Tuesday, 18 0ctober, 2011
---------------------------------------
Myanmar's Suu Kyi vows fight to free dissidents
Published on 18 October 2011 - 1:02pm
Myanmar's democracy champion Aung San Suu Kyi on Tuesday pledged to work for the release of the country's remaining political prisoners following an amnesty that left many key dissidents behind bars.
The regime pardoned 227 imprisoned critics, according to Suu Kyi's party, but kept most of its roughly 2,000 political inmates locked up, including key figures involved in a failed 1988 student-led uprising.
"Many (student leaders) have still not been freed from their imprisonment. We will continue our struggle for their release," Suu Kyi told supporters at birthday celebrations for Min Ko Naing, an 88 Generation leader serving a 65-year jail term.
"Why do I want the release of political prisoners? I want our country to become really free," Suu Kyi said at a ceremony at a monastery in Yangon.
Min Ko Naing, whose prison term stems from his role in the 2007 monk-led protests known as the "Saffron Revolution", saw in his 49th birthday in Kyaing Tong prison in Shan State, northeast Myanmar.
Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) said it was "frustrated" by the relatively small number of political detainees included in an amnesty for more than 6,000 prisoners last week.
Famous satirist Zarganar, who goes by one name, was among those released and has since spoken out against the regime's decision to leave many other critics locked up.
He now plans to organise a group of actors and comedians to visit jailed dissidents held in prisons around the country.
"I will try to visit to my friends who are still in the prisons," he told AFP at the Yangon ceremony.
Zarganar, who was held at Myitkyina prison in Kachin State in northern Myanmar, had been serving a 35-year sentence following his arrest in 2008 after organising deliveries of aid to victims of Cyclone Nargis, which left 138,000 dead or missing.
He said he would leave parcels for political detainees if he was not allowed to see them.
"They will be happy if they know that I have travelled to visit them in person, even though we cannot see each other," he said.
The fate of political prisoners in Myanmar is a key concern of western governments that have imposed sanctions on the isolated nation.
Some observers have said the amnesty could be one of several by a regime that appears eager to end its international isolation but is wary of potential unrest.
? ANP/AFP http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/myanmars-suu-kyi-vows-fight-free-dissidents
-------------------------------------------------------
October 18, 2011, 3:40 PM IST.
India Raises Its Game in Burma.
B. Mathur/Reuters
Myanmar President Thein Sein visited India last week with a large delegation of ministers. The visit, coming only days after Myanmar announced it was suspending a controversial $3.6-billion dam being constructed by a Chinese company, has Indian commentators talking about a window of opportunity for New Delhi in Myanmar.
Srinath Raghavan, a senior fellow at the New Delhibased Center for Policy Research, a think tank, wrote in The Hindu Business Line newspaper Monday that Myanmars generals are worried that Chinas focus on resources is not creating employment.
Myanmar does not wish to be locked in an exclusive embrace with China, Mr. Raghavan wrote.
India has been slower than China to develop infrastructure in Myanmar and to benefit from its natural resources but appears to want to redress the balance.
Last week, India announced it was lending $500 million to Myanmar to help develop projects, including irrigation works.
In a briefing, Indias Ministry of External Affairs said it finally was serious about plans to develop Myanmars Sittwe port in western Rakhine state. India agreed to finance and carry out the $110-million project in 2008 but has so far failed to deliver on its promise.
An Indian company, Essar Group, recently began work on the port and dredging the Kaladan River, and plans to complete the job by 2013, the ministry said last week.
The idea is for India to ship goods from its eastern port of Kolkata to Sittwe, where they can then travel up-river, either back into Indias cut-off northeastern states or on into Myanmar.
India also is pushing ahead with plans to develop a road network from Manipur state through Myanmar and down into Thailand, a policy which in the past has been delayed because of Indian fears that separatists from its northeast who hide out in isolated parts of Myanmar might use these roads to facilitate attacks.
These measures, although yet to be completed, come as India is re-invigorating its Look East policy, developed in the 1990s to focus on relations with its Asian neighbors after the demise of the Soviet Union, but never really developed.
Recently, India has been beefing up defense ties with countries like Japan and Vietnam to counter Chinas rising assertiveness in the region, especially the resource-rich South China Sea, which is the focus of territorial disputes between Beijing and a number of countries.
Myanmars state visit came on the heels of a trip to India last week by Vietnams President Truong Tan Sang. During that visit, both sides firmly stated they would go ahead with joint gas-development projects in the South China Sea, despite Chinas warnings this would amount to an infringement of its sovereignty.
Still, India has a long way to go until it can challenge China, with whom it fought a brief border war in 1962, in Myanmar or elsewhere in East Asia.
China, which won that war, knows that its military and economic heft gives it huge negotiating power. China became Indias largest trading partner last year, with two-way trade touching $60 billion, much higher than the $1.28 billion that India does with Myanmar. While China exports communications equipment to India, fueling its economic growth, Myanmar is a source of pulses.
Indian officials were keen last week to stress that theres room enough for India and China in Myanmar and that development there was not a zero sum game.
That attitude also partly reflects that India knows itll likely have to rely on Chinese infrastructure to get resources out of Myanmar.
China is building a pipeline from the Rakhine coast to southern China to transport oil and gas extracted offshore in Burmese waters. Its also building a new deep-water port at Kyauk Phyu, not far from Indias development at Sittwe.
Indian companies that are prospecting for gas in Burmese waters, which include Essar and state-owned ONGC Videsh, will likely have to use this pipeline to sell gas to China because plans to build a similar India-Myanmar pipeline have so far stalled.
Nevertheless, the game to take on China in Myanmar is on.
You can follow Mr. Wright on Twitter @TomWrightAsia. Follow India Real Time on Twitter @indiarealtime.http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2011/10/18/india-raises-its-game-in-burma/
--------------------------------------------------
Birthday Calls for Famous Dissident's Release
By SAI ZOM HSENG Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Dear Mr. President, release him as a birthday gift, famous Burmese comedian Zarganar told an event to mark the 49th birthday of jailed democracy activist Min Ko Naingmeaning Conqueror of Kings.
As one of the jailed 88 Generation Students leaders, Min Ko Naing (real name Paw Oo Tun) is currently serving a 65-year sentence in Keng Tung Prisona remote jail in Shan Statewhile family members and supporters celebrated his birth on Tuesday at a monastery in Mayangon Township, Rangoon.
Burmese pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi also attended the event and made a speech in support of Min Ko Naing. The Nobel Peace Laureate said those that strive towards achieving others' freedom should think about themselves first, feel free and work for others.
It is very important to practice living a life with freedom from fear. If they can practice it, they can experience freedom even they stay behind bars. If not, they will never taste real freedom even if they are not in prison, said Suu Kyi. It shouldnt happen that people who are not in prison still remain behind bars.
Min Ko Naing, a former zoology student from Rangoon Arts and Science University, started getting involved in politics through the traditional Than Gyat competition. Held during the annual water festival, these performances have sketched and satirized the government since 1985 with Min Ko Naing's goat mouth and spirit eye act remaining famous.
During the 1988 uprising, Min Ko Naing resurrected the All Burma Federation of Students Union (ABFSU) and became group chairman. The orignal ABFSU was forced underground in the wake of the 1962 coup by General Ne Win when student protests were violently crushed, but returned to prominence thanks to Min Ko Naing.
Min Ko Naing was arrested with other students later in 1988 and was sentenced to 20 years in prison for violating part 5(j) of the 1950 Emergency Provisions Act by starting disturbances to the detriment of law and order, peace and tranquility. His prison term was reduced to 10 years through the general amnesty in January 1993, and he was released on Nov. 19, 2004.
His second arrested was in September 2006 along with other 88 Generation Students leaders including Ko Ko Gyi, Htay Kywe, Pyone Cho and Min Zeya, but they were released in January 2007.
That same year, Min Ko Naing and 13 other 88 Generation Students leaders were arrested for organizing a peaceful demonstration. Min Ko Naing was sentenced to 65 years imprisonment in November 2008. From 1989 to 2011, Min Ko Naing has spent just two years outside prison.
Kyi Kyi Nyunt, one of Min Ko Naing's sisters, told The Irrawaddy that her family appreciate all those people who love and pray for him. She also said that they pray for the release of all political prisoners including Min Ko Naing.
Min Ko Naing currently suffers from osteoporosis and other illnesses as a result of his brutal interrogation, with his condition deteriorating still further during harsh weather.
Felicitation letters from ABFSU and the 88 Generation Students were also read at the birthday event, and the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners released a statement that said Min Ko Naing will spend his birthday behind bars maintaining his strong convictions.
Around 200 political prisoners were released as part of an amnesty for 6,359 prisoners announced by President Thein Sein on Oct. 11, but many 88 Generation Students' leaders, activists and ethnic leaders remain in jail.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22281
---------------------------------------------
When a Multi-ethnic Nation Ignores Ethnic Rights
By SAW YAN NAING Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Human Rights Watch (HRW) said on Tuesday that Burmese government forces have committed serious abuses against ethnic Kachin civilians since renewed fighting broke out in the northern state in June.
The international rights group estimated that some 30,000 civilians in Kachin State have been displaced by the conflict.
The Burmese government armed forces have been responsible for killings and attacks on civilians, using forced labor, and pillaging villages, said the HRW statement.
"Renewed fighting in Kachin State has meant renewed abuses by the Burmese army against Kachin villagers," said Elaine Pearson, the deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "Tens of thousands of people have fled through the mountains and jungle at the height of the rainy season, driven away by fear of army attacks."
The HRW statement backs up a claim made by the US special envoy to Burma, Derek Mitchell, who on Monday stated that the Burmese government has not made comparable progress in its relations with ethnic minorities in the north and east of Burma as it has with the democratic opposition---in particular noting that Naypyidaw had held high-level talks with opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Mitchell also noted what he referred to as credible reports of continued human rights abuses, including violence against minority women and children.
"We made it very clear that we [the US] could not have a transformed relationship as long as these abuses and credible reports of abuses occur," said Mitchell.
The criticisms come at a time when Naypyidaw has enjoyed much high acclaim following a series of moves viewed by Burmese and the international community at large as being progressive reforms, most notably the easing of censorship on the Burmese media, the suspension of the controversial Myitsone Dam project, and the release of 200 political prisoners.
The statements by Mitchell and by the HRW highlight growing concern that although reforms have been enacted in Rangoon and Naypyidaw, many observers see the government as being unable or unwilling to tackle issues in the ethnic areas.
Between 35 and 40 percent of Burma's 55-million population is non-Burman, and although many of the country's ethnic minorities have integrated into Burmese society over the years, many millions continue to live in the mountainous jungle that forms a natural horseshoe around the Burmese plains.
Ethnic minority groups include the Karen, the Shan, the Karenni, the Kachin, the Mon, the Chin and the Arakan, almost all of which have fought against the central government for independence or autonomy for decades.
Over the past 20 years, many ethnic armies have signed ceasefire agreements with the Burmese government, but conflicts have continued, exacerbated by overland deals with Burma's neighbors, especially China and Thailand, and a flurry of investment in natural resources within ethnic minority areas.
Over the years, the Burmese army has repeatedly been accused of human rights abuses in ethnic areas, with several reports indicating that the abuses may be systemic, and indicative of war crimes or crimes against humanity.
In a letter to the editor of The New York Times on Oct. 6, Myra Dahgaypaw, an ethnic Karen woman wrote: "Burmese soldiers killed my parents, my brother and sister, and my uncle after they forced him to watch them rape his wife.
"If soldiers are able to use forced labor, sexual violence, forced relocation and other abuses as mechanisms of domination, why should [US] President Obama reward President Thein Sein?"
Her comment was written in response to an article titled, "In Myanmar, Seize the Moment," written by a well-known Burmese historian, Thant Myint-U.
In his article, the author urged the US president to publicly support the "reforms" that are taking place in Burma.
He also wrote that Thein Sein has spoken forcefully of combating poverty, fighting corruption, ending the country's multiple armed conflicts, and working for political reconciliation.
But despite the government's recent approval of a "peacemaking committee" in parliament to deal with the issues surrounding the ongoing ethnic conflicts, observers say no tangible progress has been made---in fact, hostilities have escalated in some areas.
Brig-Gen Johnny, the commander of the rebel Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) Brigade 7, told The Irrawaddy that fighting---whether simple exchanges of gunfire or intense hostilities resulting in many casualties---break out almost every day in Karen State even though the government has declared its intention to seek a peace deal with armed ethnic groups.
"The release of more than 200 political prisoners, the suspension of the Myitsone dam, the establishment of a peacemaking committee---these steps are all good news," said Johnny.
"But these developments will not help our people and our soldiers in their daily fight for survival while government troops move into frontier areas."
With the exception of two ethnic rebel armies---the 20,000-strong United Wa State Army and its ally, the National Democratic Alliance Army, which are currently observing a ceasefire---no tangible results have come from negotiations with the other ethnic groups.
The New Mon State Party met government representatives recently in Ye Township, but the meeting concluded without an agreement.
Last Thursday, government troops began an assault on Kachin Independence Army (KIA) positions in Kachin and Shan states. The KIA leaders said they believe that the attacks are aimed at seizing KIA strongholds and military bases.
KIA spokesman La Nan said that at least 82 armed clashes have broken out since June, when fighting took place near hydropower plants in Bhamo Township in Kachin State. Seventeen of the clashes have broken out this month alone, he said.
Aye Thar Aung, a prominent Arakanese politician based in Rangoon, said that although he welcomed the steps taken by the new government, he was still concerned with the ethnic conflict issues.
"We are very concerned when we hear the government authorities saying they are making peace with the Wa, but then increase their military efforts against the Kachin," he said.
"To build a developed country, peace is needed. The civil war needs to come to an end.
"There can be no peace in a multi-ethnic nation that ignores the fundamental rights of its ethnic minorities," he added.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22282
------------------------------------------
Norwegian Nai"vete' in Burma?
By CAMILLA BUZZI Monday, October 17, 2011
Slightly more than 200 political prisoners, including Burma's most famous comedian, Zarganar, were released during last week's amnesty. While the releases are to be welcomed for those who are now free and their families, Zarganar captured the general mood when he stated that he could not rejoice over his freedom as long as so many of his friends remain detained.
Given the strong and numerous signals from key people in authority in Burma in recent weeks, there was reason to expect that more prominent dissidents would be released as well as more prisoners of conscience in total. At present, the amnesty seems little different from previous amnesties granted by Burma's various authoritarian regimes---which have yet to amount to the beginning of change to believe in.
Instead, we are urged to be patient---yet again. In a recent email to the Wall Street Journal, a representative of Burma's Ministry of Information suggests that more releases can be forthcoming, but that it depends on those prisoners who have just been released, the democratic opposition and the rest of the world. This is to turn things on their head. Does he imply that the responsibility for more releases now falls on former prisoners, the democracy movement and the international community?
Shortly before the releases took place, Norwegian Deputy Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide paid a visit to Burma---accompanied by Norwegian national broadcaster NRK. His visit played a key role in strengthening expectations as Burma's parliamentary speaker Thura Shwe Mann seems to have promised during a meeting between the two that releases were forthcoming "within days." The news quickly spread worldwide---with NRK as the main source.
In an interview with NRK, the Deputy Foreign Minister also noted that Burma is at the beginning of an extensive process of change towards full blown democracy. His diagnosis, however, still lacks a strong basis. It is far too early to conclude. There have been many changes in Burma over the past year. Since the election in November 2010, Burma has a new Parliament, a new civilian government and other institutions associated with a democratic political system. But these institutions can also be found in non-democratic systems, as for instance in neighboring Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia. The government has also become more tolerant towards the activities of media and civil society, but Burma remains some distance away from a process of liberalization, and detentions and sentencing have also continued.
Whether Burma will eventually become a full blown democracy depends on those who have positions of power in the country and how they make use of their power and influence. Experience shows that the attitudes of state leaders towards democracy and respect for human rights is of critical importance in a country undergoing reforms in order to ensure that these reforms move the country in a democratic direction.
A number of observers have noted that what is taking place in Burma seems to be linked to internal differences within the regime between moderate forces and so-called hardliners from the old regime. Burma's new president, Thein Sein, is seen as belonging to the moderate faction. However, that does not make him a democrat. His primary role is to improve Burma's relations with the rest of the world. The main proponents of democratic values in Burma remain the opposition led by Aung San Suu Kyi. This is one of the reasons why the dialogue between her and President Thein Sein is of critical importance. Until and unless the attitudes of leading figures in powerful positions change in Burma, a more sober assessment of the potential for Burma to become a full blown democracy remains in order.
Barth Eide made his assessment of the situation in Burma before last week's releases had taken place. His statements have on a number of occasions revealed Norway's limited understanding of the situation in the country. At times, it seems more important for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to be able to announce that developments in Burma are moving in the right direction than to make a serious assessment of the situation on the ground. This is the second time the Deputy Foreign Minister displayed a certain nai"vete' in his dealings with Burma.
During his previous visit to the country last March, Barth Eide also concluded that developments in Burma are moving in the right direction. At that time, his statement stood in contrast to the views of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Burma, Tomas Ojeas Quintana, who at the same time was visiting Burma's border areas to meet with victims of the armed conflicts in the country. The special Rapporteur noted that his findings represented a serious obstacle to Burma's democratic development. That was six months ago, and little has changed in border areas since then.
This time, Barth Eide's statement that there is a general mood in Burma expectant of exciting things to happen stands in contrast to the wait-and-see attitude that predominates among my Burmese friends and acquaintances. They have been disappointed too many times already and find it difficult to be hopeful---yet again. Barth Eide---and Norway---could benefit from a dialogue with broader sections of the Burmese population.
Barth Eide argues that Norway should be ahead and reward the regime for positive changes. His recommendation is connected in particular to the possible removal of sanctions. The logic is odd. A reward is normally given after a positive act---as an encouragement to continue doing the right thing. To reward in advance is to miss the function of rewards.
Most observers who have followed the situation in Burma over time recognize that sanctions in themselves cannot create a democratic Burma. There is broad agreement that the main function of the sanctions is to serve as a political instrument for the opposition. This is not the time for Norway to soften its support for the forces of reform in the country. It remains essential to listen to the viewpoints of Aung San Suu Kyi. As she also told NRK: When the day comes for lifting the sanctions, she will let the whole world know.
Burma has improved its international reputation recently by engaging in a dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi, inter alia to discuss the armed conflicts in the country, by putting an end to the building of a dam on the Irrawaddy River following widespread public protests and by suggesting that media censorship needs to stop. But there is still a long way to go from words to action. If the regime is serious about peace talks and dialogue, the release of ethnic leaders, notably Khun Htun Oo, would have been a powerful signal. If the regime is serious about listening to public opinion, the 88 generation students led by Min Ko Naing should be free. And if the regime is serious about ending censorship, detained journalists should be walking out of the prison gates.
The opposition and the international community have recognized for many years that the release of all political prisoners is the most important confidence building step that could be undertaken by Burma's rulers. On two occasions over the past year, President Thein Sein has promised amnesties with little substance. More empty promises could undermine the impression that he is a person the opposition can work with---and the value of further releases.
Barth Eide finds that things are changing so fast in Burma that it is almost too fast. What has changed in Burma is the discourse. The regime has finally realized how to make itself understood by the rest of the world. But the willingness and the ability to live up to its promises is still lacking.
Spring has yet to come to Burma. The window of opportunity that Barth Eide believes he has found in Burma only exists if those in power can match their words with action. Only then will it be possible to say that developments in Burma are moving in the right direction.
The author is a PhD candidate at the Institute for Human Rights and Peace Studies, Mahidol University. The opinions expressed here are her own. http://www.irrawaddy.org/opinion_story.php?art_id=22269
------------------------------------------
Only 600 Political Prisoners in Burma: President's Adviser
By THE IRRAWADDY Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Burma only had around 600 prisoners of conscience and released almost half during last week's amnesty order, President Thein Sein's political adviser Ko Ko Hlaing told Swedish Radio.
Ko Ko Hlaing said accusations that there are 2,000 political prisoners in Burma were an exaggeration, and the 300 political detainees that have so far been released by the president's amnesty order cannot be considered a small number. He added that he thought more will be freed in the near future.
However, in an interview with the Burmese language version of The Irrawaddy published on Monday, Ko Ko Hlaing claimed that he did not have exact figures for the number of political prisoners and advised reporters to contact the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Toe Kyaw Hlaing, an activist working on a petition campaign for the release of prisoners, said there is a huge disparity between the lists of political prisoners held by the Burmese government and human rights organizations.
He told The Irrawaddy that nearly 1,200 political prisoners still remain behind bars after last week's amnesty, according to the list compiled by the Burmese Democracy Network.
The numbers of political detainees are different because the government uses the list of those who it has imprisoned on specific political charges, said Toe Kyaw Hlaing.
He said that in many cases the previous military regime did not charge activists with specific political offenses such as article 5(J) of the 1950 State Emergency Act and article 505(B) of the State Offences Act. Instead they were charged with the Electronic Act, immigration procedures, bomb plots, connections with unlawful associations, the Press Act, and so on. Therefore the official lists of current political prisoners in Burma may not be accurate, he said.
Toe Kyaw Hlaing also said that there might be a different definition between the government and political activists with regards the term prisoners of conscience.
According to the definition used by human rights group Amnesty International, prisoners of conscience can refer to those who have been imprisoned and/or persecuted for the non-violent expression of their conscientiously-held beliefs.
The Burmese government granted amnesty to 6,359 prisoners on Oct. 12a full moon day at the end of the Buddhist lent when it is auspicious to perform acts of merit but if did not make clear how many political prisoners were included in that number.
The Voice, a domestic journal based in Rangoon, reported on Monday that around 280 prisoners of conscience were among those who had been released last week.
Bo Kyi, the joint-secretary of the exiled Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), told The Irrawaddy that his organization was still compiling lists of political prisoners remaining in different prisons and those recently granted amnesty. This information will be issued publicly in the coming days, he said.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22283
------------------------------------------------
US Urges End to Abuses of Burmas Minorities
By MATTHEW PENNINGTON/ AP Writer Tuesday, October 18, 2011
WASHINGTON The United States sees encouraging new signs of openness in isolated Burma but says that after decades of military rule, the Asian country has a way to go before it loses its pariah status and tough sanctions are lifted.
Special envoy to Burma Derek Mitchell said Monday there seems to be a trend toward greater openness but questions remain about its commitment to democratic reform.
Burma, also known as Myanmar, held elections last year which although flawed, were its first since democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi swept a 1990 vote and was barred from taking power.
In late September, the government stopped work on a controversial China-backed dam, saying the $3.6 billion project was "against the will of the people." And last week, authorities freed as many as 250 of the country's more than 2,000 political detainees.
Burmas pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, left, sees off Derek Mitchell, right, US special representative to Burma, after their meeting at her home on Sept. 12, 2011, in Rangoon. (Photo: AP)
Mitchell welcomed the government's recent moves as encouraging and said his September visit yielded productive meetings with Burmese officials, traditionally viewed as xenophobic. He said they were willing to discuss anything he raised.
"Right now I think there are a lot of restrictions that make them into a pariah state. And Burma is a proud country with a tremendous history, and they deserve to come out of the shadows and take their prideful place in the region," Mitchell told a news conference in Washington.
Burma, a former breadbasket of Southeast Asia, has suffered not just repressive government but poor economic management during nearly 50 years of military rule. It is subject to wide-ranging trade, economic and political sanctions from the U.S. and other Western nations, enforced in response to brutal crackdowns on pro-democracy protesters that left hundreds, maybe thousands dead in 1988 and again in 2007, and its refusal to hand power to Suu Kyi's party after the 1990 elections.
But sanctions and isolation have failed to force change, and only served to complicate U.S. engagement with the economically vibrant Southeast Asian region, as Washington looks to deepen its existing alliances and forge new ones to counter China's rise.
The Obama administration has sought to engage Burma, and after two years, there are signs of change, although whether that is in response to U.S. Overtures is difficult to tell. Burma is also vying to assume the rotating chair of the Association of South Asian Nations in 2014 and may be trying to impress ASEAN leaders before they meet at a November summit when the decision could be made.
When it comes to rewarding Burma for reforms, Washington is likely to have tougher criteria than ASEAN, and it is likely to proceed in an incremental manner.
Mitchell would not give specifics about what those steps might be. David Steinberg, a Myanmar expert at Washington's Georgetown University, said a first move could be to allow the World Bank and Asian Development Bank to help Burma.
The U.S. has already made some positive gestures, such as easing travel restrictions that enabled Burma's foreign minister to visit the State Department in Washington last month.
For more tangible concessions, a key test will be action on political prisoners. Mitchell urged releases of all such detainees, including 1988-era student protest leaders Min Ko Naing and Ko Ko Gyi, and a monk at the forefront of the 2007 protests, Gambiri.
Mitchell also said the government has not made comparable progress in its relations with ethnic minorities in the north and east of Burma as it has with the democratic opposition, with whose leader Suu Kyi it has held high-level talks. He noted credible reports of continued human rights abuses, including against minority women and children.
"We made it very clear that we could not have a transformed relationship as long as these abuses and credible reports of abuses occur," he said.
Burma is an ethnically diverse nation, and most of the minorities have taken up arms at some point against the government dominated by the military and the ethnic Burman majority. Legions of villagers have been displaced by brutal military campaigns, and this year has seen violence flare in the Kachin and Shan states against ethnic armies that had reached cease-fires with the Burmese regime.
Steinberg said the U.S. would also be looking to see a further decrease in media censorship and the legalization of Suu Kyi's political party which was outlawed for boycotting the 2010 elections as unfair. http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22278
-------------------------------------------
How India shut down the media over Burmese visit
By Andrew Buncombe
The Foreign Desk
Tuesday, 18 October 2011 at 8:53 am
Burma's new president, a former general called Thein Sein, flew out of Delhi this past weekend, concluding a four-day visit which saw the relationship between the two countries further cemented with a series of new deals and written agreements. Among the highlights referred to in the joint statement issued by the countries, was an undertaking to speed up construction of natural gas pipelines, increased cooperation over energy exploration and an offer from India for a $500m line of credit.
The timing of the red-carpet visit came at a hugely significant time. The day Thein Sein arrived in India at Bodh Gaya, it emerged that more than 6,000 prisoners had been released from Burma's jails, among them 200 political prisoners. The step was the latest in a series of measures by the president, including the relaxing of media controls and the suspension of work on a controversial dam project, that have led many to believe he represents a genuinely new chapter in Burma's political history and a crucial step on the journey towards democracy.
Despite the importance of the visit, there was little coverage in the Indian media. Those reports that did appear were largely superficial and seemed to echo the views of the Indian foreign ministry. (One in The Hindu newspaper appeared particularly inspired by a briefing given to the media by the ministry's spokesman) But can hardly blame the Indian media alone; as one Delhi-based journalist said to me, the trip was difficult to cover as there were no press conferences, no public statements and very few opportunities to obtain the all-important soundbite. [This purported quote in the Hindustan Times may be Thein Sein's only public utterance.]
For all the talk about the measures recently undertaken by Thein Sein, it was clear the Burmese visitors had no wish to be scrutinised by the media, apart from having their photographs taken and being filmed praying at temples [see picture above] and arriving at the president's official residence for a state banquet. Perhaps that was not so surprising. Burma's new leader, after all, was only appointed after an election that would not have been considered fair anywhere else in the world and whilst the main opposition candidate was under house arrest and prevented from taking part. Whatever slight steps of moderation Thein Sein may have taken, he clearly does not represent the will of the people, his country remains a dictatorship and it's hardly a shock that he may not yet feel ready to open himself up to the media.
What was surprising, was the readiness of the Indian authorities to go along with this. There was a time when India was a staunch supporters of the Burmese opposition and its iconic leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who was once a student in Delhi. But those days are long gone. As far back as 2004, Indian officials were telling foreign diplomats that they considered Ms Suu Kyi's time had "come and gone". These days, securing energy deals and countering the influence of China, appear to take precedence over the promotion of democracy. [It's pretty much the same relationship the UK and US have with countries such as Saudi Arabia.]
So if, the Burmese did not want to be scrutinised by the media and asked about human rights issues (as well as the visit itself), India was happy to accommodate. I suppose it also saved Indian officials having to explain why they were doing deals with a country that still keeps hundreds of prisoners of conscience behind bars. In the joint statement issued by the two countries, India "congratulated the President of Myanmar on the transition towards democratic Government". That was it. No talk of human rights, no talk of the prisoners, no talk of the repression of ethnic miniorities. As Ben Rogers of East Asia director for Christian Solidarity World, told The National newspaper: "This totally uncritical attitude to Myanmar is really a lose-lose situation for India."
I attended four events on Thein Sein's agenda, three of them in Bodh Gaya, the site of Buddha's enlightenment and a pilgramage site for Buddhists from across the world. At one of these I got as far as saying, "Sir, could you spare a moment for a question from the media", before I was confronted by a senior member of India's Intelligence Bureau who prevented any further interaction. At two subsequent events, the Bihar Special Force police told me their job was to step me from speaking to the president. When I asked how it was the job of the security personnel to harass the media, I was told by one officer that I was a potential security risk because he could not be sure "I wouldn't try and slap" the president.
The fourth event was on Saturday morning at a field centre operated by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research in Delhi, Thein Sein's final engagement before leaving India and part of his official schedule. The institute's officials were welcoming and friendly, the Delhi police were not. In this instance, The Independent was physically pushed from the event by the police, with no explanation. It may have been that my crime in the eyes of Indian and Burmese officials was to have been standing next to a reporter from the Press Trust of India, who tried to asked Thein Sein a question about cooperation between India and Burma on agriculture. [He did not bother to reply. It may be his translator did not translate the question for him.]
Given the often life-threatening peril and difficulties journalists in this part of the world regularly face while doing their jobs, Saturday morning's incident can count only as the merest of inconveniences. But it was insightful as to how, even in India, where freedom of the media is a much-celebrated right, there are limits to how far this goes, especially when it may dare "embarrass" a VIP guest from a military dictatorship. As one of the guests at the institute, who witnessed what happened to me, said: "The president of Myanmar has brought a piece of Myanmar with him to India." http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2011/10/18/how-india-shut-down-the-media-over-burmese-visit/
------------------------------------------------
Myanmar Must Release More Prisoners, Says US
Posted by Janis Esch on October 17, 2011 1:52 PM
Myanmar must release more political prisoners and end abuses against ethnic minorities if it wants to transform its relations with Washington, a U.S. official said Monday.
Special envoy to Myanmar Derek Mitchell noted a trend toward greater openness in the Asian country but said questions remain about Myanmar, also known as Burma, and its commitment to democratic reforms.
"Right now I think there are a lot of restrictions that make them into a pariah state. And Burma is a proud country with a tremendous history, and they deserve to come out of the shadows and take their prideful place in the region," Mitchell told a news conference.
Myanmar held flawed elections last year, its first voting since democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi swept a 1990 vote and was barred from taking power. The government recently stopped work on a controversial China-backed dam project and last week freed as many as 250 of its more than 2,000 political detainees.
Last month, Mitchell made his first visit to Myanmar since his appointment, aiming to advance the Obama administration's engagement with the military-dominated government after years of isolating it because of its poor record on human rights.
Mitchell welcomed the government's recent moves as encouraging and said his September visit yielded productive meetings with Myanmar officials, traditionally viewed as xenophobic. He said they were willing to discuss anything he raised.
He would not give specifics about how Washington could reward the government for progress toward positive change. Myanmar currently is subject to tough trade and economic sanctions.
He said the United States had made some gestures already: easing travel restrictions that enabled Myanmar's foreign minister to visit the State Department in Washington last month after attending the U.N. General Assembly in New York. The U.S. also is inviting Myanmar to participate in other international dialogues.
Mitchell called on Myanmar to release all remaining political prisoners and said that while the government had held discussions with the democratic opposition, it had not made comparable progress in its relations with ethnic minorities in the north and east. He said credible reports of human rights abuses, including against women and children, continue to emerge.
"We made it very clear that we could not have a transformed relationship as long as these abuses and credible reports of abuses occur," he said.
Myanmar is an ethnically diverse nation, and most of the minorities have taken up arms at some point against the government dominated by the military and the ethnic Burman majority. Legions of villagers have been displaced by brutal military campaigns, and this year has seen violence flare in the Kachin and Shan states against ethnic armies that had reached cease-fires with the Myanmar regime.
http://www.thirdage.com/news/myanmar-must-release-more-prisoners-says-us_10-17-2011
---------------------------------------------
ASIA TIMES
Thein Sein as Myanmar's Gorbachev
By Andrew Selth
Strategic analysts who studied the Soviet Union during the 1980s can still recall the excitement and intellectual challenge of trying to interpret developments as Mikhail Gorbachev first introduced his policy of perestroika (restructuring), and followed it two years later with glasnost (openness).
As is now well known, there were some diehard Cold Warriors in official and academic circles who steadfastly refused to believe that a creature of the Communist Party, who had enjoyed the patronage of figures like KGB chief Yuri Andropov and risen to the rank of general secretary, would ever challenge the system that nurtured him.
Then there were those experts who, on the basis of a careful analysis of the objective realities, were prepared to give Gorbachev the benefit of the doubt and accept that he was trying to introduce a range of genuine reforms, albeit for his own purposes. Few observers, however, went so far as to predict the downfall of the entire Soviet power structure.
It is useful to keep that period in mind when looking at developments in Myanmar, also known as Burma, since the inauguration of a hybrid civilian-military government this January.
President Thein Sein, a former army general widely believed to have been hand-picked by strongman Senior General Than Shwe, has made several public statements and promised a number of changes that appear to herald a more open-minded and conciliatory approach to government.
There is no question that the armed forces intend to remain firmly in control of Myanmar, but there now appears to be the possibility of greater personal freedoms, rational economic policies and a more relaxed attitude towards the development of civil society.
Thein Sein and his ministers have also taken a number of steps that seem designed in large part to meet the oft-repeated concerns of the international community. For example, the president has met with prominent opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who has expressed herself "happy and satisfied" with his intention to introduce "real positive change".
Over 200 political prisoners have been released, a move which addresses - to a certain extent at least - another major sticking point with the Western governments that maintain sanctions against the regime. Myanmar's ambassador in Vienna has also assured the International Atomic Energy Agency that his country has neither the capacity nor the intention to develop nuclear weapons, long a subject of speculation and concern.
These developments have prompted widely varying reactions. A number of respected academics and commentators have taken a strategic view and, with the usual caveats, sought to highlight what they believe to be the start of a gradual process of political reconciliation and incremental reform.
The International Crisis Group has gone even further and announced that "major reform is under way" in Myanmar. A hard core of activists and their supporters, however, have dismissed recent developments as part of a massive confidence trick by an entrenched military regime. Focusing on more immediate issues, some have even called for harsher economic and financial sanctions against Naypyidaw.
Given the dearth of reliable information about internal developments in Myanmar, and the highly politicized nature of the Myanmar-watching community, this divergence of views is not surprising. In another echo of the Cold War, when the academic community was deeply divided by ideological leanings and different approaches to professional contacts with the communist bloc, scholars and commentators have tended to split into two main camps.
As The Economist opined recently, one sees the glass half full while the other sees the glass half empty. Some exchanges between the two sides have become quite heated, exposing an ugly side to the Myanmar debate.
In the case of the Soviet Union, the optimists were ultimately proven correct, but even they failed to predict the full impact of Gorbachev's revolutionary policies, and the power of the forces unleashed by his relaxation of the old rules. It is possible that the activist community is right, and the shift in Naypyidaw's approach is simply a clever ploy to prompt the lifting of economic sanctions and to win Myanmar the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) chair in 2014.
Yet, if that is the plan, then Thein Sein seems to have forgotten Alexis de Tocqueville's famous dictum that the most dangerous time for a dictatorship is when it begins to loosen its grip - for whatever reason. As Gorbachev found, once such a process is set in train, it is very difficult to control.
There is another scenario that needs to be kept in mind. Notwithstanding the opaqueness of Myanmar's politics, it is known that there are hardliners within the current leadership who oppose Thein Sein's new approach, particularly his attempts at reconciliation with Aung San Suu Kyi and the pro-democracy movement.
These elements favor continued strong military control of the country and the elimination of any dissent. Myanmar's armed forces have been remarkably loyal and cohesive over the past 50 years, giving the country the world's most durable dictatorship. A split in the ruling hierarchy is still unlikely, but if events are seen to be getting out of control an attempt to reinstate direct military rule cannot be ruled out.
Faced with all this uncertainty, the key policy question faced by governments and international organizations is whether to take Thein Sein's promises at face value and seek to encourage genuine reforms, or to dismiss recent developments as a sham and impose more punitive measures.
To date, most have tended to favor the former approach, cautiously welcoming the changes that have occurred and have been promised, while pointing out the need for concrete actions to suit the president's words. If this is indeed a tipping point in Myanmar's modern history, and positive change is a real possibility, that seems the very least they can do.
Andrew Selth is a Research Fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute in Brisbane, Australia.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/MJ19Ae01.html
---------------------------------------
Myanmar's Suu Kyi vows fight to free dissidents
Published on 18 October 2011 - 1:02pm
Myanmar's democracy champion Aung San Suu Kyi on Tuesday pledged to work for the release of the country's remaining political prisoners following an amnesty that left many key dissidents behind bars.
The regime pardoned 227 imprisoned critics, according to Suu Kyi's party, but kept most of its roughly 2,000 political inmates locked up, including key figures involved in a failed 1988 student-led uprising.
"Many (student leaders) have still not been freed from their imprisonment. We will continue our struggle for their release," Suu Kyi told supporters at birthday celebrations for Min Ko Naing, an 88 Generation leader serving a 65-year jail term.
"Why do I want the release of political prisoners? I want our country to become really free," Suu Kyi said at a ceremony at a monastery in Yangon.
Min Ko Naing, whose prison term stems from his role in the 2007 monk-led protests known as the "Saffron Revolution", saw in his 49th birthday in Kyaing Tong prison in Shan State, northeast Myanmar.
Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) said it was "frustrated" by the relatively small number of political detainees included in an amnesty for more than 6,000 prisoners last week.
Famous satirist Zarganar, who goes by one name, was among those released and has since spoken out against the regime's decision to leave many other critics locked up.
He now plans to organise a group of actors and comedians to visit jailed dissidents held in prisons around the country.
"I will try to visit to my friends who are still in the prisons," he told AFP at the Yangon ceremony.
Zarganar, who was held at Myitkyina prison in Kachin State in northern Myanmar, had been serving a 35-year sentence following his arrest in 2008 after organising deliveries of aid to victims of Cyclone Nargis, which left 138,000 dead or missing.
He said he would leave parcels for political detainees if he was not allowed to see them.
"They will be happy if they know that I have travelled to visit them in person, even though we cannot see each other," he said.
The fate of political prisoners in Myanmar is a key concern of western governments that have imposed sanctions on the isolated nation.
Some observers have said the amnesty could be one of several by a regime that appears eager to end its international isolation but is wary of potential unrest.
? ANP/AFP http://www.rnw.nl/english/bulletin/myanmars-suu-kyi-vows-fight-free-dissidents
-------------------------------------------------------
October 18, 2011, 3:40 PM IST.
India Raises Its Game in Burma.
B. Mathur/Reuters
Myanmar President Thein Sein visited India last week with a large delegation of ministers. The visit, coming only days after Myanmar announced it was suspending a controversial $3.6-billion dam being constructed by a Chinese company, has Indian commentators talking about a window of opportunity for New Delhi in Myanmar.
Srinath Raghavan, a senior fellow at the New Delhibased Center for Policy Research, a think tank, wrote in The Hindu Business Line newspaper Monday that Myanmars generals are worried that Chinas focus on resources is not creating employment.
Myanmar does not wish to be locked in an exclusive embrace with China, Mr. Raghavan wrote.
India has been slower than China to develop infrastructure in Myanmar and to benefit from its natural resources but appears to want to redress the balance.
Last week, India announced it was lending $500 million to Myanmar to help develop projects, including irrigation works.
In a briefing, Indias Ministry of External Affairs said it finally was serious about plans to develop Myanmars Sittwe port in western Rakhine state. India agreed to finance and carry out the $110-million project in 2008 but has so far failed to deliver on its promise.
An Indian company, Essar Group, recently began work on the port and dredging the Kaladan River, and plans to complete the job by 2013, the ministry said last week.
The idea is for India to ship goods from its eastern port of Kolkata to Sittwe, where they can then travel up-river, either back into Indias cut-off northeastern states or on into Myanmar.
India also is pushing ahead with plans to develop a road network from Manipur state through Myanmar and down into Thailand, a policy which in the past has been delayed because of Indian fears that separatists from its northeast who hide out in isolated parts of Myanmar might use these roads to facilitate attacks.
These measures, although yet to be completed, come as India is re-invigorating its Look East policy, developed in the 1990s to focus on relations with its Asian neighbors after the demise of the Soviet Union, but never really developed.
Recently, India has been beefing up defense ties with countries like Japan and Vietnam to counter Chinas rising assertiveness in the region, especially the resource-rich South China Sea, which is the focus of territorial disputes between Beijing and a number of countries.
Myanmars state visit came on the heels of a trip to India last week by Vietnams President Truong Tan Sang. During that visit, both sides firmly stated they would go ahead with joint gas-development projects in the South China Sea, despite Chinas warnings this would amount to an infringement of its sovereignty.
Still, India has a long way to go until it can challenge China, with whom it fought a brief border war in 1962, in Myanmar or elsewhere in East Asia.
China, which won that war, knows that its military and economic heft gives it huge negotiating power. China became Indias largest trading partner last year, with two-way trade touching $60 billion, much higher than the $1.28 billion that India does with Myanmar. While China exports communications equipment to India, fueling its economic growth, Myanmar is a source of pulses.
Indian officials were keen last week to stress that theres room enough for India and China in Myanmar and that development there was not a zero sum game.
That attitude also partly reflects that India knows itll likely have to rely on Chinese infrastructure to get resources out of Myanmar.
China is building a pipeline from the Rakhine coast to southern China to transport oil and gas extracted offshore in Burmese waters. Its also building a new deep-water port at Kyauk Phyu, not far from Indias development at Sittwe.
Indian companies that are prospecting for gas in Burmese waters, which include Essar and state-owned ONGC Videsh, will likely have to use this pipeline to sell gas to China because plans to build a similar India-Myanmar pipeline have so far stalled.
Nevertheless, the game to take on China in Myanmar is on.
You can follow Mr. Wright on Twitter @TomWrightAsia. Follow India Real Time on Twitter @indiarealtime.http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2011/10/18/india-raises-its-game-in-burma/
--------------------------------------------------
Birthday Calls for Famous Dissident's Release
By SAI ZOM HSENG Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Dear Mr. President, release him as a birthday gift, famous Burmese comedian Zarganar told an event to mark the 49th birthday of jailed democracy activist Min Ko Naingmeaning Conqueror of Kings.
As one of the jailed 88 Generation Students leaders, Min Ko Naing (real name Paw Oo Tun) is currently serving a 65-year sentence in Keng Tung Prisona remote jail in Shan Statewhile family members and supporters celebrated his birth on Tuesday at a monastery in Mayangon Township, Rangoon.
Burmese pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi also attended the event and made a speech in support of Min Ko Naing. The Nobel Peace Laureate said those that strive towards achieving others' freedom should think about themselves first, feel free and work for others.
It is very important to practice living a life with freedom from fear. If they can practice it, they can experience freedom even they stay behind bars. If not, they will never taste real freedom even if they are not in prison, said Suu Kyi. It shouldnt happen that people who are not in prison still remain behind bars.
Min Ko Naing, a former zoology student from Rangoon Arts and Science University, started getting involved in politics through the traditional Than Gyat competition. Held during the annual water festival, these performances have sketched and satirized the government since 1985 with Min Ko Naing's goat mouth and spirit eye act remaining famous.
During the 1988 uprising, Min Ko Naing resurrected the All Burma Federation of Students Union (ABFSU) and became group chairman. The orignal ABFSU was forced underground in the wake of the 1962 coup by General Ne Win when student protests were violently crushed, but returned to prominence thanks to Min Ko Naing.
Min Ko Naing was arrested with other students later in 1988 and was sentenced to 20 years in prison for violating part 5(j) of the 1950 Emergency Provisions Act by starting disturbances to the detriment of law and order, peace and tranquility. His prison term was reduced to 10 years through the general amnesty in January 1993, and he was released on Nov. 19, 2004.
His second arrested was in September 2006 along with other 88 Generation Students leaders including Ko Ko Gyi, Htay Kywe, Pyone Cho and Min Zeya, but they were released in January 2007.
That same year, Min Ko Naing and 13 other 88 Generation Students leaders were arrested for organizing a peaceful demonstration. Min Ko Naing was sentenced to 65 years imprisonment in November 2008. From 1989 to 2011, Min Ko Naing has spent just two years outside prison.
Kyi Kyi Nyunt, one of Min Ko Naing's sisters, told The Irrawaddy that her family appreciate all those people who love and pray for him. She also said that they pray for the release of all political prisoners including Min Ko Naing.
Min Ko Naing currently suffers from osteoporosis and other illnesses as a result of his brutal interrogation, with his condition deteriorating still further during harsh weather.
Felicitation letters from ABFSU and the 88 Generation Students were also read at the birthday event, and the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners released a statement that said Min Ko Naing will spend his birthday behind bars maintaining his strong convictions.
Around 200 political prisoners were released as part of an amnesty for 6,359 prisoners announced by President Thein Sein on Oct. 11, but many 88 Generation Students' leaders, activists and ethnic leaders remain in jail.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22281
---------------------------------------------
When a Multi-ethnic Nation Ignores Ethnic Rights
By SAW YAN NAING Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Human Rights Watch (HRW) said on Tuesday that Burmese government forces have committed serious abuses against ethnic Kachin civilians since renewed fighting broke out in the northern state in June.
The international rights group estimated that some 30,000 civilians in Kachin State have been displaced by the conflict.
The Burmese government armed forces have been responsible for killings and attacks on civilians, using forced labor, and pillaging villages, said the HRW statement.
"Renewed fighting in Kachin State has meant renewed abuses by the Burmese army against Kachin villagers," said Elaine Pearson, the deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "Tens of thousands of people have fled through the mountains and jungle at the height of the rainy season, driven away by fear of army attacks."
The HRW statement backs up a claim made by the US special envoy to Burma, Derek Mitchell, who on Monday stated that the Burmese government has not made comparable progress in its relations with ethnic minorities in the north and east of Burma as it has with the democratic opposition---in particular noting that Naypyidaw had held high-level talks with opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Mitchell also noted what he referred to as credible reports of continued human rights abuses, including violence against minority women and children.
"We made it very clear that we [the US] could not have a transformed relationship as long as these abuses and credible reports of abuses occur," said Mitchell.
The criticisms come at a time when Naypyidaw has enjoyed much high acclaim following a series of moves viewed by Burmese and the international community at large as being progressive reforms, most notably the easing of censorship on the Burmese media, the suspension of the controversial Myitsone Dam project, and the release of 200 political prisoners.
The statements by Mitchell and by the HRW highlight growing concern that although reforms have been enacted in Rangoon and Naypyidaw, many observers see the government as being unable or unwilling to tackle issues in the ethnic areas.
Between 35 and 40 percent of Burma's 55-million population is non-Burman, and although many of the country's ethnic minorities have integrated into Burmese society over the years, many millions continue to live in the mountainous jungle that forms a natural horseshoe around the Burmese plains.
Ethnic minority groups include the Karen, the Shan, the Karenni, the Kachin, the Mon, the Chin and the Arakan, almost all of which have fought against the central government for independence or autonomy for decades.
Over the past 20 years, many ethnic armies have signed ceasefire agreements with the Burmese government, but conflicts have continued, exacerbated by overland deals with Burma's neighbors, especially China and Thailand, and a flurry of investment in natural resources within ethnic minority areas.
Over the years, the Burmese army has repeatedly been accused of human rights abuses in ethnic areas, with several reports indicating that the abuses may be systemic, and indicative of war crimes or crimes against humanity.
In a letter to the editor of The New York Times on Oct. 6, Myra Dahgaypaw, an ethnic Karen woman wrote: "Burmese soldiers killed my parents, my brother and sister, and my uncle after they forced him to watch them rape his wife.
"If soldiers are able to use forced labor, sexual violence, forced relocation and other abuses as mechanisms of domination, why should [US] President Obama reward President Thein Sein?"
Her comment was written in response to an article titled, "In Myanmar, Seize the Moment," written by a well-known Burmese historian, Thant Myint-U.
In his article, the author urged the US president to publicly support the "reforms" that are taking place in Burma.
He also wrote that Thein Sein has spoken forcefully of combating poverty, fighting corruption, ending the country's multiple armed conflicts, and working for political reconciliation.
But despite the government's recent approval of a "peacemaking committee" in parliament to deal with the issues surrounding the ongoing ethnic conflicts, observers say no tangible progress has been made---in fact, hostilities have escalated in some areas.
Brig-Gen Johnny, the commander of the rebel Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) Brigade 7, told The Irrawaddy that fighting---whether simple exchanges of gunfire or intense hostilities resulting in many casualties---break out almost every day in Karen State even though the government has declared its intention to seek a peace deal with armed ethnic groups.
"The release of more than 200 political prisoners, the suspension of the Myitsone dam, the establishment of a peacemaking committee---these steps are all good news," said Johnny.
"But these developments will not help our people and our soldiers in their daily fight for survival while government troops move into frontier areas."
With the exception of two ethnic rebel armies---the 20,000-strong United Wa State Army and its ally, the National Democratic Alliance Army, which are currently observing a ceasefire---no tangible results have come from negotiations with the other ethnic groups.
The New Mon State Party met government representatives recently in Ye Township, but the meeting concluded without an agreement.
Last Thursday, government troops began an assault on Kachin Independence Army (KIA) positions in Kachin and Shan states. The KIA leaders said they believe that the attacks are aimed at seizing KIA strongholds and military bases.
KIA spokesman La Nan said that at least 82 armed clashes have broken out since June, when fighting took place near hydropower plants in Bhamo Township in Kachin State. Seventeen of the clashes have broken out this month alone, he said.
Aye Thar Aung, a prominent Arakanese politician based in Rangoon, said that although he welcomed the steps taken by the new government, he was still concerned with the ethnic conflict issues.
"We are very concerned when we hear the government authorities saying they are making peace with the Wa, but then increase their military efforts against the Kachin," he said.
"To build a developed country, peace is needed. The civil war needs to come to an end.
"There can be no peace in a multi-ethnic nation that ignores the fundamental rights of its ethnic minorities," he added.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22282
------------------------------------------
Norwegian Nai"vete' in Burma?
By CAMILLA BUZZI Monday, October 17, 2011
Slightly more than 200 political prisoners, including Burma's most famous comedian, Zarganar, were released during last week's amnesty. While the releases are to be welcomed for those who are now free and their families, Zarganar captured the general mood when he stated that he could not rejoice over his freedom as long as so many of his friends remain detained.
Given the strong and numerous signals from key people in authority in Burma in recent weeks, there was reason to expect that more prominent dissidents would be released as well as more prisoners of conscience in total. At present, the amnesty seems little different from previous amnesties granted by Burma's various authoritarian regimes---which have yet to amount to the beginning of change to believe in.
Instead, we are urged to be patient---yet again. In a recent email to the Wall Street Journal, a representative of Burma's Ministry of Information suggests that more releases can be forthcoming, but that it depends on those prisoners who have just been released, the democratic opposition and the rest of the world. This is to turn things on their head. Does he imply that the responsibility for more releases now falls on former prisoners, the democracy movement and the international community?
Shortly before the releases took place, Norwegian Deputy Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide paid a visit to Burma---accompanied by Norwegian national broadcaster NRK. His visit played a key role in strengthening expectations as Burma's parliamentary speaker Thura Shwe Mann seems to have promised during a meeting between the two that releases were forthcoming "within days." The news quickly spread worldwide---with NRK as the main source.
In an interview with NRK, the Deputy Foreign Minister also noted that Burma is at the beginning of an extensive process of change towards full blown democracy. His diagnosis, however, still lacks a strong basis. It is far too early to conclude. There have been many changes in Burma over the past year. Since the election in November 2010, Burma has a new Parliament, a new civilian government and other institutions associated with a democratic political system. But these institutions can also be found in non-democratic systems, as for instance in neighboring Laos, Vietnam and Cambodia. The government has also become more tolerant towards the activities of media and civil society, but Burma remains some distance away from a process of liberalization, and detentions and sentencing have also continued.
Whether Burma will eventually become a full blown democracy depends on those who have positions of power in the country and how they make use of their power and influence. Experience shows that the attitudes of state leaders towards democracy and respect for human rights is of critical importance in a country undergoing reforms in order to ensure that these reforms move the country in a democratic direction.
A number of observers have noted that what is taking place in Burma seems to be linked to internal differences within the regime between moderate forces and so-called hardliners from the old regime. Burma's new president, Thein Sein, is seen as belonging to the moderate faction. However, that does not make him a democrat. His primary role is to improve Burma's relations with the rest of the world. The main proponents of democratic values in Burma remain the opposition led by Aung San Suu Kyi. This is one of the reasons why the dialogue between her and President Thein Sein is of critical importance. Until and unless the attitudes of leading figures in powerful positions change in Burma, a more sober assessment of the potential for Burma to become a full blown democracy remains in order.
Barth Eide made his assessment of the situation in Burma before last week's releases had taken place. His statements have on a number of occasions revealed Norway's limited understanding of the situation in the country. At times, it seems more important for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to be able to announce that developments in Burma are moving in the right direction than to make a serious assessment of the situation on the ground. This is the second time the Deputy Foreign Minister displayed a certain nai"vete' in his dealings with Burma.
During his previous visit to the country last March, Barth Eide also concluded that developments in Burma are moving in the right direction. At that time, his statement stood in contrast to the views of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Burma, Tomas Ojeas Quintana, who at the same time was visiting Burma's border areas to meet with victims of the armed conflicts in the country. The special Rapporteur noted that his findings represented a serious obstacle to Burma's democratic development. That was six months ago, and little has changed in border areas since then.
This time, Barth Eide's statement that there is a general mood in Burma expectant of exciting things to happen stands in contrast to the wait-and-see attitude that predominates among my Burmese friends and acquaintances. They have been disappointed too many times already and find it difficult to be hopeful---yet again. Barth Eide---and Norway---could benefit from a dialogue with broader sections of the Burmese population.
Barth Eide argues that Norway should be ahead and reward the regime for positive changes. His recommendation is connected in particular to the possible removal of sanctions. The logic is odd. A reward is normally given after a positive act---as an encouragement to continue doing the right thing. To reward in advance is to miss the function of rewards.
Most observers who have followed the situation in Burma over time recognize that sanctions in themselves cannot create a democratic Burma. There is broad agreement that the main function of the sanctions is to serve as a political instrument for the opposition. This is not the time for Norway to soften its support for the forces of reform in the country. It remains essential to listen to the viewpoints of Aung San Suu Kyi. As she also told NRK: When the day comes for lifting the sanctions, she will let the whole world know.
Burma has improved its international reputation recently by engaging in a dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi, inter alia to discuss the armed conflicts in the country, by putting an end to the building of a dam on the Irrawaddy River following widespread public protests and by suggesting that media censorship needs to stop. But there is still a long way to go from words to action. If the regime is serious about peace talks and dialogue, the release of ethnic leaders, notably Khun Htun Oo, would have been a powerful signal. If the regime is serious about listening to public opinion, the 88 generation students led by Min Ko Naing should be free. And if the regime is serious about ending censorship, detained journalists should be walking out of the prison gates.
The opposition and the international community have recognized for many years that the release of all political prisoners is the most important confidence building step that could be undertaken by Burma's rulers. On two occasions over the past year, President Thein Sein has promised amnesties with little substance. More empty promises could undermine the impression that he is a person the opposition can work with---and the value of further releases.
Barth Eide finds that things are changing so fast in Burma that it is almost too fast. What has changed in Burma is the discourse. The regime has finally realized how to make itself understood by the rest of the world. But the willingness and the ability to live up to its promises is still lacking.
Spring has yet to come to Burma. The window of opportunity that Barth Eide believes he has found in Burma only exists if those in power can match their words with action. Only then will it be possible to say that developments in Burma are moving in the right direction.
The author is a PhD candidate at the Institute for Human Rights and Peace Studies, Mahidol University. The opinions expressed here are her own. http://www.irrawaddy.org/opinion_story.php?art_id=22269
------------------------------------------
Only 600 Political Prisoners in Burma: President's Adviser
By THE IRRAWADDY Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Burma only had around 600 prisoners of conscience and released almost half during last week's amnesty order, President Thein Sein's political adviser Ko Ko Hlaing told Swedish Radio.
Ko Ko Hlaing said accusations that there are 2,000 political prisoners in Burma were an exaggeration, and the 300 political detainees that have so far been released by the president's amnesty order cannot be considered a small number. He added that he thought more will be freed in the near future.
However, in an interview with the Burmese language version of The Irrawaddy published on Monday, Ko Ko Hlaing claimed that he did not have exact figures for the number of political prisoners and advised reporters to contact the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Toe Kyaw Hlaing, an activist working on a petition campaign for the release of prisoners, said there is a huge disparity between the lists of political prisoners held by the Burmese government and human rights organizations.
He told The Irrawaddy that nearly 1,200 political prisoners still remain behind bars after last week's amnesty, according to the list compiled by the Burmese Democracy Network.
The numbers of political detainees are different because the government uses the list of those who it has imprisoned on specific political charges, said Toe Kyaw Hlaing.
He said that in many cases the previous military regime did not charge activists with specific political offenses such as article 5(J) of the 1950 State Emergency Act and article 505(B) of the State Offences Act. Instead they were charged with the Electronic Act, immigration procedures, bomb plots, connections with unlawful associations, the Press Act, and so on. Therefore the official lists of current political prisoners in Burma may not be accurate, he said.
Toe Kyaw Hlaing also said that there might be a different definition between the government and political activists with regards the term prisoners of conscience.
According to the definition used by human rights group Amnesty International, prisoners of conscience can refer to those who have been imprisoned and/or persecuted for the non-violent expression of their conscientiously-held beliefs.
The Burmese government granted amnesty to 6,359 prisoners on Oct. 12a full moon day at the end of the Buddhist lent when it is auspicious to perform acts of merit but if did not make clear how many political prisoners were included in that number.
The Voice, a domestic journal based in Rangoon, reported on Monday that around 280 prisoners of conscience were among those who had been released last week.
Bo Kyi, the joint-secretary of the exiled Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), told The Irrawaddy that his organization was still compiling lists of political prisoners remaining in different prisons and those recently granted amnesty. This information will be issued publicly in the coming days, he said.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22283
------------------------------------------------
US Urges End to Abuses of Burmas Minorities
By MATTHEW PENNINGTON/ AP Writer Tuesday, October 18, 2011
WASHINGTON The United States sees encouraging new signs of openness in isolated Burma but says that after decades of military rule, the Asian country has a way to go before it loses its pariah status and tough sanctions are lifted.
Special envoy to Burma Derek Mitchell said Monday there seems to be a trend toward greater openness but questions remain about its commitment to democratic reform.
Burma, also known as Myanmar, held elections last year which although flawed, were its first since democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi swept a 1990 vote and was barred from taking power.
In late September, the government stopped work on a controversial China-backed dam, saying the $3.6 billion project was "against the will of the people." And last week, authorities freed as many as 250 of the country's more than 2,000 political detainees.
Burmas pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, left, sees off Derek Mitchell, right, US special representative to Burma, after their meeting at her home on Sept. 12, 2011, in Rangoon. (Photo: AP)
Mitchell welcomed the government's recent moves as encouraging and said his September visit yielded productive meetings with Burmese officials, traditionally viewed as xenophobic. He said they were willing to discuss anything he raised.
"Right now I think there are a lot of restrictions that make them into a pariah state. And Burma is a proud country with a tremendous history, and they deserve to come out of the shadows and take their prideful place in the region," Mitchell told a news conference in Washington.
Burma, a former breadbasket of Southeast Asia, has suffered not just repressive government but poor economic management during nearly 50 years of military rule. It is subject to wide-ranging trade, economic and political sanctions from the U.S. and other Western nations, enforced in response to brutal crackdowns on pro-democracy protesters that left hundreds, maybe thousands dead in 1988 and again in 2007, and its refusal to hand power to Suu Kyi's party after the 1990 elections.
But sanctions and isolation have failed to force change, and only served to complicate U.S. engagement with the economically vibrant Southeast Asian region, as Washington looks to deepen its existing alliances and forge new ones to counter China's rise.
The Obama administration has sought to engage Burma, and after two years, there are signs of change, although whether that is in response to U.S. Overtures is difficult to tell. Burma is also vying to assume the rotating chair of the Association of South Asian Nations in 2014 and may be trying to impress ASEAN leaders before they meet at a November summit when the decision could be made.
When it comes to rewarding Burma for reforms, Washington is likely to have tougher criteria than ASEAN, and it is likely to proceed in an incremental manner.
Mitchell would not give specifics about what those steps might be. David Steinberg, a Myanmar expert at Washington's Georgetown University, said a first move could be to allow the World Bank and Asian Development Bank to help Burma.
The U.S. has already made some positive gestures, such as easing travel restrictions that enabled Burma's foreign minister to visit the State Department in Washington last month.
For more tangible concessions, a key test will be action on political prisoners. Mitchell urged releases of all such detainees, including 1988-era student protest leaders Min Ko Naing and Ko Ko Gyi, and a monk at the forefront of the 2007 protests, Gambiri.
Mitchell also said the government has not made comparable progress in its relations with ethnic minorities in the north and east of Burma as it has with the democratic opposition, with whose leader Suu Kyi it has held high-level talks. He noted credible reports of continued human rights abuses, including against minority women and children.
"We made it very clear that we could not have a transformed relationship as long as these abuses and credible reports of abuses occur," he said.
Burma is an ethnically diverse nation, and most of the minorities have taken up arms at some point against the government dominated by the military and the ethnic Burman majority. Legions of villagers have been displaced by brutal military campaigns, and this year has seen violence flare in the Kachin and Shan states against ethnic armies that had reached cease-fires with the Burmese regime.
Steinberg said the U.S. would also be looking to see a further decrease in media censorship and the legalization of Suu Kyi's political party which was outlawed for boycotting the 2010 elections as unfair. http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=22278
-------------------------------------------
How India shut down the media over Burmese visit
By Andrew Buncombe
The Foreign Desk
Tuesday, 18 October 2011 at 8:53 am
Burma's new president, a former general called Thein Sein, flew out of Delhi this past weekend, concluding a four-day visit which saw the relationship between the two countries further cemented with a series of new deals and written agreements. Among the highlights referred to in the joint statement issued by the countries, was an undertaking to speed up construction of natural gas pipelines, increased cooperation over energy exploration and an offer from India for a $500m line of credit.
The timing of the red-carpet visit came at a hugely significant time. The day Thein Sein arrived in India at Bodh Gaya, it emerged that more than 6,000 prisoners had been released from Burma's jails, among them 200 political prisoners. The step was the latest in a series of measures by the president, including the relaxing of media controls and the suspension of work on a controversial dam project, that have led many to believe he represents a genuinely new chapter in Burma's political history and a crucial step on the journey towards democracy.
Despite the importance of the visit, there was little coverage in the Indian media. Those reports that did appear were largely superficial and seemed to echo the views of the Indian foreign ministry. (One in The Hindu newspaper appeared particularly inspired by a briefing given to the media by the ministry's spokesman) But can hardly blame the Indian media alone; as one Delhi-based journalist said to me, the trip was difficult to cover as there were no press conferences, no public statements and very few opportunities to obtain the all-important soundbite. [This purported quote in the Hindustan Times may be Thein Sein's only public utterance.]
For all the talk about the measures recently undertaken by Thein Sein, it was clear the Burmese visitors had no wish to be scrutinised by the media, apart from having their photographs taken and being filmed praying at temples [see picture above] and arriving at the president's official residence for a state banquet. Perhaps that was not so surprising. Burma's new leader, after all, was only appointed after an election that would not have been considered fair anywhere else in the world and whilst the main opposition candidate was under house arrest and prevented from taking part. Whatever slight steps of moderation Thein Sein may have taken, he clearly does not represent the will of the people, his country remains a dictatorship and it's hardly a shock that he may not yet feel ready to open himself up to the media.
What was surprising, was the readiness of the Indian authorities to go along with this. There was a time when India was a staunch supporters of the Burmese opposition and its iconic leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who was once a student in Delhi. But those days are long gone. As far back as 2004, Indian officials were telling foreign diplomats that they considered Ms Suu Kyi's time had "come and gone". These days, securing energy deals and countering the influence of China, appear to take precedence over the promotion of democracy. [It's pretty much the same relationship the UK and US have with countries such as Saudi Arabia.]
So if, the Burmese did not want to be scrutinised by the media and asked about human rights issues (as well as the visit itself), India was happy to accommodate. I suppose it also saved Indian officials having to explain why they were doing deals with a country that still keeps hundreds of prisoners of conscience behind bars. In the joint statement issued by the two countries, India "congratulated the President of Myanmar on the transition towards democratic Government". That was it. No talk of human rights, no talk of the prisoners, no talk of the repression of ethnic miniorities. As Ben Rogers of East Asia director for Christian Solidarity World, told The National newspaper: "This totally uncritical attitude to Myanmar is really a lose-lose situation for India."
I attended four events on Thein Sein's agenda, three of them in Bodh Gaya, the site of Buddha's enlightenment and a pilgramage site for Buddhists from across the world. At one of these I got as far as saying, "Sir, could you spare a moment for a question from the media", before I was confronted by a senior member of India's Intelligence Bureau who prevented any further interaction. At two subsequent events, the Bihar Special Force police told me their job was to step me from speaking to the president. When I asked how it was the job of the security personnel to harass the media, I was told by one officer that I was a potential security risk because he could not be sure "I wouldn't try and slap" the president.
The fourth event was on Saturday morning at a field centre operated by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research in Delhi, Thein Sein's final engagement before leaving India and part of his official schedule. The institute's officials were welcoming and friendly, the Delhi police were not. In this instance, The Independent was physically pushed from the event by the police, with no explanation. It may have been that my crime in the eyes of Indian and Burmese officials was to have been standing next to a reporter from the Press Trust of India, who tried to asked Thein Sein a question about cooperation between India and Burma on agriculture. [He did not bother to reply. It may be his translator did not translate the question for him.]
Given the often life-threatening peril and difficulties journalists in this part of the world regularly face while doing their jobs, Saturday morning's incident can count only as the merest of inconveniences. But it was insightful as to how, even in India, where freedom of the media is a much-celebrated right, there are limits to how far this goes, especially when it may dare "embarrass" a VIP guest from a military dictatorship. As one of the guests at the institute, who witnessed what happened to me, said: "The president of Myanmar has brought a piece of Myanmar with him to India." http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2011/10/18/how-india-shut-down-the-media-over-burmese-visit/
------------------------------------------------
Myanmar Must Release More Prisoners, Says US
Posted by Janis Esch on October 17, 2011 1:52 PM
Myanmar must release more political prisoners and end abuses against ethnic minorities if it wants to transform its relations with Washington, a U.S. official said Monday.
Special envoy to Myanmar Derek Mitchell noted a trend toward greater openness in the Asian country but said questions remain about Myanmar, also known as Burma, and its commitment to democratic reforms.
"Right now I think there are a lot of restrictions that make them into a pariah state. And Burma is a proud country with a tremendous history, and they deserve to come out of the shadows and take their prideful place in the region," Mitchell told a news conference.
Myanmar held flawed elections last year, its first voting since democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi swept a 1990 vote and was barred from taking power. The government recently stopped work on a controversial China-backed dam project and last week freed as many as 250 of its more than 2,000 political detainees.
Last month, Mitchell made his first visit to Myanmar since his appointment, aiming to advance the Obama administration's engagement with the military-dominated government after years of isolating it because of its poor record on human rights.
Mitchell welcomed the government's recent moves as encouraging and said his September visit yielded productive meetings with Myanmar officials, traditionally viewed as xenophobic. He said they were willing to discuss anything he raised.
He would not give specifics about how Washington could reward the government for progress toward positive change. Myanmar currently is subject to tough trade and economic sanctions.
He said the United States had made some gestures already: easing travel restrictions that enabled Myanmar's foreign minister to visit the State Department in Washington last month after attending the U.N. General Assembly in New York. The U.S. also is inviting Myanmar to participate in other international dialogues.
Mitchell called on Myanmar to release all remaining political prisoners and said that while the government had held discussions with the democratic opposition, it had not made comparable progress in its relations with ethnic minorities in the north and east. He said credible reports of human rights abuses, including against women and children, continue to emerge.
"We made it very clear that we could not have a transformed relationship as long as these abuses and credible reports of abuses occur," he said.
Myanmar is an ethnically diverse nation, and most of the minorities have taken up arms at some point against the government dominated by the military and the ethnic Burman majority. Legions of villagers have been displaced by brutal military campaigns, and this year has seen violence flare in the Kachin and Shan states against ethnic armies that had reached cease-fires with the Myanmar regime.
http://www.thirdage.com/news/myanmar-must-release-more-prisoners-says-us_10-17-2011
---------------------------------------------
ASIA TIMES
Thein Sein as Myanmar's Gorbachev
By Andrew Selth
Strategic analysts who studied the Soviet Union during the 1980s can still recall the excitement and intellectual challenge of trying to interpret developments as Mikhail Gorbachev first introduced his policy of perestroika (restructuring), and followed it two years later with glasnost (openness).
As is now well known, there were some diehard Cold Warriors in official and academic circles who steadfastly refused to believe that a creature of the Communist Party, who had enjoyed the patronage of figures like KGB chief Yuri Andropov and risen to the rank of general secretary, would ever challenge the system that nurtured him.
Then there were those experts who, on the basis of a careful analysis of the objective realities, were prepared to give Gorbachev the benefit of the doubt and accept that he was trying to introduce a range of genuine reforms, albeit for his own purposes. Few observers, however, went so far as to predict the downfall of the entire Soviet power structure.
It is useful to keep that period in mind when looking at developments in Myanmar, also known as Burma, since the inauguration of a hybrid civilian-military government this January.
President Thein Sein, a former army general widely believed to have been hand-picked by strongman Senior General Than Shwe, has made several public statements and promised a number of changes that appear to herald a more open-minded and conciliatory approach to government.
There is no question that the armed forces intend to remain firmly in control of Myanmar, but there now appears to be the possibility of greater personal freedoms, rational economic policies and a more relaxed attitude towards the development of civil society.
Thein Sein and his ministers have also taken a number of steps that seem designed in large part to meet the oft-repeated concerns of the international community. For example, the president has met with prominent opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who has expressed herself "happy and satisfied" with his intention to introduce "real positive change".
Over 200 political prisoners have been released, a move which addresses - to a certain extent at least - another major sticking point with the Western governments that maintain sanctions against the regime. Myanmar's ambassador in Vienna has also assured the International Atomic Energy Agency that his country has neither the capacity nor the intention to develop nuclear weapons, long a subject of speculation and concern.
These developments have prompted widely varying reactions. A number of respected academics and commentators have taken a strategic view and, with the usual caveats, sought to highlight what they believe to be the start of a gradual process of political reconciliation and incremental reform.
The International Crisis Group has gone even further and announced that "major reform is under way" in Myanmar. A hard core of activists and their supporters, however, have dismissed recent developments as part of a massive confidence trick by an entrenched military regime. Focusing on more immediate issues, some have even called for harsher economic and financial sanctions against Naypyidaw.
Given the dearth of reliable information about internal developments in Myanmar, and the highly politicized nature of the Myanmar-watching community, this divergence of views is not surprising. In another echo of the Cold War, when the academic community was deeply divided by ideological leanings and different approaches to professional contacts with the communist bloc, scholars and commentators have tended to split into two main camps.
As The Economist opined recently, one sees the glass half full while the other sees the glass half empty. Some exchanges between the two sides have become quite heated, exposing an ugly side to the Myanmar debate.
In the case of the Soviet Union, the optimists were ultimately proven correct, but even they failed to predict the full impact of Gorbachev's revolutionary policies, and the power of the forces unleashed by his relaxation of the old rules. It is possible that the activist community is right, and the shift in Naypyidaw's approach is simply a clever ploy to prompt the lifting of economic sanctions and to win Myanmar the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) chair in 2014.
Yet, if that is the plan, then Thein Sein seems to have forgotten Alexis de Tocqueville's famous dictum that the most dangerous time for a dictatorship is when it begins to loosen its grip - for whatever reason. As Gorbachev found, once such a process is set in train, it is very difficult to control.
There is another scenario that needs to be kept in mind. Notwithstanding the opaqueness of Myanmar's politics, it is known that there are hardliners within the current leadership who oppose Thein Sein's new approach, particularly his attempts at reconciliation with Aung San Suu Kyi and the pro-democracy movement.
These elements favor continued strong military control of the country and the elimination of any dissent. Myanmar's armed forces have been remarkably loyal and cohesive over the past 50 years, giving the country the world's most durable dictatorship. A split in the ruling hierarchy is still unlikely, but if events are seen to be getting out of control an attempt to reinstate direct military rule cannot be ruled out.
Faced with all this uncertainty, the key policy question faced by governments and international organizations is whether to take Thein Sein's promises at face value and seek to encourage genuine reforms, or to dismiss recent developments as a sham and impose more punitive measures.
To date, most have tended to favor the former approach, cautiously welcoming the changes that have occurred and have been promised, while pointing out the need for concrete actions to suit the president's words. If this is indeed a tipping point in Myanmar's modern history, and positive change is a real possibility, that seems the very least they can do.
Andrew Selth is a Research Fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute in Brisbane, Australia.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/MJ19Ae01.html
Comments
Post a Comment