The BurmaNet News: September 4, 199

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------
 "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
----------------------------------------------------------

The BurmaNet News: September 4, 1998
Issue #1089

HEADLINES:
==========
REUTERS: MYANMAR GOVERNMENT STRUGGLES WITH STUDENTS 
REUTERS: REBELS SAY MYANMAR VIOLENCE "INEVITABLE" 
NEWS FROM INSIDE: MONLAND REPORT 
SPDC: THREE FOREIGN REPORTERS DEPORTED 
NLOM: REASONS FOR NOT TRANSFERRING POWER 
****************************************************************

REUTERS: MYANMAR GOVERNMENT STRUGGLES WITH STUDENTS 
3 September, 1998 By David Brunnstrom 

BANGKOK, Sept 3 (Reuters) - A decade after shooting student protesters off
the streets to end a pro-democracy uprising, Myanmar's military is
struggling to contain yet another generation of youthful adversaries.

The military government has kept universities closed for most of the past
decade to prevent a resurgence of student unrest and hands down long jail
terms to political opponents.

But each time the campuses reopen, protests follow.

Last month, the Yangon Institute of Technology (YIT) reopened its campus
for the first time since late 1996 to allow for short refresher courses
ahead of final examinations.

On Wednesday, thousands of students there risked arrest by staging the
biggest anti-government protests the country has seen for years,
Yangon-based diplomats said. They followed smaller student protests in the
city last month.

The students' anger on Wednesday was directed in part against government
plans to split up their campus and relocate future classes far from the
existing northern Yangon site.

Diplomats said the government's aim was part of a long-term plan it began
after 1988's uprising to ensure that large numbers of students were not
concentrated in urban areas.

They said the government has been building two new campuses for YIT, one at
Hlaingthayar, about 45 minutes drive from downtown Yangon, and another at
Sinde, between Yangon and Mandalay.

``The plan is that there should be three campuses. One would stay in town
for students they are less worried about -- people doing evening classes
and post-graduates,'' a diplomat said.

``The student population who have traditionally caused problems --
undergraduates and so on -- would be moved out so they can't meet and
demonstrate downtown. If they demonstrate in the sticks somewhere it
doesn't get the same sort of attention.''

Diplomats said the military planners had also thought to ensure campuses
were built on the far side of bridges.

``It seems to be a key thing as you can shut bridges very easily,'' one said.

Relocation of the campuses meant the government could repossess university
land, which was prime city real estate, the diplomat said.

University campuses have been centres of anti-government activity ever
since British colonial times. The country's independence movement grew out
of a student strike in 1920.

The tradition continued during military rule in the 1960s and 1970s and
exploded with a vengeance in 1988.

Opposition supporters say the military killed several thousand people that
year to put down an uprising for democracy sparked by police handling of a
fight involving YIT students.

Diplomats said it was unclear if the current round of student protests
would escalate, but they thought it unlikely for now that ordinary people
would be willing to risk joining in, despite worsening economic conditions.

``My feeling is that these particular protests are unlikely to cause an
escalation,'' a third diplomat said. ``There is no real feeling that people
are going to start turning out in the streets in volume like they did in
1988.''

However, opponents of military rule have become increasingly assertive in
recent months and the government will have to tread carefully to avoid more
unrest.

The student protests have come as the main opposition party, the National
League for Democracy, has stepped up its campaign to force the military to
recognise the results of the country's last election in 1990, which the
party won by a landslide.

Aung San Suu Kyi, the popular NLD leader who won the 1991 Nobel Peace
Prize, has vowed to convene a ``People's Parliament'' this month as the
military had ignored demands to do so.

In the August demonstrations, the protesters handed out leaflets supporting
the NLD plan, although the party has denied any link to the students.

The government has warned the NLD it could be outlawed if it goes ahead
with its plan and says the armed forces could not stand idly by if the
party stirred up unrest. 

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

REUTERS: REBELS SAY MYANMAR VIOLENCE "INEVITABLE"
3 September, 1998 by Somchit Rungchamratrasami 

MAE SOT, Thailand, Sept 3 (Reuters) - A leader of a group of guerrillas
fighting the Myanmar government said on Thursday violence was inevitable if
the ruling military did not agree to talk to opposition leader Aung San Suu
Kyi.

Mahn Sha, secretary-general of the Karen National Union (KNU) rebel
movement, said the two sides in Myanmar appeared to be on a collision course.

The government was determined not to accede to the demands of the 1991
Nobel Peace Prize winner, but her pro-democracy movement would not give up.

``As long as the SPDC (State Peace and Development Council) refuses to hold
direct talks with Aung San Suu Kyi, the tension will escalate and violence
is inevitable,'' Manh Sha told Reuters in an interview in the jungle along
the Thai-Myanmar border.

``People who live in the rural areas and border towns seem to get a sense
of imminent violence,'' he said.

Manh Sha predicted the student protests in Yangon would escalate along with
support for Suu Kyi's opposition National League for Democracy (NLD).

But he said the opposition movement was better organised this time than 10
years ago when Myanmar saw its last significant anti-government uprising.

Opposition supporters say several thousand people were killed by the army
in a nationwide uprising that began on August 8, 1988 -- the so-called
``Four Eights'' day.

Yangon's military government says only few dozen people died in the violence.

``The current movement of the students is totally different from the Four
Eights incident because then they had no prominent leader,'' Mahn Sha said.

``But now the students have Aung San Suu Kyi as a symbol of democracy and
their de facto leader who would fight along side with them,'' he said.

Formed in 1948, the KNU has been fighting for an autonomous Karen state in
eastern Myanmar since 1949.

It suffered a major setback in 1994, when a Buddhist faction staged a rank
and file mutiny against the Christian-dominated leadership and defected to
Myanmar troops.

But it has survived and is an enthusiastic supporter of the Myanmar
pro-democracy movement and Suu Kyi.

Suu Kyi has raised the pressure on the military government in recent weeks,
holding protests against restrictions on her movements and promising to
convene a ``People's Parliament'' because the government refuses to do so.

In a statement on Wednesday the government said an NLD parliament would
amount to setting up a parallel government, ``which no government in the
world would accept.''

It said the KNU would act as the armed wing of the NLD, endangering
national reconciliation efforts and under such a scenario the government
would have no option but to take legal action against the opposition to
safeguard national security.

The NLD won the country's last polls in May 1990 by a landslide, but the
military ignored the results, saying Myanmar was not ready for democracy.

Manh Sha said recent tension in Yangon between the government and
opposition had pushed up prices throughout Myanmar.

``People have begun to stock up on food and necessary items and this is
causing the cost of living to sky rocket,'' he said. 

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

NEWS FROM INSIDE: MONLAND REPORT 
28 August, 1998 from <nyap01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 

New Arrivals and the New Oppression against the Mon Villagers

In July, the MNRC (Mon National Relief Committee) settles about 15 families
of Mon villagers who fled from the new oppression by Burmese Army that has
happened in Ye Township of Mon State and Yebyu Township of Tenasserim
Division.   These new arrivals are resettled in Tavoy and Bee Ree
resettlement camps.   The oppression has been conducted since May, 1998,
because of the suspicion of the local Burmese troops against the villagers
that they has supported new Mon armed group, which has no name yet. Since
the NMSP, main armed resistance organization that represents Mon people,
entered into ceasefire agreement over three years ago, the local Mon
villagers were less sufferer than the previous situation in some human
rights conditions such as killings and torturing.   Before ceasefire, the
villagers were always accused as Mon rebel-supporters and many villagers
were killed or inhumanely tortured by the Burmese soldiers because of this
suspicion.

At the beginning of 1998, the Mon armed group was formed with retired
members of MNLA and started revolting the Burmese Army in the area.   This
new group has about 50 troops and they launched their activities in Ye and
Yebyu townships that close to gas-pipeline.   On 28 May, the Burmese Army's
LIB No. 273 led by Maj. Hla Naing Htwe was attacked by the Mon troops in
border area of Mon State and Tenasserim Division.   After this attack, the
Burmese Army angered to the local villagers and they also accused the local
villagers as supporters of the Mon armed group.   Because of this
accusation, the troops of Burmese Army, have mistreated the local
villagers, including women and village headmen.

On June 6, about 30 troops of LIB No. 273 led by Maj. Hla Naing Htwe went
into Daneekyar village and arrested all men in the village.   The soldiers
tied these villagers and asked every one who knew the members of Mon armed
group.   If the villagers said they did not know, they were also beaten by
jungle boots or hitting by fists.   If someone said he knew the members
they asked him many questions and whenever the soldiers dissatisfied on the
someone answers, he was beaten by the soldiers again and again.   The
soldiers also took the suspected relatives of the armed group members and
tortured by various ways in a hiding place and then released.   The village
chairman and secretary were also taken away and detained for one night for
their absence to inform the Burmese Army about the activities of the Mon
troops.

Continuously, on June 6, the same troops of the Burmese Army's LIB No. 273,
went into Kyonekanya village and forced one person from each house,
including women and village secretary, to follow with them to a place about
2 kilometers from the village near the seacoast.   The soldiers asked every
one about the new Mon armed group and their leaders.   The villagers who
gave answers they did not know or see the armed group were separated in one
place and tied with ropes.   All of them were sent to the village back and
detained under secretary's house where he put oxen and cows.   They
arrested the rest 29 villagers, including women, who gave answers they knew
and seen the members of armed group.   These villagers were brought to
Magyi village and detained in a paddy-husking factory in the village.   The
soldiers did not give them water and food for six hours.   About 8 o'clock
night time, the soldiers took the villagers one by one to a place about 200
meters from the factory and interrogated them about the members of the new
armed group under the dark and shady trees.   According to escapees, one
woman about 35 years old, who was the youngest one among three women, was
repeatedly raped by the soldiers.   In the interrogating place, when they
asked questions to each villager, the soldiers also surrounded that
villager.   When they raped the woman, although she asked for help and
cried loudly, nobody can help her.   Then, they also interrogated the other
two elder women, but the villagers did not know for sure whether the other
two women were also raped or not.   On the next day morning, they released
all these women.   The soldiers also punished the rest villagers with
various kinds of torturing for their absence to inform about the activities
of the Mon troops.   On the next day, they released other 4 men from the
group and ordered to untie the villagers who were detained under the
village secretary's house for 2 days.

Then they continued detaining the rest 22 villagers in the factories and
demanded a ransom of 70,000 Kyat to the release of all villagers.   Thus,
all villagers collected cash and paid them on June 14, and then the
soldiers released the villagers except the village secretary.   They
additionally demanded for another a ransom of 20000 Kyat to free village
secretary.   On June 16, after the villagers paid 20000 Kyat ransom, they
released the village secretary.

Similarly, the same troops also went into Tawbaung village on June 7, and
beat the village chairman and secretary.   Burmese Army's LIB No. 273 also
cooperated with troops from IB No. 61 closely.   The IB No. 61 also took
responsibility to find the group's members in Ye township area of Mon
State.    On June 6, the troops from IB No. 61, led by Maj. Kyi Lwin Oo
came near Khawza village and arrested some farmers who went to their paddy
fields or fruit plantations in the morning.   They arrested 8 men and 6
women outside of the village, tied them with ropes and brought into
village.   Soon after they reached into village, the soldiers tied all
arrested villagers in the trees and asked the village headmen who were the
relatives of the members of Mon armed group.   The village headmen told
that they were all his villagers and not the relatives of the Mon troops.
The soldiers did not believe and beat the villagers, and asked them who
knew the members of Mon armed group.   When they dissatisfied on the
answers of the villagers, they also beat the village secretary.   He was
severely beaten and had to lie in the bed about one week for treatment.
Additionally, about 20 villages in surrounding area were also instructed to
not go their paddy fields, fruit plantations and to the sea for fishing. If
the Burmese soldiers met them on the way to their work-places, or in their
work-places, they must be accused the supporters or contact persons of the
armed group.   They could be punished to die.   As the villagers are
traditionally farmers and fishermen, whenever they could not go to their
farms or to the sea, they faced much difficulty for survival.   At the same
time, whenever the Burmese soldiers went into villagers, their belongings
including food supplies and livestocks were always looted and less and less
food remained in the village.

Like Kyonekanya village, besides the villagers could not move to their
work-places, they had to pay addition 90000 Kyat as a ransom to the
soldiers to release the kidnapped villagers.   To get this amount of cash,
most villagers had to sell their paddy, rice and other livestocks in other
villages.   So they got cash and tried for the release of their villagers.
Considerably, how the situation the Kyonekanya villagers have faced losing
chance to make income or foods.

Therefore, some villagers from these villages tried to move to other
villages northern part of Ye town or into Ye town to take refuge.   Most
villages' chairmen and secretaries are not dared to stay longer inside
their own village and moved and have stayed with armed group.    The
villagers have remained without leaders and when the local Burmese Army
battalions ordered to appoint someone to be village chairman, nobody
accepted to be village leader.

Normally, during June and July, the villagers must have to start working to
plant paddy in their farms.   Because of this new movement restriction
against the villagers instructed by the Burmese Army, most villagers in the
area have to abandon the yearly farming activities.   Similarly, the
farmers who have rubber and fruit plantations could not go to work-places.
Since they could not in their farms or plantation, they received less and
less income or foods.   Then they decided to move to other villages, where
they felt the situation was better than in their village.   But most of
them expected they could return to their native places again if the
situation poses better.

This is the population displacement.   Among the escapees, only little
numbers of families reached to border area's Mon refugees resettlement
sites, Tavoy and Bee Ree.  These families have no expectation that they
could return to their homes during this rainy season.   They said the
Burmese Army will make more activities and the punishment against the
villagers will continue, if the Mon armed group continues taking base in
the area.   The Burmese troops always accuse the villagers that they are
supporters of Mon armed group, thus the reprisal against the villagers will
continue.   They also think that more and more villagers will arrive to the
resettlement camps during this rainy season when most displaced persons
clearly know that they could not stay deep inside government control area
longer.   They may find the places where they can survive.

The armed struggle occurred because of the result of dissatisfaction on the
human rights situation that committed by the government or its local troops
during previous two years after ceasefire.   According to SLORC promise to
NMSP, the both sides should not use forced labour, however, the SLORC
troops and authorities broke this promise and used many thousands of local
Mon villagers to work in the construction sites.   Again, during the 1997
offensives against the KNU in Tenasserim Division, many thousands of Mon
villagers were also arrested to be frontline civilian porters for Burmese
Army.   And the local SLORC/ SPDC troops always collected tax from
villagers permanently and they have to pay regular ransom to the Burmese
Army.   Because of this oppression, as a result, the armed assistance group
was formed to protect themselves and this tension escalates between the new
group and the Burmese Army.   The villagers, who have been constantly
suffered from protracted civil war, are facing the same situation before
NMSP-SLORC ceasefire period again. 

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

SPDC: THREE FOREIGN REPORTERS DEPORTED 
3 September, 1998 from <OKKAR66129@xxxxxxx> 

MYANMAR INFORMATION COMMITTEE, YANGON
Information Sheet N0.A-0591(I)

(4) Three Foreign Reporters Deported for Entering Country with False
Documents, Illegally Gathering News

Three foreign correspondents, one Canadian, one Japanese and one
Australian, holding tourist visas were deported from the Yangon
International Airport on 1 September for entering the country with false
documents and illegally gathering  news. Of the three, Mr. Douglas J Earl,
the Canadian, is a reporter for the Thaya Thai Advertising. He arrived
Myanmar by TG. 303 flight on 19 August 1998 holding Canadian passport No BC
015260 posing as a company staff. Mr. Munesuke Yamamoto, the Japanese, is a
correspondent of the Pacific Press Service. He arrived in Myanmar by TG.305
flight on 6 August 1998 holding a Japanese passport No TE-7369815 posing as
a designer. Ms. Sophie Louise Barrm. the Australian, is a freelance
reporter. She arrived in Myanmar by TG-303 flight on 14 August 1998 holding
an Australian passport No E-7026187 posing as a teacher. The three
foreigners with ulterior motives carried documents with false statements on
occupation and personal data.  The authorities seized from them documents,
cassette tapes, films and video tapes on internal political affairs of
Myanmar as evidence.  The authorities deported them from Yangon
International Airport on TG- 306 flight yesterday evening after they had
been found to have lied regarding their occupations despite their being
foreign reporters and illegally gathered news.

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

NEW LIGHT OF MYANMAR: REASONS FOR NOT TRANSFERRING POWER 
1 September, 1998 by Maung Tin Aye 

Although I, the writer of this article, have to concentrate on meeting the
basic needs of my family I cannot afford to ignore national affairs. So, I
once wrote an article titled, "Though it is the concern of the citizens
 ..." and sent it to the newspapers.  The article then appeared in the
Kyemon and Myanma Alin dailies published on 17-1-97.  In spite of the urge
to write articles I refrained from doing so since it is my conviction that
a person of average knowledge and experience in politics should not engage
in politics.

I did write that article because I saw many persons devoid of any knowledge
about international political affairs had jumped on the political bandwagon
as representatives-elect or organizers of a well-known big political party
and were hindering tasks for national reconstruction. Then again, there was
an urge to write an article to discuss about those giving their support out
of their personality cult to a political leader who was shouting and
demanding to transfer power to the party that won in the elections.  It is
my sincere wish for them to be considerate.

I will not argue over the demand calling for the handing over power to a
political party that won in the elections in accordance with democratic
practices.  All understand that in Britain, France, Japan, the US and in
others, a ruling party usually hands over power to the victorious party
when it loses in the elections.

Then I think it over whether those concerned are reasoning out why the
present State Peace and Development Council has not handed over power to
the political party that won in the 1990 elections. As I think it over I
see that with the exception of politicians with their attachments to the
respective parties or personalities, opportunist politicians and those who
have a grudge against the Tatmadaw [Defense Services] for taking action for
their offences, the majority of the public can rightly appreciate the
energetic efforts being exerted by the Tatmadaw day in and day out since
the 1988 disturbances.  As conditions have improved people can now live in
peace.

This does not necessarily mean that the Tatmadaw does not need to hand over
power or it will never hand over power.  As all the citizens are aware the
Tatmadaw leaders have time and again made it clear that the Tatmadaw has no
desire to rule the country for long.  There can be no doubt about this.  It
is because out of the six objectives of the National Convention at which
delegates of mass and class organizations, those of political parties and
those of national races are taking part in the drafting of a constitution,
the fourth objective agreed by the Tatmadaw Government and the delegates
calls for flourishing of a genuine multiparty democracy system.  The
constitution is being drafted conforming to those six objectives already
agreed.

After acknowledging and accepting the attitude of the Tatmadaw that it has
no desire to hold on to power for long, what remains to be considered is
why power is not handed over to the NLD [National League for Democracy].

There are two sound reasons why power is not handed over to the NLD. One
reason is lack of a constitution to enable the political party that wins in
the elections to form a government and a Hluttaw [People's Assembly].
Another reason is that reliable evidence shows that the leadership of the
party that has won in the elections including the one at the top and
Central Executive Committee members will certainly execute the sovereign
powers in accordance with the dictates of the West bloc powers.

Concerning the first reason, there have been excuses that a government is
formed in a certain country where there is no constitution and that power
has to be handed over to a party that wins in the elections. When Myanmar
[Burma] was about to regain her independence from the British, hasty
measures were taken to draft a constitution within a few months.  The
constitution was then approved on 24 September 1947  and Myanmar was
declared as a sovereign independent nation on 4 January 1998. There was no
precedence in Myanmar of forming a government without a constitution that
prescribes the administrative system and the rights of the citizens.

There was no sound evidence requiring a transfer of power in the absence or
without drafting a constitution.  The people have already accepted the
point that without a constitution formation of a government is impossible.

Hence, I would like to elaborate on the second point.  First and foremost,
the present government is not a government of any political party that
contested in the 1990 elections. The present government assuming State
responsibilities is not a kind of political party that contested in the
elections to gain power.  It has assumed the sovereign powers in order to
address the chaotic and disorderly situation resulting from riots,
lootings, beheadings and destructions.  It has done so to safeguard
non-disintegration of the Union.  Being a Tatmadaw government it has to
ensure security of the nation and the people. It has to realise the
objective.  It should not hand over power to a party just because the
latter has won in the elections.

Whoever individual or whichever country is measuring with whatever scales,
the Tatmadaw government which is always shouldering the national defence
duties will measure with the rationalism scale. Seventeen armed groups have
exchanged arms for peace and are participating in border area development
projects during the eight years the Tatmadaw has continued to restore the
nation's developing situations since 1990 after the elections.  This is a
firm evidence.

Many disagreements are surfacing in the party that won the election and is
demanding to transfer the state power.  Views such as whether to
participate in the National Convention or to boycott it, whether to accept
alien assistance or not and whether to follow the confrontation method or
to join hands with the government and views on lack of democracy and unity
in the party itself are among the differences occurring in the party. The
cracks in the party have begun to show.  There are accusations on the
members of a group led by U Aung Shwe that they are using her to win
foreign assistance although knowing that she has no right to participate in
the government and that the members of the group are going to kick her out
at the opportune time to grab power.  There are also accusations on her
that she is temporarily joining hands with them (the group) as she does not
want to split entirely with them as she has nobody in the party to rely on
although she knows their evil scheme and that she will also kick them out
with her super powers when victory over the Tatmadaw is at hand.  These
cracks, which are unremediable and undesirable circumstances, show the
weakness in the party which is demanding the state power.  Every
experienced person know what the situation of the nation would be at
present if the power would be transferred after the elections in 1990.

Even Prime Minister U Nu of AFPFL [Anti Fascists People's Freedom League]
and Patasa [Union] governments, who had taken part in political leadership
role together with Bogyoke [General] Aung San, had to transfer the power to
the Caretaker Government.  This has shown the weakness of the past
multiparty system in Myanmar.

The Tatmadaw, which is a responsible force for the national cause, cannot
ignore the fact that the godmother of NLD is going to govern the nation
under the advises, orders and directives of the Western group.  The
Tatmadaw cannot transfer the power to her. If a leader of a political party
or the government which will govern the nation wants to build power under
alien arrangements and assistance that desire will distance that person
from winning the state power.  No Myanmar [Burmese] will accept such person
as the nation's leader.

The responsibility of the Tatmadaw should be noted seriously in this case.
No political party or person can match the strength and ability of the
Tatmadaw in maintaining public security and in defending the nation against
external and internal dangers.  There were many occurrences in which
national security was threaten. Such dangers broke out three times--in
1958, 1962, and 1988--after the independence was restored.  Why should the
Tatmadaw, which has dutifully saved the nation from these dangers, transfer
the power to the party which has claimed a landslide victory in the
election as a reason?  Is National League for Democracy more important than
the security of over 40 million citizens?  Isn't it right for the Tatmadaw
to scrutinize the political party to whom it has to hand over the future of
the 40 million citizens?  The Tatmadaw cannot give priority to the NLD's
so-called democracy as it has to give more attention to national security
and in discharging its noble duties.  The democracy of Myanmar cannot be
compared with those of America or Britain. Coping of the systems of oldest
democracy countries is not suitable for Myanmar.  We should not forget the
disintegration of the Soviet Union.

We should aware of the fact that CIA was behind the Tiananmen Square
crisis.  The blood that split from 1988 disturbances is not completely
dried yet.  We should always aware of the cause which may lead to breakup
of Myanmar, which is a small nation on the world map. There are many
experienced politicians still living in Myanmar. They should boldly and
objectively analyze the current situation of the nation.

They should be loyal to the nation and the people. Myanmar parents will not
permit their child to swim in Inya Lake. Myanmar parents have the right to
prevent their 18-year daughter from going to America to work.  Because of
human rights parents in America and Europe have no right to admonish their
children. Myanmar parents will not accept that tradition. The state power
cannot be transferred to the political party only for winning the election.

The Tatmadaw government is not a political party.  It is not the government
which gained the state power by winning the most number of votes in an
election.  It is the Tatmadaw Government which has taken the
responsibilities to always discharge for the national cause in accord with
the conviction and history.  It should be considered seriously that the
transfer of the state power is the cause of the people.

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