[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
BurmaNet News May 10, 1997
------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
----------------------------------------------------------
The BurmaNet News: May 10, 1997
Issue #717
HEADLINES:
==========
THE NATION: BURMESE POLITICIAN RESIGNS
WASHINGTON POST: SLORC RESPONSE TO EDITORIAL
THE NATION: ASEAN EXTENDS TARIFF DEADLINE
THE NATION: MP BACKS CAMBODIA'S ASEAN BID
THE NATION: THAILAND EYES TRANSPORT PACT WITH BURMA
THE NATION: THE NEW BURMA ROAD BUILDERS
JAPAN TIMES: ALL QUIET ON THE THAI-MYANMAR BORDER
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THE NATION: BURMESE POLITICIAN RESIGNS
May 9, 1997 AP
Rangoon - Another member of Burma's democratically elected parliament, which
the military government never allowed to meet, has resigned, the state-run
New Light of Myanmar reported yesterday.
Since last year, more than 30 members of parliament have resigned, all
belonging to Aung San Suu Kyi's political party which won 82 per cent of the
seats in a 1990 election.
Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner, has said the military government
is coercing the representatives into resigning as part of a crackdown
against her democratic movement.
The stepped-up repression prompted US President Bill Clinton to invoke
economic sanctions against Burma's military regime on April 22. (TN)
*******************************************************
WASHINGTON POST: SLORC RESPONSE TO EDITORIAL
May 8, 1997
I have lived and worked in the U.S. long enough to appreciate the
American penchant for truth and spirit of fair-play. I therefore find the
Washington Post editorial, " When Sanctions Make Sense" (April 24,
1997) most appalling. In your headstrong rush to support the Clinton
administration's decision to impose economic sanctions on Myanmar, you
not only ignore historical precedent but also fail to check the facts in
portraying Aung San Suu Kyi as " democratically elected ". This is
nothing less than a disservice to your readers, and to your countrymen at
large.
Your support for sanctions is apparently based on the assumption
that there are widespread human rights violations in Myanmar and that
you have the moral responsibility to act to end those abuses and support
legitimately elected governments. Should the Post not have checked the
facts before endorsing the unsubstantiated allegations? Central to any
assessment of the proper policy toward Myanmar is an understanding of
the conditions that prevail there today. The government is endeavouring to
strengthen the unity of the 135 national groups that make up the
country, rebuilding its infrastructure, and setting the country on the
path of economic development. It launched a series of economic reforms
aimed at transforming the inefficient planned economy into a
market-oriented one. Private investment and domestic entrepreneurial
activity has been opened to direct foreign investment. Since the
promulgation of the foreign investment law in 1988, foreign investment
has climbed to US $6.05 billion. The economic reforms have led to
discernible GDP growth, reflecting increased employment opportunities
and better living standards. The pace of economic activity has quickened,
and, in addition to attracting foreign investment, the new economic
atmosphere has encouraged more and more expatriates to return to resettle
and to do more business.( The U.S. is currently the fourth largest investor
in Myanmar, with investments totalling $582.07 millions as of March 31,
1997.)
The Government has negotiated successfully the return to the
legal fold of 15 armed groups that had been challenging successive
governments, leaving only one, the KNU, in armed opposition. The
Government continues to leave the door open to that group which after
four rounds of talks last year, unilaterally ended the negotiation. Who
cannot, save those who see only a hole in a doughnut, welcome such
unprecedented achievements?
With regard to the reference that Aung San Suu Kyi is a "
democratically elected leader " I should like to put the record straight.
Aung San Suu Kyi was never a candidate for the 1990 elections which
were held to choose representatives to draft principles for a new
constitution. To claim that she was elected would tantamount to
deceiving the public. In keeping with the election laws which were
established at the time of our independence from Britain, and which are
known to all political parties, no citizen married to a foreigner is
eligible to be a Representative. Thus Aung San Suu Kyi who is married to
Mr. Michael Aris, a British citizen and who resided in Britain all her
adult life, save for the 2 years period prior to 1990 was not eligible to
stand for election. I am sure you will agree with me that every country
has its own good reasons to lay down elections laws as it sees fit. The
U.S. Constitution, for example, clearly stipulates that " No person shall
be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five
years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States. .." or "
No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of
thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the United States..."and
"No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United
States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be
eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible
to that Office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five
years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States ".
Given the findings of the considerable research carried out on
sanctions, I find your conclusion " rarely has a nation been more
deserving of economic sanction ", contrived. First and foremost, the
Clinton administration's decision smacks of hypocrisy coming as it does at
a time when the President has not been able to act on analogous
situations. It is unconvincing why Myanmar should stand so starkly apart
from other regimes. The political system in some of the U.S. allies is not
notable for their concern with individual liberties. Secondly, the chances
that unilateral sanctions imposed by the United States would have a
measurable impact on Myanmar is nil. Eighty percent of Myanmar's trade
is with other Asian countries and any void that US may leave in the wake
of the sanctions will be quickly filled by Asian investors.
It should be noted that unilateral sanctions are particularly
ineffective. One needs only look at US policies toward Cuba, Iraq and
Libya. What about South Africa? Myanmar is not South Africa. There are
crucial differences. Myanmar is undergoing important change and
transformation. The white minority government of South Africa tried to
maintain the status quo. Myanmar on the other hand, is moving rapidly
towards a market economy and regional integration. The Government is
moving away from self-imposed isolation of the 60s, 70s, and 80s, and is
seeking to uplift the living standard of the people by opening its doors.
Most importantly, in contrast to the broad support enjoyed by advocates of
sanctions against South Africa under apartheid no consensus can be found
on Myanmar sanctions even in the U.S., leave alone the world.
The US lawmakers and the media should not forget their
responsibility as molders of public opinion. From the Branch Davidians to
Heaven's Gate, recent history is replete with examples of what can go
wrong when a few are allowed to poison the minds of others. In recent
years, as a result of the concerted campaign carried out by the US media
and Members of the Congress such as Senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan
and Mitch McConnell and Representatives James Leach and Dana
Rohrabacher, the situation in Myanmar has been viewed through jaundiced
eyes.
It is time to question the wisdom of the current punitive stance
towards Myanmar by the Members of Congress and the media. If you
continue to act as Applewhite by poising the minds of the public , you
will only be doing a disservice to your nation .
At a time when there is significant change and transformation in
Myanmar, when it is opening its doors, creating opportunities for other
countries to make a difference not only in the economic field but also in
other spheres, it is important for the U.S. not to be influenced by the
rhetoric of dissidents. The sooner the U.S. realizes this, the better its
chances of achieving progress on bilateral issues as well as in bringing
about positive change in Myanmar.
***********************************************
THE NATION: ASEAN EXTENDS TARIFF DEADLINE FOR NEW ENTRIES
May 9, 1997 Kyodo
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) has agreed to allow
Cambodia, Laos and Burma to postpone until 2008 the cutting of their
respective tariff rates to less than five per cent to integrate the three
into the Asean Free Trade Area (Afta) trading bloc, a Thai government
official said.
The Asean member states are seeking to fully establish by 2003 the Afta
regime, under which signatories would offer preferential tariff treatments
to each other by holding down mutual tariffs on all products to less than
five per cent.
However, the Asean members agreed to apply more lenient terms to Cambodia,
Laos and Burma in terms of the timing of meeting the requirement that Afta
members' import duties be reduced to the range between zero and five per
cent, the Commerce Ministry official said in Bangkok late on Wednesday.
"If Asean can reach a political decision to admit Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar
[Burma] in July, the time frame for Afta [tariff rule] implementation of the
three new members would be Jan 1, 2008, as economic officials agreed in a
preliminary discussion," the official said.
The official was referring to a secret agreement in March among Asean member
states and the three countries to allow the three to put of the timing of
the tariff cutbacks, at a meeting of trade officials on the Indonesian
island of Bali.
Having the three countries pledge to implement tariff cutback plans by a
definite deadline has been deemed a crucial prerequisite by Asean member
states, before Asean agrees to grant the trio membership.
The three are currently drawing up respective lists of products which they
will agree to submit to tariff cutback obligations, starting in 1998, on the
assumption that Asean will agree to admit the trio during a meeting of
association foreign ministers slated for July in Kuala Lumpur, Asean sources
said.
The official warned, however, that the three may postpone the timing of
implementing their tariff cutback programmes further if Asean members fail
to agree to admit them during the July conference.
"The time frame would be rescheduled if Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar fail to
enter Asean in July," he said.
Asean members, except Vietnam, plan to implement the tariff cutback
programmes under the Common Effective Preferential Tariff scheme for Afta by
2003. The scheme is to be implemented over a 10-year period that started on
Jan 1, 1993.
Vietnam, which joined Asean in 1995, has been given more lenient terms than
other members in implementing its tariff cutback programme, planning to do
so by 2006.
Cambodia, Laos and Burma are scheduled to submit their lists of products to
be subjected to tariff cutback programmes for endorsement by Asean economic
ministers, who will meet in Malaysia in October, the official said.
"Only a political decision" remains to be made, an analyst said in reference
to the expected accession by the three into Asean.
Voicing concern about human rights abuses in Burma, the United States
slapped economic sanctions on Burma in April, banning new American
investments in the country, although some have seen the move as aimed at
derailing the plan to admit Burma into Asean as early as July.
Asean foreign ministers will meet informally in Kuala Lumpur on May 31 to
discuss accession of the three countries in view of an assessment report now
being prepared by the Asean Secretariat, the Asean sources said.
Leaders of Asean, which currently comprises Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the
Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, want to bring in the three
countries simultaneously by the year 2000, the sources said. (TN)
*******************************************************
THE NATION: MP BACKS CAMBODIA'S ASEAN BID
May 9, 1997
Marisa Chimprabha, The Nation
CAMBODIA'S membership in Asean should not be tied to Burma even though it
has been suffering from internal political conflicts and violence often
involving two coalition parties, Democrat party said yesterday.
"Each Asean observer, including Laos, which has applied for full membership
in the grouping has its own conditions and level of preparedness," he said.
"So, their future membership in Asean should not be considered as agreed on
at an informal meeting of Asean leaders last year," he said. As a package, a
refusal by Asean to accept one country means the others could be rejected as
well.
Sukhumbhand led a 10-member private study mission to Phnom Penh from May 4
to May 7 comprising senior academics and policy-makers from Malaysia, the
Philippines, Indonesia and Singapore.
The mission met Cambodia's co-premiers Prince Norodom Ranariddh and Hun Sen
as well as senior Cambodian Cabinet members including Interior Minister Sar
Kheng and Foreign Minister Ung Huot.
Tensions in Cambodia reached a high point in April after an explosion on
March 30 killed 19 demonstrators and some of Prince Ranariddh's Funcinpec
Party MP defected to Hun Sen's Cambodia People's Party, prompting daily
attacks between the two parties.
Sukhumbhand said the team went to Phnom Penh out of concern for the
situation, as they considered themselves "friends of Cambodia".
According to statement by the team, recent developments have given rise to
growing concerns that Cambodia may be in danger of relapsing into another
round of prolonged and purposeless violence.
"Accusations and countercharges set against a background of the coming 1998
elections pose questions concerning the country's continued stability.
During the ongoing political conflict Cambodia stood alone given the UN's
shrinking role following its massive peace-keeping operation here and the
reluctance of Asean countries to assist in resolving domestic problems.
"In the past few days, Cambodia's predicament has been complicated by the
fact that some Asean leaders have publicly questioned her preparedness to
become a new Asean member on account of the worsening domestic situation,"
the statement said.
Sukhumbhand said some Asean countries now cited the internal conflicts in
Cambodia as a possible obstacle to its membership despite the fact that the
real problem is Burma's internal political situation and poor human rights
record.
"As Asean is considering the three observers as a package, the grouping
should not try to use Cambodia's internal conflicts as a possible cause for
not accepting the three. Cambodia should not become a victim of Burma which
is still administered by a military junta," he said. Sukhumbhand told The
Nation although Cambodia has been in political conflict, its leaders and
officials were working hard to restore peace and stability. (TN)
*******************************************************
THE NATION: THAILAND EYES TRANSPORT PACT WITH BURMA
May 8, 1997
THAILAND will probe Burma's readiness to establish a framework
agreement on cross-border transport during a two-day visit, beginning
today, by Transport and communication Minister Suwat Liptapanlop.
Deputy Permanent Secretary Sathien Vongvichien said that the agreement
should be in place in anticipation of the growing contacts between both
countries, particularly with the completion of the Friendship Bridge across
the Moei River at Mae Sot-Myawaddy.
Sathien said the agreement would be almost identical to the one which
government officials will sign with Laos, except with a possible allowance
for travel to and from a third country.
He said the bridge, which was completed just two days ago, will not be
operational until a mechanism to administer and maintain the bridge is in
place. Thailand and Burma last year put in place a cross-border trade
agreement.
Sathien said that during the visit, Suwat will discuss a plan to set up joint
committees at government and local levels to deal with traffic, customs,
insurance and jurisdiction issues.
Other topics include proposals to improve and extend road and railway
connections between the two countries. Thai officials will also discuss
improving the road from Myawaddi to Pha Ang and Rangoon with their
Burmese counterparts.
The Mae Sot-Myawaddi route is part of the Asian Highway being
promoted by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific.
The government last year approved a Bt300 million soft loan to Burma to
improve the road between Thachilek and Keng Tung provinces which will
link up with Thailand in the Mae Sai district of Chiang Rai.
Sathien said the government will propose that Burma boost the frequency
of flights between Bangkok and Rangoon from 12 to 14 times per week as
part of an effort to boost air transportation links among the six Mekong
River countries.
******************************
THE NATION: THE NEW BURMA ROAD BUILDERS
April 25, 1997
Thailand's Italthai is a leading player in a regional triad of forces that
involves investment, collaboration and repression. Steve Thompson
reports on the infrastructure plans and dealmaking taking place in
Rangoon.
Important development have become clear in recent months that have
dangerous implications for Burma's environment. These concern the
rapidly increasing investment by large Thai companies in Burma, and the
collaboration between the State Law and Order Restoration Council and
the Thai coalition government led by Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh. Playing
a role also are Asean leaders, and the Asian Development Bank who are
trying to promote investment in Burma as part of their constructive
engagement policy.
Italian Thai Development PLC, one of Thailand's biggest multinational
corporations, has in the past year pledged over half a billion dollars (Bt26
billion) in investment capital in Burma. The company, under executive
Premchai Karnasutra and Chaiyuth Karnasutra, has become by far the
largest Thai investor in Burma.
If projects that it is now bidding for or investigating are approved,
Italian-Thai will become the biggest single foreign investor in Burma, with
approximately a billion dollars in funds committed to projects it will be
contracted to implement. Currently the Singapore based Kuok Group is the
biggest investor, with US$660 million in holdings, mostly in tourism
related sectors.
The company, called Italthai for short, along with a few others such as the
agro-industrial giant Charoen Pokpand group, appears to be acting as a
central player in executing the Thai government's policy of constructive
engagement with the Burmese Slorc regime.
Italian Thai Development's investments in Burma focus on large scale
transport, energy, and industrial developments. It also has interests in the
development of tourism there through its majority shareholding in the
Amari Group hotel chain.
Since early 1995 Amari Group has been building a $12 million five star
hotel in Pagan. Many Burmese farmers and villagers have been summarily
ordered by Burmese military personnel to relocate from their family lands
so that the tourism hotel can be built. The company made an "up-front
payment", otherwise euphemistically known as a 'signing bonus" of over
US$2.5 million to the Slorc to undertake the project. The hotel can be
considered Italthai's pilot project in Burma.
Secret payment
Its next venture with the Slorc started on Aug 09, 1996 with the foundation
laying ceremony of the $149 million Mandalay International Airport.
Italian-Thai is both the contractor and the investor. The project attracted
controversy when the Thai Democrat Party implied in a censure debate that
then Prime Minister Banharn Silapa-archa took a huge "secret payment"
from Italian-Thai for approving a government backed loan for the project.
Eyewitnesses have reported the use of forced prisoner labour at the site.
Italthia signed its biggest deal with the Slorc in December 1996 as the
scandalplagued Banharn government was being replaced by one led by Gen
Chavalit Yongchaiyudh to build a massive cement production complex.
It is understood to involve the construction of two natural-gas fueled
cement plants with a capacity of producing 90,000 tonnes of cement per
year. Details are scarce but it seems that the plants will have a dual
function - both producing portland cement and at the same time using the
heat to generate electricity. According to press reports the project is worth
a total of $400 million. The Thai-language Poojad Karn newspaper claims
the deal is worth $521 million.
Another major deal involves the construction of a deep sea port and an
industrial estate covering hundreds of hectares at Tavoy on the long
southern arm of Burma. In the first half of 1996 a memorandum was
signed between the Thai and Burmese governments, followed by a
memorandum of understanding between Slorc and Italian-Thai to develop
the site.
A contract between the Slorc and Ital-Thai for the construction of the port
was expected to be signed by the end of March 1997. The government of
the Industrial Estates Authority of Thailand has said that the heavy cargo
handling port would cost an estimated $80 million, and the industrial
estate some $200 million.
The logging connection
The industries to be developed at the site would use natural gas from the
controversial Burma-Thai gas pipeline, or electricity generated from it.
Environmentally unfriendly industries, including timber processing
facilities and a petrochemical complex would be built at the site.
A new road between the site of the Tavoy port and the Thai border at Bong
Ti is planned. This follows a route cut by logging companies - and used by
Slorc troops in its February offensive to occupy the southern heartland of
the autonomy seeking ethnic Karen people.
Perhaps not coincidentally, the Thai government has run into a storm of
international protests after it forced back unarmed Karen male civilians
into the path of the advancing Burmese Army at Bong Ti, the planned
border crossing for the road. The Thai army then "voluntarily repatriated"
hundreds of helpless women and children who had fled the area at a place
called Suan Phung 40 kilometres further South.
Suan Phung is yet another recently proposed border crossing for a road.
Thai authorities, despite the furor about the repatriation, have reiterated
their intention to continue it "when it is safe".
Italian-Thai, in partnership with MDX Power PLC of Thailand and the
vast Japanese conglomorate Marubeni, is currently undertaking a 15 month
feasibility study to build a 100 to 200 megawatt hydro-electric dam on the
Kok River in the Shan State.
If built, most of the electricity from the dam will be delivered to the
Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. Although no recent cost
estimate for making the dam is publicly available, a 100MW dam would
cost a minimum of $120 million. However, a 1992 preliminary study for a
dam on the site done, by the Japanese quasi-governmental Electric Power
Development Corporation, calculated that it would cost $375 million. The
dam would flood a wide, fertile and scenic upland valley.
Yet another major infrastructure project Italian-Thai is bidding for is the
proposed Hanthawaddy International Airport at Pegu. The Slorc apparently
aims to replace the Rangoon Airport as the country's main terminal with
the airport at Pegu. It would cost $150 million and be similar in many
other respects to the Mandalay Airport. Pegu is 90 kilometres from the
capital of Rangoon, which along with other factors has led to scepticism
about the projects' viability.
There is some question as to whether the dam, the port, and the Pegu
airport deals will be finalised due to competition from other bidders,
security considerations, and the uncertainty of securing financing.
The Hanthawaddy International Airport construction contract is being
sought by a number of other large concerns from the region.
The Nam Kok Dam site is in an area of the Shan State that ethnic Wa
guerrillas claim as part of their territory. Despite having a ceasefire with
the Slorc, over 100 Wa and Slorc troops have died in recent clashes at Doi
Lang, a mountain that rises above the Nam Kok valley.
The Tavoy port development however seems highly likely to proceed due to
the advanced stage of the negotiations. Nevertheless, the logic of the whole
development is questionable due to the serious competition the project is
likely to face from no fewer than three other similar port developments
planned for the southern coast of Burma and the adjacent stretch of coast
in the south of Thailand.
The site of the massive Southern Seaboard port development in the
southwest of Thailand has been the subject of political intrigue as various
interest groups have maneouvred to secure agreement to have the lucrative,
but ecologically disruptive, programme located in their area.
The Slorc has begun construction of the huge Thilawa Port complex at
Rangoon, with financial and technical assistance from Chinese and
Singaporean companies. It has been alleged that some of the finance for
the Thiwala Port development has come from Asia World Ltd, a Burmese
company part owned by the son of drug kingpin Lo Hsing-han.
Another planned project in even more direct conflict with the Tavoy deep-
sea port and estate development, is a proposed container port at
Thanbyuzayat in the Mon State area, just 200 kilometres north of Tavoy.
This port would be connected to Thailand by a road to Three Pagodas Pass.
A concession for the construction of the road has already been granted by
the Slorc and work is underway. The combined cost of the Thanbyuzayat
Port and the road linking it to Thailand is set at $100 million, nearly the
same cost as the Tavoy Port alone.
The port and industrial estate development programme may become a
casualty for reasons other than the practical competition.
The struggle to gain the contracts for the lucrative infrastructure projects
is highly political. Actively behind the Thanbyuzayat port link is that
national Hiranyapreuk, and influential businessman who was a personal
advisor to former National Security Council chief Gen Charan
Kulavanijaya.
Meanwhile, the progress of the Southern Seaboard developments is in the
interest of the Democrats, the main opposition party, which has its
electoral stronghold in the south of Thailand. The Democrats exposed the
connections between Italthai and the deposed Prime Minister Banharn
Silapa-archa leading to the collapse of his administration.
These and other groups have obvious motives to try to block the Italthai
development projects at Tavoy and elsewhere.
The influence of Italthai within the now ruling Chavalit coalition may also
have waned despite its links to powerful parties within the coalition
government itself.
Italian-Thai has been battered by a string of embarrassing disclosures
relating to corrupt practices in the past six months. These include the Nong
Ngu Hao contract, the Mandalay Airport loan, a highway construction
project in Bangkok, and a land development project in the Philippines in
which Ital-Thai is said to hold a 70 per cent stake.
The Slorc, which happily does business with tainted figures such as the
drug warlords Khun Sa and Lo Hsing-han, the Canadian mining magnate
Robert Friedland and assorted disreputable logging company tycoons, is
unlikely to be put off by the record of a group such as Italian Thai
Development.
Burma may be becoming more attractive to Thai investors following the
installation of the Chavalit government in Thailand in December of 1996.
Since then the Thai government has sought to play up its rapidly
expanding trade and investment links with Burma. Italthai's investment
makes up a substantial proportion of this investment.
More investment in Burma is actively being encouraged by government
agencies as a key aspect of both the new governments' strategy of
appeasing the Slorc, and its efforts to establish itself as the prosperous
hub of the Greater Mekong Subregion. The Greater Mekong Subregion is a
grouping of Thailand, Burma, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos and China's Yunnan
Province.
Italthai, having well established contacts with Slorc leaders, into whose
hands it has already placed millions of dollars in "signing bonuses," is
well to secure more contracts.
More opportunities
Opportunities that Italthai could capitalise on are not lacking following
the Slorc's reopening of the Thai-Burma border. Relations between the two
governments have thawed remarkably quickly since Chavalit came to
power, and especially since the Thai military graphically and publicly
demonstrated its willingness to push back fleeing Karen refugees to Burma.
Discussions between the Thai Army Chief General Chettha and the Slorc
Army Chief Gen Maung Aye days after the push-back have resulted in
resumption of work on the 90 per cent complete Myanmar-Thailand Friendship
Bridge at Myawaddy, opposite the Thai town of Mae Sot.
The generals' also spoke of Thai assistance to the Burmese government to
build a highway from the bridge at Myawaddy that would go all the way to
Rangoon. The 400 kilometer Rangoon-Myawaddy Highway would be a
continuation of the Trans-Asia Highway that for decades has stopped at
Burma's closed borders.
Another major contract in the offing involves the construction of a section
of the "Loop Road" that would link Thailand and China with Burma and
Laos. Work on the road had been halted by the Slorc after Shan guerrillas
attacked the border town of Tachilek and Slorc officers accused Thai
officials of sheltering them.
The Slorc has now agreed to accept a $12 million low interest loan
proffered by the Chavalit government for the completion of the road, after
two years of setting unacceptable conditions to previous Thais
administrations.
The road is just one of nine huge transport infrastructure projects
involving Burma and adjoining countries that the Asian Development
Bank has been promoting to international financiers. There are also two
equally huge energy infrastructure projects.
There fall within an ambitious plan for opening up and exploiting the
natural resources in the whole sub-region called the Greater Mekong
Subregion Development Programme. The Bank and officials of some of the
regional governments have been seeking some $15 billion for the
development projects.
Up to $8 billion worth of this would be invested in Burma. Some projects
are already underway with foreign funding, such as the Yadana Gasfield and
associated Burma-Thai gas pipeline development, the Thiwala Port
Development, and the Kunming to Lashio roadway.
These development plans have received the backing of key leaders in the
Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean) such as Indonesian
President Suharto and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. They have
been vigorously pushing for the inclusion of Burma into the Asean fold, and
have also begun a push to invest in Burma.
Combined with the weak moderating pressures from the Western nations,
all these moves by the ADB, by Asean, and by the Chavalit coalition will
favour investment by Italian-Thai and other multinational corporations.
All of these parties have shown that they are eager to exploit Burma's
supposed wealth of natural resources, it's low-cost labour pool, and its
potential as a transit route to other countries. Their moves will also
favour those aiming to maintain their own political and financial power by
making large fortunes from development projects. And naturally, they will
also favour the increasingly repressive Burmese military government.
On the other hand, they bode ill for the long-suffering Burmese people,
especially those in opposition to the repressive rule of the military.
Both the non-violent political opposition, which easily won national
elections held by the Slorc, and the numerous ethnic groups, some of
whom have renounced armed struggle and some who have not, are facing
growing pressure from the Slorc.
In the six months in which most of Italian-Thai's deals have been made,
even highly visible opposition leaders have been publicly threatened,
attacked, arrested and otherwise harasse including Nobel Peace Prize winner
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.
Renewed student unrest over deteriorating conditions has again led to
demonstrations in Rangoon. To quell them the military brought tanks onto
the streets, shut down the universities, and launched a new wave of large
scale arrests by heavily armed troops.
Ethnic groups that have signed ceasefire agreements with the Slorc have
expressed growing dissatisfaction with the non-fulfilment of promise made
to them during ceasefire negotiations.
In the same short period Slorc has abandoned peace talks with the Karen
National Union and launched a massive military offensive against it.
According to army chief Gen Maung Aye, the reason for the offensive was
because the Burmese government wants to establish order along the Thai-
Burma border before its admission into Asean in July.
It is evident that the increasing repression, the increase in the number of
official contacts between regional military and national leaders, and the
increase in big budget investments are closely connected.
Investments from Thailand and the Asean countries are quickly rising, and
may already be higher than the investments from the richer Western
countries.
Unfortunately for the people of Burma, the triad of investment,
collaboration and repression appears to be working to seal their fates. And
those who are profiting from the repression are the Slorc generals and their
"true friends" - people like Chavalit, President Suharto, Italthai executive
Premchai and Chaiyuth Karnasutra and their less visible Italian partners.
*******************************************************
JAPAN TIMES: ALL QUIET ON THE THAI-MYANMAR BORDER
May 7, 1997
by James Whitlow Delano
(BurmaNet Editor's Note: The camp referred to in this article is called
"Beh Gloh" by Karens, "Mae La" by Thais, and both names are used by
foreigners. Most of the refugee camps have both Karen and Thai names.)
"We couldn't make radio contact with the KNU [Karen National
Union] rebels," said the human rights monitor. "It's the monsoon, so there
may be no trucks coming to Thailand from Burma [Myanmar]."
"Besides," she added, "it's possible that the Thai border guards
wouldn't let a foreigner pass, anyhow. You're not Asian, are you? That
would make it easier."
"No," I answered.
As I stepped out of the telephone booth, I realized I wouldn't be
able to enter the KNU's free state, which still provides sanctuary for the
KNU and the All-Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF). Instead I
boarded a predawn bus bound for the border town of Mae Sot.
In Mae Sot I caught a /songthaew/ carrying refugees back to camp
from the Mae Sot central market. Songthaews are canopied Japanese
pickups used throughout the countryside as public transportation. About
halfway to my destination, Mae La, a Myanmar family flagged down the
songthaew. Faces covered with yellow /thanaka/, the women climbed in
first, removing their giant conical sun hats. Thanaka is a paste made from
tree bark, used as makeup and sunblock.
The eldest woman cradled a struggling cock under her arm. The
youngest woman flashed a shy smile, her flawless skin contrasting with the
deep lines marking her grandmother's withered face. The men, wearing
/longyi/ (sarongs) loaded dusty sacks of rice and potatoes between
passengers' knees.
When the paved road gave to dirt in a steep jungle canyon,
passengers squinted and held batik handkerchiefs to their noses and
mouths. Dust in our wake filtered through the jungle trees crowding the
road. The teak trees, in yellow-green bloom, stood out from the canopy.
The songthaew came to its first scheduled stop at a Karen-style
village.
"Mae La?" I asked, gesturing toward the village.
"Bek Loh," the tiny grandmother said, and climbed out.
I made note of Bek Loh and decided to return there after Mae La.
White cliffs rose behind the village. Vegetation swarmed over every
surface. Hundreds of raised Karen-style huts lined the road; broad, dry
leaves shingled gently pitched roofs. Banana trees stood between the
houses.
Mae La overlooks a bend in the Moei River. The forbidden state
of Kayin ("Karen" in Burmese) lay on the opposite shore. Forested
mountains rose from the horizon above gray pitched roofs faintly visible
through high bamboo.
I followed the road along the river. It was well covered by Thai
military placements; two smiling Thai soldiers waved down from their
machine gun nest commanding a sweeping view of the valley spreading
out on both sides of the border.
There were no refugees in Mae La. It was a Thai village. At a
Buddhist school, a Karen woman teacher named Moola sent a young boy to
find a motorcycle to take me to the refugee camp -- at Bek Loh.
The Karen have been offering armed resistance since the
autonomy promised in the Panglong Agreement of 1947, which also gave
Burma independence from the British, was not honored by the Burmese.
(The name Myanmar was not adopted until 1989.) The current
government, the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), took
advantage of a rift between Christian and Buddhist Karen by extending
support to the Buddhists in January 1995. Violating a ceasefire, their
combined forces made a great advance. The KNU is now barely holding
on after 50 years of resistance.
The motorcycle arrived as the clouds, now gray, were building.
We sped toward Bek Loh, passing a concrete watchtower. A jeep was
parked out front with a machine gun mounted on it. How far, I wondered,
would the Thai military go to defend foreign refugees?
Large raindrops pounded harmlessly on giant leaves used as
umbrellas by two old Karen women. Men, disregarding the rain, walked
along the road burdened with rattan backpacks. A swashbuckling KNU
rebel sporting a flowing black bandanna on his head exploded from the
forest and swung himself up on the back of the songthaew with one hand,
pointing his automatic rifle skyward with the other.
The motorcycle ran out of gas in front of the soldiers guarding the
main entrance to Bek Loh refugee camp. Almost apologetically, I
approached the soldiers, expecting to be denied entry into the camp. Two
were playing cards while a third reclined on a bamboo cot. Barely
acknowledging my presence, they motioned me to pass.
The words "refugee camp" call to mind sprawling shanty towns of
corrugated steel and plastic sheeting, festering in squalor. Bek Loh was
different. In a way, the camp was merely an overgrown Karen village like
those which, in much smaller versions, dot the Karen homeland along the
Myanmar-Thai border, spreading into the Irrawaddy River delta and
throughout the Bago Yoma Mountains of central Myanmar.
The sun broke through and sent steam rising from my rain-
drenched clothing. Shops opened onto a market street selling anything
from foodstuffs to battery-powered electronics. Restaurants offered hot
food and fabric stores sold brightly colored longyi. No foul odors filled the
air.
Myanmar me drew water from a well while women and children
bathed in a stream. Women carried baskets on their heads, some with
babies in longyi slung across their backs. Some Muslim men in white
skullcaps and long robes crossed a log bridge on the way to afternoon
prayers.
An old white-haired man with a mustache left a circle of tattooed
men watching a saber-less cockfight. In halting English, he invited me to
tea at his house. Taking my shoes off, I climbed onto Puka Su's open
veranda. There were no doors to lock or windows to close. Teak posts
supported the roof. We sat cross-legged on the split bamboo floor looking
out over a grove of banana trees.
I asked about the life he'd left behind in Myanmar.
"I left Rangoon in 1947," he said. "I have eight children, four in
Thailand and four in Burma." Yellowing 1970s snapshots of his full-grown
children hung in frames behind us.
"The guerrilla war was hard," he said, "and now I am too old to
fight. Bek Loh is about 10 years old but I've been here for two. There may
be 10,000 people here, but who knows?"
There is little outside work for the refugees in nearby Thai
communities, but still the refugees of Bek Loh could count themselves
among the more fortunate. Bek Loh is the only refugee camp in the Mae
Sot area administered by the Thai government's Interior Ministry. As a
result, there is greater security, better health services and government
schooling for children.
As tensions grow once again in Myanmar, Puka Su and tens of
thousands of other refugees make the most of their sanctuary along the
Myanmar-Thai border. It is uncertain how long the refugees will be
welcome or what their fate will be if forced to return to Myanmar. Until
the oligarchs of Myanmar loosen their grip on that nation, the refugees will
try to remain in Thailand, the occasional mortar attacks being the lesser
evil.
(A refugee camp is not recommended as a tourist destination.
Travelers may help refugees through human rights groups and relief
organizations such as Earth Rights International in Kanchanaburi and the
Karen Refugee Committee in Mae Sot. It is best to visit in conjunction
with one of these groups.)
****************************************************