The BurmaNet News: September 29, 19

[strider@xxxxxxxxxxx]

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

The BurmaNet News: September 29, 1998
Issue #1106

HEADLINES:
==========
REUTERS: OPPOSITION REJECTS ANTI-DISSENT LAWS 
REUTERS: NE WIN SAID IN SINGAPORE FOR TREATMENT 
DVB: R'GOON MAKING CEASEFIRE GROUPS ISSUE STATEMENTS 
MIZZIMA: VIEWS ON INDO-BURMA RELATIONSHIP 
ASIAN AGE: INDIA REFUSED BURMA BID 
ASIAN AGE: FERNANDES ORDERS PROBE OF "OPERATION LEECH" 
****************************************************************

REUTERS: MYANMAR OPPOSITION REJECTS ANTI-DISSENT LAWS 
28 September, 1998 

YANGON, Sept 28 (Reuters) - Myanmar's opposition National League for
Democracy (NLD) resolved on Monday to annul two laws used by successive
governments to suppress dissent, a move likely to escalate tensions between
it and the ruling military.

A 10-member committee formed by the NLD this month to represent a
parliament said in a statement it had resolved to annul the 1950 Emergency
Provisions Act and the Law Protecting the State Against the Dangers of
Destructionists.

At the same time it resolved to have parliament approve three laws
introduced after the 1988 military takeover, covering the registration of
political parties, organisation of associations, and parliamentary elections.

It said the latter law was amended to ``delete provisions inconsistent with
democratic procedures.''

Political analysts called the legal changes announced by the opposition a
symbolic act that would achieve little beyond escalating already-charged
tensions with the military.

Earlier, state newspapers quoted Lieutenant General Khin Nyunt, a senior
member of the ruling military council, as saying in a speech on Sunday that
a ``handful of destructionists'' were plotting to destabilise the nation.

In an apparent reference to the committee, he added: ``Development will
last only if there is a prevalence of law and order and if destructionists
cannot raise their heads.''

Khin Nyunt also criticised the group for persuading people not to invest in
Myanmar.

The September 25 issue of the government's official gazette announced that
the military council had formed a 16-member ``Political Affairs Committee''
headed by Khin Nyunt.

Its role would be to study the activities of political parties in
successive eras, said an official source who did not want to be identified.

The gazette said the committee had been formed on September 18, the 10th
anniversary of the military takeover. It said its members included
Lieutenant General Win Myint, the secretary three of the council, and Major
General Maung Than of the Yangon command, another council member.

[ ... ] 

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

REUTERS: MYANMAR'S NE WIN SAID IN SINGAPORE FOR TREATMENT 
28 September, 1998 

YANGON, Sept 28 (Reuters) - Ne Win, the officially retired architect of
military rule in Myanmar, flew to Singapore at the weekend for medical
treatment, a business source told Reuters on Monday.

Ne Win, 88, left Yangon for the Southeast Asian city state on a Myanmar
Airways flight on Sunday morning, said the source, who declined to be
identified.

The source said Ne Win's health condition was unclear at present. Further
details were not available.

An airline source confirmed that Ne Win's name was on the passenger manifest.

Ne Win, one of the leaders of Myanmar's (Burma's) independence movement
from Britain in the 1930s and 1940s, led a coup in 1962 that began the past
three-and-a-half decades of military-dominated rule in Myanmar.

He implemented the ``Burmese Way to Socialism,'' a disastrous doctrine that
reduced Myanmar from one of Southeast Asia's richest countries to one of
its poorest.

Ne Win officially retired from politics in 1988, the year the military
seized direct control by bloodily crushing a nationwide pro-democracy
uprising.

His name is rarely mentioned in public and he has scarcely been seen since
he officially relinquished power, but many political analysts believe he
continues to wield considerable influence from behind the scenes.

A personal visit to Indonesia in September 1997 was the first time he had
been in public since 1988. 

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

DEMOCRATIC VOICE OF BURMA: RANGOON MAKING CEASEFIRE GROUPS ISSUE ANTI-NLD
STATEMENTS 
23 September, 1998 

It has been learned that the SPDC [State Peace and Development Council] has
been sending its special emissaries from military intelligence to
organizations which had signed cease-fire agreements to issue statements
saying they do not support the activities of the National League for
Democracy [NLD] to convene parliament.  Pressure is being put on these
organizations following the expression of support for NLD plan to convene
parliament by four organizations which had signed peace agreement with the
government.  It is learned that beginning 21 September, leaders of
organizations which had signed ceasefire agreement with the government and
leaders of ethnic political organizations have been barred from leaving
their respective regions.  It has been learned that agents from military
intelligence nos. 2, 3, 22, and 23 are being dispatched as special
emissaries of the SPDC to cease-fire groups to pressure them to issue
statements saying they do not support the NLD plan to convene parliament.
That is why the Kokang group had to issue such a statement on 19 September,
stating it does not support the NLP plan to convene parliament.

The term peace group was used instead of cease-fire group in the statement
as insisted by the SPDC, according to circles close to Kokang group.  It
was learned that a military intelligence officer arrived in Mong Ko on 17
September and asked U (Aung Palat), leader of Mong Ko defense unit, to
issue a similar statement.  The officer is pressuring Palaung, Wa, Shan,
Pa-o, and (?Lahu) cease-fire groups to issue similar statements. The SPDC
is reported to be concerned about a possible boycott of the forthcoming
National Convention by cease-fire groups who may cite various excuses for
their absence.  It is reported that a list of attendance for the convention
is being compiled.  They have been told that if they do not issue
statement, responsibility for the consequences were not be taken. According
to a member of a cease-fire group who wished to remain anonymous, because
of this threat the cease-fire groups are likely to issue statements as
demanded by the SPDC.

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

MIZZIMA NEWS GROUP: VIEWS ON INDO-BURMA RELATIONSHIP 
27 September, 1998 

The relationship between India and Burma was severe and cold after the
military staged a coup in September 1988 and its continuing crack down on
the democratic forces in Burma. The Government of India distanced itself
from the military junta and expressed its support to the democratic
movement in Burma. However, the relationship between the two countries
slowly has become more cordial in terms of cooperation in trade and
counter-insurgency on the border. This was particularly seen after the then
Indian Foreign Secretary Mr. J.N. Dixit's visit to Rangoon in March 1993.
In January, 1994, Burma's Deputy Foreign Minister U Nyunt Swe made an
official visit to New Delhi. During his visit, the two countries signed a
bilateral agreement to regularize and promote informal trade across the
land border into India's North Eastern States. The border trade was
officially inaugurated on 12th April 1995 at Moreh, a border township of
India. Since that time, there have been regular meetings and exchanges
between the two countries.

In the past three weeks, there were reports in the Indian newspapers that
India has offered to supply arms to Burma. One Indian newspaper quoted
Cabinet secretariat sources and wrote that this offer was made by the
Indian defence secretary to Brig. Kyaw Win, Deputy Director of Defence
Services Intelligence of Burma during the his visit to India in March this
year. The offer was, reportedly, in response to Burmese government's
cooperation extended to New Delhi in tackling North-East insurgency groups.
Burma's pro-democracy activists based in India were concerned with the
reports. MIZZIMA News Group conducted extensive interviews during the last
week with certain individuals regarding the report of India's arms-offer in
particular and Indo-Burma relationship in general. [BurmaNet is posting an
edited version of the interviews with the Chairman of an NGO, a Research
fellow of Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, spokesperson of a
Burma pro-democracy organization and Defense Minister of India.]  The first
two interviewees used the term "Myanmar" instead of the term "Burma".

MIZZIMA News Group, 1944, Outran Line, Kingsway Camp, Delhi - 9
Tel/Fax : 0091-11-7115491

(Interview with Mr.. Deenadayalan, Chairman of the Other Media. The Other
Media is a networking organization of peoples' movements in India and it is
based in Delhi. It has been actively supporting Burma's struggle for
democracy and Mr. Deenadayalan is also a member of Friends of Burma
organization.)

Highlight : "Though Indian state is supposed to be the largest democracy in
the world, the kind of its expression and manifestation in terms of its
relationship with neighbouring countries has showed that is has also been
undemocratic of promoting forces which are not democratic. This is a very
clear indication in terms of its support to Burmese government."

Q : Recently, there have been reports in the media that India offered to
supply arms to Burma in response to Burmese government's concerted efforts
in helping India to fight North-East insurgents. What is your response to
the reports?

A: I have seen the reports. So myself it was not very surprising for me. It
was for many reasons. One is the relationship between Indian intelligence
and movements in neighbouring countries has been there for very long time
as it is for strategic purposes. [ ... ] One knows the political position
of BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) government on the whole question of
nationalities and those aspects of states as such they are much more
patriotic in terms of their own articulation. [ ... ] They want to deal
with the political discontents in the border areas by force and they don't
mind co-opting the help of the neighbouring countries in bringing by force
in finding solutions to the political issues in these borders. [ ... ] 

Q: As you know, there is a strong lobby in India which supports democratic
movement in Burma. But, on the other hand, many people in India are feeling
that India should normalize the relationship with the military regime in
Burma too. Particularly, this view is getting stronger in the bureaucrats.
What is your comment on that?

A: This again is an indication in terms of the policy that the government
takes now. It is not on the values of democracy. It is not on the values of
secularism. It is not on the highest principles by which a state is
governed now. The state is governed basically now by economic interest. For
me, it is a clear indication that the government of India though it
professes that it is committed to certain deeper values of democracy,
secularism but it remains in words. But in action, you will see that since
the time of opening up of its own borders for multinational companies for
multilateral industries or even financial institutions to come into this
country. It is very clear indication that they have succumbed to the
pressure of economic interest both outside and also from within.  And what
is very clear indication in terms of its policy towards neighbours is that
as long as its economic interest are furthered by this relationship, it is
satisfied and it doesn't matter in that process if it is going to violate
the democratic principles in another country.  This is precisely what is
happening. So this is not something new. It has been set up because of the
process of globalization too. India is caught up in the process of
globalization very seriously. And it is an indication.

Q: China was providing arms to Burma. There are many people in India saying
that we also should go to Burma to counter China's hand in Burma. What is
opinion on that?

A: We know that any state for the matter for its own survival has used many
bogies and many excuses. And China bogey is another bogey India government
is using. It is in the name of protecting its own interest vis-a-vis
Chinese interest. [ ... ]

Q: I would like to go into insurgency problems in North East India. To
counter anti-India insurgent groups, Indian government seems to have a
strong argument to crack down Burma's anti-government armed groups which
are reportedly linked with some of the North-East insurgent groups. What is
your view on this argument?

A: The way that I look at the issue of insurgency or containing of
insurgency whether it is in Burma or India is entirely different. What the
Indian government is trying to do by its own policy in terms of insurgency
is by negotiating with Burma in terms of supplying arms and ammunition to
them so that they will be equipped better to fight against Indian insurgent
groups. But what guarantee is there that arms and ammunition is not going
to be used by Burmese government to oppress its own people? There is no
guarantee. That is one thing. 

Second thing is that what government of India trying to do is trying to
deal with the symptoms of the problems. The insurgency exists because of
the lopsided development policy of the government. Second thing is lack of
the political will to solve the political problems of the people. We always
say that we need to find political solutions to the problems of North East
insurgency. Because these are political issues. We cannot think in terms of
military intervention and military solution to a political issue. And we
stand by it. And this attitude of the government of trying to deal with the
political issues with arms and ammunition is not going to bring about the
solutions at all. On the contrary, it is going to breath more violence. It
is going to breath more insurgency in the North East. It is not going to
solve the problems at all.

[ ... ]

Q: So, what are your suggestions to build up the solidarity movement for
democracy in Burma among the people of India?

A: There are one or two things which I am concerned about even in terms of
the struggle in Burma for pro-democracy. The pro-democratic struggle itself
should find some kind of consulted expression. But unfortunately this
consulted expression is not there. Even the expression is divided. [ ... ]
There is a certain amount of confusion among the minds of the Indian people
also in terms of perceiving this reality of democratic struggle in Burma.

Even within the struggle for democracy in Burma, there are also a lot other
problems. You are talking about what kind of new Burma you should have. [
 ... ] Even the debates and discussions will have to find currency in India
among the people. And so my own suggestion is that you need to evolve an
effective campaign among political parties, student leaders and with
independent mass movements. [ ... ] There has to be a very conscious, very
clear campaign demanding solidarity to the struggles that are taking place.
[ ... ]

END - Interview One.

(Interview with Dr. Swaran Singh, Research fellow of Institute for Defense
Studies and Analyses - IDSA which is based in Delhi.)

Highlight : "I think it is perfect that after waiting ten years now India
has gradually started showing a certain change in its Burma policy and
government has been taken a positive view of evolving relation with
military junta there."

Q: What is your view on recent media reports of India offering arms to Burma?

A: Yes, there has been report lately of India has offered some sort of
defence equipment to Burmese authorities. That was perhaps expected also.
If you look at what actually involves in relations of these two countries,
India and Burma have no border problems, no ethnic or other problems. The
only problem which is central to India and Burma is the level of violence
which continues to be there for last 10, 20 years on their borders. And
both the countries have been suspecting each other being involved in
promoting and embetting this kind of violence. Therefore, I think, removing
or at least controlling and gradually eliminating that violence from both
sides on the border remains number one priority for these two countries.

India has been trying for long years now, if you remember, it started in
1993 when the first time Indian foreign secretary visited Burma. There was
a certain change of thinking then, you know, that you need to deal with
authorities there and you can not go on waiting for democracy to come in
Burma.  And since then a lot of things have happened and if you see a lot
of economic cooperation has certainly taken place. But if you see what is
the objective from both sides, then as I said, the cooperation between what
I called violence management agencies has to be achieved. Now these can be
intelligence agencies from both sides, police from both sides, paramilitary
organizations and even defence establishment from both sides. Now because
that has to be based at higher level of mutual confidence and mutual
understanding of each other's problems. And therefore simple cultural
exchange, economic cooperation cannot actually, directly have an effective
method of resolving the level of violence which has continued in the border
region of India and Burma. And entire North East has been suffering for
long years because of that.

And then let us see, there are two ways of looking at how one country
decides policy on the other country. One is how the international community
is viewing that country and how international community is reacting towards
the country. If you see, China was the first country after 1988 massacre to
show tremendous level of indulgence. At one stage, people were talking of
serenization [sic] of Burma that shows China was fully in control of what
was happening in Burma. There were two major defence contracts singed in
1992 and later in 1994. One of US $ 1.2 billion and other one of $ 400
millions supplied them tremendous equipment which  was also followed by
tremendous increase in the numbers of manpower of military in Burma.

But that did not deter the international community now after 1995. When
Albright, the then US permanent representative to United Nations visited to
Burma, it resulted in all other countries, be European countries,
especially ASEAN countries fully coming into investment and cooperating
with Burma, co-opting Burma into the ASEAN. And therefore, these are the
international response, you see. Gradually all of the countries responding
positively and accepting Burmese authorities whatever they are now. There
can be value judgments on these things. But you have to see that
international trend is in favour of building relationship with military
authorities in Rangoon.   Should India follow international trend? That is
question number one.

Second question is how Burma has been evolving internally. There is a
definite view, I think a lot of people think like that internally also,
Aung San Suu Kyi herself has softened her stand over the years. And she has
often shown some radical views have come and sometimes she has protested
and always things have been appearing likely to change. But overall in last
6, 7 years, her stand appears to have softened. So internally, there is a
greater acceptance, at least apparently greater acceptance of military
junta in Burma. Should India then continue to be exclusive and still
willing to support democracy support? Now this is one aspect of the problem.

Then, if you look at the other aspects of the problem which is how India
formulates its foreign policy internally. How domestic opinion gradually
becomes dominant in formulating in changing foreign policy from one side to
another. There was a strong lobby in this country for supporting democracy
movement in Burma. But as you see looking at these changes worldwide and
internally in Burma, there is a parallel lobby in India which has been long
time persistently asking that India should now build relations with
military junta in Burma. Have state to state relationship and there is a
huge number of people who are fallen with in between who generally supports
democracy saying you should continue supporting democracy but at the same
time evolve and build a relationship with junta. Because they are in power
now for 10 years. And one cannot go on waiting indefinitely and let the
violence in North East of India and border areas of Burma go on.

You have to find the solution and let me say solution always comes in a
package form and what you have to see is what is the net result whether
that is positive. If that is positive that becomes a basis for a country to
decide its policy vis-a-vis another country. There is definitely going to
be somebody somewhere who is going to be negatively effected by what is
happening and what will happen. But definitely there is a point of view
here that we should build relations.

As I said, since the violence is the number one obsession from both sides,
the national interest of both countries should demand resolving these
violence which exists on the border for long years. And therefore that
demand I think is certain level of cooperation, mutual confidence
especially in what I said violence management agencies which can go up to
defence co-operation and paramilitary cooperation and intelligence
agencies, etc. etc..

Q: What are the kinds of weapons India has reportedly offered to supply Burma?

A: [ ... ] What I am trying to say here is that since India decided in
principle to sell defence equipment and defence related other things like
trucks, communication networks, bridges, there is now a drop and India
should therefore start looking for new areas where it can sell its defence
and related equipment. On the other side, if you look at Burma, the last
two major deals in purchasing defence equipment and weapons, that was in
1992-94. Both with Chinese. And since then they have not purchased any.
They have not signed any major contract on purchasing weapons and other
equipment for defence forces. That makes a party which perhaps are now
looking for new sources to obtain defence related equipment. And perhaps
that matches these two countries well together.

But one word of caution here has to be given is that if you look at the
India's defence exports, they can no way be compared with Chinese. Because
Chinese are the only country in this world which is known to have been
supplied ballistic missiles. So when we talk of Chinese contracts with
Burma India contracts can never ever be as offensive in terms of the
categories of weapons. India is generally known to supply more of logistics
communication networks and defence what it is called "deem to be defence"
equipment which is not exactly weapons. Even when you talk of kind of
weapons India has been supplying, it is generally very small category of
weapons of rapid fire weapons in terms of guns, rifles, pistol, etc. etc..
Therefore, Burma can not expect India to give them certain category of
weapons which will ever as powerful as they have already obtained from
Chinese. But I think from both sides it is a clear understanding at least
from the Indian side, the understanding is very clear that what we are
aiming at is increasing the level of mutual confidence, increasing the
level of transparency between two establishments and because the core
interest here is resolving violence in North East of India and on their
side of the border. That in a way makes imperative to achieve a level of
cooperation between defence related and violence management agencies of two
sides. That remains the motive. Not just selling weapons.

Q: India is known to have been supporting democratic movement in Burma.
Will it be contrary to this stand that India supplies arms to Burmese
military regime and cracks down the anti-Burmese government armed groups in
the process of handling North East insurgents?

A: Now, whether these kinds of exports from Indian defence establishment
will have some effect on what you call people on the periphery. People who
supports democratic movement of Burma, but have been operating perhaps more
like insurgents. Now there are two dimensions to it. One is that it is
difficult always to define these categories of people as freedom fighters
or insurgents. Each person will have different definition on it. But
looking at purely India's interest, I think there is a feeling in India,
these groups have been having a certain effect which is negative on India
security and there is certain co-relationship between their operations and
operations of various insurgency movements in India's North East which then
I think forces India to go and achieve a certain level of mutual
understanding with authorities in Rangoon and try to resolve our problems.
In fact, as I said everything comes in a package. [ ... ]

Perhaps some of these groups whom you mentioned are supporting the NLD at
the centre and a lot of their supporters are operating from the outskirts
and side areas and not in the mainstream of the country will get merely
negatively effected of course. But it is a package as I said.

Q: So, what could be the future military cooperation between the two
countries?

A: I think looking at the strategic importance of Burma, very clearly
except for last one year of financial crisis in East Asia, South East Asia
was emerging as hub of international activities what had decided that both
China and India were looking at Burma as their stepping stones of walking
into South East Asia and achieving a major level of participation in the
region. Therefore, if you see, China achieved certain level of indulgence
which was partly got it at least forced upon by their decision makers in
terms of developing engagement in East Asia.

Similarly, I think there is definitely an element of truth in saying that
India's engagement, if that has to be used as an expression, with Burma
definitely has an element of India's Look East Policy. And therefore
whether we want to concentrate just on what is happening inside, I said
there are changes even inside, but even on the other end of spectrum which
is in South East Asia.

All these South East Asia countries have accepted Burma as it is. They are
not even willing to talk about internal problems in the meetings. That is
the terrible subject. And then I think it makes it at the basic level, even
if you have the strong lobby in India of people who want to support
democracy movement in Burma, unless and until something happens inside
Burma, unless and until international opinion is of that kind , India finds
it I think definitely very difficult to stand it alone.

There are people who have accused India and Indians accused India of trying
to stand alone which makes very difficult for a country, especially a
country like India which is also gradually trying to evolve and find
acceptance in international community as a major actor in Asia, then you
cannot take very controversial decision. And therefore, you can't just go
by one particular factor and decide your policy. You have to take in view
in series of factors and various things that have been happening and
therefore I think it is perfect that after waiting ten years now India has
gradually started showing its certain change in Burma policy and government
has been taking a positive view of evolving relations with military junta
there.

End - Interview Two.

(Interview with Dr. Swi Khar, spokesperson and In-Charge of Foreign Affairs
of Chin National Front (CNF). CNF is one of the armed groups still fighting
against the military junta in Burma.)

Q: I would like to know the position of CNF on the recent reported offer of
arms to Burma's military regime by the government of India.

A: Regarding India's reported offer of arms to Burma, our stand is that
India should not sit on the fence. We cannot agree with India's action (of
arms supply to Burma). While India maintains that it supports democratic
movement in Burma, it should not provide arms to the military junta which
is hampering democratic process in the country. We understand the problems
of India. Particularly, what is happening in North East India. But, to
solve these problems, India should not work and cooperate with the military
government. India should work with the future democratic government in
Burma to solve its problems.

End - Interview Three

(Interview with Mr.. George Fernandes, Defense Minister of India.)

Highlight : "India is not supplying any kinds of weapons to Burma."

Q: What is your comment on the media reports that India has offered to
supply arms to Burma?

A: No. There is no subsistence in that report at all. That is a highly
inspired report. India is not supplying any kinds of weapons to Burma.

Q: There were reports that some Arakanese activists were killed and
captured during the Operation Leech. One Indian Army Colonel had in fact a
deal with the Arakanese group and later Indian armed forces conducted this
Operation Leech. What is your response to that?

A: Well, I have received some letters from within Burma and also quite a
few representation from people within the country, particularly those
concerned with the human rights. And even as I got those letters, I have
started investigation on that and the matter is still under investigation.

Q: After the military regime arrested nearly 200 Members of Parliament, NLD
formed 10 members-committee representing elected Members of Parliament. And
Aung San Suu Kyi has called international recognition to it. What is the
stand of the Government of India?

A: Well, I don't think the Government has received any formal or informal
communication from within Burma or from outside Burma. But, as far as the
political parties are concerned I can assure you that the stand of the
Samata Party (his party) has always been to support to democracy movement
in Burma in all forms and all aspects. And therefore, there will be never
any change in that in so far our commitment to support Aung San Suu Kyi and
the battle for restoration of democracy there.

Q: NLD might form a provisional government inside Burma through its
parliament. What is India's stand on this?

A: Well, as I said, unless there is a formal or even informal approach to
the government, it will be difficult for the government to take a position.
Government won't take recognition of a situation that is developing there.
But if there is a formal request or informal request also to the Government
of India, then that matter will definitely receive consideration.

End - Interview Four

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

THE ASIAN AGE: INDIA REFUSED BURMA BID TO BUY MILITARY HARDWARE 
28 September 1998 by Rezaul H. Laskar

The Union government has turned down several requests from Burma's military
junta for the supply of military hardware.

Government sources told the Asian Age the requests were made by Brigadier
Kyaw Win deputy director of Burma's defence services intelligence, during
his two visits to India since November last year. "The Union Cabinet
decision decided against supplying the equipment to the Burmese armed
forces," the sources said.

The supply of weapons and military equipment to Burma is on a list of
countries with which military hardware deals are restricted. "The Burmese
asked for tanks, helicopters and other equipment, "the sources said.

The Burmese authorities were told New Delhi would be willing to supply
civilian versions of helicopter, like those used by Pawan Hans and not
helicopters used by armed forces. A Burmese request for spare parts for
military hardware of Russian origin also has not been acceded to by New
Delhi, sources said. The Cabinet's decision was apparently influenced by
the situation prevailing in the neighboring country. Defence Minister
George Fernandes, a critic of the Burmese military junta, has often spoken
out against links between the armed forces of Burma and China.

Mr. Fernandes has said the Chinese helped Burma to establish electronic
surveillance post on the Coco Islands to maintain a close watch on Indian
missile tests and movements of Indian Navy.

The Union home ministry is also keeping a close watch on developments in
Burma following the steadfast approach adopted by dissident leader Aung San
Suu Kyi. A Secretary-level meeting, scheduled to be held in May, has been
postponed several times by the Burmese side. Several key issues like
trans-border crimes, insurgent activities and border trade were to be taken
up by the meeting. 

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

THE ASIAN AGE: FERNANDES  ORDERS PROBE OF "OPERATION LEECH" 
26 September, 1998 by Rezaul H. Laskar 

6 Burmese were killed joint forces action in Adamans

New Delhi, Sept.25: The defence ministry has ordered a probe into the
controversial Operation Leech conducted jointly by the three services in
the Adaman amd Nicobor island in February in this year.

Defence minister George Fenandes told Burmese pro-democracy activist on
Thursday the investigation has been ordered to find out "what had actually
happen" during the operation. Mr Soe Myint, a representative of Burmese
pro-democracy and human rights organization, told The Asian Age that six
Arakan and Karen National Union insurgents were killed and 74 others
captured by the armed forces during the operation on Feb 11. A huge cache
of the weapons was seized by the armed forces. Mr. Myint said those killed
and captured were members of "ethnic armed groups fighting" Burma military
junta. The National Party of the Arakan had also informed Mr Fernandes the
arrested persons were "Arakenese revolutionaries who were always
cooperating with Indian against her enemies." The NUPA has even claimed
Indian Intelligence agency in the know about the arms shipment. The
Fenandes acknowledged the receipt of the NUPA letter during the recent
informal get-together with reporters.

The armed forces had claimed the persons arrested were "gun-runners"
supplying weapons to insurgent groups operating in the Northeastern states.
Furthers investigations were handed over to the CBI. Defence secretary Ajit
Kumar, however, directed the three services not to conduct any more
sensitive operations like Leech.

Although the CBI and Union government are tight lipped about the latest
development in the matter, it is believed that the arms were actually
supplied to Burmese insurgent by an Indian Intelligence Agency.

Due to lack of coordination, the arm forces intercepted the shipment before
it could reach its destination in the Arakan hills. Mr Fernendes also
informed the Burmese pro-democracy activist that New Delhi had no plans to
supply military hardware to the neighboring countries' military junta.

Mr Myint said the Defence minister described recent press report on this
matter as "False, groundless and highly inspired."

The Chin National Front, which is carrying on an armed struggle against the
military junta, has also criticized New Delhi over the reported offer of
the arms to  Burma.

Mr. Shwi Khar, the spokesman for the CNF, said, "Indian should not sit on
the fence. We can agree with India action. While India maintains that its
support the Burmese democratic movement, it should not provide arms to the
military junta."

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