of his men. They
were joined by other dissatisfied units and eventually swelled up to
17 battalions. The mutineers called themselves the Shan State
National Army and made peace with Rangoon.
Charges and Counter-charges
According to the SSNA's leaflets published on 24 June 1995, Chang
Shee-fu (Khun Sa) and Chang Hsu-chuan (Falang, Khun Sa's Manchurian
chief-of-staff) were guilty of several charges, among which were:
inequality (i.e. favoring Chinese descendants over Shans) disrespect
for the people and the monkhood, extrajudicial executions (one of
Gunyawd's top fighters, Ternyai, was executed, without notification
to Gunyawd, for his "public condemnation" of Chinese-born officers),
fighting with Shan nationals more than with the Burmese military,
denial of the right to present constructive criticisms and
defamation of the resistance with the drug image. ("Freedom shall
remain an elusive dream under him", said one leaflet. "It's like
attracting international assistance for Rangoon to wipe the Shans
out".)
Khun Sa and his supporters countered the charges by saying, "This
must be a conspiracy by overseas Shans led by Sengsuk (leader of the
Shan State Organization as well as the Shan Democratic Union) and
the people from Hsengkeo (Shan State Army "North"'s headquarters)".
Khun Sa himself said, "Gunyawd has jeopardized my plan to restore the
Shan State in two years. He has helped to prolong the Burmese
military's misrule over our people".
"Has he forgotten that it was Khun Sa who had defeated both the
White Chinese (i.e. Kuomintang) and the communists?"
His close aides also sided with him by arguing, "Is there any
existing group that has not received aid and support from the Chinese
(-born)? Gunyawd has gone from us but isn't he going over to a
regime that is being propped up by the Chinese?"
As the mutiny was made known to the people on the border on 20 June,
two weeks after the incident, the reactions were at first mixed.
Many knew they were in a difficult situation and speaking the wrong
words might put themselves and their families in danger.
At the same time, there were some Shan commanders who sided with Khun
Sa. "Khun Sa may have his faults, but he's not with the Burmese
(military) like Gunyawd," said one. "The resistance has had to drag
on for more than 30 years because the university students broke away
from Sao Noi (the founder of the first resistance movement). How
much longer will our people have to suffer because of Gunyawd's
treachery?"
Some, led by Khwanmong, Chief Polical Officer, and "Minister of the
Interior", suggested to Khun Sa the need for reform before it was too
late. "The issue is not Chinese vs Shans," one said. "It is a matter
of system or lack of it. Just look at Thailand. Their independence
was won by Taksin, a Chinese descendant. Many of their leaders today
are also of Chinese origins, but it is not an issue there, because
the Thais have evolved a system in which both Thais and non-Thais
can live and work together. We can begin here with a collective
leadership."
Khwanmong spoke scathingly of Khun Sa's attempts to soothe the
feelings of the leaders of Shan origin by announcing promotions for
many of them. Instead of handing the certificates to the officers in
a ceremony, he had merely made them feel worse by sending a junior
officer with a motorcycle to distribute the papers to the
recipients. "It showed us how little he respected us," Khwangmong
was said to have told Falang.
Reform
Anyhow, with Khun Sa's blessings, the proposition made by Khawnmong
and other sensible leaders, both Chinese and Shan alike, began to be
implemented.
On 12 August, two months after the mutiny, a congress was convened to
form the Central Executive Committee, chaired by the popular
Gunjade, and co-chaired by Zarmmai and Falang. A judiciary
committee, chaired by Nawmong Awn, was also formed to ensure proper
administration of justice. The overall strategy of the CEC was for
reconciliation among the Shan groups especially with the renegade
SSNA.
This was at once denounced by Khun Sa himself, who declared that the
CEC, under Khawnmong's management, was only "following Gunyawd's
ass" instead of leading him. Khun Sa, who in his younger days, had
countered insubordination to his leadership with a heavy hand,
said, "What the CEC should have done was to order an expedition
against the traitor". This, nevertheless, did not keep him from
signing his approval of the CEC.
A month later, an agreement was reached with Gunyawd to enter a
ceasefire pact with Rangoon under the cloak of the SSNA, that had
already signed one. The new leadership, re-named the Shan State
National Council, would be composed of Gunjade as chairman and
Gunyawd as General Secretary, among others.
The resolution was publicly attacked by Khun Sa on 7 November as
submission to traitorous elements. Quietly but firmly, he took back
his powers from the CEC.
The situation that followed was almost anarchic. Chairman Gunjade,
who traveled to central Shan State to negotiate with Gunyawd,
returned with only 100 of his initial 500 troops after the talks
broke down, the rest fleeing to join hands with the latter.
Meanwhile the attack made by the Was in Loilang on 20 September was
repulsed. The MTA seemed to be winning all the battles, according to
the reports. But the same reports also told S.H.A.N. the MTA was
losing the war, because troops were deserting their positions in
droves.
Khun Sa, who was reported to have begun taking drugs, only worsened
the situation by declaring publicly that the "extrajudicial
executions" as charged by Gunyawd were ordered by himself.
Audiotapes recorded by himself offering monetary rewards to those
who could assassinate Gunyawd were also shown to S.H.A.N. by people
in Bangkok, Chiangmai and Chiangrai. Inevitably, his actions only
served to send things further out of control. Afterwards, there was
a deluge of desertions to Gunyawd's camp.
Last Days
On 18 October 1995, a S.H.A.N. source in Chiangrai reported that Khun
Sa had sent a secret message to Tachilek through his emissary, Wu
Zeng-liang. He also reported that Kyaw Myint and Lao Tai a.k.a. Tin
Maung Win a.k.a. Yang Wangsuan, both Khun Sa's trusted lieutenants,
had gone across to Maesod to talk with the authorities in Rangoon.
Nearly two months later, on 14 December, Zarmhurng a.k.a. Pathai
Changtrakul a.k.a. Chang Weikang, Khun Sa's second son, showed
S.H.A.N. a radio message: the high command had agreed to make
a "partial" surrender to Rangoon.
This news spread like wildfire to the whole "Free territory of Shan
State" in the Trans-Salween areas.
On 29 December, S.H.A.N. was back in Homong for the last time.
Sources told S.H.A.N. that Khun Seng had gone across the Salween on
18 December to prove to Rangoon that "Khun Sa was acting in good
faith." They also related that Khun Seng's 23 loyal bodyguards were
also put to death on the orders of Khun Sa on 17 December, on
suspicion of conspiring to assassinate the MTA leaders. On 25
December, Khun Sa made a final public appearance in Mongmai, a few
kilometers south of Homong. He told his audience that he would be
back within two years, "when people learn for themselves that Khun
Sa is better than anyone else", hinting that he would be leaving
Homong soon.
During our brief meeting, Khun Sa disclosed that Col. San Pwint from
Rangoon would be arriving in Homong on the next day. He also
indicated that the further presence of S.H.A.N. in the area would be
an embarassment.
"Try to set up your office in Thailand from now on," he said
We were already out of Homong when he officially surrendered to Gen.
Tin Htut, Commander of Eastern Command, on 7 January 1996.
So, why did he do this?
To some like Sao Sengsuk, former commander-in-chief of the SSA and
at present a leader of the overseas Shans, the reason was
simple. "He was only going back to his masters," he said. "I knew it
well ahead".
For others who had lived and worked with him, it was not that simple.
"He always said that there was no place for him to live in peace
unless Shan State was free. Wanted by drug agencies around the
world, he had nowhere to go except to live among the Shans to fight
for them," said a former close aide. "So when the Shans showed they
didn't want him anymore, the only choice that remained for him was
to make the best deal he could with the Burmese".
Soon afterwards The Bangkok Post predicted that the surrender spelled
the end of the Shan resistance. But it was not to be so. A hitherto
little known commander, Yawdserk, rose out from among the ashes to
wave the flag of resistance in the same month that Khun Sa
surrendered, and, by all accounts, his numbers appear to be swelling.
Does he have any more chance than Khun Sa had? S.H.A.N. does not have
an answer for this, but a report that arrived a few days ago seems
to provide one:
"(Someone close to Khun Sa) had dispatched a message to Yawdserk,
counselling him that he shouldn't emulate Khun Sa by refusing to
listen to well-meaning people. Had Khun Sa not learned to trust only
his own counsel, he might not have been wasting his life away in
Rangoon like he is doing now, said the message."
____________________________________________________
SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER: KARENS IN BURMA 'SUFFER IN SILENCE'
By Rick Mercier
SPECIAL TO THE EXAMINER
June 4, 2000
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
file=/examiner/hotnews/stories/04/burmasun.dtl
Reportedly victims of 'ethnic cleansing' by the military, their
plight is little known
MAE SOT, Thailand - Burma's jungle-clad hills, blue in the late
afternoon haze, loom as a reminder to Billy Htoo of what he was
forced to leave behind.
One night last November, Burmese soldiers assaulted the village where
the 27-year-old medic had been providing care for destitute Karen
civilians bearing the brunt of the military junta's counterinsurgency
campaign against Karen National Union (KNU) rebels, who have been
fighting for self-rule for the ethnic minority since 1949.
On that night, Htoo recalls, he and the 600 residents of Mae La Poe
Hta fled for the Thai border when the soldiers came, crossing the
Moei River, which forms the border between Thailand and Burma, also
known as Myanmar. "We carried the sick people," he said.
Htoo and the others from his village are among the more than 100,000
Burmese Karens who have taken refuge in neighboring Thailand. Some of
these refugees have been in Thailand since the mid-1980s, but the
bulk arrived after January 1995, when government forces overran the
KNU's stronghold at Manerplaw, about 185 miles from Rangoon, the
capital.
In addition to the refugees in Thailand, at least 300,000 Karens are
believed to be internally displaced within Burma, meaning that as
many as one in 10 Burmese Karens have been uprooted.
"Whenever we go to a village, we see people wearing backpacks, ready
to move out at any moment," said Saw Tay Tay, secretary of the Karen
Refugee Committee, or KRC, which serves as an intermediary between
Thai authorities and the tens of thousands of Karens spread out in
more than a dozen camps on the Thai side of the border.
Human rights violations
Human rights groups claim that thousands of Karen civilians have died
as a result of Burmese military actions in the 1990s. Amnesty
International and other groups have documented mass killings of Karen
civilians during counterinsurgency operations. Karen villagers
fleeing Burmese troops have fallen victim to "a de facto shoot-to-
kill policy," Amnesty has noted, while others have been killed at
random to terrorize the population in areas where KNU guerrillas are
active.
In a report released on May 24, Amnesty said women from minority
groups such as the Karens have suffered some of the worst persecution
at the hands of the Burmese government. "When the army began massive
relocation programs in 1996 as part of its counter-insurgency
campaign, tens of thousands of women belonging to ethnic minorities
were forcibly relocated from their ancestral lands," the report said.
KNU Secretary-General Mahn Sha Lah Phan, in an interview here last
month, said the Burmese were practicing "ethnic cleansing" against
the Karens, and compared the situation in Burma to the Balkans. "We
hear about Bosnia and the term ethnic cleansing. The ethnic
population (in Burma) are in a very similar situation."
Tay Tay said descriptions of Bosnia and Kosovo resonate among
Karens. "When we told our people about Bosnia and Kosovo, they
said, 'Oh, we have gone through that.'"
But while the world has taken decisive action against governments
that have pursued similar policies in places such as the former
Yugoslavia and East Timor, the Karens' desperate plight has received
little international attention. "We suffer in silence," Tay Tay said.
British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook condemned Burma's treatment of
the Karens during an April visit to a refugee camp in Thailand. "I
have heard enough and I have seen enough to know that the people that
are here only came here because they were fleeing from brutality,
from military action," he said.
Foreign oil investments
The Karens, who mostly live in eastern Burma's jungles and highlands,
also have come under pressures not directly linked to the Burmese
counterinsurgency in the past decade.
The 1990s saw an influx of massive foreign investment in offshore
natural gas fields and pipelines in Burma. One pipeline that has been
in operation since 1998 - a $1.2 billion project involving California-
based Unocal Corp. and French-owned Total Fina Elf - cuts through
nearly 40 miles of territory traditionally inhabited by Karens.
Another pipeline runs parallel to it, and will be operated by
Britain's Premier Oil, which has sunk $200 million into the project.
The KNU's Mahn Sha charged the oil companies that invested in and
oversee the pipelines "have been hurting the Karen population to a
very serious extent" through their collusion with the Burmese
military junta that rules the country. "In the building of the
pipeline, many Karen villages were relocated, and many people were
forced to work in construction activities," he said.
He said the three major Western investors in the pipeline projects -
Unocal, Total Fina Elf and Premier - were partially responsible for
human rights violations that included not only forced relocation and
forced labor, but also executions, rape and arbitrary arrests.
Fifteen plaintiffs representing thousands of Karen refugees have
filed lawsuits against Unocal in U.S. federal court, charging that
the oil firm was complicitous in human rights abuses by the Burmese
military.
Unocal has strongly denied the plaintiffs' allegations. "There were
no human rights violations on our project, and that's a fact," Unocal
Chief Executive Officer Roger Beach told protesters at the company's
annual shareholders meeting in Brea, Orange County, last month.
A U.S. federal judge in Los Angeles will decide soon whether the
suits against Unocal - which are seeking more than $1 billion in
damages and are the first ever to name a U.S. corporation as a human
rights violator - can go to trial.
EarthRights International, one of four human rights groups that have
filed the suits on behalf of the refugees, said it was considering
similar legal action against Premier Oil.
Firms' argument: Jobs
The oil companies have argued that their investments provide jobs and
improve the standard of living of many Burmese. But the KRC's Tay Tay
scoffed at such justifications for doing business in Burma. "Any
money that goes into Burma will go into the hands of the military -
that's for sure."
In 1996, Massachusetts enacted a boycott of companies that do
business in Burma. In response, a foreign trade group representing
580 corporations, including Unocal, has challenged the Massachusetts
law. The case is now before the Supreme Court.
Justices on March 22 heard arguments from the Clinton administration
and the trade group claiming that the law was unconstitutional
because it usurped the federal government's power to conduct foreign
policy. They have not yet issued a ruling.
The case is the first the high court has agreed to hear on state and
local governments' authority to impose economic penalties to express
displeasure with a foreign government. Massachusetts is one of nearly
three dozen states and municipalities - including San Francisco,
Oakland, Berkeley and Alameda County in the Bay Area - that have
enacted some form of Burma-related boycott.
Burma's military junta, the State Peace and Development Council, or
SPDC, is widely regarded as one of the world's most repressive
regimes. Military governments dominated by members of the majority
Burman ethnic group have controlled Burma since 1962, when a coup led
by Gen. Ne Win ousted an elected civilian government.
The junta has ruled by decree since 1988, when security forces
slaughtered thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators. Two years
later, the regime annulled elections in which the pro-democracy
movement, led by Nobel Peace Prize recipient Aung San Suu Kyi, scored
an overwhelming victory. More than 1,300 political prisoners are
currently languishing in Burmese jails, according to the U.S. State
Department.
Other ethnic groups
In recent years, Burma has reached cease-fire agreements with all of
the country's ethnic insurgents except the Karens. Mahn Sha said the
KNU finds serious faults with those deals. "The Shan, the Mon, the
Karenni - a number have reached cease-fire agreements, but they are
still no nearer to any negotiated settlement of problems" facing
Burma's ethnic groups, Mahn Sha said.
The KNU began dialogue with the military junta earlier this year, but
fresh fighting between the insurgents and government troops in April
sent thousands of Karen civilians fleeing into Thailand and led the
KNU to break off talks.
The Karen insurgents envisage establishing a Karen state within a new
democratic Burmese federation. The state would have its own
legislature and governor, along with its own system of taxation. The
rebels also seek control over natural resources in Karen territory.
Even in a democratic Burma under new leadership, Tay Tay said, Karens
would need to have self-rule, because putting their fate in the hands
of the Burman majority would still be too risky. "Maybe you can call
it autonomy or self-determination, but we want self-rule," he
said. "We know Burmese ways."
____________________________________________________
INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION EXCHANGE CLEARING HOUSE: BURMA:
RSF REVIEWS LONG HISTORY OF REPRESSION
COMMUNIQUE # 9-22 6 June 2000
Burma has witnessed "ten years of contempt for press freedom" under
the rule of the military junta, which continues to flagrantly violate
human rights and free expression, states Reporters sans frontieres
(RSF). Holding power since 1988, the junta refused to recognise the
May 1990 elections in which the National League for Democracy (NLD),
under the head of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, won a
landslide victory with over 80% of the popular vote. Since this time,
the junta "has violated the rights of Burmese and foreign journalists
to practice their profession freely" through murder, torture, severe
jail sentences, threats and censorship, reports RSF. In the past ten
years, four journalists were killed by Burmese security services.
Immediately prior to the junta's take over in 1988, the Burmese press
was "spearheading the struggle for democracy" and "enjoyed a revival
of freedom," says RSF. The 18 September coup d'etat by the military
junta ended this phase and since then the group has enacted many
repressive measures against the media and civil society. Journalists
are among a long list of others, including dissidents and members of
rebel movements, who have been subjected to the regime's "cruelty,
physical and psychological torture, rape and extra judiciary
executions." For more information, view RSF's website:
http://www.rsf.fr.
For other sources of news on Burma, the Alternative Asean Network on
Burma (ALTSEAN) regularly publishes a report card on Burma. To
receive a copy of this report, contact ALTSEAN in Bangkok, Thailand;
Tel: +662 275 1811; Fax: +662 693 4515; E-mail: altsean@xxxxxxxxxxx
____________________________________________________
BBC: CHINA AND BURMA SIGN DEAL
Tuesday, 6 June, 2000,
The vice-chairman of Burma's military government, General Maung Aye,
has concluded an agreement with the Chinese government to tackle drug
trafficking and other crimes across their shared border. The
agreement was announced in Beijing during a visit by by General Maung
Aye to mark the fiftieth anniversary of diplomatic relations between
the two countries.
In a joint statement, the two countries also agreed to explore new
channels for developing trade, investment, agriculture, fishery and
tourism.
China was the first country to recognise Burma's military regime
after it seized power in 1988, and correspondents say it is now the
country's main arms supplier.
____________________ REGIONAL ____________________
AFP: THAILAND ISSUES STRONG PROTEST TO MYANMAR OVER ROYAL SLIGHT
BANGKOK, June 7 (AFP) - Thailand has issued a strong protest to the
Myanmar junta following a commentary in the state-run press
threatening to expose Thai officials engaged in drugs
trafficking "including those of royal blood."
"We have passed on our concern to the Myanmar authorities on the
groundless implication in the report, (mentioning) certain sections
of our society," Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan said late Tuesday in
response to reporters' questions.
He said the protest had been made "in very, very clear and definite
terms," and that Thailand believed it unlikely such an incident would
happen again.
On May 19 a commentary in the New Light of Myanmar blamed Thailand
for the illicit drugs trade along its border.
It said if Bangkok tried to deny the charges the paper was "willing
to reveal a list of names stretching back generations, even including
those of royal blood."
Thailand and Myanmar form part of the notorious "Golden Triangle"
opium growing region, along with parts of Laos, and the two countries
often squabble over who bears the brunt of the blame
BBC: CHINA AND BURMA SIGN DEAL
Tuesday, 6 June, 2000,
The vice-chairman of Burma's military government, General Maung Aye,
has concluded an agreement with the Chinese government to tackle drug
trafficking and other crimes across their shared border. The
agreement was announced in Beijing during a visit by by General Maung
Aye to mark the fiftieth anniversary of diplomatic relations between
the two countries.
In a joint statement, the two countries also agreed to explore new
channels for developing trade, investment, agriculture, fishery and
tourism.
China was the first country to recognise Burma's military regime
after it seized power in 1988, and correspondents say it is now the
country's main arms supplier.
____________________________________________________
THE PEOPLE'S DAILY (CHINA): CHINA KEEN TO PROMOTE BILATERAL RELATIONS
WITH MYANMAR
Wednesday, June 07, 2000, updated at 10:56(GMT+8)
The further promotion of good-neighborly and cooperative relations
between China and Myanmar is an important part of China's diplomacy
concerning its surrounding areas, Chinese Vice-President Hu Jintao
said in Beijing Tuesday.
During talks with Maung Aye, vice-chairman of the State Peace and
Development Council of Myanmar, Hu said that Sino-Myanmese friendship
and cooperation has been developing steadily over the past decades
despite the great changes that have taken place in the international
arena.
There have been frequent exchange of high-level visits between the
two countries in recent years, and bilateral cooperation in
political, economic, trade, cultural and other areas has expanded.
In addition, the two countries have supported and cooperated with
each other in international and regional affairs, Hu said, adding
that "We are satisfied with the smooth development of Sino- Myanmese
relations."
The Chinese vice-president also expressed his appreciation for the
Myanmese government's consistent adherence to the one China stance
and its support for China's reunification.
Hu said he hopes that the tradition of high-level exchanges of visits
will continue in the future, and government departments and people
from all walks of life between the two countries will increase
exchanges.
He also hopes that the two sides will expand economic and trade
cooperation, and promote consultation and cooperation in
international and regional affairs in order to consolidate their
traditional friendship and bring long-term and good-neighborly
relations in the 21st century.
Hu briefed the visitors on China's reform and opening-up as well as
its modernization drive. He wished the Myanmese people more success
in building their country.
Maung Aye said that the two countries are linked by rivers and
mountains, and their peoples have a time-honored friendship, noting
that bilateral relations have developed satisfactorily since the
establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries five
decades ago.
There are no pending issues to be solved between the two countries,
he said, noting that the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence
serves as the cornerstone of brotherly relations between the two
countries.
He said that Myanmar is willing to work with China to develop their
relations in the 21st century, adding that Myanmar hopes to maintain
high-level visits, expand economic and trade cooperation, implement a
border management agreement, and intensify anti-drug cooperation to
maintain a safe and stable border between the two countries.
The Myanmese leader said that his country has long followed the one
China principle, and the Myanmese government has taken a clear- cut
and firm stance on the Taiwan issue. Myanmar will never develop
official relations with Taiwan at any time, he said.
He offered congratulations to the return of Hong Kong and Macao to
China. He said the smooth return demonstrates that the policy of "one
country, two systems" is successful, expressing the belief that the
Chinese people will accomplish their objective of peaceful
reunification of the motherland.
He said that developing countries should intensify unity, and work
together to safeguard their own interests.
Maung Aye also invited Hu to visit Myanmar. Hu expressed thanks for
the invitation.
Prior to the talks, Hu presided over a welcoming ceremony in honor of
Maung Aye.
The two leaders also attended a signing ceremony of a joint statement
on a blueprint for future bilateral relations and cooperation between
the two countries.
__________________ INTERNATIONAL __________________
NCGUB: MP CAMPAIGN UPDATE AS OF JUNE 6, 2000
Information Office, National Coalition Government of the Union of
Burma
The following is an update on the MP campaign as of Tuesday, June 6,
2000.
We would like to take this opportunity to express our most sincere
thanks and highest appreciation to all of you for your continued
efforts and dedication to Burma's struggle for democracy and freedom.
1. 201 MPs at IPU conference in Jordan already signed up for
their Solidarity with the MPs of Burma. (Representing 82
countries)
2. 122 MPs of Ireland
3. 68 MPs of Estonia
4. 66 MPs of Belgium
5. 50* Members of the United States Congress (16 Senators and
34 House of Representatives)
6. 43 Members of European Parliament
7. 27 MPs and Senators from Canada
8. 26 MPs of the Netherlands
9. 3 MPs of Cambodia (including Sam Rainsy, Chair of
the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats)
* 50 members of the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States signed up for the co-sponsorship of the concurrent resolution
on Burma (S.CON.RES. 113 IS and H.CON.RES. 328 IH respectively,
expressing the sense of the Congress in recognition of the 10th
anniversary of the free and fair elections in Burma and the urgent
need to improve the democratic and human rights of the people of
Burma).
In total, 606 MPs all over the world have been officially with the
legitimate MPs of the Union of Burma.
Information Office
NCGUB
____________________________________________________
CHRISTIAN SOLIDARITY WORLDWIDE: BURMA RESOLUTION TABLED IN PARLIAMENT
Paul Marsden MP tabled the following Early Day Motion today in the
British Parliament.
The EDM number is 804. British readers of Burmanet news may like to
write to their MP to ask him/her to sign up.
Catherine Field,
Research and Advocacy
Christian Solidarity Worldwide
Text:
That this house recognises and supports the Committee Representing
the People's Parliament in Burma, which has been established due
to the military junta's refusal to comply with the 1990 election
results and allow parliament to convene since that time; notes
that the CRPP has already received statements of support from the
European Parliament, the Danish Parliament, the Belgian Parliament
and the Norwegian Parliament, and hopes that international
recognition of this kind will serve to strengthen the pro-
democracy movement in Burma.
____________________________________________________
NEW LIGHT OF MYANMAR: SECRETARY-1 LEAVES TO ATTEND FUNERAL SERVICE OF
FORMER JAPANESE PM
June 7, 2000
Special Envoy of the Government of the Union of Myanmar Secretary-
1 of the State Peace and Development Council Lt-Gen Khin Nyunt left
Yangon by air on 6 June to attend the funeral service of the former
Prime Minister of Japan Mr. Keizo Obuchi at the invitation of the
Government of Japan.
____________________________________________________
JOINT ACTION COMMITTEE JAPAN: KHIN NYUNT ARRIVED AT TOKYO
June 7, 2000
Lt.General Khin Nyunt of Military Intelligence arrived at Tokyo June
6, 2000. SPDC Secretary 1 and Head of Military Intelligence arrived
at Tokyo this evening to attend the former prime minister of Japan
funeral on June 8, 2000. The initial news came out last week that the
military strong man will arrive on Tokyo June 7 and he will go back
on June 8 after the ceremony of Keizo Obuchi's funeral.
According to reliable sources, he will meet some Japanese officials.
But it is difficult to get his schedule exactly.
Some Burma watcher think that the military intelligence avoid the
protest of pro-democracy activists in Tokyo and he got a very good
lesson from his deputy, Brig.General Kyaw Win who came to Japan last
year. Kyaw Win faced the protests wherever he go while he was in
Japan.
Joint Action Committe for Democracy in Burma hold a press conference
this afternoon and announced the statement concerned with Khin
Nyunt's trip to Tokyo.
The statement said that Khin Nyunt is the most responsible person for
crack down on peace demonstrators in 1988 peoples'uprising, jailing,
torturing, threatening, confining, restricting the pro-democracy
activists in Burma. JAC also urged the world leaders who coming to
Japan to attend the former prime minister's funeral that not to shake
hand, not to sit together and not to talk anything with Khin Nyunt.
Tokyo activists will stage a demonstration on June 7 at Ministry of
Foreign Affairs for issuing the visa to Khin Nyunt.
____________________________________________________
AFP: PRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGNERS PROTEST MYANMAR GENERAL'S JAPAN TRIP
TOKYO, June 7 (AFP) - Pro-democracy protesters rallied here Wednesday
to protest a Myanmar general's trip to Japan to attend a memorial
service for former prime minister Keizo Obuchi.
About 100 Myanmar protesters, wearing T-shirts and badges with pro-
democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi's pictures, shouted slogans against
Lieutenant General Khin Nyunt in front of the Myanmar embassy in
Tokyo.
The powerful chief of Myanmar's military intelligence arrived here
Tuesday after Japan granted him a visa so that he could join the
mourners at the memorial service.
"Get out," "Democracy never dies," the protesters shouted as 50
Japanese police officers looked on.
They labelled Khin Nyunt, who is also first secretary of the
military junta, as "the strongest champion in violating human
rights," and in a leaflet charged "part of the Japanese government is
helping the military dictator."
"He should not attend the funeral service with other countries'
representatives like (US) President Clinton," said Htin Aung, a 40-
year-old protester from the Japanese branch of the National League
for Democracy (NLD).
"I want him to get out of Japan as soon as possible ... All he wants
is money from Japan," said Thaing Shin-Yat, a 24-year-old student in
Japan.
Earlier, activisits had said the Myanmar general was notorious for
barbarity and responsible for cracking down on democracy.
Myanmar has been a pariah to most Western nations, including the
United States and European Union, since its regime bloodily
suppressed pro-democracy protests in 1988.
_________________OPINION/EDITORIALS________________
NATION: OPEN LETTER TO BURMA'S LONDON EMBASSY
June 7, 2000
Late last month, you issued Myanmar News Bulletin Issue No.5/2000.
It contained so many important errors, I feel it necessary to send
this letter. Contrary to what you said, "that the election was not
held to transfer power" is incorrect.
If you had consulted the election law, which the soldiers in power
wrote and promulgated, you would have found that it was called Pyithu
Hluttaw Election Law, 31, May l989. In its definitions, it said that
Hlut¼taw means Pyithu Hluttaw. That term was prominently used in the
military written constitution of l974. Article 12 of the l974
fundamental law declared that: "The sovereign powers of the State,
legislative, executive and judicial reside in the people, comprising
all national races whose strength is based on peasants and workers."
In Article 13, it said: "The Pyithu Hluttaw, elected by citizens
having the right to vote, exercise the sovereign power invested in it
by the people . . ." Chapter IV sets forth the powers and duties of
this body. Had you read this you would not have followed the Slorc
fiction about the meaning of the term.
Thus, the authors of the election law and the people knew that they
were voting to create a new Pyithu Hluttaw and that, once seated, all
power, including control of the military, should be transferred to
the legal seat of power. The language is clear and only after the
military saw the size of the NLD victory and its total rejection by
the people did it begin to reinterpret the language of the election
law so that Slorc did not have to give up power which belonged to the
people.
The second error in your report was to say that the "process of
orderly convening the people's assembly was disrupted when the
political party that won the largest number of seats, the NLD,
decided to ignore the primary objective of holding the election".
If you had reviewed the facts, you would have found that the NLD
waited patiently between May 27, when the election was held, and July
27, when the military issued Declaration 1/90 which said in paragraph
19 that the government it put in place on September 18, the State Law
and Order Restoration Council, is a military government, "one that is
governing by martial law". On July 28 and 29, the NLD held a caucus
and issued the Gandhi Hall Declaration. It said that the party had
proposed to the Slorc "to hold frank and sincere discussion with good
faith and with the object of national reconciliation" but received no
reply.
At the end of its declaration, it said, "in accordance with the
wishes of the people, Article 3, Chapter 2, of the Pyithu Hluttaw
Election Law, the essence of the democratic system and international
procedures, we, the NLD Pyithu Hluttaw members, unanimously call on
the Slorc on this day to convene the Pyithu Hluttaw." Sadly, this was
not done.
In the light of the facts, not the fiction issued by Slur/SPDC, the
NLD did not ignore the orderly process for consultation and transfer
of power as called for in the election law, but it was the military
rulers who disregarded the outcome of the election they called and
supervised. For 60 days they made no effort to hold talks with the
leaders of the victorious party and take steps to fulfill the
conditions of the election law and transfer power.
Finally, your bulletin reports that when the NLD refused to join in
forming an assembly to write a new constitution presumably under the
military, "some members elect went underground" thus delaying the
convening the people's assembly.
That some members of the NLD went underground and even left the
country is of no consequence in the light of the fact that it was the
military rulers who were in violation of the election law and by
their action provoked some individuals to take individual actions.
But that was not the action of the elected party: it did not call
for it members to go underground and leave the country. It stood
ready then as it has ever since, to begin talks with the Slorc/SPDC,
to follow the letter of the law and bring about a peaceful and proper
transfer of power.
Finally, you call upon the Western media to correct its description
of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, saying that she was never qualified to stand
for elected public office in Burma and you cite the l947 constitution
which the military violated when it overthrew the elected government
in l962 and abrogated in favor of a new fundamental law promulgated
in l974.
You specifically say that she was disqualified because "any person
married to a foreign citizen or anyone holding allegiance to a
foreign power" is so. If you had examined the l947 constitution you
would have found that Article 74 sets forth persons who were
disqualified from being members of the parliament. Subsection 1
defines this as "any person who is under any acknowledgement of
allegiance or adherence to a foreign power or is a subject or citizen
or entitled to the rights and privileges of a subject or a citizen of
a foreign power". Do you know for a fact that she acknowledge
allegiance or adherence to a foreign power? Do you know for a fact
that she is a subject or citizen of a state other than Burma and is
entitled to the rights and privileges of a subject or a citizen of a
foreign power? Do you know for a fact that she renounced her Burmese
citizenship and chose that of her husband?
I do not think that you can honestly say yes to any of the above
questions. Further, you have the words of her husband, published in
his introductory essay in her book, "Freedom from Fear" (l991), that
long before their marriage they discussed her feeling that someday
she might have to return to Burma: "I only ask one thing, that should
my people need me, you would help me to do my duty by them."
These are not the words of someone under another's control. These
are the words of a true patriot, who stood ready, long before the
hour, to return to her homeland and take up any tasks given to her by
the people. Surely, you must hope that your sons and daughters,
wherever they may live, also are ready to return home in response to
the call of your people and demonstrate the same kind of patriotism
that Aung San Suu Kyi had demonstrated for these past 11plus years.
I believe that you owe the people of Burma, Aung San Suu Kyi and the
NLD an apology for toadying to the criminal and illegal government in
Burma and acting as its mouthpiece.
Josef Silverstein is professor emeritus of Rutgers University. He is
a Burma specialist.
________________
The BurmaNet News is an Internet newspaper providing comprehensive
coverage of news and opinion on Burma (Myanmar).
For a subscription to Burma's only free daily newspaper, write to:
strider@xxxxxxx
You can also contact BurmaNet by phone or fax:
Voice mail or fax (US) +1(202) 318-1261
You will be prompted to press 1 for a voice message or 2 to send a
fax. If you do neither, a fax tone will begin automatically.
Fax (Japan) +81 (3) 4512-8143
________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life's too short to send boring email. Let SuperSig come to the rescue.
http://click.egroups.com/1/5108/6/_/713843/_/960401603/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
theburmanetnews-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx