BURMA NEWS INTERNATIONAL

WEEKLY NEWS PACKAGE

17 September 2004

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Politics

========

 

Lahu: Rangoon broke its word to us (S.H.A.N)

 

U Lwin: NLD to Continue with Changes despite no Meeting with Suu Kyi

(Mizzima News)

 

Drugs

====

One Win could be losing (S.H.A.N)

 

 

Border

=====

 

Burma Reopens Its Border Transit Point to Trade after 14 Days (Kaladan

News)

 

Tension on Burma-Bangladesh Border  (Kaladan News)

 

Nasaka Abduct Bangladeshi Fisherman (Kaladan News)

 

 

Inside Burma

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

 

One captured and eight arrested on suspicion of supporting rebels

(Independent Mon News Agency)

 

 

International

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

 

 

Indian Army Chief Visits Northeast  (Mizzima News)

 

French judge refuses to stop Total case (Kao Wao News Group)

 

Assam CM Wants More Pressure on Burma (Mizzima News)

 

Burmese Migrants kill Thai employers (Kao Wao News Group)

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Politics

========

 

Lahu: Rangoon broke its word

 

9 September 2004: Shan Herald Agency for News : Two

Lahu "spokespeople" who recently crossed the border into Thailand told

S.H.A.N. the majority of their people who had been resettled in

southern Shan State 5 years earlier had ‘had enough of’ the Burmese

military authorities' broken promises, reports Hawkeye from Chiangrai:

 

"Before we moved down from the north," said Joseph (not his real

name), 25, a high school graduate from Lashio, "we were given three

promises by the colonel from Kunhing, who said he represented Maj-Gen

Maung Bo, Commander of the (Taunggyi-based) Eastern Region Command."

They were the right to establish their own local government, freedom

from forced labor and exemption from the draft. "These assurances were

given to us at a meeting in October 1999 in Tangyan," said Joseph.

 

Altogether, 700 families with a total population of 4,000 people from

Tangyan, Mawfah (across the Salween), Monghsu, Lashio, Mongyai and

Hsenwi had agreed to resettle in the Wanzing area in Kehsi township,

Loilem district. Since then, the population in the area (now

designated as Wanzing sub-township) has more than doubled, 90% of them

Lahu and the remainder comprising Shan and Palaung respectively.

 

This is still less than half of the original population, according to

the Shan Human Rights Foundation, who reported on the forced

relocation of 300,000 people and extra judicial killings (664

documented in total) during the Burmese Army's three year campaign

against the Shan State Army 1996-99.

 

"Now they have broken every promise they gave to us five years ago,"

lamented Joseph. "Our leaders cannot do anything without authorization

from Infantry Battalion 287, a unit that was created on our arrival.

We have to take turns and work in their paddy fields confiscated from

the locals. And now they are forcibly recruiting us to serve in their

army units."

 

In 2002, a month-long battle broke out between the Burmese Army and

the Shan State Army, and all Lahus who had received a 6-month training

in Panglawng, 80-miles southwest of Taunggyi, were required to

participate in the fight. "Most of us fled on the first night on our

way to the border," he said, "because we knew they wanted us to be in

the vanguard."

 

The Lahu, of Tibeto-Burman stock, are distributed widely in northern

and eastern Shan State, with a total population of 360,000, according

to some Lahu sources. During the 1990 elections, one Lahu, Daniel

Aung, was elected as Member of Parliament for Mongpiang township.

Related report: Lahu relocations escape rights advocates' notice,

S.H.A.N., 14 April 2004

 

 

 

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

 

 

U Lwin: NLD to Continue with Changes despite no Meeting with Suu Kyi

 

September 3, 2004  Mizzima News: Though the military junta has not

responded to the National League for Democracy (NLD) demand to meet

with Aung San Suu Kyi, they will continue with their activities, NLD

spokesman, U Lwin, said yesterday.

 

To address Aung San Suu Kyi’s proposal to expand the NLDs Central

Executive Committee (CEC) and Central Committee (CC), party leaders

demanded a meeting with Suu Kyi, who is still under house arrest.

 

“We are only seven people here, we cannot work effectively. We have

five Central Committee members and nine CEC members. As the nine-

member CEC is to do the work, we need to meet Daw Aung San Suu Kyi”,

said U Lwin.

 

“We will write everything in detail to Daw Suu and present it to her,

even  though we cannot meet her in person. We will also give a copy to

U Tin Oo. And if we find any response favorable to reducing the 9-

member committee to 7 members, then we will continue as we have

agreed. For now that is what we will be doing”, U Lwin continued.

 

Changes to and expansion of the party were proposed as most agreed to

include younger members in the decision-making bodies, including the

CEC. The Central Committee will be reformed and placed under the

administration of the CEC and is likely to include over a dozen

members, including women and younger members.

 

To discuss changes within the party, the NLD earlier held a meeting

with women’s groups, youth groups and 13 groups from states and

divisions and alliance groups such as the National Democratic Party,

said a source from the NLD.

 

A veteran politician from Rangoon remarked that the junta’s fear of

the NLD gaining political momentum may be the main reason for not

allowing NLD leaders to meet with Suu Kyi to discuss party affairs.

 

The NLD leaders had their last meeting in May and announced their

rejection of the military junta's invitation to attend the national

convention. The regime has been ruling the country since the 1962

coup, and said that the convention was the first step to democracy,

but the opposition and international community has dismissed it as

undemocratic and a sham.

 

Nobel laureate Suu Kyi and her deputy Tin Oo have been detained since

the May 30 Depayin massacre last year when her convoy was attacked by

a junta-backed mob in northern Burma while she was on a political

trip. The Military junta ignored the NLD's landslide victory result in

the 1990 elections, which the international community considered free

and fair.

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Drug

====

 

Reports: One Win could be losing

 

8 September 2004: Shan Herald Agency for News : After more than two

weeks of unconfirmed reports, it now appears that one of the generals

in Rangoon bearing the name of Kyaw Win has been laid off for keeps in

connection with the seizure of an unprecedented amount of heroin in

southern Burma last July, reports S.H.A.N. correspondent Hawkeye from

Maesai:

 

"We heard that it was definitely (Maj Gen) Kyaw Win who had been

acting chief of National Intelligence since Gen Khin Nyunt was

appointed prime minister (25 August 2003)," said a businessman who was

recently in Rangoon. "According to in-house gossip," (Senior Gen) Then

Shwe was already considering a transfer order for him when he handed

in his resignation."

 

There are four generals each of whom answers to the name of Kyaw Win,

according to an opposition directory:

 

Brig-Gen Kyaw Win - Deputy Minister, Ministry of Industry #1

 

Maj-Gen Kyaw Win - Deputy Chief of Logistics

 

Maj-Gen Kyaw Win - Acting Chief of Military Intelligence Directorate

 

Lt-Gen Kyaw Win - Chief of Armed Forces Training

 

She said the surprise move originated in the 500-kg (some reports say

600 kg) drug haul on 9 July in a fishing village in Ye township,

Tenasserim Division, 600-km southeast of Rangoon. "He and several

other officers were said to be implicated in the scandal," she added.

 

Meanwhile S.H.A.N. sources who are based in Tachilek say two men, Ai

Ti and Ai Yi, who are brothers and natives of Kengtung, had been

arrested in Rangoon's Shwe Gondaing township. "The two are brothers-in-

law of Ta Way, an associate of Wei Hsuehkang and electricity supplier

for Tachilek (since April 2003)," an ex-Khun Sa follower and "chemist"

said. "Ta Way himself is still intact although he has a home in

Rangoon. He hasn't been back to Tachilek since being informed that his

name was on the Thai blacklist (of drug suspects)."

 

Another source told S.H.A.N. he was invited to the home of one of the

brothers last year when he was informed they had "a very good pawliang

(employer)" in Hong Kong.

 

Both sources maintained that the actual amount of drugs seized in

southern Burma was more than a ton. "1,600 kg, we were told," said

one. "Can you imagine a consignment that big coming from Shan State,

reaching Rangoon and then loaded on a boat without top-level

authorization? Can you also imagine an individual operator trying to

smuggle out a payload of that size? Even Khun Sa, during his prime,

never shipped out more than 200 kg on each delivery. Only a big, big

organization can afford to run an operation this big."

 

The two believed it was a joint effort by Rangoon's top-ranking

officers and the United Wa State Army that somehow came to grief.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Border

======

 

Burma Reopens Its Border Transit Point after 14 Days

 

Teknaf, September 07: Kaladan News  Burma reopened its border transit

point with Bangladesh on the Maungdaw-Teknaf border today, and other

frontier points after 14 days of closure following hot tempers in

Bangladesh triggered by the August grenade attack, said Sayed from

Teknaf by telephone.

 

Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) officials say Burma border security forces

reopened the trading point without prior notice.

 

Hearing the news, people from the Bangladeshi side are preparing to go

to Burma. Its border transit point with Bangladesh on Teknaf-Maungdaw

and other points have been closed since 24th August 2004.

 

BDR official of 23rd Rifles Battalion in Teknaf says today, Burma

border security forces (Nasaka) did not make any explanation on the

move.

 

Nasaka officials posted a letter to the Teknaf BDR saying that they

had directives from headquarters to reopen the Burmese border from

September 7, 2004, said the BDR official of Teknaf.

 

A border trader from Teknaf, who declined to mention his name and

formerly participated many times in Burma-Bangladesh flag meetings, 

said, “ Burmese authorities, mostly Nasaka, never give direct answers

to the Bangladeshi authorities but they usually say that they wil

submit the proposals to the higher authorities.”

 

An agreement between Burma and Bangladesh in 1988 allows citizens

residing within 8 kilometers of the border of the two countries to

travel on special transit pass. Businesspeople can also use the route

only for business purpose. 

 

Officials also said they have repeatedly asked Nasaka to join in a

flag meeting at the commander level to talk about the issue, but the

Burmese border forces didn’t show interest.

 

On 3rd September 2004, the two sides sat at a camp-commander level

flag meeting where Bangladeshi officials asked for implementation of

the 1988 agreement and the immediate opening of the transit point. But

Burmese officials said that they would convey the proposal to the

higher officials.

 

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

 

Nasaka Abducts Bangladeshi Fisherman

 

Cox’s Bazar, September 04: Kaladan News : A Bangladeshi fisherman was

abducted by Burmese-Border Security Forces (Nasaka) from the Naf River

while he was fishing, according to our correspondent.

 

On August 24, 2004, the victim Shabir Ahamed, 32, son of late Kalu

Meah of Ullo Bonia village of Whaikong union under the Cox’s Bazar

district, was abducted by Nasaka forces while fishing in the Naf River

beyond the Bangladeshi water territorial boundary, according to the

victim’s wife.

 

Afterwards, he was taken to the Nasaka camp and detained there the

whole night. The next day, on being informed, a relative of the

fisherman went to the Nasaka camp and the victim was released after

paying a Taka 1,000 bribe. While in custody, he was severely tortured,

said the victim.

 

He was in Cox’s Bazar General Hospital taking medical treatment and in

a critical condition.

 

At present, hundreds of fishermen do not dare to go to fishing in the

Naf River because of Nasaka abductions, local fishermen said.

 

Hence, the fishermen across the Naf River are seeking help from Border

Security Forces of Bangladesh to provide them with adequate security

for trouble-free fishing in the Naf River, said a local.

 

“Frequently, fishermen are abducted by Nasaka while they are fishing

in the Naf River. Though we inform the concerned authorities about the

situation, they pay no attention”, said a fisherman who preferred not

to mention his name.

 

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

 

Tension on Burma-Bangladesh Border

 

Cox’s Bazar, 3 September.: Kaladan News : The Burma-Bangladesh Border

became tense after eight Bangladeshi businessmen were sent back to the

Bangladeshi border by Burmese authorities, according to our

correspondent.

 

According to local people from Teknaf, the said businessmen took

necessary documents from the immigration department of Teknaf and went

to Burma at noon on 24th August 2004, and without any reason, the same

day, they were sent back by Burmese authorities. Since then, a tense

situation has prevailed at the Burma-Bangladesh border.

 

Police from the Teknaf border in Bangladesh arrested about 165

Rohingyas, including women and children. They were undocumented

refugees from Teknaf makeshift camps and some were from rented houses

in Teknaf, said the Daily Cox’s Bazar of 20th August 2004.

 

But local people in Teknaf said that about 300 Rohingyas were

arrested, including some that hold border passes and came to

Bangladesh legally for business purposes.

 

Some people of Tekanf border belt said, “ Some Burmese border pass

passport holders’ arrests provoked the Burmese authorities. So they

pushed back Bangladeshi businessmen without any reason.”

 

Some people in the border area said that the incident was related to

the grenade explosion in Dhaka on 21st August 2004.

 

Police lodged cases against all the arrestees at Teknaf police Station

and they were sent to Cox’s Bazar jail.

 

On August 3, 2003, Teknaf police attempted an operation against the

Rohingya people living in Teknaf. They were gathered by police in

front of the Teknaf upazila and have been living as undocumented

refugees at makeshift camps.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Inside Burma

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

 

One captured and eight arrested on suspicion of supporting rebels

 

September 6, 2004 : Independent Mon News Agency A villager was

captured and eight other villagers were arrested on suspicion of

supporting a Mon rebel group by the local Burmese Army battalion in

Southern Burma, according to the rebel leader and local sources.

 

“Killing and arresting villagers then applying inhumane torture is a

common habit of the Burmese Army,” said Mr. Nai Pan Nyunt, a Mon rebel

leader from the Hongsarwatoi Restoration Party.

 

“It is so cruel and inhumane to our people. They (the Burmese Army)

took the headmen from Magyi and Mi-htaw-hla villages and killed them.

And they lied to the villagers that headmen were killed while fighting

with our HRP,” he added.

 

A train ticket seller, Mr. Nai Chit Htwe, 35 years old from Pauk-pin-

gwin village, southern Ye township, was killed by Burmese Army’s

Infantry Battalion No.273,” said Mon splinter armed group leader Nai

Pan Nyunt.

 

Nai Chit Htwe was killed on August 27, 2004 and 8 villagers from Mi-

htaw-hlar-kalay were arrested after fighting between Mon rebels broke

out on August 29. The fighting killed 4 Burmese soldiers and a 14 year-

old schoolboy.

 

Eight villagers under the suspicion of supporting rebels were accused

of keeping the rebels in the villages and providing food for them.

 

Mon people have been supporting the rebels for years and currently the

Burmese military government SPDC, have launched military offensives

against the Mon rebels in order to take control of the whole area.

 

“In the area, the Burmese soldiers have often and regularly arrested

villagers and punished them in order to prevent them from supporting

the rebels. Early this year, from January to March, No. 3 Tactical

Command in the area killed over 10 villagers on a similar suspicion,”

said Nai Kasauh of the Mon Human Rights Foundation of Monland.

 

“There has been 15 times more fighting in the area between the Burmese

Army and the HRP,” Nai Pan Nyaut confirmed.

 

Because of the recent offensives launched by the Burmese Army in the

area, about 20% of the estimated over 50, 000 local population have

been displaced and many of them have fled to the border areas with

Thailand or to Mon refugee resettlement camps, according to the Kyone-

kanya village headman.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

International

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

 

French judge refuses to stop Total case

 

Taramon/ Sangkhlaburi ( Kao Wao News Group)

September 9,2004

 

A spokesperson for French Government lawyer Le Procureur Bernard asked

the judge to stop the case against Total, but the judge, Katherine

Cornier, has not accepted the request, according to the Le Point

weekly on August 19.

 

“The judge has strong evidence in the case, which is why she refused

to stop the case, “ Mr, Htoo Chit, the coordinator of the Grass Roots

Human Rights Education and Development Committee based on the Thai-

Burma border said.

 

The local Burmese NGO based on the southern Thai- Burma border has

accused Total company of human rights abuses while constructing the

Yadana gas pipeline in southern Burma, with 12 cases, the coordinator

of the group said.

 

“ Eight forced-laborers and four perpetrators, three soldiers and one

servant were involved in the cases,” said Mr, Htoo Chit.

 

“ Total has 12 lawyers but we have two,” Chit said. He discussed the

cases with Total’s lawyers while in France, yet no compromise was

reached as he does not represent all the  forced-laborers working on

the pipeline.

 

The French lawyers came to the Thai- Burma border three times to take

testimonies and collect information about the cases, Chit said.

 

He said that he had networked with a French NGO to accuse Total. “ We

are confident of winning the cases,  even though we are a local NGO,

because we have strong evidence and testimonies of the cases.”

 

The group is happy that French embassy in BKK cooperated on traveling

arrangements to get the French to give testimony before the judges,

Chit said.

 

He criticized the two French journalists who interviewed him about the

cases last year and wrote the wrong information which tended to favor

to the company.

 

Some ministers in the cabinet of France are holding shares in the

company, Chit said.

 

 

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

 

Indian Army Chief Visits Northeast

 

September 5, 2004 Surajit Khaund/Mizzima News: Chief of Army Staff

General NC Vij visited some areas of Northeast India on Friday. His

visit takes place at a time when the Chief Minister of Assam is

demanding the sealing of the Indo-Burma border to control insurgents

attacking India’s central government.

 

During his two-day visit, the general also visited Nagaland and the

bordering states of Burma. He also met the governors of Manipur and

held a series of discussions with senior army officials.

 

Though the Indian army describes the visit as routine, political

circles say the visit comes at a crucial time.

 

Sources say the army chief held a marathon discussion with the third

corps General officer in Command (GoC), who is monitoring the Burmese

border, and met Manipur Chief Minister Ibobi Singh.

 

Recently, the Assam CM met Home Minister Sivraj Patil and requested

that he put diplomatic pressure on Burma to evict the militants,

official sources said.

 

General NC Vij was informed of the prevailing military situation and

assured that forces would increase patrols along the Indo-Burma

border, he added.

 

The sources said the Indian government is seeking help from the

Burmese military junta to contain the insurgency problem in Northeast

India. The Indian government has requested that the junta destroy

rebel camps in Western Burma.

 

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

 

Assam CM Requests More Pressure on Burma

 

September 7, 2004 : Surajit Khaund/Mizzima News: Assam chief minister

Tarun Gogoi has requested that India’s home minister, Sivraj Patil,

apply diplomatic pressure on the Burmese government in a bid to drive

Burmese militants out of the country.

 

Mr Patil arrived in Shillong, the capital of Meghalya in north-east

India, on Sunday September 5 for a three-day visit to determine the

social stability of the region.

 

Mr Gogoi and Mr Patil held a 30-minute private meeting in Shillong on

Sunday to discuss the increased activity of the United Liberation

Front of Assam. The ULFA is made up of Burmese and Bangladeshis and

has been labelled a terrorist organisation.

 

During the discussion, Mr Gogoi asked Mr Patil to intensify patrols

along the Indo-Burma and Indo-Bangladesh border in a bid to contain

the activities of the militant group.

 

Mr Patil reportedly agreed to approach the subject with both Burma and

Bangladesh.

 

Mr Gogoi had repeatedly asked Mr Patil to seal the Indo-Burma border

following movements by the ULFA.

 

The official press release stated the Indian Home Ministry had agreed

to send more troops to the border areas as a means of containing the

group.

 

Mr Patil visited Manipur, a notorious trouble spot on the Burmese

border on Monday, where he held discussions with Manipur chief

minister Ibobi Singh, and met with senior military and security

officials.

 

A high-ranking official from the Manipur government  said Mr Patil

also met with senior military and Assam Rifles officials stationed on

the border and asked them to intensify their patrols.

 

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

 

Burmese Migrants kill Thai employers

 

September 10, 2004: Kao Wao : Burmese migrants were involved in murder

last week when they were refused to register for work permits and got

disappointed with their Thai employers, a source from the Mon

community in Mahar chai province, Thailand said.

 

No fishing boat had landed at the harbor for over two months and the

migrants were getting upset as they had lost the chance of applying

for work permits, the source said. They were also tortured by their

Thai bosses.

 

About 60 migrant fishermen, most of them Mon nationals from Kaw Paline

village,Kyaik Mayaw township, Mon state, killed their seven Thai

employers on the boat then headed for Indonesian waters, the source

said.

 

Some of their families have moved to other places for security and

some of them have tried to go back to Burma.

 

Burmese migrants in the province are not happy with Thai media

coverage that favored the Thai employers, another Mon migrant worker

said on condition of anonymity.

 

Now they have been captured by Indonesian policemen.

 

In the past Burmese migrants in fishing boats have been involved in

murder, especially when they were mistreated by their Thai captains, a

Mon migrant from the area said. They sometimes kill each other, too.

 

 Some Mon nationalists in the area killed Thai citizens when Mon women

were harassed, Nai Lawi Mon, a Mon migrant worker said.

 

Most of the migrants in this area are Mon.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

DEA Agent’s Whistleblower Case Exposes “War on Drugs” as “War of

Pretense”

 

Agent’s Sealed Legal Case Dismissed on National Security Grounds;

Details Leaked to Narco News

 

By Bill Conroy

Special to The Narco News Bulletin

 

September 7, 2004

 

Former DEA agent Richard Horn has been fighting the U.S. government

for the past 10 years trying to prove the CIA illegally spied on him

as part of an effort to thwart his mission in the Southeast Asian

country of Burma.

 

After being removed from his post in Burma, Horn filed litigation in

federal court in Washington, D.C., in 1994, accusing top officials for

the CIA and State Department in Burma of violating his Fourth

Amendment rights.

 

After languishing in the federal court system for some 10 years,

Horn’s case was dismissed in late July of this year after crucial

evidence in the case was suppressed on national security grounds.

Because the entire court record had been sealed by the judge, no one

would have even known that Horn’s case was torpedoed, if it were not

for the fact that an anonymous source leaked the judge’s ruling to

Narco News.

 

Horn served in the early 1990s as the DEA country attaché to Burma ­

which ranks as one of the top opium poppy producing countries in the

world.

 

As the highest-ranking in-country DEA representative in Burma (also

known as Myanmar), Horn was charged with overseeing the agency’s

mission in that country of eradicating the opium poppy, which is used

to produce heroin.

 

Form the start, Horn ran into problems with the top U.S. State

Department official in Burma, Charge d’Affaires Franklin Huddle Jr.,

and the CIA chief of station in Burma at the time, Arthur M. Brown.

 

Horn’s attorney, Brian Leighton, describes what Horn was up against in

Burma in a letter he sent in 1997 to U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.

In the letter, Leighton claims Huddle and Brown were bent on

portraying the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) ­ the

oppressive military junta ruling Burma ­ in the worst possible light.

 

However, Horn, according to the letter to Shelby, had made inroads in

gaining the assistance of the SLORC in working toward opium poppy

eradication in Burma. Horn’s success set in motion a series of overt

and clandestine efforts on the part of Huddle and Brown to undermine

DEA efforts in the region, Leighton alleges.

 

The reason, Leighton claimed in a recent phone interview, was that if

Horn’s strategy proved successful, it would have undercut the State

Department’s goal of vilifying the SLORC in the eyes of Congress and

the public at large.

 

Sources within the intelligence community, however, tell Narco News

that the CIA’s motivations in the region are likely far more complex,

and that Horn simply found himself in the path of the Agency’s buzz

saw.

 

In the end, Huddle managed to get Horn run out of Burma through the

machinations of the State Department, Leighton contends, but only

after Horn discovered that the CIA had planted eavesdropping equipment

in his private quarters in Burma.

 

Horn’s attorney claims the bug was planted by Brown or one of his

cronies as part of an effort to set up Horn and to undermine the DEA’s

mission in Burma. The eavesdropping, in the end, failed to produce any

dirt that could be used against Horn, but it was a clear violation of

his civil rights, according to Leighton.

 

Sources within the DEA contend that Horn’s claims against the CIA and

State Department are on target, adding that the Department of Justice

went as far as to claim that no U.S. citizen is protected from

eavesdropping by its government when overseas.

 

“Horn’s whole story is true,” contends one DEA source. “They spied on

his home, and the Department of Justice defended the CIA’s actions.”

 

Horn’s attorney, in his letter to Sen. Shelby, contends that the CIA’s

net is far wider than Burma, and that the Agency regularly spies on

DEA agents overseas:

 

… My client has learned that many DEA agents have been the subject of

electronic eavesdropping by the State Department and our U.S.

intelligence agencies.

 

… There are, no doubt, countless times when DEA’s operation plans have

been foiled by “the listeners,” without DEA even knowing what happened.

 

What really happened in the Horn case, though, was not supposed to

come out, if the government had its way. From the start, Horn’s

litigation was sealed and critical evidence that could have supported

his claims censored by the court.

 

Specifically, the evidence ­ two federal Inspector General (IG)

reports that centered on Horn’s accusations ­ was determined by the

court to be protected from disclosure based on something called state

secrets privilege. The privilege, which was established as part of a

1953 Supreme Court ruling known as the Reynolds case, allows the

government to deep-six information if it is deemed a threat to

national security.

 

“Having determined that state secrets privilege bars disclosure of the

IG Reports and certain attachments … the case cannot continue and must

be dismissed,” wrote U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth in his

July 28, 2004, ruling in the Horn case. “As a result of the state

secrets privilege, a plaintiff cannot make out a … case, defendants

cannot present facts necessary to their defense and the very subject

matter at the heart of this case is protected from disclosure as a

state secret.”

 

Leighton says he plans to appeal against the judge’s ruling in the

case.

 

Horn’s Charges

So what are these terrible state secrets that must be protected at all

costs ­ even at the expense of Horn’s constitutional rights? Well, we

may never know given how Horn’s case has been swept up into the world

of cloak and dagger secrecy. Even in the sealed court ruling leaked to

Narco News, all references to the alleged “state secrets” have been

redacted.

 

However, it is clear that some of these state secrets are not really

so secret. For example, in the sealed Lamberth ruling, among the

material redacted is the name of the CIA chief of station in Burma who

is one of the defendants in Horn’s lawsuit.

 

Horn’s attorney told Narco News that he would be subject to criminal

prosecution for disclosing the name. However, the individual’s name,

Arthur Brown, has been published numerous times in past media stories

about the CIA’s operations in Burma and is referenced in the letter

Leighton sent to Sen. Shelby. So it’s really not so secret after all,

except when it comes to the peculiar rules of the U.S. Justice system.

 

Even though we cannot know for certain what the U.S. government deems

to be “state secrets privilege” material in Horn’s case, we can assume

that not everything is as it appears on the surface. An examination of

Horn’s specific charges against Huddle and Brown offers additional

insight as well.

 

For starters, Horn’s attorney claims Huddle and Brown used the

resources of the State Department and CIA to sabotage a DEA plan to

gain the government of Burma’s cooperation in conducting an opium

yield study in the region. Leighton also claims that Huddle undermined

Horn’s efforts to provide Burma’s prosecutors and police with U.S.

assistance in implementing the country’s drug laws.

 

“In stark contrast,” Leighton points out in his letter to Shelby, “Mr.

Huddle allowed the CIA to send Burmese military officers to Langley,

Virginia, for training by the CIA.”

 

Horn also claims, according to assertions outlined in Judge Lamberth’s

July 28 ruling in his case, that Brown compromised a DEA informant.

 

“… (Brown) turned over a copy of a DEA document that included the name

of a confidential DEA informant to certain persons within the Burmese

government without DEA permission,” the ruling states.

 

Leighton, in his 1997 letter to Sen. Shelby, describes the same event

as follows:

 

The DEA’s well-placed contact from the largest opium producing area in

Burma provided the DEA with a proposal to withdraw from opium

production. The document was even signed by the DEA’s informant. … If

released, its contents would be highly inflammatory to the Central

Government of Burma (GOB).

 

… Brown chose to deliver a signed copy of this document (which he

surreptitiously obtained without Horn’s permission or knowledge) to a

ranking figure of the Central Government of Burma knowing full well

the outcome would be disastrous. It held the overall potential of

causing the death of the informant, depreciating the DEA’s credibility

with the GOB and derailing the entire project ­ all at once.

 

… It seemed a near miracle that Brown’s plan failed. Horn and his

agents still managed (after much work) to convince the Central

Government of Burma not to arrest the DEA’s informant and to give the

crop substitution program a chance to succeed.

 

Huddle was finally able, through the clout of the State department, to

get Horn run out of Burma in September of 1993, a little more than a

year after Horn had arrived in Burma as the top DEA agent in the

country. But about a month before his departure, Horn discovered that

his home in Burma had been wired by the CIA.

 

Leighton describes how Horn discovered the bug in his letter to Sen.

Shelby:

 

Before leaving Burma, Horn happened to see a teletype which had

quotes, ellipses and a summary of a private telephone conversation

Horn had from the telephone in his living room. This cable clearly

demonstrates that an electronic intercept had been planted ­ probably

by Brown.

 

… As if that is not enough, Mr. Horn then learned about the technology

used to conduct the intercept. … My client learned from a friend in

the intelligence community (now retired) who served with him in Burma,

how the intercept was likely accomplished and where the transmitter

and receiver were likely located.

 

… Meanwhile, my client and I were threatened with prosecution if we

told anyone details about this technology (designed specifically for

use against other American diplomats) while at the same time, the

government claimed it did not eavesdrop on my client.

 

In addition to the compromising of the DEA informant in Burma, the

alleged illegal monitoring of Horn’s private residence is also

referenced in Judge Lamberth’s sealed ruling. In fact, the ruling

states that they were the subjects of the two Inspector General

reports that have since been cloaked under state secrets privilege.

 

From Lamberth’s ruling:

 

(Horn’s) allegations regarding the handling of the DEA document was

the subject of an Inspector General report that the court determined

on Aug. 15, 2000, to be protected from disclosure by the state secrets

privilege. (Horn) further argues that the purpose of the phone tap was

to assist (Huddle) in obtaining information that would justify

(Huddle) demanding (Horn’s) removal from Burma or otherwise justify

expelling him directly. (Horn) alleges that (Huddle) sought (his)

removal from Burma as retaliation for (Horn) sending reports to

congressmen that conflicted with State Department reports prepared by

(Huddle).

 

(Horn) supports his accusations of wire tapping with the contents of a

cable sent by (Huddle) on or about Aug. 13, 1993, to his superiors in

the State Department that contained allegedly verbatim quotations from

the Aug. 12, 1993, phone conversation. The alleged phone tapping

incident is the subject of a second Inspector General Report that the

Court determined on Aug. 15, 2000, to be protected from disclosure by

the state secrets privilege.

 

To understand the context of Horn’s incredible story, we have to

explore the background of Burma in the early 1990s. The SLORC was a

brutal regime with a horrendous civil rights record that came into

power through a military coup in 1988. That junta is now known as the

State Peace and Development Council, or SPDC.

 

However, today, as was the case in the early 1990s, the ruling junta

of Burma, because of financial and military limitations, does not

control various regions of the country. This holds true in particular

in the Golden Triangle region of the nation ­ an area that borders

Laos, Thailand and China and is the source of much of the world’s

opium poppy production.

 

The narco-trade in the Golden Triangle region is controlled by

warlords who are able to field large armies that are funded with the

proceeds of their illicit trade, according to sources in the

intelligence community. In some cases, Burma’s military junta has

struck bargains with these powerful factions, such as the United Wa

State Army, which has had a ceasefire in effect with the government of

Burma since 1989.

 

The relationship between the powerful warlords who control the

lucrative narco-trade in Burma and the corrupt military junta that

controls the government is very complex and layered. Sources in the

intelligence community say that relationship is similar to two

parasites, each sucking the blood out of the other, in a symbiotic

union. As a result, drug money often finds its way into government

coffers and personal accounts through agreements of convenience

between corrupt government officials and the narco-traffickers.

 

The intelligence game in the region, then, according to sources,

involves penetrating both worlds, and using information gained to

manipulate the politics and forces in the region. As a result, the CIA

would have assets planted inside both the government and the major

trafficking organizations ­ with some of those assets likely working

both sides of that fence. The CIA officials handling these human

assets have built their careers on the information obtained from this

spying game, and in some cases may have become corruptly involved in

the system itself, according to sources in the intelligence community.

 

“If you want to cultivate assets in the drug trade to get information,

then you have to let the drug trade continue, and that’s why you don’t

want a noisy DEA agent getting in the way,” explains one source who

does consulting work in the intelligence field. “The reason the opium

economy will not stop is that the CIA does not see a value in stopping

it when they want intelligence. … We don’t have a drug policy, we have

a drug pretense.”

 

Former FBI agent Lok Lau says the Horn case is a perfect illustration

of how there “is no coordination at all” between the intelligence

community and other federal law enforcement agencies. Lau drew

national attention last year after revealing he spied on China in the

late 1980s and early 1990s for the Bureau.

 

Although Lau is prohibited from discussing the specifics of his spying

mission due to national security concerns, his assignment did provide

him with the expertise to brief CIA agents on the topics of “Chinese

alien smuggling, Asian organized crime and Asian cultural issues in

general,” according to government documents.

 

Like Horn, certain pleadings in an employment discrimination case Lau

brought against the government were later stricken from the public

record under the cloak of national security. Documents filed in Lau’s

case show that he was successful in penetrating the Chinese diplomatic

community as well as organized crime organizations that had strong

links to the Chinese government.

 

A partially classified brief filed by the League of Untied Latin

American Citizens in support of Lau’s legal claims offers a glimpse of

the nature of Lau’s spying assignment:

 

“From a reading of the record, it is not difficult to discern that Lau

was involved in espionage activities, kidnappings, trading in human

slavery, illegal immigration, murder, torture, extortion, hostage-

taking and any number of other criminal activities that involved

crimes against humanity. Lau penetrated the Chinese Triads, the Tong,

and other Chinese Organized Crime Organizations that trade in all of

these things as a way of life … For six years Lau had to be on his

guard and had to participate in whatever these hostile forces demanded

of him.”

 

Lau explains that if the U.S. Government was really serious about

eradicating the drug trade, “they would have done it. But they do not

really want to.”

 

“Let’s say the DEA was successful in eradicating all drug

trafficking,” Lau adds. “What would be left to prop up pro-U.S.

regimes that rely on the drug trade? … The CIA can use the proceeds of

the drug trade to pay for armies to support a friendly government.”

 

Lau also says a lot of careers in the intelligence community have been

built around human assets who have been planted within the ranks of

the narco-trafficking organizations. If you take down the drug trade,

you take down the very assets that are helping to make careers ­ and

at times, corrupt fortunes ­ within the intelligence community, Lau

points out.

 

In fact, Lau alleges in his lawsuit against the FBI, which was

dismissed in late 2003 and is currently on appeal, that on the eve of

one of his overseas spying trips, he learned that one of the

Bureau’s “highly placed assets had betrayed him.”

 

“I did not cancel my trip for it would confirm the asset’s

allegation,” Lau contends in his court pleadings.

 

Lau says no effort was ever made by the FBI “to flush the asset out,

because some (FBI) agent had made his career running that asset.”

 

“So they sold me out so that agent wouldn’t have to give him up,” Lau

adds. “… Nothing ever happened to that informant….”

 

“War of Pretense”

Given that backdrop, it doesn’t take much of a leap of imagination to

conclude that the intelligence community has a lot of motivation to

keep a lid on the Horn case. Because the DEA agent actually wanted to

do his job and take down the narco-trafficking trade in Burma, he was

in fact likely threatening the opposing mission of the State

Department and CIA in the region. Their mission was to maintain the

status quo so that the information pipeline could continue to prop up

careers and U.S. interests in the region ­ which had nothing to do

with eradication of the opium market.

 

Clearly, the game as it is played is reprehensible in the eyes of most

decent people, but it’s an old game that is not likely to end without

a major reshuffling of the status quo. However, when that game starts

to reach into this country’s courts and subverts the ultimate U.S.

interest, the Constitution, it may be time to start drawing some lines.

 

The use of the state secrets privilege in the Horn case is

the “government’s nuclear option when it comes to litigation,”

explains Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government

Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. “By claiming state

security issues, the government can effectively shut down a lawsuit.

 

“It used to be a fairly rare procedure, but its use is on the rise in

recent years, and based on perception at least, there is a question

about the government’s good faith in citing the privilege.”

 

Mark Zaid, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney who has represented a

number of high-profile government whistleblowers, says often the use

of state secrets privilege “is an abuse, a way for the government to

cover up wrongdoing or incompetence, and the judiciary goes along with

it because they are intimidated.”

 

Zaid is the attorney representing former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds,

who claims she was fired from the FBI for blowing the whistle on

serious security and management dysfunction within the FBI’s

translator program. Edmonds filed a lawsuit against the U.S.

Department of Justice in 2002 claiming the government violated her

civil rights.

 

However, this past July, a judge threw her case out of court after

ruling evidence Edmonds needed to prove her claims was protected by

state secrets privilege. As in the Horn and Lau cases, Edmonds was

prevented from exposing alleged government corruption and

mismanagement because of the national security trump card. Edmonds

case is currently on appeal.

 

Zaid points out that the Horn case has particularly serious

implications for open government, because not only was state secrets

privilege invoked, but the case itself was sealed, which meant no one

would even know that national security had been used to torpedo the

case if the judge’s order had not been leaked to Narco News.

 

“The CIA will do what it needs to do to suit its interests,” Zaid

says. “If that means taking steps against another agency employee,

they will do it.

 

“… But there is a double tragedy in the use of the state secrets

privilege (in the Horn case) in that because the case is sealed, no

one would even know the government invoked the privilege. … The

ridiculous thing is that (Horn’s) case is still under seal. There is

very little classified information involved in the case (and what is

there has already been redacted from the record).

 

“So why is this case being covered up by the government?” Zaid asks.

 

That is a question that goes to the heart of our Constitution, and

whether the document still has any meaning. Ironically, Horn could not

be reached for comment on this story because, according to sources, he

fears the government will retaliate against him if he exercises his

First Amendment right to discuss his case.

 

Phone calls to the CIA and State Department were never returned.

 

Their silence, like the pall that the national security trump card

lays over the truth, only contributes to the “war of pretense” being

waged against the civil rights of people around the globe.

 

One DEA source summed up the danger of the government’s continued

expansion of that pretense as follows:

 

Illegal eavesdropping, the centerpiece of Horn’s civil case, is also a

criminal offense. An analogy of the government’s position is this: If

a CIA chief of station had stabbed Horn with a butcher knife in the

American Embassy, he could not be prosecuted because the very

existence, location and name of chiefs of station are considered

classified and cannot be disclosed. Moreover, the chief of station

would not be able to defend himself without using classified

information. Therefore, the state secrets privilege kicks in and the

case disappears. This theoretical “stretch” of the privilege is not

unlike what was done in Horn’s civil action.

 

In practice, both cases could move forward, but only if fair treatment

is accorded by the court.

 

It is apparent that the state secrets privilege has expanded and

evolved in such a way that it effectively immunizes persons and

agencies of crimes and other misconduct. It no longer just protects

troop movements, satellite imagery, etc. It now seems to include

everything the intelligence community does. The intelligence agencies

are no longer held accountable for wrongdoing. They have the all-

inclusive trump card.

 

… In the Horn case, the state secrets privilege has been used to

immunize people and agencies from wrongdoing ­ a far cry from what the

United States Constitution intended.

 

*** End ***

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Burma News International is a network of seven exiled media groups

such as Mizzima News, Khonumthung News Group, Narinjara News, Kaladan

Press Network, Independent Mon News Agency, Karenni Information

Network Group and Network Media Group.

 

For more information, contact duty editor of BNI at:

Phone: +66 9 54 94 296

E-mail: [email protected]

 

Burma News International

Contact: Duty Editor

         +66 1 530 2837

         [email protected]