|
Please visit this web page and sign the petition to
support for restoration of Democracy in Burma.
http://www.petitiononline.com/DforB_1/petition.html
-------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- HEADLINES -------------------------------------------------------------- AFP - Myanmar can't ignore neighbours' call to free Aung San Suu Kyi: UN envoy Reuters - Myanmar's Suu Kyi a domestic issue-state media AP - Myanmar's media accuse foreign diplomats of interfering in internal affairs AP - Thai leader wants more say in U.N. determination of refugee status CEU - Council decision on Burma. Sinchew-I - KL Reminds Myanmar Of ASEAN Obligations Bkk Post - Sanctions boost opposed Bkk Post - Wa fighters killed in clash Bkk Post - Extension of permits urged Bkk Post - PM takes a whack at UNHCR The Nation - EDITORIAL: Japan turns more assertive on Burma ST - Asean serves as bridge between East and West NSTP - Comment: The
Asean way of constructive engagement in addressing issues -------------------------------------------------------------- Myanmar's Suu Kyi a domestic issue-state media Sat Jun 28, 3:23 AM ET
By Aung Hla Tun BANGKOK, June 28 (Reuters) - Military-ruled Myanmar's state-run media said on Saturday detention of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi was a domestic matter and criticised Western diplomats who tried to gain access to her. The commentary in two newspapers considered mouthpieces for the junta was the first reaction in the Myanmar media to growing international outrage over Suu Kyi's detention on May 30 after a clash between members of her National League for Democracy (NLD) party and a pro-junta group. ''The matters concerning NLD (and) Suu Kyi...are domestic affairs of Myanmar,'' the commentary said. ''In Western nations too, lawbreakers are arrested and actions are taken against them. Exercising its sovereign power, Myanmar is making efforts for the prevalence of peace and progress in an honest way on a self-help basis.'' Diplomatic pressure on the Myanmar junta to free Suu Kyi has gradually intensified in the last month, with Japan threatening to turn off aid and the European Union and the United States planning harsher sanctions. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) broke with tradition to criticise one of its own, urging Myanmar to free Suu Kyi. Myanmar's ruling generals say the Nobel peace prize winner is under ''protective custody'' and will be freed soon, but have not said when. Former colonial power Britain says the junta is holding Suu Kyi in the ''notorious'' Insein jail on Yangon's northern outskirts, the biggest prison in the British empire before 1945. The junta denies this. According to British diplomats, Home Minister Tin Hlaing has said Suu Kyi is being held under a law ''safeguarding the state from the danger of subversive elements,'' the law used to keep her under house arrest twice previously for a combined seven years. The newspaper commentary also criticised diplomats who had tried to gain access to the residences of Suu Kyi and the NLD's vice-chairman Tin Oo to check on their wellbeing. ''Some diplomats went to the residences of Daw Suu Kyi and U Tin Oo a number of times,'' it said. ''When requested, saying they were not allowed to see them, some diplomats shoved the responsible officials aside and forced (their way) into the houses.'' A member of the International Committee of the Red Cross, in central Myanmar to visit detained NLD members, said last week he had met Tin Oo and he was uninjured. Myanmar exiles and some diplomats say hundreds of pro-junta youths, wielding bamboo and iron rods, set upon Suu Kyi's convoy and villagers when she was touring central Myanmar, killing at least 70. The junta said four died in the clash. The military, which refused to recognise a landslide 1990 election victory by Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy, has ruled the country under various guises since a 1962 coup. --------------------------------------------------------------
Myanmar's media accuse foreign
diplomats of interfering in internal affairs
Sat Jun 28, 6:13 PM
ET
YANGON, Myanmar (AP) _ Myanmar's state-run press Saturday accused unnamed foreign diplomats of interfering in the country's internal affairs, after some European envoys boycotted an annual drug-burning ceremony to protest the detention of democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. A commentary in the Myanmar-language Kyemon daily and at least one other newspaper also noted that diplomats had repeatedly tried to visit the houses of Suu Kyi and her deputy, Tin Oo, while both were under detention. Suu Kyi, head of the opposition National League for Democracy, has been detained since a May 30 clash between her supporters and a pro-junta mob in northern Myanmar that opposition activists say was instigated by the government. The government says four people were killed and dozens injured in the violence. ``It is regretful that some diplomats are interfering in Myanmar's internal affairs, disregarding the diplomatic norms,'' Saturday's commentary said. ``Though there are 10 legally existing political parties, these diplomats give their full support only to the NLD and interfere in the NLD political affairs as their own.'' The commentary did not name the offending diplomats, but said only a handful had failed to adhere to diplomatic codes of conduct. European diplomats said earlier there wasn't an organized boycott of Thursday's ceremony, some diplomats individually decided not to participate. World leaders have decried Suu Kyi's detention and called for her immediate release. The military government says Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, was placed under ``protective detention, and refuses to disclose where she is being held. Only one outsider, a special U.N. envoy, has been allowed to meet her since her arrest. The government also detained other party leaders and closed party offices around the country. Saturday's commentary described issues concerning Suu Kyi's party as Myanmar's internal affair, and said Western governments also take action against those who break the law. The military government has not announced any criminal charges against anyone for the May 30 violence. The current junta came to power in 1988 after crushing mass pro-democracy demonstrations. It held elections in 1990 but refused to hand over power to Suu Kyi's party after it won a landslide victory. --------------------------------------------------------------
Thai leader wants more say in
U.N. determination of refugee status
Sat Jun 28, 10:35 PM ET BANGKOK, Thailand (AP) - Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra said Saturday that he wants to change the arrangements under which the United Nations determines who can claim status as a refugee in Thailand. Thaksin said Thailand would have to be more involved in the process in the future, because refugees from Myanmar were causing problems. The office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees _ UNHCR _ can certify an asylum-seeker as a ``person of concern,'' meaning a political refugee who might face harm if returned to his or her country. Hundreds of thousands of people from Myanmar have fled to Thailand, but the vast majority are economic migrants or people fleeing the dangers of combat between the army and ethnic insurgents. A relatively small number are given documentation from the UNHCR certifying them as political refugees, meaning under customary international law they should not be repatriated against their will. Thaksin complained to reporters Friday that for the United Nations to issue refugee papers was an infringement on Thailand's sovereignty. His complaint came soon after 11 Myanmar migrants were arrested for allegedly plotting some sort of activity against Myanmar's embassy in Bangkok. Myanmar authorities recently warned their Thai counterparts that exiled opponents of the Yangon junta might try to kidnap the Myanmar ambassador in response to the junta's detention since May 30 of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Historically, Thailand has shown great tolerance for refugees from neighboring countries. But Thaksin on Friday accused migrants from Myanmar of causing trouble by bringing disease into Thailand and being involved in drug trafficking and other crimes. Thaksin, who has shown greater sympathy toward Myanmar's military rulers than have previous Thai leaders, said Saturday that the system under which the UNHCR issued papers would have to be changed. ``From now on, they can't do this,'' he said, complaining that counterfeit UNHCR papers had also become a problem. He also suggested that there should be restrictions on where refugees could live. Thaksin noted that Thailand has not signed two key international treaties on refugees, and therefore was not bound by them. But in practice, Thailand has followed customary international law, which respects the rights of refugees. Thaksin's plans for the Thai government to play a part in determining refugees status may also be hindered by the fact that there is no provision in Thai domestic law for dealing with people seeking asylum. Representatives for the UNHCR were not available for comment Saturday. --------------------------------------------------------------
Council of the European
Union
Brussels, 27 June 2003 10957/03 (Presse 183) P76/03 Declaration by the Presidency on behalf of the European Union on regarding a declaration by the Acceding Countries Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia, and the associated countries Bulgaria and Romania and the EFTA countries, members of the European Economic Area, concerning the Council Decision implementing Common Position 2003/297/CFSP on Burma/Myanmar The Acceding Countries Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, the Slovak Republic, and Slovenia, and the associated countries Bulgaria and Romania and the EFTA countries, members of the European Economic Area, declare that they share the objectives of the Council Decision of 20 June 2003 implementing Common Position 2003/297/CFSP concerning Burma/Myanmar defined by the Council of the European Union on 28 April 2003 on the basis of Article 15 of the Treaty on European Union. They will ensure that their national policies conform to that Council Decision. The European Union takes note of this commitment and welcomes it. --------------------------------------------------------------
Sinchew-i 2003/06/27
KL Reminds Myanmar Of ASEAN Obligations Updated:2003-06-27 13:02:46 MYT Malaysia concedes that permission to meet detained Myanmar pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi lies with the junta but Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar reminded Yangon that it has to help ASEAN regain its credibility. He said those outside ASEAN were critical of the grouping's policy of constructive engagement and recent events in Myanmar had proven to be a setback. "Not only Myanmar is being questioned. ASEAN is being questioned. We have to be able to convince people outside the region that the policy is working in getting both sides in Myanmar to get back to the reconciliation table. "This is an internal affair but that internal affair has got implication on ASEAN," he said when commenting on a report in The Star Thursday that he had requested to see Suu Kyi. "If I have an opportunity to see her of course I will see her. I wanted to see her last year." "We would like to go and we should not be disillusioned. We should keep on trying. The final say is with Myanmar," he added. Suu Kyi has been under "protective custody" since May 30 after a clash between her supporters and a pro-government group. ASEAN Foreign Ministers during their meeting in Cambodia last week had taken an unprecedented move to discuss the issue and told Myanmar to release her as soon as possible. Syed Hamid said the discussion was a departure from the norm and showed ASEAN had reached a stage of maturity. "We told Myanmar that Suu Kyi should be released quickly and that the matter should not derail the reconciliation process in the country." On the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) summit to be held here from Oct 11-18, Syed Hamid said the meeting would go on as scheduled. "The meeting is not going to be cancelled. It is going to go on. "Whatever rumours may be circulated, we consider that as very irresponsible," he said after a receiving a courtesy call by OIC secretary-general Dr Abdelouahed Belkeziz at Wisma Putra. Dr Belkeziz, who was present at the press conference, concurred with Syed Hamid saying he had not received any indication or request from member countries for postponement or cancellation of the summit. He later paid a courtesy call on Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Syed Hamid also said that as part of reforms in the organisation, the question of strengthening the secretariat was also necessary. He said one of the problems faced by the secretariat was payment of subscription fees by member countries of which only one third had paid up their dues. He said despite calls by certain member countries for Malaysia to stand as a candidate for the secretary-general post in two years, Kuala Lumpur had not decided whether to go for it. Syed Hamid was also non-committal over Manila's request to lead a team of Islamic nations to monitor a proposed ceasefire with Muslim rebels in the Philippines. --------------------------------------------------------------
Bangkok Post - Saturday
28 June 2003
Sanctions boost opposed Achara Ashayagachat Intensified sanctions against the military regime in Burma would only cause another huge spillover of illegal migrants to Thailand, said Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai. Thailand and other neighbouring countries would not want to see any beefed-up sanctions from the European Union or Washington since it would only hurt the poor and push them to emigrate to other countries, Mr Surakiart said. ``We would like to see the situation to return to normal as soon as possible. Once (Burma's) national reconciliation is back on track, the government will consider allowing these immigrants into our country, including workers, students, and ethnic people,'' he said. US ambassador Darryl N. Johnson said the exact details of US sanctions against Burma have yet to be spelled out, but the objective was not to damage countries which were involved in trade and investment with Burma. Rather, the measure was a bid to cut off sources of funding to the leadership in Burma, which acted against the democratically elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi and her colleagues, Mr Johnson said. The opposition leader has been held under protective custody since May 30 after a clash between her supporters and government-organised protesters. Mr Surakiart and the ambassador were speaking yesterday at the ground-breaking ceremony for the new site of the International Law Enforcement Academy (Ilea), set up in late 1998 to provide training for people fighting transnational crime including terrorism and trafficking in humans and drugs. Mr Surakiart said he hoped Ilea could strengthen cooperation in fighting drugs. The foreign ministers of Burma, China, India, Laos, and Thailand met to discuss transnational issues and drugs on the sidelines of the second ACD meeting in Chiang Mai last weekend. --------------------------------------------------------------
Bangkok Post - Saturday
28 June 2003
Wa fighters killed in clash Soldiers killed two Wa soldiers guarding a drug convoy from Burma in a clash in Chiang Mai's Mae Ai district yesterday. The fighting took place in tambon Tha Ton when the methamphetamine-smuggling convoy ran into an ambush by soldiers from the 133rd Cavalry Battalion who had been lying in wait near a border trail in Ban Saenprom village for two days. The clash lasted about 30 minutes before the smugglers fled back into Burma, leaving behind the bodies of two dead Wa soldiers in unform. Two rucksacks containing about 100,000 speed pills and an AK47 rifle were found near the bodies. Maj-Gen Manas Paorik, head of the Pha Muang task force, said the ambush followed intelligence reports that some 500,000 speed pills and an unknown amount of heroin would be smuggled into Thailand from Mong Yawn, a border town controlled by the ethnic Wa fighters. --------------------------------------------------------------
Bangkok Post - Saturday
28 June 2003
Extension of permits urged Employment system to change next year The Labour Ministry will ask cabinet to allow migrant workers from neighbouring countries to extend their work permits for another year, after which a new system for employing foreign labour will be introduced. Labour Minister Suwat Liptapanlop said the government would extend work permits for the final time this year, before setting up a new framework to control the employment of workers from Burma, Cambodia and Laos. The government recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Rangoon, Phnom Penh and Vientiane covering the employment of their nationals here. Under the agreement, migrant workers would be required to present authorities with proof of having undergone medical examinations in their homelands. The government would also deduct 1.5% of their wages to finance their return journeys at the end of their contracts. Mr Suwat said a ministry panel would be established to decide the sectors that would be allowed to employ alien workers. These would most likely include the fisheries and agricultural sectors, as well as domestic labour, he said. The fisheries sector currently employed more than 90,000 migrant workers. Mr Suwat said he had sought cooperation from police and the military to curtail a rising crime rate among illegal foreign workers. He warned that employers found to have hired illegal labour would be prosecuted. --------------------------------------------------------------
Bangkok Post - Saturday
28 June 2003
PM takes a whack at UNHCR Agency `violating Thai sovereignty' Yuwadee Tunyasiri and AFP Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra has accused the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) of violating Thailand's sovereignty by granting refugee status to foreign exiles without the government's permission. Mr Thaksin said people were fleeing from fighting and political troubles into Thailand, and taking refuge with the UNHCR. This presented the government with problems. The UNHCR issued cards for those people who were now scattered all over the country despite the fact they were not free to travel anywhere and had to stay in their camps, he said. ``They must stay in their places. They must be controlled. ``Now they act like they can be above Thailand's sovereignty. They are everywhere now,'' he said. The prime minister said he needed to ``put things in order'' by talking to the UNHCR and making it clear the UN refugee agency could no longer issue cards to any displaced person without endorsement from Thai authorities. ``Nobody can violate our sovereignty. We are a UN member. We are not a UN lackey,'' Mr Thaksin said. Those exiles had become a heavy burden on Thailand, he said. ``They live here and give birth to a lot of children. They shot our students. They bring diseases long gone from our country back to us, including tuberculosis and elephantiasis. They sell drugs and rob and kill our people. ``We also have to deal with millions of them who turn out to be illegal workers,'' Mr Thaksin said but added that problems would be dealt with in a humanitarian way. However, he knew he could expect criticism from people who thought of themselves as ``saints''. The prime minister repeated his intention to solve problems concerning illegal aliens. This followed reports that Burma had warned the government that Burmese student dissidents planned to seize the Burmese embassy in Bangkok and kidnap the ambassador, to bargain for the release of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Eleven Burmese were arrested on Thursday for preparing to protest in front of the embassy on June 30. Police said they claimed they were registered with the UNHCR as ``persons of concern'' but that the UN agency said their identification cards were no longer valid. The UNHCR office in Bangkok, meanwhile, said it had the right to grant refugee status because Thailand was not a signatory to the main UN treaty on refugees, and did not have its own legislation to determine an applicant's refugee status. ``Under the terms of its statute the UNHCR is empowered by the international community to decide that itself, in the absence of a state procedure,'' said spokeswoman Kirsten Young. ``Obviously, we only do that with the consent and cooperation of the state in which we do it. And we've been doing this in Thailand now for the past two decades.'' The UNHCR declined to reveal how many Burmese exiles had been granted refugee status, but Ms Young said only a very small proportion of all Burmese in Bangkok had sought the office's protection and assistance. --------------------------------------------------------------
The
Nation
EDITORIAL: Japan turns more assertive on Burma Published on Jun 28, 2003 The junta?s detention of Aung San Suu Kyi has given Tokyo a chance to wield some clout in Southeast Asia Japan has seldom stood up to Burma because of sensitivity to its historical experiences there. But Tokyo's latest demand is that the opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, be released immediately, otherwise its assistance to Rangoon will be axed. This assertive move should be welcomed by the international community. Apparently, the Japanese government has become increasingly irritated by the junta leaders' insistence that Suu Kyi's "protective custody" will continue. As long as she is under detention (in the infamous Insein prison or not), this will jeopardise Japan's ongoing "soft" approach and various rehabilitation programmes to help Burma. Indeed, the stand-off will produce a turnaround in Japan's policy towards Burma. For years, Japan had insisted that the Western hard-line approach toward Burma would not work as the country was self-reliant in food. Economic sanctions and other boycott measures would only harden the regime's position against its own population. Worse, ordinary people would only suffer more from international sanctions. Instead, Japan continued to engage the regime by providing humanitarian aid to help Burma construct its economic foundations. Tokyo believed that without economic prosperity and stability, political liberalisation in Burma would be hard to come by. With so much goodwill and effort invested in Burma but with such little progress, Japan is feeling the heat as the West has imposed a broad new range of sanctions. Since the Black Friday incident, the international community has spearheaded the effort to secure Suu Kyi's release. Japan has now threatened to sever aid to Rangoon if she is not freed. Since the junta gets most of its foreign aid from Japan, Tokyo should first reflect on its position a little. The junta knows how to manipulate the international community and drag on the political process to whittle down the opposition. But the opposition is stronger than ever. Suu Kyi's growing popularity is unstoppable. This was why the junta put her under detention. From the junta's point of view, it would be suicidal for them to let her continue her political work and strengthen her party's branches. Japan must also use its influence to discourage both China and India from pursuing their present courses. Because of growing border transactions, these two countries have strengthened the junta's survivability. It may sound absurd to suggest that Japan take such action in dealing with the two Asian giants, but Japan really has the economic and political clout to sway them, if it really wants to push for this objective. In the past, Japan has not felt strong enough to assert itself in regional crises, barring the Cambodian conflict. Now, Burma has provided the window for Japan to display its diplomatic finesse in dealing with a major crisis. Of course Thailand, a recipient of Japanese aid, should also be included in the list. Tokyo does not want to upset Thailand by criticising its Burmese policy, but it must pressure Thailand to take Burma's political situation seriously. During the Cambodian conflict, both countries coordinated with each other and helped move the peace process forward there. Such collaboration should be initiated on Burma as both have access to the junta leaders in various ways. If all Asian players get their act together and work uniformly, they can move the political process in Burma forward. They would not need US State Secretary Colin Powell to tell them what to do. Like it or not, Burma is a make-or-break situation for Japan's future role in the region. --------------------------------------------------------------
The Straits Times -
JUNE 28, 2003 SAT
Asean serves as bridge between East and West BY HIRO KATSUMATA CRITICS of Asean like to dismiss the regional organisation as a mere 'talk shop'. But this is to miss the vital bridging role that it plays, a role made evident during the latest series of meetings in Phnom Penh. Asean members showed deftness in handling two important issues: the Myanmar government's detention of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, and North Korea's programme to develop nuclear weapons. In both cases, the grouping's foreign ministers performed an important 'bridging' role, and demonstrated the real significance of Asean diplomacy. On the Myanmar issue, the foreign ministers took the unprecedented step of encouraging the Yangon military regime to release Ms Suu Kyi, during the Asean Ministerial Meeting. They held lengthy discussions with their colleague from Myanmar. The joint communique stated that they 'look forward to the early lifting of restrictions' placed on her. While most newspapers reported this as a surprise abandonment of the long- standing Asean principle of non-interference, some critics - in particular, those from Western countries - said it was still insufficient. They demanded that Asean impose economic sanctions against the junta. However, both these views missed the significant point of Asean diplomacy. PLAYING MIDDLEMAN ON MYANMAR, the grouping's members neither abandoned the non-interference principle completely nor neglected the issue posed by the military junta's handling of Ms Suu Kyi. That is to say, Asean neither disregarded the junta's concern nor ignored the Western countries' criticism of Myanmar. It acknowledged the concerns of both Yangon and Washington, and diplomatically sought to accommodate both parties. Asean's significance lies in its potential to serve as a bridge between Western countries and non-Western ones. It can bridge the gulf between Western states - the United States and European Union (EU) members - and those nations generally at odds with the West in the international arena. In the global community today, the gap between these two groups is widening. The US and the EU members, under the banner of human rights and democracy, have been putting pressure on those who do not share their liberal values. The non-Western countries, in turn, are dodging criticisms from their Western counterparts. They are not united, but what they have in common is strong opposition to the Western countries' intrusive behaviour. The situations in Myanmar and North Korea have not improved, despite the Western countries' strong pressures on these states. In contrast, the set of multilateral frameworks offered by Asean - including the Asean Regional Forum (ARF) - serves as a bridge which connects countries in the Asia-Pacific region, whose positions on issues vary in the spectrum between the Western and non-Western camps. Countries such as Japan do understand the plight of non-Western countries; however, their policies are usually in line with those of the Western countries. For example, during the Asean meetings, Tokyo threatened to withdraw economic assistance to Myanmar if the human rights conditions there showed no improvement. No other arrangement, apart from the framework offered by Asean, connects these countries in the Western and non-Western camps. On the North Korean issue, Asean again attempted to accommodate the concerns of both the Western participants and Pyongyang. Unlike the former's pressure diplomacy, the grouping avoided direct criticism of Pyongyang. The joint communique expressed the Asean ministers' conviction that a 'peaceful resolution to the current tensions through dialogue' would be valuable and maintained that the ARF was a 'useful venue for facilitating dialogue on the Korean peninsula'. It is true that Asean's accommodating diplomatic manoeuvres will not bring about any drastic change or immediate improvement of the situation. However, the importance of its bridging role should not be underestimated. CRITICAL ROLE TO PUT it in another way, what if there were no Asean framework to connect the diverse countries in the Asia-Pacific region? There would be no common ground between the Western and non-Western countries, and the relationship between them could easily worsen, to the detriment of the region as a whole. Finally, the role of the grouping should also be understood in reference to various non-traditional security issues, including terrorism. In order for the Asia-Pacific region to deal with these issues effectively, conflicts between Western and non-Western countries should be mitigated. Asean can facilitate cooperation between countries within the framework which it offers. Its accommodating approach, expressed during the Phnom Penh meeting, is notable in this respect. The ARF Statement on Cooperative Counter-Terrorist Action rejected 'any attempt to associate terrorism with any religion, ethnicity, race or nationality', and emphasised the need to 'strengthen dialogue and promote mutual understanding'. In sum, in various issue areas, including politics and security, Asean serves as a vital bridge, accommodating broader conflicting interests in the Asia-Pacific region. The writer is an IDSS-Sasakawa Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Institute of Defence andStrategic Studies. --------------------------------------------------------------
New Straits
Times
Comment: The Asean way of constructive engagement in addressing issues Jawhar Hassan June 28: THE week before witnessed once again one of the most intensive annual regional co-operation exercises the world knows. The 10 members of Asean, the 13 members of the Asean+3 process, the 23 members of the Asian Regional Forum and the 20 participants of the Asean Post-Ministerial Conference met successively in Phnom Penh, to address co-operation and common concerns in key political, economic, security and social areas. The fact that Cambodia, one of the poorest and most ravaged countries on earth, could successfully organise and host the events passed almost without comment from the international (largely Western) media. Considering grave concerns (tinged sometimes with sarcasm) about the ability of resource-strapped members to participate meaningfully in the intensive Asean processes, this is quite remarkable. The absence of the usual attacks on the relevance of Asean is also noteworthy. Asean discussions and statements on the issue of the detention of Aung San Suu Kyi, and its continuing focus on international terrorism targeted at US and allied interests perhaps helped mollify the critics. The critics, however, remain not terribly impressed with this essentially Third World enterprise. Joined by some within the region, these largely Western critics continue to highlight what is characterised as Asean's "sweep-under-the-carpet" approach to prob-lems and its norm of adhering to the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs. It is amazing how little attention and criticism other regional processes like PIF attract. How many of us have even heard of "PIF"? It is the Pacific Islands Forum, formerly the South Pacific Forum, helmed mainly by Australia and to some extent New Zealand. Ironically, some of the loudest critics of Asean come from PIF. Even SAARC, the South Asia Association for Regional Co-operation, not noted for meaningful and productive initiative, escapes as much negative attention. When Asean discussed the Myanmar issue, did it breach its own principle of non-intervention? That is, did it intervene in the core domestic political and security concerns of a member against the will of that member, in an area that did not impact adversely upon outside interests? Certainly, Asean not only discussed the internal affairs of a member country, it also effectively called for the early release of Aung San Suu Kyi. Nothing could be more "interventionist". Asean's "intervention", however, was not against Myanmar's will. Yangon consented to the discussion, and agreed to the relevant wording in the joint communique. Asean's "intervention" was also in a matter that directly affected its interests. The detention on May 30 invited intense pressure from the United Nations and other parties that adversely affected the interests of the Asean members. In this sense, the issue was no longer an entirely domestic matter. In these respects, Asean's action was not tantamount to intervention of the kind that is sometimes routinely employed by some major powers ? threats, demands, condemnations, sanctions, and in extreme cases, overt subversion of the government in power (Iran) as well as aggression and regime change. This is not the first time too that Asean has discussed the issue of Myanmar. Further, it also discussed the situation in Aceh, though in terms favourable to the Government in Jakarta and against the insurgents. Rather than intervention, Asean would perhaps see its action as what it calls "constructive engagement". If this is the organisation's approach, it bodes well for Asean and the region. Its standing and image would have been seriously impaired if it had refused even to discuss the issue. In this day and age, it is impossible for any respectable grouping to ignore blatant oppression and extensive abuse of human rights within its ranks. Asean also cannot stand aloof if there are humanitarian disasters like genocide. That said, it will have to be careful about the precedent it has set and where it draws the line between permissible constructive engagement and prohibited intervention. Asean supported efforts leading to "peaceful transition to democracy" in Myanmar. Will it do the same with Laos, Vietnam, and Brunei? In one respect, however, the media focus followed the norm. It largely ignored or gave little prominence to the matters of far greater significance to Asean's long-term collective economic and security well-being that were addressed at the meeting. These included the Asean Economic Community proposal; the Asean-Russia Joint Declaration on Partnership for Peace and Security, and Prosperity and Development in the Asia Pacific Region; and the important measures being undertaken to enhance Asean-India co-operation. It also largely ignored as mere rhetoric Asean's specific call for a central role for the UN in Iraq and its reaffirmation of the critical importance of strictly abiding by international law including the UN, a message aimed directly at the US and its allies. -------------------------------------------------------------- |