By KYAW ZWA MOE
The Irrawaddy News
After nearly two decades in power, Burma’s ruling junta should be showing signs of wear and tear. Indeed, observers are constantly on the lookout for evidence of a split within the ranks of the regime’s top leadership.
Not surprisingly, they often find what they’re looking for. But rarely, if ever, do these internal strains signal the sort of real weakness that could undermine the junta’s hold on power.
Since it seized power in 1988, the current regime has carried out four significant purges, each time emerging, if anything, stronger and more united.
In each case, the motive for removing certain high-ranking figures from their positions was personal rather than political: At no point has there ever been any major disagreement among the top generals about what direction the country should take.
The first change to take place in the regime’s leadership came in April 1992, when the head of the ruling military council, Snr-Gen Saw Maung, was forced to step down, opening the way for the current leader, Snr-Gen Than Shwe, to assume the position of head of state.
Saw Maung wasn’t dismissed because he had shown a willingness to hand over power to the main opposition party, the National League for Democracy. Actually, he refused to recognize the results of the 1990 national elections, which had handed the party an overwhelming victory.
The real problem was Saw Maung’s health. “He was becoming increasingly erratic and his public speeches were incoherent and rambling, covering subjects such as dying tomorrow and sightings of Jesus in Tibet,” wrote journalist Bertil Lintner in his book “Burma in Revolt.” Finally, he had a nervous breakdown and his tenure as Burma’s supreme leader came to an abrupt end.
In 1997, several junta members and senior ministers, including Trade and Commerce Minister Lt-Gen Tun Kyi, Hotels and Tourism Minister Lt-Gen Kyaw Ba and Agriculture Minister Lt-Gen Myint Aung were purged. All three had previously been regional commanders notorious for abusing their power in their respective regions of Mandalay Division, Kachin State and Irrawaddy Division. They were removed from their ministerial posts on charges of corruption.
In 2002, Secretary 3 Lt-Gen Win Myint and Minister for Military Affairs Lt-Gen Tin Hla were sacked because “they violated the state policy.” There was no evidence that political rivalry had played any part in their ouster.
The most interesting and controversial purge happened in 2004, when Gen Khin Nyunt was dismissed and arrested on charges of corruption. Khin Nyunt, who for many years was one of the most influential figures within the junta, is currently under house arrest with a suspended prison sentence of 44 years.
Some foreign observers regarded Khin Nyunt as a “moderate” military officer who had shown some willingness to move the country towards a political transition. However, Burmese dissidents dubbed him the “Prince of Evil,” as the person primarily responsible for the arrest and torture of thousands of political prisoners.
The 2004 purge was due to Than Shwe’s suspicion of the military intelligence apparatus, which had been under Khin Nyunt’s control for two decades. Than Shwe ordered the dismantling of the military intelligence services, but Khin Nyunt’s political legacy—the so-called “road map to democracy”—remained in place even after he was neutralized.
Since last September’s monk-led protests, there have been persistent rumors of discontent among field generals who disagreed with the top generals’ orders to shoot monks and other peaceful protestors. However, no evidence of a serious rift within the junta has yet emerged over its handling of the demonstrations.
Instead, the 11 members of the junta and its powerful regional commanders seem to be more unified than ever, especially since the announcement of a constitutional referendum on February 9.
It is, in fact, very difficult to imagine military officials wanting a radical political shift. They know that it is in their own interests to stick together in order to hold on to their privileges. No high-ranking military leader is going to put the good of the country ahead of his family’s well-being.
There may well be a handful of far-sighted military officials who realize that the current situation cannot continue forever. But these individuals are in no position to seriously influence the country’s political direction. The only choice before them is to obey and hopefully work their way up the ranks, where they might be able to do some good. But the odds are strongly against it.
Anything is possible, but there is little point in daydreaming that Burma’s long overdue revolution could come about through a transformation within the junta.
Unfortunately for the Burmese people, the regime’s ability to manage its internal conflicts probably means that it will see no need to respond to external pressures for some time to come.
Thursday, 24 April 2008
Slovenian official says EU to extend sanctions against Myanmar
STRASBOURG, France: The European Union will extend its political and economic sanctions against Myanmar and only allow limited EU development aid, an official said Wednesday.
Slovenian State Secretary for European Affairs Janez Lenarcic said EU foreign ministers will adopt the decision to prolong the sanctions by another 12 months during a meeting starting Monday in Luxembourg.
Lenarcic told the European Parliament that the sanctions may be adapted to deal with any political changes in Myanmar, also known as Burma.
"We will once again launch an appeal to the Burmese authorities to pave the way for a transition to a civilian government ... release political prisoners and stop persecutions," Lenarcic said.
The EU has imposed a travel ban on Myanmar officials, an arms embargo and a freeze of Myanmar assets. It also has banned imports of timber, gemstones and precious metals from Myanmar in response to the military junta's crackdown on pro-democracy groups.
But the EU has said the bloc's humanitarian aid will continue.
Source: IHT
Slovenian State Secretary for European Affairs Janez Lenarcic said EU foreign ministers will adopt the decision to prolong the sanctions by another 12 months during a meeting starting Monday in Luxembourg.
Lenarcic told the European Parliament that the sanctions may be adapted to deal with any political changes in Myanmar, also known as Burma.
"We will once again launch an appeal to the Burmese authorities to pave the way for a transition to a civilian government ... release political prisoners and stop persecutions," Lenarcic said.
The EU has imposed a travel ban on Myanmar officials, an arms embargo and a freeze of Myanmar assets. It also has banned imports of timber, gemstones and precious metals from Myanmar in response to the military junta's crackdown on pro-democracy groups.
But the EU has said the bloc's humanitarian aid will continue.
Source: IHT
Myanmar's awful choice
From Economist.com
A referendum its people cannot win
IN EMBASSIES abroad, voting has already begun in the referendum on Myanmar’s new constitution, which will be held in-country on May 10th. The ruling junta advertises it as an important step forward on its “roadmap” to democratic, civilian rule. If only.
Rather the referendum is, in the words of Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, a “ritual without real content”.
Or perhaps it is even worse than that: a ritual with content, symbolising and confirming the sheer misery of Myanmar’s plight and threatening to make it permanent. A junta-appointed committee took 15 years to draft the constitution, which offers nothing close to democracy.
It gives the army chief the power to intervene in politics at will. Several cabinet seats would be reserved for army officers, as would 25% of seats in both houses of parliament.
A bizarre clause is apparently tailor-made to bar Aung San Suu Kyi, the detained opposition leader, from elected office. When Myanmar last held elections, she was banned because of her foreign connections: she was married to a foreigner and had spent much of her life abroad.
Her husband has since died, and she has been in Myanmar without interruption—mostly under lock and key. Now, however, those whose “children or their spouses” are foreign are excluded. Miss Suu Kyi’s two sons are British, having been deprived of their Burmese citizenship.
Despite all this, some of the regime’s critics used to think the constitution worth voting for: it is, after all, the only chance of change that is on offer. And it does envisage some sort of political process, with a parliament, which implies debate and even, perhaps, disagreement.
To be blithely optimistic, this process might gather a momentum of its own. It might, for example, expose the undoubted rifts within the junta.
And, by bringing in the “ceasefire groups”—representatives of ethnic insurgencies that are at present quiescent—it would bring a formal end to some of the world’s longest-running armed conflicts.
Now, however, it is hard to find anyone outside the junta itself who favours a “yes” vote. There are two main reasons for this. The first is the junta’s brutal suppression of last autumn’s monk-led protests. A much feared and loathed regime proved itself even more hateful.
Second is the strengthening of provisions in the draft designed to make it hard to change it in future. Amendment will require at least 75% of the votes in parliament—ie, including those of some of the soldiers—and 50% of eligible voters in a subsequent referendum.
So the constitution seems a way of entrenching eternal military domination.
Any hint of a campaign for a “no” vote in Myanmar has been suppressed—those caught scrawling graffiti face long jail sentences; T-shirts bearing the word “Nobody”, which were made in Thailand and which Burmese had taken to wearing in discreet protest, are being removed from shop shelves.
With no independent poll-monitors, even if there is a “no” vote, we might never know. The generals will surely remember the embarrassment of being thrashed in the election they held in 1990.
So the looming vote evokes in some activists not the hope of change, however imperfect, but desperation over its impossibility. In that sense, it is comparable to the role of the Beijing Olympics in Tibet—almost a last chance to make a futile protest heard.
In a rare (if minor) incident of terrorism in Myanmar, two small bombs exploded in the centre of Yangon on Sunday April 20th. The government has blamed a group of exiled dissidents. But the one thing Myanmar is not short of is angry, desperate people.
A referendum its people cannot win
IN EMBASSIES abroad, voting has already begun in the referendum on Myanmar’s new constitution, which will be held in-country on May 10th. The ruling junta advertises it as an important step forward on its “roadmap” to democratic, civilian rule. If only.
Rather the referendum is, in the words of Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, the United Nations’ special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, a “ritual without real content”.
Or perhaps it is even worse than that: a ritual with content, symbolising and confirming the sheer misery of Myanmar’s plight and threatening to make it permanent. A junta-appointed committee took 15 years to draft the constitution, which offers nothing close to democracy.
It gives the army chief the power to intervene in politics at will. Several cabinet seats would be reserved for army officers, as would 25% of seats in both houses of parliament.
A bizarre clause is apparently tailor-made to bar Aung San Suu Kyi, the detained opposition leader, from elected office. When Myanmar last held elections, she was banned because of her foreign connections: she was married to a foreigner and had spent much of her life abroad.
Her husband has since died, and she has been in Myanmar without interruption—mostly under lock and key. Now, however, those whose “children or their spouses” are foreign are excluded. Miss Suu Kyi’s two sons are British, having been deprived of their Burmese citizenship.
Despite all this, some of the regime’s critics used to think the constitution worth voting for: it is, after all, the only chance of change that is on offer. And it does envisage some sort of political process, with a parliament, which implies debate and even, perhaps, disagreement.
To be blithely optimistic, this process might gather a momentum of its own. It might, for example, expose the undoubted rifts within the junta.
And, by bringing in the “ceasefire groups”—representatives of ethnic insurgencies that are at present quiescent—it would bring a formal end to some of the world’s longest-running armed conflicts.
Now, however, it is hard to find anyone outside the junta itself who favours a “yes” vote. There are two main reasons for this. The first is the junta’s brutal suppression of last autumn’s monk-led protests. A much feared and loathed regime proved itself even more hateful.
Second is the strengthening of provisions in the draft designed to make it hard to change it in future. Amendment will require at least 75% of the votes in parliament—ie, including those of some of the soldiers—and 50% of eligible voters in a subsequent referendum.
So the constitution seems a way of entrenching eternal military domination.
Any hint of a campaign for a “no” vote in Myanmar has been suppressed—those caught scrawling graffiti face long jail sentences; T-shirts bearing the word “Nobody”, which were made in Thailand and which Burmese had taken to wearing in discreet protest, are being removed from shop shelves.
With no independent poll-monitors, even if there is a “no” vote, we might never know. The generals will surely remember the embarrassment of being thrashed in the election they held in 1990.
So the looming vote evokes in some activists not the hope of change, however imperfect, but desperation over its impossibility. In that sense, it is comparable to the role of the Beijing Olympics in Tibet—almost a last chance to make a futile protest heard.
In a rare (if minor) incident of terrorism in Myanmar, two small bombs exploded in the centre of Yangon on Sunday April 20th. The government has blamed a group of exiled dissidents. But the one thing Myanmar is not short of is angry, desperate people.
More Repression In Burma
Protests are growing inside Burma against the military junta’s proposed constitution and its May 10th referendum on that draft constitution. During a recent demonstration in the city of Rangoon, thirty-some protesters wearing “NO” t-shirts were urging voters to reject the constitution in the upcoming referendum. Burmese authorities cracked down on the peaceful rally by arresting six youth activists.
The following day, eleven Muslim community leaders in Rakhine state were arrested, reportedly for peaceful political activities. Moreover, in recent weeks, democracy and human rights activists in Rangoon have been assaulted and beaten with sticks. “These blatant human rights abuses,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack in a statement, “contribute to the climate of fear and repression in Burma as the regime prepares to conduct a referendum on its draft constitution.”
In a recent speech, Burma’s top military leader Senior General Than Shwe again promised to bring democracy to Burma, saying a civilian government would be in place after the 2010 elections. But there is much cause for skepticism. The democratic representatives of the Burmese people have made clear that they oppose the unjust way in which the government is trying to impose its draft constitution. The junta continues to arrest individuals campaigning against the constitution and refuses to welcome independent referendum monitors.
The United States renews its call for the Burmese government to release all detainees and political prisoners, including pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. According to Amnesty International, seven-hundred people detained during the crackdown in August and September 2007 remain behind bars, while forty have been sentenced to prison terms.
The Burmese regime should also cease its crackdown on peaceful demonstrators and begin a genuine dialogue with democratic and ethnic minority representatives. "Every civilized nation," said President George W. Bush, "has a responsibility to stand up for the people suffering under dictatorship." That includes the Burmese people.
Source: Voice of America
The following day, eleven Muslim community leaders in Rakhine state were arrested, reportedly for peaceful political activities. Moreover, in recent weeks, democracy and human rights activists in Rangoon have been assaulted and beaten with sticks. “These blatant human rights abuses,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack in a statement, “contribute to the climate of fear and repression in Burma as the regime prepares to conduct a referendum on its draft constitution.”
In a recent speech, Burma’s top military leader Senior General Than Shwe again promised to bring democracy to Burma, saying a civilian government would be in place after the 2010 elections. But there is much cause for skepticism. The democratic representatives of the Burmese people have made clear that they oppose the unjust way in which the government is trying to impose its draft constitution. The junta continues to arrest individuals campaigning against the constitution and refuses to welcome independent referendum monitors.
The United States renews its call for the Burmese government to release all detainees and political prisoners, including pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. According to Amnesty International, seven-hundred people detained during the crackdown in August and September 2007 remain behind bars, while forty have been sentenced to prison terms.
The Burmese regime should also cease its crackdown on peaceful demonstrators and begin a genuine dialogue with democratic and ethnic minority representatives. "Every civilized nation," said President George W. Bush, "has a responsibility to stand up for the people suffering under dictatorship." That includes the Burmese people.
Source: Voice of America
Burma's displaced people
By Inge Brees
(From "Forced Migration Review" No. 30: Burma's displaced people)
Forced displacement of Burmese people
This issue of FMR aims to help bring the crisis of forced displacement of Burmese people back into the international spotlight.
With the 'Saffron Revolution' of September 2007, Burma was catapulted into the centre of international attention. It was briefly headline news as people monitored the regime's response and watched for hints of progress towards democracy and the restoration of rights. With little action on either front (and no visible resurgence of violence or protest), interest has since waned.
The September protests, led by Buddhist monks, were sparked by a sudden increase in oil prices which had a serious impact on the already impoverished population. After a few days, the government violently ended what it called the 'disruption of stability'. Governments around the world condemned the crackdown and the UN Secretary-General sent Special Representative Ibrahim Gambari to negotiate with the Burmese rulers. At the same time, however, China and Russia used their right of veto in the UN Security Council to block discussion of matters which they considered to be internal to Burma, no 'threat to international security' – and therefore outside the mandate of the Security Council.
Most reports on Burma explain that the conflict started in 1988 when the Burmese junta cracked down on nationwide demonstrations. But is that really when it all started? How about the moment when the army took power in 1962? Or before that, after independence from the British in 1948, when some of the ethnic minorities were granted autonomy while the plight of others was ignored – who then, predictably, took up arms to fight this inequality? Stating that conflict only started in 1988 ignores the call for (cultural) autonomy by the ethnic minorities that started decades earlier. What is certainly true is that refugee and IDP numbers rose considerably at the end of the 1980s, in the aftermath of the demonstrations of 1988, and with the loss of territory by the ethnic armies and the country's growing economic emergency.
Today, displacement is widespread. In June 2007, the ICRC issued a rare public condemnation of the Burmese military government's actions, saying that they have 'helped to create a climate of constant fear among the population and have forced thousands of people to join the ranks of the internally displaced, or to flee abroad.' Close to half a million people have been displaced internally over the last decade on the eastern border alone. In addition, millions of Burmese have crossed into neighbouring countries. In Thailand there are an estimated two million Burmese trying to make a living. If they are fleeing armed conflict or political persecution, they can receive protection and assistance in refugee camps. Those who fled after November 2005, however, are ineligible for protection, due to the moratorium on refugee registration. They have no choice but to stay outside the camps, where they are considered illegal migrants, subject to arrest and deportation.
There are good reasons why Thailand maintains such a strict demarcation between refugee and migrant status. Those inside the camps not only get protection and assistance but also have access to resettlement programmes – a recognised pull factor. Thailand has had to carry the burden of refugee inflows from neighbouring countries for decades and prefers to keep tight control on its ability to respond according to its own interests. That is why Thailand has still not signed the Geneva Convention and why they call refugees 'temporary displaced persons fleeing fighting', to emphasise that their stay in Thailand will come to an end as soon as conditions in Burma are conducive to return.
The exact number of Burmese refugees in other countries bordering Burma is unknown but Bangladesh, India, China and Malaysia have all had to deal with substantial influxes of Burmese citizens. As Thailand receives the bulk of the refugees and is the base for the vocal Burmese opposition, many of the articles in this issue of FMR focus on the Thai situation and the ethnic Karen. This should not be seen to underplay the plight of Burmese refugees in other countries or IDPs in other areas inside Burma. There is simply less information available on them – a gap that needs to be addressed.
In terms of durable solutions for this refugee population, the current focus is on resettlement. As a form of responsibility sharing, several Western countries have agreed to accept groups of Burmese refugees. This is resulting in largescale movements from the Thai camps to the West, with some additional cases from Bangladesh and India. Several articles in this issue explain how resettlement, while ensuring protection for the refugees concerned, raises issues for community management of the camps and is causing tensions within the refugee population.
Thoughts on other durable solutions, such as repatriation or local integration, are missing, however. Even if repatriation is currently impossible, agencies should at least consider the possibility of unexpected changes in Burma which would lead to massive population movements. Early planning is imperative. At the same time, more thought should be given to the alternative solution of local integration. Although most host countries are against this option, my own research indicates that many Burmese people are already integrating, against the odds, and are an economic asset to their host countries. An open debate on all durable solutions and immediate improvements to the 'closed' camps are urgently needed for the sake of both the Burmese refugees and their host populations.
Given that Burmese people are displaced throughout the region, this humanitarian crisis will require regional solutions. UNHCR could be encouraged to set up a consultative committee involving all refugeereceiving countries to discuss and coordinate a common approach towards Burmese refugees – even if a comprehensive plan of action is currently impossible due to the actions of the Burmese junta. But, as Loescher and Milner state, this is only part of the solution: 'A humanitarian response to the needs of refugees in the region is not a substitute for engaging in the question of resolving the conditions in the country of origin that continue to force refugees to flee.' (1) The efforts of the UN Special Representative to push for dialogue between the different stakeholders in Burma are essential if Burma's large-scale displacement is ever to end. But from his latest visit to the country in March 2008 it is clear that the prospects for genuine dialogue remain gloomy.
In January 2008 the junta suddenly announced that the National Convention had drafted a Constitution, on which the Burmese population has to vote in a national referendum. Elections will be held in 2010. Finally a positive move? Maybe so, but with a lot of caveats. Opposition to or campaigning against the National Convention and the referendum are regarded as treason, and incur a penalty of several years' imprisonment. Additionally, opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize Winner Aung San Suu Kyi is barred from taking part in the elections because of her marriage to a British citizen. When Gambari requested that international monitors be allowed to observe the referendum, this was immediately rejected and he was accused of bias in favour of the opposition. The carving out of both humanitarian and political space thus so far remains extremely difficult.
We would like to express our thanks to the numerous academics, UN agencies, NGOs and human rights organisations who have written for this issue – and to the refugees and IDPs themselves who wrote from inside the conflict zones and the refugee camps to make sure their views were heard. (2)
Inge Brees (inge.brees@ugent.be), guest editor for this issue, is a doctoral fellow at the Conflict Research Group, based at the University of Ghent in Belgium (www.conflictresearchgroup.be). She is currently conducting research on livelihoods of both camp and self-settled refugees in Thailand.
Notes:
(1.) 'Protracted refugee situation in Thailand: towards solutions'. Presentation given to the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand, 1 February 2006.
(2.) For their protection, the names of most refugee contributors have not been given; these articles have instead, at their request, been attributed to their organisation.
Burma v Myanmar
Using the name Burma, rather than the official name Myanmar, is a politically sensitive choice, as the opposition and several Western countries refuse to recognise the name change instigated by the junta. Most Burmese people still use the old name in private conversations, which is why 'Burma' is used here. Contributors to FMR were free to choose which name to use. The term 'Burmese' is used for any person originally coming from Burma, while the term 'Burman' is used for people from the ethnic majority group.
Full_Report (pdf* format - 3.3 Mbytes)
Source: Relief Web
(From "Forced Migration Review" No. 30: Burma's displaced people)
Forced displacement of Burmese people
This issue of FMR aims to help bring the crisis of forced displacement of Burmese people back into the international spotlight.
With the 'Saffron Revolution' of September 2007, Burma was catapulted into the centre of international attention. It was briefly headline news as people monitored the regime's response and watched for hints of progress towards democracy and the restoration of rights. With little action on either front (and no visible resurgence of violence or protest), interest has since waned.
The September protests, led by Buddhist monks, were sparked by a sudden increase in oil prices which had a serious impact on the already impoverished population. After a few days, the government violently ended what it called the 'disruption of stability'. Governments around the world condemned the crackdown and the UN Secretary-General sent Special Representative Ibrahim Gambari to negotiate with the Burmese rulers. At the same time, however, China and Russia used their right of veto in the UN Security Council to block discussion of matters which they considered to be internal to Burma, no 'threat to international security' – and therefore outside the mandate of the Security Council.
Most reports on Burma explain that the conflict started in 1988 when the Burmese junta cracked down on nationwide demonstrations. But is that really when it all started? How about the moment when the army took power in 1962? Or before that, after independence from the British in 1948, when some of the ethnic minorities were granted autonomy while the plight of others was ignored – who then, predictably, took up arms to fight this inequality? Stating that conflict only started in 1988 ignores the call for (cultural) autonomy by the ethnic minorities that started decades earlier. What is certainly true is that refugee and IDP numbers rose considerably at the end of the 1980s, in the aftermath of the demonstrations of 1988, and with the loss of territory by the ethnic armies and the country's growing economic emergency.
Today, displacement is widespread. In June 2007, the ICRC issued a rare public condemnation of the Burmese military government's actions, saying that they have 'helped to create a climate of constant fear among the population and have forced thousands of people to join the ranks of the internally displaced, or to flee abroad.' Close to half a million people have been displaced internally over the last decade on the eastern border alone. In addition, millions of Burmese have crossed into neighbouring countries. In Thailand there are an estimated two million Burmese trying to make a living. If they are fleeing armed conflict or political persecution, they can receive protection and assistance in refugee camps. Those who fled after November 2005, however, are ineligible for protection, due to the moratorium on refugee registration. They have no choice but to stay outside the camps, where they are considered illegal migrants, subject to arrest and deportation.
There are good reasons why Thailand maintains such a strict demarcation between refugee and migrant status. Those inside the camps not only get protection and assistance but also have access to resettlement programmes – a recognised pull factor. Thailand has had to carry the burden of refugee inflows from neighbouring countries for decades and prefers to keep tight control on its ability to respond according to its own interests. That is why Thailand has still not signed the Geneva Convention and why they call refugees 'temporary displaced persons fleeing fighting', to emphasise that their stay in Thailand will come to an end as soon as conditions in Burma are conducive to return.
The exact number of Burmese refugees in other countries bordering Burma is unknown but Bangladesh, India, China and Malaysia have all had to deal with substantial influxes of Burmese citizens. As Thailand receives the bulk of the refugees and is the base for the vocal Burmese opposition, many of the articles in this issue of FMR focus on the Thai situation and the ethnic Karen. This should not be seen to underplay the plight of Burmese refugees in other countries or IDPs in other areas inside Burma. There is simply less information available on them – a gap that needs to be addressed.
In terms of durable solutions for this refugee population, the current focus is on resettlement. As a form of responsibility sharing, several Western countries have agreed to accept groups of Burmese refugees. This is resulting in largescale movements from the Thai camps to the West, with some additional cases from Bangladesh and India. Several articles in this issue explain how resettlement, while ensuring protection for the refugees concerned, raises issues for community management of the camps and is causing tensions within the refugee population.
Thoughts on other durable solutions, such as repatriation or local integration, are missing, however. Even if repatriation is currently impossible, agencies should at least consider the possibility of unexpected changes in Burma which would lead to massive population movements. Early planning is imperative. At the same time, more thought should be given to the alternative solution of local integration. Although most host countries are against this option, my own research indicates that many Burmese people are already integrating, against the odds, and are an economic asset to their host countries. An open debate on all durable solutions and immediate improvements to the 'closed' camps are urgently needed for the sake of both the Burmese refugees and their host populations.
Given that Burmese people are displaced throughout the region, this humanitarian crisis will require regional solutions. UNHCR could be encouraged to set up a consultative committee involving all refugeereceiving countries to discuss and coordinate a common approach towards Burmese refugees – even if a comprehensive plan of action is currently impossible due to the actions of the Burmese junta. But, as Loescher and Milner state, this is only part of the solution: 'A humanitarian response to the needs of refugees in the region is not a substitute for engaging in the question of resolving the conditions in the country of origin that continue to force refugees to flee.' (1) The efforts of the UN Special Representative to push for dialogue between the different stakeholders in Burma are essential if Burma's large-scale displacement is ever to end. But from his latest visit to the country in March 2008 it is clear that the prospects for genuine dialogue remain gloomy.
In January 2008 the junta suddenly announced that the National Convention had drafted a Constitution, on which the Burmese population has to vote in a national referendum. Elections will be held in 2010. Finally a positive move? Maybe so, but with a lot of caveats. Opposition to or campaigning against the National Convention and the referendum are regarded as treason, and incur a penalty of several years' imprisonment. Additionally, opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize Winner Aung San Suu Kyi is barred from taking part in the elections because of her marriage to a British citizen. When Gambari requested that international monitors be allowed to observe the referendum, this was immediately rejected and he was accused of bias in favour of the opposition. The carving out of both humanitarian and political space thus so far remains extremely difficult.
We would like to express our thanks to the numerous academics, UN agencies, NGOs and human rights organisations who have written for this issue – and to the refugees and IDPs themselves who wrote from inside the conflict zones and the refugee camps to make sure their views were heard. (2)
Inge Brees (inge.brees@ugent.be), guest editor for this issue, is a doctoral fellow at the Conflict Research Group, based at the University of Ghent in Belgium (www.conflictresearchgroup.be). She is currently conducting research on livelihoods of both camp and self-settled refugees in Thailand.
Notes:
(1.) 'Protracted refugee situation in Thailand: towards solutions'. Presentation given to the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand, 1 February 2006.
(2.) For their protection, the names of most refugee contributors have not been given; these articles have instead, at their request, been attributed to their organisation.
Burma v Myanmar
Using the name Burma, rather than the official name Myanmar, is a politically sensitive choice, as the opposition and several Western countries refuse to recognise the name change instigated by the junta. Most Burmese people still use the old name in private conversations, which is why 'Burma' is used here. Contributors to FMR were free to choose which name to use. The term 'Burmese' is used for any person originally coming from Burma, while the term 'Burman' is used for people from the ethnic majority group.
Full_Report (pdf* format - 3.3 Mbytes)
Source: Relief Web
Myanmar's opposition party says political prisoners denied proper medical care
YANGON, Myanmar: Myanmar's military junta is intentionally denying proper medical care to political prisoners, the country's pro-democracy party said Wednesday.
National League for Democracy spokesman Nyan Win said the junta's withholding of medical treatment was a deliberate and malicious act.
Nyan Win made the comment a day after State Department spokesman Tom Casey said the United States had received reports that pro-democracy activist Min Ko Naing has been denied care for an eye infection that could cause blindness. He said the U.S. was also worried that Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, who is under house arrest, has not received promised monthly doctor visits.
Suu Kyi underwent major gynecological surgery in September 2003 and suffered a serious stomach ailment in June 2006.
In rare photos taken after her two meetings with U.N. special envoy Ibrahim Gambari last year, the 62-year-old leader of the National League for Democracy appeared tired and gaunt.
Suu Kyi has been in detention for more than 12 of the past 18 years and is not allowed visitors or telephone contact with the outside world. Nyan Win said Suu Kyi has not been seen by her physician since January.
Calls to the junta's public relations officials went unanswered Wednesday.
Nyan Win said Min Ko Naing's eye infection needs urgent medical treatment.
Min Ko Naing, leader of the 88 Generation Students group, and more than a dozen other activists were arrested last August after holding anti-junta rallies. He has been held in Yangon's notorious Insein prison.
In September monks led nationwide demonstrations. At least 31 people were killed when the military crushed the protests, sparking global outrage.
Nyan Win earlier said more than 120 National League for Democracy members have been arrested since the crackdown. Thousands of other protesters were also detained and some were given harsh prison sentences.
Members of the 88 Generation Students were at the forefront of a 1988 pro-democracy uprising and were given lengthy prison terms and tortured after the military harshly suppressed the protests.
The Assistance Association of Political Prisoners, a group of former political prisoners based near the Thai-Myanmar border, says Myanmar authorities have long used denial of medical treatment for political intimidation.
It said a 70-year-old political prisoner, Than Lwin, lost his eyesight earlier this year when authorities were slow to allow him medical treatment while he was imprisoned in the central city of Mandalay.
"When he was sent to an eye specialist, the doctors said it was already about two months late," the group said in a recent statement. "There was nothing they could do to help him."
Source: AP
National League for Democracy spokesman Nyan Win said the junta's withholding of medical treatment was a deliberate and malicious act.
Nyan Win made the comment a day after State Department spokesman Tom Casey said the United States had received reports that pro-democracy activist Min Ko Naing has been denied care for an eye infection that could cause blindness. He said the U.S. was also worried that Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, who is under house arrest, has not received promised monthly doctor visits.
Suu Kyi underwent major gynecological surgery in September 2003 and suffered a serious stomach ailment in June 2006.
In rare photos taken after her two meetings with U.N. special envoy Ibrahim Gambari last year, the 62-year-old leader of the National League for Democracy appeared tired and gaunt.
Suu Kyi has been in detention for more than 12 of the past 18 years and is not allowed visitors or telephone contact with the outside world. Nyan Win said Suu Kyi has not been seen by her physician since January.
Calls to the junta's public relations officials went unanswered Wednesday.
Nyan Win said Min Ko Naing's eye infection needs urgent medical treatment.
Min Ko Naing, leader of the 88 Generation Students group, and more than a dozen other activists were arrested last August after holding anti-junta rallies. He has been held in Yangon's notorious Insein prison.
In September monks led nationwide demonstrations. At least 31 people were killed when the military crushed the protests, sparking global outrage.
Nyan Win earlier said more than 120 National League for Democracy members have been arrested since the crackdown. Thousands of other protesters were also detained and some were given harsh prison sentences.
Members of the 88 Generation Students were at the forefront of a 1988 pro-democracy uprising and were given lengthy prison terms and tortured after the military harshly suppressed the protests.
The Assistance Association of Political Prisoners, a group of former political prisoners based near the Thai-Myanmar border, says Myanmar authorities have long used denial of medical treatment for political intimidation.
It said a 70-year-old political prisoner, Than Lwin, lost his eyesight earlier this year when authorities were slow to allow him medical treatment while he was imprisoned in the central city of Mandalay.
"When he was sent to an eye specialist, the doctors said it was already about two months late," the group said in a recent statement. "There was nothing they could do to help him."
Source: AP
Burma: Chronicle of a referendum foretold
By Marwaan Macan-Markar
23 April 2008 - Bangkok: A rising star within the ranks of Burma’s military regime is reported to have unveiled a plan to ensure the junta gets its way at the May referendum for a new constitution, according to information revealed to IPS.
Lt. Gen Myint Swe told a meeting of some 600 people, which included senior government officials, that only the last 10 people to vote at each polling station will be entitled to monitor the counting of the ballots at the station, revealed a well-informed source close to the military, who attended the meeting.
Furthermore, the results of the votes counted at the local level will not be revealed as and when the tallies are confirmed, Myint Swe is reported to have added, the source said of the April 9 meeting, which was held in the former capital, Rangoon. The junta’s plan is to reveal the final results in one announcement from the new capital, Naypidaw.
“This is to control the votes and rig the votes if needed,” says Win Min, a Burmese national security expert lecturing at Payap University, in northern Thailand. “This is different from the 1990 elections, when they announced the results by each polling station at the local level, which makes controlling the result difficult.”
At that election, the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) won a thumping majority despite the heavy odds it faced and the strong campaign launched by the junta to promote its own political party.
However the junta refused to recognise the results. It opted, instead, to establish a national convention to draft a new constitution, a process that took a record 15 years and is finally awaiting approval on May 10.
Members of the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA), a pro-junta organisation, will be the ones sent to vote last at each polling station to ensure access to monitor the vote count, Win Min added in an interview.
Fear of sacking
“There have been widespread worries among the ministers, regional commanders, light infantry division commanders and senior USDA officials that they would be sacked if the referendum is lost in their respective areas.”
Another plan the military has in store is to compel civil servants, university lecturers and school teachers to vote a week ahead of the referendum date in the direct presence of senior military officers, an order that ignores a voter’s right to secrecy.
“This is voter intimidation,” says Win Min. “It shows that the authorities are worried that these civil servants are likely to vote ‘no’ if they are free to do so.”
General’s Man Friday
The role of Myint Swe in this effort to swing the plebiscite the junta’s way has broader implications, since he is known as a close confidante of the South-east Asian country’s strongman, Senior General Than Shwe. Some Burmese analysts concur that what Myint Swe says “reflects Than Shwe’s mind.”
In fact, the army officer, in his late 50s, has played pivotal roles in the past to strengthen the military dictator’s grip on power in Burma, or Myanmar, as the junta has renamed it.
In early 2006, in his capacity as the head of the military division in Rangoon and as head of military intelligence, Myint Swe launched a campaign to track down citizens in Burma who were feeding the international media with information. This manhunt in an already oppressed country included targets that ranged from businessmen and civil servants to local journalists.
Myint Swe’s role to ensure an outcome favourable to the junta is no different to that of another confidante of Than Shwe, Maj. Gen. Htay Oo, the secretary-general of the USDA. The latter organisation, which Than Shwe founded in September 1993, has been given the lead role in the forthcoming referendum and the general elections to be held in 2010.
Legion of mafias
And Htay Oo’s role goes beyond ensuring that the USDA, which is officially reported to have 23 million members out of the country’s 54 million population, campaigns for a favourable vote. He is reportedly spearheading a programme of intimidation in the run-up to the plebiscite.
Currently, an old race course in downtown Rangoon, the Kyaik-Ka-San grounds, has been converted to a training centre for USDA toughs to learn such skills as beating, threatening and arresting civilians identified as opponents of the junta, says a Burmese source who has secured pictures of such sessions.
“Htay Oo is very close to Than Shwe and he is part of the junta’s campaign to intimidate voters into saying ‘yes’ at the referendum,” says Zin Linn, spokesman for the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma, the Burmese government in exile. “The training at the race course is under Htay Oo’s control. No wonder the people regard them as a mafia.”
“NLD members and pro-democracy activists have already been attacked by these USDA members,” Zin Linn added in an interview.
“There is going to be more force unleashed as the days for the referendum draw closer.’’
The USDA’s notoriety as another arm of Than Shwe’s oppressive regime was on display in September 2007, when it joined the military and riot police in the brutal crackdown of the pro-democracy protests, led by thousands of maroon-robed monks.
In May 2003, the USDA was also implicated in a bloody attack on NLD members, including its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, during a political campaign in Depayin. Nearly 70 NDL supporters were killed by the mob of USDA members and other junta supporters.
In fact, the military official who masterminded the Depayin attack – aimed at silencing the universally popular pro-democracy leader Suu Kyi, now under house arrest – was Gen. Soe Win, another Than Shwe ally. He was subsequently named “the Butcher of Depayin” by Burmese dissidents for his ruthlessness. But Than Shwe viewed his confidante differently, rewarding him with the role of prime minister following Khin Nyunt’s arrest.
Since it grabbed power in a March 1962 coup, the Burmese military has regularly served up officers prepared to unleash acts of repression as a pledge of loyalty to the dictator in power. Among the earliest in this Burmese military tradition was Brig. Gen. Sein Lwin. As a young commander, he gave soldiers the order to first shoot university students demonstrating and then to blow up the students’ union building at the Rangoon University with students trapped inside.
For such brutal acts in July 1962, Sein Lwin was dubbed “the Butcher of Rangoon” by the Burmese opposition at the time. Yet it hardly came in the way of his rise within the military regime under Gen. Ne Win.
Sein Lwin was rewarded for implementing his master’s policies as Myint Swe is being rewarded today. The latter is reported to be Than Shwe’s second favourite after Gen Thura Shwe Mann, the third-most powerful military officer in Burma and the one Than Shwe reportedly favours as his successor.
Source: IPS-OneWorld
23 April 2008 - Bangkok: A rising star within the ranks of Burma’s military regime is reported to have unveiled a plan to ensure the junta gets its way at the May referendum for a new constitution, according to information revealed to IPS.
Lt. Gen Myint Swe told a meeting of some 600 people, which included senior government officials, that only the last 10 people to vote at each polling station will be entitled to monitor the counting of the ballots at the station, revealed a well-informed source close to the military, who attended the meeting.
Furthermore, the results of the votes counted at the local level will not be revealed as and when the tallies are confirmed, Myint Swe is reported to have added, the source said of the April 9 meeting, which was held in the former capital, Rangoon. The junta’s plan is to reveal the final results in one announcement from the new capital, Naypidaw.
“This is to control the votes and rig the votes if needed,” says Win Min, a Burmese national security expert lecturing at Payap University, in northern Thailand. “This is different from the 1990 elections, when they announced the results by each polling station at the local level, which makes controlling the result difficult.”
At that election, the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) won a thumping majority despite the heavy odds it faced and the strong campaign launched by the junta to promote its own political party.
However the junta refused to recognise the results. It opted, instead, to establish a national convention to draft a new constitution, a process that took a record 15 years and is finally awaiting approval on May 10.
Members of the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA), a pro-junta organisation, will be the ones sent to vote last at each polling station to ensure access to monitor the vote count, Win Min added in an interview.
Fear of sacking
“There have been widespread worries among the ministers, regional commanders, light infantry division commanders and senior USDA officials that they would be sacked if the referendum is lost in their respective areas.”
Another plan the military has in store is to compel civil servants, university lecturers and school teachers to vote a week ahead of the referendum date in the direct presence of senior military officers, an order that ignores a voter’s right to secrecy.
“This is voter intimidation,” says Win Min. “It shows that the authorities are worried that these civil servants are likely to vote ‘no’ if they are free to do so.”
General’s Man Friday
The role of Myint Swe in this effort to swing the plebiscite the junta’s way has broader implications, since he is known as a close confidante of the South-east Asian country’s strongman, Senior General Than Shwe. Some Burmese analysts concur that what Myint Swe says “reflects Than Shwe’s mind.”
In fact, the army officer, in his late 50s, has played pivotal roles in the past to strengthen the military dictator’s grip on power in Burma, or Myanmar, as the junta has renamed it.
In early 2006, in his capacity as the head of the military division in Rangoon and as head of military intelligence, Myint Swe launched a campaign to track down citizens in Burma who were feeding the international media with information. This manhunt in an already oppressed country included targets that ranged from businessmen and civil servants to local journalists.
Myint Swe’s role to ensure an outcome favourable to the junta is no different to that of another confidante of Than Shwe, Maj. Gen. Htay Oo, the secretary-general of the USDA. The latter organisation, which Than Shwe founded in September 1993, has been given the lead role in the forthcoming referendum and the general elections to be held in 2010.
Legion of mafias
And Htay Oo’s role goes beyond ensuring that the USDA, which is officially reported to have 23 million members out of the country’s 54 million population, campaigns for a favourable vote. He is reportedly spearheading a programme of intimidation in the run-up to the plebiscite.
Currently, an old race course in downtown Rangoon, the Kyaik-Ka-San grounds, has been converted to a training centre for USDA toughs to learn such skills as beating, threatening and arresting civilians identified as opponents of the junta, says a Burmese source who has secured pictures of such sessions.
“Htay Oo is very close to Than Shwe and he is part of the junta’s campaign to intimidate voters into saying ‘yes’ at the referendum,” says Zin Linn, spokesman for the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma, the Burmese government in exile. “The training at the race course is under Htay Oo’s control. No wonder the people regard them as a mafia.”
“NLD members and pro-democracy activists have already been attacked by these USDA members,” Zin Linn added in an interview.
“There is going to be more force unleashed as the days for the referendum draw closer.’’
The USDA’s notoriety as another arm of Than Shwe’s oppressive regime was on display in September 2007, when it joined the military and riot police in the brutal crackdown of the pro-democracy protests, led by thousands of maroon-robed monks.
In May 2003, the USDA was also implicated in a bloody attack on NLD members, including its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, during a political campaign in Depayin. Nearly 70 NDL supporters were killed by the mob of USDA members and other junta supporters.
In fact, the military official who masterminded the Depayin attack – aimed at silencing the universally popular pro-democracy leader Suu Kyi, now under house arrest – was Gen. Soe Win, another Than Shwe ally. He was subsequently named “the Butcher of Depayin” by Burmese dissidents for his ruthlessness. But Than Shwe viewed his confidante differently, rewarding him with the role of prime minister following Khin Nyunt’s arrest.
Since it grabbed power in a March 1962 coup, the Burmese military has regularly served up officers prepared to unleash acts of repression as a pledge of loyalty to the dictator in power. Among the earliest in this Burmese military tradition was Brig. Gen. Sein Lwin. As a young commander, he gave soldiers the order to first shoot university students demonstrating and then to blow up the students’ union building at the Rangoon University with students trapped inside.
For such brutal acts in July 1962, Sein Lwin was dubbed “the Butcher of Rangoon” by the Burmese opposition at the time. Yet it hardly came in the way of his rise within the military regime under Gen. Ne Win.
Sein Lwin was rewarded for implementing his master’s policies as Myint Swe is being rewarded today. The latter is reported to be Than Shwe’s second favourite after Gen Thura Shwe Mann, the third-most powerful military officer in Burma and the one Than Shwe reportedly favours as his successor.
Source: IPS-OneWorld
Monday, 21 April 2008
Government staffs forced to sign pledge to cooperate on referendum
IMNA
18 Apr 2008 - Departmental officers of the Burmese government have been made to sign a pledge that they will work in coordination with the referendum commission to campaign to the people to cast the ‘Yes' vote.
A school administrator in Mon State, "We had to sign that we are going to cooperate and help them in the coming referendum". All staff members of schools and other departments were forced to sign.
"We will help out the commission in the polling booths and the referendum process in May", she said. Their signatures will be submitted to the top authorities.
Departmental offices in Mon State were forced to sign by their relevant ministry from the end of March.
To get the 'Yes' vote, the Burmese regime has not closed government offices for civilian staff members during the water festival even though it had declared closure during the festival.
After the Burmese regime ordered the closure for the duration of the water festival, the Township department officers were reordered not to close the office and stand by at the office by their concerned ministry.
According to some civilian department officers, the officers have to take the responsibility of explaining to their staff members about the new constitution.
"It was a mix up. We can't do our job well due to such contradictory orders," the school administrator said.
18 Apr 2008 - Departmental officers of the Burmese government have been made to sign a pledge that they will work in coordination with the referendum commission to campaign to the people to cast the ‘Yes' vote.
A school administrator in Mon State, "We had to sign that we are going to cooperate and help them in the coming referendum". All staff members of schools and other departments were forced to sign.
"We will help out the commission in the polling booths and the referendum process in May", she said. Their signatures will be submitted to the top authorities.
Departmental offices in Mon State were forced to sign by their relevant ministry from the end of March.
To get the 'Yes' vote, the Burmese regime has not closed government offices for civilian staff members during the water festival even though it had declared closure during the festival.
After the Burmese regime ordered the closure for the duration of the water festival, the Township department officers were reordered not to close the office and stand by at the office by their concerned ministry.
According to some civilian department officers, the officers have to take the responsibility of explaining to their staff members about the new constitution.
"It was a mix up. We can't do our job well due to such contradictory orders," the school administrator said.
Burmese embassy in Singapore to conduct absentee voting
Mizzima News
April 19, 2008
New Delhi – The Burmese embassy in Singapore has announced that it will hold absentee referendum voting at the end of April, and has reportedly sent out notices to Burmese citizens to come to the embassy premises to cast their votes.
In a letter sent to Burmese citizens, the embassy said it will hold absentee referendum voting from April 25 to 29. The letter, which is dated April 10, was signed by Kyaw Swe Tint, Consul of the Burmese embassy in Singapore.
The letter, a copy of which is with Mizzima, said Burmese citizens must bring copies of their passports or proof of identity. Reports said Singapore hosts at least 40,000 Burmese citizens with legal documents.
Meanwhile, the Singapore based Patriotic Exile Burmese Organisation, has urged Burmese citizens to cast the "No" vote as a protest against the current military rulers.
The group said, it has begun explaining to people the articles in the junta's draft constitution and urged them to reject it by voting "No'.
However, the group expressed concern over rumours that voters going to the embassy to vote will be asked to write down their passport number and national identity card numbers, which will help authorities identify voters.
"Vote rigging is almost certain even if we cast the 'No' vote. And some are afraid of casting the 'No' vote in the referendum after hearing the rumours that their passport number and National ID number will be noted down on the ballot paper. So they are undecided about going to the embassy for casting their votes. But we explained to them and many are convinced," Ko Kyaw Soe from the Patriotic Exile Burmese organization said.
A Burmese in Singapore said that the draft constitution has not yet been distributed in Singapore and inviting them to cast votes in the referendum is nothing but cheating them by forcing them to cast votes without studying the draft and knowing about the pros and cons of giving their consent to this draft.
"The constitution is an important document which must guarantee fundamental civic rights and human rights. It is not fair to cast votes in a referendum without studying the draft. So we have no other choice, but to cast 'No' votes in this referendum," he added.
The Patriotic Exile Burmese Organization said it will urge voters, authorities of Singapore, foreign embassies in Singapore, media groups and Burmese monks to monitor the voting at the embassy and call for counting of the votes on the same day and monitor the result.
"There are about 40,000 Burmese in Singapore. It will be ok if 35,000 cast 'No' votes and the remaining 5,000 cast 'Yes' votes on that day. This news will spread to Burma and influence the voting in Burma," Kyaw Soe said.
Similarly, Burmese citizens in Japan, US, UK, and Australia have been notified by the Burmese embassy for the dates of absentee referendum voting. However, the actual dates could not be confirmed as yet.
April 19, 2008
New Delhi – The Burmese embassy in Singapore has announced that it will hold absentee referendum voting at the end of April, and has reportedly sent out notices to Burmese citizens to come to the embassy premises to cast their votes.
In a letter sent to Burmese citizens, the embassy said it will hold absentee referendum voting from April 25 to 29. The letter, which is dated April 10, was signed by Kyaw Swe Tint, Consul of the Burmese embassy in Singapore.
The letter, a copy of which is with Mizzima, said Burmese citizens must bring copies of their passports or proof of identity. Reports said Singapore hosts at least 40,000 Burmese citizens with legal documents.
Meanwhile, the Singapore based Patriotic Exile Burmese Organisation, has urged Burmese citizens to cast the "No" vote as a protest against the current military rulers.
The group said, it has begun explaining to people the articles in the junta's draft constitution and urged them to reject it by voting "No'.
However, the group expressed concern over rumours that voters going to the embassy to vote will be asked to write down their passport number and national identity card numbers, which will help authorities identify voters.
"Vote rigging is almost certain even if we cast the 'No' vote. And some are afraid of casting the 'No' vote in the referendum after hearing the rumours that their passport number and National ID number will be noted down on the ballot paper. So they are undecided about going to the embassy for casting their votes. But we explained to them and many are convinced," Ko Kyaw Soe from the Patriotic Exile Burmese organization said.
A Burmese in Singapore said that the draft constitution has not yet been distributed in Singapore and inviting them to cast votes in the referendum is nothing but cheating them by forcing them to cast votes without studying the draft and knowing about the pros and cons of giving their consent to this draft.
"The constitution is an important document which must guarantee fundamental civic rights and human rights. It is not fair to cast votes in a referendum without studying the draft. So we have no other choice, but to cast 'No' votes in this referendum," he added.
The Patriotic Exile Burmese Organization said it will urge voters, authorities of Singapore, foreign embassies in Singapore, media groups and Burmese monks to monitor the voting at the embassy and call for counting of the votes on the same day and monitor the result.
"There are about 40,000 Burmese in Singapore. It will be ok if 35,000 cast 'No' votes and the remaining 5,000 cast 'Yes' votes on that day. This news will spread to Burma and influence the voting in Burma," Kyaw Soe said.
Similarly, Burmese citizens in Japan, US, UK, and Australia have been notified by the Burmese embassy for the dates of absentee referendum voting. However, the actual dates could not be confirmed as yet.
Upcoming political uncertainties hover over Burma
By Kavi Chongkittavorn
In less than three weeks the Burmese people will vote in a national referendum on the country's draft constitution.
April 21, 2008 - It will be a historic democratic battle between the iron-fisted government that wants to impose its rule and impoverished voters who want to be free. The draft constitution, which would give 25 per cent of parliament seats to the military, was recently completed after 15 years. Draft copies are now available in bookstores for 1000 kyats (Bt4,846) - something not all Burmese can afford.
Bangkok-based diplomats and Burmese living in exile around the world have predicted that voters will certainly reject the draft constitution. Growing resentment over the increased price of gas and oil, which triggered the saffron uprising last August, continues to mount and is currently being compounded with increases in the price of rice and other basic-food commodities.
Unfortunately, the exact count will never be known or publicised. The results - whatever they may be - will depend
totally on the whip or rather the imagination of junta leaders. Without international observers, the referendum would lack creditability and legitimacy. There is also a strong possibility that there could be further violence after the referendum if the junta goes against the people's will.
To the junta, public affirmation and legitimacy - even if it has been fabricated to the hilt - is necessary and considered a pivotal step to put its seven-point roadmap for democracy in place. At issue here are the various post-referendum scenarios and the outside world's reaction to them. Whatever happens would inevitably affect Burma's future and its people's aspirations for democracy, including the planned 2010 election. Despite pessimism, Asean, the UN and the international community continue to look for ways to make Burma more democratic and inclusive in future political processes.
They are now trying to gauge the junta leaders' political moves, which have been surprising so far. After repeatedly failing to engage the Burmese regime even before September's crackdown on monks, they have been looking for new ways to keep channels with the junta open.
De-linking politics from humanitarian and development assistance, the approach currently taken by the EU, could serve as a new modus operandi. The idea of punishing the regime, coupled with increasing assistance to those most vulnerable inside Burma, is gaining currency.
With the US continuing to impose harsher sanctions, the EU approach is obviously more attractive at this point. However, it is still too early to tell if this path will lead to more positive outcomes. In past months, vulnerable Burmese have benefited more from increased humanitarian and development assistance, especially in heath care and education, than before. As a matter of urgency, the EU should provide more anti-viral drugs for additional HIV/Aids patients beyond the current 10,000.
Asean's inability to convince Burma to comply with norms of collective responsibility and group interest has been appalling. For over a decade, the Burma debacle has sapped the grouping's energies and marred the grouping's prospects of cooperation with dialogue partners. As the current Asean chair, Singapore, has tried and subsequently failed to engage both Asean members and major powers in resolving the Burmese quagmire.
Burma's bitterness over Singapore's handling of the political fallout from the September crackdown remains evident. The cold shoulder that Burma has been giving UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari over the past six months is linked to his aborted plan to brief East Asian leaders at November's Asean Summit in Singapore.
But the UN remains crucial for any future settlement and rehabilitation in Burma. With continued coordination between US, UK and France, the council is expected to add Burma to its future agenda. A tougher and more binding resolution could be expected.
In the previous council's discussion last year, China and Russia vetoed the resolution calling for sanctions. Given the current international political environment, there could be further trade-offs among the council's members.
Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's dealings with Burma have been quite exceptional. He has had personal correspondence with the reclusive General Than Shwe for quite some time. But it was only last week that the president's office had enough confidence to inform the media that Yudhoyono's efforts were not all in vain and that the general has answered his mail.
In his letter, Than Shwe assured Yudhoyono of the continuing democratic process in his country and pledged to continue communicating with him. "This is a unique process as every one of the president's letters has been replied to by General Than Shwe," said presidential spokesman Dino Patti Djalal.
It remains to be seen whether this "unique process" will lead to more tangible progress. After all, Than Shwe is still the leader who decides everything in Burma. With a presidential election scheduled for next year, Yudhoyono is also pondering his own political legacy. As Asean's largest member, Indonesia carries weight with whatever plans it undertakes, especially on regional issues.
To back up Yudhoyono's personal initiative, the Indonesian foreign ministry has fine-tuned a peace plan for Burma that would involve initially informal discussions among a handful of key stakeholders. It is essentially a mechanism similar to the informal talks held in Jakarta in the early 1990s to end the Cambodian conflict. Indonesia skilfully played the role of mediator and employed a strategy that allowed rival Cambodian groups to meet and subsequently agree on common ground, which eventually led to the Paris peace talks.
Before it is formally proposed to Asean, Indonesia wants to make sure that it has the support of its colleagues and the international community for a Burmese peace plan. China has already supported this peace plan and soon Asean would make its position known.
Source: The Nation
In less than three weeks the Burmese people will vote in a national referendum on the country's draft constitution.
April 21, 2008 - It will be a historic democratic battle between the iron-fisted government that wants to impose its rule and impoverished voters who want to be free. The draft constitution, which would give 25 per cent of parliament seats to the military, was recently completed after 15 years. Draft copies are now available in bookstores for 1000 kyats (Bt4,846) - something not all Burmese can afford.
Bangkok-based diplomats and Burmese living in exile around the world have predicted that voters will certainly reject the draft constitution. Growing resentment over the increased price of gas and oil, which triggered the saffron uprising last August, continues to mount and is currently being compounded with increases in the price of rice and other basic-food commodities.
Unfortunately, the exact count will never be known or publicised. The results - whatever they may be - will depend
totally on the whip or rather the imagination of junta leaders. Without international observers, the referendum would lack creditability and legitimacy. There is also a strong possibility that there could be further violence after the referendum if the junta goes against the people's will.
To the junta, public affirmation and legitimacy - even if it has been fabricated to the hilt - is necessary and considered a pivotal step to put its seven-point roadmap for democracy in place. At issue here are the various post-referendum scenarios and the outside world's reaction to them. Whatever happens would inevitably affect Burma's future and its people's aspirations for democracy, including the planned 2010 election. Despite pessimism, Asean, the UN and the international community continue to look for ways to make Burma more democratic and inclusive in future political processes.
They are now trying to gauge the junta leaders' political moves, which have been surprising so far. After repeatedly failing to engage the Burmese regime even before September's crackdown on monks, they have been looking for new ways to keep channels with the junta open.
De-linking politics from humanitarian and development assistance, the approach currently taken by the EU, could serve as a new modus operandi. The idea of punishing the regime, coupled with increasing assistance to those most vulnerable inside Burma, is gaining currency.
With the US continuing to impose harsher sanctions, the EU approach is obviously more attractive at this point. However, it is still too early to tell if this path will lead to more positive outcomes. In past months, vulnerable Burmese have benefited more from increased humanitarian and development assistance, especially in heath care and education, than before. As a matter of urgency, the EU should provide more anti-viral drugs for additional HIV/Aids patients beyond the current 10,000.
Asean's inability to convince Burma to comply with norms of collective responsibility and group interest has been appalling. For over a decade, the Burma debacle has sapped the grouping's energies and marred the grouping's prospects of cooperation with dialogue partners. As the current Asean chair, Singapore, has tried and subsequently failed to engage both Asean members and major powers in resolving the Burmese quagmire.
Burma's bitterness over Singapore's handling of the political fallout from the September crackdown remains evident. The cold shoulder that Burma has been giving UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari over the past six months is linked to his aborted plan to brief East Asian leaders at November's Asean Summit in Singapore.
But the UN remains crucial for any future settlement and rehabilitation in Burma. With continued coordination between US, UK and France, the council is expected to add Burma to its future agenda. A tougher and more binding resolution could be expected.
In the previous council's discussion last year, China and Russia vetoed the resolution calling for sanctions. Given the current international political environment, there could be further trade-offs among the council's members.
Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's dealings with Burma have been quite exceptional. He has had personal correspondence with the reclusive General Than Shwe for quite some time. But it was only last week that the president's office had enough confidence to inform the media that Yudhoyono's efforts were not all in vain and that the general has answered his mail.
In his letter, Than Shwe assured Yudhoyono of the continuing democratic process in his country and pledged to continue communicating with him. "This is a unique process as every one of the president's letters has been replied to by General Than Shwe," said presidential spokesman Dino Patti Djalal.
It remains to be seen whether this "unique process" will lead to more tangible progress. After all, Than Shwe is still the leader who decides everything in Burma. With a presidential election scheduled for next year, Yudhoyono is also pondering his own political legacy. As Asean's largest member, Indonesia carries weight with whatever plans it undertakes, especially on regional issues.
To back up Yudhoyono's personal initiative, the Indonesian foreign ministry has fine-tuned a peace plan for Burma that would involve initially informal discussions among a handful of key stakeholders. It is essentially a mechanism similar to the informal talks held in Jakarta in the early 1990s to end the Cambodian conflict. Indonesia skilfully played the role of mediator and employed a strategy that allowed rival Cambodian groups to meet and subsequently agree on common ground, which eventually led to the Paris peace talks.
Before it is formally proposed to Asean, Indonesia wants to make sure that it has the support of its colleagues and the international community for a Burmese peace plan. China has already supported this peace plan and soon Asean would make its position known.
Source: The Nation
Voices silenced in Myanmar vote campaign
21 April, 2008
YANGON: In military-run Myanmar, the junta’s campaign for the proposed draft constitution is in full swing while opposing voices are kept silent, but many people are not convinced by the generals’ promises.
Three weeks ahead of the May 10 referendum on the charter, front pages of state press scream in bold headlines: “Let’s vote Yes for national interest.”
Songs extolling the new proposed constitution, which was drafted by a committee hand-picked by the generals, fill the prime-time airwaves of government-owned television and radio stations.
The draft constitution book is now available in many bookstores in Yangon, albeit at a price of nearly $1 – far beyond the means of most people in this impoverished country.
Than Than, a 45-year-old housewife in the economic hub Yangon, has no plans to splash out for the hefty 194-page basic law.
“We don’t even need to read that book. Even a housewife like me has enough experience under military rule. I think it was just prepared to secure their power,” she said.
The regime says the referendum will pave the way for multi-party elections in 2010.
But activists say the constitution was drafted with no public input, and simply enshrines the military’s role in the country it has ruled for nearly half a century.
While barely a day goes by without the appearance in local press of poems, cartoons and editorials urging people to vote “Yes”, efforts by pro-democracy activists to campaign against the charter have been quashed.
Detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) party is urging people to vote down the charter, but said last week that their activities were being curtailed, sometimes violently.
In the western town of Sittwe on Tuesday, at least 23 people wearing T-shirts bearing just one word – “No” – were arrested, the party said.
Official NLD documents were confiscated by authorities, they said, while local party organisers had been detained and interrogated.
Amid the tense atmosphere, people were weighing up their choice in the first poll to be held in Myanmar in 18 years.
“People are so stubborn. They should be aware that if we vote ‘Yes’, the military will step down in two years, if not it will take another 10 years,” said a Myanmar engineer who works in Singapore.
The proposed constitution reserves one quarter of seats in both chambers of Parliament for military members, while some key ministries including home affairs will also be controlled exclusively by the army.
Aung San Suu Kyi would be barred from running for president under the new constitution because she was married to a foreigner.
Win, a 73-year-old former socialist party member, said it reminded him of the period after the military first grabbed power in 1962, headed by Ne Win.
“Many army officials including General Ne Win changed uniforms and took up positions in country’s administration,” he said.
Many people in Myanmar were unwilling to discuss how they plan to vote out of fear of repercussions from the regime, and some are afraid that their votes too will be monitored by the junta.
“It would be dangerous for us if we vote ‘No’ because somebody might watch what we vote for at polling places”, said 59-year-old Ye Ye.
Analysts have warned that the generals will do anything to prevent a “No” vote, and have cautioned that the poll will likely not be free and fair.
The last time the junta called open elections in 1990, the NLD won by a landslide in a result the regime refused to recognise.
Instead, the generals kept Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest, where she has remained for 12 of the last 18 years.
“I don’t think they will clear out even if the result is ‘No’, but I just want to show clearly that I don’t want them anymore,” said a 38-year-old woman. “So although there is not much hope for voting ‘No’, I will just vote ‘No’ anyway.”
Source: AFP-Gulf Times
YANGON: In military-run Myanmar, the junta’s campaign for the proposed draft constitution is in full swing while opposing voices are kept silent, but many people are not convinced by the generals’ promises.
Three weeks ahead of the May 10 referendum on the charter, front pages of state press scream in bold headlines: “Let’s vote Yes for national interest.”
Songs extolling the new proposed constitution, which was drafted by a committee hand-picked by the generals, fill the prime-time airwaves of government-owned television and radio stations.
The draft constitution book is now available in many bookstores in Yangon, albeit at a price of nearly $1 – far beyond the means of most people in this impoverished country.
Than Than, a 45-year-old housewife in the economic hub Yangon, has no plans to splash out for the hefty 194-page basic law.
“We don’t even need to read that book. Even a housewife like me has enough experience under military rule. I think it was just prepared to secure their power,” she said.
The regime says the referendum will pave the way for multi-party elections in 2010.
But activists say the constitution was drafted with no public input, and simply enshrines the military’s role in the country it has ruled for nearly half a century.
While barely a day goes by without the appearance in local press of poems, cartoons and editorials urging people to vote “Yes”, efforts by pro-democracy activists to campaign against the charter have been quashed.
Detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) party is urging people to vote down the charter, but said last week that their activities were being curtailed, sometimes violently.
In the western town of Sittwe on Tuesday, at least 23 people wearing T-shirts bearing just one word – “No” – were arrested, the party said.
Official NLD documents were confiscated by authorities, they said, while local party organisers had been detained and interrogated.
Amid the tense atmosphere, people were weighing up their choice in the first poll to be held in Myanmar in 18 years.
“People are so stubborn. They should be aware that if we vote ‘Yes’, the military will step down in two years, if not it will take another 10 years,” said a Myanmar engineer who works in Singapore.
The proposed constitution reserves one quarter of seats in both chambers of Parliament for military members, while some key ministries including home affairs will also be controlled exclusively by the army.
Aung San Suu Kyi would be barred from running for president under the new constitution because she was married to a foreigner.
Win, a 73-year-old former socialist party member, said it reminded him of the period after the military first grabbed power in 1962, headed by Ne Win.
“Many army officials including General Ne Win changed uniforms and took up positions in country’s administration,” he said.
Many people in Myanmar were unwilling to discuss how they plan to vote out of fear of repercussions from the regime, and some are afraid that their votes too will be monitored by the junta.
“It would be dangerous for us if we vote ‘No’ because somebody might watch what we vote for at polling places”, said 59-year-old Ye Ye.
Analysts have warned that the generals will do anything to prevent a “No” vote, and have cautioned that the poll will likely not be free and fair.
The last time the junta called open elections in 1990, the NLD won by a landslide in a result the regime refused to recognise.
Instead, the generals kept Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest, where she has remained for 12 of the last 18 years.
“I don’t think they will clear out even if the result is ‘No’, but I just want to show clearly that I don’t want them anymore,” said a 38-year-old woman. “So although there is not much hope for voting ‘No’, I will just vote ‘No’ anyway.”
Source: AFP-Gulf Times
Myanmar arrests keep pressure on "no" campaign
By Aung Hla Tun
April 20, 2008, YANGON (Reuters) - Myanmar's junta is intensifying its campaign of intimidation against dissidents, and conducting a propaganda drive, to ensure its new constitution gets passed in a referendum next month, opposition leaders said on Sunday.
At least 60 people have been arrested in Sittwe, capital of northwest Rakhine state, since last week's traditional New Year celebrations for wearing T-shirts urging people to vote "No" in the May 10 plebiscite.
"More than 30 have been released but at least 20 are still in detention, and the arrests are still going on," Ko Thein Hlaing, a senior member of the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) in Rakhine, told Reuters.
The NLD, whose leader Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi remains under house arrest, is leading the campaign to reject the constitution, which has been drafted over the last 14 years by an army-picked committee.
The NLD boycotted the process because of Suu Kyi's detention, and refuses to accept some of the main clauses of the charter, in particular those guaranteeing the army 25 percent of seats in parliament and the right to suspend the constitution at will.
Other underground opposition groups are also pushing for the former Burma's 53 million people to reject the charter, most notably the "88 Generation Students" who led a brutally crushed 1988 uprising against decades of military rule.
In addition to the Sittwe arrests, NLD spokesman Nyan Win said one party official had been arrested in Yangon for putting up a "No" poster, and several other party members had been beaten or assaulted for campaigning.
Perhaps mindful of 1990, when they allowed an election only to suffer a humiliating defeat -- which they then ignored -- to Suu Kyi's NLD, the generals are also pulling out all the propaganda stops to ensure the charter passes.
State-run MRTV has been broadcasting programmes and songs calling for a "Yes", while government workers and soldiers have also received orders on how to vote.
Regime-controlled newspapers have also been carrying slogans, articles, commentaries and poems urging people to vote in favour.
"To approve the State Constitution is a national duty of the entire people today," the New Light of Myanmar, the junta's official mouthpiece, blared in a front-page headline.
Inside, the paper carried a sinister commentary accusing dissidents of being "the axe-handles and mouthpiece of the colonialists".
(Writing by Ed Cropley; Editing by Bill Tarrant)
April 20, 2008, YANGON (Reuters) - Myanmar's junta is intensifying its campaign of intimidation against dissidents, and conducting a propaganda drive, to ensure its new constitution gets passed in a referendum next month, opposition leaders said on Sunday.
At least 60 people have been arrested in Sittwe, capital of northwest Rakhine state, since last week's traditional New Year celebrations for wearing T-shirts urging people to vote "No" in the May 10 plebiscite.
"More than 30 have been released but at least 20 are still in detention, and the arrests are still going on," Ko Thein Hlaing, a senior member of the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) in Rakhine, told Reuters.
The NLD, whose leader Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi remains under house arrest, is leading the campaign to reject the constitution, which has been drafted over the last 14 years by an army-picked committee.
The NLD boycotted the process because of Suu Kyi's detention, and refuses to accept some of the main clauses of the charter, in particular those guaranteeing the army 25 percent of seats in parliament and the right to suspend the constitution at will.
Other underground opposition groups are also pushing for the former Burma's 53 million people to reject the charter, most notably the "88 Generation Students" who led a brutally crushed 1988 uprising against decades of military rule.
In addition to the Sittwe arrests, NLD spokesman Nyan Win said one party official had been arrested in Yangon for putting up a "No" poster, and several other party members had been beaten or assaulted for campaigning.
Perhaps mindful of 1990, when they allowed an election only to suffer a humiliating defeat -- which they then ignored -- to Suu Kyi's NLD, the generals are also pulling out all the propaganda stops to ensure the charter passes.
State-run MRTV has been broadcasting programmes and songs calling for a "Yes", while government workers and soldiers have also received orders on how to vote.
Regime-controlled newspapers have also been carrying slogans, articles, commentaries and poems urging people to vote in favour.
"To approve the State Constitution is a national duty of the entire people today," the New Light of Myanmar, the junta's official mouthpiece, blared in a front-page headline.
Inside, the paper carried a sinister commentary accusing dissidents of being "the axe-handles and mouthpiece of the colonialists".
(Writing by Ed Cropley; Editing by Bill Tarrant)
Sunday, 20 April 2008
Friday, 18 April 2008
Myanmar monks pray for democracy
BANGKOK, Thailand (AP) - Monks who helped lead last year's protests against Myanmar's junta urged the country to mark the traditional New Year on Thursday with prayers for democracy.
The All Burma Monks Alliance, a coalition of activist monks in Myanmar, denounced the country's military leaders for having "mistreated and abused the religion and Buddhist monks" during its crackdown on peaceful protests.
In a statement, the alliance called on the devoutly Buddhist country to pray "for the success of the democratic movement and to pray that those who committed sins against the religion ... face retribution."
The alliance was instrumental in organizing last September's pro-democracy protests. Most of its leaders were arrested or are in hiding. The statement with the group's seal was sent by e-mail from the same address it has used in the past.
Calls for democratic reforms in Myanmar intensified after the junta quashed the protests. The United Nations estimates at least 31 people were killed and thousands more detained during the crackdown.
The All Burma Monks Alliance, a coalition of activist monks in Myanmar, denounced the country's military leaders for having "mistreated and abused the religion and Buddhist monks" during its crackdown on peaceful protests.
In a statement, the alliance called on the devoutly Buddhist country to pray "for the success of the democratic movement and to pray that those who committed sins against the religion ... face retribution."
The alliance was instrumental in organizing last September's pro-democracy protests. Most of its leaders were arrested or are in hiding. The statement with the group's seal was sent by e-mail from the same address it has used in the past.
Calls for democratic reforms in Myanmar intensified after the junta quashed the protests. The United Nations estimates at least 31 people were killed and thousands more detained during the crackdown.
Cracks in constitution divide Myanmar
By Marwaan Macan-Markar
Asia Times
BANGKOK - Myanmar's military regime is under fire for the language in a new constitution to be approved at a national referendum on May 10. The full text of the charter was made public only a month ahead of the plebiscite.
Articles that have aroused anger deal with attempts by the junta to legitimize its role as the supreme political authority in the troubled country. Such clauses make the constitution's promise of a new democratic landscape meaningless, say critics.
Article No 445 tops the list of concerns for the Burma Lawyers' Council (BLC) and groups like the US-based Global Justice Center (GJC). "No legal action shall be taken against those (either individuals or groups who are members of SLORC and SPDC) who officially carried out their duties according to their responsibilities," states this article.
Tha SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council) and the SPDC (State Peace and Development Council) are the official names the governing arm of the regime has been known by since military leaders staged a power-grabbing coup in 1988. The regime that it overthrew was itself military-based and had come to power following a 1962 coup.
"That clause is to provide immunity to the junta for all the human rights violations it has committed since 1988," says Aung Htoo, general secretary of the BLC. "The new constitution will be meaningless if the perpetrators of violence can enjoy immunity after it is approved. What is the difference for the people, who are the victims? Nothing."
It also undermines the hope of Myanmar transforming from a dictatorship to a democracy, he explained in an interview. "A constitution for a post-conflict society has to give justice and genuine national reconciliation a priority. That is what happened in South Africa. But the new constitution offers little to move Burma [Myanmar] away from its current conflicts."
On Monday, the BLC and GJC issued a statement denouncing the military regime for trying to evade "criminal prosecution" through the constitution. "There is ample evidence that the military regime has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and potentially even genocide through forced relocations, torture, rape, enforced disappearance and extermination," they said.
Leaders of the Myanmar's ethnic communities are perturbed that the junta's much-vaunted promise to create regional assemblies through the constitution amounts to essentially toothless legislative bodies. The new charter is set to create 14 assemblies in areas that are home to the major ethnic groups, marking the first offer of political space to the non-Burmese minorities since the country gained independence from the British in 1948.
"The regional assemblies will be under the junta, which has the power to appoint a fourth of the members and the chief minister for the region," says David Taw, joint general secretary of the Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC), an umbrella body for the seven major ethnic groups. "Most of the people would like to choose their own chief minister through a ballot."
The space for economic activity to meet the needs of the ethnic communities is also restrained, Taw added in an interview. "The local people will not be able to pursue their economic activity freely. It is a setback to our hope of achieving a federal system of government."
The unresolved question of genuine political representation for Myanmar's ethnic communities has dogged the country since independence, resulting in bloody separatist conflicts that have lasted over six decades. "The attempt to adopt a constitution to lengthen the military dictatorship will [create] more problems," the ENC declared in a recent statement. "It will also lengthen the 60-year-long civil war caused by breaching the self-determination rights of the ethnic nationalities."
The current constitution has been 15 years in the making. Some say the delay was created by the junta to stall the country's democratic parties, led by detained Aung San Suu Kyi, in claiming a stake in running the country. The junta refused to recognize the outcome of a parliamentary election in 1990, which Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) won in a landslide. Instead, the military created a national convention soon after to draft a new constitution.
The current charter is Myanmar's third, following the 1947 document, which was drafted by the country's resistance fighters ahead of independence from British colonialism, and the 1974 document, which was shaped by the military dictator at the time, General Ne Win.
The second constitution, which established a one-party state to promote a socialist agenda, was torn up in 1988 by the current military regime. Consequently, the SLORC and SPDC governed without constitutional authority and were seen as lacking political legitimacy by a domestic and a growing international constituency.
The only advance the new constitution has made over the 1974 document is its promise to create a multi-party democracy. But the prospect of such inclusive features has been undermined by the junta's move to limit the drafting of the charter to military-appointed delegates and its harsh restrictions on public discussion of the document.
"The military has made sure that any amendments to the constitution introduced by political parties in the future will be harder to be approved," says Aung Naing Oo, an independent Myanmar political analyst living in exile in Thailand. "The conflict in the country will go on without the prospect of change and improvement."
The likelihood of the constitution adding to the political fires already burning in Myanmar arises from the deep divisions that plague the country. "Burma is a different country today than it was in 1974. When the constitution was passed then, we were not so divided," Aung Naing Oo added. "Now it is different, and now the entire world is also watching."
The junta, for its part, appears confident that it has drafted the best constitution for Myanmar. "Approving the constitution is the responsibility of all citizens in the country. All who support our national interests must vote in favor," declared the page-one headline of a state-run newspaper on the week the referendum campaign was officially launched.
Asia Times
BANGKOK - Myanmar's military regime is under fire for the language in a new constitution to be approved at a national referendum on May 10. The full text of the charter was made public only a month ahead of the plebiscite.
Articles that have aroused anger deal with attempts by the junta to legitimize its role as the supreme political authority in the troubled country. Such clauses make the constitution's promise of a new democratic landscape meaningless, say critics.
Article No 445 tops the list of concerns for the Burma Lawyers' Council (BLC) and groups like the US-based Global Justice Center (GJC). "No legal action shall be taken against those (either individuals or groups who are members of SLORC and SPDC) who officially carried out their duties according to their responsibilities," states this article.
Tha SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council) and the SPDC (State Peace and Development Council) are the official names the governing arm of the regime has been known by since military leaders staged a power-grabbing coup in 1988. The regime that it overthrew was itself military-based and had come to power following a 1962 coup.
"That clause is to provide immunity to the junta for all the human rights violations it has committed since 1988," says Aung Htoo, general secretary of the BLC. "The new constitution will be meaningless if the perpetrators of violence can enjoy immunity after it is approved. What is the difference for the people, who are the victims? Nothing."
It also undermines the hope of Myanmar transforming from a dictatorship to a democracy, he explained in an interview. "A constitution for a post-conflict society has to give justice and genuine national reconciliation a priority. That is what happened in South Africa. But the new constitution offers little to move Burma [Myanmar] away from its current conflicts."
On Monday, the BLC and GJC issued a statement denouncing the military regime for trying to evade "criminal prosecution" through the constitution. "There is ample evidence that the military regime has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity and potentially even genocide through forced relocations, torture, rape, enforced disappearance and extermination," they said.
Leaders of the Myanmar's ethnic communities are perturbed that the junta's much-vaunted promise to create regional assemblies through the constitution amounts to essentially toothless legislative bodies. The new charter is set to create 14 assemblies in areas that are home to the major ethnic groups, marking the first offer of political space to the non-Burmese minorities since the country gained independence from the British in 1948.
"The regional assemblies will be under the junta, which has the power to appoint a fourth of the members and the chief minister for the region," says David Taw, joint general secretary of the Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC), an umbrella body for the seven major ethnic groups. "Most of the people would like to choose their own chief minister through a ballot."
The space for economic activity to meet the needs of the ethnic communities is also restrained, Taw added in an interview. "The local people will not be able to pursue their economic activity freely. It is a setback to our hope of achieving a federal system of government."
The unresolved question of genuine political representation for Myanmar's ethnic communities has dogged the country since independence, resulting in bloody separatist conflicts that have lasted over six decades. "The attempt to adopt a constitution to lengthen the military dictatorship will [create] more problems," the ENC declared in a recent statement. "It will also lengthen the 60-year-long civil war caused by breaching the self-determination rights of the ethnic nationalities."
The current constitution has been 15 years in the making. Some say the delay was created by the junta to stall the country's democratic parties, led by detained Aung San Suu Kyi, in claiming a stake in running the country. The junta refused to recognize the outcome of a parliamentary election in 1990, which Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) won in a landslide. Instead, the military created a national convention soon after to draft a new constitution.
The current charter is Myanmar's third, following the 1947 document, which was drafted by the country's resistance fighters ahead of independence from British colonialism, and the 1974 document, which was shaped by the military dictator at the time, General Ne Win.
The second constitution, which established a one-party state to promote a socialist agenda, was torn up in 1988 by the current military regime. Consequently, the SLORC and SPDC governed without constitutional authority and were seen as lacking political legitimacy by a domestic and a growing international constituency.
The only advance the new constitution has made over the 1974 document is its promise to create a multi-party democracy. But the prospect of such inclusive features has been undermined by the junta's move to limit the drafting of the charter to military-appointed delegates and its harsh restrictions on public discussion of the document.
"The military has made sure that any amendments to the constitution introduced by political parties in the future will be harder to be approved," says Aung Naing Oo, an independent Myanmar political analyst living in exile in Thailand. "The conflict in the country will go on without the prospect of change and improvement."
The likelihood of the constitution adding to the political fires already burning in Myanmar arises from the deep divisions that plague the country. "Burma is a different country today than it was in 1974. When the constitution was passed then, we were not so divided," Aung Naing Oo added. "Now it is different, and now the entire world is also watching."
The junta, for its part, appears confident that it has drafted the best constitution for Myanmar. "Approving the constitution is the responsibility of all citizens in the country. All who support our national interests must vote in favor," declared the page-one headline of a state-run newspaper on the week the referendum campaign was officially launched.
European Parliament Calls for Pressure on Junta
By WAI MOE
The Irrawaddy News
The European Parliament says the Burmese referendum on May 10 is a move to give the military power and keep opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi out of politics, according to its press release on April 16.
The statement also noted that “pressure within Burma is certain to mount” as the date of the referendum draws nearer.
A Dutch member of the European Parliament, Thijs Berman, who chaired the parliament’s hearing on Burma on April 2, said the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) should launch an inquiry into human rights abuses in Burma and said he hoped the UNSC would start bringing human rights violations in Burma before the International Criminal Court.
He suggested the European Parliament adopt a resolution on Burma at its next meeting. He also called for economic pressure to be applied to international companies who undertake business with the Burmese regime.
While the official Burmese media are calling on voters to approve the constitution on May 10, dissident groups, such as Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy and the 88 Generation Students group, are urging the Burmese public to vote against the constitution.
A Portuguese member of the European Parliament, Jose Ribeiro e Castro, called on the European Union (EU) to give more support to Suu Kyi—a former winner of the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize. He also urged the EU to have a coherent strategy in relations with China and India in order to coordinate an international response to the regime.
Glenys Kinnock of the British Labour Party said any development assistance to Burma should be linked to political progress—part of a wider call by many parliament members for “smarter sanctions.”
The EU’s special envoy to Burma, Piero Fassino, told European Parliament members at the hearing that the junta had refused a UN plan that would lead to democracy and that the plan stressed the importance of dialogue and recognition.
The issue of Burma has also been discussed at a conference of the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats-Alliance of Liberal and Democrats for Europe, which is being held from April 15 to April 17 in the Belgian capital, Brussels. Fassino is one of the speakers at the conference.
Win Min, a Burmese political analyst based in Chiang Mai, Thailand, said that after the September uprising in Burma, the EU’s stand on Burma had been stronger and that the EU is the second most influential institution after the United States in terms of pressuring the Burmese junta.
“EU pressure is an important factor because it has two permanent members of the UNSC, as well as good economic and political ties with China,” he said. “However, the EU’s decision is dependent upon a caucus decision among its 27 member states,” Win Min noted.
Meanwhile, Burmese authorities in Sittwe, northwestern Burma, arrested 23 democracy activists during the Burmese New Year festival as they marched peacefully wearing t-shirts bearing the slogan “No,” which have become increasingly popular as a sign of protest against the junta’s constitution.
The junta’s planned referendum on a new constitution will be reduced to “a mere ritual” unless international observers are allowed to monitor the vote, said the outgoing UN human rights investigator on Burma, Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, on Monday.
“How can you believe in this referendum?” Pinheiro added. “How can you have a referendum without any of the basic freedoms?”
The Irrawaddy News
The European Parliament says the Burmese referendum on May 10 is a move to give the military power and keep opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi out of politics, according to its press release on April 16.
The statement also noted that “pressure within Burma is certain to mount” as the date of the referendum draws nearer.
A Dutch member of the European Parliament, Thijs Berman, who chaired the parliament’s hearing on Burma on April 2, said the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) should launch an inquiry into human rights abuses in Burma and said he hoped the UNSC would start bringing human rights violations in Burma before the International Criminal Court.
He suggested the European Parliament adopt a resolution on Burma at its next meeting. He also called for economic pressure to be applied to international companies who undertake business with the Burmese regime.
While the official Burmese media are calling on voters to approve the constitution on May 10, dissident groups, such as Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy and the 88 Generation Students group, are urging the Burmese public to vote against the constitution.
A Portuguese member of the European Parliament, Jose Ribeiro e Castro, called on the European Union (EU) to give more support to Suu Kyi—a former winner of the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize. He also urged the EU to have a coherent strategy in relations with China and India in order to coordinate an international response to the regime.
Glenys Kinnock of the British Labour Party said any development assistance to Burma should be linked to political progress—part of a wider call by many parliament members for “smarter sanctions.”
The EU’s special envoy to Burma, Piero Fassino, told European Parliament members at the hearing that the junta had refused a UN plan that would lead to democracy and that the plan stressed the importance of dialogue and recognition.
The issue of Burma has also been discussed at a conference of the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats-Alliance of Liberal and Democrats for Europe, which is being held from April 15 to April 17 in the Belgian capital, Brussels. Fassino is one of the speakers at the conference.
Win Min, a Burmese political analyst based in Chiang Mai, Thailand, said that after the September uprising in Burma, the EU’s stand on Burma had been stronger and that the EU is the second most influential institution after the United States in terms of pressuring the Burmese junta.
“EU pressure is an important factor because it has two permanent members of the UNSC, as well as good economic and political ties with China,” he said. “However, the EU’s decision is dependent upon a caucus decision among its 27 member states,” Win Min noted.
Meanwhile, Burmese authorities in Sittwe, northwestern Burma, arrested 23 democracy activists during the Burmese New Year festival as they marched peacefully wearing t-shirts bearing the slogan “No,” which have become increasingly popular as a sign of protest against the junta’s constitution.
The junta’s planned referendum on a new constitution will be reduced to “a mere ritual” unless international observers are allowed to monitor the vote, said the outgoing UN human rights investigator on Burma, Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, on Monday.
“How can you believe in this referendum?” Pinheiro added. “How can you have a referendum without any of the basic freedoms?”
Exile, Canadian-Style
By AUNG ZAW
The Irrawaddy News
Myo Min pointed to the on-board computer in his police patrol car. “This is how we track down the bad guys,” he boasted, clearly relishing his newfound role as a high-tech crime fighter.
But this is Canada, and bureaucracy soon stood in the way of his desire to show off. He couldn’t let me into the vehicle, he said, without getting permission from his supervisor at least 48 hours in advance. I did, however, notice that he was playing a song by Burmese rock star Zaw Win Htut in the car’s cassette player.
It was a brutally cold night, and Myo Min was on duty patrolling the streets of Ottawa, doing his bit to keep the Canadian capital safe from drug traffickers and drunk drivers and free of domestic violence and illegal weapons.
Stopping by the apartment where I was staying with a friend, he adjusted his bulletproof vest and started telling me about his journey from the jungles of the Thai-Burmese border to Canada. Every few minutes, our conversation was interrupted by radio communication from his walkie-talkie.
Twenty years ago, Myo Min was one of thousands of young Burmese who left their country to resist a regime that had just seized power in a bloody coup. He joined the All Burma Students’ Democratic Front (ABSDF), a student army formed in the jungles of eastern Burma, but after several years, he grew disillusioned with the armed struggle and factional infighting within the students’ army. He left for resettlement in Canada in 1997.
In 2003, he joined the police force in Ottawa. These days, he doesn’t talk much about bringing down the regime in Burma. But like many former activists living abroad, he still dreams of returning to his homeland someday.
According to Kevin McLeod, an active member of Canadian Friends of Burma (CFOB) and self-described “unemployed student,” many Burmese asylum seekers in Canada are struggling to keep their heads above water in their new country.
“They have emotional stress and frustration and suffer from depression,” he said of some of his many Burmese friends and acquaintances.
He noted that Burmese who migrated to Canada in the 1960s were better educated and more financially secure than those who migrated after fleeing political persecution in 1988. Most of these later immigrants came with nothing and have had to rebuild their lives from scratch, making integration much more difficult for them.
McLeod is perhaps uniquely sympathetic to the difficulties faced by Burmese living in Canada. His Burmese friends jokingly call him a “Canadian refugee,” because like many former student activists from Burma, he hasn’t completed his university studies and is often broke. But he is an avid student of Burmese affairs, reading many books on the country and spending countless hours talking with Burmese friends, on whose couches he often finds himself spending the night.
In some cases, the failure to adapt to life in Canada has ended in tragedy. Several years ago, a young activist named Aung Ko jumped off Niagara Falls. Close friends said that he suffered from depression and may have had a drug-abuse problem. Later, another young Burmese activist hung himself in his room in Toronto.
But all is not doom and gloom for Burmese living in Canada. Tin Maung Htoo, the current executive director of CFOB, said that Canada offers great opportunities to Burmese.
As former members of Burma’s clandestine high-school student union, Tin Maung Htoo and his close friend and fellow CFOB member Toe Kyi have followed a familiar trajectory from student activism inside Burma to eventual third-country resettlement.
But in their case, they managed to avoid imprisonment in Burma—a common fate among activists—only to end up spending three years in the Special Detention Center in Bangkok for attempting to protest against the Salween dam project in 1993.
The Thai authorities refused to release Tin Maung Htoo and Toe Kyi onto Thai soil, so the two friends finally agreed to go to Canada. They were taken directly from the detention center to the airport.
Tin Maung Htoo, who studied at the University of Western ontario, said that he especially appreciates the educational opportunities in Canada, both for himself and his children. He also thinks he is lucky because he has been able to continue his involvement in the Burmese pro-democracy movement. These days, he said, he can go to Parliament to meet politicians and senior foreign ministry officials to discuss Burma and Canadian foreign policy. Several years ago, he said, this would have been impossible. “Doors were closed and we were blocked.” But under Tin Maung Htoo, CFOB has become an effective lobby group.
But Tin Maung Htoo’s friend, Toe Kyi, was more skeptical about how well Canadians and Burmese really understand each other. He recounted how the pastor at the church where he stayed when he first arrived in Canada attempted to convert him to Christianity. When it came time for the baptism, the pastor asked Toe Kyi if he could forgive his enemies, including the military leaders in Burma. He shook his head to indicate that he would never forgive the generals who had ruined his country, and the ceremony came to an abrupt end. He added, with a touch of chagrin, that he saw many other Burmese activists convert to Christianity in Thailand or Canada just to ensure their survival.
Today, Toe Kyi and his Burmese wife and child enjoy their life in Canada, where his political interests have expanded over the years. In their living room, Toe Kyi and his wife are watching CBC news coverage of the US presidential election campaign—they are both big fans of Hillary Clinton. He is also a supporter of the Dalai Lama, who held formal talks with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper during a visit to Ottawa last November.
When US President George W. Bush made an official visit to Canada in 2004, Toe Kyi joined protests against the immensely unpopular American leader. He said that he and fellow protestors braved baton-wielding police and tear gas to show their opposition to US foreign policy. I joked that the experience probably made him nostalgic for his days as an activist during the 1988 uprising against military rule in Burma.
Toe Kyi, who now works for CompuCorps Mentoring in Ottawa, a non-profit organization that donates hundreds of used computers to African countries, hasn’t forgotten about his country and his people. He recently arranged a donation of over 100 computers for refugees recently arrived from the Thai-Burmese border. He said that he wants to set up a voluntary service inside Burma to do community development work.
The best thing about Canada, he said, is its respect for the rule of law and democratic values. Despite this, however, he only reluctantly became a Canadian citizen after several years of living in the country.
Many Burmese are deeply ambivalent about life in Canada, noted Kevin McLeod from CFOB, who attributed this to their strong attachment to the Burmese pro-democracy struggle. “They are very devoted,” he said.
Though Burmese enjoy life in a democratic country, they haven’t learned to be united and democratic, according to another Canadian observer married to a former student activist. After years of working on the Thai-Burmese border, she returned to live in Vancouver, where she said that many of the Burmese she met seemed like lost souls.
Not all Burmese are completely directionless, however. In fact, most have simply moved on, finding jobs and trying to get ahead in life. Some have even joined the Canadian Armed Forces. Zaw Latt, a former member of the Burmese high school student union, is now a Canadian soldier assigned to Afghanistan. His friends joke that he really wishes he had been sent to Naypyidaw to fight.
Many activists want Canada to do more on Burma. CFOB is asking Canada to support Burma groups along the Thai-Burmese border and take a tougher stance toward the regime. Many Burmese activists think Canada’s recent comprehensive sanctions on the junta were a good start, but others say that Canada has yet to show much commitment to Burmese issues.
The Canadian government recently held a one-day Burma conference in Quebec City, with UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari as a keynote speaker. At the gathering, some NGOs and activists expressed concern that Ottawa seems more interested in supporting the UN’s fruitless missions and providing humanitarian assistance inside Burma than in addressing Burma’s political impasse more directly.
Most Burmese in Canada would like to see Ottawa send a stronger message to the regime in Naypyidaw.
Even Burmese who have been hurt by the sanctions that are now in place say that they support punitive measures against the junta.
Zaw Win Aung, a former ABSDF member and owner of the Golden Burma grocery store in Toronto, and Aung Tin, another grocery store owner and member of the National League for Democracy, said that the sanctions made it harder for them to import goods such as betel nuts from Burma. But, said Zaw Win Aung with a smile, “It is good” that Canada has taken action against the regime.
As I spoke with Zaw Win Aung, some newly arrived Karen refugees walked into his store to buy some betel nut. Outside, the weather was bitterly cold. Suddenly, a BMW 318 with the words “Free Burma” painted on it and with photographs of detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and monks in the rear windows pulled over in front of the shop. A window rolled down and a familiar face smiled and said hello to his friends and the new arrivals. He was Si Thu, a former ABSDF member who arrived in Canada in the early 1990s.
For a moment, the Karen family from the Mae La refugee camp in Thailand looked at the car and its owner with admiration, recognizing both familiar images from their homeland and a symbol of success in their new country. But after a few moments, they returned to their own reality—far from the struggle in Burma, and equally distant from any sense of belonging in Canada—and walked back to their small apartment.
The Irrawaddy News
Myo Min pointed to the on-board computer in his police patrol car. “This is how we track down the bad guys,” he boasted, clearly relishing his newfound role as a high-tech crime fighter.
But this is Canada, and bureaucracy soon stood in the way of his desire to show off. He couldn’t let me into the vehicle, he said, without getting permission from his supervisor at least 48 hours in advance. I did, however, notice that he was playing a song by Burmese rock star Zaw Win Htut in the car’s cassette player.
It was a brutally cold night, and Myo Min was on duty patrolling the streets of Ottawa, doing his bit to keep the Canadian capital safe from drug traffickers and drunk drivers and free of domestic violence and illegal weapons.
Stopping by the apartment where I was staying with a friend, he adjusted his bulletproof vest and started telling me about his journey from the jungles of the Thai-Burmese border to Canada. Every few minutes, our conversation was interrupted by radio communication from his walkie-talkie.Twenty years ago, Myo Min was one of thousands of young Burmese who left their country to resist a regime that had just seized power in a bloody coup. He joined the All Burma Students’ Democratic Front (ABSDF), a student army formed in the jungles of eastern Burma, but after several years, he grew disillusioned with the armed struggle and factional infighting within the students’ army. He left for resettlement in Canada in 1997.
In 2003, he joined the police force in Ottawa. These days, he doesn’t talk much about bringing down the regime in Burma. But like many former activists living abroad, he still dreams of returning to his homeland someday.
According to Kevin McLeod, an active member of Canadian Friends of Burma (CFOB) and self-described “unemployed student,” many Burmese asylum seekers in Canada are struggling to keep their heads above water in their new country.
“They have emotional stress and frustration and suffer from depression,” he said of some of his many Burmese friends and acquaintances.
He noted that Burmese who migrated to Canada in the 1960s were better educated and more financially secure than those who migrated after fleeing political persecution in 1988. Most of these later immigrants came with nothing and have had to rebuild their lives from scratch, making integration much more difficult for them.
McLeod is perhaps uniquely sympathetic to the difficulties faced by Burmese living in Canada. His Burmese friends jokingly call him a “Canadian refugee,” because like many former student activists from Burma, he hasn’t completed his university studies and is often broke. But he is an avid student of Burmese affairs, reading many books on the country and spending countless hours talking with Burmese friends, on whose couches he often finds himself spending the night.
In some cases, the failure to adapt to life in Canada has ended in tragedy. Several years ago, a young activist named Aung Ko jumped off Niagara Falls. Close friends said that he suffered from depression and may have had a drug-abuse problem. Later, another young Burmese activist hung himself in his room in Toronto.
But all is not doom and gloom for Burmese living in Canada. Tin Maung Htoo, the current executive director of CFOB, said that Canada offers great opportunities to Burmese.
As former members of Burma’s clandestine high-school student union, Tin Maung Htoo and his close friend and fellow CFOB member Toe Kyi have followed a familiar trajectory from student activism inside Burma to eventual third-country resettlement.
But in their case, they managed to avoid imprisonment in Burma—a common fate among activists—only to end up spending three years in the Special Detention Center in Bangkok for attempting to protest against the Salween dam project in 1993.
The Thai authorities refused to release Tin Maung Htoo and Toe Kyi onto Thai soil, so the two friends finally agreed to go to Canada. They were taken directly from the detention center to the airport.
Tin Maung Htoo, who studied at the University of Western ontario, said that he especially appreciates the educational opportunities in Canada, both for himself and his children. He also thinks he is lucky because he has been able to continue his involvement in the Burmese pro-democracy movement. These days, he said, he can go to Parliament to meet politicians and senior foreign ministry officials to discuss Burma and Canadian foreign policy. Several years ago, he said, this would have been impossible. “Doors were closed and we were blocked.” But under Tin Maung Htoo, CFOB has become an effective lobby group.
But Tin Maung Htoo’s friend, Toe Kyi, was more skeptical about how well Canadians and Burmese really understand each other. He recounted how the pastor at the church where he stayed when he first arrived in Canada attempted to convert him to Christianity. When it came time for the baptism, the pastor asked Toe Kyi if he could forgive his enemies, including the military leaders in Burma. He shook his head to indicate that he would never forgive the generals who had ruined his country, and the ceremony came to an abrupt end. He added, with a touch of chagrin, that he saw many other Burmese activists convert to Christianity in Thailand or Canada just to ensure their survival.
Today, Toe Kyi and his Burmese wife and child enjoy their life in Canada, where his political interests have expanded over the years. In their living room, Toe Kyi and his wife are watching CBC news coverage of the US presidential election campaign—they are both big fans of Hillary Clinton. He is also a supporter of the Dalai Lama, who held formal talks with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper during a visit to Ottawa last November.
When US President George W. Bush made an official visit to Canada in 2004, Toe Kyi joined protests against the immensely unpopular American leader. He said that he and fellow protestors braved baton-wielding police and tear gas to show their opposition to US foreign policy. I joked that the experience probably made him nostalgic for his days as an activist during the 1988 uprising against military rule in Burma.
Toe Kyi, who now works for CompuCorps Mentoring in Ottawa, a non-profit organization that donates hundreds of used computers to African countries, hasn’t forgotten about his country and his people. He recently arranged a donation of over 100 computers for refugees recently arrived from the Thai-Burmese border. He said that he wants to set up a voluntary service inside Burma to do community development work.
The best thing about Canada, he said, is its respect for the rule of law and democratic values. Despite this, however, he only reluctantly became a Canadian citizen after several years of living in the country.
Many Burmese are deeply ambivalent about life in Canada, noted Kevin McLeod from CFOB, who attributed this to their strong attachment to the Burmese pro-democracy struggle. “They are very devoted,” he said.
Though Burmese enjoy life in a democratic country, they haven’t learned to be united and democratic, according to another Canadian observer married to a former student activist. After years of working on the Thai-Burmese border, she returned to live in Vancouver, where she said that many of the Burmese she met seemed like lost souls.
Not all Burmese are completely directionless, however. In fact, most have simply moved on, finding jobs and trying to get ahead in life. Some have even joined the Canadian Armed Forces. Zaw Latt, a former member of the Burmese high school student union, is now a Canadian soldier assigned to Afghanistan. His friends joke that he really wishes he had been sent to Naypyidaw to fight.
Many activists want Canada to do more on Burma. CFOB is asking Canada to support Burma groups along the Thai-Burmese border and take a tougher stance toward the regime. Many Burmese activists think Canada’s recent comprehensive sanctions on the junta were a good start, but others say that Canada has yet to show much commitment to Burmese issues.
The Canadian government recently held a one-day Burma conference in Quebec City, with UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari as a keynote speaker. At the gathering, some NGOs and activists expressed concern that Ottawa seems more interested in supporting the UN’s fruitless missions and providing humanitarian assistance inside Burma than in addressing Burma’s political impasse more directly.
Most Burmese in Canada would like to see Ottawa send a stronger message to the regime in Naypyidaw.
Even Burmese who have been hurt by the sanctions that are now in place say that they support punitive measures against the junta.
Zaw Win Aung, a former ABSDF member and owner of the Golden Burma grocery store in Toronto, and Aung Tin, another grocery store owner and member of the National League for Democracy, said that the sanctions made it harder for them to import goods such as betel nuts from Burma. But, said Zaw Win Aung with a smile, “It is good” that Canada has taken action against the regime.
As I spoke with Zaw Win Aung, some newly arrived Karen refugees walked into his store to buy some betel nut. Outside, the weather was bitterly cold. Suddenly, a BMW 318 with the words “Free Burma” painted on it and with photographs of detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and monks in the rear windows pulled over in front of the shop. A window rolled down and a familiar face smiled and said hello to his friends and the new arrivals. He was Si Thu, a former ABSDF member who arrived in Canada in the early 1990s.
For a moment, the Karen family from the Mae La refugee camp in Thailand looked at the car and its owner with admiration, recognizing both familiar images from their homeland and a symbol of success in their new country. But after a few moments, they returned to their own reality—far from the struggle in Burma, and equally distant from any sense of belonging in Canada—and walked back to their small apartment.
Burmese Embassy in Singapore Prepares for Absentee Referendum Voting
By MIN LWIN
The Irrawaddy News
April 17, 2008 - The Burmese Embassy in Singapore has sent a letter to Burmese citizens urging them to vote absentee in the constitutional referendum from April 25 to 29, while an anonymous telephone message is urging people to vote “No.”
“We the Burmese people can vote “No” at the Myanmar [Burma] embassy…. Please pass this message to all your friends and take this exercise seriously for our freedom,” says the telephone message, which is being widely distributed in the Burmese community.
The embassy letter sent to Burmese citizens was dated April 10, urging them to bring their Burmese passport or citizen documents as identification. An estimated 50,000 Burmese citizens live in Singapore.
“The letter was signed by Kyaw Swe Tint, the Burmese counselor,” said a Burmese man from Tuas South on the outskirts of Singapore, who received a letter on Thursday.
He said the letter was sent by air mail to Burmese citizens who paid their income tax at the embassy.
Ko Hla, an information technology engineer in Singapore, said Burmese citizens are likely to vote “No” on the referendum or to not vote.
“I haven’t heard of anyone who will give a ‘Yes’ vote,” Ko Hla told The Irrawaddy on Thursday.
“As a Burmese citizen, the constitutional referendum is important for me to vote,” said Myo Htet a construction engineer in Singapore. “Even the people inside Burma will vote ‘No.’ Why can’t I vote ‘No’ too?”
A worker at a Singapore shipping yard said he will not go to the embassy to vote.
“I get no leave from my boss, so I can’t,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Burmese Embassy in the United States of America is collecting names of people eligible to vote based on an income tax list.
Millions of migrants live outside of Burma, but the Burmese regime has not yet announced whether they all will be allowed to vote in the referendum. More than one million Burmese migrants live in Thailand.
The Irrawaddy News
April 17, 2008 - The Burmese Embassy in Singapore has sent a letter to Burmese citizens urging them to vote absentee in the constitutional referendum from April 25 to 29, while an anonymous telephone message is urging people to vote “No.”
“We the Burmese people can vote “No” at the Myanmar [Burma] embassy…. Please pass this message to all your friends and take this exercise seriously for our freedom,” says the telephone message, which is being widely distributed in the Burmese community.
The embassy letter sent to Burmese citizens was dated April 10, urging them to bring their Burmese passport or citizen documents as identification. An estimated 50,000 Burmese citizens live in Singapore.
“The letter was signed by Kyaw Swe Tint, the Burmese counselor,” said a Burmese man from Tuas South on the outskirts of Singapore, who received a letter on Thursday.
He said the letter was sent by air mail to Burmese citizens who paid their income tax at the embassy.
Ko Hla, an information technology engineer in Singapore, said Burmese citizens are likely to vote “No” on the referendum or to not vote.
“I haven’t heard of anyone who will give a ‘Yes’ vote,” Ko Hla told The Irrawaddy on Thursday.
“As a Burmese citizen, the constitutional referendum is important for me to vote,” said Myo Htet a construction engineer in Singapore. “Even the people inside Burma will vote ‘No.’ Why can’t I vote ‘No’ too?”
A worker at a Singapore shipping yard said he will not go to the embassy to vote.
“I get no leave from my boss, so I can’t,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Burmese Embassy in the United States of America is collecting names of people eligible to vote based on an income tax list.
Millions of migrants live outside of Burma, but the Burmese regime has not yet announced whether they all will be allowed to vote in the referendum. More than one million Burmese migrants live in Thailand.
Wednesday, 16 April 2008
Looming "Vote No" messages in Little Myanmar Island
By Joe Moe
Almost 100,000 Burmese nationals in Singapore are looming to cast a "Vote No" at the forthcoming constitutional referendum in which the military is occupying 25% of the seats in parliament.
Kyaw Swe Thint, First Secretary of the Union of Myanmar Embassy to Singapore sent quietly an uncommon letter through the post to Burmese residents in Singapore inviting them to attend the embassy to vote for the upcoming referendum.
The “Vote NO” messaging campaign, Singapore island-wide via SMS text messaging, popular service amongst the Burmese bloggers and news agencies has started to flow around the world.
"Dear All, Kyaw Swe Thint, First Secretary to the Burma embassy in Singapore issued notification about voting for constitution dated 10 April 08, inviting all Burmese in Singapore to attend the embassy for voting any day from April 25 - 29 between 9am to 5pm. Either you received the letter or not, please attend the embassy and vote for "NO". "Be united for the Freedom of Burma". "We must win".
The announcement from the First Secretary clearly confirmed those who identify as Myanmar citizens eligible to cast a vote at the office of Myanmar embassy which is located at 15, Saint Martin's Drive, Orchard Road, starting from 25 to 29 April from 9:00a.m to 5:00p.m.
Singapore is the first country for overseas Burmese people to cast their vote officially for the constitutional referendum amongst the other countries.
How Can the Constitutional Referendum be Monitored?
Burmese and Ethnics in majority are concerned about the monitoring of the voting event in Burma and Singapore.
It is now clear that many people in Singapore will cast a "No" vote against the military government's constitutional referendum by the end of April at the Myanmar Embassy.
On April 13, the word "No" appeared at several locations in Singapore, whilst Burmese people celebrated water festival at Toa Payoh Burmese Buddhist Temple and Eunos Mingala Vihara (Buddhist Temple).
A "No" vote is required, said the NLD, because the draft constitution was written by "hand-picked puppets" of the military government and lacks basic principles of democracy and human rights. The NLD was the major winner in the 1990 general elections.
Meanwhile, a small group of people inside and outside Burma have expressed support for the draft. However, there is little likelihood of a real debate between "No" and "Yes" groups at this stage.
If the "Vote No" campaign gained significant momentum, there's always the possibility that the junta might cancel the referendum, or if the referendum proceeds, that the election results will be rigged by the junta's so-called poll-watchers, including the Union Solidarity and Development Association.
Because the junta has banned outside poll-watchers, it's up to the NLD and other groups to try to monitor the referendum as well as they can.
A proposal to allow international observers to monitor the referendum by UN Special Envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari in March was rejected outright by the military authorities.
"We are a sovereign country," they said. "We have done these things before without international help."
Gambari told news agencies in a recent exclusive interview: "Our position is that their situation has been the subject of international concern, so [there is a need] to enhance the credibility of the process, to meet the exercise of their sovereign right to ask for help. Technical assistance or even independent monitors need not come from the UN—it could be from international monitors or neighboring countries or from friendly countries."
There is no chance the junta will change its mind and accept the UN's proposal.
Therefore, the NLD and other activist groups have the impossible task of trying to monitor the election. They risk severe penalties if they are seen to be obstructing the referendum process because of the junta's new law, enacted in February and signed by junta Snr-Gen Than Shwe, provides for up to three years imprisonment and a fine for anyone who distributes statements or posters or who makes a speech against the referendum.
An NLD member was arrested on Sunday for possessing a NLD party statement calling for a "No" vote, according to party spokesperson Nyan Win.
The junta has created a situation that prohibits any effective monitoring of the referendum. To do so, risks imprisonment. Opposition groups have again been out maneuvered by the wily generals.
The "Vote No" campaign is likely to produce the desired results, but the question is will the referendum's official outcome reflect the people's vote, or—more likely—what the generals want?
Original News sources:
BBC Burmese and from the various bloggers
http://www.ko-htike.blogspot.com/
http://myochitmyanmar.blogspot.com/
http://linletkyalsin.blogspot.com/ and
http://arzarni.blogspot.com/
Almost 100,000 Burmese nationals in Singapore are looming to cast a "Vote No" at the forthcoming constitutional referendum in which the military is occupying 25% of the seats in parliament.
Kyaw Swe Thint, First Secretary of the Union of Myanmar Embassy to Singapore sent quietly an uncommon letter through the post to Burmese residents in Singapore inviting them to attend the embassy to vote for the upcoming referendum.
The “Vote NO” messaging campaign, Singapore island-wide via SMS text messaging, popular service amongst the Burmese bloggers and news agencies has started to flow around the world.
"Dear All, Kyaw Swe Thint, First Secretary to the Burma embassy in Singapore issued notification about voting for constitution dated 10 April 08, inviting all Burmese in Singapore to attend the embassy for voting any day from April 25 - 29 between 9am to 5pm. Either you received the letter or not, please attend the embassy and vote for "NO". "Be united for the Freedom of Burma". "We must win".
The announcement from the First Secretary clearly confirmed those who identify as Myanmar citizens eligible to cast a vote at the office of Myanmar embassy which is located at 15, Saint Martin's Drive, Orchard Road, starting from 25 to 29 April from 9:00a.m to 5:00p.m.
Singapore is the first country for overseas Burmese people to cast their vote officially for the constitutional referendum amongst the other countries.
How Can the Constitutional Referendum be Monitored?
Burmese and Ethnics in majority are concerned about the monitoring of the voting event in Burma and Singapore.
It is now clear that many people in Singapore will cast a "No" vote against the military government's constitutional referendum by the end of April at the Myanmar Embassy.
On April 13, the word "No" appeared at several locations in Singapore, whilst Burmese people celebrated water festival at Toa Payoh Burmese Buddhist Temple and Eunos Mingala Vihara (Buddhist Temple).
A "No" vote is required, said the NLD, because the draft constitution was written by "hand-picked puppets" of the military government and lacks basic principles of democracy and human rights. The NLD was the major winner in the 1990 general elections.
Meanwhile, a small group of people inside and outside Burma have expressed support for the draft. However, there is little likelihood of a real debate between "No" and "Yes" groups at this stage.
If the "Vote No" campaign gained significant momentum, there's always the possibility that the junta might cancel the referendum, or if the referendum proceeds, that the election results will be rigged by the junta's so-called poll-watchers, including the Union Solidarity and Development Association.
Because the junta has banned outside poll-watchers, it's up to the NLD and other groups to try to monitor the referendum as well as they can.
A proposal to allow international observers to monitor the referendum by UN Special Envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari in March was rejected outright by the military authorities.
"We are a sovereign country," they said. "We have done these things before without international help."
Gambari told news agencies in a recent exclusive interview: "Our position is that their situation has been the subject of international concern, so [there is a need] to enhance the credibility of the process, to meet the exercise of their sovereign right to ask for help. Technical assistance or even independent monitors need not come from the UN—it could be from international monitors or neighboring countries or from friendly countries."
There is no chance the junta will change its mind and accept the UN's proposal.
Therefore, the NLD and other activist groups have the impossible task of trying to monitor the election. They risk severe penalties if they are seen to be obstructing the referendum process because of the junta's new law, enacted in February and signed by junta Snr-Gen Than Shwe, provides for up to three years imprisonment and a fine for anyone who distributes statements or posters or who makes a speech against the referendum.
An NLD member was arrested on Sunday for possessing a NLD party statement calling for a "No" vote, according to party spokesperson Nyan Win.
The junta has created a situation that prohibits any effective monitoring of the referendum. To do so, risks imprisonment. Opposition groups have again been out maneuvered by the wily generals.
The "Vote No" campaign is likely to produce the desired results, but the question is will the referendum's official outcome reflect the people's vote, or—more likely—what the generals want?
Original News sources:
BBC Burmese and from the various bloggers
http://www.ko-htike.blogspot.com/
http://myochitmyanmar.blogspot.com/
http://linletkyalsin.blogspot.com/ and
http://arzarni.blogspot.com/
Enjoying Burmese New Year as a fictitious outlet from dictatorship nightmares
By Burmakin
In accordance with Buddha's biography written by Ven. U Visitta,the first Burmese scholar to memorize all tripitika text (All Theravada scriptures), the real new year day in Buddhism is the full-moon day of Kason (the birthday of Buddha in the third week of May), the vivacious transition period from the scorching summer to the and renovating rainy season.
It is a paradoxical fact that the Burmese Buddhists have a new year day at the beginning of the last month of the Buddha's calendar instead of the actual new year day after the actual last month.This is another upside-down matrix created by wicked Burmese ancient kings (since Pagan) who wanted to hold their long-live power like today's nasty military government.
As Burmese wrongly celebrate the new year day in the old year,the monarchs believed that there would not be new comings in the new year on the ground of the cosmic astrological power to hold that the effects of the symbolism will last throughout (washing the old ones at the old time and becomes the old ones again in the same old time- water festival, thus no change when the new year time actually comes. In Burmese words, Burmese people have been put under "inferior star" by the dictators who rule them and who always want to hold the "superior star" over the people.
Burmese will probably regard the enjoyment of Thingyan as an opportunity for their outlet from those nightmares of military dictatorship. In reality, they are going for an outlet where there is virtually no outlet. So is the situation of Burmese in sham referendum today what the junta is going to hold. Ostensibly and superficially, it could be assumed that Burmese could vote and could make a choice now. Actually, Burmese are forced to do a choice where there is actually no choice for them.
In accordance with Buddha's biography written by Ven. U Visitta,the first Burmese scholar to memorize all tripitika text (All Theravada scriptures), the real new year day in Buddhism is the full-moon day of Kason (the birthday of Buddha in the third week of May), the vivacious transition period from the scorching summer to the and renovating rainy season.
It is a paradoxical fact that the Burmese Buddhists have a new year day at the beginning of the last month of the Buddha's calendar instead of the actual new year day after the actual last month.This is another upside-down matrix created by wicked Burmese ancient kings (since Pagan) who wanted to hold their long-live power like today's nasty military government.
As Burmese wrongly celebrate the new year day in the old year,the monarchs believed that there would not be new comings in the new year on the ground of the cosmic astrological power to hold that the effects of the symbolism will last throughout (washing the old ones at the old time and becomes the old ones again in the same old time- water festival, thus no change when the new year time actually comes. In Burmese words, Burmese people have been put under "inferior star" by the dictators who rule them and who always want to hold the "superior star" over the people.
Burmese will probably regard the enjoyment of Thingyan as an opportunity for their outlet from those nightmares of military dictatorship. In reality, they are going for an outlet where there is virtually no outlet. So is the situation of Burmese in sham referendum today what the junta is going to hold. Ostensibly and superficially, it could be assumed that Burmese could vote and could make a choice now. Actually, Burmese are forced to do a choice where there is actually no choice for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)