The BurmaNet News, May 7, 1997

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------    
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"    
----------------------------------------------------------    
    
The BurmaNet News: May 7, 1997    
Issue #714
  
HEADLINES:    
==========   
REUTER: NYC COUNCIL TO VOTE ON CURBING DEALINGS 
REUTER: IBM  SAYS BURMA OFFICE IS "DORMANT"
FEER: CHINESE MORE FLEXIBLE TOWARD BURMESE EXILES 
NATION: BURMESE SEIZE HEROIN REFINERY NEAR BORDER
CFOB: SEAGRAM COMPANY STOPS SOURCING WHISKY 
REUTER: DIARRHOEA KILLS DOZENS OF KAREN REFUGEES 
THAILAND TIMES: ARMY SENDS PROTEST BURMESE JUNTA
THAILAND TIMES: REFUGEE SHELTER TO BE MOVED
BKK POST: BORDER BATTLE OVER MOEI RIVER PROJECT
REUTER: COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS 
FEER: FRIENDS AND FEARS
ASIAWEEK: IN THE NAME OF MONEY
THAILAND TIMES: ROJANA TO INVEST IN BURMESE PROJECT
-----------------------------------------------------------------  

REUTER: NYC COUNCIL TO VOTE ON CURBING DEALINGS WITH BURMA
May 5, 1997

NEW YORK, May 5 (Reuter) - The New York City Council plans to approve on May
14 a bill that would restrict the city's financial dealings with banks and
companies doing business in Burma, a city council spokesman said. 

The city council's bill could affect a number of major companies, including
American Express Co , Citibank ( Citicorp ), International Business Machines
Corp , Texaco Inc , Procter & Gamble Co , and some Japanese car makers,
including Toyota Motor Corp 7203.T , he added. 

"These companies would come under the scope of our legislation," said the
spokesman, Charles Walker. 

On May 6, the council's Committee on Governmental Operations plans to to
hold a hearing on the bill. The measure would go further than a ban approved
last month by the Clinton Administration, the council said, in prepared
remarks, as its bill would not only ban the city's future dealings with
banks and contractors who do business in Burma, but prohibit agencies from
using vendors who have a business relationship with or investments in Burma,
during any contracts with the city. 

A six-month grace period would give firms time to wind down their affairs in
Burma, Walker said, adding Citibank, which helps underwrite the city's debt,
was in the process of doing so. A spokesman for Citibank, Richard Howe,
noted that the firm did not have an office in that country and said the firm
needed to review the bill's language. 

The council has said it took up the measure against Burma because of alleged
human rights violations by the nation's State Law and Order Restoration
Council, which seized power in 1988 after crushing
a prodemocracy uprising. 

Peter Vallone, the City Council Speaker, tied the council's latest proposal
to other measures the body has taken against countries it wants to prod. 

"The Council undertook similar actions to encourage the governments of South
Africa and Northern Ireland to do the right thing," he said, in prepared
remarks. Adding the council's recent threat to take action against Swiss
banks helped push Berne to agree to make restitution to victims of the
Holocaust, he added: "We can and we will use our legislative capabilities to
help restore democracy in Burma." 

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

REUTER: IBM  SAYS BURMA OFFICE IS "DORMANT"
May 5, 1997 [abridged]

NEW YORK, May 5 (Reuter) - International Business Machines Corp on Monday
said it has not done any business through its Burma office for years, but
could not immediately say if a ban planned by the New York City council
would include it. 

"I haven't seen the resolution, but if it's aimed against companies
currently doing sales and marketing in Burma, we would not be affected,"
said a company spokesman, Fred McNeese. "We've had a dormant office there
for a number of years, but we don't do any business there," he said, adding
the computer-maker also had no manufacturing plants in that country. 

IBM was one of a number of companies that a spokesman for the council,
Charles Walker, said could be affected by the ban. 

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

FEER: CHINESE MORE FLEXIBLE TOWARD BURMESE EXILES -- RESULT OF SANCTIONS?
May 8, 1997

Chinese intelligence officials have begun to take a closer interest in the
activities of anti-Rangoon Burmese exiles in Yunnan.  Until a few months
ago, the Chinese tolerated the dissidents' presence in several southern
border towns, but maintained links only with pro-government Burmese in the
province.  Now, local officers in Yunnan frequently meet the dissident
exiles to ask them their opinions.  While no one is suggesting an official
shift in Beijing's Burma policy, some circles in China now evidently prefer
to keep their options open.  One reason could be increasing uncertainty
about the future of the ruling junta in Rangoon, which has been slapped with
sanctions by Washington.  It is also possible that with the death of
patriarch Deng Xiaoping, Chinese officials are considering different
opinions in a number of fields.  Either way, Beijing's approach to Burma's
internal problems has definitely become more flexible, sources in Yunnan
assert.

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

NATION: BURMESE SEIZE HEROIN REFINERY NEAR BORDER
May 6, 1997
Associated Press

RANGOON-After a shootout with 30 gang  members near the Chinese border,
Burmese troops and anti-narcotics police captured a heroin refinery and
seized 35 kilogrammes of the drug , a state-run newspaper said
yesterday . 

In a two-day sweep of the area around Namlin village in Hsenwi Township, 740
kilometres northeast of Rangoon , officials also confiscated 320kg of opium
and 3,000 gallons of acetic anhydride ,a chemical used to refine opium into
heroin . 

The newspaper New Light of Myanmar did not say  whether there were any
casualties in the fighting nor how many gang members were arrested or had
escaped . It also did not indicate which ethnic group the gang belonged to.
The area is populated by Shan, Wa and Kokang Chinese minorities who all have
,been involved in the drug trade. 

Burma is the largest producer of opium and heroin in world. During the past
decade , the main trafficking route out of Burma has shifted from Thailand
to China's Yunnan province .

Wa, Kokang Chinese and Shan groups, who were all fighting for autonomy for
decades and funded their struggle through narcotics trafficking, have signed
cease-fires with the government in Rangoon and their leaders are attending
the military-run constitutional convention. 

Burmese drug enforcement  officials have said they are giving these groups a
few years grace to stop opium growing and trafficking, but have displayed
some impatience that production is rising. 

State -run papers also said another 33 kg of heroin was seized in Shan state
on April 9, when anti-drug squad officers intercepted a car.(TN)

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

CFOB: SEAGRAM COMPANY STOPS SOURCING WHISKY TO BURMA
May 1, 1997
cfob@xxxxxxxxxxx

Canadian Friends of Burma 
145 Spruce St, Suite 206, Ottawa, ON K1R 6P1 Canada. 
tel: 613 237 8056 fax: 613 563 0017 email cfob@xxxxxxx

May 1, 1997

For immediate release:

                  Seagram Company stops sourcing whisky to Burma

Following discussions with Canadian Friends of Burma, Montreal-based Seagram
Company Limited announced that on April 30, 1997, it terminated its
distribution of Seagram brands to Burma.

Seagram had been sourcing its Chivas Regal scotch whisky to Burma through
Tanyaung International, a distributership owned by Thein Tun. Tun, a top
Burmese businessman whose empire has close corporate ties with
SLORC-controlled companies and who has denounced the democracy movement in
pro-SLORC rallies, was also PepsiCo's partner in Burma prior to its divestment. 

Canadian Friends of Burma welcomes Seagram's decision and views the move to
cut corporate ties with Burma as a responsible one. As the human rights
situation in Burma deteriorates and the Burmese regime continues to brutally
crack down on the internal democracy movement, Seagram is joining a growing
list of companies who have decided to pull their operations out of that
country, thus answering the appeals of the Burmese democracy movement not to
invest in Burma until dramatic change occurs and rule of law and respect for
human rights are established.

The State Law and Order Restoration Council relies on international
investment to maintain its expanding army and to try and achieve an
international profile. In the end, multilateral economic sanctions are
needed to cut off the flow of hard currency to the SLORC and send a strong
message to this regime. Canadian Friends of Burma calls on the Canadian
government to impose immediate economic sanctions on Burma.

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

REUTER: DIARRHOEA KILLS DOZENS OF KAREN REFUGEES IN CAMPS 
May 5, 1997

MAESOT, Thailand, May 5 (Reuter) - At least 26 Karen refugees who fled
fighting in Burma and sought refuge in camps along the western Thai border
have died from diarrhoea over the past two months, refugee officials said on
Monday. 

Twenty refugees who got diarrhoea died in camps in southwestern Rachaburi
province while six others died in a camp in Nu Hpo camp in Umphang district
in Tak province in March and April, Robert Htwe, chairman of the Karen
Refugees Committee, told Reuters. 

A western relief worker confirmed the reports of the diarrhoea-related
deaths but said the problem, due to poor living conditions in the camps, was
now under control. 

The refugees fled into Thailand in March after the Burmese military launched
an offensive against the rebel Karen National Union (KNU) guerrilla bases
inside Burma. 

The KNU, formed in 1948 to seek greater autonomy from the Burmese government
for the eastern Karen state, is one of the few rebel groups that is still
fighting against the ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC). 

Thai health officials were not available to confirm the reports as Monday
was a public holiday in the country. 

Refugee officials said an outbreak of malaria was feared as the rainy season
approached later this month. 

Some 7,000 Karen refugees in three camps in Rachaburi province were forced
to sleep on the ground in makeshift shelters covered with plastic sheets
because Thai authorities would not allow them to cut trees to build
above-ground structures, Htwe said. 

Nearly 100,000 Karen refugees, family members and followers of the KNU have
been living in sprawling camps near the Thai border with Burma since 1984.

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

THAILAND TIMES: ARMY SENDS PROTEST BURMESE JUNTA OVER CAMP ATTACK
May 5, 1997
By Assawin Pinitwong

TAK : Thailand's Thai- Burmese Border Committee sent a letter to protest
Burma's frequent violations of Thai sovereignty and to demand the return of
property stolen by an unidentified forces which invaded the Ban Ta Per Poo
refugee camp last Sunday, according to a senior army official.

Col Suwit Manmuan, commander of the 4th Special Infantry Force, said
yesterday the warning was addressed to the Burmese military who must be held
accountable for such attacks, including the destruction of the camp and the
robbery of over 150,000 baht worth of property from Umphang's Ban Ta Per Poo
refugee camp last Sunday.

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

THAILAND TIMES: REFUGEE SHELTER TO BE MOVED
May 5, 1997

Army chief Gen Chettha Thanajaro insisted on moving the temporary
shelter for Karen refugees away from the border in spite of the
Interior Ministry's opposition.

Gen Chettha made it clear he wanted the centre moved another 10 kilometres
into the border, saying its present location close to
the border has made it prone to attacks.

"The interior officials responsible for the centre's operation are partly to
blame for the frequent torching of the centre," the army chief said, without
further comment.

The army claimed that it will be able to provide better security if it were
allowed to manage the shelter.

The army and the Interior Ministry representatives will soon meet to
determine if . the shelter should be moved and to also discuss if the army
should take over its administration.

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

BKK POST: BORDER BATTLE OVER MOEI RIVER PROJECT
May 6, 1997
Supamart Kasem, Mae Sot, Tak

Thailand told Burma yesterday it would continue to build an embankment along
the Moei River, saying that construction did not encroach on Burmese territory.

It was the second time Thailand had responded to Burmese protests about
construction along the river, which forms the border between the countries.

The Burmese claim the concrete embankment will destroy a new island in the
Moei River, which formed after a channel was dug in the waterway.

Burma's Myawaddy province sent a letter of protest to Thai authorities last
week, and another letter yesterday.

Suvit Maenmoen, chairman of the Thailand's Local Thai-Burmese Border
Committee, said in a reply that the embankment aimed to prevent riverbank
erosion which could damage house and government offices.

The embankment was built on Thai soil and did not intrude on the new island
or the new channel, Col Suvit said. (BP)

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

REUTER: COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS NAMES 10 'ENEMIES' 
May 3, 1997

NEW YORK, May 3 (Reuter) - The Committee to Protect Journalists on Saturday
released a list of 10 people it has singled out as ``1997 enemies of the
press,'' including the heads of state of Albania, Burma, China, Cuba and
Nigeria. 

William A. Orme, Jr., CPJ's executive director, said in a statement that the
10 had ``deliberately engaged in hundreds of press freedom violations
ranging from censorship, harassment and physical attack to imprisonment and
even assassination.'' 

The list is as follows: Algeria's Antar Zouabri, head of the militant Armed
Islamic Group; China's President Jiang Zemin; Cuban President Fidel Castro;
Nigeria's leader, General Sani Abacha; Turkish Prime Minister Neemettin
Erbakan; Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko; Ethiopian
Prime Minister Meles Zenawi; Indonesian President Suharto; Burma's Senior
General Than Shwe, and; Albanian President Sali Berisha. 

``These 10 individuals are characterised by their relentless hostility to
the very concept of a free and independent press in their own countries and
around the world,'' said Orme. 

The New York-based CPJ is an independent non-profit organisation that
documents violations of press freedom.

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

FEER: FRIENDS AND FEARS
May 8, 1997
By Michael Vatikiotis in Bangkok

Upset by U.S. sanctions against Burma, Asean is growing closer to China. But
it remains suspicious of Beijing-and dependent on Washington.

The Cold War may be a thing of the past, but superpower rivalry is alive and
well. For some early signs of a likely arena of contention, look to the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations, where China and the United States
have become entangled in the contest over Burma's admission to the
seven-member regional grouping.

China, mounting a new drive to build cordial ties with Asean, supports the
group's plans to welcome Burma, Laos and Cambodia into the fold. But, by
imposing a ban on American investment in Burma, the U.S. has sent a strong
message to Asean against Burma's admission to the association.

Judging from initial reaction in the region, the American move may have the
exact opposite effect, pushing Asean to defy Washington-thus playing to
China's advantage in the region.

But when it looks at the big picture, Asean finds itself caught between a
rock and a hard place. As much as Washington's actions offend collective
nationalist feelings, the American security umbrella and the U.S. market
remain vital to the region. At the same time, China's overtures, although
tempting, cannot be taken at face value.

Nevertheless, the U.S. sanctions have generated a mood of defiance in
Southeast Asian capitals. The American ban will "weaken the case against
Burma's admission," says Kusuma Sintwongse of the Institute of International
and Strategic studies at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University: Asean's
reaction "is a sort of defiant position vis-a-vis the West," she adds.

Demonstrating this defiance, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad was
quoted as saying: "We're going to work very hard to get [Burma] into Asean."

Enter China. Normally quiet on Asean affairs, Beijing weighed in quickly
with support for the association's stance.

"Isolating and excluding Burma will only increase tensions and aggravate
confrontation and will benefit no side," a spokesman from the Chinese
Foreign Ministry in Beijing said.

And that's by no means the only indication of Beijing's desire to get chummy
with Asean. Consider the mid-April dialogue between China and Asean held at
the mountain resort of Huangshan in China's Anhui province.

At previous annual dialogues, China stubbornly refused to discuss security
concerns in the South China Sea, where Beijing's territorial claims overlap
with those of Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei and the Philippines. But in
Huangshan there was a sea-change: Beijing agreed for the first time to talk
about Asean members' claims in the South China Sea, and offered to frame a
code of conduct governing ties with Asean.

Encouraged by the gesture, Asean expressed a measure of sympathy for China.
Indonesia and Vietnam-an erstwhile foe-praised China for fending off a vote
on human rights engineered by Western states at the United Nations. And both
sides agreed that certain Western powers were trying to drive a wedge
between China and Asean.

Behind the platitudes and public posturing, analysts detect that China is
wooing Asean to counterbalance its increasingly troubled relations with
Washington.

Long-standing Sino-American differences over human rights, non-proliferation
and trade disputes have now been compounded by suspicion that the Chinese
government tried to influence last year's U.S. elections. One influential
U.S. columnist has even called for the subversion of China.

Beijing is, therefore, actively seeking friends elsewhere. "The Chinese
don't want to be encircled. They would like to have safeguards," says Jusuf
Wanandi of the Centre of Strategic and International Studies in Jakarta.
Chinese President Jiang Zemin's visit to Moscow strengthened another element
of the "multipolar" layering of Beijing's international relations.

Closer to home, China's diplomatic dexterity serves a clear purpose,
believes Scoot Snyder at the Institute of Peace, a government-funded
think-tank in Washington. "China wants to put the South China Sea on the
back burner while it deals with the higher priorities of Hong Kong and
cross-straits relation," he says. Smooth relations with Asean could help
Beijing combat Western pressure on these issues.

However, the sugar-coated posturing on both sides does not necessarily
reflect a fundamental shift in the balance of power-nor a change in China's
ultimate objectives.

Barely 10 days after the Huangshan meeting, the Philippines navy sighted
Chinese warships in disputed waters around the Spratly islands. Both Manila
and Hanoi expressed their concern over the development.

In the long term, the apparent accord between Asean and China is unlikely to
erase regional suspicions of Beijing. "We are mindful of the need to assess
the relationship based on China's actions," cautions a senior Thai Foreign
Ministry official in Bangkok.

Nor does the divergence with Washington over Burma, and more cordial ties
with China, reduce Asean's reliance on the US. "Of course we must engage
China, but there are more limited possibilities. The US is still our largest
trading partner," says Wanandi.

Despite some sympathy for China in facing US pressure, Asean has been
careful not to side with China in its call for a withdrawal of US forces
from East Asia. Several Asean countries hold joint exercises with the US and
allow the American 7th Fleet repair and other facilities.

By imposing sanctions on Burma, however, Washington may have made a tactical
error, one  that could tilt events away from US interests in the immediate
future. "It's totally counterproductive," says Rodolfo Severino,
undersecretary at the Philippine Foreign Ministry. "Even if we were disposed
to bend on Burma, how can we now?"

Thus, local lobbies which have been working against Burma's admission in the
region now see their chances of success diminished. By imposing sanctions,
"Washington offended Asean and put us on the defensive," argues M.Rajaretnam
of the Institute of  Policy Studies in Kuala Lumpur, who favours delaying
Burma's membership.

A decision on Burma's admission may now be put off until the Asean summit in
December, senior Asean officials say privately. Nevertheless, the
association remains committed to bringing Burma in. In a recent interview
with the Review, Indonesian Foreign Minister Ali Alatas spelled out why
Burma's admission could not be judged using internal political criteria and
conditions for Burma's entry which have never been applicable for other
members in the past," he said. As for the chances of Burma's membership,
Alatas said: "I'll be very frank. It looks like this year." (FEER)

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

ASIAWEEK: IN THE NAME OF MONEY
May 9, 1997
Dominic Faulder

Slorc, the Thais and two multi-national oil giants are building a gas
pipeline. The Karen are in the way - and that's just too bad.

A gray Sunday morning, and all is quiet at Ban-I-Thong, a collection of
corrugated iron and timber houses on a precipitous section of the
Thai-Myanmar border. A rickety stockade marks the frontier; a wooden barrier
projects sharp stakes, defenses best suited to elephant warfare.

There are no pill-boxes with machine guns or artillery emplacements, just
helipads. Light mists skim the ridge, occasionally obscuring the Thai and
Myanmar flags fluttering side by side.

At this point along the rugged 2,400-km border, the Thai and Myanmar
militaries stand toe-to-toe in peace, the enmity of centuries set aside.
Both sides are solicitous, intent upon building cross-border confidence. The
reason for this sudden friendliness: mutual business interests. From far
below, I can hear the clink of chains and the roar of heavy machinery.

Men are starting work on a pipeline. It is being built by an international
consortium comprising the state-owned Myanma Oil and Gas Enterprise, the
Petroleum Authority of Thailand's exploration arm and two oil
multinationals, France's Total and America's Unocal. Once completed next
year, the pipeline will carry natural gas from the Yadana field some 400km
offshore in the Andaman Sea to a new power station 270km inside Thailand.

An enormous, sandy-haired man is scanning the scene below, from time to time
fussing over a two-way radio. He is a former South African soldier. Now he
works for Ordsafe, an American security outfit. He is here for America's
Texaco, a company not in the consortium. Somewhere below, a Texaco survey
team is figuring out how another pipe can be laid along-side Total's. By
1999, the second pipeline is supposed to carry gas from a smaller field.

"I hear this [Total] project has attracted bad publicity," says the affable
South African. He is a master of understatement. We are gazing at what is
easily Southeast Asia's most controversial infrastructure project. Its many
critics say Myanmar's military junta, the State Law and Order Restoration
Council, will stop at nothing to ensure the pipeline gets built. Even if
that means stamping hard on anyone in the way. Or weathering economic
sanctions, such as those imposed in April by U.S. President Bill Clinton.

The stakes are high. Consider Unocal's recent decision to open a "twin
cooperate headquarters" in Malaysia. That may help it evade Clinton's ban on
American investment in Myanmar (though the sanctions may well torpedo
Texaco's plan for a second pipeline).

Slorc-directly or otherwise- stands to earn $200 million a year from the
pipeline, and plainly it is prepared to ignore worldwide opprobrium. "I
cannot see that the pipeline is going to benefit the public at large," says
Myanmar's voice of conscience, Aung San Suu Kyi.

"What it will do is put money in the pockets of the authorities. This could
be used for buying weapons or building extravagant hotels. That is not going
to help the ordinary people of Burma." No one knows that better than those
unlucky enough to be in the pipeline's path-especially the Karen people.
Given that they account for at least a tenth of Myanmar's 48 million
citizens, presumably they deserve some say in their future.

A minority group shunted aside by "progress" is not unusual. In this case,
however, history and geography have made things extra-complicated. For
starters, armed Karen groups have been battling the central authorities for
nearly half a century.

Until early 1995, the powerful Karen National Liberation Army controlled
much of the border with Thailand, charging a 7% tax on smuggled goods to
bankroll its struggle. The leaders of the group are mainly Christians who
once wanted to secede from the mostly Buddhist country, but would now settle
for a degree of autonomy.

Unlike most rebel groups in Myanmar, the KNLA was sufficiently well-armed,
organized and confident to scorn any peace treaty with Slorc. It obtained
weapons in Thailand, where authorities generally looked the other way when
rebel fighters regrouped on the wrong side of the border.

Each dry season, the Myanmar military would hurl its troops, many of them
boys, against the battle-hardened Karen. Each year the Karen would defend
their jungle redoubts. When the rains began, the army would withdraw,
leaving the Karen in their malarial barracks to prepare for the next
dry-season offensive. So it went, year after year.

The tide began to turn when Thai and Myanmar officials recognized the area's
commercial potential. In late 1988, Thai army chief Gen Chavalit
Yongchaiyudh, now the prime minister, flew to Yangon with a planeful of Thai
reporters and embraced his Slorc "brothers". Fishing and timber concessions
quickly followed to Thai companies, many with military connections.

The Karen found themselves in an economic vice. This decade, the oil
companies entered the picture. The junta wants the money that the pipeline
will bring; the Thais need the electricity. With so much at stake, an armed
insurrection could no longer be tolerated.

This became clear in 1995 when Karen fighters launched an attack along the
pipeline route and killed five workers and wounded eleven others. The
repercussions were grave. Twelve Karen reportedly were executed after the
attack on the pipeline crew.

Since then, the military balance has shifted inexorably in Slorc's favour.
Indeed, no central Myanmar government has been more successful in projecting
influence over border areas since the Union of Burma was founded in 1948.
One by one, Karen strongholds have fallen before the Slorc onslaught. The
army easily overran the newest Karen headquarters in late February. Even Bo
Mya, the veteran Karen guerrilla leader, has fled north and is talking
retirement.

In February, Myanmar TV showed Slorc deputy chairman Gen Maung Aye stomping
on a Karen flag after a company of fighters had surrendered. He made the
Karen commander kneel before him and apologize. The general's gesture of
contempt was sure to radicalize some Karen not involved in the insurgency,
but the military junta clearly smells victory.

Maung Aye says the Karen rebels should be finished by July, when Myanmar is
due to join Asean. Front-line officers expect to "mop up" by the end of the
1998 dry season - coincidentally about the time the pipeline is due for
completion. With the Karen National Liberation Army teetering, refugees are
pouring into Thailand. In 1988 there were about 20,000 along the border;
today there are six times as many - and the Thais are proving to be fickle
hosts, letting some refugees stay and pushing others back.

At a noodle shop along the southern border, a scruffy man with a wispy beard
sketches a map showing the site of a new refugee camp. He describes the
condition of the refugees, mostly women and kids, with unaffected sympathy.

"They have nothing to eat at home," he says. "Very bad." He tugs out an ID
card that reveals him to be a Thai Special Forces officer. Without his map,
there would be no finding the camp and its 2,500-plus refugees. Down a dusty
track and across two small streams, the road is barred by Thai rangers. They
are friendly but adamant - no access without a special pass.

Further north in Tak province, the refugees are more accessible. Mae Hla is
the largest refugee camp along the border. It houses 26,000 Karen, having
recently absorbed two other camps: Its occupants believe there is safety in
numbers.

Here, Pastor Simon worries about the future of his children. At 49, the
Karen Christian is as old as the insurgency. Pictures of the Thai royal
family hang in his hurt; the Karen know how important it is to show respect
to their hosts.

"We're very vulnerable to attack," says Pastor Simon. In January, a group of
men crossed the border and tried to torch Mae Hla. Sixteen huts burned down
before Thai border police and Karen fighters drove off the intruders. 
Similar incursions up to six km inside Thailand have almost wiped out other
camps. In one incident more than half of 2,500 huts were razed. In another,
145 houses burned to the ground at the Sho Klo and Maekier camps near Mae
Sot; 500 people were left homeless.

The way the attacks were orchestrated says a lot  about  how Slorc is waging
this dirty little war. Eyewitnesses claim  that a breakaway Karen faction
bankrolled by the junta took part in the cross-border raids.

The renegade group has its genesis in a typically subversive Slorc tactic.
In 1994, the junta planted an activist abbot named U Thuzana in a Karen
monastery. He managed to set the Buddhist and animist rank-and-file against
the mostly Christian leadership. 

As a result, up to 400 fighters joined Slorc. Later, they led government
soldiers straight to the Karen base camp. It was captured, and other camps
followed suit. The Karen fighters, now numbering perhaps 2,000 and low on
ammunition, have been on the run ever since.

In March, Thai army chief Gen Chettha Thanajaro went to the Friendship
Bridge that will soon connect Thailand to Myanmar and publicly embraced Gen
Maung Aye, Slorc's deputy chairman. The bonhomie was a tonic for business
interests but made refugees nervous.

They fear any accommodation between the two militaries will come at their
expense. They may be right. It was the general's second meeting this year. A
month earlier they got together at the Myanmar border town of Tachilek,
which is linked to Thailand's Mae Sai by a two-lane bridge.

Not long after, the Thai army reportedly forced several thousand refugees
back into Myanmar. Some also were turned away at Thong Phaboom, near where
the pipeline will cross the border. The same thing happened at Bongti, where
a new road will connect Thailand to the Andaman sea. How the Thai military
treats the Karen refugees seems to depend largely on whether or not they are
close to an infrastructure project.

When Slorc is too heavy-handed, Thai officials feel bound to react. After
the January attack on the Mae Hla camp where Pastor Simon lives, the foreign
ministry called in Myanmar Ambassador Hla Maung. He emerged unchastened. 

"The Thai government is not expressing concern," he said. "We did not
discuss in detail how to solve the border problem. Repatriating the Karen
refugees, though, must be the first step. We want to see the removal of the
camps from Thailand."

At Huay Kraloke, 14 km from the Friendship Bridge, it is immediately clear
why the Karen are in no hurry to go home. Much of the fire-stormed camp
looks like an over-size ash tray. Refugees say the whole place would have
gone up had Thai-fire-fighters not arrived. 

In one of the remaining houses sits the vice chair of the Karen Refugee
Committee, Mary Oh, 63. An avid pipe-smoker, she is an indomitable soul who
once played right-wing for a football team. Oh considers herself a "Karen
Joan of Arc," and has a disconcerting habit of bursting into song. "We're
not intending to stay here forever," she says. "If there were genuine peace
in Burma, we would go back tonight. We look forward to cake, not the whip or
fire."

At her feet sit the widows of three Karen farmers. The women are numbed by
predicaments that leave them beyond tears. Naw Myi, 26, has three children
clinging to her, the eldest Mu Ker Htee, 5. 

In December, Naw Myi's husband, 28-year-old Par Pya, a farmer with no
connection to the Karen rebels, tried to beg off sick as a military porter.
Shortly, she says, more than 100 soldiers surrounded their house.

An officer nicknamed Captain Sparrow watched his men lynch the young father.
With a rifle stock they broke Par Pya's legs, then his arms and finished him
with two shots. According to Naw Myi, little Mu Ker Htee saw it all.

"She screamed and cried," says her mother. Terrified neighbours did not dare
move the body until the next day. Not long after, there were reports that
3,000 porters had been dragooned for an impending offensive.

Most came from towns well inside Myanmar. Forced portering is standard
operating procedure for the military. Groups of starving men and boys who
escape, or have been released in the middle of nowhere, regularly appear at
the border. The bodies of the less fortunate sometimes float down the Moei
and Salween rivers.

Meantime, human rights workers say minority villages are being relocated for
a variety of security and economic reasons. The military is said to be
trying to contain villagers and prevent embarrassing tell-tale exoduses into
Thailand.

The latest controversy surrounds the certain of the million-hectare
Myinmolekat Nature Reserve south of the pipeline corridor. 

New York's World Conservation Society and Washington's Smithsonian Institute
are under fire over a project that may involve wholesale village relocations.

On a bright day, one can look down the pipeline corridor from Ban-I-Thong
almost as far as  the Andaman Sea. On this murky Sunday in March, however,
the sky has obscured the high ground where more than 10,000 troops are
scattered along the route.

This is the most secure zone in a country in one of the tightest military
grips on Earth. Total says the figure is fantasy. I board a helicopter and
can see little evidence of such a robust presence. Nevertheless, Myanmar
soldiers certainly cleared the corridor, and by most accounts were
none-too-gentle.

As a result, key players in the pipeline consortium have been named as
defendants in a California class-action suit. They face 19 charges, such as
crimes against humanity, torture, violence against women and wrongful death.
The case may hinge on proof of "vicarious liability" - that is, guilt by
association.

Even if the consortium did not knowingly use forced labour, it cannot be
unaware of it nearby. Consider the new freight-and-passenger railway from Ye
to Tavoy. It actually bisects the pipeline.

Human rights types call it the "Second Death Railway" - a reference to the
line Allied prisoners built during World War II. The activists say the
tracks are being laid with forced labour, but not a soul can be seen when I
fly over.

Security along the corridor is low-key tight. Workers do not live inside
mine-ringed compounds, as has been alleged. Critics of the project say the
consortium has used forced labour. There are allegations that children have
worked the pipeline.

But clearly kids and unskilled laborers would be incapable of driving the
heavy machinery brought in to lay the massive 4.5-ton, 12-meter sections of
pipe. To be sure, the consortium is in full public-relations mode. Total has
committed $6 million over three years for schools, agricultural projects and
health programmes. "We cannot imagine working in the area and ignoring the
people," says Total personnel manager Sandy MacKay. "We cannot build the
pipeline and simply walk away."

Most of the villages in the corridor are inhabited by the Mon people. But
Eindayaza, located near the new railway, is entirely Karen. Slorc officers
say residents still have ties with the rebels.

That many explain the reports of a nearby army garrison that withdraws when
journalists like me show up. "The villagers have to bribe the soldiers to
get a one-week pass," says Kay Hsaw Wa (White Elephant), a Karen who helped
research Total Denial, a critical report on the project.

"Normally, it's three bottles of alcohol and two chickens." Nai Rot Sa,
chief of the New Mon State party, says the army has been extorting money
from villagers near the pipeline to hire cheap labour. "During the [press]
visits, all the abuse stopped," he said. "But as soon as they left,
everything returned to, normal." Well, as normal as it gets along the border.

The embattled pipeline consortium can take credit for shedding light on a
situation it did not create but that has long been mostly ignored. The
Clinton sanctions may make Texaco think twice about building its pipeline.
But they will not scare off non-American companies. Nor will the sanctions
help the Karen. For them it has all come too late. (AW)

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

THAILAND TIMES: ROJANA TO INVEST IN BURMESE PROJECT
May 6, 1997

BANGKOK: Rojana Industrial Park Plc (ROJNA) has signed a contract
to invest US$14 million in an infrastructure project in Burma Commercial
Attache's Advisor in Rangoon Srirat Suwan said.

He said ROJNA's investment would be concentrated in the Hlaing Thar Yar
Industrial Park industrial estate area of Burma.

"ROJNA' s infrastructure project is very useful for foreign investors who
invest in Burma because Burma still has insufficient infrastructure projects
especially in relation to electricity, water, and telecommunications," he said.

Furthermore, the company's project will help to create more jobs in Burma,
as well as helping to encourage industrial development. This will benefit
other new investors who want to invest in Burma because they will be able to
rent land for investment purposes more easily.

ROJNA has allocated $14 million for the construction of the infrastructure
project in the Hlaing Thar Yar Industrial Park Phase 1, covering 250 acres.
Construction will begin at the end of the year and will be completed within
two years.

Construction of the second phase covering 200 acres will begin immediately
after the first phase of the project has been completed.

The project represents the third such venture between foreign companies and
the Burmese government to develop the country's industrial estates .

Previously, the Burmese government signed a joint venture contract with the
Japanese-based firm Mitsui & Co to invest $12 million baht. The project is
now 80 percent complete.

Further investment came from the Singapore based firm Sinmardev
International Pte, which invested $ 166.1 million in the Thanlyin-Kyauktan
Industrial Zone.

Meanwhile, the Malaysian based company Genting Sanyen Berhad,
together with the Marubeni Corporation of Japan is currently negotiating
with the Burmese government to construct and develop new industrial estates
in Thanlyin-Kyauktan, Dagon Myothit, and Insein Daningon.

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