[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
The BurmaNet News, September 2, 199
- Subject: The BurmaNet News, September 2, 199
- From: strider@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 19:51:00
------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
----------------------------------------------------------
The BurmaNet News: September 2, 1997
Issue #811
HEADLINES:
==========
REUTER: UK - NO BURMA INVITE TO EUROPE-ASIA SUMMIT
TACDB PRESS RELEASE: BURMESE STARVING ON WORK- SITE
BKK POST: ALIEN WORKFORCE TO BE CUT BACK
US STATE DEPT: CONDITIONS IN BURMA AND U.S. POLICY
BKK POST: ASEAN MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS A VERY FEW
THE NATION: CRUNCH TIME FOR ASEAN'S NON-INTERFERENCE
THE NATION: US DENIES ISSUING SUU KYI PERMIT
BURMANET SUBJECT-MATTER RESOURCE LIST
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
REUTER: NO BURMA INVITE TO EUROPE-ASIA SUMMIT, UK SAYS
September 1, 1997
By Chris Johnson
SINGAPORE, Sept. 1 (Reuter) - British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook condemned
the Burmese government on Monday for profiting from the drugs trade and said
it would not be admitted to a summit of European and Asian nations next year.
Cook told a meeting of business leaders in Singapore that Europe's recent
decision to deny visas to senior Burmese officials made their inclusion at
the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) in London in April ``impossible.''
ASEM is a forum linking the 15 members of the European Union with Japan,
China, South Korea and some members of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN).
ASEAN admitted Burma to its ranks this year, despite heavy Western criticism
of Rangoon's record on human rights and its flourishing drugs trade.
``There is a common European position across all European countries not to
grant visas to ministers from Burma, which will make it impossible for us to
consider the inclusion of Burma in the ASEAN process next year,'' Cook said
at the end of a four-nation tour of Southeast Asia.
``Burma is the largest single world producer of opium, and it has achieved
that infamous position precisely because it is a government that does not
act against the drug barons,'' he said.
``It is not only a deeply repressive regime, but it is also a deeply
irresponsible regime in that it is one of the few governments in the world
whose members are prepared to profit out of the drugs trade rather than to
seek to suppress the drugs trade,'' he added.
Cook told a news conference before leaving for home that Britain could bar
Burma from the summit because ASEM was not a bloc-to-bloc meeting but a
voluntary dialogue between nations.
He said he had found ``deep common recognition'' of the problem of Burma in
the Asian capitals he had visited ``both in terms of its government system
and in terms of the connivance of the government in the drugs trade.''
But he said there was ``an honest difference of approach'' as to how to
resolve the issue and persuade Rangoon's State Law and Order Restoration
Council (SLORC) to change.
``In Europe, we have taken the view that we cannot have dialogue with a
government that is both as repressive as SLORC and as irresponsible in its
connivance with the drug barons,'' he said.
``In Southeast Asia there is, particularly in ASEAN, a belief that the best
way forward is for dialogue with SLORC.
``What I have found encouraging is that there is in every capital I have
been to a recognition that there is a serious problem here that must be
addressed.
``I think SLORC would be ill-advised if it took the willingness of ASEAN to
have dialogue with them as a basis on which not to respond to the concerns
they raise.''
Cook told the business leaders Burma's acceptance on the international stage
would be based on its embrace of democracy and on action against the drugs
trade.
``Until the military junta in Burma is prepared to recognise the democratic
rights of the people, and most certainly until it is prepared to cooperate
with the rest of the world in trying to take action against the menace of
heroin, it will be extremely difficult for the governments of the developed
world to recognise the government of Burma as an acceptable interlocutor and
a partner,'' he said.
********************************************
TACDB PRESS RELEASE: BURMESE STARVING ON WORK- SITE
September 1, 1997
Thai Action Committee for Democracy in Burma (TACDB)
URGENT PRESS RELEASE!
70 Burmese Nationals Starving on the work- site
for the next Asia Games in Bangkok.
1st September, 1997.
BANGKOK- Plans for Thailand's stadium and grounds construction for the next
Asian Games are being disrupted by a serious case of migrant worker
exploitation. Over 80 Burmese nationals are starving at the site of the
forthcoming Asia Games in Bangkok's district of Ramkhanheng. The group of
undocumented workers, originating from the war-torn areas of Mon and Karen
state in Burma, have not received wages for over six weeks and can no longer
afford to feed themselves. U Win Aung, leader of the group said that workers
have been subsisting on rice water and salt and that they hadn't been given
any reason for the non-payment of wages by their supervisor.
The National Stadium project in Ramkhanheng is a Thai government funded
project which has been contracted out to STNC Construction Company, 113/26
Onnuch Road, Sukhumvit 77 Road, Suanluang, Praweite, Bangkok 10250, tel:
(+662) 321 8102, fax: (+662) 821 8090. Workers are under the supervision of
a sub-contractor, named Pi Chankaphan, and have been working on building the
foundations for a five floor building behind the actual stadium for the last
two months. Burmese workers refused to continue work on Saturday, while
around 30 workers have already been forced to leave the work-site to find
alternative employment without receiving the wages already owned to them.
Sub-contractor, Pi Chankaphan, came to the work-site over the weekend and
gave workers 132 Baht each in attempt to placate workers and avoid further
absences from the work-site as pressure is now on to finish construction on
scheduled time.
A large number of Cambodian, Laotian and Thai workers are in a similar
situation at the work-site. All workers were denied the chance of
registering as legal migrant workers by the sub-contractor. Often, employers
refuse to register workers because of the cost involved. The situation at
the National Stadium is a serious blemish upon Thailand's regional and
international image. One must question Thailand's sincerity in it's attempts
to resolve the problems created by the presence of so many Burmese nationals
within it's borders.
Workers said that they would not return home to Burma unless they were
forced to. U Win Aung stated that "... there is nothing to do for our
survival in Burma, it is better for us to stay in Thailand.". He went on to
say that "...we come from an area of Burma where there are very serious
military operations being carried out.... hunger is better for us than
torture and death.".
Action should be taken to ensure the payment and protection of workers at
the site as a matter of urgency. TACDB encourages people to visit the
work-site with donations of food.
Please contact TACDB on tel/fax: (+662) 216 4463 for further information.
-------------------------------------------
Thai Action Committee for Democracy in Burma (TACDB),
328 Phayathai Road,
Rajthevee,
Bangkok 10400,
THAILAND.
tel/fax: (+662) 216 4463
email: tacdb@xxxxxxxxxx
******************************************************
BKK POST: ALIEN WORKFORCE TO BE CUT BACK
September 2, 1997
Chatrudee Theparat
Increase in jobless figures expected
The foreign workforce is to be cut to cope with an anticipated surge in
unemployment.
The Economic Screening Committee assigned the Ministry of Labour and Social
Welfare to work out the cuts yesterday.
Between 700,000 and a million aliens, mostly Burmese, work here, and until
last November, 370,000 had registered in 43 provinces.
Of those, 81.7 percent are Burmese, 3.7 percent Lao, 8.14 percent Cambodian
and the rest from the Indian sub-continent and China.
Although most are labourers, many skilled workers and professionals, such as
engineers, mechanics, accountants and architects, have been engaged in the
commercial and industrial sectors.
Official figures show the number of skilled foreign workers and
professionals rose from 179,000 in 1995 to 185,000 last year.
The cuts will affect skilled and unskilled workers, said Varathep
Rattanakorn, government spokesman. The panel also decided efforts be stepped
up to promote labour exports to offset the effects of a construction sector
slump.
The National Economic and Social Development Board was told at the meeting
to devise an early warning system with concerned agencies and the private
sector.
Mr Varathep said businesses would be asked to cut costs before staff.
Tens of thousands of new graduates are to be encouraged to further their
studies, possibly with the same kind of funding the Education Ministry
provides for students from low-income families
Instead of being salaried workers, the committee also encouraged new
graduates to start businesses, probably with funding to be arranged by the
state, said Mr Varathep.
The NESDB expects up to one mil., lion people to be jobless if economic
growth shrinks to 2.5-3 percent this year but the ministry says the figure
should not exceed 300,000. For 1998, the NESDB put the figure at 1. 13
million and the ministry 489,000.
The NESDB also doubted the ministry's redundancy figure of 13,215 for
January-August, pointing out it was based on the textile industry and did
not take into account people laid off from the 58 suspended finance firms
and the service sector.
*********************************************
US STATE DEPT: CONDITIONS IN BURMA AND U.S. POLICY TOWARD BURMA
August 21, 1997
CONDITIONS IN BURMA AND U.S. POLICY TOWARD BURMA
(Plan for Implementation of Section 570 of Conference Report 104-863 to
Accompany H.R. 3610 (Omnibus Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 1997)
Submitted to the U.S. Congress, June 13, 1997
Released by the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, August 21, 1997
U.S. Department of State)
The people of Burma continue to live under a highly authoritarian military
regime that is widely condemned for its serious human rights abuses. The
military regime in Burma, the State Law and Order Restoration Council
(SLORC), has made no progress in the past six months in moving toward
greater democratization and little, if any, progress toward fundamental
improvement in the quality of life of the people of Burma. The SLORC
continues to dominate the political, economic and social life of the
country in the same arbitrary, heavy-handed way that it has since seizing
power in September 1988 after harshly suppressing massive pro-democracy
demonstrations.
U.S. policy toward Burma seeks progress in three key areas -- democracy,
human rights and counter-narcotics. We have taken steps to pressure the
SLORC -- suspending economic aid, withdrawing GSP and OPIC, implementing an
arms embargo, blocking assistance from international financial institutions,
downgrading our representation to Charge, and imposing visa restrictions on
senior leaders and their families. We are engaged in vigorous multilateral
diplomacy to encourage ASEAN, Japan, the EU and other nations to take
similar steps and other actions to encourage progress by the SLORC in these
areas of key concern. The EU recently imposed visa restrictions similar to
ours and is expected to withdraw GSP in March. In addition, Japan's
suspension of much of its bilateral aid program remains in force.
In addition, the President signed an Executive Order implementing a ban on
new investment by U.S. persons in Burma effective May 21, 1997. The order
prohibits persons from engaging in any of the following activities:
-- entering a new contract that includes the economic development of
resources located in Burma;
-- entering a new contract providing for the general supervision and
guarantee of another person's performance of a contract that includes the
economic development of resources located in Burma;
-- entering into a contract providing for the participation in royalties,
earnings, or profits in the economic development of resources located in
Burma, without regard to the form of the participation;
-- facilitating transactions of foreign persons that would violate any of
the foregoing prohibitions if engaged in by U.S. person; and
-- evading or avoiding, or attempting to violate, any of the prohibitions
in the order.
MEASURING PROGRESS TOWARD DEMOCRATIZATION
In the past six months the SLORC has shown no sign of willingness to cede
its hold on absolute power. The generals have continued to refuse to
negotiate with pro-democracy forces and ethnic groups for a genuine
political settlement to allow a return to the rule of law and respect for
basic human rights.
The SLORC claims that the military-dominated National Convention is an
appropriate forum for dialogue with the NLD and parties representing the
country's ethnic minorities. But the National Convention, a body ostensibly
tasked since 1993 with drafting a new constitution, is hardly a democratic
forum as currently structured. The Convention is overwhelmingly made up of
delegates hand-picked by the SLORC, which has carefully stage-managed the
proceedings and ignored even limited opposition views. The NLD withdrew from
the National Convention in November 1995 because of the undemocratic nature
of the institution and was formally ejected by the SLORC in December.
Despite having no legal mandate, the SLORC appears determined to draft a
constitution that would ensure a dominant role for the military forces in
the country's future political structure. However, the Convention has not
met since mid-1996, and the SLORC's current plans for the body are unclear.
The worsening narcotics situation in Burma reflects the SLORC's disregard
for the rule of law. Burma is the world's largest source of illicit opium,
and output increased by an estimated nine per cent in 1996 to 2,560 metric
tons. Nevertheless, Burmese law enforcement actions against producers and
traffickers remain limited. Leading trafficker Khun Sa, who "surrendered" to
Burmese forces in early 1996, has never been brought to justice. Even as
heroin production remains high, Burmese traffickers are also diversifying
into methamphetamines, which are posing severe problems for neighboring
states. As well, traffickers are increasingly investing in legitimate
sectors of the economy, and there is reason to believe that the laundering
of drug profits is having a substantial impact on the Burmese economy.
MEASURING PROGRESS ON IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF LIFE
In the same way, in the past six months the Burmese people have seen little
progress in improving their quality of life. In fact, by many indices,
their quality of life has worsened. The SLORC's severe violations of human
rights have continued. There continue to be credible reports, particularly
from ethnic minority-dominated areas along the Thai border, that soldiers
have committed serious human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killing
and rape. Disappearances continue, and members of the security forces beat
and otherwise abuse detainees. Arbitrary arrests and detentions continue for
expression of dissenting political views. Several hundred, if not more,
political prisoners remain in detention, including 29 Members of Parliament
elected in 1990.
The SLORC reinforces its rule via a pervasive security apparatus led by
military intelligence and sharply restricts basic rights to free speech,
press, assembly, and association. Political party activity remains severely
restricted. The activities of the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi are monitored
and circumscribed by the regime. Since late September Aung San Suu Kyi has
been prevented from addressing party supporters in front of her house, as
the SLORC puts up blockades to prevent gatherings there. In November the
motorcade in which she was riding was attacked by a gang of thugs
encouraged by elements of the regime. Aung San Suu Kyi was not hurt, though
one NLD leader was slightly injured by broken glass.
In response to street protests by large groups of students in November and
December, the SLORC closed the nation's universities. Most remain closed to
prevent another outbreak of student protest. For three weeks in December
Aung San Suu Kyi did not leave her compound. Since late December, she has
been able to leave her compound after notifying authorities of her
destinations. She meets relatively often with diplomats and supporters.
Visitors are generally allowed to meet her at her compound if authorities
are notified in advance. She has held two meetings of her supporters on her
compound that were attended by 2,000 or more persons. NLD leaders have
expressed strong concerns about SLORC repression and have called for
increased international pressure on the SLORC, including sanctions.
In February the Burmese Army launched a full-scale assault on the forces of
the Karen National Union near the Thai border. Up to 12,000 Karen were
forced to flee into Thailand, the vast majority of them civilians,
including women, children and the elderly. Thousands of civilians were
forcibly conscripted to serve as porters for the Burma Army in its
offensive.
Thousands of other citizens of Burma remain in exile because of fear of
persecution and poor economic conditions. About 24,000 Rohingya Muslims from
Arakan state remain in camps in Bangladesh. A few thousand students and
dissidents remain in exile in Thailand. Approximately 100,000 individuals
now reside in ethnic minority camps along the Thai-Burma border, among them
thousands of new arrivals driven out by army attacks in the areas controlled
by the Karen and Karenni ethnic minorities.
Burma is a poor country, with an average per capita income of only $600 to
$800, even after adjusting for the relative purchasing power of the Burmese
currency. Progress on market reforms has been mixed and uneven. Since 1988
the Government has partly opened the economy to permit expansion of the
private sector and to attract foreign investment. Some economic improvement
has ensued, but major obstacles to economic reform persist. These include
disproportionately large military spending, extensive overt and covert state
involvement in economic activity, excessive state monopolization of leading
exports, a bloated bureaucracy prone to arbitrary and opaque governance, and
poor human and physical infrastructure. In addition, the SLORC does not have
access to external credit from the IMF, World Bank and Asian Development
Bank. Money laundering in Burma is a growing problem, and the laundering of
drug profits is thought by some analysts to have a widespread impact on the
Burmese economy.
The Government restricts worker rights and uses forced labor on a
widespread basis. The use of porters by the army -- with attendant
mistreatment, illness, and even death for those compelled to serve --
remains a common practice. The military authorities continue to force
ordinary citizens (including women and children) to "contribute" their
labor on a massive scale, often under harsh working conditions, on
construction projects throughout the country. Some of these projects --
such as the moat of the Mandalay fort -- were undertaken to promote tourism
to the country. In the past year, the military has begun using soldiers
instead of civilians at certain infrastructure projects, following the
issuance of directives in 1995 to end the practice of forced civilian
labor. Child labor continues to be a serious problem.
As a largely underdeveloped country, Burma does not have some of the
extensive environmental problems affecting air and water quality that
plague many of its rapidly industrializing neighbors. However, with a rapid
population growth rate, the country faces increasing pressure on
environmental quality. Burma possesses the largest tracts of remaining
tropical forest in southeast Asia, though aggressive international logging
companies are eyeing these forests just as they are eyeing those in other
Mekong countries. Some NGOs have charged that Burma's teak forests in the
Thai-Burma border area are being rapidly destroyed by clear-cutting and
deforestation. Because of the severe restrictions on Embassy travel to
outlying parts of Burma, it is difficult to document the overall extent of
the problem. Embassy officials have visited the showcase Bago Yoma Forest
150 miles north of Rangoon. The Ministry of Forest operates a research
station and seed orchards in this area in what appears to be an example of
sustainable forestry.
The poor quality of life is also reflected in rising drug abuse. Burmese
estimates put the addict population at approximately 60,000, but UNDCP and
NGOs working in the health sector estimate the actual number is at least
five times that figure. Intravenous use of heroin is contributing to the
rapid spread of HIV/AIDS. Drug treatment services are not reaching most
drug users because of a lack of facilities and a lack of properly trained
personnel.
DEVELOPMENT OF A MULTILATERAL STRATEGY
The goals of U.S. policy toward Burma are progress toward democracy,
improved human rights, and more effective counter-narcotics efforts.
Failing national reconciliation, Burma will not be able to address
systematically the many severe problems it faces, including narcotics
trafficking and abuse, a low level of education and poor economic
performance.
In recent months we have forged a vigorous multilateral strategy to seek
improvement in our key areas of concern. We consult about Burma regularly
and at senior levels with leaders of ASEAN nations, Japan, the European
Union, and other countries having major trading and investment interests in
Burma. These efforts have helped build and maintain strong international
pressure on the SLORC.
The key to progress toward democracy and human rights is, first and
foremost, a direct dialogue about the political future of the country among
the SLORC, the NLD, and the ethnic minorities. In all our public and
private messages to the SLORC, leaders of third countries and other
interested parties, we stress the importance of beginning such a dialogue
as the key to achieving significant progress in Burma. We work closely with
our friends and allies in Asia and Europe to press the SLORC to begin
dialogue. In response, leaders from ASEAN nations, Japan and the European
Union have urged the regime, both publicly and privately, to move to
dialogue with the democratic opposition.
In order to urge the SLORC to make progress in our areas of concern, we
have taken a number of steps -- suspending economic aid, withdrawing GSP and
OPIC, implementing an arms embargo, blocking assistance from
international financial institutions, downgrading our representation to
Charge, and imposing visa restrictions on senior regime leaders and their
families. We likewise have encouraged ASEAN, Japan, the EU and other
nations to take similar steps and other actions to encourage progress by
the SLORC in these areas of key concern. Many nations join us in our arms
embargo, including European countries, Canada, Australia and Japan. The EU
and Japan limit their assistance to Burma to humanitarian aid. Our efforts
in the international financial institutions continue to be successful in
blocking loans to the SLORC, which is probably the single most important
form of pressure we have against the regime. Since 1988 we have taken an
active role in pressing for strong human rights resolutions on Burma at the
United Nations General Assembly and the UN Human Rights Commission, as well
as having worked vigorously in the ILO to condemn the lack of freedom of
association for workers and the use of forced labor by the SLORC.
In November, at our urging, the EU and associated European states joined us
in imposing a ban on visas for high-level SLORC officials and their
families. In addition, the European Commission has recommended that the
European Union withdraw GSP trade benefits from Burma's agricultural and
industrial products because of forced labor concerns. EU Foreign Ministers
are expected to adopt these recommendations in March, which would bring
European trade policy in line with the U.S. ban on GSP.
On several occasions in recent months, our embassies have made high-level
demarches to leaders in the ASEAN countries, urging them to use their
influence with the SLORC to press for positive change in Burma. We have also
raised with the ASEAN countries our concerns that Burma not join that
organization prematurely. ASEAN shares many of our goals with regard to
Burma, but we disagree on the means to achieve those goals. ASEAN believes
that "constructive engagement" of the SLORC is the most effective way to
promote positive change in Burma. We will continue to raise our strong
concerns with ASEAN and urge continued steps to encourage progress by the
SLORC.
[end of document]
******************************************
BKK POST: ASEAN MEMBERSHIP BENEFITS A VERY FEW
August 30, 1997
Asean's policy of "constructive engagement" in its dealings with Slorc
failed totally to produce the most basic concessions to human rights before
Burma became a member of the regional alliance, and the policy appears to
have not much more of a chance now the generals can boast Asean
membership.
It is unfortunate that the period following the admission of Burma into the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations coincided with a host, not to say a
plague, of distractions. Had the member states of the regional grouping
been without distraction, they might just have begun to see that Asean's
policy of constructive engagement had opened the door to a regime unable
to behave itself.
It was fortunate for the State Law and Order Restoration Council, which
claims to represent Burma, that its elevation to full membership of the
alliance was obscured in the news by an unlikely alliance. The stars of the
show were our own economic bunglers, Hun Sen, the second and only co-
premier of Cambodia, Pol Pot, whose personal Year Zero appears to have
started, and George Soros, the international financial devil whose stunning
gains cause Malaysia's prime minister to have stunning tantrums.
With each of these players doing their bit in their own little way, the
continuing bad behaviour of the generals who rule Burma and the collapse
of the economy they have plundered since 1962 were consigned to the back
burner, but snippets did filter out. Slorc had arrested and jailed two
relatives of Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the opposition National League
for Democracy, it accused her of taking money from Washington and
seeking a permit to live in the United States. Ms Suu Kyi and the United
States have denied both claims.
In other words, it was business as usual: Slorc harassing members of the
democratic opposition that won the 1990 general election by a landslide,
the country's jails crowded with political prisoners, ethnic minorities being
brutalised in border areas. In the immediate aftermath of its admission,
Slorc showed by its behaviour that it was not about to moderate its
behaviour and that Asean was whistling in the wind if it thought that it
would. On the positive side, the Thai-Burma friendship bridge finally
opened with Slorc imposing distinctly unfriendly restrictions on its use,
and the junta showed that in terms of economic folly, it is without rival.
But this is not to say that Slorc is not happy to have become the ninth
member of the regional club. Far from it, because when you are broke, it is
nice to have friends, as we are finding with the International Monetary
Fund. It is also nice to be able to use the good offices of Asean to correct
misconceptions that are somehow taken as fact by the international
community. Rather than use membership as the pretext to make Slorc
behave itself, SLORC is using Asean to justify its own warped behaviour.
Lt-Gen Khin Nyunt, Secretary 1 of Slorc, believes Burma should raise its
profile in Asean and host meetings to correct what he claims to be false
impressions of the country. The head of military intelligence believes that
through Asean the regime can counter fabrications by the wicked western
media that has painted Burma as a foreboding place. "By playing host to
some of the regular Asean meetings," he said, "we cannot only correct this
false concept and show that pace and stability prevails here but this will
also help promote tourism."
The remarks of Lt-Gen Khin Nyunt and the regime's behaviour show that
Asean's policy of constructive engagement has been a very good thing
indeed, but only for a benighted and thoroughly brutal dictatorship. Asean
said it would apply pressure once Burma was in the fold but it appears to
have been distracted, and lamentably so.
*************************************************
THE NATION: CRUNCH TIME FOR ASEAN'S NON-INTERFERENCE
POLICY
August 27, 1997
Regional/Puangthong Rungswasdisab
The changing dynamics of relations within the region is forcing a re-
appraisal of the grouping's core policies.
Since 1991, "constructive engagement" has become increasingly adopted
by Southeast Asian nations as the preferred mode of dealing with conflict
and instability in the region.
At the same time, there has been a shift in one of Asean's core principles -
noninterference in a member's domestic affairs - at the senior official level,
as the group has come under heavy criticism from some sections of the
international community.
The challenge Asean now faces is how to incorporate these ideological
changes into practice.
The implementation of constructive engagement depends on how each
state interprets it in accordance with its national interest. The US view and
practice of the policy towards China is different from Asean's policy
towards Burma, while China has its own terms of engagement with other
countries. India, on the other hand, prefers to use the term "cooperative
peace", despite sharing the same pattern of inter-state relations adopted by
most Asian countries.
Jasjit Singh, director of New Delhi based Institute for Defence Studies and
Analyses, compared it to the ancient Indian parable about the blind men
and the elephant, where each man has his own interpretation of what the
object is. Asean's original terms of constructive engagement implied an
effort to induce change in the domestic policies of another state through a
policy of dialogue and persuasion, without any threat of sanction or
coercion, and an acceptance of differences in political and socio-economic
systems. The target countries of constructive engagement, Burma and
recently Cambodia, no doubt favour such an accommodating principle.
The West, and local and international human rights groups, have
repeatedly criticised Asean for using the policy as a cover for their
economic engagement with Burma and Cambodia. These groups advocate
sanctions and some restrictions on trade and economic activity as the most
effective method of bringing the stubborn states violating human rights
into line.
Since the policy was implemented in 1991, Asean has stood firm on its
non-interference doctrine. But in a conference on "Constructive
Engagement in Asia: Political and Economic Dimensions" held in
Bangkok from Aug 20 to 21, Burmese expert Josef Silverstein of Rutgers
University pointed out that a gradual shift of the doctrine was evident on
the eve of Burma's joining Asean and in the wake of the collapse of the
coalition government in Cambodia in early June.
In a visit to Rangoon in June, Malaysian Foreign Minister Abdulla Badawi
reportedly urged the leaders of the State Law and Order Restoration
Council (Slorc) to begin a dialogue with pro-democracy leader Aung San
Suu Kyi in order to ease tensions in the country.
Thailand's Foreign Minister Prachuab Chaiyasarn soon adopted Badawi's
idea when he said on July 1 during the celebration of the Hong Kong
handover to China that Asean could no longer employ constructive
engagement in its relations with Burma and that he had proposed replacing
it with a more comprehensive policy. But he gave no details.
In an interview with the international Newsweek magazine, Malaysia's
deputy prime minister, Anwar Ibrahim also acknowledged that Asean
"must now move from being a largely reactive organisation".
"We need to intervene before simmering problems erupt into full-blown
crises like the one now unfolding in Cambodia. Perhaps it is now
appropriate for Asean to seriously consider the idea of constructive
engagement," he said.
He wrote further that "our non-involvement in the reconstruction of
Cambodia actually contributed to the deterioration and final collapse of
national reconciliation." Asean then sent its special envoys down the road
to mediate the Cambodian conflict.
Anwar's statement was "a remarkably candid and unprecedented display of
self-criticism, especially unusual at a time of euphoria marking the
approach of the 30th anniversary of the founding of Asean," said Prof
Amitav Acharya of York University in Toronto.
Anwar also suggested steps in which Asean should become actively
involved within Cambodia, including direct assistance to firm up the
electoral processes, an increased commitment to legal and administrative
reforms, the development of human capital, the general strengthening of
civil society and the rule of law.
These developments have thus placed Asean at a crossroad of the new
notions of constructive engagement/intervention and the original non-
interference principle.
Amitav, however, argued that the noninterference doctrine which appeared
to serve Asean so well at the peak of superpower rivalry and the ideological
rivalries in Southeast Asia, is probably less important in the current
situation when Asean members have established a degree of confidence
and trust in their relations.
"Asean cannot afford to have 'failed states' or 'pariah states' as members of
the regional community. But helping its weaker members to develop
economically and politically requires it to accept a more flexible notion of
sovereignty and establish an acceptable middle ground between
indifference and interference," Amitav said.
However, in adopting a newly defined policy of constructive engagement,
Asean will inevitably face a number of difficulties. Asean needs a
consensus on the desirability of the constructive programme, the
appropriate benchmarks that would justify Asean's intervention and
financial support, Amitav said.
Silverstein added that it is important for Asean members to incorporate the
notions of the new policy in their relations with each other and non-
member states, otherwise there will be no progress on the concerns raised
by Malaysia's Foreign Minister Badawi.
It is likely that Asean will face stumbling blocks if it pushes for credible
elections in Cambodia and Burma, when most Asean members struggle to
meet that standard. If a free and fair election would mean the loss of power
for Slorc or Hun Sen's Cambodian People's Party, it is unlikely that the two
regimes would agree to such an Asean proposal, said Prof Carlyle Thayer,
head of the School of Politics at the Australian Defence Force Academy.
Thayer also warned Asean that trying to bring a quick democracy to
Cambodia would again bring Cambodia into a "vicious cycle" of military
intervention in politics - coup, constitutional order, coup - which would
only delay Cambodia's socio-economic development and stability.
**************************************************
THE NATION: US DENIES ISSUING SUU KYI PERMIT
September 2, 1997 [slightly abridged]
Andreas Harsono, The Nation
JAKARTA - A spokesman for the American State Department said it had no
knowledge of reports that Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi used
her high profile to obtain a green card to the United States.
"We are very supportive of her, but I have not heard anything about a green
card," James P Rubin said in an Aug 25 press briefing, a transcript of which
has been made available to The Nation.
Brig Gen David O Abel of Burma's State Law and Order Restoration Council
(Slorc) told The Nation on Aug 13 that Suu Kyi's allegiance is not to Burma
but to "another country" and that she had used her position "to obtain a
green card from America".
A green card is a permanent resident permit. One usually obtains a green
card before applying for US citizenship.
In his daily briefing in the State Department building in Washington DC,
Rubin said he had not heard any discussions of a green card for Suu Kyi. "I
can tell you this, that Secretary [of State Madeleine] Albright believes
very strongly in the work that Aung San Suu Kyi is doing. She has been a
long-time supporter of her."
"We, as you know, have taken additional sanctions in recent months to try to
send the message that the elected leader of the party that won the elections
should have a role to play in that country," Rubin said.
***********************************************
BURMANET SUBJECT-MATTER RESOURCE LIST
BurmaNet regularly receives enquiries on a number of different
topics related to Burma. If you have questions on any of the
following subjects, please direct email to the following volunteer
coordinators, who will either answer your question or try to put you
in contact with someone who can:
Campus activism: zni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Boycott campaigns: ai268@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Buddhism: Buddhist Relief Mission: brelief@xxxxxxx
Chin history/culture: [volunteer temporarily away]
Fonts: tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
High School Activism: [volunteer needed]
History of Burma: zni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
International Affairs: Julien Moe: moe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Kachin history/culture: 74750.1267@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Karen history/culture: Karen Historical Society: 102113.2571@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mon history/culture: [volunteer needed]
Naga history/culture: Wungram Shishak: z954001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Burma-India border Aung San Myint: aungsan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Pali literature: "Palmleaf": c/o burmanet@xxxxxxxxxxx
Pipeline Campaign freeburma@xxxxxxx
Resettlement info: refugee_help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Rohingya culture volunteer needed
Shan history/culture: Sao Hpa Han: burma@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shareholder activism: simon_billenness@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Total - France Dawn Star: cd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tourism campaigns: bagp@xxxxxxxxxx "Attn. S.Sutcliffe"
volunteering: refugee_help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
World Wide Web: FreeBurma@xxxxxxxxx
Geographical Contacts:
Massachusetts simon_billenness@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[Feel free to suggest more areas of coverage]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FREE BURMA WEB PAGES:
http://FreeBurma.org
This single page serves only as an easy to remember URL and departure
point to resources promoting the establishment of democracy in Burma.
Please write to FreeBurma@xxxxxxxxx to add a site or for further
information." - Glen, system administrator
FREE BURMA COALITION:
to get involved in the Free Burma Coalition, send a message to:
zni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
or visit their homepage, accessible through: http:// FreeBurma.org
There is also an e-mail list-server especially for Free Burma activists
BURMANET SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION:
The BurmaNet News is an electronic newspaper covering Burma.
Articles from newspapers, magazines, newsletters, the wire
services and the Internet as well as original material are published.
It is produced with the support of the Burma Information Group
(B.I.G) and the Research Department of the ABSDF. We are also
grateful to many other friends around the world who send us articles
to post.
The BurmaNet News is e-mailed directly to subscribers and is
also distributed via the soc.culture.burma and seasia-l mailing lists.
For a free subscription to the BurmaNet News:
send a message to: majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx
a. For the BurmaNet News only:
in the message, type: subscribe burmanews-l
b. For the BurmaNet News and 4-5 other messages a day:
in the message, type: subscribe burmanet-l
(NOTE: all lower case letters, last letter is a lower case "L", not the
numeral one).
Letters to the editor, comments or contributions of articles should be
sent to the editor at: strider@xxxxxxxxxxx
***************************************************