Attack of Myanmar gas-pipeline

[art31148@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 1995 08:54:55 +0800 (SST)
To: strider@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Attack of Myanmar gas-pipeline


	With regards to the recent attack of Myanmar gas-pipeline, many 
would certainly hope that this will lead to a re-evaluation of the 
gas-pipeline project foreign oil companies have undertaken with 
SLORC. Those involved have already been warned of the potential dangers 
they are putting their employees through. However, craving for a large 
bite of the investment potentials in Burma, they, like every other 
foreign companies currently investing in Burma have blinded themselves to 
the civil war that has been going on for the past 40 years.
	TOTAL and UNICAL have maintained that they are only interested in 
business and do not want to be involved in the internal politics of 
Burma. However, reality is such that by economically pairing up with 
SLORC, their actions will definately have an indirect influence on 
internal politics whether or not they claim not to want to be involved.
	SLORC's policy towards the Burmese have always been repressive. 
Despite showing a few 'signs of flexibility', these are merely attempts 
to deceive the international community, especially those with foreign 
currency pouring in. Therefore, it is necessary for UNOCAL president John 
Imle to re-examine and be more critical of SLORC's internal policies ( 
before blaming on the resistance of the Karens and Mons as the factor 
that led to SLORC's greater oppressive measures) and during the process, 
it is also important to make sure it is seen not through rose-tinted 
glasses smear wiht economic figures, neither by just simply looking at 
the map of Burma, focussing only on the location of the natural gas 
resources.
	SLORC has now armed themselves with an increased confidence in 
their ability to get away with increase level of human rights violations. 
This is not surprising as SLORC has been successful in gathering a 
sizeable amount of of international economic support as well as sophisticated 
amount of the-state-of-the-art weaponry. SLORC understands the overarching 
mechanism that motivates the international community. For as 
long as they open their economy, and allow foreign investments and 
business opportunities to penetrate and flourish, the faction of 
international community that is largely motivated by economic 
justifications will conviniently 'close-one-eye' to the repressive 
actions of the Burmese military. 
	SLORC is already at a stage where they are immune to 
international condemnation; so what if another statement is issued 
condemning their actions? It is the people living inside Burma as well as 
the displaced people along the border that have to bear the cost of 
SLORC's strategies of terrorization and social diruption, while SLORC 
carries on with the task of entrenching their power and the CEOs earn 
their millions back home.
	TOTAL and UNOCAL's connection and business dealings with an 
illegitimate military junta does not speck much of the companies. 
Theoretically, it is easy to list down the many benefits that companies 
can squeeze out of an investment with Burma, especially if it is done 
within the comforts of an office in the mist of a concrete jungle. 
However, in reality, the economic context is not ideal and will never be 
for as long as SLORC continues their atrocities and find ways and means 
to justify their actions as well as foreign investments continue to pour 
in. In addition, to narrowly focus on economic growth without paying 
attention to social justice is a short-sighted and faulty investment 
strategy. Companies who invest beyond their territorial shores should
equip themselves with a strong sense of global responsibility and 
accountability; Seek to attain a decent level of 'peace' (not by SLORC's 
standards), after which, go ahead and invest all they want.