AFP
- Japan's FM demands immediate release of Suu Kyi
AFP
- EU set to harden sanctions against Myanmar over Aung San Suu Kyi
WP
- U.S. Sanctions Bill Would Ban Burmese Imports
WP
- I Went To Burma. Bad Move
HC
- Put pressure on repressive Burma military junta
WSJ
- It's time to turn the tables on Burma's thugs.
MJS
- Editorial: Free Aung San Suu Kyi
VOA
News - Current Situation Makes Political Dialogue Unlikely in Burma
Washington File - House International Relations Committee Approves
Burma Sanctions Act
Bkk
Post - Somdhat defends Rangoon
Bkk
Post - COMMENTARY - Burmese daze
NST
- Pakistan?s bid for ARF membership shot down
The
Globe and Mail - Canada calling for UN reform
DS
- Editorial - Detaining Suu Kyi
Asia Times - US to turn up pressure on Yangon
Asian Tribune - Airline mulls Burma move
--------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday June 14, 11:13 AM
Japan's FM demands
immediate release of Suu Kyi
Japanese Foreign Minister
Yoriko Kawaguchi has underlined Tokyo's demand for an immediate release of
pro-democracy opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, the foreign ministry
said.
Kawaguchi told telephone talks with Myanmar Foreign Minister Win
Aung by telephone late Friday, the ministry said.
"Japan demands that Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi and other leaders of the National League for Democracy (NLD) be
immediately released and freedom of NLD's political activities be immediately
ensured," Kawaguchi told her Myanmar counterpart, according to the
ministry.
"It is critically important for Myanmar to make progress on
national reconciliation and democratisation," she said.
Win Aung was
quoted by the ministry as telling Kawaguchi: "The Government of Myanmar has not
abandoned the process of national reconciliation and democratisation and would
like to make progress in the process."
But the Myanmar foreign minister
stopped short of mentioning any immediate plans for her release.
She told
Win Aung that she hopes to meet him in Phnom Penh next week on the sidelines of
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum, a regional
security grouping.
Japan is the biggest aid donor to Myanmar. It
suspended all but a small amount of humanitarian aid in the aftermath of a 1988
military coup and crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators, but the flow of
funds resumed in 1994.
In February Japan's overseas aid agency said it
planned to spend about 20 million dollars in Myanmar in the fiscal year
beginning last month despite a reduction in its overall budget.
--------------------------------------------------------------
EU set to harden sanctions against Myanmar over Aung San
Suu Kyi
BRUSSELS, June 14 (AFP) - The European Union is expected immediately
to toughen up sanctions against Myanmar in the wake of the arrest of opposition
leader Aung San Suu Kyi, an EU diplomatic source said on Saturday.
EU
foreign ministers scheduled to meet in Luxembourg on Monday were ready to
"immediately put in place increased sanctions," the source said.
The
Nobel peace laureate was placed in "protective custody" at the end of May after
violent clashes between her supporters and a junta-backed mob that left dozens
dead.
Harsher EU penalties could include an extension to the list of
Myanmar's leaders barred from entering the EU as well as a toughening up of an
arms embargo.
The present sanctions regime includes an arms embargo, a
freezing of assets and a visa ban on a list of Burmese officials.
The
European Unio's Commission warned on June 6 that it could strengthen sanctions
against Yangon, and again called for the immediate release of Suu Kyi. It set a
deadline of October 29 to introduce the new measures.
Aung San Suu Kyi
is being held in a military camp 40 kilometres (25 miles) outside the capital.
She apparently sustained non-life threatening head injuries when her car
windscreen was shattered during the clashes.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Washington Post
U.S. Sanctions
Bill Would Ban Burmese Imports
By Paul
Blustein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 13,
2003; Page E01
Outraged over the latest crackdown by Burma's
military junta, Congress is poised to approve legislation that would impose some
of the toughest economic sanctions ever on a country for human rights
violations, including a ban on the importation of Burmese goods.
The
Senate passed a sanctions bill by a 97 to 1 vote on Wednesday, amid indignation
over a deadly May 30 attack on the motorcade of Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of
Burma's pro-democracy forces, who was later detained. Yesterday, the House
International Relations Committee approved a similar bill by voice vote, and
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell endorsed the "goals and intent" of the bills
in a signed Wall Street Journal commentary headlined "It's Time to Turn the
Tables on Burma's Thugs."
Business groups are protesting that the
sanctions violate international trade rules, will accomplish little in the
absence of cooperation from other countries, and contravene the longstanding
U.S. policy of using "engagement," including commerce, to change the behavior of
dictatorial regimes. But "when the train is moving 400 miles per hour, not a
whole lot of people want to stand on the tracks," said William A. Reinsch,
president of the National Foreign Trade Council, a corporate-backed
organization.
The proposed import ban, which would cut off shipments of
textiles and other Burmese goods to the United States that totaled about $356
million last year, gives the legislation far more of an economic bite than most
other human rights or pro-democracy bills that Congress has passed. The only
comparable laws to be enacted in recent memory, according to Kimberly Ann
Elliott, a expert on sanctions at the Institute for International Economics, are
the embargo on Cuba, the sanctions that restricted commerce with South Africa's
apartheid regime and similar bans on trade with Haiti in the early
1990s.
The success enjoyed by Burma's congressional critics, whose
leaders include Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.),
marks a reversal of a trend away from the use of trade as a weapon for human
rights and other foreign policy purposes. The predominance of the engagement
approach was evident in the approval of "permanent normal trade relations" with
China in 2000, and Powell derided sanctions as exercises in futility when the
Bush administration took office.
So although commerce with
poverty-stricken Burma is of scant economic significance to the United States,
business representatives fear that a trade embargo on Rangoon will give human
rights activists and other proponents of sanctions new momentum to press for
trade restrictions on other countries. After all, if engagement has been judged
a clear failure in Burma's case, that makes it harder to argue that the policy
will work at loosening authoritarian control elsewhere.
"We were kind of on a
roll," Reinsch said ruefully. "Someone asked me the other day for a list of
sanctions that had been enacted since [the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks],
and the answer is none. I thought that was a pretty good record. Then here we
go." Besides the Burma legislation, "there are other bills kicking around," he
noted, including one aimed at Syria, which failed to pass last year but now "has
some steam behind it."
Burma is a member of the World Trade Organization,
which entitles it to the same treatment for its exports as other WTO members. So
if the proposed ban on Burmese imports is implemented, Rangoon would presumably
file a complaint with the WTO, and it might win the right to impose a ban on
imports of U.S. goods.
That is a matter of little practical consequence,
since U.S. exports to Burma total only about $10 million a year -- less than
one-one-thousandth of 1 percent of total exports -- and the legislation would
ban those exports anyway. But the administration is concerned enough about
appearing to flout WTO rules that Powell's article warned of the need to "take
into account our WTO obligations." He endorsed other provisions of the bills,
including a freeze on the junta's financial assets.
For now, concerns about
WTO rules do not seem likely to halt the march toward sanctions, given the
widespread sentiment that the oppression by the generals in Rangoon has reached
intolerable levels.
Even longtime critics of sanctions, such as Senate
Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), backed
McConnell's bill. Asked to explain the apparent change of heart, Lugar's
spokesman, Andrew Fisher, said that although the senator "has been opposed to
unilateral sanctions . . . the world is well united against the regime in
Burma," and may join an embargo if Washington leads.
But Burma's main
trading partners, including China and Thailand, have voiced unwillingness to go
the sanctions route, and if that continues to be the case, "U.S. sanctions, or
even more broadly, Western sanctions, probably aren't going to have much of an
impact," said Elliott. Still, she said, "I think somehow, the regime does need
to be confronted over its behavior."
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Washington Post
I Went To Burma.
Bad Move
A Place Where Tourism Carries Political Baggage
By Steve Hendrix
Sunday, June
15, 2003; Page B02
You know, I really thought I was too smart a
traveler to be duped like this.
It was in January that I finally went to
Burma, one of tourism's most controversial destinations. It's a country usually
bypassed by travelers concerned about its pitiless military regime. I spent
almost two weeks behind the Bamboo Curtain, visiting the handful of cities and
sites where foreigners are allowed to wander in that most secluded corner of
Southeast Asia.
I loved it. It's less frantic than Vietnam, friendlier
than Cambodia and not as mercantile as Thailand. The tourist infrastructure is
basic, but pleasant and improving. The people are frank, poised and welcoming. I
left thinking that Burma -- so full of promise -- was creeping toward a better
future and that tourism could nudge it along.
Sucker.
Less than a week
after my May 25 article on Burma appeared in The Post's Travel section, the
country's leadership showed the world an uglier face. A gang, apparently under
orders from the military government, ambushed the caravan of Nobel laureate Aung
San Suu Kyi, the country's dogged opposition leader. The facts are still vague,
but at least four of her supporters were killed and the 57-year-old leader of
the National League for Democracy was whisked away to a military base "for her
own protection."
Opposition offices were shut down, Suu Kyi is a prisoner
once again and the brief thaw in the country's decades-long repressive history
appears to be over. And I am rethinking one of my articles of faith as a
conscientious traveler: that responsible tourism is always a force for good.
Sometimes, I now realize, it's better to stay away.
Burma has been high on
my must-see list for decades. It's one of those cloaked-in-mystery countries,
still wearing the veils of jungle secrecy so celebrated by Kipling and Orwell.
Few Westerners go to Burma, which alone makes it irresistible. Add Burma's
reputation for unspoiled natural beauty and deep cultural traditions, and its
siren call reaches clear around the world.
It was only recently that it
seemed appropriate to be a tourist in Burma. This is a government credibly
accused of trafficking in narcotics, imprisoning dissidents and forcing citizens
onto road gangs and children into the army. In 1990, Suu Kyi's National League
for Democracy won national elections in a landslide. The military regime ignored
the vote, crushed the party and sent Suu Kyi into the purgatory of house arrest
for most of the decade.
A year ago, the generals seemed to budge. In May
2002, they released Suu Kyi. They promised meaningful political negotiations.
They let her travel the country, crisscrossing Burma to rebuild her political
party. In short, they showed some meager moves toward a freer state.
A
lot of tour operators and travelers were quick to construe those halting steps
as a rain dance for tourism. The number of foreign visitors shot up,
particularly after last fall's bombing in Bali sent beach lovers looking for
safer palm trees to lie under (no one can guarantee a crime-free vacation like a
junta). Burma's hotels and resorts have reported record bookings, although
government claims that tourism has doubled since 1996 -- with almost half a
million arrivals last year -- are probably exaggerated.
But did these
tourists know they were playing into a government plan? In the mid-1990s, the
regime launched a major effort to attract foreigners as a way to make hard
currency. They built new roads (reportedly with forced labor) and new hotels
(reportedly with financing from the opium lords), and they declared 1996 "Visit
Myanmar Year." (In 1988, the regime renamed the country Myanmar, a more ancient
name. It hasn't caught on everywhere.)
For her part, Suu Kyi asked
tourists to stay away. Her outside allies launched a voluntary boycott, saying
that tourism props up an evil government with cash and legitimacy. But boycott
opponents argue that visitors mean jobs for poor people and that tourism is just
the sort of "engagement" that can loosen tyranny's grip. I usually find myself
in the second camp.
Ordinarily, what I think about a particular
government has nothing to do with where I go or how I describe the experience
for readers. But after many years of writing about travel for a living, I now
see tourism, more than almost any other form of trade, as a way of knitting the
world together. I don't feel closer to the Malaysians because they manufactured
my SpongeBob SquarePants bobblehead, but give me a week in Kuala Lumpur and I'll
come back with a real attachment. Tourists don't just bring their money when
they travel -- they bring eyes to witness hidden wrongs, hearts to be won
over.
In the case of Burma, it's impossible to avoid the political. When
I was assigned to report on the tourism boomlet, I knew that my it's-good-to-go
philosophy would be tested.
I liked the country at once. There are 44
million people there, living in an area slightly smaller than Texas. Rangoon,
known locally as Yangon, is not the handsomest city in Asia. The capital lacks
Hanoi's crowded colonial charm or Hong Kong's waterfront vibrancy. But it is
full of massive trees, a city in an old-growth urban forest. Buddhist monks are
everywhere -- bald and berobed, filing along decrepit sidewalks, shuffling among
the many shrines, clinging to the backs of pickups. With all those monks, how
menacing could it be?
Not that the shadows aren't visible. The airport
road runs past one military base after another, the personal garrisons of the
ruling generals, my taxi driver said. But Rangoon isn't particularly martial. It
isn't draped in barbed wire. Troops don't man every corner. Citizens are out and
about, most in traditional dress. Market stalls are heaped with fruits and
grains. "It certainly doesn't feel like a police state," said Kathy Henry, a
vacationing retired principal from Los Angeles. But she had been jarred to see a
child working on a road crew.
There's an expat community -- the usual
mix of Brit teachers, Aussie salesmen, diplomats from everywhere, a smattering
of Americans. They were full of politics and gossip about Suu Kyi and the
regime. But they all seemed to consider Rangoon a pretty plum posting. I could
see why.
It wasn't just that I liked the place. I felt like I was on the
right side of the fight by being there. I met a Burmese travel agent. This
person, who asked not to be identified, was full of tips about which
regime-linked hotels to avoid, which of the two local airlines to fly. Without
asking, I received instruction on ways to steer my dollars away from the junta.
"We absolutely don't support the government," the agent said. It struck me as a
clever kind of resistance in a country where resistance has seemed
futile.
When I headed upcountry, I found more reasons to like Burma.
Bagan is the country's star tourist attraction, a collection of more than 2,000
11th-century temples dotted around a bend of the Irrawaddy River. Thousands of
locals survive directly on tourism there. They come every dawn to work in the
hotels or peddle lacquerware. "If no tourists come, I cannot feed my family,"
said the man who drove group tours from Europe and China around in his donkey
cart.
Each night, I knew, my hotel was required to send a list of the
day's guests to a military intelligence office. But there were few overt signs
of control. In the tourist areas, a local told me, the regime keeps a lower
profile.
At Inle Lake, I stayed at an enchanting floating hotel run by a
local hill tribe, the Pa O people. They had been at war with the regime until
they got permission to build this hotel as part of a truce. Except for a 10
percent government tax, the Pa O manager told me, all my money went to village
schools, roads and clinics.
On the hotel patio, I met a Burmese-born
woman who has lived in California for 38 years. Her last trip back to see her
family had been a decade earlier. "It's a little looser now," she said. "Ten
years ago, I had to register everywhere I was staying, but today we don't have
to worry about it." I was glad to hear it.
Don't get me wrong. In no way
did I find Burma a model of emerging democracy. It was clear that the Burmese
live in fear. No one is allowed to keep a passport. Even the monasteries are
under government control. A guide told me of the security stooges in her
building who count shoes outside the doors to detect unauthorized visitors. A
tailor who sewed some shirts for me was a former physics professor. She lost her
job when the junta broke apart the university to dampen student organizing. Her
department landed in the countryside, 30 kilometers outside
Rangoon.
Nonetheless, my overall impression was that Burma was -- very,
very slowly -- getting better, and that tourism was pushing it in the right
direction. At least, that's what I thought before May 30.
The attack on
Suu Kyi's traveling party makes me look back at my visit as a sort of Potemkin
postcard. Behind the pretty scenery, democracy wasn't just stalled. It was being
destroyed. It's not that those signs of progress weren't real -- it's that they
were meaningless under a regime that could so blithely lift its hand to brush
them aside. And I didn't see it.
I still believe in tourism as a powerful
agent of human exchange. There aren't many countries I would avoid on a purely
political basis. But to go now to Burma, before Suu Kyi is freed and back at her
mission, would be an act of blithe disregard in its own right.
Suu Kyi
has implied that she will drop her call for a tourism boycott as soon as the
time is right. Clearly -- tragically -- the clock has stopped. She says don't
come. This time, I'm listening.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Houston Chronicle
June 12, 2003,
7:28PM
TIMELY
Put pressure on repressive Burma military
junta
Myanmar's military government continues to ignore
international criticism of its detention of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu
Kyi.
Legislation passed in the U.S. Senate on Thursday to step up the
pressure on the repressive regime is right on time.
The legislation, S
1215, introduced by Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and co-sponsored by Texas' Sen.
Kay Bailey Hutchison, would impose a U.S. ban on goods manufactured in Myanmar
(formerly known as Burma).
"This bill answers the rising concern that
democracy cannot begin to take its first promising steps in Burma," Hutchison
said. " ... The Burmese government is acting with renegade abandon."
The
bill would also freeze certain Burmese assets in this country, require the
United States to oppose loans or other assistance for Burma by international
financial institutions, and encoruages greater support for Burmese democracy
advocates.
The military seized power in 1988 and has defied
international demands to hand power to Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy
party, which won general elections in 1990. Official repression and continued
human rights violations have been the junta's modus operandi.
The
military has detained Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, since its
latest crackdown began on May 30 and refuses to say when it might release her.
China and officials in Malaysia, two of the military regime's closest
allies, cautioned against pressuring the junta. But, that may be an indication
of exactly why further pressure, such as the U.S. legislation is exactly what is
needed.
The repression has gone on for more than a decade. It way past
time to push harder for a change.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Wall Street Journal
STANDING FOR
FREEDOM
Get Tough on Rangoon
It's time to turn the tables on
Burma's thugs.
BY COLIN L. POWELL
Thursday, June 12, 2003 12:01 a.m. EDT
United
Nations Special Envoy Razali Ismail has just visited Burma and was able to bring
us news that Aung San Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and the leader of a
peaceful democratic party known as the National League for Democracy, is well
and unharmed. The thoughts and prayers of free people everywhere have been with
her these past two weeks. Our fears for her current state of health are now
somewhat lessened.
On May 30, her motorcade was attacked by thugs, and
then the thugs who run the Burmese government placed her under "protective
custody." We can take comfort in the fact that she is well. Unfortunately, the
larger process that Ambassador Razali and Aung San Suu Kyi have been
pursuing--to restore democracy in Burma--is failing despite their good will and
sincere efforts. It is time to reassess our policy towards a military
dictatorship that has repeatedly attacked democracy and jailed its heroes.
There is little doubt on the facts. Aung San Suu Kyi's party won
an election in 1990 and since then has been denied its place in Burmese
politics. Her party has continued to pursue a peaceful path, despite personal
hardships and lengthy periods of house arrest or imprisonment for her and her
followers. Hundreds of her supporters remain in prison, despite some initial
releases and promises by the junta to release more. The party's offices have
been closed and their supporters persecuted. Ambassador Razali has pursued every
possible opening and worked earnestly to help Burma make a peaceful transition
to democracy. Despite initial statements last year, the junta--which shamelessly
calls itself the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC)--has now refused his
efforts and betrayed its own promises.
At the end of last month, this
rejection manifested itself in violence. After the May 30 attack on Aung San Suu
Kyi's convoy, we sent U.S. Embassy officers to the scene to gather information.
They reported back that the attack was planned in advance. A series of trucks
followed her convoy to a remote location, blocked it and then unloaded thugs to
swarm with fury over the cars of democracy supporters. The attackers were brutal
and organized; the victims were peaceful and defenseless. The explanation by the
Burmese military junta of what happened doesn't hold water. The SPDC has not
made a credible report of how many people were killed and injured. It was clear
to our embassy officers that the members of the junta were responsible for
directing and producing this staged riot.
We have called for a full
accounting of what happened that day. We have called for Aung San Suu Kyi to be
released from confinement of any kind. We have called for the release of the
other leaders of the National League for Democracy who were jailed by the SPDC
before and after the attack. We have called for the offices of the National
League for Democracy to be allowed to reopen. We are in touch with other
governments who are concerned about the fate of democracy's leader and the fate
of democracy in Burma to encourage them, too, to pressure the SPDC.
The
Bush administration agrees with members of Congress, including Sen. Mitch
McConnell, who has been a leading advocate of democracy in Burma, that the time
has come to turn up the pressure on the SPDC.
Here's what we've done so
far. The State Department has already extended our visa restrictions to include
all officials of an organization related to the junta--the Union Solidarity and
Development Association--and the managers of state-run enterprises so that they
and their families can be banned as well.
The United States already uses
our voice and our vote against loans to Burma from the World Bank and other
international financial institutions. The State Department reports honestly and
frankly on the crimes of the SPDC in our reports on Human Rights, Trafficking in
Persons, Drugs, and International Religious Freedom. In all these areas, the
junta gets a failing grade. We also speak out frequently and strongly in favor
of the National League for Democracy, and against the SPDC. I will press the
case in Cambodia next week when I meet with the leaders of Southeast Asia,
despite their traditional reticence to confront a member and neighbor of their
association, known as Asean.
Mr. McConnell has introduced the Burmese
Freedom and Democracy Act in the Senate; Reps. Henry Hyde and Tom Lantos have
introduced a similar bill in the House. We support the goals and intent of the
bills and are working with the sponsors on an appropriate set of new steps.
Those who follow this issue will know that our support for legislation is in
fact a change in the position of this administration and previous ones as well.
Simply put, the attack on Ms. Suu Kyi's convoy and the utter failure of the
junta to accept efforts at peaceful change cannot be the last word on the
matter. The junta that oppresses democracy inside Burma must find that its
actions will not be allowed to stand.
There are a number of
measures that should now be taken, many of them in the proposed legislation.
It's time to freeze the financial assets of the SPDC. It's time to ban
remittances to Burma so that the SPDC cannot benefit from the foreign exchange.
With legislation, we can, and should, place restrictions on travel-related
transactions that benefit the SPDC and its supporters. We also should further
limit commerce with Burma which enriches the junta's generals. Of course, we
would need to ensure consistency with our World Trade Organization and other
international obligations. Any legislation will need to be carefully crafted to
take into account our WTO obligations and the president's need for waiver
authority, but we should act now.
By attacking Aung San Suu Kyi and her
supporters, the Burmese junta has finally and definitively rejected the efforts
of the outside world to bring Burma back into the international community.
Indeed, their refusal of the work of Ambassador Razali and of the rights of Aung
San Suu Kyi and her supporters could not be clearer. Our response must be
equally clear if the thugs who now rule Burma are to understand that their
failure to restore democracy will only bring more and more pressure against them
and their supporters.
Mr. Powell is the secretary of state.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Editorial:
Free Aung San Suu Kyi
From the Journal Sentinel
Last Updated:
June 12, 2003
Joined by visiting Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra
of Thailand, President Bush called recently for the immediate release of Aung
San Suu Kyi, a courageous champion of democracy and freedom in Myanmar, also
know by its former name, Burma. But it will take more than feeble protests to
get the attention of the generals who run Burma. What's needed are sharp words
and sharper actions.
Suu Kyi and her party won a parliamentary election
in 1990, but the results were promptly scrapped, and she has spent much of the
time since then under house arrest. In May 2002, after two years of
negotiations, she was released with a promise from the military government to
engage in substantive negotiations on political issues.
The generals
never delivered on that promise. Worse, Suu Kyi was rearrested on May 30 after
she and her supporters were attacked by what diplomats and others have said were
military-backed thugs. An envoy from the United Nations who visited Suu Kyi this
week reported that she appears to be in good health and probably will be
released fairly soon.
Secretary of State Colin Powell will attend a
conference of foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in
Cambodia early next week, and it is possible Suu Kyi will be set free before
then. Continuing to detain a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize would expose the
Burmese generals to the kind of publicity they are keen to avoid.
Even if
Suu Kyi is freed, however, Powell and the other ASEAN ministers need to make it
plain to the Burmese that years of harassment directed against Suu Kyi and her
party have brought discredit to their nation and constitute an unacceptable
violation of human rights. The generals should be told to honor their promise to
hold serious negotiations with the political opposition.
Congress needs
to back up these tough words with legislation. Imposing an embargo on imports
from Burma - one option under consideration - could inflict pain on ordinary
Burmese and backfire in other ways. But Congress should enact legislation
freezing the U.S. assets of Burma's leading generals and take other steps
against members of the ruling elite in a country where freedom itself - not
simply its most courageous champion - remains under arrest.
--------------------------------------------------------------
VOA News
Asia Pacific - Current
Situation Makes Political Dialogue Unlikely in Burma
Gary
Thomas
Washington
14 Jun 2003, 04:48
UTC
Burma's foremost democracy advocate, Aung San Suu Kyi, is
again in detention following an attack on her and her followers by a
government-backed mob in which scores are reported to have been killed or
injured. The current climate makes any effort to rekindle a dialogue between the
military government and the pro-democracy opposition extremely unlikely.
In dealing with the democratic opposition, Burma's generals have over
the years swung back and forth between cautious conciliation and heads-on
confrontation. But with each confrontation, such as the most recent one on May
30, positions harden and suspicions deepen.
Aung San Suu Kyi was
arrested in 1989 and released from house arrest six years later. After another
confrontation while testing the limits on her movements in 2000, she was again
confined to her home for 19 months, and released last year. Now she is once
again under house arrest. The government has made vague promises to release her
when, as a spokesman put it, the situation is under control.
Josef
Silverstein, a professor emeritus of political science at Rutgers University and
a leading authority on Burma, says hopes of a dialogue at the time of Aung San
Suu Kyi's release last year were never realized. "If we go back to May 6th of
last year, that was when the military said she was totally free, that she could
travel, she could renew her contacts with the party, and gave some credence to
the idea that there was a softening or a loosening, and maybe even the
beginnings of a first step towards transition. But that never was followed up.
The military never really spoke to her," he says. "They kept talking about
confidence-building. And she finally got a little nonplussed by saying, "we have
confidence, let's get down to the serious business of talking about the
transition."
Brad Adams, Asia director for Human Rights Watch, says the
May 30 incident makes it clear that the military government had no real interest
in a substantive dialogue with the pro-democracy movement. "It was pretty clear
that the government wasn't intending to move forward. The question was sort of
what way they would try to stop it. And I guess that they decided to try to stop
it in a very clumsy and heavy-handed way," he says.
Most analysts
believe the swing between conciliation and confrontation is indicative of
disagreements among the top generals over how to deal with Aung San Suu Kyi and
her followers.
The most senior general, Than Shwe, is believed to favor
a hard-line approach. Mr. Silverstein believes the May 30 incident underscores
the power of Than Shwe over the other two top generals, intelligence chief Khin
Nyunt and army chief Maung Aye, and an endorsement of his tough approach. "In my
estimation, these men are not close. But they are bound together by hierarchy
and by the tradition of the army, and, most of all by the acknowledgment that if
they separate, the army will collapse. So they do stand together. I think they
have different objectives. I think they may very well have different ideas about
how to deal with Suu Kyi and the people. But thus far Than Shwe has been able to
manipulate and hold all power in that triumvirate," he says.
Brad Adams
of Human Rights Watch says that with each confrontation, chances of achieving a
political compromise between the generals and Aung San Suu Kyi become more
remote. "It will take a long time to rebuild trust. Aun San Suu Kyi will be
very, very cautious before she engages in another round of dialogue with them.
There will very likely be private and informal contacts, and people will read a
lot into them," he says. "But I think it's going to be a long time before
there's a genuine discussion about political reform that would involve in some
way the two sides working together."
The United States has called for
stepped-up international pressure on Burma for change, and discussions are under
way in the U.S. Congress about imposing sanctions on Burmese imports. But
analysts say Burma's neighbors in Southeast Asia are sticking to a collective
policy of refraining from criticism of each other, and little support is
expected from that quarter.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Washington File
13 June 2003
House International Relations
Committee Approves Burma Sanctions Act
(HR 2330 passed by voice
vote, two amendments added to bill) (360)
By
Steve La Rocque
Washington File United Nations
Correspondent
One day after the Senate passed a bill endorsing
sanctions on Burma by a 97-to-one margin, the House International Relations
Committee passed by voice vote its own version of a sanctions bill aimed at that
country.
The House International Relations Committee approved H.R. 2330,
the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003, with two amendments, during a
busy mark-up session June 12.
One amendment to H.R. 2330, proposed by
Representative Tom Lantos (Democrat of California), focused on the terms by
which the President could waive the trade ban on Burma, and sought to coordinate
any ban on visas with actions by the European Union. The second amendment,
brought by Representative Joseph Pitts (Republican of Pennsylvania, noted the
ethnic cleansing of minorities in Burma, and emphasized the need for the United
States to work with other nations to promote freedom and human rights in that
country.
The House International Relations Committee passed the
amendments by unanimous consent.
The House version of the Burma sanctions
bill still has to face the House Ways and Means Committee, the House Financial
Services Committee and the House Judiciary Committee before being brought to the
floor of the House of Representatives for action.
If the bill were to
pass the House of Representatives, any differences between H.R. 2330 and the
related Senate Bill (S. 1215) would have to be resolved before a reconciled bill
could be resubmitted to both the House and Senate for approval.
Both
bills to sanction the military government ruling Burma have a wide range of
bipartisan support. In the House, there are 49 co-sponsors of H.R. 2330 as of
June 12.
Lantos, who introduced H.R. 2330 June 4, and offered the
amendment regarding the waiving of the trade ban, is the co-chairman of the
Congressional Human Rights Caucus and the ranking Democrat on the House
International Relations Committee. Pitts, who also serves on the Human Rights
Caucus, and the House International Relations Committee, is the founder and
co-chairman of the Religious Prisoners Congressional Task Force.
(The
Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International Information
Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site:
http://usinfo.state.gov)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bangkok Post - Saturday 14 June 2003
Somdhat defends Rangoon
More time needed to destroy
labs, he says
Wassana Nanuam and Anucha Charoenpo
Burma is
trying, and will need more time, to destroy drug production bases, said army
chief Gen Somdhat Attanant.
The army had told Burmese troops about the
location of drug factories but Rangoon had not moved to uproot them.
The
army was waiting for Burma's response. He understood Rangoon's ability to
control minority rebels, in whose area the factories were sited, were
limited.
Burma was in a poor state economically and that had compromised
the country's ability to fight the drug trade.
``We must give Burma
time,'' Gen Somdhat said.
Gen Somdhat's tone was noticeably more subtle
than that of his deputy Gen Wattanachai Chaimuengwong who earlier criticised
Rangoon's inability to end drug production on the border.
Factories in
minority-rebel strongholds flooded the market with drugs especially
methamphethamines.
Gen Somdhat said the army could not stop drug
production if it was based outside Thailand.
All it could do was suppress
supplies across the border and break up distribution networks.
If the
drugs were not being smuggled in or were harder to sell, factories would be hurt
by depleted demand and eventually have to to close.
From February to May,
the army intercepted 2.6 million speed pills.
``I'm not breaking a
record with the drug seizures. On the contrary, our efforts would really be
effective if we caught nothing. That would mean our deterrent measures were
working,'' he said.
Meanwhile, Thailand will host a five-nation meeting
to discuss illicit drugs in the region next month.
Pol Lt-Gen Chidchai
Wannasathit, secretary-general of the Office of the Narcotics Control Board,
said China, Burma, Laos, India and Thailand would meet in Chiang Rai on July
22-25.
A memorandum of understanding on the control of drug precursors
would be issued.
Pol Lt-Gen Chidchai said Thai authorities were concerned
about the number of drug laboratories outside the country.
``We have to
find solution to this long-term problem,'' he said.
Gen Chavalit
Yongchaiyuth, director of the National Centre to Defeat Drugs, said a committee
would be set up to oversee the suppression of influential figures.
The
committee was made up of three sub-committees.
Interior Minister Wan
Muhamad Nor Matha's sub-committee will oversee mafia and influential
people.
Defence Minister Gen Thammarak Issarangkura na Ayudhaya will
inspect information flows, and Justice Minister Pongthep Thepkanchana will plug
any loopholes and mistakes.
Gen Chavalit said he was also keeping an eye
on a group of hired gunmen and ruffians, who mostly worked under the influence
of state officials.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bangkok Post - Saturday 14 June
2003
COMMENTARY - Burmese daze
Thirasant
Mann
Chief of the Triumvirate of Generals, Prime
Minister Than Shwe had spent a sleepless night counting the number of black
sheep he still needed to slaughter to ensure the lambs kept their silence, and
upwardly of 5am mobiled his immediate subordinates, demanding in Myanmese
newspeak that they meet ``spdc'' to ``slorc'' out a matter of utmost urgency. A
little later as they huddled over breakfast of boiled eggs and ego sauce, he
told Secretary #1 Khin Nyunt and Vice Chairman Maung Aye:
``Should have
wrung her ruddy neck back in 1988 when opportunity knocked and we bludgeoned
practically everyone else senseless. Who knows, we might even have got the Nobel
for maintaining peace and quiet around this graveyard _ instead of that
lipsticked loudmouth with flowers in her hair.''
Trying to calm the PM
who looked like he'd just swallowed a rotten egg, Sec #1 said, ``Yes, we should
have put her out of our misery long ago, but your predecessor Saw Maung was too
soft. He hoped in vain she'd flee back to mama Britannia's biscuity arms. Good
thing you got rid of him.
``Anyhow, we've got her under protective
custody once again. We've even installed a piano so she can sing her slogans to
the walls. The world will forget her soon enough. Hasn't that been the case
these last 14 years?''
VC Maung Aye, superstitious like every proper
Burmese and who once dreamt of a bayonet in his back and was watchful ever
since, ventured guardedly: ``Yes, but this time the Burning Bush in the White
House has, after scorching Afghanistan and Iraq, cast an eye in this direction.
And the UN is already singing Please Release Me at candle-lit vigils. We must
tread carefully _ this Pobble may have no toes but it has a Security Council.
Then there's the Asean Regional Forum next week, where Powell will push for
action against us...''
``Arf barf!'' barked PM Than Shwe. ``Asean will
never impose economic sanctions against us. As for America and Europe, we
couldn't care less. We don't have anything to export to them except unpatriotic
displaced persons, and what we want we don't have to import at all, they're
giving it to us for free _ and in the millions, supposedly to eradicate drugs
and Aids.
``Just look at Thailand, our friendly fool of a neighbour. They
were grovelling at our feet when last we closed the border. Their fishermen,
gambling addicts and factory owners were threatening their own government
because business got so bad. They're hooked on our drugs and casinos; they need
our fishing grounds; their factories, farms and even households run on our
labour, illegal or otherwise.
``And who knows better than their very own
generals that the true colour of graft is green? That generals don't retire but
find new aspirations to party the night away with political aplomb?
``No.
We must stick to the rules of our Old World Disorder. Ethnic cleansing must go
on, for war is peace; our people's slavery ensures our freedom and their
ignorance is our strength. That Orwell was a smart chap, no doubt; his days in
Mandalay certainly showed us the proper road to condescension.
``By the
way, I'm going kill the cook for this lousy breakfast. But first, to the matter
at hand with an iron fist,'' and cracked the table with a bang. VC Maung Aye
jumped, but Sec #1 spoke first. ``I suggest we bundle her out of the country
secretly, announce she's been kidnapped by anti-government goondas to God knows
where, let in Hans Blix to search the place high and low, thereby giving no
reason for outsiders to interfere in our infernal affairs. Then we'll quietly
inform our Thai friends which Bangkok spa she's relaxing in _ and let Thaksin,
who loves the limelight, take the credit for saving her.''
VC Maung Aye
piped in: ``But first we should visit Mt Popa near Pagan to consult the oracle
of the celestial Nats...''
``Have you gone nuts, Aye?'' PM Than Shwe
grunted. ``Nyunt, has the fellow flipped? You both know my astrologer's told me
not to leave home without him _ and he's gone across the border to renew my
credit card. We'll consult him about the plan when he returns. Meanwhile, don't
breathe a word to anyone. In fact, don't breathe at all if you can help
it.''
- Thirasant Mann is a sub-editor of Bangkok Post.
--------------------------------------------------------------
New Straits Times
ASEAN
Meeting: Pakistan?s bid for ARF membership shot down
Ashraf Abdullah in Phnom Penh
PHNOM PENH,
June 14: ASEAN senior officials meeting in Phnom Penh ahead of Monday?s
36th
Asean Ministerial Meeting was adjourned yesterday after they squabbled
over Pakistan?s request to become a member of the Asean Regional Forum.
The proposal by Malaysia to allow Pakistan to become part of the existing
23-member ARF, which was formed to promote regional security and stability, was
objected by several countries as there is a moratorium over the expansion of the
ARF membership.
"Malaysia's position is simple and sincere.
"It
feels that if Pakistan becomes a participant, there will be greater incentive
for peace in south Asia," said a senior diplomat.
He said North Korea was
accepted as a member in 2000 because Asean wanted to ensure that there would be
peace in the Korean Peninsula.
"It is for a similar reason that Malaysia
wants Pakistan to be accepted to prevent a possible conflict in south Asia," he
said.
Asean decided several years ago to impose the moratorium on new
memberships to concentrate on improving relations with existing
members.
"It decided on this because there were too many countries
wanting to become participants.
"This will result in the forum being too
large and too messy," the diplomat said.
When ARF was established in
Bangkok in 1994, all dialogue partners automatically became partners.
The
objectives of the ARF are:
* to foster constructive dialogue and
consultation on political and security issues of common interest and concern;
and,
* to make significant contributions to efforts towards
confidence-building and preventive diplomacy in the Asia-Pacific
region.
The current participants in the ARF are: Australia, Brunei,
Cambodia, Canada, China, European Union, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea,
North Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Mongolia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea,
Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Thailand, United States and
Vietnam.
Diplomats also said Myanmar senior officials briefed their Asean
counterparts about the situation in the country.
The senior officials
were told that opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi would be released
soon.
The officials said Yangon was committed to democracy and would
"work together with all political forces in its efforts for national
reconciliation and democratisation."
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Globe and Mail
UPDATED AT 2:05
AM EDT Saturday, Jun. 14, 2003
Canada calling for UN reform
By JEFF SALLOT
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Ottawa ? Canada is calling for a sweeping reform of the United
Nations, including the expulsion of members who violate the fundamental
principles of the world body.
Canada also wants permanent members of the
UN Security Council to refrain from using their veto to block peacemaking or
policing operations in a crisis if there is a broad international consensus to
proceed.
The UN Charter makes it clear "membership is not a right, but a
commitment to uphold the principles and purposes of the organization," Foreign
Affairs Minister Bill Graham said yesterday.
Yet membership standards are
not being applied, he said in a keynote speech in New York to a UN reform
conference convened by the Academic Council on the United Nations
System.
He cited three examples to make his point:
?Libya's
election earlier this year to the chairmanship of the UN Commission on Human
Rights despite the North African country's poor record of jailing and torturing
political opponents.
?Iraq's membership at the UN Disarmament Conference last
year while the regime of Saddam Hussein was being scrutinized by UN arms
inspectors.
?Rwanda's membership on the Security Council in 1994 when the
country's regime was slaughtering members of the Tutsi ethnic
minority.
"The time has come to revisit the basis upon which membership
in these bodies is determined," Mr. Graham said.
"The UN must consider
suspending or expelling member states which have failed in their obligation to
the organization and violated the basic principles of the Charter," he
added.
The toughest UN reform issue of them all is the question of the
Security Council, where five permanent members ? the United States, Britain,
Russia, China and France ? each has a veto, which means anyone can thwart the
will of the other four permanent members and the 10 elected representative
countries.
He endorsed a reform proposal that would not allow the use of
a veto to block resolutions authorizing military intervention to protect human
lives if a Security Council majority favours the intervention.
The UN as
an organization often takes the rap for the political failures that have more to
do with the policies and decisions of individual member states, he said.
In a
telephone interview, Mr. Graham suggested that permanent members of the Security
Council should be restricted to using a veto only if they can find a second
permanent member to support them.
A number of humanitarian efforts have
been stymied over the years because of the threatened use of a veto, he
said.
Asked for some examples, Mr. Graham diplomatically declined to
point fingers.
But Lloyd Axworthy, a former Liberal foreign affairs
minister, and other Canadian officials were critical of the U.S. government in
1994 for failing to support deployment of a large international force to prevent
the Rwandan genocide. Bill Clinton later apologized to Rwandans when he was
president.
In his speech, Mr. Graham also proposed making greater use of
the UN General Assembly, where all 191 member countries are represented, to deal
with major issues rather than passing off the "big issues of the day" to the
15-member Security Council.
The five major powers do not have a veto over
decisions by the assembly.
Mr. Graham met earlier in the day with
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to discuss the conflicts in the Middle East and
the Congo, the postwar reconstruction of Iraq and the continuing imprisonment of
democratic reform leader Aung San Suu Kyi by the military junta of
Myanmar.
Mr. Graham said he believes the UN has weathered the
political crisis it faced earlier this year when the Security Council would not
authorize military intervention in Iraq by the United States and Britain.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Daily Star
Editorial - Detaining Suu Kyi
We join voices with others
in demanding her release
It has by now become clear that the
military junta of Myanmar panicked at the increasing popularity of Aung San Suu
Kyi, the opposition leader. They obviously felt uncomfortable with the growing
acceptance of the leader who had been under house arrest for many years. Hence
the sudden and unexpected decision to detain her again and keeping her in an
undisclosed location; not allowing anyone to meet her or even get any
information about her. The junta's thinking was probably that during her earlier
detention, much of her appeal and charm had worn off. They must have thought
that it was a case of 'out of sight, out of mind'. But how wrong they were!
The junta got visibly scared watching her address huge public rallies around
the countryside. They had even formed reactionary forces who began to clash with
Suu Kyi's supporters anticipating that it would scare them away. But their
calculation went wrong, instability crept into the political scenario. What has
been most astonishing is the complete disregard for international outcry to Suu
Kyi's detention. Mounting pressure from international arena to release Suu Kyi
should not be ignored unless the military junta wants to court isolation. Though
the UN envoy Razali Ismail, the only person to have met her since the latest
detention, has assured us that she is in good health, we would only believe it
when we see her with our own eyes. And that can be possible if the junta keeps
up to their pledge of releasing her from custody 'as soon as possible.'
Here Association of South Asian Nations (ASEAN) can take a firm stand,
perhaps a united stand. The interpenetration of markets between the ASEAN
countries and Myanmar goes on at such high level that they would think twice
before contemplating any change in power in the country. To ASEAN, uncertainty
in a partner country wouldn't be accepted. They would always look for a stable
situation for doing business. Therefore we would urge ASEAN to persuade the
Myanmar regime, at next week's meeting of ASEAN member countries, to release Suu
Kyi, at least for democracy if nothing else.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Asia Times - Jun 14, 2003
Southeast Asia
US to turn up pressure on
Yangon
By Katrin Dauenhauer
WASHINGTON - The US Congress is moving quickly to punish the military
regime in Myanmar for its current crackdown against Nobel Peace laureate Aung
San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy (NLD) party.
The
International Relations Committee of the US House of Representatives on Thursday
unanimously approved legislation to expand existing US trade and economic
sanctions against Myanmar's military junta led by General Than Shwe.
The
vote, which sets up a floor vote for next week, follows near-unanimous (97-1)
approval of almost identical legislation in the Senate on Wednesday.
"Supporters of a free Burma know that America must lead in defending
democracy in that country. They believe that serving the cause of freedom is
America's challenge and obligation. We should not abandon the people of Burma
during the greatest moment of their need. It's time for the tyrants to fear in
Burma," said Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, who introduced the bill in the
Senate on Wednesday. Burma is the old name for Myanmar, which the junta
officially renamed in 1989.
Representative Tom Lantos, a Democrat who
co-sponsored the House version, added: "The [Yangon] regime has sunk to new lows
and secured its place among the world's rogues gallery of chronic human-rights
abusers, which includes North Korea and Iran," he said on Thursday.
The
measures included in both the Senate and House versions would expand a 1996 ban
on new investments by US companies in Myanmar. They ban all imports of Myanmese
goods to the United States, freeze the US assets of both the government and its
top leaders, and require the US representative on the boards of the World Bank,
the Asian Development Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to oppose
proposed loans to the country.
"This bill represents the strongest
action that any actor in the international community is taking so far against
Than Shwe's regime during this time of political crisis," said Aung Din,
director of policy of the Washington-based Free Burma Coalition. "The committee
and the US senators are right to push other countries to follow suit and to
pursue additional pressure for regime change in Burma."
Congressional
action followed an attack on May 30 against Suu Kyi and her supporters as they
were making their way to address a rally several hundred kilometers north of
Yangon, the capital.
The trip was one in a series made around the
country by the pro-democracy leader over the past several months to rally
support in the face of an apparent breakdown in a United Nations-mediated
19-month dialogue between her and the regime, known as the State Peace and
Development Council (SPDC).
The government blamed the violence, in which
at least four people were killed and scores more injured, on the NLD. But
independent observers, including US diplomats who visited the attack site last
week, and witnesses said her caravan was in essence ambushed by "thugs", as the
State Department described the attackers.
Suu Kyi was rumored to have
been hurt in the attack, but this was denied by the UN envoy on Myanmar, Razali
Ismail, who was permitted to visit her briefly this week.
Suu Kyi and
her top lieutenants were arrested and flown back to Yangon on the night of June
6, where they have been held at an undisclosed location. Razali said government
officials assured him that she would be freed within the next two weeks.
Security forces arrested or surrounded the homes of other senior NLD
leaders after the attack and closed university campuses and colleges that have
been strongholds of anti-military sentiment.
They also closed NLD
offices around the country in what has been seen as the worst crackdown against
the opposition since 1990, when the military arrested hundreds of NLD activists
after elections in which the party won over 80 percent of the vote.
Apart from measures by the US Congress, the administration of President
George W Bush has also been moving to tighten sanctions against Myanmar.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal on Thursday, Secretary of State Colin
Powell noted that Washington, which already has a ban on the issuance of US
visas for top Myanmese government officials and their families, has expanded the
visa ban to include officials in the pro-government Union Solidarity Development
Association and the managers of state-run enterprises.
"It is time to
reassess our policy toward a military dictatorship that has repeatedly attacked
democracy and jailed its heroes," noted Powell. "The time has come to turn up
the pressure on the SPDC."
The junta's recent actions reflected its
character, Powell wrote. "Our response must be equally clear if the thugs who
now rule Burma are to understand that their failure to restore democracy will
only bring more and more pressure against them and their supporters."
With the United States taking the lead in putting pressure on the
Myanmese government, Senator John McCain also argued for a boycott by Powell of
meetings next week of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), of
which Myanmar is a member, if the crisis there is not on top of the agenda.
He was referring in particular to US participation in the ASEAN Regional
Forum, a forum for discussing security issues, and ASEAN's meetings with
different governments, including the United States and the European Union. These
meetings take place around the annual meetings of ASEAN foreign ministers, set
this year for Monday through Friday next week.
But sanctions against
Myanmar's regime are only a first step, said Aung Din. "The US is pressuring
Asian countries to act on Burma, and is raising the issue with members of the UN
Security Council to see an end to Than Shwe's tyranny," he said.
The
proposed ban on goods made or produced in Myanmar would remain in place until
the president certifies to Congress that the regime has made "substantial and
measurable progress" in ending human-rights abuses and moving toward a
democratic government in dialogue with Suu Kyi and the NLD.
(Inter Press
Service)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Asian Tribune
Date :
2003-06-14
Airline mulls Burma move
By
Choosak Jirasakunthai
Bangkok, June 14: Privately run Bangkok
Airways is looking at the possibility of setting up a new airline in Burma, the
airline's president and chief executive officer, Prasert Prasarttong-Osoth, said
following this week's conference on the Mekong sub-region.
Establishing a
new airline in neighbouring countries is part of the company's attempt to
introduce a new service linking three ancient cities - Xi'an in China, Bagan in
Burma and Siem Reap in Cambodia.
"We may set up a new airline in [Burma]
similar to our sister airline in Cambodia," Praset said, referring to Siem Reap
Airways.
He said the airline might instead opt for a code-sharing
agreement with existing airlines in Burma to operate a new service to China's
ancient capital of Xi'an if the idea of setting up a new airline in Burma did
not materialise.
Bangkok Airways also plans to open a new service link
between Chiang Mai and Bagan in October and will begin flying between Krabi and
China's popular tourist destination Guilin late this year.
The firm
already flies to historical sites around the Mekong subregion, including
Sukhothai, Luang Prabang in Laos, Hue in Vietnam and Siem Reap.
Peter
Semone, vice president of the Pacific Asia Travel Association, said more than
16.2 million people had travelled to the Mekong area last year, an 8.6-per-cent
increase over 2001.
Armin Schoch, group general manager of Diethelm
Travel Asia, one of the largest tour operators in the region, said Chiang Mai
should be the hub for tourism in the Mekong area since it could provide
back-door access by air and road.
- The Nation -
--------------------------------------------------------------