Original report by Aye Aye Mon, DVB
Translation by Nay Chi U
25 January 2008
Thingungyun National League for Democracy Party (Youth) member Ko Mya Than Htike, who was shot in the back, appeared at Kyauk Tada magistrate court on 22 January, according to senior attorney U Aung Thein.
He was charged under sections 145: for refusing to obey riot police warning and 505b: acting to 'dishonour' the State, and prosecuted by Inspector Soe Naing of Kyauk Tada police station.
Soe Naing claimed that the troops were ordered to take over, and to use force to disperse demonstrators as they did not obey the order issued by 'authorities' under section 144, to disperse immediately, and to prevent riots. He also told the court that while military troops were using force to disperse the protesters, Ko Mya Than Htike was at the front of the demonstrations.
Then U Aun Thein, the defence lawyer asked," Do you have any knowledge that Ko Mya Than Htike was shot at as he was turning his back to the soldiers and walking away from them? So that the bullet went through his bottom then came out from his left thaigh ? He was not at the front, he was not facing the soldiers. He had turned his back to the soldiers and was walking away from them while the security forces shot him from the military truck. Did you know any thing of that?
The official then answered," I knew that he was in the hospital."
The next trial for the case is on 29th January and the defence lawyer said he looks forward to questioning the prosecution witnesses.
U Aung Thein has accepted at least 4 cases to represent the defendants who have been charged in connection with the September protests, in Kyauk Tada area.
Sunday, 27 January 2008
Taunggok : Two Youths Charged
Original report by Naw Say Paw, DVB
Translation by Nay Chi U
25 January 2008
The two youths, who called out political slogans in Taunggok, Arakan have been prosecuted under movement restriction laws and will appear at court on 5 February, a resident reported.
Ko Than Htay and Ko Zaw Naing, who are from Chaung Kauk, Taunggok, called out," We Want Democracy !"," Release Aung San Suu Kyi!" as they were riding on bikes and and were subsequently arrested and detained in Taunggok police station.
While the security is still extremely tight in Taunggok, authorities are particularly focusing attention on particular area - Chaung Kauk.
After forcing protesters gathering for peaceful demonstrations in town to disperse, more armed security forces have been placed in Taunggok and members of the National League for Democracy Party are under surveillance.
Translation by Nay Chi U
25 January 2008
The two youths, who called out political slogans in Taunggok, Arakan have been prosecuted under movement restriction laws and will appear at court on 5 February, a resident reported.
Ko Than Htay and Ko Zaw Naing, who are from Chaung Kauk, Taunggok, called out," We Want Democracy !"," Release Aung San Suu Kyi!" as they were riding on bikes and and were subsequently arrested and detained in Taunggok police station.
While the security is still extremely tight in Taunggok, authorities are particularly focusing attention on particular area - Chaung Kauk.
After forcing protesters gathering for peaceful demonstrations in town to disperse, more armed security forces have been placed in Taunggok and members of the National League for Democracy Party are under surveillance.
Over 75 Burmese refugees left homeless in Malaysia
Mizzima News
January 25, 2008
New Delhi - At least 75 Burmese refugees have been rendered homeless after the Malaysian government-backed volunteer corps, RELA, raided their homes in Putra Jaya and burnt down their make-shift camp, a Human Rights group said.
The Chin Human Rights Organization today said the 75 Burmese refugees, belonging to the Zomi tribe of Chin ethnics, are left wandering in the jungles near Kuala Lumpur after the RELA stormed their campsite in the morning of January 20.
"Nothing is left for any of them. Nobody knows what they should do, where they should go for shelter, how they can overcome this...They are left with nothing," the CHRO cited a Zomi Chin leader, who recently visited the residents and their burnt out campsite, as saying.
CHRO said the incident was the latest of many well-documented acts of abuse committed by the authorities against the refugee community in Malaysia.
"We really don't understand why they [the RELA] are angry and what they want but what they do is very abusive, very harmful for the refugee communities and it is not the first time," Amy Alexander, Regional Advocacy and Campaigns Officer of CHRO said.
According to the CHRO, there are at least 23,000 Chin refugees out of about half a million Burmese refugees and they live in constant fear of being arrested, tortured and deported to Burma, from which they have fled in fear of government persecution.
While the UN refugee agency, UNHCR, does take the initiative to provide protection, even the small number of UNHCR recognized refugees are not spared by the baton-wielding RELA, the CHRO said.
"Not only the refugees who do not have UNHCR certificates, but also people who have certificates are facing the same problems. But the UNHCR document can help them at least get released from the detention camps. So the refugees need help from UNHCR," Alexander said.
According to the Malaysian Chin Refugee Committee, there are at least nine make-shift camps in the jungles of Putra Jaya, where hundreds of Chin refugees are hiding from the authorities.
However, Salai Khen Sang, the spokesperson of CRC, said with the RELA supposed to take charge of security of all the camps, from February 15, "the situation for refugees will be worse than in the past."
The only hope for Burmese refugees is to be recognized by the UNHCR and to be re-settled as soon as possible, Alexander said.
"There is only one way to help these people. They [UNHCR] should reopen general registration and every one can access UNHCR for protection and be able to resettle as soon as they can. Then we hope the situation will be processed," Alexander said.
January 25, 2008
New Delhi - At least 75 Burmese refugees have been rendered homeless after the Malaysian government-backed volunteer corps, RELA, raided their homes in Putra Jaya and burnt down their make-shift camp, a Human Rights group said.
The Chin Human Rights Organization today said the 75 Burmese refugees, belonging to the Zomi tribe of Chin ethnics, are left wandering in the jungles near Kuala Lumpur after the RELA stormed their campsite in the morning of January 20.
"Nothing is left for any of them. Nobody knows what they should do, where they should go for shelter, how they can overcome this...They are left with nothing," the CHRO cited a Zomi Chin leader, who recently visited the residents and their burnt out campsite, as saying.
CHRO said the incident was the latest of many well-documented acts of abuse committed by the authorities against the refugee community in Malaysia.
"We really don't understand why they [the RELA] are angry and what they want but what they do is very abusive, very harmful for the refugee communities and it is not the first time," Amy Alexander, Regional Advocacy and Campaigns Officer of CHRO said.
According to the CHRO, there are at least 23,000 Chin refugees out of about half a million Burmese refugees and they live in constant fear of being arrested, tortured and deported to Burma, from which they have fled in fear of government persecution.
While the UN refugee agency, UNHCR, does take the initiative to provide protection, even the small number of UNHCR recognized refugees are not spared by the baton-wielding RELA, the CHRO said.
"Not only the refugees who do not have UNHCR certificates, but also people who have certificates are facing the same problems. But the UNHCR document can help them at least get released from the detention camps. So the refugees need help from UNHCR," Alexander said.
According to the Malaysian Chin Refugee Committee, there are at least nine make-shift camps in the jungles of Putra Jaya, where hundreds of Chin refugees are hiding from the authorities.
However, Salai Khen Sang, the spokesperson of CRC, said with the RELA supposed to take charge of security of all the camps, from February 15, "the situation for refugees will be worse than in the past."
The only hope for Burmese refugees is to be recognized by the UNHCR and to be re-settled as soon as possible, Alexander said.
"There is only one way to help these people. They [UNHCR] should reopen general registration and every one can access UNHCR for protection and be able to resettle as soon as they can. Then we hope the situation will be processed," Alexander said.
Quote on Accountability
“The [Burmese military]
government’s chief priority is
to silence its citizens
who would hold them to account”
—Catherine Baber,
Director of Amnesty International
Asia-Pacific programme
High Tide Run [Beyond 1988—Reflections]
By Aung Naing Oo
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 26, 2008
We left the island about 5:30 p.m., before the evening tide, quietly walking past the house we had visited that morning. I saw the woman of the house and her family watching us sympathetically. Without looking back, I felt their collective gaze, as we descended into the deep ravine of the river.
There was only a small stream of water now flowing through the deep channel—perhaps just enough for a long-tailed boat. We waded through the water, sinking in the soft mud, and struggling with the supplies in our bags. There were many birds—mostly herons and seagulls —feeding on crabs and mudfish on the muddy sediment on the other side. The sun was setting slowly on the horizon.
To this day, I do not know what the river was called, but it was one of the many tributaries that flowed into the gulf. I could clearly see its estuary opening towards the gulf a few hundred meters to our left. With the tide out, it was like dry land—a strange spectacle for newcomers like me. The riverbed was so deep that from the middle we couldn’t even see on the opposite bank the small house that was our intended destination.
As we reached the other side, I heard the faint sound of an engine from around the river bend. I assumed it was a boat and turned around, expecting to see it appear, but there was nothing— just the sound of an engine seemingly louder by the second. I ignored the engine sound and followed my friends into the house a short distance from the riverbank. We said hello to our hosts, put down our heavy bags and washed our muddy sandals and feet.
Two shots suddenly rang out. They were very close and very loud. “They are shooting at us,” someone shouted in a panic. All of us looked around wildly, stunned and terrified. “The army!” Then, two more shots were fired—louder and even closer. “Run!” someone shouted urgently.
Run we did, without looking. I ran past the trees and into the open field away from the river. I saw my friends fleeing in all directions, away from the river, as fast as they could. More shots ran out. “They have found us,” I thought furiously, mentally cursing whoever had informed the army of our whereabouts.
After five minutes or so, I realized I was running along the bank of the gulf, and I could see the tide coming in fast. I also saw that I was not alone; there were several of us running in the same direction, including the two newcomers. They were right behind me. I didn’t know in which direction the rest of our group had fled.
Soon we came to a small creek that was filling up fast with the tidewater. It was only about 70 feet wide and right at the edge of the gulf. I jumped in and without thinking, started swimming. Just then I heard my name called. I turned around and saw one of the Pegu students shouting, “I can’t swim! I can’t swim!”
I wanted to keep swimming ahead, but saw all my friends standing agitatedly on the creek’s muddy bank. I swam back but didn’t know what to do. “Longi! Longi!,” someone shouted and I realized what we had to do do. We took our sarongs off and tied them into a rope. One friend swam to the other side of creek. I also jumped in the water; the idea was to pull the guy who could not swim to the other side.
Tense and afraid, he clung to the longyi rope so hard that at one point he pulled me beneath the water. I swallowed a large gulp of salt water, mud and sand, and was still coughing it up days later. Finally, though, we were able to pull the student to the other side.
With the Pegu student safely on the bank, I took off running again along the shore, which I knew would be submerged by the tide within a few minutes. I grew increasingly agitated about my prospects for escape. I saw a small boat, carrying two men and sailing in with the tide. They looked at me, puzzled. I waved at them, hoping that they could help me. But they couldn’t stop and soon the boat had gone.
I looked around for my friends but couldn’t see any of them. I was now alone, afraid of being engulfed by the rising water. I suddenly saw a small fishing hut on stilts and ran for it as fast as I could, as the water rose ever higher.
When I reached the hut, the water already reached above my knees. I saw a thin man in his mid-40s peeling green bamboo with his curved knife to make “Hnee,” thin slices of bamboo used for tying poles. I told him I was a student and quickly explained what had happened. He had heard the shots and realized why I was standing there in the middle of the flood water.
“Get in quickly!” he shouted. He held his knife if ready to defend himself or repel an intruder, and he handed me another. We hid from view, knives in our hands. When I finally looked out there was no soldier to be seen, just the submerged island and the trees in the distance.
As night came on, the fisherman offered to go and look for my friends, instructing me to stay put. He left on his small boat. For the next two hours, I waited alone, listening to the sounds of the water splashing and the wind howling.
When the fisherman returned at about 8 p.m., he had good news. All my friends were safe, and I was taken to a house inland to rejoin them.
The story end with an anticlimax, I’m afraid. It later transpired that the shots that had so alarmed us had not been fired by soldiers but by police—and they weren’t shooting at us, but at the mud flats where the birds were feeding on crabs and mudfish.
Also:
The Catapult Threat [Beyond 1988—Reflections]
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 26, 2008
We left the island about 5:30 p.m., before the evening tide, quietly walking past the house we had visited that morning. I saw the woman of the house and her family watching us sympathetically. Without looking back, I felt their collective gaze, as we descended into the deep ravine of the river.
There was only a small stream of water now flowing through the deep channel—perhaps just enough for a long-tailed boat. We waded through the water, sinking in the soft mud, and struggling with the supplies in our bags. There were many birds—mostly herons and seagulls —feeding on crabs and mudfish on the muddy sediment on the other side. The sun was setting slowly on the horizon.
To this day, I do not know what the river was called, but it was one of the many tributaries that flowed into the gulf. I could clearly see its estuary opening towards the gulf a few hundred meters to our left. With the tide out, it was like dry land—a strange spectacle for newcomers like me. The riverbed was so deep that from the middle we couldn’t even see on the opposite bank the small house that was our intended destination.
As we reached the other side, I heard the faint sound of an engine from around the river bend. I assumed it was a boat and turned around, expecting to see it appear, but there was nothing— just the sound of an engine seemingly louder by the second. I ignored the engine sound and followed my friends into the house a short distance from the riverbank. We said hello to our hosts, put down our heavy bags and washed our muddy sandals and feet.
Two shots suddenly rang out. They were very close and very loud. “They are shooting at us,” someone shouted in a panic. All of us looked around wildly, stunned and terrified. “The army!” Then, two more shots were fired—louder and even closer. “Run!” someone shouted urgently.
Run we did, without looking. I ran past the trees and into the open field away from the river. I saw my friends fleeing in all directions, away from the river, as fast as they could. More shots ran out. “They have found us,” I thought furiously, mentally cursing whoever had informed the army of our whereabouts.
After five minutes or so, I realized I was running along the bank of the gulf, and I could see the tide coming in fast. I also saw that I was not alone; there were several of us running in the same direction, including the two newcomers. They were right behind me. I didn’t know in which direction the rest of our group had fled.
Soon we came to a small creek that was filling up fast with the tidewater. It was only about 70 feet wide and right at the edge of the gulf. I jumped in and without thinking, started swimming. Just then I heard my name called. I turned around and saw one of the Pegu students shouting, “I can’t swim! I can’t swim!”
I wanted to keep swimming ahead, but saw all my friends standing agitatedly on the creek’s muddy bank. I swam back but didn’t know what to do. “Longi! Longi!,” someone shouted and I realized what we had to do do. We took our sarongs off and tied them into a rope. One friend swam to the other side of creek. I also jumped in the water; the idea was to pull the guy who could not swim to the other side.
Tense and afraid, he clung to the longyi rope so hard that at one point he pulled me beneath the water. I swallowed a large gulp of salt water, mud and sand, and was still coughing it up days later. Finally, though, we were able to pull the student to the other side.
With the Pegu student safely on the bank, I took off running again along the shore, which I knew would be submerged by the tide within a few minutes. I grew increasingly agitated about my prospects for escape. I saw a small boat, carrying two men and sailing in with the tide. They looked at me, puzzled. I waved at them, hoping that they could help me. But they couldn’t stop and soon the boat had gone.
I looked around for my friends but couldn’t see any of them. I was now alone, afraid of being engulfed by the rising water. I suddenly saw a small fishing hut on stilts and ran for it as fast as I could, as the water rose ever higher.
When I reached the hut, the water already reached above my knees. I saw a thin man in his mid-40s peeling green bamboo with his curved knife to make “Hnee,” thin slices of bamboo used for tying poles. I told him I was a student and quickly explained what had happened. He had heard the shots and realized why I was standing there in the middle of the flood water.
“Get in quickly!” he shouted. He held his knife if ready to defend himself or repel an intruder, and he handed me another. We hid from view, knives in our hands. When I finally looked out there was no soldier to be seen, just the submerged island and the trees in the distance.
As night came on, the fisherman offered to go and look for my friends, instructing me to stay put. He left on his small boat. For the next two hours, I waited alone, listening to the sounds of the water splashing and the wind howling.
When the fisherman returned at about 8 p.m., he had good news. All my friends were safe, and I was taken to a house inland to rejoin them.
The story end with an anticlimax, I’m afraid. It later transpired that the shots that had so alarmed us had not been fired by soldiers but by police—and they weren’t shooting at us, but at the mud flats where the birds were feeding on crabs and mudfish.
Also:
The Catapult Threat [Beyond 1988—Reflections]
Detained Activists Charged under Printing and Publishing Act
By Shah Paung
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 25, 2008
About 10 leading members of the 88 Generation Students group who were arrested in August were charged on Wednesday under Section 17/20 of Burma’s Printing and Publishing Act. Meanwhile Amnesty International condemned the Burmese military government for the continued imprisonment of political activists and expressed concern for the detainees’ health.
Family members who had visited in prison said they were told that about 10 former student leaders were charged inside the prison.
Win Maung, the father of Pyone Cho, a leader who is being detained, told The Irrawaddy on Friday that they do not know the details of who was charged, but they heard it included well-known leaders of 88 Generation Students group Min Ko Naing, Ko Ko Gyi and Min Zeya.
According to various family members who have recently visited detainees, the student leaders were charged under Section 17/20 of Burma’s Printing and Publishing Act at Insein Prison where they have been detained since their arrests during the protests against the hike in fuel prices in August.
Speaking alongside the sister of arrested student leader Panniek Tun, Win Maung said that they last visited Panniek Tun and Pyone Cho on Monday, but at that time the students said nothing about any formal charges.
The Burmese authorities arrested 13 leading members of the 88 Generation Students group on August 21 after they led a march protesting increased fuel prices.
On Tuesday, the Burmese authorities tried a member of the National League for Democracy, Mya Than Htike, who was arrested at a hospital while receiving medical treatment for a gunshot wound. He is currently being detained in Insein Prison.
According to Aung Thein, a lawyer in Rangoon, the police accused Mya Than Htike of being a prominent activist in September’s demonstrations. The trial was held at a court in Kyauktada Township in Rangoon.
Aung Thein said that Mya Than Htike was shot from behind on September 27 at the junction of Sule and Anawrahta roads by Burmese soldiers. On January 22 he was charged under sections 143 and 505(b) of the penal code, relating to involvement in the demonstrations.
Section 143 of the penal code carries a maximum sentence of two years, while 505(b) carries up to six months imprisonment. Mya Than Htike is now being detained at Insein Prison. His trial is due on January 29, the lawyer said.
Meanwhile, many of the detained political prisoners are in poor and deteriorating health, according to NLD spokesman Nyan Win, including: Win Mya Mya, an organizer of the Mandalay branch of the NLD; Than Lwin, vice-chairman of the NLD’s Mandalay Division and an elected candidate for Madaya Township in the 1990 elections; and Shwe Maung, a member of the NLD. All are currently being detained in Mandalay Prison.
International human rights group Amnesty International on Friday condemned the Burmese military government for its continued imprisonment of political activists and expressed its concern for the health of the detainees. In a statement released on January 25, AI said that since November 1, 2007, the military authorities had arrested no less than 96 activists.
“Four months on from the violent crackdown on peaceful demonstrators, rather than stop its unlawful arrests, the Myanmar [Burma] government has actually accelerated them,” said Catherine Baber, director of Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific programme.
She added: “Such prosecutions are politically motivated, imposed after proceedings that flagrantly abuse people’s rights to a free and fair trial and contravene international human rights standards.”
The group also urged the international community to press the Burmese military government to immediately invite Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, the United Nations human rights envoy to Burma, to return to Burma “to conduct the full-fledged fact-finding mission he has requested.”
AI said that 1,850 political prisoners are currently detained in Burmese prisons while more than 80 persons remain unaccounted for since the September demonstrations.
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 25, 2008
About 10 leading members of the 88 Generation Students group who were arrested in August were charged on Wednesday under Section 17/20 of Burma’s Printing and Publishing Act. Meanwhile Amnesty International condemned the Burmese military government for the continued imprisonment of political activists and expressed concern for the detainees’ health.
Family members who had visited in prison said they were told that about 10 former student leaders were charged inside the prison.
Win Maung, the father of Pyone Cho, a leader who is being detained, told The Irrawaddy on Friday that they do not know the details of who was charged, but they heard it included well-known leaders of 88 Generation Students group Min Ko Naing, Ko Ko Gyi and Min Zeya.
According to various family members who have recently visited detainees, the student leaders were charged under Section 17/20 of Burma’s Printing and Publishing Act at Insein Prison where they have been detained since their arrests during the protests against the hike in fuel prices in August.
Speaking alongside the sister of arrested student leader Panniek Tun, Win Maung said that they last visited Panniek Tun and Pyone Cho on Monday, but at that time the students said nothing about any formal charges.
The Burmese authorities arrested 13 leading members of the 88 Generation Students group on August 21 after they led a march protesting increased fuel prices.
On Tuesday, the Burmese authorities tried a member of the National League for Democracy, Mya Than Htike, who was arrested at a hospital while receiving medical treatment for a gunshot wound. He is currently being detained in Insein Prison.
According to Aung Thein, a lawyer in Rangoon, the police accused Mya Than Htike of being a prominent activist in September’s demonstrations. The trial was held at a court in Kyauktada Township in Rangoon.
Aung Thein said that Mya Than Htike was shot from behind on September 27 at the junction of Sule and Anawrahta roads by Burmese soldiers. On January 22 he was charged under sections 143 and 505(b) of the penal code, relating to involvement in the demonstrations.
Section 143 of the penal code carries a maximum sentence of two years, while 505(b) carries up to six months imprisonment. Mya Than Htike is now being detained at Insein Prison. His trial is due on January 29, the lawyer said.
Meanwhile, many of the detained political prisoners are in poor and deteriorating health, according to NLD spokesman Nyan Win, including: Win Mya Mya, an organizer of the Mandalay branch of the NLD; Than Lwin, vice-chairman of the NLD’s Mandalay Division and an elected candidate for Madaya Township in the 1990 elections; and Shwe Maung, a member of the NLD. All are currently being detained in Mandalay Prison.
International human rights group Amnesty International on Friday condemned the Burmese military government for its continued imprisonment of political activists and expressed its concern for the health of the detainees. In a statement released on January 25, AI said that since November 1, 2007, the military authorities had arrested no less than 96 activists.
“Four months on from the violent crackdown on peaceful demonstrators, rather than stop its unlawful arrests, the Myanmar [Burma] government has actually accelerated them,” said Catherine Baber, director of Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific programme.
She added: “Such prosecutions are politically motivated, imposed after proceedings that flagrantly abuse people’s rights to a free and fair trial and contravene international human rights standards.”
The group also urged the international community to press the Burmese military government to immediately invite Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, the United Nations human rights envoy to Burma, to return to Burma “to conduct the full-fledged fact-finding mission he has requested.”
AI said that 1,850 political prisoners are currently detained in Burmese prisons while more than 80 persons remain unaccounted for since the September demonstrations.
Burma Under Siege
By Min Zin
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 26, 2008
After the September uprising, the Burmese junta regained control over opposition groups and activists, but whether it achieved a stronger strategic position remains doubtful.
A series of bomb blasts in the past two weeks demonstrates one of two things: the security issue is still potentially troublesome for the military or, if opposition charges are true, the junta itself was the source of the bomb blasts, which can be used to blame powerful, disruptive organizations.
There were four explosions within one week, killing at least three civilians and injuring five others. The first blast occurred on January 11 at the railway station serving the country's capital, Naypyidaw. It was the first incident of a bombing in the new capital.
As the bombs were going off, the regime and ethnic, armed opposition groups traded allegations.
The junta accused the Karen National Union (KNU) and an unspecified "foreign organization" of sending "terrorist saboteurs with explosives across the border to perpetrate destructive acts inside the country." Many observers believe the "foreign organization" was a reference to the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
"They are not making this allegation lightly," said a well-informed source inside Burma. "No matter whether the allegation is true or not, it’s a well-calculated charge that is being interpreted within the military establishment in the context of U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman's recent call for the US to use its military capabilities in Burma."
The influential senator wrote an opinion piece in October 2007, suggesting the Bush administration should actively investigate US military and intelligence capabilities could be used to put additional pressure on the regime. Lieberman said, "We should be examining how the junta's ability to command and control its forces throughout the country might itself be disrupted."
But opposition groups and the media dismissed the accusation of a "foreign organization" involvement as a ridiculous charge. The KNU also denied carrying out any attacks targeting civilians.
The opposition speculated that the regime itself could be behind the bombings in the hope of raising a perception of threat against the military, offering an excuse to continue its crack down against known democracy activists and the KNU.
Some exiled Burmese analysts even point to bitter military intelligence members who were purged in 2004 for orchestrating the bombings. Theories abound.
Meanwhile, security has been increased in Rangoon, Pegu and other major cities. Local authorities in some cities even reportedly detained and questioned residents who had recently returned from Thailand after working there as migrants.
In fact, the bombings underscore the vulnerability of the junta's leadership, no matter the source.
Even if the regime uses the bombings as a justification to continue its crackdown against opposition groups, it underscores its fear of the opposition. If the bombings were self-inflicted and meant to shore up unity within the Tatmadaw (armed forces), it’s a sign the junta is unsure of the loyalty of officers and soldiers
"It is less likely that the junta orchestrated the recent explosions," said Win Min, a Burmese analyst who studies civil-military relations in Burma. "I don't think the military would stage an attack in Naypyidaw, the capital they extol and take pride in. In fact, it is not necessary for them to use bombings to justify their crackdowns on the oppositions."
In fact, since 1988 the military’s image, in the eyes of the domestic public as well as abroad, has descended to rock bottom, while the opposition, including the armed ethnic groups, is seen as democratic freedom fighters.
The September demonstrations again allowed Burmese society to witness mindless killing and brutality directed against Buddhist monks and civilians. As result, the morale of the military, including some senior officers, is at its lowest ebb in years.
Moreover, the generals have pushed the limit of the international community including their regional supporters.
Under the current circumstances, the last thing the generals want is to be seen as weak.
An unfortunate consequence of this deep sense of vulnerability is that it hardens Snr-Gen Than Shwe's thinking. Under the spell of a bunker mentality, the military leadership will continue to dig in their heels and new reforms are less likely.
Than Shwe's regime is now determined to entrench its power in non-negotiable terms.
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 26, 2008
After the September uprising, the Burmese junta regained control over opposition groups and activists, but whether it achieved a stronger strategic position remains doubtful.
A series of bomb blasts in the past two weeks demonstrates one of two things: the security issue is still potentially troublesome for the military or, if opposition charges are true, the junta itself was the source of the bomb blasts, which can be used to blame powerful, disruptive organizations.
There were four explosions within one week, killing at least three civilians and injuring five others. The first blast occurred on January 11 at the railway station serving the country's capital, Naypyidaw. It was the first incident of a bombing in the new capital.
As the bombs were going off, the regime and ethnic, armed opposition groups traded allegations.
The junta accused the Karen National Union (KNU) and an unspecified "foreign organization" of sending "terrorist saboteurs with explosives across the border to perpetrate destructive acts inside the country." Many observers believe the "foreign organization" was a reference to the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
"They are not making this allegation lightly," said a well-informed source inside Burma. "No matter whether the allegation is true or not, it’s a well-calculated charge that is being interpreted within the military establishment in the context of U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman's recent call for the US to use its military capabilities in Burma."
The influential senator wrote an opinion piece in October 2007, suggesting the Bush administration should actively investigate US military and intelligence capabilities could be used to put additional pressure on the regime. Lieberman said, "We should be examining how the junta's ability to command and control its forces throughout the country might itself be disrupted."
But opposition groups and the media dismissed the accusation of a "foreign organization" involvement as a ridiculous charge. The KNU also denied carrying out any attacks targeting civilians.
The opposition speculated that the regime itself could be behind the bombings in the hope of raising a perception of threat against the military, offering an excuse to continue its crack down against known democracy activists and the KNU.
Some exiled Burmese analysts even point to bitter military intelligence members who were purged in 2004 for orchestrating the bombings. Theories abound.
Meanwhile, security has been increased in Rangoon, Pegu and other major cities. Local authorities in some cities even reportedly detained and questioned residents who had recently returned from Thailand after working there as migrants.
In fact, the bombings underscore the vulnerability of the junta's leadership, no matter the source.
Even if the regime uses the bombings as a justification to continue its crackdown against opposition groups, it underscores its fear of the opposition. If the bombings were self-inflicted and meant to shore up unity within the Tatmadaw (armed forces), it’s a sign the junta is unsure of the loyalty of officers and soldiers
"It is less likely that the junta orchestrated the recent explosions," said Win Min, a Burmese analyst who studies civil-military relations in Burma. "I don't think the military would stage an attack in Naypyidaw, the capital they extol and take pride in. In fact, it is not necessary for them to use bombings to justify their crackdowns on the oppositions."
In fact, since 1988 the military’s image, in the eyes of the domestic public as well as abroad, has descended to rock bottom, while the opposition, including the armed ethnic groups, is seen as democratic freedom fighters.
The September demonstrations again allowed Burmese society to witness mindless killing and brutality directed against Buddhist monks and civilians. As result, the morale of the military, including some senior officers, is at its lowest ebb in years.
Moreover, the generals have pushed the limit of the international community including their regional supporters.
Under the current circumstances, the last thing the generals want is to be seen as weak.
An unfortunate consequence of this deep sense of vulnerability is that it hardens Snr-Gen Than Shwe's thinking. Under the spell of a bunker mentality, the military leadership will continue to dig in their heels and new reforms are less likely.
Than Shwe's regime is now determined to entrench its power in non-negotiable terms.
Arroyo rallies Asean leaders: Let’s free Suu Kyi now
TJ Burgonio
Philippine Daily Inquirer
January 27, 2008
DAVOS, SWITZERLAND -- President Macapagal-Arroyo on Friday urged the leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) to make a difference in the region by working to bring about the release of the jailed Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
“We must work together to make the tough choices to make Asean real and Aung San Suu Kyi free,” the President said in a strongly worded message she delivered at the Asean session of the World Economic Forum here.
The President said the regional grouping would attain a “level of democratization” on the issue of human rights “if we are to work collaboratively for the common good.”
“We must see political reform. We must see Aung San Suu Kyi released and now,” she told Asean leaders and dignitaries during the high-level session called “The Emerging Asian Community: Role of Asean.”
She warned that the Philippine Senate would not ratify the Asean Charter unless the legislators saw “real political reform” take place in Burma (Myanmar).
The charter, signed during the November 2007 Asean Leaders’ Summit in Singapore, seeks to create a human rights body in the region.
Policy of noninterference
Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, however, stressed that the 10-member Asean must always abide by its policy of “noninterference.”
“It’s important to respect the principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of member countries. [That’s why there’s] a problem on how to deal with the Myanmar issue,” he said.
Also present at the session were Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Asean Secretary General Surin Pitsuwan, officials from other Asean member-countries, and Stephen Green, chair of HSBC Holdings.
Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace laureate, has been held under house arrest by Burma’s ruling military junta since 2003.
Same, strong message
The junta, which took power in 1988, called elections in 1990, but refused to recognize the results when Suu Kyi’s party won a resounding victory.
President Arroyo delivered the same message when she addressed the Gender Parity Group minutes later.
“What should we do? We stand up and call for Aung San Suu Kyi’s freedom,” she said.
Ms Arroyo has consistently advocated that Asean take a more active role in introducing reforms in Burma. At the 13th Asean summit last November, she called on her fellow Asian leaders to work for the release of Suu Kyi.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
January 27, 2008
DAVOS, SWITZERLAND -- President Macapagal-Arroyo on Friday urged the leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) to make a difference in the region by working to bring about the release of the jailed Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
“We must work together to make the tough choices to make Asean real and Aung San Suu Kyi free,” the President said in a strongly worded message she delivered at the Asean session of the World Economic Forum here.
The President said the regional grouping would attain a “level of democratization” on the issue of human rights “if we are to work collaboratively for the common good.”
“We must see political reform. We must see Aung San Suu Kyi released and now,” she told Asean leaders and dignitaries during the high-level session called “The Emerging Asian Community: Role of Asean.”
She warned that the Philippine Senate would not ratify the Asean Charter unless the legislators saw “real political reform” take place in Burma (Myanmar).
The charter, signed during the November 2007 Asean Leaders’ Summit in Singapore, seeks to create a human rights body in the region.
Policy of noninterference
Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, however, stressed that the 10-member Asean must always abide by its policy of “noninterference.”
“It’s important to respect the principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of member countries. [That’s why there’s] a problem on how to deal with the Myanmar issue,” he said.
Also present at the session were Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Asean Secretary General Surin Pitsuwan, officials from other Asean member-countries, and Stephen Green, chair of HSBC Holdings.
Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace laureate, has been held under house arrest by Burma’s ruling military junta since 2003.
Same, strong message
The junta, which took power in 1988, called elections in 1990, but refused to recognize the results when Suu Kyi’s party won a resounding victory.
President Arroyo delivered the same message when she addressed the Gender Parity Group minutes later.
“What should we do? We stand up and call for Aung San Suu Kyi’s freedom,” she said.
Ms Arroyo has consistently advocated that Asean take a more active role in introducing reforms in Burma. At the 13th Asean summit last November, she called on her fellow Asian leaders to work for the release of Suu Kyi.
Thursday, 24 January 2008
Government Hospital Stops Free Medical Services to HIV/AIDS Sufferers
Shah Paung
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 23, 2008
A hospital run by the Burmese military government has stopped providing free medical services to HIV/AIDS sufferers, according to a person living with HIV/AIDS who was directly affected by the decision.
Tin Ko Ko said that HIV/AIDS sufferers who receive treatment at Rangoon Infectious Diseases Hospital—which has for several years provided free medical services, such as blood tests, laboratory analysis and x-rays, to HIV/AIDS sufferers—now have to pay for tests and are charged a “donation fee” to cover their treatment.
Patients who undergo x-rays or blood tests for laboratory analysis must now pay from 3,000 kyat (US $2.3) to 4,000 kyat ($3.1). They also have to put 500 kyat ($0.39) in a donation box, he said.
The Rangoon Infectious Diseases Hospital announced that the new regulations started on January 21, 2008. The hospital said that HIV/AIDS patients would have to pay for services now that the group that previously supported the services had stopped funding.
“On Monday, several HIV/AIDS sufferers broke down in tears because they could not pay for their medical fees,” Tin Ko Ko said. “It clearly shows that the government cannot help HIV/AIDS patients without other supporting organizations.”
He added that most persons living with HIV/AIDS who came to the hospital for testing or treatment could only afford enough for transportation, food and basic living costs.
Tin Ko Ko is one of many HIV/AIDS sufferers who has been under the care of a National League for Democracy-affiliated welfare group. The group was led by well-known HIV/AIDS activist Phyu Phyu Thin, a member of the NLD who is now in hiding.
The welfare group has also been facing difficulties supplying antiretroviral (ARV) drugs to their patients since the September uprising as the military authorities have been hunting down and arresting many of its working members.
The NLD-affiliated group is now taking care of up to 600 people living with HIV/AIDS, including some 200 from other townships, according to Yazar, a volunteer who has now had to take on a leading role within the group since Phyu Phyu Thin went into hiding.
Yazar said that about 30 people are living in their two safe houses in Rangoon. The welfare group is not supported by any other non-government organization—it simply exists on donations from their patients, from NLD members and other private benefactors, such as actors, in the community.
The Rangoon Infectious Diseases Hospital, known locally as Wai Bar Gi, is one of the only hospitals in Burma providing ARV drugs to HIV/AIDS sufferers. No official from the hospital was available to comment to The Irrawaddy on Wednesday.
The AZG clinic, which is funded by the Dutch branch of Médecins sans Frontières, was the only other clinic known to be in a position to provide ARV drugs in Rangoon. However, in early January 2007, the AZG clinic was forced to stop accepting new HIV/AIDS patients due to budget limitations.
According to a World Health Organization report in November 2007, Burma has more than 339,000 people living with HIV/AIDS, one of the worst epidemics in Asia.
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 23, 2008
A hospital run by the Burmese military government has stopped providing free medical services to HIV/AIDS sufferers, according to a person living with HIV/AIDS who was directly affected by the decision.
Tin Ko Ko said that HIV/AIDS sufferers who receive treatment at Rangoon Infectious Diseases Hospital—which has for several years provided free medical services, such as blood tests, laboratory analysis and x-rays, to HIV/AIDS sufferers—now have to pay for tests and are charged a “donation fee” to cover their treatment.
Patients who undergo x-rays or blood tests for laboratory analysis must now pay from 3,000 kyat (US $2.3) to 4,000 kyat ($3.1). They also have to put 500 kyat ($0.39) in a donation box, he said.
The Rangoon Infectious Diseases Hospital announced that the new regulations started on January 21, 2008. The hospital said that HIV/AIDS patients would have to pay for services now that the group that previously supported the services had stopped funding.
“On Monday, several HIV/AIDS sufferers broke down in tears because they could not pay for their medical fees,” Tin Ko Ko said. “It clearly shows that the government cannot help HIV/AIDS patients without other supporting organizations.”
He added that most persons living with HIV/AIDS who came to the hospital for testing or treatment could only afford enough for transportation, food and basic living costs.
Tin Ko Ko is one of many HIV/AIDS sufferers who has been under the care of a National League for Democracy-affiliated welfare group. The group was led by well-known HIV/AIDS activist Phyu Phyu Thin, a member of the NLD who is now in hiding.
The welfare group has also been facing difficulties supplying antiretroviral (ARV) drugs to their patients since the September uprising as the military authorities have been hunting down and arresting many of its working members.
The NLD-affiliated group is now taking care of up to 600 people living with HIV/AIDS, including some 200 from other townships, according to Yazar, a volunteer who has now had to take on a leading role within the group since Phyu Phyu Thin went into hiding.
Yazar said that about 30 people are living in their two safe houses in Rangoon. The welfare group is not supported by any other non-government organization—it simply exists on donations from their patients, from NLD members and other private benefactors, such as actors, in the community.
The Rangoon Infectious Diseases Hospital, known locally as Wai Bar Gi, is one of the only hospitals in Burma providing ARV drugs to HIV/AIDS sufferers. No official from the hospital was available to comment to The Irrawaddy on Wednesday.
The AZG clinic, which is funded by the Dutch branch of Médecins sans Frontières, was the only other clinic known to be in a position to provide ARV drugs in Rangoon. However, in early January 2007, the AZG clinic was forced to stop accepting new HIV/AIDS patients due to budget limitations.
According to a World Health Organization report in November 2007, Burma has more than 339,000 people living with HIV/AIDS, one of the worst epidemics in Asia.
Valentine poem makes hidden swipe at Myanmar junta
AFP - Straits Time
January 24, 2008
YANGON - MILITARY censors in Myanmar have launched an investigation after a Valentine poem in a newspaper contained a hidden message criticising the nation's junta leader, officials at the paper said on Thursday.
The weekly Love Journal, a private paper seen as close to the information ministry, published the brief poem in its latest issue, under a picture of heart-shaped balloons reading 'I Love You.'
The Myanmar-language poem, titled 'February Fourteenth,' reads like a love letter, but the first character in each word spells 'Senior General Than Shwe is power crazy.'
Officials at the paper, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the military's censors had questioned the poet Saw Wai and top editors at the newspaper over the poem, which had apparently slipped past them.
Newspaper vendors said the poem had sparked a rush to buy the paper.
'Many people have been asking for the Love Journal. Normally we are left with many extra copies of the journal to return to the publishing house, but this time it was sold out,' one vendor said in downtown Yangon.
The poem follows a similar stunt in August, when a group of Danish street artists published an advertisement in the Myanmar Times weekly containing a hidden message calling Than Shwe a 'killer.'
Myanmar has been called a 'paradise for censors' by media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders. All newspapers must be reviewed by censors before going to press, while the airwaves are under complete military control.
Last week the Myanmar Times was ordered to suspend publication for a week for running a story in its Myanmar-language edition about a massive hike in fees for satellite TV licenses. --
January 24, 2008
YANGON - MILITARY censors in Myanmar have launched an investigation after a Valentine poem in a newspaper contained a hidden message criticising the nation's junta leader, officials at the paper said on Thursday.
The weekly Love Journal, a private paper seen as close to the information ministry, published the brief poem in its latest issue, under a picture of heart-shaped balloons reading 'I Love You.'
The Myanmar-language poem, titled 'February Fourteenth,' reads like a love letter, but the first character in each word spells 'Senior General Than Shwe is power crazy.'
Officials at the paper, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the military's censors had questioned the poet Saw Wai and top editors at the newspaper over the poem, which had apparently slipped past them.
Newspaper vendors said the poem had sparked a rush to buy the paper.
'Many people have been asking for the Love Journal. Normally we are left with many extra copies of the journal to return to the publishing house, but this time it was sold out,' one vendor said in downtown Yangon.
The poem follows a similar stunt in August, when a group of Danish street artists published an advertisement in the Myanmar Times weekly containing a hidden message calling Than Shwe a 'killer.'
Myanmar has been called a 'paradise for censors' by media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders. All newspapers must be reviewed by censors before going to press, while the airwaves are under complete military control.
Last week the Myanmar Times was ordered to suspend publication for a week for running a story in its Myanmar-language edition about a massive hike in fees for satellite TV licenses. --
Leader with only date of birth
Central Chronicle
January 24, 2008
Perhaps Subhash Chandra Bose is the only leader worldwide who had a date of birth (Jan 23:, 1897) but no date of death. Even after three Commissions of Enquiry people do not believe that he is no more. Netaji, as he is endearingly addressed, Subhash was an embodiment of rare courage and bravery coupled with a sense of mission to free his motherland from the clutches of the British.
The Justice Mukherjee Commission appointed by the NDA government has submitted its report to the Central Government and after a large number of questions under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, and political pressure, the Government decided to share the full findings, which by and large don't appear to resolve the mystery. There are people who hope that their beloved leader would return to steer the country out of the chaos.
Jawaharlal Nehru was so impressed by Subhash's work in the INA that he wrote a postscript to 'The Discovery of India', on 29 Dec 1945 saying: "The story of INA, formed in Burma and Malaya during the war years, spread suddenly throughout the country and evoked an astonishing enthusiasm - they became the symbol of unity amongst the various religious groups in India for Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and Christian were all represented in that army. They had solved the communal problems amongst themselves and so why should we not do so?"
For the past 62-years since the 1945 Taihoku plane crash, the nation has been grappling with the Netaji mystery. How did Subhash die? Where and when did he die? Did he live for some period in exile?
Netaji's daughter Anita Plaff believes her father in all probability perished in the air accident. Anita Plaff, 66, who was in India said "I don't think he survived. Unless some fantastically new evidence comes up, if I look at the data available to me, he did not survive".
She also said, "I have been present at the interviews of some of the survivors of the plane crash, including some Japanese officers and their story sounded quite consistent, credible and reasonable".
Elaborating further Anita said "there are stories circulating that my father is still alive. I do not think so. Yes, he continues to remain alive in the memories of scores of people, but it is impossible to believe that he is living at the age of 111".
Anita has a point, if it is true that he is alive now or was alive for some years after the plane crash, Netaji would have definitely established contact with his homeland and not kept quiet for 62 odd years. The Shah Nawaz Committee (1956) and the Khosla Commission (1972), which probed Netaji's disappearance, had concluded that he died in the plane crash.
Subhash was the most enigmatic leader of our freedom struggle. Beginning his political career with the Congress in the 1920 he was elected its president in 1938. The following year in 1939, Bose contested against and won though Mahatma Gandhi threw his weight behind Dr. Sitaramayya, his lone rival, saying "Pattabhi's defeat is my defeat" Gandhi 's opposition of Bose - fostered doubtless by the latter's strong Leftist leanings forced him to resign from the Congress, and he launched the Forward Bloc.
In 1939, the Second World War broke out. Subhash was arrested in Calcutta in July 1940. In December he went on a hunger strike in the prison as a protest against his continued detention and threatened to fast unto death if he was not released. The Government released him but kept a strict vigil at his house to watch his movements. The whole country was thrilled one morning in January 1941 to hear that Subhash had escaped. He got out of the house in the guise of a Muslim divine at dead of night. He got into a car and 40 miles away from Calcutta boarded a train. The tight Pyjama and a long beard made him look like a Maulvi. He reached Peshawar on Jan 17, 1941 and spent two days there. On Jan 19, he drove out of Peshawar, dressed as a Pathan.
The onward journey to Kabul was done partly on foot and partly in lorry in the guise of a deaf and dumb man. In Kabul he underwent the most excruciating physical and mental agonies before he reached Moscow. From Moscow he flew to Berlin in March 1941, with the assumed name of an Italian. It was nearly a year later that he revealed his presence in Berlin by speaking to his countrymen on German radio with glowing tributes to Gandhiji. In fact it was Subhash that called for the first time Mahatma Gandhi as the Father of Nation.
Subash landed in Singapore on July 2, 1943 and from then on knew no rest. Two days later he took over the leadership of the Indian Independence League and the INA from Rash Behari Bose. Netaji's most extraordinary move was to form a provisional government of Azad Hind on Oct 21, 1943 and to declare war on Britain and America. The Azad Hind Government received recognition from nine sovereign countries soon.
In a broadcast from Rangoon addressed to Mahatma Gandhi seeking his blessings, Netaji said, "Once our enemies are expelled from India and peace and order were established, the mission of the Provisional Government would be over. The only reward that we desire for our efforts, for our suffering and for our sacrifice, is the freedom of our motherland. There are many of us who would like to retire from the political field once India is free".
Such was his vision and thought.
Subhash inculcated in the INA not only courage and bravery but inspired supreme self confidence and fearlessness in the face of odds. The INA soldiers marched mainly on foot. They traversed the whole distance of 1100 miles separating Singapore from the Imphal front on foot. There were occasions when Subhash himself walked for miles. There were no fixed scales of pay. Everybody got enough to cover his needs. A Lieutenant got Rs.85, a captain Rs.125, a Major Rs.180, a Lt. Col Rs.300 and a Col. Rs.400. Yet there was a time when no body got more than Rs.250 for months.
Subhash collected donations from Indians through out Asia. Once during a mammoth meeting in Rangoon a flower garland which had earlier been offered to him fetched rupees two lakhs when auctioned. In Penang a small flower vase was presented to Netaji. He announced his intention to auction it for Rs.25000. His eyes were filled with tears when the first bid was for Rs.51000. He collected Rs.25 crores from Indians in Burma now Myanmar. A Muslim business man gave away all his worldly possession worth over a crore of rupees. He even established a national Bank of Azad Hind in Rangoon. Once when the Burma Government had no money to make payments to its soldiers the Bank made a gift of Rs. 5 lakhs.
In brief Subhash was an embodiment of bravery and courage. He struck a new path, although he had earlier been following the Gandhian line. In statesmanship administrative ability and catholicity of views he was like Akbar. Morally, spiritually and intellectually he was like Swami Vivekananda.
January 24, 2008
Perhaps Subhash Chandra Bose is the only leader worldwide who had a date of birth (Jan 23:, 1897) but no date of death. Even after three Commissions of Enquiry people do not believe that he is no more. Netaji, as he is endearingly addressed, Subhash was an embodiment of rare courage and bravery coupled with a sense of mission to free his motherland from the clutches of the British.
The Justice Mukherjee Commission appointed by the NDA government has submitted its report to the Central Government and after a large number of questions under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, and political pressure, the Government decided to share the full findings, which by and large don't appear to resolve the mystery. There are people who hope that their beloved leader would return to steer the country out of the chaos.
Jawaharlal Nehru was so impressed by Subhash's work in the INA that he wrote a postscript to 'The Discovery of India', on 29 Dec 1945 saying: "The story of INA, formed in Burma and Malaya during the war years, spread suddenly throughout the country and evoked an astonishing enthusiasm - they became the symbol of unity amongst the various religious groups in India for Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and Christian were all represented in that army. They had solved the communal problems amongst themselves and so why should we not do so?"
For the past 62-years since the 1945 Taihoku plane crash, the nation has been grappling with the Netaji mystery. How did Subhash die? Where and when did he die? Did he live for some period in exile?
Netaji's daughter Anita Plaff believes her father in all probability perished in the air accident. Anita Plaff, 66, who was in India said "I don't think he survived. Unless some fantastically new evidence comes up, if I look at the data available to me, he did not survive".
She also said, "I have been present at the interviews of some of the survivors of the plane crash, including some Japanese officers and their story sounded quite consistent, credible and reasonable".
Elaborating further Anita said "there are stories circulating that my father is still alive. I do not think so. Yes, he continues to remain alive in the memories of scores of people, but it is impossible to believe that he is living at the age of 111".
Anita has a point, if it is true that he is alive now or was alive for some years after the plane crash, Netaji would have definitely established contact with his homeland and not kept quiet for 62 odd years. The Shah Nawaz Committee (1956) and the Khosla Commission (1972), which probed Netaji's disappearance, had concluded that he died in the plane crash.
Subhash was the most enigmatic leader of our freedom struggle. Beginning his political career with the Congress in the 1920 he was elected its president in 1938. The following year in 1939, Bose contested against and won though Mahatma Gandhi threw his weight behind Dr. Sitaramayya, his lone rival, saying "Pattabhi's defeat is my defeat" Gandhi 's opposition of Bose - fostered doubtless by the latter's strong Leftist leanings forced him to resign from the Congress, and he launched the Forward Bloc.
In 1939, the Second World War broke out. Subhash was arrested in Calcutta in July 1940. In December he went on a hunger strike in the prison as a protest against his continued detention and threatened to fast unto death if he was not released. The Government released him but kept a strict vigil at his house to watch his movements. The whole country was thrilled one morning in January 1941 to hear that Subhash had escaped. He got out of the house in the guise of a Muslim divine at dead of night. He got into a car and 40 miles away from Calcutta boarded a train. The tight Pyjama and a long beard made him look like a Maulvi. He reached Peshawar on Jan 17, 1941 and spent two days there. On Jan 19, he drove out of Peshawar, dressed as a Pathan.
The onward journey to Kabul was done partly on foot and partly in lorry in the guise of a deaf and dumb man. In Kabul he underwent the most excruciating physical and mental agonies before he reached Moscow. From Moscow he flew to Berlin in March 1941, with the assumed name of an Italian. It was nearly a year later that he revealed his presence in Berlin by speaking to his countrymen on German radio with glowing tributes to Gandhiji. In fact it was Subhash that called for the first time Mahatma Gandhi as the Father of Nation.
Subash landed in Singapore on July 2, 1943 and from then on knew no rest. Two days later he took over the leadership of the Indian Independence League and the INA from Rash Behari Bose. Netaji's most extraordinary move was to form a provisional government of Azad Hind on Oct 21, 1943 and to declare war on Britain and America. The Azad Hind Government received recognition from nine sovereign countries soon.
In a broadcast from Rangoon addressed to Mahatma Gandhi seeking his blessings, Netaji said, "Once our enemies are expelled from India and peace and order were established, the mission of the Provisional Government would be over. The only reward that we desire for our efforts, for our suffering and for our sacrifice, is the freedom of our motherland. There are many of us who would like to retire from the political field once India is free".
Such was his vision and thought.
Subhash inculcated in the INA not only courage and bravery but inspired supreme self confidence and fearlessness in the face of odds. The INA soldiers marched mainly on foot. They traversed the whole distance of 1100 miles separating Singapore from the Imphal front on foot. There were occasions when Subhash himself walked for miles. There were no fixed scales of pay. Everybody got enough to cover his needs. A Lieutenant got Rs.85, a captain Rs.125, a Major Rs.180, a Lt. Col Rs.300 and a Col. Rs.400. Yet there was a time when no body got more than Rs.250 for months.
Subhash collected donations from Indians through out Asia. Once during a mammoth meeting in Rangoon a flower garland which had earlier been offered to him fetched rupees two lakhs when auctioned. In Penang a small flower vase was presented to Netaji. He announced his intention to auction it for Rs.25000. His eyes were filled with tears when the first bid was for Rs.51000. He collected Rs.25 crores from Indians in Burma now Myanmar. A Muslim business man gave away all his worldly possession worth over a crore of rupees. He even established a national Bank of Azad Hind in Rangoon. Once when the Burma Government had no money to make payments to its soldiers the Bank made a gift of Rs. 5 lakhs.
In brief Subhash was an embodiment of bravery and courage. He struck a new path, although he had earlier been following the Gandhian line. In statesmanship administrative ability and catholicity of views he was like Akbar. Morally, spiritually and intellectually he was like Swami Vivekananda.
The waiting game - Myanmar's junta plays to win
Economist.com
January 23, 2008
IN A comic novel by Evelyn Waugh, an exasperated teacher tames his unruly class by setting an essay competition with a cash prize. Entries, he tells his rowdy students, will be judged on one criterion alone: length.
Myanmar has long been run on much the same lines. A convention set up to draft a constitution for a move to democratic rule eventually pronounced last September, 14 years after it first met. Its conclusion surprised no one: an arrangement ensuring the perpetuation of military dominance.
Playing for time in the face of demands for political reform—combined with brutally quashing of any sign of popular impatience—has proved a successful tactic. The junta seems more securely in control now than in 1990, when its representatives were trounced in an election. The army has doubled in size. It easily quelled last autumn’s monk-led popular uprising.
The junta is now using the same stalling tactics to frustrate the United Nations Security Council. Last September, despite the objections of countries such as Russia and China, which argued the country was a threat to no one other than its own people, the council voted to include the “situation in Myanmar” on its agenda.
Appalled by the army’s bloody treatment of peaceful protestors, and by the arrest of hundreds of people in an effort to thwart any renewed unrest, the council issued a statement in October calling for the release of all political prisoners. It also demanded a “genuine dialogue” with Aung San Suu Kyi, the detained opposition leader, and “all concerned parties and ethnic groups”.
It would not be true to accuse Myanmar of having done nothing at all to meet these goals, but it is perfectly fair to say that it has done nothing of any significance. It has appointed one of its ministers to “liase” with Miss Suu Kyi. They have met four times, with long gaps in between. Miss Suu Kyi’s view of the arrangement was clear from an official picture showing her looking sombre beside a beaming minister.
The UN estimates at least 4,000 people were detained during and after the protests. Many have been freed, but perhaps 500-1,000 are still locked up. Many families still do not know what has happened to their loved ones.
And these numbers do not even count the 1,100 political prisoners in detention before last September. Some of the ordinary citizens caught up in the fervour of the street protests have been allowed to go home. But anyone with a history of activism of political involvement remains inside a cruel penal system, notorious for torture.
The junta has also allowed the UN’s special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, Sérgio Pinheiro, back for a visit. And it has received the Security Council’s special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari.
But now that Mr Gambari wants to go back, the junta has said it cannot receive him until April. In response, the Security Council on Friday “regretted the slow pace of progress so far” towards meeting its objectives.
The row over the timing of Mr Gambari’s visit shows the powerless of the UN against a regime determined not to mend its ways. It also shows that regime’s cunning: it has managed to turn a debate about the fundamental rights of its citizens into an administrative wrangle about a visa for a visiting diplomat.
As Britain’s ambassador, Mark Canning, has put it, “the name of the game” for the junta is staying off the front pages. The worldwide sympathy evoked by the “saffron revolution” made that seem a hard game to play. But these generals are past masters.
January 23, 2008
IN A comic novel by Evelyn Waugh, an exasperated teacher tames his unruly class by setting an essay competition with a cash prize. Entries, he tells his rowdy students, will be judged on one criterion alone: length.
Myanmar has long been run on much the same lines. A convention set up to draft a constitution for a move to democratic rule eventually pronounced last September, 14 years after it first met. Its conclusion surprised no one: an arrangement ensuring the perpetuation of military dominance.
Playing for time in the face of demands for political reform—combined with brutally quashing of any sign of popular impatience—has proved a successful tactic. The junta seems more securely in control now than in 1990, when its representatives were trounced in an election. The army has doubled in size. It easily quelled last autumn’s monk-led popular uprising.
The junta is now using the same stalling tactics to frustrate the United Nations Security Council. Last September, despite the objections of countries such as Russia and China, which argued the country was a threat to no one other than its own people, the council voted to include the “situation in Myanmar” on its agenda.
Appalled by the army’s bloody treatment of peaceful protestors, and by the arrest of hundreds of people in an effort to thwart any renewed unrest, the council issued a statement in October calling for the release of all political prisoners. It also demanded a “genuine dialogue” with Aung San Suu Kyi, the detained opposition leader, and “all concerned parties and ethnic groups”.
It would not be true to accuse Myanmar of having done nothing at all to meet these goals, but it is perfectly fair to say that it has done nothing of any significance. It has appointed one of its ministers to “liase” with Miss Suu Kyi. They have met four times, with long gaps in between. Miss Suu Kyi’s view of the arrangement was clear from an official picture showing her looking sombre beside a beaming minister.
The UN estimates at least 4,000 people were detained during and after the protests. Many have been freed, but perhaps 500-1,000 are still locked up. Many families still do not know what has happened to their loved ones.
And these numbers do not even count the 1,100 political prisoners in detention before last September. Some of the ordinary citizens caught up in the fervour of the street protests have been allowed to go home. But anyone with a history of activism of political involvement remains inside a cruel penal system, notorious for torture.
The junta has also allowed the UN’s special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, Sérgio Pinheiro, back for a visit. And it has received the Security Council’s special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari.
But now that Mr Gambari wants to go back, the junta has said it cannot receive him until April. In response, the Security Council on Friday “regretted the slow pace of progress so far” towards meeting its objectives.
The row over the timing of Mr Gambari’s visit shows the powerless of the UN against a regime determined not to mend its ways. It also shows that regime’s cunning: it has managed to turn a debate about the fundamental rights of its citizens into an administrative wrangle about a visa for a visiting diplomat.
As Britain’s ambassador, Mark Canning, has put it, “the name of the game” for the junta is staying off the front pages. The worldwide sympathy evoked by the “saffron revolution” made that seem a hard game to play. But these generals are past masters.
Burmese government suspends newspaper
Source: Committee to Protect Journalists
New York, January 23, 2008 — The Committee to Protect Journalists is concerned that the Burmese government has suspended the weekly Myanmar Times for one week as a result of its publication of unauthorized news, according to international news reports.
Burma’s Press Scrutiny Board ordered the temporary closure because of the newspaper’s January 11 Burmese-language edition, which included an article about the government’s decision to raise satellite fees from 6,000 kyat (US$4.80) to 1 million kyat (US$800), The Associated Press reported. Many Burmese citizens have privately installed satellite dishes in recent years to receive foreign news broadcasts instead of the heavily censored, government-controlled fare.
The newspaper apparently did not receive prior government permission to publish the news item, which was first reported by Agence France-Presse. All news publications in Burma publish as weekly editions because of a time-consuming pre-censorship process which systematically ensures that nearly no news critical of the government is published.
“That the government prohibits the media from reporting on its own pronouncements confirms the absurdity of Burma’s censorship regulations,” said Joel Simon, CPJ’s executive director.
Myanmar Times Editor-in-Chief Ross Dunkley told CPJ last year that on average 20 percent of the articles his paper submits to the censorship board every week are rejected and that he must maintain a stock of soft news stories to fill the gaps created on the page.
Myanmar Times began publishing in 2000 as a 51/49 percent joint venture between the Burmese government and the Australian-owned Myanmar Consolidated Media. The paper’s Burmese-language edition is currently the country’s largest circulation newspaper.
CPJ ranked Burma as one of the most heavily censored countries in the world in its 2006 censorship survey. Government authorities harassed and censored journalists, and in one tragic case, killed Japanese journalist Kenji Nagai, who was reporting on anti-government street protests that swept the country in August and September last year.
New York, January 23, 2008 — The Committee to Protect Journalists is concerned that the Burmese government has suspended the weekly Myanmar Times for one week as a result of its publication of unauthorized news, according to international news reports.
Burma’s Press Scrutiny Board ordered the temporary closure because of the newspaper’s January 11 Burmese-language edition, which included an article about the government’s decision to raise satellite fees from 6,000 kyat (US$4.80) to 1 million kyat (US$800), The Associated Press reported. Many Burmese citizens have privately installed satellite dishes in recent years to receive foreign news broadcasts instead of the heavily censored, government-controlled fare.
The newspaper apparently did not receive prior government permission to publish the news item, which was first reported by Agence France-Presse. All news publications in Burma publish as weekly editions because of a time-consuming pre-censorship process which systematically ensures that nearly no news critical of the government is published.
“That the government prohibits the media from reporting on its own pronouncements confirms the absurdity of Burma’s censorship regulations,” said Joel Simon, CPJ’s executive director.
Myanmar Times Editor-in-Chief Ross Dunkley told CPJ last year that on average 20 percent of the articles his paper submits to the censorship board every week are rejected and that he must maintain a stock of soft news stories to fill the gaps created on the page.
Myanmar Times began publishing in 2000 as a 51/49 percent joint venture between the Burmese government and the Australian-owned Myanmar Consolidated Media. The paper’s Burmese-language edition is currently the country’s largest circulation newspaper.
CPJ ranked Burma as one of the most heavily censored countries in the world in its 2006 censorship survey. Government authorities harassed and censored journalists, and in one tragic case, killed Japanese journalist Kenji Nagai, who was reporting on anti-government street protests that swept the country in August and September last year.
Wednesday, 23 January 2008
Joint Statement issued by PM Gordon Brown with Indian Prime Minister
eGov Monitor
January 22, 2008
British Government and the Indian Government
1. The India-UK annual Summit was held in Delhi on January 21, 2008. The delegation from the United Kingdom was led by Prime Minister Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown MP and that from India was led by Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh.
India-UK Strategic Partnership
2. India and the UK share a Strategic Partnership. The two Sides underscored their commitment to the Strategic Partnership launched in 2004 and reaffirmed their shared conviction in the values of democracy, fundamental freedoms, pluralism, rule of law, respect for human rights and multilateralism in the international political and financial architecture as the means to tackle global challenges effectively. The close bilateral relationship has already led to growing cooperation in global affairs and substantial expansion in the bilateral engagement in multiple fields. Building on the achievements of the ‘New Delhi Declaration’ (2002) and ‘India-UK Joint Declaration’ (2004), the two Sides commit themselves to strengthening and deepening the comprehensive Strategic Partnership that exists between the two countries, which is underpinned by growing economic ties and the presence of a large Indian Diaspora in the UK.
Economic & Commercial
3. Bilateral economic linkages are strengthening through increased trade and investment flows. The UK is the third largest cumulative investor in India. India has emerged as one of the largest investors in the UK, including several major acquisitions, reflecting the maturing nature of the bilateral economic partnership. The UK is among India’s important global trading partners. The two Sides acknowledged the potential for greater collaboration especially in hi-tech (ICT, life sciences, nano-technology etc.), research, advanced manufacturing, infrastructure, energy, healthcare, agricultural products and processed foods, higher education and other service sectors.
4. Both sides took note of the outcome of the 4th meeting of the India-UK Joint Economic and Trade Committee (JETCO) held in London on 13 December 2007. This meeting reviewed various aspects of bilateral trade and received valuable feedback from businesses on both sides on measures that could further enhance bilateral trade and investment flows. India and the United Kingdom agreed to cooperate in developing collaboration between Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), entrepreneurs and venture capitalists. The Prime Ministers welcomed the meeting of a CEOs’ Round Table and Entrepreneurs’ Summit of Indian and UK business leaders in Delhi. In the light of the rapidly growing trade and economic relations and the rapidly evolving pattern of international competitive advantage, both governments acknowledged the considerable potential for bilateral trade, investment and services. They noted the importance of improving market access through liberalization and facilitating movement of professionals across a broad range of sectors of interest to both sides.
5. Both sides took note of the large opportunities in the infrastructure sector, in the context of the massive infrastructure development programme being undertaken in India. Facilitating the flow of information on the infrastructure projects being undertaken would encourage business partnerships. Both sides agreed to take forward proposals for the establishment of a capacity building programme in India for public-private partnership in infrastructure with UK support.
6. India and the United Kingdom noted the role played by people of Indian origin in Britain. Through their hard work, dynamism and entrepreneurial talents they have made an enormous contribution to the strengthening of bilateral ties.
Education
7. The two Sides noted the traditionally close ties between the two knowledge societies in the field of Higher Education. They recognised that the UK-India Education & Research Initiative (UKIERI), launched in April 2006, was playing an important role in fostering such contacts. They further noted the huge expansion planned in the Indian Higher Education sector which would increase the gross enrolment ratio by 5 percentage points and include the establishment of a range of central government institutions of excellence including 8 new Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), 7 new Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs), 5 Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research and 30 new Central Universities. It was agreed that both sides would forge a closer partnership in the field of Higher Education, for further developing education and skills to the mutual advantage of the students and faculty of both countries. While exploring new avenues of collaboration to further deepen the cooperation, the two Sides agreed to initiate specific measures to collaborate in the field of higher education. In particular they agreed: to establish an Education Forum to work towards an early conclusion of an Education Partnership Agreement;
to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding on an India-UK Higher Education Leadership Development Programme to develop leadership skills in Indian and UK universities; to establish a Programme, under UKIERI, to support faculty development in key Indian universities with participation of leading UK academics; to develop further student and faculty exchange programmes and partnerships with a commitment of further funding from the UK government; and to promote pro-actively links between British Universities and the premier educational institutions in India including collaborating for the establishment of at least one new Indian Institute of Technology, one new Indian Institute of Science Education and Research and one Central University proposed in the XI Five Year Plan. The latter would be taken forward through a meeting between a British delegation, including Vice Chancellors and their Indian counterparts later in the year. They further agreed to work towards mutual recognition of degrees, diplomas and other academic qualifications supported through greater co-operation between the relevant UK and Indian authorities. The two Sides agreed to the further development of UK/India collaboration on English Language Training. The two Governments recognize the strong interest of higher educational institutions of both countries to work together to further their global educational objectives.
Research, Science & Technology
8. India and the UK see considerable potential for growth in Research, Science and Technology collaboration. They share the vision for further strengthening their partnership through new and existing initiatives and agree to widen discussion to all research funding bodies in both countries through the India-UK Science and Innovation Council mechanism. The UK’s proposal to establish a Research Councils UK (RCUK) office in India is a welcome development that would lead to enhanced collaboration between the two countries. Underlining the importance for further developing Research and S&T cooperation, India and the UK shall establish a Science Bridges Initiative to build institution to institution relationships on equal partnership with joint funding under the principle of parity. RCUK will contribute £ 4 million with a matching grant from Department of Science and Technology (DST) India to promote this initiative. The UK and India also agree to support a further round of UKIERI awards designed to establish networking links between Indian and UK education and research institutions with the UK committing £ 2 million over 3 years and DST agreeing to match this funding on a parity basis. DST and the Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) UK also agreed to collaborate on the initial phase of development of major projects in select research areas.
Civil Nuclear Cooperation
9. The two Sides strongly emphasised the potential of civil nuclear energy to be a safe, sustainable and non-polluting source of energy, which could make a significant contribution to meeting the global challenge of achieving energy security, sustainable development, economic growth, and limiting climate change. The UK supports the India-US civil nuclear co-operation initiative with all its elements, including an appropriate India specific exemption to the Nuclear Suppliers Group Guidelines. As two countries with advanced nuclear technology, India and the UK agree to promote co-operation in civil nuclear energy and will work expeditiously towards a bilateral agreement for this purpose, in line with their strong commitment to non-proliferation. The two Sides will also continue to encourage their scientists to develop closer links and to co-operate in research in this field. The two Sides also welcome the opportunity for their scientists to work together in the context of ITER.
Climate Change
10. India and the UK recognise the need to find effective and practical solutions to address concerns regarding climate change and its implications for human kind. These would include mitigation and adaptation strategies in a manner that supports further economic and social development in particular of developing countries. Long-term convergence of per capita emission rates is an important and equitable principle that should be seriously considered in the context of international climate change negotiations. They expressed satisfaction over the successful outcome at Bali that reaffirmed the relevance of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), including its provision and principles, in particular the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. The process established under the Bali Road Map should aim for enhanced implementation of the UNFCCC and give due weight to issues of concern to developing countries, in particular those relating to addressing adaptation, technology, and financing arrangements. In the field of bilateral cooperation on climate change, the two Sides expressed satisfaction over the announcement of a UK-India Agreement on the second phase of UK-India Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Study.
The UK and India are convinced that development of the international carbon market is important for the future and wish to explore new approaches to market related investment that offer the potential to drive technology transfer. The two Sides shall work towards the success of the second Phase of a project aimed at identifying the barriers to low carbon technology transfer. They will also collaborate on a project piloting implementation of programmatic CDM in India this year to jointly explore the potential of this to facilitate up-scaling of carbon market investment in accordance with India’s future development priorities. Both sides recognised the importance of Research and Development collaboration on low carbon energy technologies and welcomed the broadening dialogue between the two countries on clean coal technologies and other power generation technologies.
MDGs
11. The two Sides agreed that an urgent global effort is required to meet the MDGs. India and the UK agreed to enhance efforts to achieve the MDGs and reduce global poverty. The two parties launched a new Partnership to Achieve the MDGs Globally. The two countries committed to harness their combined knowledge, experience and resources towards this goal including through third country cooperation. India and the UK will start by scoping opportunities to collaborate in third countries where both parties have a development interest. India and the UK would jointly consider ways and means to reform the international institutions. While noting the establishment of the mechanism for this purpose under the Commonwealth at the Kampala CHOGM 2007, the two Prime Ministers agreed that India and the UK should exchange views bilaterally on this important agenda. They agreed the importance of continued exchange of experiences and future cooperation on international policies on major global public goods that impact on the global achievement of the MDGs.
WTO
12. India and the UK strongly support an early, fair and ambitious outcome of the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations. A successful conclusion of the Doha Agenda must focus on the development dimension. Existing differences amongst members have to be overcome for the benefit of all. Close cooperation between India and the UK will make a significant contribution to achieve a balanced and comprehensive agreement.
India-EU
13. India and the UK noted with satisfaction the growing partnership between India and the EU. They welcomed the progress made in the negotiations between India and the EU for a broad-based Trade and Investment Agreement and expressed their commitment for an early and mutually beneficial conclusion of the negotiations for such an agreement. They noted with satisfaction the success of the 8th India-EU Summit held in New Delhi on November 30, 2007.
International
14. The two Sides discussed a range of other international issues, and agreed on the importance of more representative and effective international institutions to address global challenges. The two Sides agreed that a reformed UN Security Council that better reflected the realities of the 21st century would enhance global cooperation and security. The UK reaffirmed its firm support for India’s candidature for a permanent membership in an expanded UNSC.
15. They reaffirmed their sustained commitment to supporting the Afghan government in the stabilisation and rebuilding of Afghanistan, and reiterated the importance of coherent international efforts to address the development needs of Afghanistan. They urged Iran to co-operate fully with the IAEA and fulfil the requirements of the relevant UN Security Council resolutions, to address international concerns about its nuclear programme. In this regard, they underlined the importance of continued dialogue with Iran. The leaders emphasised the urgent need for a comprehensive, just and durable peace in the Middle East/West Asia. They reaffirmed their support for a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on existing agreements, including relevant UNSC Resolutions, the Roadmap, and the Arab League Resolution (Beirut 2002), and urged the parties to work toward this end. The UK and India are committed to contributing to peace and prosperity in Africa. They reiterated their firm belief in the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, a key framework for socio-economic development. Both sides recognised the importance of enhancing efforts to support peace and security in Africa, and the UK paid particular tribute to India’s contribution to UN Peace Keeping Operations. India and the UK will work with international partners to support implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between North and South Sudan. They will support AU-UN efforts to reach a lasting political settlement for Darfur, underpinned by an effective peacekeeping force. They called on all parties to the conflict to immediately cease all hostilities and commit themselves to a sustained and permanent ceasefire.
16. The two Sides shared the hope that Pakistan would see an early return to stability and prosperity and recognised the importance of free and fair Parliamentary elections on 18 February. They agreed that the process of national reconciliation and political reform in Burma/Myanmar should be inclusive, broad-based and taken forward expeditiously, so as to bring about genuine reconciliation and progress towards democracy. They expressed their strong support for the ongoing good offices of the UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy, and their shared hope that he be able to visit Burma/Myanmar again as soon as possible. They welcomed the announcement of elections in Nepal on 10 April and urged all parties to cooperate and maintain the declared date to ensure a free and fair process, open to all without intimidation. It is for the people of Nepal to decide their own future. Both sides would like to see a peaceful, stable and democratic Bangladesh, where the people of Bangladesh will be able to exercise their will through free and fair elections. They agreed that there is no military solution to the conflict in Sri Lanka, and urged the Sri Lankan government to put forward a credible devolution package as a key contribution to finding a political settlement acceptable to all communities within the framework of a united Sri Lanka.
Counter Terrorism
17. Terrorism is a global threat requiring a global response. Both sides underline the importance of joint international efforts in countering terrorism which is not justified under any circumstances. They agree to intensify mutual exchange of views, experiences and practical cooperation in the fight against terrorism, both through bilateral channels and in multilateral forums. They shall strengthen cooperation through the Indo-UK Joint Working Group on Counter-Terrorism. Multilaterally, the two countries remain committed to pursuing as soon as possible agreement in the UN on the Comprehensive Convention against International Terrorism. Bilaterally, the UK and India agreed to build on existing co-operation including in the protection of critical national infrastructure, mass transit systems and the security of major sporting events/UK, and expand it further in the fields of Civil Aviation security and crisis management. In addition, it was agreed to establish a new bilateral dialogue on Terrorist Financing. The UK reiterated its support for India’s full membership of the Financial Action Task Force.
January 22, 2008
British Government and the Indian Government
1. The India-UK annual Summit was held in Delhi on January 21, 2008. The delegation from the United Kingdom was led by Prime Minister Rt. Hon. Gordon Brown MP and that from India was led by Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh.
India-UK Strategic Partnership
2. India and the UK share a Strategic Partnership. The two Sides underscored their commitment to the Strategic Partnership launched in 2004 and reaffirmed their shared conviction in the values of democracy, fundamental freedoms, pluralism, rule of law, respect for human rights and multilateralism in the international political and financial architecture as the means to tackle global challenges effectively. The close bilateral relationship has already led to growing cooperation in global affairs and substantial expansion in the bilateral engagement in multiple fields. Building on the achievements of the ‘New Delhi Declaration’ (2002) and ‘India-UK Joint Declaration’ (2004), the two Sides commit themselves to strengthening and deepening the comprehensive Strategic Partnership that exists between the two countries, which is underpinned by growing economic ties and the presence of a large Indian Diaspora in the UK.
Economic & Commercial
3. Bilateral economic linkages are strengthening through increased trade and investment flows. The UK is the third largest cumulative investor in India. India has emerged as one of the largest investors in the UK, including several major acquisitions, reflecting the maturing nature of the bilateral economic partnership. The UK is among India’s important global trading partners. The two Sides acknowledged the potential for greater collaboration especially in hi-tech (ICT, life sciences, nano-technology etc.), research, advanced manufacturing, infrastructure, energy, healthcare, agricultural products and processed foods, higher education and other service sectors.
4. Both sides took note of the outcome of the 4th meeting of the India-UK Joint Economic and Trade Committee (JETCO) held in London on 13 December 2007. This meeting reviewed various aspects of bilateral trade and received valuable feedback from businesses on both sides on measures that could further enhance bilateral trade and investment flows. India and the United Kingdom agreed to cooperate in developing collaboration between Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), entrepreneurs and venture capitalists. The Prime Ministers welcomed the meeting of a CEOs’ Round Table and Entrepreneurs’ Summit of Indian and UK business leaders in Delhi. In the light of the rapidly growing trade and economic relations and the rapidly evolving pattern of international competitive advantage, both governments acknowledged the considerable potential for bilateral trade, investment and services. They noted the importance of improving market access through liberalization and facilitating movement of professionals across a broad range of sectors of interest to both sides.
5. Both sides took note of the large opportunities in the infrastructure sector, in the context of the massive infrastructure development programme being undertaken in India. Facilitating the flow of information on the infrastructure projects being undertaken would encourage business partnerships. Both sides agreed to take forward proposals for the establishment of a capacity building programme in India for public-private partnership in infrastructure with UK support.
6. India and the United Kingdom noted the role played by people of Indian origin in Britain. Through their hard work, dynamism and entrepreneurial talents they have made an enormous contribution to the strengthening of bilateral ties.
Education
7. The two Sides noted the traditionally close ties between the two knowledge societies in the field of Higher Education. They recognised that the UK-India Education & Research Initiative (UKIERI), launched in April 2006, was playing an important role in fostering such contacts. They further noted the huge expansion planned in the Indian Higher Education sector which would increase the gross enrolment ratio by 5 percentage points and include the establishment of a range of central government institutions of excellence including 8 new Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), 7 new Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs), 5 Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research and 30 new Central Universities. It was agreed that both sides would forge a closer partnership in the field of Higher Education, for further developing education and skills to the mutual advantage of the students and faculty of both countries. While exploring new avenues of collaboration to further deepen the cooperation, the two Sides agreed to initiate specific measures to collaborate in the field of higher education. In particular they agreed: to establish an Education Forum to work towards an early conclusion of an Education Partnership Agreement;
to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding on an India-UK Higher Education Leadership Development Programme to develop leadership skills in Indian and UK universities; to establish a Programme, under UKIERI, to support faculty development in key Indian universities with participation of leading UK academics; to develop further student and faculty exchange programmes and partnerships with a commitment of further funding from the UK government; and to promote pro-actively links between British Universities and the premier educational institutions in India including collaborating for the establishment of at least one new Indian Institute of Technology, one new Indian Institute of Science Education and Research and one Central University proposed in the XI Five Year Plan. The latter would be taken forward through a meeting between a British delegation, including Vice Chancellors and their Indian counterparts later in the year. They further agreed to work towards mutual recognition of degrees, diplomas and other academic qualifications supported through greater co-operation between the relevant UK and Indian authorities. The two Sides agreed to the further development of UK/India collaboration on English Language Training. The two Governments recognize the strong interest of higher educational institutions of both countries to work together to further their global educational objectives.
Research, Science & Technology
8. India and the UK see considerable potential for growth in Research, Science and Technology collaboration. They share the vision for further strengthening their partnership through new and existing initiatives and agree to widen discussion to all research funding bodies in both countries through the India-UK Science and Innovation Council mechanism. The UK’s proposal to establish a Research Councils UK (RCUK) office in India is a welcome development that would lead to enhanced collaboration between the two countries. Underlining the importance for further developing Research and S&T cooperation, India and the UK shall establish a Science Bridges Initiative to build institution to institution relationships on equal partnership with joint funding under the principle of parity. RCUK will contribute £ 4 million with a matching grant from Department of Science and Technology (DST) India to promote this initiative. The UK and India also agree to support a further round of UKIERI awards designed to establish networking links between Indian and UK education and research institutions with the UK committing £ 2 million over 3 years and DST agreeing to match this funding on a parity basis. DST and the Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) UK also agreed to collaborate on the initial phase of development of major projects in select research areas.
Civil Nuclear Cooperation
9. The two Sides strongly emphasised the potential of civil nuclear energy to be a safe, sustainable and non-polluting source of energy, which could make a significant contribution to meeting the global challenge of achieving energy security, sustainable development, economic growth, and limiting climate change. The UK supports the India-US civil nuclear co-operation initiative with all its elements, including an appropriate India specific exemption to the Nuclear Suppliers Group Guidelines. As two countries with advanced nuclear technology, India and the UK agree to promote co-operation in civil nuclear energy and will work expeditiously towards a bilateral agreement for this purpose, in line with their strong commitment to non-proliferation. The two Sides will also continue to encourage their scientists to develop closer links and to co-operate in research in this field. The two Sides also welcome the opportunity for their scientists to work together in the context of ITER.
Climate Change
10. India and the UK recognise the need to find effective and practical solutions to address concerns regarding climate change and its implications for human kind. These would include mitigation and adaptation strategies in a manner that supports further economic and social development in particular of developing countries. Long-term convergence of per capita emission rates is an important and equitable principle that should be seriously considered in the context of international climate change negotiations. They expressed satisfaction over the successful outcome at Bali that reaffirmed the relevance of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), including its provision and principles, in particular the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. The process established under the Bali Road Map should aim for enhanced implementation of the UNFCCC and give due weight to issues of concern to developing countries, in particular those relating to addressing adaptation, technology, and financing arrangements. In the field of bilateral cooperation on climate change, the two Sides expressed satisfaction over the announcement of a UK-India Agreement on the second phase of UK-India Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Study.
The UK and India are convinced that development of the international carbon market is important for the future and wish to explore new approaches to market related investment that offer the potential to drive technology transfer. The two Sides shall work towards the success of the second Phase of a project aimed at identifying the barriers to low carbon technology transfer. They will also collaborate on a project piloting implementation of programmatic CDM in India this year to jointly explore the potential of this to facilitate up-scaling of carbon market investment in accordance with India’s future development priorities. Both sides recognised the importance of Research and Development collaboration on low carbon energy technologies and welcomed the broadening dialogue between the two countries on clean coal technologies and other power generation technologies.
MDGs
11. The two Sides agreed that an urgent global effort is required to meet the MDGs. India and the UK agreed to enhance efforts to achieve the MDGs and reduce global poverty. The two parties launched a new Partnership to Achieve the MDGs Globally. The two countries committed to harness their combined knowledge, experience and resources towards this goal including through third country cooperation. India and the UK will start by scoping opportunities to collaborate in third countries where both parties have a development interest. India and the UK would jointly consider ways and means to reform the international institutions. While noting the establishment of the mechanism for this purpose under the Commonwealth at the Kampala CHOGM 2007, the two Prime Ministers agreed that India and the UK should exchange views bilaterally on this important agenda. They agreed the importance of continued exchange of experiences and future cooperation on international policies on major global public goods that impact on the global achievement of the MDGs.
WTO
12. India and the UK strongly support an early, fair and ambitious outcome of the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations. A successful conclusion of the Doha Agenda must focus on the development dimension. Existing differences amongst members have to be overcome for the benefit of all. Close cooperation between India and the UK will make a significant contribution to achieve a balanced and comprehensive agreement.
India-EU
13. India and the UK noted with satisfaction the growing partnership between India and the EU. They welcomed the progress made in the negotiations between India and the EU for a broad-based Trade and Investment Agreement and expressed their commitment for an early and mutually beneficial conclusion of the negotiations for such an agreement. They noted with satisfaction the success of the 8th India-EU Summit held in New Delhi on November 30, 2007.
International
14. The two Sides discussed a range of other international issues, and agreed on the importance of more representative and effective international institutions to address global challenges. The two Sides agreed that a reformed UN Security Council that better reflected the realities of the 21st century would enhance global cooperation and security. The UK reaffirmed its firm support for India’s candidature for a permanent membership in an expanded UNSC.
15. They reaffirmed their sustained commitment to supporting the Afghan government in the stabilisation and rebuilding of Afghanistan, and reiterated the importance of coherent international efforts to address the development needs of Afghanistan. They urged Iran to co-operate fully with the IAEA and fulfil the requirements of the relevant UN Security Council resolutions, to address international concerns about its nuclear programme. In this regard, they underlined the importance of continued dialogue with Iran. The leaders emphasised the urgent need for a comprehensive, just and durable peace in the Middle East/West Asia. They reaffirmed their support for a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on existing agreements, including relevant UNSC Resolutions, the Roadmap, and the Arab League Resolution (Beirut 2002), and urged the parties to work toward this end. The UK and India are committed to contributing to peace and prosperity in Africa. They reiterated their firm belief in the New Partnership for Africa’s Development, a key framework for socio-economic development. Both sides recognised the importance of enhancing efforts to support peace and security in Africa, and the UK paid particular tribute to India’s contribution to UN Peace Keeping Operations. India and the UK will work with international partners to support implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement between North and South Sudan. They will support AU-UN efforts to reach a lasting political settlement for Darfur, underpinned by an effective peacekeeping force. They called on all parties to the conflict to immediately cease all hostilities and commit themselves to a sustained and permanent ceasefire.
16. The two Sides shared the hope that Pakistan would see an early return to stability and prosperity and recognised the importance of free and fair Parliamentary elections on 18 February. They agreed that the process of national reconciliation and political reform in Burma/Myanmar should be inclusive, broad-based and taken forward expeditiously, so as to bring about genuine reconciliation and progress towards democracy. They expressed their strong support for the ongoing good offices of the UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy, and their shared hope that he be able to visit Burma/Myanmar again as soon as possible. They welcomed the announcement of elections in Nepal on 10 April and urged all parties to cooperate and maintain the declared date to ensure a free and fair process, open to all without intimidation. It is for the people of Nepal to decide their own future. Both sides would like to see a peaceful, stable and democratic Bangladesh, where the people of Bangladesh will be able to exercise their will through free and fair elections. They agreed that there is no military solution to the conflict in Sri Lanka, and urged the Sri Lankan government to put forward a credible devolution package as a key contribution to finding a political settlement acceptable to all communities within the framework of a united Sri Lanka.
Counter Terrorism
17. Terrorism is a global threat requiring a global response. Both sides underline the importance of joint international efforts in countering terrorism which is not justified under any circumstances. They agree to intensify mutual exchange of views, experiences and practical cooperation in the fight against terrorism, both through bilateral channels and in multilateral forums. They shall strengthen cooperation through the Indo-UK Joint Working Group on Counter-Terrorism. Multilaterally, the two countries remain committed to pursuing as soon as possible agreement in the UN on the Comprehensive Convention against International Terrorism. Bilaterally, the UK and India agreed to build on existing co-operation including in the protection of critical national infrastructure, mass transit systems and the security of major sporting events/UK, and expand it further in the fields of Civil Aviation security and crisis management. In addition, it was agreed to establish a new bilateral dialogue on Terrorist Financing. The UK reiterated its support for India’s full membership of the Financial Action Task Force.
ThinkBIG shows film on sex trade
January 22, 2008
Joanna Xu
Stanford Daily
Screening prepares for Feb. conference on womens issues
Zuzu, a prostitute in Burma, recounted her forced abortion in last night’s screening of “Anonymously Yours.”
“My mother pressed stones on my stomach,” the sex-trafficked Burmese girl said in the documentary. “The next day, my stomach hurt on the bus. I told the bus driver to go faster. When I got off the bus, it was coming out. I collected myself and went onto the side to push the rest out. Then, I went home. I was very bloody. But my mother was happy because I could work again.”
Last night’s presentation of “Anonymously Yours” addressed the topic of reproductive health as the third of five films to be featured in the thinkBIG film festival. Together, the films address the four topics of thinkBIG, which also include women and HIV/AIDS; education; and violence against women.
“The purpose of the films is to introduce people to the issues before the actual thinkBIG conference,” said Ciara Segura ‘10, the thinkBIG film festival coordinator. “They put the topics of the conference in [the] perspective of the world.”
Organized by the student group thinkBIG, the film festival is leading up to the thinkBIG conference, which will deal with the issues of international women’s health and human rights. The conference, to be held Feb. 1 through 3, will consist of four panels, each with a keynote speaker and four panelists. The lineup of speakers includes notable individuals including former President of Ireland Mary Robinson.
ThinkBIG’s focus on women’s rights issues is reflected in the film selection process.
“Because of the large number of documentaries dealing with these issues, we narrowed the search by selecting movies with female directors,” Segura said.
Last night’s film, which was filmed clandestinely in the closed-off Southeast Asian state of Burma (Myanmar), portrayed the sex-trafficking and prostitution scene in the region through the stories of four Burmese women.
The film did not hold back in illustrating the severity of the situation, providing statistics that included the fact that 36 percent of girls sold into prostitution are sold by their parents in order to pay off a debt.
Furthermore, trafficked girls have almost no chance of escaping the system due to familial pressure and economic circumstances. One of the women featured in the film opened a center to assist trafficked girls in leaving prostitution but ultimately most of them were forced back, including Zuzu.
The film is only one stage in the complex promotion scheme leading up to the upcoming thinkBIG conference.
“Right now we have over 700 people registered for the conference,” said Laura Carwile ‘08, thinkBIG program director. “This is going to be the biggest student-run conference in Stanford history.”
“This is definitely a once-in-a-Stanford-career opportunity,” Carwile added.
Registration for the conference ends on Jan. 30.
Joanna Xu
Stanford Daily
Screening prepares for Feb. conference on womens issues
Zuzu, a prostitute in Burma, recounted her forced abortion in last night’s screening of “Anonymously Yours.”
“My mother pressed stones on my stomach,” the sex-trafficked Burmese girl said in the documentary. “The next day, my stomach hurt on the bus. I told the bus driver to go faster. When I got off the bus, it was coming out. I collected myself and went onto the side to push the rest out. Then, I went home. I was very bloody. But my mother was happy because I could work again.”
Last night’s presentation of “Anonymously Yours” addressed the topic of reproductive health as the third of five films to be featured in the thinkBIG film festival. Together, the films address the four topics of thinkBIG, which also include women and HIV/AIDS; education; and violence against women.
“The purpose of the films is to introduce people to the issues before the actual thinkBIG conference,” said Ciara Segura ‘10, the thinkBIG film festival coordinator. “They put the topics of the conference in [the] perspective of the world.”
Organized by the student group thinkBIG, the film festival is leading up to the thinkBIG conference, which will deal with the issues of international women’s health and human rights. The conference, to be held Feb. 1 through 3, will consist of four panels, each with a keynote speaker and four panelists. The lineup of speakers includes notable individuals including former President of Ireland Mary Robinson.
ThinkBIG’s focus on women’s rights issues is reflected in the film selection process.
“Because of the large number of documentaries dealing with these issues, we narrowed the search by selecting movies with female directors,” Segura said.
Last night’s film, which was filmed clandestinely in the closed-off Southeast Asian state of Burma (Myanmar), portrayed the sex-trafficking and prostitution scene in the region through the stories of four Burmese women.
The film did not hold back in illustrating the severity of the situation, providing statistics that included the fact that 36 percent of girls sold into prostitution are sold by their parents in order to pay off a debt.
Furthermore, trafficked girls have almost no chance of escaping the system due to familial pressure and economic circumstances. One of the women featured in the film opened a center to assist trafficked girls in leaving prostitution but ultimately most of them were forced back, including Zuzu.
The film is only one stage in the complex promotion scheme leading up to the upcoming thinkBIG conference.
“Right now we have over 700 people registered for the conference,” said Laura Carwile ‘08, thinkBIG program director. “This is going to be the biggest student-run conference in Stanford history.”
“This is definitely a once-in-a-Stanford-career opportunity,” Carwile added.
Registration for the conference ends on Jan. 30.
The Whole World Was Watching
Sarah Stillman
Truth Dig
January 22, 2008
Hundreds of Buddhist monks march through Rangoon in late September 2007 in the days before the Burmese military junta’s brutal crackdown.
When the youths of Burma chanted “The whole world is watching!” through clouds of tear gas last September, it was—for once—an understatement. Cell phone footage of the junta’s violent crackdown made the rounds from Beijing to St. Petersburg. Rebellious monks graced the front page of The New York Times (twice!), and global leaders cheered them on: Desmond Tutu, Laura Bush, the Dalai Lama, Gordon Brown. Everywhere you turned—from late-night TV talk shows to political newsweeklies—the Saffron Revolution was hot.
But then came winter, with new battlegrounds de jour: Kenya, Gaza, Pakistan. In October, CNN’s Anderson Cooper may have pledged his journalistic fidelity to Burma’s 100,000-odd protesters—“We’ll continue to cover this story, no matter how long it takes”—but a mere three months later, while hundreds of monks still languished in Rangoon’s infamous Insein Prison and others continued to flee down the Moei River in inner tubes at night, Cooper had moved on to San Francisco, covering a death-by-tiger at the city zoo.
If only Burma’s junta had the short attention span of U.S. media moguls. To the contrary, the military regime ranks among the world’s most durable autocracies, with a 46-year-long rap sheet of endemic torture, forced labor and extrajudicial executions. If it takes endurance to transform an oil-rich nation of beaches and gemstones into one of the world’s most impoverished states, the Burmese junta has it in spades—along with an uncanny knack for natural-resource trafficking and diplomatic subterfuge. In the 1990s, Burma sold more heroin than any other country on the planet. Elbowed out of the market by Afghanistan, the regime now deals in more hoity-toity cargo—rubies, teak and assorted hydrocarbons—the last of which has been skillfully doled out by Gen. Than Shwe in exchange for more than $2 billion in military equipment from China and India.
But Burma’s democracy movement also has its masterminds. Allow me to introduce Maung Maung. In 1988, the Burmese trade unionist survived the front lines of a violent rally suppression that killed at least 3,000 of his peers. Two decades later, he remains an agitator-in-exile, helping to coordinate last fall’s nonviolent demos from the Thai frontier town of Mae Sot. As secretary-general of the National Council of the Union of Burma, an umbrella group for exiled politicians and ethnic leaders, Maung Maung shuttles revolutionary spores across the border like the Johnny Appleseed of Burmese democracy—everything from educational materials to digital cameras.
I recently caught up with Maung Maung over coffee in Washington, D.C. He’d flown some 17,000 miles to Capitol Hill for another crusade of sorts, testifying before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus on the need for toothier U.S. sanctions against the junta. At present, he says, corporations like Chevron can slip through various loopholes in U.S. protocol, funneling millions into—and out of—Burma’s natural gas pipelines. American consumers, too, play a role in funding the regime, thanks to our taste for Burmese gemstones. In 2006 alone, the state-controlled Myanmar Gems Enterprise lapped up almost $300 million from the global ruby and jade trade, a revenue increase of 45 percent from the previous year.
What follows are Maung Maung’s observations from inside the Saffron Revolution—about the regime’s penchant for trafficking in dirty stones and child soldiers; about the democracy movement’s love affair with Gmail and satellite phones; and, most of all, about the future prospects for a regime-crippled nation with so much to gain from revolt.
Sarah Stillman: Back in September, the whole world had its eyes on Burma. When the junta began clubbing students and shooting monks, the international community reacted with collective outrage and calls to action. But as we enter 2008, that flurry of attention has subsided ... although, of course, the torture and arbitrary arrests have not. What do you think will happen next within Burma? Do you anticipate a new wave of protests, or is the opposition within Burma in a period of consolidation and reassessment?
Maung Maung: There have been countless activities taking place that haven’t made it into the international news—much of it is happening secretly. Our main focus at the moment is getting the endangered monks and activists into safe homes, moving the resistance leaders out of harm’s way. Many of them are still in situations where they could be arrested at any moment by the regime.
There are also brave groups of young people who are getting together at roadside cafes to tear up copies of The New Light of Myanmar, the regime’s newspaper. They rip it up, throw it on the ground and stomp on it, saying, “We don’t believe this propaganda anymore!” They also held a small protest on Nov. 26, with a group of about 300 people.
So, yes, there is action—quite a lot of action, in fact—but there is not much reporting by the international media. Mostly silence.
Stillman: It’s interesting to hear about these roadside gatherings—I guess young people have always played an important part in telling the regime it has no clothes. ... Can you talk more about the role that students have played in the movement, from its origins until today?
Maung Maung: Well, students have always been more mobile and flexible in their activism—they don’t have to fear losing their jobs or being unable to feed their families. That’s one reason they’ve always played such a large role.
The last wave of protests in Burma—the movement that I came out of—took place more than two decades ago now. Young people who were born after that ’88 uprising weren’t tuned in to the injustices of the regime, at least not in the same ways as those of us who lived through it. And so the younger people often fell for the propaganda of the regime more easily.
But last August and September, the protests let them see with their own eyes what this regime is really about. And so a new breed of activists is rising up and radicalizing. It’s a very hopeful sign.
The regime tried hard to prevent this; they opened karaoke bars and restaurants and things like that, trying to divert young people away from politics and claimed that “democratization” was finally happening.
But they couldn’t cover up all the hardships. And now, after the recent protests, the younger generation is finally asking, “Hmm ... what’s really going on here?” So, it’s a regime that we have to thank for showing a new generation of students, “Hey, this is how bad we really are.” We should thank them for their own stupidity.
Stillman: Let’s talk about the shifts between the 1988 protests and the current unrest. Clearly, one key change has been the rise of new forms of media—cell phones, digital cameras, blogging. ... What kind of impact have these technologies had on dissident culture in Burma? What are the other similarities and differences between the recent protests and ’88?
Maung Maung: In ’88, the movement was very different: There were more protesters from all parts of the country and all walks of life. It was much more diverse, in terms of participation. This time, the protests were more confined to the capital city of Rangoon, and monks played a more prominent role than ever before.
But, having said that, there is also the media difference you mention between now and ’88. When ’88 took place, very few people knew about it—the news slowly trickled out as we started telling people, and then more people, and then more people all around the world. This time, you’re right, the graphic images could come out right away with the help of new technologies. The activists inside the country have started to use the available technologies to their advantage—the Internet, the cell phone, the satellite phone. We’ve trained more than 200 activists to transmit images from the front lines of the demonstrations, using satellite phones and digital cameras.
Even more incredible, there were live chats coming from inside the country. There are about 50 Internet cafes all over Burma, and young people were able to log into GTalk and say to the rest of the world, “Here’s what is happening on this corner; here’s what is happening on that corner.” Quite a lot of young activists have been trained in how to use Gmail. It is extremely helpful to the movement.
Stillman: But how much was the regime able to crack down on this activity in September? I read that they tried to cut off cell phone reception and Internet connectivity. ...
Maung Maung: Well, if you look at the number of bloody images from the protests, you can see that the activists found their way around the regime. In the beginning, the junta didn’t know what the hell was happening. Young people were running around with their hand-held mobile phones and passing on photographs to people outside the country. They were two steps ahead.
The regime controlled the gateway to the Internet—it was really more of an Intra-net than an Internet—and they tried to shut it down, but the young people were breaking out for themselves, using their brains to get around the regime’s barriers.
Stillman: I’d like to get your take on some U.S. legislative issues. Last month, Congress passed legislation authored by Rep. Tom Lantos that would cut off tax deductions for business activities in Burma by U.S. companies, such as Chevron. The bill will also block the current laundering of Burmese gemstones, particularly rubies, through third countries before they are sold here. If these new measures get signed by President Bush and become law, how big a blow will they be to the military regime?
Maung Maung: Well, the regime wants the world to think that Burma is a free and open economy, but if you scrutinize it, you’ll see that there are only two or three real monopolies controlling everything. The first is the UMEH. [Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings], which is owned by the military. The second is owned by a business tycoon named Tay Za, and he’s the son-in-law of the regime’s top general. The third is a guy named Steven Law [who is alleged to have links to Burma’s drug trade].
If you want to do mining for gems or jade in Burma, you have to buy permission from the military’s own holdings company, so your very first investment in the project, even before you start digging, goes directly to the government. You also have to give a certain percentage of your profits to the government once you sell the gems, along with an export tax. So to get a single ruby into the global marketplace, you have to feed money to the government at least three times.
That’s why it’s so important that Burma’s gem and jade business be shut down. A long time ago, before I became an activist, I was a gemologist. I worked for the Burmese government for 12 years, so I know the business well, and I know that Burma has the best gems in the world. In order to get around the sanctions that were placed on Burmese gems [in 2003], they are bought by the Thai traders, recut in Thailand, and resold as “Thai” exports.
But any gemologist can look at a collector’s piece and see immediately that it’s come from Burma. You can’t lie about what we call “internal inclusions,” which are always unique to the site of mining: air bubbles, gas bubbles, rubies within rubies. A gem that is mined in, say, Dupont Circle, would be very different from a gem that is mined in Rockville. So you can identify the origins of a gem, if you bother to try.
Although the Thai exporters will continue to claim that their rubies are coming from Thailand, most of the top-quality gemstones are still coming from Burma, and we need to close up these legal loopholes. I think this new piece of legislation is just the beginning.
Stillman: China has significant influence with the Burmese military regime, given its extensive trade and military ties to the junta. And China has blocked meaningful actions by the U.N. Security Council on Burma. What would you like to see done to pressure China on Burma? Some have urged a boycott of the Olympic Games this summer. ....
Maung Maung: We’re not calling for a boycott of the Olympics. First of all, the Olympics are time-bound. They come and they go in 2008. Second of all, the athletes have spent their whole lives preparing for this event, and we want to respect that.
Having said that, what we need is to inform China that a stable Burma is good for everybody. We are not looking to kick up China’s investments in Burma; we’re looking at a system that would allow democratic participation for everybody in Burma’s politics and economics, and, therefore, greater stability.
Stillman: And what about India? It, too, could have an impact on the regime, and while China is repressive in its own right, India is a democracy that ought to play a constructive role but hasn’t—due to its energy interests, it seems.
Maung Maung: Being a large democracy, India is a very bulky animal to move around—the bureaucracy is so big that it’s hard to tell what’s going on. They were supportive of the pro-democracy movement earlier, but we don’t know what shifts have taken place. It seems like energy and gas availability from Burma has made India more willing to get comfortable with the regime.
Once again, we need to emphasize: Democracy in Burma is the best way to ensure that the raw energy that Indian needs comes from a stable and reliable source.
Stillman: How effective do you think the various targeted sanctions by the U.S. are on the regime’s top leaders: the ban on travel visas, restrictions on bank accounts and so on?
Maung Maung: It’s making the regime go crazy. I must point out that, except from the U.S., there have been no sanctions from anybody. Some people say that sanctions haven’t worked, but I want to challenge them: Excuse me, but can you tell me who has even tried to place forceful sanctions on Burma? Europeans, mostly, have not. European countries have visa bans, but nothing to strike at the heart of the economic issues. It’s only the United States that has done anything substantive. We have to thank the U.S. customs people and other authorities for following up on [presidential] executive orders.
As small as they are, the financial sanctions are making a huge economic impact. The man I mentioned earlier—Tay Za—owned an airline called Air Bagan. It flew to Singapore and Thailand, and the military generals were very proud of it. But then the financial scrutiny hit Tay Za, and the banks in Singapore refused to handle his money. The French, too, stopped servicing his planes, and Tay Za eventually had to give up the enterprise.
The business community in Singapore is scrutinizing Burmese accounts more harshly than ever before. There have been complaints from Burmese merchants about it. We know it’s making a big difference.
Stillman: The U.N. has reported on “grave child rights violations,” including the forced recruiting of children into the army. Apparently there’s pressure to accelerate army recruitment rates, and brokers are said to be paid $30 and a bag of rice for each child soldier recruited. The U.N. also found that some children who desert from the Burmese military are given prison terms of up to five years. What is the state of the military. ... Is the regime so desperate that it has to recruit kids?
Maung Maung: Yes, the regime is having serious problems recruiting. The military used to be a respected entity, but this is no longer true. Although the top generals are filthy rich, many of their soldiers face great economic hardships. They don’t even have basic footwear—many of them go around in sandals or barefoot. It’s just not impressive! When a soldier doesn’t have any shoes, it not only makes it hard to fight, but it also shakes his faith in his superiors.
We have a database of how many individuals are deserting the military, and it shows that more and more men at the senior levels of the military are defecting. This is due mostly to the hardships that their families face. It’s a sad fact, but many of the soldiers’ wives and daughters have become prostitutes to cope with the poverty. Reasons like this explain why the military is having a hard time recruiting.
And so what have they done? The regime is forcibly taking children, especially high school kids hanging out at the theater or wherever. The army truck pulls up and the kids are forced into the back of the truck and taken to the police station, where they are left to sleep overnight. The next morning, the sergeant shows up and tells them that they’ve committed a crime and that the only way to avoid jail is to join the military.
Stillman: How would you describe the role of the trade union movement in the Burmese opposition? You’re a union leader, as are many of the key people who play pivotal roles in charting the next steps for this struggle. How did labor people come to play such a vital role?
Maung Maung: Well, I wouldn’t say we’re necessarily prominent. But the real key is that the trade unionists are the only unit of activists inside Burma who have unique experience with international organizations. We know exactly how to link up with trade union movements around the world to get basic training materials, and also to get references on the techniques used by other countries in other struggles in history.
We also have people who are well trained in organizing skills, unlike most of the movement’s student activists. I can ask any union person to come and offer training to our activists for two weeks, and they’ll come—we get tremendous help from the ILO [International Labor Organization], the ITUC [International Trade Union Confederation,] the SEIU [Service Employees International Union] and other groups. The ILO even has an office in Rangoon, working on international monitoring issues and providing protection for us. This isn’t true with the students or political organizations, who have a big handicap on the international front. They often lack basic organizing skills.
Stillman: You mention learning from other countries. When the street demonstrations were going on, Bishop Tutu of South Africa strongly backed the monks and other protesters, saying, “It is so like the rolling mass actions that eventually toppled apartheid.” Certainly there are many differences, but do you see parallels from the success of the anti-apartheid movement?
Maung Maung: Well, different countries, different struggles. I’d say that the overall similarity is that the international effort must be coordinated. We need a wide array of governments to support the United Nation’s initiatives in a coordinated way. The U.S. is doing it, and the UK is, too. France is starting to wake up, and Italy.
But we’re been having big problems with the Germans, who’ve been a pain in the neck. They want to have their own approach. We need unity. Most countries are slowly moving towards working together, with the U.N. at the helm. Even China is starting to think like that. Coordination, like in South Africa, is the most important thing.
Stillman: What do you think is the most constructive role that American advocates can play in the pro-democracy struggle? What forms of action or protest would be most helpful?
Maung Maung: There has been a huge amount of moral support from American politicians, but the U.S. government hasn’t fully delivered. Sure, Congress has done a lot, and there is even support from Laura Bush, but we have huge problems with logistics and implementation.
What it really comes down to is money: We need simple things like bicycles and satellite phones. People may laugh, but the movement really needs bicycles. In Burma, fuel is very expensive, so bicycles allow organizers to go around and speak with individuals in different areas.
We also need money for video cameras, digital cameras and cell phones—these things are transforming our movement. It’s by bringing the eyes of the world back to the brutality of the regime that we can win out.
Truth Dig
January 22, 2008
Hundreds of Buddhist monks march through Rangoon in late September 2007 in the days before the Burmese military junta’s brutal crackdown.
When the youths of Burma chanted “The whole world is watching!” through clouds of tear gas last September, it was—for once—an understatement. Cell phone footage of the junta’s violent crackdown made the rounds from Beijing to St. Petersburg. Rebellious monks graced the front page of The New York Times (twice!), and global leaders cheered them on: Desmond Tutu, Laura Bush, the Dalai Lama, Gordon Brown. Everywhere you turned—from late-night TV talk shows to political newsweeklies—the Saffron Revolution was hot.
But then came winter, with new battlegrounds de jour: Kenya, Gaza, Pakistan. In October, CNN’s Anderson Cooper may have pledged his journalistic fidelity to Burma’s 100,000-odd protesters—“We’ll continue to cover this story, no matter how long it takes”—but a mere three months later, while hundreds of monks still languished in Rangoon’s infamous Insein Prison and others continued to flee down the Moei River in inner tubes at night, Cooper had moved on to San Francisco, covering a death-by-tiger at the city zoo.
If only Burma’s junta had the short attention span of U.S. media moguls. To the contrary, the military regime ranks among the world’s most durable autocracies, with a 46-year-long rap sheet of endemic torture, forced labor and extrajudicial executions. If it takes endurance to transform an oil-rich nation of beaches and gemstones into one of the world’s most impoverished states, the Burmese junta has it in spades—along with an uncanny knack for natural-resource trafficking and diplomatic subterfuge. In the 1990s, Burma sold more heroin than any other country on the planet. Elbowed out of the market by Afghanistan, the regime now deals in more hoity-toity cargo—rubies, teak and assorted hydrocarbons—the last of which has been skillfully doled out by Gen. Than Shwe in exchange for more than $2 billion in military equipment from China and India.
But Burma’s democracy movement also has its masterminds. Allow me to introduce Maung Maung. In 1988, the Burmese trade unionist survived the front lines of a violent rally suppression that killed at least 3,000 of his peers. Two decades later, he remains an agitator-in-exile, helping to coordinate last fall’s nonviolent demos from the Thai frontier town of Mae Sot. As secretary-general of the National Council of the Union of Burma, an umbrella group for exiled politicians and ethnic leaders, Maung Maung shuttles revolutionary spores across the border like the Johnny Appleseed of Burmese democracy—everything from educational materials to digital cameras.
I recently caught up with Maung Maung over coffee in Washington, D.C. He’d flown some 17,000 miles to Capitol Hill for another crusade of sorts, testifying before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus on the need for toothier U.S. sanctions against the junta. At present, he says, corporations like Chevron can slip through various loopholes in U.S. protocol, funneling millions into—and out of—Burma’s natural gas pipelines. American consumers, too, play a role in funding the regime, thanks to our taste for Burmese gemstones. In 2006 alone, the state-controlled Myanmar Gems Enterprise lapped up almost $300 million from the global ruby and jade trade, a revenue increase of 45 percent from the previous year.
What follows are Maung Maung’s observations from inside the Saffron Revolution—about the regime’s penchant for trafficking in dirty stones and child soldiers; about the democracy movement’s love affair with Gmail and satellite phones; and, most of all, about the future prospects for a regime-crippled nation with so much to gain from revolt.
Sarah Stillman: Back in September, the whole world had its eyes on Burma. When the junta began clubbing students and shooting monks, the international community reacted with collective outrage and calls to action. But as we enter 2008, that flurry of attention has subsided ... although, of course, the torture and arbitrary arrests have not. What do you think will happen next within Burma? Do you anticipate a new wave of protests, or is the opposition within Burma in a period of consolidation and reassessment?
Maung Maung: There have been countless activities taking place that haven’t made it into the international news—much of it is happening secretly. Our main focus at the moment is getting the endangered monks and activists into safe homes, moving the resistance leaders out of harm’s way. Many of them are still in situations where they could be arrested at any moment by the regime.
There are also brave groups of young people who are getting together at roadside cafes to tear up copies of The New Light of Myanmar, the regime’s newspaper. They rip it up, throw it on the ground and stomp on it, saying, “We don’t believe this propaganda anymore!” They also held a small protest on Nov. 26, with a group of about 300 people.
So, yes, there is action—quite a lot of action, in fact—but there is not much reporting by the international media. Mostly silence.
Stillman: It’s interesting to hear about these roadside gatherings—I guess young people have always played an important part in telling the regime it has no clothes. ... Can you talk more about the role that students have played in the movement, from its origins until today?
Maung Maung: Well, students have always been more mobile and flexible in their activism—they don’t have to fear losing their jobs or being unable to feed their families. That’s one reason they’ve always played such a large role.
The last wave of protests in Burma—the movement that I came out of—took place more than two decades ago now. Young people who were born after that ’88 uprising weren’t tuned in to the injustices of the regime, at least not in the same ways as those of us who lived through it. And so the younger people often fell for the propaganda of the regime more easily.
But last August and September, the protests let them see with their own eyes what this regime is really about. And so a new breed of activists is rising up and radicalizing. It’s a very hopeful sign.
The regime tried hard to prevent this; they opened karaoke bars and restaurants and things like that, trying to divert young people away from politics and claimed that “democratization” was finally happening.
But they couldn’t cover up all the hardships. And now, after the recent protests, the younger generation is finally asking, “Hmm ... what’s really going on here?” So, it’s a regime that we have to thank for showing a new generation of students, “Hey, this is how bad we really are.” We should thank them for their own stupidity.
Stillman: Let’s talk about the shifts between the 1988 protests and the current unrest. Clearly, one key change has been the rise of new forms of media—cell phones, digital cameras, blogging. ... What kind of impact have these technologies had on dissident culture in Burma? What are the other similarities and differences between the recent protests and ’88?
Maung Maung: In ’88, the movement was very different: There were more protesters from all parts of the country and all walks of life. It was much more diverse, in terms of participation. This time, the protests were more confined to the capital city of Rangoon, and monks played a more prominent role than ever before.
But, having said that, there is also the media difference you mention between now and ’88. When ’88 took place, very few people knew about it—the news slowly trickled out as we started telling people, and then more people, and then more people all around the world. This time, you’re right, the graphic images could come out right away with the help of new technologies. The activists inside the country have started to use the available technologies to their advantage—the Internet, the cell phone, the satellite phone. We’ve trained more than 200 activists to transmit images from the front lines of the demonstrations, using satellite phones and digital cameras.
Even more incredible, there were live chats coming from inside the country. There are about 50 Internet cafes all over Burma, and young people were able to log into GTalk and say to the rest of the world, “Here’s what is happening on this corner; here’s what is happening on that corner.” Quite a lot of young activists have been trained in how to use Gmail. It is extremely helpful to the movement.
Stillman: But how much was the regime able to crack down on this activity in September? I read that they tried to cut off cell phone reception and Internet connectivity. ...
Maung Maung: Well, if you look at the number of bloody images from the protests, you can see that the activists found their way around the regime. In the beginning, the junta didn’t know what the hell was happening. Young people were running around with their hand-held mobile phones and passing on photographs to people outside the country. They were two steps ahead.
The regime controlled the gateway to the Internet—it was really more of an Intra-net than an Internet—and they tried to shut it down, but the young people were breaking out for themselves, using their brains to get around the regime’s barriers.
Stillman: I’d like to get your take on some U.S. legislative issues. Last month, Congress passed legislation authored by Rep. Tom Lantos that would cut off tax deductions for business activities in Burma by U.S. companies, such as Chevron. The bill will also block the current laundering of Burmese gemstones, particularly rubies, through third countries before they are sold here. If these new measures get signed by President Bush and become law, how big a blow will they be to the military regime?
Maung Maung: Well, the regime wants the world to think that Burma is a free and open economy, but if you scrutinize it, you’ll see that there are only two or three real monopolies controlling everything. The first is the UMEH. [Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings], which is owned by the military. The second is owned by a business tycoon named Tay Za, and he’s the son-in-law of the regime’s top general. The third is a guy named Steven Law [who is alleged to have links to Burma’s drug trade].
If you want to do mining for gems or jade in Burma, you have to buy permission from the military’s own holdings company, so your very first investment in the project, even before you start digging, goes directly to the government. You also have to give a certain percentage of your profits to the government once you sell the gems, along with an export tax. So to get a single ruby into the global marketplace, you have to feed money to the government at least three times.
That’s why it’s so important that Burma’s gem and jade business be shut down. A long time ago, before I became an activist, I was a gemologist. I worked for the Burmese government for 12 years, so I know the business well, and I know that Burma has the best gems in the world. In order to get around the sanctions that were placed on Burmese gems [in 2003], they are bought by the Thai traders, recut in Thailand, and resold as “Thai” exports.
But any gemologist can look at a collector’s piece and see immediately that it’s come from Burma. You can’t lie about what we call “internal inclusions,” which are always unique to the site of mining: air bubbles, gas bubbles, rubies within rubies. A gem that is mined in, say, Dupont Circle, would be very different from a gem that is mined in Rockville. So you can identify the origins of a gem, if you bother to try.
Although the Thai exporters will continue to claim that their rubies are coming from Thailand, most of the top-quality gemstones are still coming from Burma, and we need to close up these legal loopholes. I think this new piece of legislation is just the beginning.
Stillman: China has significant influence with the Burmese military regime, given its extensive trade and military ties to the junta. And China has blocked meaningful actions by the U.N. Security Council on Burma. What would you like to see done to pressure China on Burma? Some have urged a boycott of the Olympic Games this summer. ....
Maung Maung: We’re not calling for a boycott of the Olympics. First of all, the Olympics are time-bound. They come and they go in 2008. Second of all, the athletes have spent their whole lives preparing for this event, and we want to respect that.
Having said that, what we need is to inform China that a stable Burma is good for everybody. We are not looking to kick up China’s investments in Burma; we’re looking at a system that would allow democratic participation for everybody in Burma’s politics and economics, and, therefore, greater stability.
Stillman: And what about India? It, too, could have an impact on the regime, and while China is repressive in its own right, India is a democracy that ought to play a constructive role but hasn’t—due to its energy interests, it seems.
Maung Maung: Being a large democracy, India is a very bulky animal to move around—the bureaucracy is so big that it’s hard to tell what’s going on. They were supportive of the pro-democracy movement earlier, but we don’t know what shifts have taken place. It seems like energy and gas availability from Burma has made India more willing to get comfortable with the regime.
Once again, we need to emphasize: Democracy in Burma is the best way to ensure that the raw energy that Indian needs comes from a stable and reliable source.
Stillman: How effective do you think the various targeted sanctions by the U.S. are on the regime’s top leaders: the ban on travel visas, restrictions on bank accounts and so on?
Maung Maung: It’s making the regime go crazy. I must point out that, except from the U.S., there have been no sanctions from anybody. Some people say that sanctions haven’t worked, but I want to challenge them: Excuse me, but can you tell me who has even tried to place forceful sanctions on Burma? Europeans, mostly, have not. European countries have visa bans, but nothing to strike at the heart of the economic issues. It’s only the United States that has done anything substantive. We have to thank the U.S. customs people and other authorities for following up on [presidential] executive orders.
As small as they are, the financial sanctions are making a huge economic impact. The man I mentioned earlier—Tay Za—owned an airline called Air Bagan. It flew to Singapore and Thailand, and the military generals were very proud of it. But then the financial scrutiny hit Tay Za, and the banks in Singapore refused to handle his money. The French, too, stopped servicing his planes, and Tay Za eventually had to give up the enterprise.
The business community in Singapore is scrutinizing Burmese accounts more harshly than ever before. There have been complaints from Burmese merchants about it. We know it’s making a big difference.
Stillman: The U.N. has reported on “grave child rights violations,” including the forced recruiting of children into the army. Apparently there’s pressure to accelerate army recruitment rates, and brokers are said to be paid $30 and a bag of rice for each child soldier recruited. The U.N. also found that some children who desert from the Burmese military are given prison terms of up to five years. What is the state of the military. ... Is the regime so desperate that it has to recruit kids?
Maung Maung: Yes, the regime is having serious problems recruiting. The military used to be a respected entity, but this is no longer true. Although the top generals are filthy rich, many of their soldiers face great economic hardships. They don’t even have basic footwear—many of them go around in sandals or barefoot. It’s just not impressive! When a soldier doesn’t have any shoes, it not only makes it hard to fight, but it also shakes his faith in his superiors.
We have a database of how many individuals are deserting the military, and it shows that more and more men at the senior levels of the military are defecting. This is due mostly to the hardships that their families face. It’s a sad fact, but many of the soldiers’ wives and daughters have become prostitutes to cope with the poverty. Reasons like this explain why the military is having a hard time recruiting.
And so what have they done? The regime is forcibly taking children, especially high school kids hanging out at the theater or wherever. The army truck pulls up and the kids are forced into the back of the truck and taken to the police station, where they are left to sleep overnight. The next morning, the sergeant shows up and tells them that they’ve committed a crime and that the only way to avoid jail is to join the military.
Stillman: How would you describe the role of the trade union movement in the Burmese opposition? You’re a union leader, as are many of the key people who play pivotal roles in charting the next steps for this struggle. How did labor people come to play such a vital role?
Maung Maung: Well, I wouldn’t say we’re necessarily prominent. But the real key is that the trade unionists are the only unit of activists inside Burma who have unique experience with international organizations. We know exactly how to link up with trade union movements around the world to get basic training materials, and also to get references on the techniques used by other countries in other struggles in history.
We also have people who are well trained in organizing skills, unlike most of the movement’s student activists. I can ask any union person to come and offer training to our activists for two weeks, and they’ll come—we get tremendous help from the ILO [International Labor Organization], the ITUC [International Trade Union Confederation,] the SEIU [Service Employees International Union] and other groups. The ILO even has an office in Rangoon, working on international monitoring issues and providing protection for us. This isn’t true with the students or political organizations, who have a big handicap on the international front. They often lack basic organizing skills.
Stillman: You mention learning from other countries. When the street demonstrations were going on, Bishop Tutu of South Africa strongly backed the monks and other protesters, saying, “It is so like the rolling mass actions that eventually toppled apartheid.” Certainly there are many differences, but do you see parallels from the success of the anti-apartheid movement?
Maung Maung: Well, different countries, different struggles. I’d say that the overall similarity is that the international effort must be coordinated. We need a wide array of governments to support the United Nation’s initiatives in a coordinated way. The U.S. is doing it, and the UK is, too. France is starting to wake up, and Italy.
But we’re been having big problems with the Germans, who’ve been a pain in the neck. They want to have their own approach. We need unity. Most countries are slowly moving towards working together, with the U.N. at the helm. Even China is starting to think like that. Coordination, like in South Africa, is the most important thing.
Stillman: What do you think is the most constructive role that American advocates can play in the pro-democracy struggle? What forms of action or protest would be most helpful?
Maung Maung: There has been a huge amount of moral support from American politicians, but the U.S. government hasn’t fully delivered. Sure, Congress has done a lot, and there is even support from Laura Bush, but we have huge problems with logistics and implementation.
What it really comes down to is money: We need simple things like bicycles and satellite phones. People may laugh, but the movement really needs bicycles. In Burma, fuel is very expensive, so bicycles allow organizers to go around and speak with individuals in different areas.
We also need money for video cameras, digital cameras and cell phones—these things are transforming our movement. It’s by bringing the eyes of the world back to the brutality of the regime that we can win out.
Myanmar elects Stephen Than Myint Oo as Primate and Bishop of Rangoon
Episcopal Life Org - News Service
January 22, 2008
The Church of the Province of Myanmar (Burma) elected Stephen Than Myint Oo as its Primate and Bishop of Rangoon out of a field of five nominees on January 15 at Holy Trinity Cathedral in Yangon, Myanmar.
Myint, 50, has served as Bishop of Hpa'an since 2005. He will be consecrated and enthroned as Bishop of Rangoon and Myanmar's sixth Anglican Primate on February 17 at Holy Trinity Cathedral in Yangon.
From 1993-2004, Myint served Holy Cross Theological College in Yangon as a librarian, lecturer, and dean of Studies. He has also served as an assistant priest and priest-in-charge of two Myanmar churches. He received his M.Th from Trinity Theological College in Singapore, where he continues his study for a D.Th.
Myint is married to Nan Myint Yi and they have three sons: Sa Sai Naw Aye, Sa Sai Luker and Michael Wyne Myat San.
According to colonial church tradition held within the Constitution of Myanmar's Anglican Church, the Bishop of Rangoon simultaneously serves as the Archbishop of the Province. There are six dioceses in the province: Rangoon, which is the former seat of the national government, Hpa'an, Toungoo, Mandalay, Myitkyina, and Sittwe.
Anglican chaplains and missionaries worked in Burma in the early and mid-nineteenth century. The Province of Myanmar was formed in 1970, nine years after the declaration of Buddhism as the state religion and four years after all foreign missionaries were forced to leave.
January 22, 2008
The Church of the Province of Myanmar (Burma) elected Stephen Than Myint Oo as its Primate and Bishop of Rangoon out of a field of five nominees on January 15 at Holy Trinity Cathedral in Yangon, Myanmar.
Myint, 50, has served as Bishop of Hpa'an since 2005. He will be consecrated and enthroned as Bishop of Rangoon and Myanmar's sixth Anglican Primate on February 17 at Holy Trinity Cathedral in Yangon.
From 1993-2004, Myint served Holy Cross Theological College in Yangon as a librarian, lecturer, and dean of Studies. He has also served as an assistant priest and priest-in-charge of two Myanmar churches. He received his M.Th from Trinity Theological College in Singapore, where he continues his study for a D.Th.
Myint is married to Nan Myint Yi and they have three sons: Sa Sai Naw Aye, Sa Sai Luker and Michael Wyne Myat San.
According to colonial church tradition held within the Constitution of Myanmar's Anglican Church, the Bishop of Rangoon simultaneously serves as the Archbishop of the Province. There are six dioceses in the province: Rangoon, which is the former seat of the national government, Hpa'an, Toungoo, Mandalay, Myitkyina, and Sittwe.
Anglican chaplains and missionaries worked in Burma in the early and mid-nineteenth century. The Province of Myanmar was formed in 1970, nine years after the declaration of Buddhism as the state religion and four years after all foreign missionaries were forced to leave.
Art exhibition aims to help ‘Displaced Burma’
TV3 News
January 22, 2008
An exhibition in Wellington is raising the profile of a country half a world away.
For over forty years Burma has been governed by a strict military dictatorship, notorious for ethnic cleansing, torture and the daily destruction of rural villages.
They changed the country's name to Myanmar in 1989.
The exhibition hopes to show the plight of the Burmese and raise money for those who need it most.
''Displaced Burma" is an exhibition giving a voice to people who don't have one.
“The generals and the military don't allow them that freedom, so we need to give them a voice. As friends we need to raise awareness of what is really going on in their country,” says Shelly Mansfield, the exhibition organiser, from Children on the Edge.
The exhibition features 30 works by Burmese artist Saw Cu Cil, who like one and a half million others fled to neighbouring Thailand desperate to escape persecution in Burma, where accounts of forced labour, destruction of villages and torture, are common.
“Probably one of the most horrific is using them as human mine sweepers to track the mines, and the way in which they do that, of course, is by standing on them,” says Mansfield.
Burma, renamed "the union of Myanmar'' in 1989 has been under strict military rule since 1962.
Opposition groups refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the ruling government, and won't adopt the new name.
The country's tumultuous past came to a head last year when monks led pro-democracy demonstrations, now known as "the saffron revolution," and many died for the cause.
Sher Nay Moo and her family are Burmese refugees.
They have been in New Zealand for eight months.
“I miss my mum,” cries Sher Nay Moo, a Burmese Refugee, as she looks at a painting by Saw Cu Cil of a bridge in Burma.
She used to cross the very same bridge every day to visit her mother, who is still in Burma.
The image is a bitter sweet reminder of her homeland.
Displacement is a way of life there...
“You will also see pictures of the internally displaced running and that is literally what they have to do. Their villages are attacked and burnt down and the people run and hide in the jungle,” says Mansfield.
In the last week the exhibition has raised around $16,000.
The money will help create a safe environment for the children of Burma and facilitate the most basic human right - a chance at life.
For more information or to buy prints or make a donation go to www.childrenontheedge.org.nz
January 22, 2008
An exhibition in Wellington is raising the profile of a country half a world away.
For over forty years Burma has been governed by a strict military dictatorship, notorious for ethnic cleansing, torture and the daily destruction of rural villages.
They changed the country's name to Myanmar in 1989.
The exhibition hopes to show the plight of the Burmese and raise money for those who need it most.
''Displaced Burma" is an exhibition giving a voice to people who don't have one.
“The generals and the military don't allow them that freedom, so we need to give them a voice. As friends we need to raise awareness of what is really going on in their country,” says Shelly Mansfield, the exhibition organiser, from Children on the Edge.
The exhibition features 30 works by Burmese artist Saw Cu Cil, who like one and a half million others fled to neighbouring Thailand desperate to escape persecution in Burma, where accounts of forced labour, destruction of villages and torture, are common.
“Probably one of the most horrific is using them as human mine sweepers to track the mines, and the way in which they do that, of course, is by standing on them,” says Mansfield.
Burma, renamed "the union of Myanmar'' in 1989 has been under strict military rule since 1962.
Opposition groups refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the ruling government, and won't adopt the new name.
The country's tumultuous past came to a head last year when monks led pro-democracy demonstrations, now known as "the saffron revolution," and many died for the cause.
Sher Nay Moo and her family are Burmese refugees.
They have been in New Zealand for eight months.
“I miss my mum,” cries Sher Nay Moo, a Burmese Refugee, as she looks at a painting by Saw Cu Cil of a bridge in Burma.
She used to cross the very same bridge every day to visit her mother, who is still in Burma.
The image is a bitter sweet reminder of her homeland.
Displacement is a way of life there...
“You will also see pictures of the internally displaced running and that is literally what they have to do. Their villages are attacked and burnt down and the people run and hide in the jungle,” says Mansfield.
In the last week the exhibition has raised around $16,000.
The money will help create a safe environment for the children of Burma and facilitate the most basic human right - a chance at life.
For more information or to buy prints or make a donation go to www.childrenontheedge.org.nz
‘ASEAN massage parlor’
John Nery
Philippine Daily Inquirer
January 22, 2008
BANGKOK -- Surin Pitsuwan, the new ASEAN secretary-general, is an academic and a diplomat, but it may be for his skills as a politician that he was chosen to lead the regional grouping’s permanent secretariat. The Ph.D. from Harvard and former foreign minister of Thailand was elected to parliament nine times in the last 20-odd years. Now, as ASEAN’s fourth secretary-general, he has the opportunity to lead the association into a new era of community-building.
First things first. “They would like a stronger secretariat,” he said at a journalists’ forum in Bangkok on Sunday. He was referring to ASEAN’s 10 heads of government, and their expansive idea of his job description. It is true, he said, that he is the first politician to assume the Jakarta-based post.
“What would be the difference in the running of that nerve center [in Jakarta]?” He answered his own question: “I will do what politicians do best: energize, create a sense of belonging.” And promote a sense of the possible.
He drew a vivid picture of what he said will become “a network secretariat” during his term, “reaching out, roping in and working with” anyone who understands the role ASEAN can play in Asia.
But while Surin talks a good game (he is quite eloquent when it comes to vision-setting), the reality is that much of the agenda he will face in his five-year term (it ends in 2012) has already been set.
Case in point: His first official trip as secretary-general was a ministerial meeting in Naypyidaw, the capital-in-the-making of Burma (Myanmar). Despite all the talk of community-building, brutal, repressive Burma remains ASEAN’s odd man out. One truth of politics: There is a limit to everything, even constructive engagement.
* * *
On Burma, Surin waxes and wanes. He is optimistic that, with ASEAN in its current state of evolution, “there is a very, very strong spirit of democracy in the system already.” He is sanguine about the prospects of a consolidating ASEAN, through the use of the proposed Charter (a document which Singapore has signed, but which the Philippines has threatened to reject, because of Aung San Suu Kyi’s continuing detention). He even offers a timetable for greater consolidation. “We want to do it by 2015, seven years from now.”
At the same time, he is realistic about the difficulty ASEAN finds itself in. “We ran into a stalemate,” he said, referring to the ultimately failed efforts to avert and then to mitigate Burma’s violent crackdown on protest actions late last year.
He spoke of a recent meeting with the Sultan of Brunei, where the Burma problem was discussed and his proposals were sought. His reply: “Your Majesty, I don’t know my role in this issue.”
“I’m still trying to find out my space,” he told the journalists gathered in Bangkok. “Is the secretary-general expected to play that role [of engaging Burma]?”
Ever the politician, he makes or rather suggests a prediction about the eventual resolution of ASEAN’s Burma problem: “I think it will come [down] to [the use of] regional mechanisms.”
* * *
A sense of humor is one of Surin’s winning points. He spoke about how, after he was appointed secretary-general, he became more conscious of everything ASEAN. Once, somewhere in Pattaya, he saw a sign that began with “ASEAN.” Back up, he told his driver. I want to know what the sign says. Well, he certainly found out. The sign read: “ASEAN massage parlor.”
Philippine Daily Inquirer
January 22, 2008
BANGKOK -- Surin Pitsuwan, the new ASEAN secretary-general, is an academic and a diplomat, but it may be for his skills as a politician that he was chosen to lead the regional grouping’s permanent secretariat. The Ph.D. from Harvard and former foreign minister of Thailand was elected to parliament nine times in the last 20-odd years. Now, as ASEAN’s fourth secretary-general, he has the opportunity to lead the association into a new era of community-building.
First things first. “They would like a stronger secretariat,” he said at a journalists’ forum in Bangkok on Sunday. He was referring to ASEAN’s 10 heads of government, and their expansive idea of his job description. It is true, he said, that he is the first politician to assume the Jakarta-based post.
“What would be the difference in the running of that nerve center [in Jakarta]?” He answered his own question: “I will do what politicians do best: energize, create a sense of belonging.” And promote a sense of the possible.
He drew a vivid picture of what he said will become “a network secretariat” during his term, “reaching out, roping in and working with” anyone who understands the role ASEAN can play in Asia.
But while Surin talks a good game (he is quite eloquent when it comes to vision-setting), the reality is that much of the agenda he will face in his five-year term (it ends in 2012) has already been set.
Case in point: His first official trip as secretary-general was a ministerial meeting in Naypyidaw, the capital-in-the-making of Burma (Myanmar). Despite all the talk of community-building, brutal, repressive Burma remains ASEAN’s odd man out. One truth of politics: There is a limit to everything, even constructive engagement.
* * *
On Burma, Surin waxes and wanes. He is optimistic that, with ASEAN in its current state of evolution, “there is a very, very strong spirit of democracy in the system already.” He is sanguine about the prospects of a consolidating ASEAN, through the use of the proposed Charter (a document which Singapore has signed, but which the Philippines has threatened to reject, because of Aung San Suu Kyi’s continuing detention). He even offers a timetable for greater consolidation. “We want to do it by 2015, seven years from now.”
At the same time, he is realistic about the difficulty ASEAN finds itself in. “We ran into a stalemate,” he said, referring to the ultimately failed efforts to avert and then to mitigate Burma’s violent crackdown on protest actions late last year.
He spoke of a recent meeting with the Sultan of Brunei, where the Burma problem was discussed and his proposals were sought. His reply: “Your Majesty, I don’t know my role in this issue.”
“I’m still trying to find out my space,” he told the journalists gathered in Bangkok. “Is the secretary-general expected to play that role [of engaging Burma]?”
Ever the politician, he makes or rather suggests a prediction about the eventual resolution of ASEAN’s Burma problem: “I think it will come [down] to [the use of] regional mechanisms.”
* * *
A sense of humor is one of Surin’s winning points. He spoke about how, after he was appointed secretary-general, he became more conscious of everything ASEAN. Once, somewhere in Pattaya, he saw a sign that began with “ASEAN.” Back up, he told his driver. I want to know what the sign says. Well, he certainly found out. The sign read: “ASEAN massage parlor.”
Who Can Rescue Nilar Thein? [Commentary]
Kyaw Zwa Moe
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 22, 2008
Who remembers her now? Actually, she was well-known about four months ago. But today few seem to remember her. Four months is a long time in today’s fast-moving world.
Nilar Thein is a fugitive with a price on her head. She has been hiding in different locations in Rangoon since September when Burma’s military authorities began hunting down activists who led demonstrations in August and September.
If that’s not reason enough to feel sorry for the 35-year-old activist, her whole family is also suffering along with her.
Her husband Kyaw Min Yu, known as Jimmy, is in the notorious Insein Prison. A prominent activist since 1988 and a leading member of the 88 Generation Students group, he played a prominent role in the first street demonstrations in Rangoon in August.
Nilar Thein’s 9-month-old daughter, Nay Kyi Min Yu, has been living with her grandparents. Her grandparents say she is doing well, but she doesn’t experience the protective, loving kindness of her parents.
The daughter is taken to the prison occasionally to visit her father. But she hasn’t touched her mother in the past months.
If that’s not enough, Nilar Thein spent eight years in jail from 1996 to 2003 for her political activity. Her husband spent 16 years in prison after the 1988 pro-democracy uprising.
Nilar Thein told The Irrawaddy in a conversation from where her hiding place, “I love my daughter like any mother. I had to leave her, but I believe she will later understand why.”
Her husband is likely to receive another long prison sentence, as Nilar Thein continues to try to evade the security forces.
Can you imagine a beautiful end to this sad story?
Do you believe the ruling generals will stop their oppression? Do you believe the United Nations can achieve change in Burma? Do you believe Burma’s neighbors will truly seek change in Burma?
The UN Special Envoy to Burma, Ibrahim Gambari, said in a recent interview with Newsweek magazine, “I don’t have the instruments to change the regime.”
Yes, true regime change is hard to imagine. “The UN is not in the business of changing regimes,” Gambari said. Yes that’s true.
So what about one, single issue: the release of political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi?
Gambari attempted that, but again, with no success.
“The release of Aung San Suu Kyi and the other political prisoners is long overdue,” the envoy said in the interview.
But the junta hasn’t budged, sticking closely to its “seven-step road map,” which is intended to install the military institution legally as the legitimate government of Burma.
Can you imagine political reconciliation? “It’s long overdue,” said Gambari. Opposition groups and the international community have called for reconciliation since the junta took power 20 years ago, especially after Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy, won the 1990 election by a landslide.
Can you imagine a true dialogue between the junta and the opposition?
Gambari said, “If they [talks] were combined with real engagement and with some incentives at the appropriate time, they could work.” To try to achieve dialogue, sanctions have been imposed by the United States and the European Union since the mid-1990s. Still, it’s hard to imagine sanctions working because Burma’s two biggest neighbors, China and India, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations remain opposed.
How about the world’s super power, the US? In a recent trip to Hanoi, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Scott Marciel said Burma is going “downhill on all fronts.”
“The economy is going downhill, the education system is getting ruined,” he said. “The health care system isn’t functioning…you’re getting more and more cases of resistant strains of tuberculosis and malaria out of Burma. You’ve got refugee flows out of Burma. It’s just a whole series of problems.”
The US is the strongest critic of the Burmese regime and recently it imposed new sanctions targeted at the generals, their family and business cronies. But it doesn’t have any real means to change the regime or open its prisons or get the generals to sit down and talk to opposition and ethnic leaders. It might be another story if Burma were in Middle East, perhaps.
So, how can Nilar Thein, and the Burmese people be saved?
You can imagine only one person who could save Nilar Thein—Rambo.
The Irrawaddy News
www.irrawaddy.org
January 22, 2008
Who remembers her now? Actually, she was well-known about four months ago. But today few seem to remember her. Four months is a long time in today’s fast-moving world.
Nilar Thein is a fugitive with a price on her head. She has been hiding in different locations in Rangoon since September when Burma’s military authorities began hunting down activists who led demonstrations in August and September.
If that’s not reason enough to feel sorry for the 35-year-old activist, her whole family is also suffering along with her.
Her husband Kyaw Min Yu, known as Jimmy, is in the notorious Insein Prison. A prominent activist since 1988 and a leading member of the 88 Generation Students group, he played a prominent role in the first street demonstrations in Rangoon in August.
Nilar Thein’s 9-month-old daughter, Nay Kyi Min Yu, has been living with her grandparents. Her grandparents say she is doing well, but she doesn’t experience the protective, loving kindness of her parents.
The daughter is taken to the prison occasionally to visit her father. But she hasn’t touched her mother in the past months.
If that’s not enough, Nilar Thein spent eight years in jail from 1996 to 2003 for her political activity. Her husband spent 16 years in prison after the 1988 pro-democracy uprising.
Nilar Thein told The Irrawaddy in a conversation from where her hiding place, “I love my daughter like any mother. I had to leave her, but I believe she will later understand why.”
Her husband is likely to receive another long prison sentence, as Nilar Thein continues to try to evade the security forces.
Can you imagine a beautiful end to this sad story?
Do you believe the ruling generals will stop their oppression? Do you believe the United Nations can achieve change in Burma? Do you believe Burma’s neighbors will truly seek change in Burma?
The UN Special Envoy to Burma, Ibrahim Gambari, said in a recent interview with Newsweek magazine, “I don’t have the instruments to change the regime.”
Yes, true regime change is hard to imagine. “The UN is not in the business of changing regimes,” Gambari said. Yes that’s true.
So what about one, single issue: the release of political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi?
Gambari attempted that, but again, with no success.
“The release of Aung San Suu Kyi and the other political prisoners is long overdue,” the envoy said in the interview.
But the junta hasn’t budged, sticking closely to its “seven-step road map,” which is intended to install the military institution legally as the legitimate government of Burma.
Can you imagine political reconciliation? “It’s long overdue,” said Gambari. Opposition groups and the international community have called for reconciliation since the junta took power 20 years ago, especially after Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy, won the 1990 election by a landslide.
Can you imagine a true dialogue between the junta and the opposition?
Gambari said, “If they [talks] were combined with real engagement and with some incentives at the appropriate time, they could work.” To try to achieve dialogue, sanctions have been imposed by the United States and the European Union since the mid-1990s. Still, it’s hard to imagine sanctions working because Burma’s two biggest neighbors, China and India, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations remain opposed.
How about the world’s super power, the US? In a recent trip to Hanoi, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Scott Marciel said Burma is going “downhill on all fronts.”
“The economy is going downhill, the education system is getting ruined,” he said. “The health care system isn’t functioning…you’re getting more and more cases of resistant strains of tuberculosis and malaria out of Burma. You’ve got refugee flows out of Burma. It’s just a whole series of problems.”
The US is the strongest critic of the Burmese regime and recently it imposed new sanctions targeted at the generals, their family and business cronies. But it doesn’t have any real means to change the regime or open its prisons or get the generals to sit down and talk to opposition and ethnic leaders. It might be another story if Burma were in Middle East, perhaps.
So, how can Nilar Thein, and the Burmese people be saved?
You can imagine only one person who could save Nilar Thein—Rambo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)