[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
Commentary from the Myanmar Embassy
- Subject: Commentary from the Myanmar Embassy
- From: moe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:35:00
Subject: Commentary from the Myanmar Embassy, Washington DC regarding the terrorist attack in Bangkok
>From:Thuriya@xxxxxxx
Following is the commentary from the Myanmar Embassy, Washington DC regarding
the terrorist attack in Bangkok:
Terrorist Attack On The Myanmar Embassy In Bangkok :
Implications For The International Community
Now that dust has settled over the terrorist attack on the Myanmar
Embassy in Bangkok last week-end, it is time to review the situation and
consider the wider implications of that occurrence for the international
community. The denouement of the situation begs the question whether the
right message has been sent to those who may be planning to perpetrate
similar crimes.
A careful study of the situation reveals that the attack was not
launched on the spur of the moment by some misguided youths but planned and
carried out by hard-nosed terrorists belonging to the All Burma Students
Democratic Front (ABSDF) and the Kayin insurgent groups. It is clear that
they were not only able to move without let or hindrance between the
Maneeloy refugee camp and Bangkok but were able to acquire assault rifles,
pistols, grenades and substantial rounds of ammunition without difficulty. It
is also evident that the security guards posted at the Embassy offered little
or no resistance to the 5 terrorists when they approached the main entrance
with suspiciously large guitar cases. Had they bothered to search the guitar
cases, they could have easily foiled the attempt to siege the Embassy. It is
also doubtful that the terrorists conspired to do the job by themselves.
Judging from the exuberance displayed by some of the foreigners "taken
hostage" and released and the fact that those hostages came out of the
Embassy wearing the red head band supplied by the terrorists, it would not be
farfetched to assume that the whole episode was orchestrated. When
journalists saw that the hostages had bonded with their captors, they
described it as bizarre. In reality it may be more accurate to say that
there was "espirit de corps " among terrorists and co-conspirators.
Thai authorities led by Deputy Prime Minister, Vichai Ratanakul,
General Chetta Thanajaro and Interior Minister, Sanan Kachornprasart worked
professionally to end the hostage situation without bloodshed. Much to their
credit they were able to persuade the terrorists to give up their threat to
execute one hostage at a time until all their demands were met. Deputy
Foreign Minister Sukhumband Paribata displayed uncommon courage by offering
himself as a hostage in place of the others and agreeing to take the
helicopter trip with the 5 armed men to the Myanmar border where they were
freed. However, notwithstanding the relief felt by everyone that the siege of
the Embassy was ended without the loss of a single life, the kid glove
treatment of the terrorists by the authorities concerned raises a lot of
questions, particularly in the light of statements alleged to have been made
by a senior official that the perpetrators are "not terrorists. They are
students who fight for democracy. We have given them safe passage to their
own country. We don't consider them to be terrorists. They are student
activists". Such irresponsible statements will only encourage terrorists to
strike again and erode the international community's efforts to decisively
meet the challenge posed by them. Terrorism is a scourge and a terrorist is a
terrorist by any name. No one who takes up arms, forcibly enters diplomatic
premises and hold diplomats and innocent men, women and children hostage
should be allowed to hide behind the banner of student activism. The
international community can ill afford to be ambiguous when it comes to
meeting the challenge posed by terrorists.
It is also pertinent to note that peoples of all nations from ancient
times have recognized that diplomats must be granted proper status to ensure
the efficient performance of their duties. For this reason the state parties
to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations have agreed that the person
of a diplomatic agent as well as the premises of diplomatic missions shall be
inviolable. The receiving state is under a special duty to take all
appropriate steps to prevent any attack on diplomatic agents and to protect
the premises of the mission against any intrusion or damage.
Countries like the United States which are engaged in a long-term
struggle against terrorism acknowledge the importance of dealing firmly with
terrorists. Thus the US was quick to condemn, in no uncertain terms, the
terrorist attack on the Myanmar Embassy and the taking of hostages in spite
of the claims of the terrorists that they were acting on behalf of those
aspiring for democracy.
At this important juncture when we stand on the threshold of a new
millennium, the international community should avoid giving the impression
that nations can condone terrorism if they consider a cause worthy enough. In
fact countries should be bolstering their counter-terrorism policy by making
it abundantly clear that no deals will be struck and that there will be no
concessions to terrorists.
When it concerns terrorism, the international community needs to
discard the kid glove in favour of the iron fist.
End of Document