by Mungpi
02 October 2008
New Delhi (Mizzima)- Poverty and the slow-pace of economic development in Burma, which was once known as the 'Rice Bowl' of Southeast Asia, is not the result of the current economic sanctions imposed by western nations but because of the ruling junta's mismanagement and inept economic decision making, said an economic expert.
Sean Turnell, Associate Professor and member of the Burma Economic Watch, at the Economics Department of Macquarie University in Sydney said he disagrees with the Burmese Foreign Minister's statement that sanctions have hindered economic development in Burma.
Nyan Win, in his address to the UN General Assembly in New York on Monday, called for an end to what he described as 'immoral sanctions' against his country, saying sanctions hamper economic development and harm the people.
Nyan Win, in his speech, said sanctions are "unwarranted," and "They are not only unfair but immoral. They are counter-productive and deprive countries of their right to development."
But Sean, a long time observer of Burmese economy, said Burma's economy is hardest hit by the junta's mismanagement and its self-imposed isolation.
"Burma's poverty is not a result of sanctions, but 45 years of extraordinarily inept economic decision making by Burma's military regimes," Sean said in an email to Mizzima.
He added that the regime has self-imposed sanctions by creating an economic environment that makes international investment, in true productive industry, utterly impossible.
The United States and the European Union have recently stepped up sanctions against Burma's military government for its suppression of pro-democracy groups and its refusal to improve the situation of human rights including the release of political prisoners.
However, the Burmese Foreign Minister, in his speech said, for Burma to be able to implement economic development, it needs "unfettered access" to markets, modern technology and investment, which according to him has been deprived to Burma due to the imposition of sanctions.
"The sooner the unjust sanctions are revoked and the barriers removed, the sooner will the country be in a position to become the rice bowl of the region and a reliable source of energy," he added.
Economic development without sanctions?
Aung Naing Oo, a Burmese analyst based in Thailand, said while lifting economic sanctions cannot improve Burma's economy over-night, it will, however, allow space for development in the long-run.
According to him, Burma, which has been isolated for nearly half a century and suffered nearly two decades of economic sanctions, a 'command economy' is prevailing, whereby the ruling generals dictate the economy and provide opportunities only to their cronies.
He said, therefore, lifting sanctions and allowing free flow of direct foreign investments, in the long run, would help open up new space for development as well as create new political space.
He added that economic sanctions, which the opposition group led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi have called for and was imposed by the US and EU, does not encourage political reconciliation in Burma.
The Burmese junta is annoyed with the west because of the sanctions but are even more so on the opposition led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi for urging the west to impose sanctions, he said.
"[T]here has been a sore relationship between the junta and the opposition. So, international sanctions are an obstacle to reconciliation," Aung Naing Oo said.
However, he said, unless the junta drops its 'Command Economy', cronyism, and corruption, lifting sanctions will not help in developing the economy.
But Nyo Ohn Myint, the foreign affairs in-charge of the National League for Democracy – Liberated Area (NLD-LA), said sanctions have its causes and effects, but the deteriorating economic situation in Burma is mainly caused by the junta's corruption, nepotism and cronyism.
Nyo Ohn Myint, who closely monitors Burmese economy, said western sanctions does not put on hold the possibility of foreign investment, which mostly are from neighbouring countries including members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
But he said, Burma failed to attract foreign investors due to the lack of political stability, and transparency, which investors see as an unhealthy atmosphere for business deals.
"Despite the sanctions, we see that Burma's bilateral trade with neighbouring countries like India and China are increasing," Nyo Ohn Myint said.
Even with sanctions imposed by US and EU, there are several companies still operating in Burma, Nyo Ohn Myint said, but he added that the junta's failure to demonstrate stability and mismanagement of the economy has slowed down Burma's economic development.
According to Sean, sanctions by any means are "not a full solution" they are, however, useful in an array of strategies.
"Often overlooked is that sanctions can be an avenue, through their progressive lifting, for sponsoring genuine reforms," he added.
Despite the sanctions Burma has several opportunities to implement economic development, Sean said, adding that Burma can still "bring about wholesale reform - especially in the areas of property rights and rational decision-making."
But under the current circumstance corporates and companies are "hardly going to invest in a place where expropriation is a real possibility, where poverty is such that a viable market is barely achievable, and where corruption imposes such high a 'tax' on genuine activity," Sean said.
Showing posts with label sanctions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sanctions. Show all posts
Friday, 3 October 2008
Saturday, 27 September 2008
To Implement Amendments to the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003
September 26, 2008
White House Government
A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America
1. Section 3A(b)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-61) (the "Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act"), as amended by section 6(a) of the Tom Lantos Block Burmese JADE (Junta's Anti-Democratic Efforts) Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-286) (the "JADE Act"), directs the President to prohibit the importation of jadeite and rubies mined or extracted from Burma, as well as the importation of articles of jewelry containing jadeite and rubies mined or extracted from Burma (Burmese covered articles), until such time as the President determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that Burma has met the conditions described in section 3(a)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act.
2. Sections 3A(c)(1) and 3A(c)(2) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, set forth certain conditions for the importation of jadeite and rubies mined or extracted from countries other than Burma, as well as for the importation of articles of jewelry containing jadeite and rubies mined or extracted from countries other than Burma (non-Burmese covered articles).
3. Section 3A(c)(2) of the Act, as amended, also permits the President to waive the conditions for importation set forth in section 3A(c)(1) of non-Burmese covered articles from any country with respect to which the President determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that the country has implemented certain measures to prevent the trade in Burmese covered articles.
4. In order to implement the prohibitions on the importation of Burmese covered articles and the conditions for importation of non-Burmese covered articles set forth in sections 3A(b)(1), 3A(c)(1), and 3A(c)(2) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, it is necessary to modify the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) to include an additional U.S. Note to chapter 71.
5. Section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (the "1974 Act") (19 U.S.C. 2483), authorizes the President to embody in the HTS the substance of relevant provisions of that Act, or other acts affecting import treatment, and of actions taken thereunder, including the removal, modification, continuance, or imposition of any rate of duty or other import restriction.
6. Sections 3A(b)(2) and 3A(c)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, authorize the President to issue such proclamations, regulations, licenses, and orders, and conduct such investigations, as may be necessary to implement the prohibition on Burmese covered articles set forth in section 3A(b)(1) of that Act and the conditions for importation of non-Burmese covered articles set forth in sections 3A(c)(1) and 3A(c)(2) of that Act.
7. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to sections 3A(b)(2) and 3A(c)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, to issue regulations, licenses, and orders, and conduct such investigations as may be necessary, to implement the prohibition on importation of Burmese covered articles set forth in section 3A(b)(1) of that Act and the conditions for importation of non-Burmese covered articles set forth in sections 3A(c)(1) and 3A(c)(2) of that Act. I further determine that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security to redelegate, as necessary, any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law.
8. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to perform the functions set forth in section 3A(c)(2)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, relating to the issuance waivers of the conditions for importation set forth in section 3A(c)(1) of non-Burmese covered articles from any country that has implemented certain measures to prevent the trade in Burmese covered articles. I further determine that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to redelegate, as necessary, any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law.
9. Section 3A(b)(3)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, directs the President to take all appropriate actions to seek issuance of a draft waiver decision by the Council for Trade in Goods of the World Trade Organization (WTO) granting a waiver of the applicable WTO obligations with respect to the provisions of section 3A of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, and any measures taken to implement it.
10. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the United States Trade Representative to perform the functions specified in section 3A(b)(3)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
11. Section 3A(b)(3)(B) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, directs the President to take all appropriate actions to seek the adoption of a resolution by the United Nations General Assembly expressing the need to address trade in Burmese covered articles and calling for the creation and implementation of a workable certification scheme for non-Burmese covered articles to prevent the trade in Burmese covered articles.
12. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of State to perform the functions specified in section 3A(b)(3)(B) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
13. Section 3A(g) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, directs the President to, not later than January 26, 2009, transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a report describing what actions the United States has taken during the 60-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of the JADE Act to seek (i) the issuance of a draft waiver decision by the Council for Trade in Goods of the WTO, as specified in section 3A(b)(3)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended; (ii) the adoption of a resolution by the United Nations General Assembly, as specified in section 3A(b)(3)(B) of that Act; and (iii) the negotiation of an international arrangement, as specified in section 3A(f)(1) of that Act.
14. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of State, in consultation with the United States Trade Representative, to perform the functions specified in section 3A(g) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
15. Under section 3(b) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended by section 6(c) of the JADE Act, the President may waive the restrictions described above if the President determines and notifies the Committees on Appropriations, Finance, and Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committees on Appropriations, Foreign Affairs, and Ways and Means of the House of Representatives that to do so is in the national interest of the United States.
16. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of State to perform the functions and authorities specified in section 3(b) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, acting under the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 3 and 3A of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended by section 6 of the JADE Act, section 604 of the 1974 Act, and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, do proclaim that:
(1) In order to implement the prohibition on the importation of Burmese covered articles and the conditions for the importation of non-Burmese covered articles provided for in sections 3A(b)(1) and 3A(c)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, an additional U.S. Note as set forth in the Annex to this proclamation is included in chapter 71 of the HTS.
(2) Beginning on September 27, 2008, the importation into the United States of any Burmese covered article shall be prohibited, except as provided for (i) in section 3A(d) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended; (ii) in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this proclamation and section 3A(b)(2) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended; or (iii) by waiver issued pursuant to section 3(b) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(3) Beginning on September 27, 2008, as a condition for the importation into the United States of any non-Burmese covered article, the importer and exporter of such article must meet the conditions set forth in section 3A(c)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, except as provided for (i) in section 3A(d) of that Act; (ii) in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses issued pursuant to this proclamation and section 3A(c)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended; or (iii) by waiver issued pursuant to either section 3(b) or section 3A(c)(2) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(4) The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security are hereby authorized, pursuant to sections 3A(b)(2) and 3A(c)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, to issue regulations, licenses, and orders, and conduct such investigations as may be necessary, to implement the prohibition on Burmese covered articles set forth in section 3A(b)(1) of that Act and the conditions for importation of non-Burmese covered articles set forth in sections 3A(c)(1) and 3A(c)(2) of that Act. The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security are further authorized to redelegate, as necessary, any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law.
(5) The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to perform the functions set forth in section 3A(c)(2)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, relating to the issuance of waivers of the conditions for importation set forth in section 3A(c)(1) of non-Burmese covered articles from any country that has implemented certain measures to prevent the trade in Burmese covered articles. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law.
(6) The United States Trade Representative is hereby authorized to perform the functions specified in section 3A(b)(3)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(7) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to perform the functions specified in section 3A(b)(3)(B) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(8) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized, in consultation with the United States Trade Representative, to perform the functions specified in section 3A(g) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(9) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to perform the functions specified in section 3(b) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(10) Any provisions of previous proclamations and Executive Orders that are inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-sixth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand eight, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.
GEORGE W. BUSH
White House Government
A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America
1. Section 3A(b)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-61) (the "Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act"), as amended by section 6(a) of the Tom Lantos Block Burmese JADE (Junta's Anti-Democratic Efforts) Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-286) (the "JADE Act"), directs the President to prohibit the importation of jadeite and rubies mined or extracted from Burma, as well as the importation of articles of jewelry containing jadeite and rubies mined or extracted from Burma (Burmese covered articles), until such time as the President determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that Burma has met the conditions described in section 3(a)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act.
2. Sections 3A(c)(1) and 3A(c)(2) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, set forth certain conditions for the importation of jadeite and rubies mined or extracted from countries other than Burma, as well as for the importation of articles of jewelry containing jadeite and rubies mined or extracted from countries other than Burma (non-Burmese covered articles).
3. Section 3A(c)(2) of the Act, as amended, also permits the President to waive the conditions for importation set forth in section 3A(c)(1) of non-Burmese covered articles from any country with respect to which the President determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that the country has implemented certain measures to prevent the trade in Burmese covered articles.
4. In order to implement the prohibitions on the importation of Burmese covered articles and the conditions for importation of non-Burmese covered articles set forth in sections 3A(b)(1), 3A(c)(1), and 3A(c)(2) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, it is necessary to modify the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) to include an additional U.S. Note to chapter 71.
5. Section 604 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (the "1974 Act") (19 U.S.C. 2483), authorizes the President to embody in the HTS the substance of relevant provisions of that Act, or other acts affecting import treatment, and of actions taken thereunder, including the removal, modification, continuance, or imposition of any rate of duty or other import restriction.
6. Sections 3A(b)(2) and 3A(c)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, authorize the President to issue such proclamations, regulations, licenses, and orders, and conduct such investigations, as may be necessary to implement the prohibition on Burmese covered articles set forth in section 3A(b)(1) of that Act and the conditions for importation of non-Burmese covered articles set forth in sections 3A(c)(1) and 3A(c)(2) of that Act.
7. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to sections 3A(b)(2) and 3A(c)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, to issue regulations, licenses, and orders, and conduct such investigations as may be necessary, to implement the prohibition on importation of Burmese covered articles set forth in section 3A(b)(1) of that Act and the conditions for importation of non-Burmese covered articles set forth in sections 3A(c)(1) and 3A(c)(2) of that Act. I further determine that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security to redelegate, as necessary, any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law.
8. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to perform the functions set forth in section 3A(c)(2)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, relating to the issuance waivers of the conditions for importation set forth in section 3A(c)(1) of non-Burmese covered articles from any country that has implemented certain measures to prevent the trade in Burmese covered articles. I further determine that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to redelegate, as necessary, any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law.
9. Section 3A(b)(3)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, directs the President to take all appropriate actions to seek issuance of a draft waiver decision by the Council for Trade in Goods of the World Trade Organization (WTO) granting a waiver of the applicable WTO obligations with respect to the provisions of section 3A of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, and any measures taken to implement it.
10. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the United States Trade Representative to perform the functions specified in section 3A(b)(3)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
11. Section 3A(b)(3)(B) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, directs the President to take all appropriate actions to seek the adoption of a resolution by the United Nations General Assembly expressing the need to address trade in Burmese covered articles and calling for the creation and implementation of a workable certification scheme for non-Burmese covered articles to prevent the trade in Burmese covered articles.
12. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of State to perform the functions specified in section 3A(b)(3)(B) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
13. Section 3A(g) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, directs the President to, not later than January 26, 2009, transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a report describing what actions the United States has taken during the 60-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of the JADE Act to seek (i) the issuance of a draft waiver decision by the Council for Trade in Goods of the WTO, as specified in section 3A(b)(3)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended; (ii) the adoption of a resolution by the United Nations General Assembly, as specified in section 3A(b)(3)(B) of that Act; and (iii) the negotiation of an international arrangement, as specified in section 3A(f)(1) of that Act.
14. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of State, in consultation with the United States Trade Representative, to perform the functions specified in section 3A(g) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
15. Under section 3(b) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended by section 6(c) of the JADE Act, the President may waive the restrictions described above if the President determines and notifies the Committees on Appropriations, Finance, and Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committees on Appropriations, Foreign Affairs, and Ways and Means of the House of Representatives that to do so is in the national interest of the United States.
16. I have determined that it is appropriate to authorize the Secretary of State to perform the functions and authorities specified in section 3(b) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, acting under the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 3 and 3A of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended by section 6 of the JADE Act, section 604 of the 1974 Act, and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, do proclaim that:
(1) In order to implement the prohibition on the importation of Burmese covered articles and the conditions for the importation of non-Burmese covered articles provided for in sections 3A(b)(1) and 3A(c)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, an additional U.S. Note as set forth in the Annex to this proclamation is included in chapter 71 of the HTS.
(2) Beginning on September 27, 2008, the importation into the United States of any Burmese covered article shall be prohibited, except as provided for (i) in section 3A(d) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended; (ii) in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this proclamation and section 3A(b)(2) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended; or (iii) by waiver issued pursuant to section 3(b) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(3) Beginning on September 27, 2008, as a condition for the importation into the United States of any non-Burmese covered article, the importer and exporter of such article must meet the conditions set forth in section 3A(c)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, except as provided for (i) in section 3A(d) of that Act; (ii) in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses issued pursuant to this proclamation and section 3A(c)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended; or (iii) by waiver issued pursuant to either section 3(b) or section 3A(c)(2) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(4) The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security are hereby authorized, pursuant to sections 3A(b)(2) and 3A(c)(3) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, to issue regulations, licenses, and orders, and conduct such investigations as may be necessary, to implement the prohibition on Burmese covered articles set forth in section 3A(b)(1) of that Act and the conditions for importation of non-Burmese covered articles set forth in sections 3A(c)(1) and 3A(c)(2) of that Act. The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Homeland Security are further authorized to redelegate, as necessary, any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law.
(5) The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to perform the functions set forth in section 3A(c)(2)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended, relating to the issuance of waivers of the conditions for importation set forth in section 3A(c)(1) of non-Burmese covered articles from any country that has implemented certain measures to prevent the trade in Burmese covered articles. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law.
(6) The United States Trade Representative is hereby authorized to perform the functions specified in section 3A(b)(3)(A) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(7) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to perform the functions specified in section 3A(b)(3)(B) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(8) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized, in consultation with the United States Trade Representative, to perform the functions specified in section 3A(g) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(9) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to perform the functions specified in section 3(b) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, as amended.
(10) Any provisions of previous proclamations and Executive Orders that are inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-sixth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand eight, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.
GEORGE W. BUSH
Switzerland extends sanctions
GENEVA (DailyTimes): Switzerland’s government said Friday it has decided to extend its sanctions against Myanmar to include a ban on wood imports, bringing its measures in line with the European Union.
“The new coercive measures include the banning of imports of wood and wooden products, coal, certain metals and gemstones from Myanmar,” the Federal Council said.
Financial sanctions will also be tightened and the number of Myanmar businesses subjected to sanctions has risen to 83 from 39.
The European Union strengthened its own sanctions against Myanmar in May, including an embargo on the import of timber, gems and metals from Myanmar.
The 27-nation bloc also extended the list of Myanmar leaders and their relatives subject to a travel ban and assets freeze. afp
“The new coercive measures include the banning of imports of wood and wooden products, coal, certain metals and gemstones from Myanmar,” the Federal Council said.
Financial sanctions will also be tightened and the number of Myanmar businesses subjected to sanctions has risen to 83 from 39.
The European Union strengthened its own sanctions against Myanmar in May, including an embargo on the import of timber, gems and metals from Myanmar.
The 27-nation bloc also extended the list of Myanmar leaders and their relatives subject to a travel ban and assets freeze. afp
Friday, 8 August 2008
US to keep pressure on Burma
Activists reassured of American support
THANIDA TANSUBHAPOL and
Bangkok Post-AP
United States President George Bush yesterday vowed to continue exerting pressure on Burma's military regime. Mr Bush assured a group of 11 pro-democracy activists of America's support during a lunch meeting at the home of US ambassador Eric John on Witthayu road in Pathumwan.
The meeting was attended by Aung Naing Oo, a political activist who was involved in Burma's 8/8/88 pro-democracy uprising, which was crushed by the military.
He quoted Mr Bush as saying the Burmese regime was difficult to deal with.
In an interview with reporters, Mr Bush also pledged to complain to Chinese leaders about human rights abuses in Burma.
He also explained why a tough approach towards Burma was still needed.
''We have to be tough because we believe that the generals have been very stubborn in not allowing freedom, and we believe that is wrong,'' he said.
However, Aung Naing Oo, who is now based in Chiang Mai, suggested Washington go beyond exerting pressure on Burma over human rights.
''The US government should engage with the Burmese generals for the long-term strategy of democracy development in the country,'' he told Mr Bush.
Before having lunch with the Burmese dissident, Mr Bush gave his speech on the US policy towards Asia on the last day of his visit to Thailand to celebrate the 175th anniversary of bilateral relations between Bangkok and Washington.
His speech attacked the Burmese junta and also praised Thailand for being what he considered a leader in the region.
''I was proud to designate Thailand a major non-NATO ally of the United States,'' he said in the speech at the Queen Sirikit National Convention Center on Ratchadaphisek road.
''And I salute the Thai people for the restoration of democracy, which has proved that liberty and law reign here.''
In between delivering the speech and having lunch with the Burmese activists, Mr Bush relived his school days.
He went to Klong Toey to visit the Mercy Centre, run by Father Joe Maier, which has a shelter for street children, four orphanages, a hospice and a home for mothers and children with HIV/Aids.
In an art class, Mr Bush grabbed a green coloured pencil and joined children in creating colourful artwork to decorate the walls. He autographed some of their pictures.
The children replied with a wai.
Mr Bush's wife Laura, a vocal critic of Burma's junta, toured the Mae La refugee camp in Tha Song Yang district in Tak and the Mae Tao clinic in Mae Sot district, during which she called on the military regime to open dialogue with the pro-democracy opposition.
Highlighting abuses in military-run Burma has been the chief cause of the First Lady, and with her daughter Barbara she made her way through a muddy settlement which is home to tens of thousands who fled the junta.
She thanked the Thai government for allowing the nine camps, which house more than 120,000 refugees.
''If we could see a change in the Burmese government, people could move home in safety,'' the First Lady told camp leaders
''The best solution would be if Gen Than Shwe's regime would start real dialogue,'' she said after being greeted by refugees performing song and dance routines in traditional dress.
About 35,000 refugees huddle in the Mae La camp at the foot of forested mountains, which many risked their lives to cross in their desperation to flee military repression of ethnic minorities in their homeland.
Mae La is on the site of the first refugee camp, which was set up in 1984 as Burma's army advanced into Karen state and forced thousands over the border into Thailand.
The United States has pledged to resettle 26,811 of the refugees.
But Mrs Bush said: ''Most people do not want to have to move to third countries. They would rather move [back] to their home villages in safety and security.
''We urge the Chinese to do what other countries have done to put financial sanctions on the junta.''
Mrs Bush later rejoined her husband in Bangkok before flying to Beijing for today's opening of the Olympic Games
THANIDA TANSUBHAPOL and
Bangkok Post-AP
United States President George Bush yesterday vowed to continue exerting pressure on Burma's military regime. Mr Bush assured a group of 11 pro-democracy activists of America's support during a lunch meeting at the home of US ambassador Eric John on Witthayu road in Pathumwan.
The meeting was attended by Aung Naing Oo, a political activist who was involved in Burma's 8/8/88 pro-democracy uprising, which was crushed by the military.
He quoted Mr Bush as saying the Burmese regime was difficult to deal with.
In an interview with reporters, Mr Bush also pledged to complain to Chinese leaders about human rights abuses in Burma.
He also explained why a tough approach towards Burma was still needed.
''We have to be tough because we believe that the generals have been very stubborn in not allowing freedom, and we believe that is wrong,'' he said.
However, Aung Naing Oo, who is now based in Chiang Mai, suggested Washington go beyond exerting pressure on Burma over human rights.
''The US government should engage with the Burmese generals for the long-term strategy of democracy development in the country,'' he told Mr Bush.
Before having lunch with the Burmese dissident, Mr Bush gave his speech on the US policy towards Asia on the last day of his visit to Thailand to celebrate the 175th anniversary of bilateral relations between Bangkok and Washington.
His speech attacked the Burmese junta and also praised Thailand for being what he considered a leader in the region.
''I was proud to designate Thailand a major non-NATO ally of the United States,'' he said in the speech at the Queen Sirikit National Convention Center on Ratchadaphisek road.
''And I salute the Thai people for the restoration of democracy, which has proved that liberty and law reign here.''
In between delivering the speech and having lunch with the Burmese activists, Mr Bush relived his school days.
He went to Klong Toey to visit the Mercy Centre, run by Father Joe Maier, which has a shelter for street children, four orphanages, a hospice and a home for mothers and children with HIV/Aids.
In an art class, Mr Bush grabbed a green coloured pencil and joined children in creating colourful artwork to decorate the walls. He autographed some of their pictures.
The children replied with a wai.
Mr Bush's wife Laura, a vocal critic of Burma's junta, toured the Mae La refugee camp in Tha Song Yang district in Tak and the Mae Tao clinic in Mae Sot district, during which she called on the military regime to open dialogue with the pro-democracy opposition.
Highlighting abuses in military-run Burma has been the chief cause of the First Lady, and with her daughter Barbara she made her way through a muddy settlement which is home to tens of thousands who fled the junta.
She thanked the Thai government for allowing the nine camps, which house more than 120,000 refugees.
''If we could see a change in the Burmese government, people could move home in safety,'' the First Lady told camp leaders
''The best solution would be if Gen Than Shwe's regime would start real dialogue,'' she said after being greeted by refugees performing song and dance routines in traditional dress.
About 35,000 refugees huddle in the Mae La camp at the foot of forested mountains, which many risked their lives to cross in their desperation to flee military repression of ethnic minorities in their homeland.
Mae La is on the site of the first refugee camp, which was set up in 1984 as Burma's army advanced into Karen state and forced thousands over the border into Thailand.
The United States has pledged to resettle 26,811 of the refugees.
But Mrs Bush said: ''Most people do not want to have to move to third countries. They would rather move [back] to their home villages in safety and security.
''We urge the Chinese to do what other countries have done to put financial sanctions on the junta.''
Mrs Bush later rejoined her husband in Bangkok before flying to Beijing for today's opening of the Olympic Games
Tuesday, 5 August 2008
Gems And Justice In Burma
02 August 2008
Gems And Justice In Burma - Download (MP3)
Gems And Justice In Burma - Listen to (MP3)
(VOA)-Despite growing international pressure for democratic reform, the military junta that has ruled Burma for decades shows no inclination of loosening its repressive grip. Hoping to get the attention of the generals where it can't be missed – in their bank accounts – the United States has tightened economic sanctions on regime leaders, its supporters and companies that are linked to them.
President George Bush approved legislation enacted by the U.S. Congress to strengthen financial sanctions against regime leaders and their supporters and to outlaw the importation of rubies and jade mined in Burma. The East Asian nation is a major supplier of the world’s jade and rubies, and the gem trade provides substantial income to the regime. After timber and oil, gems are Burma's third largest export. The trade provides crucial revenue to the military government and the generals themselves since it is believed that members of the junta own a majority interest in each of the country's mines. Many of the operations sit on land confiscated from private owners or local communities.
Some large jewelry companies around the world, worried about being associated with the junta, already have given up sales of Burmese gems. But it is also possible to mask the origin of a stone as it often changes hands many times and in many countries, before it ever reaches the U.S. as a finished necklace or ring. The new sanctions now make it harder for unscrupulous traders to circumvent the ban on trading in Burmese gems.
These new sanctions aim to increase financial pressure on the regime. At the same time, the U.S. and others continue to apply political pressure on the regime leadership to move towards democratic transition.
"On the Burmese regime, our message is: The United States believes in democracy and freedom," President Bush said.
Gems And Justice In Burma - Download (MP3)
Gems And Justice In Burma - Listen to (MP3)
(VOA)-Despite growing international pressure for democratic reform, the military junta that has ruled Burma for decades shows no inclination of loosening its repressive grip. Hoping to get the attention of the generals where it can't be missed – in their bank accounts – the United States has tightened economic sanctions on regime leaders, its supporters and companies that are linked to them.
President George Bush approved legislation enacted by the U.S. Congress to strengthen financial sanctions against regime leaders and their supporters and to outlaw the importation of rubies and jade mined in Burma. The East Asian nation is a major supplier of the world’s jade and rubies, and the gem trade provides substantial income to the regime. After timber and oil, gems are Burma's third largest export. The trade provides crucial revenue to the military government and the generals themselves since it is believed that members of the junta own a majority interest in each of the country's mines. Many of the operations sit on land confiscated from private owners or local communities.
Some large jewelry companies around the world, worried about being associated with the junta, already have given up sales of Burmese gems. But it is also possible to mask the origin of a stone as it often changes hands many times and in many countries, before it ever reaches the U.S. as a finished necklace or ring. The new sanctions now make it harder for unscrupulous traders to circumvent the ban on trading in Burmese gems.
These new sanctions aim to increase financial pressure on the regime. At the same time, the U.S. and others continue to apply political pressure on the regime leadership to move towards democratic transition.
"On the Burmese regime, our message is: The United States believes in democracy and freedom," President Bush said.
Saturday, 2 August 2008
Bush and Burma
By AUNG ZAW
The Irrawaddy News
US President George W Bush has never been to Burma, and he once called the country’s detained Nobel Peace Prize laureate “Aung Suu San Kyi,” drawing laughter from journalists at an APEC summit in Thailand.
He has since learned how to pronounce the name of Burma’s most famous pro-democracy leader; and thanks in large part to the tutelage of his wife, Laura Bush, who has taken a strong personal interest in Suu Kyi’s struggle on behalf of her people, he now knows a bit more about the problems of a remote country that he still declines to visit.
Next week, the president and first lady will be in Thailand to mark the 175th anniversary of bilateral ties with the Kingdom. While he is here, he will also meet with Burmese activists on the eve of the 20th anniversary of a nationwide pro-democracy uprising that was brutally crushed by the regime that still holds power in Burma.
The United States has always strongly supported the efforts of Burma’s people achieve freedom from military rule. The current administration has been no exception. Though often criticized at home and abroad for his foreign policy, Bush has won the respect of most Burmese for his firm stance on the repressive regime in Naypyidaw.
In 2003, the US introduced the Freedom and Democracy Act in response to a ruthless attack on Suu Kyi and her supporters in the central Burmese town of Depayin. In 2005, Bush identified Burma as one of the world’s “outposts of tyranny,” together with Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Belarus.
Last year, following the crackdown on the September uprising, he blasted the regime and tightened sanctions against the generals and their cronies. As a further sign of support, the US Congress awarded its highest civilian honor, the Congressional Gold Medal, to Suu Kyi last December. And just this week, Bush signed into law the Burma Jade Act, which restricts the import of precious stones from Burma and extends existing import sanctions.
Bush has often been faulted for his tendency to see complex issues in black and white. But while many condemn him for trying to impose his political vision on Iraq, few can argue that in the case of Burma, he has taken a genuinely principled stand that is perfectly consistent with reality.
The Burmese people are indeed fortunate to have the support of both Bush and his wife, Laura, who has been a real driving force in keeping Burma at the top of the world’s political agenda.
She has met with Burmese activists in Washington and New York on a number of occasions and held video teleconferences with prominent exiles. She has also participated in several roundtable discussions on Burma with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his special envoy to Burma, Ibrahim Gambari.
When the Burmese regime crushed protests last year, she called Ban to discuss the situation—a rare move by an American first lady, and one that shows the depth of her concern for the fate of Burma’s people.
At the height of the crisis, she even called on Snr-Gen Than Shwe, the junta’s supreme leader, to step down. Instead, he moved to consolidate his position, more determined than ever to move forward with his road map to “disciplined democracy.”
In May of this year, it became evident just how much Than Shwe has staked on the ultimate success of this deeply flawed political process, which promises only a continuation of military rule under another guise.
On May 3, one week before a planned referendum on a military-drafted constitution, Burma was hit by its worst natural disaster in living memory. But Cyclone Nargis did not stop the junta going ahead with its rigged referendum, putting politics ahead of the lives of millions of people.
The American response to this disaster was markedly different from that of the rulers in Naypyidaw. The US moved quickly to temporarily suspend its sanctions against Burma so that it could assist in the relief effort, offering aid and the use of military aircraft to transport international emergency relief supplies into the country.
Humanitarian workers in Burma praised the Bush administration for its bold decision to send C-130 flights into Rangoon with relief items, setting aside politics for the sake of saving lives.
But when the USS Essex and other US naval ships withdrew from their positions near Burmese waters, after weeks of hopes that Bush would invoke the UN’s Responsibility to Protect and order them into the delta, many Burmese were more than a little disappointed.
This raises the most serious question about US support for Burma’s pro-democracy movement: Is there any real political will in the US to effect substantive change in Burma, or is Washington simply offering moral support to the victims of a heinous regime to burnish its image as a defender of freedom?
While some cynics say that Bush’s stance on Burma is merely a distraction from the troubling consequences of other facets of his foreign policy, others suggest that ultimately, the US is seeking to use Burma to “contain” China, which has become the Burmese regime’s most important ally.
These critics of US policy point to Washington’s overtures to Gen Ne Win soon after he seized power in 1962 as evidence that the US has never been particularly troubled by military rule in Burma or anywhere else when broader geopolitical interests were at stake.
Although Ne Win accepted an invitation to the White House, he never became close to Washington. Even substantial development aid and other support in the form of weapons and helicopters for Burma’s anti-narcotics efforts failed to bring Burma within America’s sphere of influence—something US leaders were desperate to achieve in a bid to counter Communist China’s regional ambitions.
But a great deal has changed since the days of the Cold War. China is no longer the “red threat” that it once was, but a country that has opened up to the world in ways that were almost unimaginable even two decades ago. The US has no interest in reversing this process, any more than it has a desire to see Burma sealed off and stagnating under the same regressive regime that has ruled since 1988.
As part of his visit to Asia next week, Bush will be in Beijing to attend the opening ceremony of the 2008 Olympic Games on August 8. This will give him an opportunity to both celebrate China’s progress and to highlight the need for deeper changes, particularly regarding its attitude towards fundamental human rights.
By meeting with Burmese exiles the day before attending Beijing’s grand coming-out party, Bush is sending a reminder that August 8 is not only a day to recognize China’s achievements, but also an occasion to recall the unfulfilled aspirations of the Burmese people.
There is little more that the Burmese people can ask of Bush in the remaining months of his administration. And after eight years of unstinting support, which even the most skeptical Burmese activists have had to acknowledge as a major contribution to their cause, they can even learn to live with his occasional mangling of Burmese names.
The Irrawaddy News
US President George W Bush has never been to Burma, and he once called the country’s detained Nobel Peace Prize laureate “Aung Suu San Kyi,” drawing laughter from journalists at an APEC summit in Thailand.
He has since learned how to pronounce the name of Burma’s most famous pro-democracy leader; and thanks in large part to the tutelage of his wife, Laura Bush, who has taken a strong personal interest in Suu Kyi’s struggle on behalf of her people, he now knows a bit more about the problems of a remote country that he still declines to visit.
Next week, the president and first lady will be in Thailand to mark the 175th anniversary of bilateral ties with the Kingdom. While he is here, he will also meet with Burmese activists on the eve of the 20th anniversary of a nationwide pro-democracy uprising that was brutally crushed by the regime that still holds power in Burma.
The United States has always strongly supported the efforts of Burma’s people achieve freedom from military rule. The current administration has been no exception. Though often criticized at home and abroad for his foreign policy, Bush has won the respect of most Burmese for his firm stance on the repressive regime in Naypyidaw.
In 2003, the US introduced the Freedom and Democracy Act in response to a ruthless attack on Suu Kyi and her supporters in the central Burmese town of Depayin. In 2005, Bush identified Burma as one of the world’s “outposts of tyranny,” together with Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Belarus.
Last year, following the crackdown on the September uprising, he blasted the regime and tightened sanctions against the generals and their cronies. As a further sign of support, the US Congress awarded its highest civilian honor, the Congressional Gold Medal, to Suu Kyi last December. And just this week, Bush signed into law the Burma Jade Act, which restricts the import of precious stones from Burma and extends existing import sanctions.
Bush has often been faulted for his tendency to see complex issues in black and white. But while many condemn him for trying to impose his political vision on Iraq, few can argue that in the case of Burma, he has taken a genuinely principled stand that is perfectly consistent with reality.
The Burmese people are indeed fortunate to have the support of both Bush and his wife, Laura, who has been a real driving force in keeping Burma at the top of the world’s political agenda.
She has met with Burmese activists in Washington and New York on a number of occasions and held video teleconferences with prominent exiles. She has also participated in several roundtable discussions on Burma with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and his special envoy to Burma, Ibrahim Gambari.
When the Burmese regime crushed protests last year, she called Ban to discuss the situation—a rare move by an American first lady, and one that shows the depth of her concern for the fate of Burma’s people.
At the height of the crisis, she even called on Snr-Gen Than Shwe, the junta’s supreme leader, to step down. Instead, he moved to consolidate his position, more determined than ever to move forward with his road map to “disciplined democracy.”
In May of this year, it became evident just how much Than Shwe has staked on the ultimate success of this deeply flawed political process, which promises only a continuation of military rule under another guise.
On May 3, one week before a planned referendum on a military-drafted constitution, Burma was hit by its worst natural disaster in living memory. But Cyclone Nargis did not stop the junta going ahead with its rigged referendum, putting politics ahead of the lives of millions of people.
The American response to this disaster was markedly different from that of the rulers in Naypyidaw. The US moved quickly to temporarily suspend its sanctions against Burma so that it could assist in the relief effort, offering aid and the use of military aircraft to transport international emergency relief supplies into the country.
Humanitarian workers in Burma praised the Bush administration for its bold decision to send C-130 flights into Rangoon with relief items, setting aside politics for the sake of saving lives.
But when the USS Essex and other US naval ships withdrew from their positions near Burmese waters, after weeks of hopes that Bush would invoke the UN’s Responsibility to Protect and order them into the delta, many Burmese were more than a little disappointed.
This raises the most serious question about US support for Burma’s pro-democracy movement: Is there any real political will in the US to effect substantive change in Burma, or is Washington simply offering moral support to the victims of a heinous regime to burnish its image as a defender of freedom?
While some cynics say that Bush’s stance on Burma is merely a distraction from the troubling consequences of other facets of his foreign policy, others suggest that ultimately, the US is seeking to use Burma to “contain” China, which has become the Burmese regime’s most important ally.
These critics of US policy point to Washington’s overtures to Gen Ne Win soon after he seized power in 1962 as evidence that the US has never been particularly troubled by military rule in Burma or anywhere else when broader geopolitical interests were at stake.
Although Ne Win accepted an invitation to the White House, he never became close to Washington. Even substantial development aid and other support in the form of weapons and helicopters for Burma’s anti-narcotics efforts failed to bring Burma within America’s sphere of influence—something US leaders were desperate to achieve in a bid to counter Communist China’s regional ambitions.
But a great deal has changed since the days of the Cold War. China is no longer the “red threat” that it once was, but a country that has opened up to the world in ways that were almost unimaginable even two decades ago. The US has no interest in reversing this process, any more than it has a desire to see Burma sealed off and stagnating under the same regressive regime that has ruled since 1988.
As part of his visit to Asia next week, Bush will be in Beijing to attend the opening ceremony of the 2008 Olympic Games on August 8. This will give him an opportunity to both celebrate China’s progress and to highlight the need for deeper changes, particularly regarding its attitude towards fundamental human rights.
By meeting with Burmese exiles the day before attending Beijing’s grand coming-out party, Bush is sending a reminder that August 8 is not only a day to recognize China’s achievements, but also an occasion to recall the unfulfilled aspirations of the Burmese people.
There is little more that the Burmese people can ask of Bush in the remaining months of his administration. And after eight years of unstinting support, which even the most skeptical Burmese activists have had to acknowledge as a major contribution to their cause, they can even learn to live with his occasional mangling of Burmese names.
Friday, 1 August 2008
Bush: Burma’s Neighbors Not Interested in Sanctions
By LALIT K JHA
The Irrawaddy News
WASHINGTON — US President George W Bush said on Thursday that neighboring countries do not favor economic sanctions against Burma, and this is one of the reasons US sanctions have not been as successful as he would have liked.
"There are some countries in the neighborhood that are not interested in joining," Bush told Suthichai Yoon of the National Media Group of Thailand in an interview, the transcript of which was released by the White House.
Bush said sanctions are not working more effectively because many neighboring countries do not apply them. Observing that unilateral sanctions are effective only to a certain extent, he urged other countries to join the US which has slapped the Burmese junta with a series of sanctions, the last round early this week.
Praising the Burmese democracy advocate, Aung San Suu Kyi, for her courage, Bush said: "Here is a very heroic woman that was elected overwhelmingly by her people and has now been under house arrest by a group of military guys that just simply won't allow the will of the people to flourish."
The US president, who will meet with several Burmese dissidents while in Bangkok, in another roundtable interview with foreign print media, acknowledged there is a difference of opinion within the Association of Southeast Asia Nations about how hard to push Burma to move toward democracy. "I'm at one end of the ledger,” he said. “And we'll continue to press hard."
On meeting with Burmese dissidents in Bangkok, Bush said: "My message is going to be one directed to the people in Burma when I meet with some of the activists, and Laura is going to be meeting with some of the people that she got to know."
Bush thanked the people of Thailand and its government for their humanitarian help to the people of Burma in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis.
"I think it's very constructive and very helpful,” he said. “And I will be speaking to activists to let them know that the United States of America hears their voices. You know, it's a tough issue for some countries.
"I do want to thank the Thai government for its understanding of the refugee issue, particularly as relates to the border policy,” he said. “I think it's been very wise and very humane."
Meanwhile, three leading Burmese dissident groups—the All Burma Monk's Alliance, the 88 Generation Students and the All Burma Federation of Student Union—urged UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to review the mission of the United Nations in Burma.
The statement said: "The United Nations is stepping back from its benchmarks, which is the realization of an all party-inclusive, democratic, participatory and transparent process of national reconciliation."
Instead of working toward these benchmarks, the UN has allowed the Burmese military regime to embark on a unilateral and brutal path, forcing democracy groups to live in a repressive, untenable position, it said.
"If the secretary-general openly and strongly asks the Security Council take action on Burma, we believe that China and Russia might change their position," the statement said.
The statement expressed disappointment with the role played by UN Special Envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari, who will visit Burma in August: "Instead of convincing the regime with a forceful voice and the strength of moral authority, it seems that he was convinced by the regime that there was no other way [but] to accept their unilateral actions."
The Irrawaddy News
WASHINGTON — US President George W Bush said on Thursday that neighboring countries do not favor economic sanctions against Burma, and this is one of the reasons US sanctions have not been as successful as he would have liked.
"There are some countries in the neighborhood that are not interested in joining," Bush told Suthichai Yoon of the National Media Group of Thailand in an interview, the transcript of which was released by the White House.
Bush said sanctions are not working more effectively because many neighboring countries do not apply them. Observing that unilateral sanctions are effective only to a certain extent, he urged other countries to join the US which has slapped the Burmese junta with a series of sanctions, the last round early this week.
Praising the Burmese democracy advocate, Aung San Suu Kyi, for her courage, Bush said: "Here is a very heroic woman that was elected overwhelmingly by her people and has now been under house arrest by a group of military guys that just simply won't allow the will of the people to flourish."
The US president, who will meet with several Burmese dissidents while in Bangkok, in another roundtable interview with foreign print media, acknowledged there is a difference of opinion within the Association of Southeast Asia Nations about how hard to push Burma to move toward democracy. "I'm at one end of the ledger,” he said. “And we'll continue to press hard."
On meeting with Burmese dissidents in Bangkok, Bush said: "My message is going to be one directed to the people in Burma when I meet with some of the activists, and Laura is going to be meeting with some of the people that she got to know."
Bush thanked the people of Thailand and its government for their humanitarian help to the people of Burma in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis.
"I think it's very constructive and very helpful,” he said. “And I will be speaking to activists to let them know that the United States of America hears their voices. You know, it's a tough issue for some countries.
"I do want to thank the Thai government for its understanding of the refugee issue, particularly as relates to the border policy,” he said. “I think it's been very wise and very humane."
Meanwhile, three leading Burmese dissident groups—the All Burma Monk's Alliance, the 88 Generation Students and the All Burma Federation of Student Union—urged UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to review the mission of the United Nations in Burma.
The statement said: "The United Nations is stepping back from its benchmarks, which is the realization of an all party-inclusive, democratic, participatory and transparent process of national reconciliation."
Instead of working toward these benchmarks, the UN has allowed the Burmese military regime to embark on a unilateral and brutal path, forcing democracy groups to live in a repressive, untenable position, it said.
"If the secretary-general openly and strongly asks the Security Council take action on Burma, we believe that China and Russia might change their position," the statement said.
The statement expressed disappointment with the role played by UN Special Envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari, who will visit Burma in August: "Instead of convincing the regime with a forceful voice and the strength of moral authority, it seems that he was convinced by the regime that there was no other way [but] to accept their unilateral actions."
Thursday, 31 July 2008
United States Imposes Sanctions on 10 Burmese Firms
(News Blaze) The United States is imposing further economic sanctions on Burma in an effort to punish the ruling military junta for systematically oppressing the Burmese people.
The U.S. Treasury Department announced financial sanctions against 10 companies suspected of being owned or controlled by the military-run government of Burma. At the same time, President Bush signed into law legislation and a joint resolution that will continue some sanctions, add new ones and extend import restrictions.
"We are tightening financial sanctions against Burma's repressive junta and the companies that finance it," said Adam Szubin, director of the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control. "The regime's refusal to protect and allow relief to reach the Burmese people as Cyclone Nargis devastated their country is but another example of the regime's heartless neglect of its people."
The sanctions will affect two major conglomerates - the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd. (UMEH) and the Myanmar Economic Corp. - that have extensive interests in a variety of sectors critical to the Burmese government, including the gem, banking and construction industries, Szubin said July 29. And four of UMEH's subsidiaries - Myanmar Ruby Enterprise, Myanmar Imperial Jade Company Ltd., Myawaddy Trading Ltd. and Myawaddy Bank Ltd. - have been added to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons list, the Treasury Department said.
In addition, Szubin said, any bank accounts or other financial assets found in the United States that belong to those named by Treasury officials must be frozen. No Americans or American companies may do business with these companies, the Treasury Department said.
"The designations also make available to the global community information about companies that provide vital support to the Burmese military and to a regime that is systematically oppressing the Burmese people," the Treasury Department said.
Bush signed into law the renewal of import restrictions on Burma and the 2008 Tom Lantos Block Burmese JADE (Junta's Anti-Democratic Efforts) Act, which is aimed at extending sanctions against leaders of the Burmese military regime, those providing them with economic and political support, their immediate families and the Burmese gem industry.
Source: U.S. Department of State
judythpiazza@newsblaze.com
To comment on this story, email to comment@newsblaze.com
The U.S. Treasury Department announced financial sanctions against 10 companies suspected of being owned or controlled by the military-run government of Burma. At the same time, President Bush signed into law legislation and a joint resolution that will continue some sanctions, add new ones and extend import restrictions.
"We are tightening financial sanctions against Burma's repressive junta and the companies that finance it," said Adam Szubin, director of the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control. "The regime's refusal to protect and allow relief to reach the Burmese people as Cyclone Nargis devastated their country is but another example of the regime's heartless neglect of its people."
The sanctions will affect two major conglomerates - the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd. (UMEH) and the Myanmar Economic Corp. - that have extensive interests in a variety of sectors critical to the Burmese government, including the gem, banking and construction industries, Szubin said July 29. And four of UMEH's subsidiaries - Myanmar Ruby Enterprise, Myanmar Imperial Jade Company Ltd., Myawaddy Trading Ltd. and Myawaddy Bank Ltd. - have been added to the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons list, the Treasury Department said.
In addition, Szubin said, any bank accounts or other financial assets found in the United States that belong to those named by Treasury officials must be frozen. No Americans or American companies may do business with these companies, the Treasury Department said.
"The designations also make available to the global community information about companies that provide vital support to the Burmese military and to a regime that is systematically oppressing the Burmese people," the Treasury Department said.
Bush signed into law the renewal of import restrictions on Burma and the 2008 Tom Lantos Block Burmese JADE (Junta's Anti-Democratic Efforts) Act, which is aimed at extending sanctions against leaders of the Burmese military regime, those providing them with economic and political support, their immediate families and the Burmese gem industry.
Source: U.S. Department of State
judythpiazza@newsblaze.com
To comment on this story, email to comment@newsblaze.com
Sanction has not really impacted Burmese gem trade
30 Jul 2008, IMNA
Although the US government continues with its sanction on importing gems from Burma, it will not strongly impact the Burmese gem trade, said Burmese gem traders.
President Bush signed a legislation yesterday banning the import of rubies and jades from Burma to the United States to penalise Burma's brutal ruling regime. It has also frozen assets of the generals.
"Trading on board through Hong Kong had been totally stopped. But we are still working trough neighbouring countries and there has been no strong impact in gem trading," a gem trader in Rangoon said.
Demand for jewels in China and Thailand is increasing and it could help balance the loss of market in the US.
"A majority export jade and some high value rubies to China," a trader said.
A majority of traders in upper Burma cross the Sino-Burma border and sell jade in China.
"Selling gems in China is like selling vegetables because the Chinese like jade so much," a Mandalay jade producer and trader said.
According to a trader, although the US government started banning Burmese gem, the gem trade is not really hard hit and trade in Burma has been going on normally.
However the trade has lost major customers in California trough Hong Kong and Singapore. But Burmese gem traders have found markets through neighbours to by pass the sanction.
Gem earns the third major export income for Burma and it has generated 647 million dollars during the 2007-2008 fiscal, according to official statistics.
Although the US government continues with its sanction on importing gems from Burma, it will not strongly impact the Burmese gem trade, said Burmese gem traders.
President Bush signed a legislation yesterday banning the import of rubies and jades from Burma to the United States to penalise Burma's brutal ruling regime. It has also frozen assets of the generals.
"Trading on board through Hong Kong had been totally stopped. But we are still working trough neighbouring countries and there has been no strong impact in gem trading," a gem trader in Rangoon said.
Demand for jewels in China and Thailand is increasing and it could help balance the loss of market in the US.
"A majority export jade and some high value rubies to China," a trader said.
A majority of traders in upper Burma cross the Sino-Burma border and sell jade in China.
"Selling gems in China is like selling vegetables because the Chinese like jade so much," a Mandalay jade producer and trader said.
According to a trader, although the US government started banning Burmese gem, the gem trade is not really hard hit and trade in Burma has been going on normally.
However the trade has lost major customers in California trough Hong Kong and Singapore. But Burmese gem traders have found markets through neighbours to by pass the sanction.
Gem earns the third major export income for Burma and it has generated 647 million dollars during the 2007-2008 fiscal, according to official statistics.
Wednesday, 30 July 2008
US clamps down on firms linked to Myanmar
By JEANNINE AVERSA
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration is imposing financial sanctions on companies suspected of being owned or controlled by the military-run government of Myanmar.
The Treasury Department's action Tuesday covers 10 companies including two big conglomerates _ the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited and the Myanmar Economic Corp. _ that each has extensive holdings in gem mining, banking and construction. Those sectors are keenly important to the government, the department said. All the companies are located in Myanmar.
Any bank accounts or other financial assets found in the United States that belong to those named Tuesday must be frozen. Americans also are prohibited from doing business with them.
It marked the latest administration move to financially punish the repressive junta in Myanmar, also known as Burma, and its backers for a crackdown on pro-democracy protesters.
The United States last week blasted the Myanmar junta's oft-repeated promise to democratize as a "kind of mockery." The U.S. also renewed criticism of Myanmar for initially refusing international help after Cyclone Nargis in May, when several countries including the United States were sitting offshore with ships loaded with aid.
"The regime's refusal to protect and allow relief to reach the Burmese people as Cyclone Nargis devastated their country is but another example of the regime's heartless neglect of its people," said Adam Szubin, director of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, which enforces the sanctions program.
Three mining companies and an export-import firm also were targeted Tuesday. Myanmar Ruby Enterprise Co. Ltd., Myanmar Imperial Jade Co., Myawaddy Bank, and Myawaddy Trading Ltd. also were covered by the department's order.
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration is imposing financial sanctions on companies suspected of being owned or controlled by the military-run government of Myanmar.
The Treasury Department's action Tuesday covers 10 companies including two big conglomerates _ the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Limited and the Myanmar Economic Corp. _ that each has extensive holdings in gem mining, banking and construction. Those sectors are keenly important to the government, the department said. All the companies are located in Myanmar.
Any bank accounts or other financial assets found in the United States that belong to those named Tuesday must be frozen. Americans also are prohibited from doing business with them.
It marked the latest administration move to financially punish the repressive junta in Myanmar, also known as Burma, and its backers for a crackdown on pro-democracy protesters.
The United States last week blasted the Myanmar junta's oft-repeated promise to democratize as a "kind of mockery." The U.S. also renewed criticism of Myanmar for initially refusing international help after Cyclone Nargis in May, when several countries including the United States were sitting offshore with ships loaded with aid.
"The regime's refusal to protect and allow relief to reach the Burmese people as Cyclone Nargis devastated their country is but another example of the regime's heartless neglect of its people," said Adam Szubin, director of Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, which enforces the sanctions program.
Three mining companies and an export-import firm also were targeted Tuesday. Myanmar Ruby Enterprise Co. Ltd., Myanmar Imperial Jade Co., Myawaddy Bank, and Myawaddy Trading Ltd. also were covered by the department's order.
Saturday, 26 July 2008
Signboards removed by Mandalay authorities
Jul 25, 2008 (DVB)–Local authorities in Mandalay have ordered the National Political League to take down signboards from their provincial and divisional offices, group leader Aye Lwin told DVB.
Aye Lwin said the group’s signs on 41st and 22nd streets were temporarily taken down on the instructions of local authorities in two different townships.
"They said we had to get permission from the relevant authorities in order to do this and they promised to negotiate," he said.
"We had no problems with our signboards in Rangoon though."
Sources in Mandalay who closely monitored the incident said Aye Lwin had informed USDA secretary general Htay Oo, who is also minister of Agriculture and Irrigation, about the signs, but he failed to inform Industry (1) minister and USDA chairman Aung Thaung, who directed Mandalay divisional USDA chairman U Aung Kyaw Thar to take them down.
Aye Lwin suggested the incident had arisen due to a change of regional military commander in Mandalay, but said that Mandalay authorities had not taken down signs the group has been hanging at its offices for the past year saying, “Oppose sanctions against Burma”.
"We approach this from a political point of view and they see things from their point of view which is based on maintaining security. So there is no one to be blamed," Aye Lwin said.
"Based on the situation in our country right now, we are seeing how much we can contribute to shaping a political system where everyone can participate."
In February this year, residents of Insein township, Rangoon, were angered by the local authorities’ double standards in allowing Aye Lwin’s pro-government 88 Generation Students (Union of Myanmar) group to hand out leaflets while opposition activists faced harassment or arrest if they tried to do the same.
Reporting by Aye Nai
Aye Lwin said the group’s signs on 41st and 22nd streets were temporarily taken down on the instructions of local authorities in two different townships.
"They said we had to get permission from the relevant authorities in order to do this and they promised to negotiate," he said.
"We had no problems with our signboards in Rangoon though."
Sources in Mandalay who closely monitored the incident said Aye Lwin had informed USDA secretary general Htay Oo, who is also minister of Agriculture and Irrigation, about the signs, but he failed to inform Industry (1) minister and USDA chairman Aung Thaung, who directed Mandalay divisional USDA chairman U Aung Kyaw Thar to take them down.
Aye Lwin suggested the incident had arisen due to a change of regional military commander in Mandalay, but said that Mandalay authorities had not taken down signs the group has been hanging at its offices for the past year saying, “Oppose sanctions against Burma”.
"We approach this from a political point of view and they see things from their point of view which is based on maintaining security. So there is no one to be blamed," Aye Lwin said.
"Based on the situation in our country right now, we are seeing how much we can contribute to shaping a political system where everyone can participate."
In February this year, residents of Insein township, Rangoon, were angered by the local authorities’ double standards in allowing Aye Lwin’s pro-government 88 Generation Students (Union of Myanmar) group to hand out leaflets while opposition activists faced harassment or arrest if they tried to do the same.
Reporting by Aye Nai
Friday, 25 July 2008
Western Interests Dictate Security Council Agenda
Analysis by Thalif Deen, Inter Press Service
United Nations, 24 July, (Asian Tribune-IPS): The continued political deadlock over a rash of ongoing crises -- including Iran, Myanmar (Burma), Palestine, Kosovo, Zimbabwe and Sudan -- is threatening to paralyze one of the world's most powerful political bodies, harking back to the days of the Cold War when it was turned into a battleground for U.S.-Soviet confrontation.
The 15-member Security Council, the only U.N. body with the power to make war and peace, remained incapacitated when China and Russia double vetoed two different resolutions, over the last 19 months, aimed at punishing Burma and Zimbabwe.
In January last year, a Western-backed and U.S.-led move to castigate the Burmese government for human rights violations suffered the first double veto in recent memory.
And in early July, history repeated itself, when these two big powers exercised their vetoes again -- this time to stall a resolution aimed at imposing sanctions against Zimbabwe for its disputed presidential elections.
The Zimbabwe resolution co-sponsored by Western nations -- led by the veto-wielding United States, Britain and France -- was dismissed by China and Russia primarily on the grounds that domestic issues, including human rights and presidential elections, do not constitute threats to international peace and security: the primary mandate of the Security Council.
Dr. Stephen Zunes, professor of politics and international studies at the University of San Francisco, told IPS that although the double veto was "very disappointing and certainly a setback in terms of U.N.'s ability to stand up for human rights, it does not represent a significant precedent."
For example, there were the multiple triple vetoes by the United States, Britain and France, which blocked sanctions against South Africa during the apartheid era, he said.
"There have been the multiple U.S. vetoes blocking U.N. action over ongoing Israeli violations of international humanitarian law in the West Bank, which -- unlike the Zimbabwe case -- did not even involve issues of national sovereignty, since they involved territories under belligerent occupation," he added.
Similarly, France and the United States have repeatedly prevented the Security Council from enforcing its resolutions on Western Sahara due to their support for the Moroccan monarch, said Zunes, who has written extensively on issues relating to Security Council vetoes.
"Indeed, one would have to wonder what the three Western powers on the Security Council would have done if there was a similar resolution involving Equatorial Guinea or any of the other dozen Western-backed dictatorships in Africa," Zunes told IPS.
While Western hypocrisy is no excuse for China and Russia to block strong action against Zimbabwe, he argued, the Western nations should not expect those countries to be more responsible in enforcing international standards of human rights as long as they fail to do so themselves.
If the Western powers had their way, as one political observer pointed out, the Security Council would have imposed international sanctions against Sudan, Burma, Iran and Zimbabwe, and also admitted Kosovo as a new U.N. member state (a move that will be vetoed by Russia).
If China and Russia had their way, the Security Council would have penalised Israel for the increasingly brutal occupation of Palestinian territories (a move that will surely be vetoed by the United States, along with France and Britain).
So, the conflicting political scenario has continued to leave the Security Council in a state of permanent deadlock.
Speaking just after the double veto on Zimbabwe, an Asian diplomat told IPS that "the Security Council has been paralyzed once again on a topical issue."
Many had expected China and Russia to abstain, he said. "That was the feedback many of us had, but something happened in between."
Russia's decision to veto, he said, toughened the Chinese position. "There was a view prior to this that China would try to be accommodating given the Olympics. Clearly, this consideration did not stop them, as evidenced by the veto."
He also said: "I understand that they wanted an up-front assurance from the three Western powers that the Security Council would suspend any indictment of Sudanese President (Ahmad) Al-Bashir by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in return for an abstention" -- an issue that could come up before the Security Council in the near future.
But the Western powers were apparently unwilling to agree to this, claiming that justice had to take its course.
He said the double veto could herald a period of greater division and tension in the Security Council.
"If this is the case, we can expect the Security Council to be paralysed further," he added.
Commenting on the failed resolution on Zimbabwe, Bill Fletcher Jr., executive editor of BlackCommentator.com, said: "U.S.-inspired sanctions against the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe lack any moral authority. This does not excuse President (Robert) Mugabe for his autocratic approach to the situation in his country."
Rather, with the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq -- and its threats to Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and other countries -- the United States lacks the ability to play a leading role in resolving the Zimbabwe crisis, Fletcher told IPS.
As is happening now, the African Union (AU) must be pressured to play the leading role, along with the Southern African Development Community (SADC), he added.
"This means that Africans must lead in putting the pressure on the Mugabe regime," Fletcher said.
The Congress of South African Trade Unions has suggested a policy of complete non-cooperation with the Mugabe regime and this makes sense if led by Africans rather than introduced by those in the West who have unhelpful agendas, he added.
On Monday, in a dramatic turnaround, the Mugabe government and the opposition agreed to a dialogue "with a view to creating a genuine, viable, permanent and sustainable solution to the Zimbabwe crisis."
This agreement was reached as a result of the intervention both by the AU and SADC. The talks are scheduled to take place later this week in Pretoria, presided over by South African President Thabo Mbeki.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, a Third World diplomat told IPS that there is also a disturbing tendency by the "West" to try to broaden the definition of what is a "threat to international peace and security".
While the U.N. Charter leaves some room for interpretation, this definition of a "threat" has generally been confined to wars and violence.
"What we were seeing now is an attempt by the West to include all manner of transgressions as possible reasons that require Security Council action," the diplomat said.
In the Zimbabwe case, the argument was that democracy, elections, and human rights all fall under possible new definitions of "threats". "This is the same sort of reasoning that we have seen the West try to apply to Myanmar over the political process and the humanitarian crisis."
Related to this, he said, there is also a tendency on the part of the West to impose its own standards of behavior on the world.
"You can see this being done throughout the U.N., most noticeably in the committee dealing with social, humanitarian and cultural issues, and increasingly now so in the Security Council," he said.
"I am not sure whether the double veto will stymie these Western efforts. I doubt so. They will keep pushing the envelope," he declared.
- Inter Press Service (IPS) News Agency
United Nations, 24 July, (Asian Tribune-IPS): The continued political deadlock over a rash of ongoing crises -- including Iran, Myanmar (Burma), Palestine, Kosovo, Zimbabwe and Sudan -- is threatening to paralyze one of the world's most powerful political bodies, harking back to the days of the Cold War when it was turned into a battleground for U.S.-Soviet confrontation.
The 15-member Security Council, the only U.N. body with the power to make war and peace, remained incapacitated when China and Russia double vetoed two different resolutions, over the last 19 months, aimed at punishing Burma and Zimbabwe.
In January last year, a Western-backed and U.S.-led move to castigate the Burmese government for human rights violations suffered the first double veto in recent memory.
And in early July, history repeated itself, when these two big powers exercised their vetoes again -- this time to stall a resolution aimed at imposing sanctions against Zimbabwe for its disputed presidential elections.
The Zimbabwe resolution co-sponsored by Western nations -- led by the veto-wielding United States, Britain and France -- was dismissed by China and Russia primarily on the grounds that domestic issues, including human rights and presidential elections, do not constitute threats to international peace and security: the primary mandate of the Security Council.
Dr. Stephen Zunes, professor of politics and international studies at the University of San Francisco, told IPS that although the double veto was "very disappointing and certainly a setback in terms of U.N.'s ability to stand up for human rights, it does not represent a significant precedent."
For example, there were the multiple triple vetoes by the United States, Britain and France, which blocked sanctions against South Africa during the apartheid era, he said.
"There have been the multiple U.S. vetoes blocking U.N. action over ongoing Israeli violations of international humanitarian law in the West Bank, which -- unlike the Zimbabwe case -- did not even involve issues of national sovereignty, since they involved territories under belligerent occupation," he added.
Similarly, France and the United States have repeatedly prevented the Security Council from enforcing its resolutions on Western Sahara due to their support for the Moroccan monarch, said Zunes, who has written extensively on issues relating to Security Council vetoes.
"Indeed, one would have to wonder what the three Western powers on the Security Council would have done if there was a similar resolution involving Equatorial Guinea or any of the other dozen Western-backed dictatorships in Africa," Zunes told IPS.
While Western hypocrisy is no excuse for China and Russia to block strong action against Zimbabwe, he argued, the Western nations should not expect those countries to be more responsible in enforcing international standards of human rights as long as they fail to do so themselves.
If the Western powers had their way, as one political observer pointed out, the Security Council would have imposed international sanctions against Sudan, Burma, Iran and Zimbabwe, and also admitted Kosovo as a new U.N. member state (a move that will be vetoed by Russia).
If China and Russia had their way, the Security Council would have penalised Israel for the increasingly brutal occupation of Palestinian territories (a move that will surely be vetoed by the United States, along with France and Britain).
So, the conflicting political scenario has continued to leave the Security Council in a state of permanent deadlock.
Speaking just after the double veto on Zimbabwe, an Asian diplomat told IPS that "the Security Council has been paralyzed once again on a topical issue."
Many had expected China and Russia to abstain, he said. "That was the feedback many of us had, but something happened in between."
Russia's decision to veto, he said, toughened the Chinese position. "There was a view prior to this that China would try to be accommodating given the Olympics. Clearly, this consideration did not stop them, as evidenced by the veto."
He also said: "I understand that they wanted an up-front assurance from the three Western powers that the Security Council would suspend any indictment of Sudanese President (Ahmad) Al-Bashir by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in return for an abstention" -- an issue that could come up before the Security Council in the near future.
But the Western powers were apparently unwilling to agree to this, claiming that justice had to take its course.
He said the double veto could herald a period of greater division and tension in the Security Council.
"If this is the case, we can expect the Security Council to be paralysed further," he added.
Commenting on the failed resolution on Zimbabwe, Bill Fletcher Jr., executive editor of BlackCommentator.com, said: "U.S.-inspired sanctions against the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe lack any moral authority. This does not excuse President (Robert) Mugabe for his autocratic approach to the situation in his country."
Rather, with the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq -- and its threats to Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and other countries -- the United States lacks the ability to play a leading role in resolving the Zimbabwe crisis, Fletcher told IPS.
As is happening now, the African Union (AU) must be pressured to play the leading role, along with the Southern African Development Community (SADC), he added.
"This means that Africans must lead in putting the pressure on the Mugabe regime," Fletcher said.
The Congress of South African Trade Unions has suggested a policy of complete non-cooperation with the Mugabe regime and this makes sense if led by Africans rather than introduced by those in the West who have unhelpful agendas, he added.
On Monday, in a dramatic turnaround, the Mugabe government and the opposition agreed to a dialogue "with a view to creating a genuine, viable, permanent and sustainable solution to the Zimbabwe crisis."
This agreement was reached as a result of the intervention both by the AU and SADC. The talks are scheduled to take place later this week in Pretoria, presided over by South African President Thabo Mbeki.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, a Third World diplomat told IPS that there is also a disturbing tendency by the "West" to try to broaden the definition of what is a "threat to international peace and security".
While the U.N. Charter leaves some room for interpretation, this definition of a "threat" has generally been confined to wars and violence.
"What we were seeing now is an attempt by the West to include all manner of transgressions as possible reasons that require Security Council action," the diplomat said.
In the Zimbabwe case, the argument was that democracy, elections, and human rights all fall under possible new definitions of "threats". "This is the same sort of reasoning that we have seen the West try to apply to Myanmar over the political process and the humanitarian crisis."
Related to this, he said, there is also a tendency on the part of the West to impose its own standards of behavior on the world.
"You can see this being done throughout the U.N., most noticeably in the committee dealing with social, humanitarian and cultural issues, and increasingly now so in the Security Council," he said.
"I am not sure whether the double veto will stymie these Western efforts. I doubt so. They will keep pushing the envelope," he declared.
- Inter Press Service (IPS) News Agency
UN keeps watch on aid money to Burma
(ABC News)- It's been almost three months since Cyclone Nargis swept through south-west Burma leaving 140,000 people dead or missing and 2 million without homes.
Australia has put in an extra $30 million, more than doubling its contribution to Burma to help it rebuild after the disaster.
However other nations may not be so generous and there are concerns that aid funds will be siphoned off and end up lining the pockets of the military junta that runs Burma.
The United Nations humanitarian envoy, John Holmes, has just left Burma after assessing what's needed.
Last night as he was in transit in Bangkok he spoke about what has changed since his last visit.
"Repairs were underway, houses were being rebuilt, fields were being tilled, economic activity was underway, so it was beginning to resume at least a degree of normal life," he said.
The rebuilding bill in Burma is expected to reach $1 billion. That's on top of the $500 million that will be spent in total on relief.
This week Human Rights Watch, the New York-based agency, called on donor countries to insist on an independent monitoring process.
John Holmes says that is happening.
"We have international relief workers on the ground in the shape of NGOs (non-government organisations) and UN agencies," he said.
"The embassies who were taking a close interest in this are certainly sending people on a regular basis to see what's going on."
In the early days of the aid efforts, some donor countries were wary of the military junta's past record of diverting development funds for its own use, but most still managed to overcome their scepticism.
"There are relatively large sums of money here but they are not as big as they were for the tsunami," Mr Holmes said.
"The damage in the delta is pretty much equivalent to what happened in Aceh after the tsunami, and the response was much bigger in terms of funding then."
The equation could change once development and rebuilding projects ramp up.
Donor countries which have imposed sanctions against Burma because of its human rights record might well rethink their contributions.
There are some signs of a softening by the junta. This week Burma ratified the charter set down by the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), which will include provisions for greater human rights protections.
But even the ever-optimistic John Holmes is wary.
"You can sign onto all the documents you like. You have to demonstrate, in practice, that you are going to improve things and that is why a lot of people have been watching the future, not only in the humanitarian area but other areas too," he said.
Based on a report by Karen Percy aired on AM.
Australia has put in an extra $30 million, more than doubling its contribution to Burma to help it rebuild after the disaster.
However other nations may not be so generous and there are concerns that aid funds will be siphoned off and end up lining the pockets of the military junta that runs Burma.
The United Nations humanitarian envoy, John Holmes, has just left Burma after assessing what's needed.
Last night as he was in transit in Bangkok he spoke about what has changed since his last visit.
"Repairs were underway, houses were being rebuilt, fields were being tilled, economic activity was underway, so it was beginning to resume at least a degree of normal life," he said.
The rebuilding bill in Burma is expected to reach $1 billion. That's on top of the $500 million that will be spent in total on relief.
This week Human Rights Watch, the New York-based agency, called on donor countries to insist on an independent monitoring process.
John Holmes says that is happening.
"We have international relief workers on the ground in the shape of NGOs (non-government organisations) and UN agencies," he said.
"The embassies who were taking a close interest in this are certainly sending people on a regular basis to see what's going on."
In the early days of the aid efforts, some donor countries were wary of the military junta's past record of diverting development funds for its own use, but most still managed to overcome their scepticism.
"There are relatively large sums of money here but they are not as big as they were for the tsunami," Mr Holmes said.
"The damage in the delta is pretty much equivalent to what happened in Aceh after the tsunami, and the response was much bigger in terms of funding then."
The equation could change once development and rebuilding projects ramp up.
Donor countries which have imposed sanctions against Burma because of its human rights record might well rethink their contributions.
There are some signs of a softening by the junta. This week Burma ratified the charter set down by the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), which will include provisions for greater human rights protections.
But even the ever-optimistic John Holmes is wary.
"You can sign onto all the documents you like. You have to demonstrate, in practice, that you are going to improve things and that is why a lot of people have been watching the future, not only in the humanitarian area but other areas too," he said.
Based on a report by Karen Percy aired on AM.
Thursday, 24 July 2008
Letter to donors on reconstruction after Cyclone Nargis
Relief Web
Human Rights Watch remains deeply concerned about the dire plight of Burmese severely affected by Cyclone Nargis, which struck Burma’s Irrawaddy Delta on May 2-3, 2008. The United Nations estimates that the cyclone left at least 140,000 persons dead or missing and that approximately 2.4 million more were severely affected, many of whom are still in need of urgent and sustained humanitarian assistance.
Human Rights Watch recognizes the strong and committed role played by international relief agencies and organizations in responding to the crisis and the difficulties of operating in an environment where there is little infrastructure and many government barriers. We support the continued efforts by international and Burmese organizations and individuals to respond to the disaster.
The Burmese authorities’ reaction to the cyclone shocked the world. Instead of allowing humanitarian assistance to be delivered urgently to survivors, as did countries affected by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, the Burmese military government prevented international humanitarian agencies from entering the delta during the crucial first weeks after the cyclone. An untold number of people died and suffered needlessly as the junta treated the cyclone as a national security problem instead of a natural disaster, demonstrating the shocking disregard that Burma’s ruling generals hold for the welfare of their own people.
While the government has improved its cooperation with aid agencies, the authorities continue to obstruct humanitarian relief efforts in various ways. More than two months after the cyclone, just 1.3 million out of the 2.4 million Burmese severely affected have received any form of international humanitarian assistance. While restrictions on international relief workers visiting affected areas have been eased, official permission to travel to the delta still takes many days and does not allow the full access required to reach all at risk.
From Relief to Reconstruction
Even when the immediate needs for food, temporary shelter, clean water, and medical assistance have been met, major efforts will be necessary to help people rebuild their lives and livelihoods. The cyclone swept away entire villages and hundreds of thousands of survivors have lost their homes. The United Nations estimates that between 77 to 85 percent of houses in Bogale and Lapputa townships were completely destroyed. Public infrastructure, including roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, and other essential services, have largely disappeared in many areas. The rice cultivation paddies of the Irrawaddy Delta have been inundated with salt water and require a massive rehabilitation effort. Livestock populations, including the water buffaloes used for rice cultivation, have been decimated. Rehabilitating the Irrawaddy Delta region will require a massive reconstruction effort, including the financial support of the international community.
The Tripartite Core Group (TCG)—comprising the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the United Nations and the Burmese ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC)—has completed its needs assessment of the affected areas and presented its formal findings at a meeting in Singapore on July 21. The total cost of relief and reconstruction was estimated at US$1 billion. On July 10 a Revised Flash Appeal for humanitarian assistance was raised from an initial US$201 million to US$481 million for relief operations lasting until April 2009. For the 13 UN agencies and 23 international humanitarian organizations involved in operations in the cyclone-affected areas, adequate funding is urgent and crucial to alleviate suffering and prepare the way for reconstruction.
Human Rights Watch has long supported humanitarian aid to Burma so long as it is provided in an accountable, transparent and principled manner. Unfortunately, the Burmese authorities have long refused to allow aid to be provided in this way.
As the donor and humanitarian community move towards considering support for major reconstruction efforts in the cyclone-affected regions of Burma, Human Rights Watch believes it is of utmost importance that clear principles be established for the provision of aid. Aid provided without respect for clear principles—as detailed below—and without careful monitoring, will invariably be misused and fail to meet the needs of cyclone victims.
The greatest obstacle faced by the international community in addressing the large-scale reconstruction needs of the Irrawaddy Delta is Burma’s abusive military leadership. The Burmese government has a long record of severe human rights violations against its own people, which have repeatedly been raised at the UN Security Council, the Human Rights Council (and its predecessor the Commission on Human Rights), and other international bodies. Many abuses previously reported will directly impact on the reconstruction effort, such as the widespread use of forced labor, documented by the International Labor Organization (ILO) and other independent international organizations.
In order to ensure that future reconstruction meets the needs of the affected population and does not contribute to further human rights abuses, donors should adopt the following basic principles when planning, funding and implementing reconstruction projects in Burma:
- Insist that the continuing humanitarian needs of the affected population are immediately addressed. Soon after the cyclone, the Burmese government claimed that the “emergency phase” of the crisis had been completed and that the focus should shift to long-term reconstruction. This view reflected not only the military leadership’s disregard for the welfare of the affected population, but its own political and financial interest in being the recipient of multi-million dollar donor-funded infrastructure development projects. As more than one million of those affected by the cyclone have still not been reached by international humanitarian agencies, the donor community should insist that the immediate humanitarian needs of the population be addressed before embarking on large-scale reconstruction efforts.
- Insist on unimpeded humanitarian access for local and international humanitarian organizations to the affected population and to determine reconstruction needs. Despite promises made nearly two months ago by the military junta to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the government continues to place significant obstacles in the path of international humanitarian agencies and local volunteer organizations in meeting the needs of the affected population. Two months after the cyclone, international humanitarian efforts remain severely impeded and far less effective than after other large-scale disasters, such as the response to the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the May 2008 earthquake in Sichuan, China. While the government has granted 1,670 visas to aid workers from UN agencies, private nongovernmental organizations and ASEAN officials, many humanitarian relief professionals lose crucial time waiting for official permission to travel and are still prohibited from spending extended time in the delta. The authorities have also arbitrarily detained and harassed some local volunteers, such as the prominent comedian Zargana. The limited reach of international aid is almost entirely due to obstacles created by the government. The donor community should continue to insist on unimpeded access for humanitarian workers to the affected population, and make further assistance contingent on greater access and a removal of obstacles. The Burmese government has requested billions of dollars in reconstruction assistance but has provided almost no documentation to support its request. In order to accurately assess the reconstruction needs, countries considering pledges should insist on full and unimpeded access to affected areas to do their own independent assessments of reconstruction needs. The Post-Nargis Joint Assessment (PONJA) conducted by ASEAN, Burmese officials, and UN officials, is an important step towards an accurate assessment of the reconstruction needs, but further assessment efforts will be required.
- Ensure that all internationally funded reconstruction activities be conducted by independent humanitarian and development organizations, rather than by providing funding directly to the Burmese government, and that local participation be monitored by the donor. Many donors have long refused to provide aid directly to the government because of grave concerns over widespread human rights violations, corruption, and a lack of accountability and transparency in spending of donor funds. In recent years The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and Medecins Sans Frontieres (France) terminated their programs because of excessive government interference in aid activities. In light of these concerns, reconstruction funding should not go directly to the government, but should be conducted by qualified independent organizations that can be adequately monitored by the donor. Donors should insist that implementing organizations be freely allowed to recruit and hire local staff, and respond promptly should the authorities seek to intimidate or otherwise improperly interfere with local staff. Donors should take sufficient measures, including the creation of independent structures within Burma, to monitor aid to ensure that it is not diverted to the authorities.
- Monitor reconstruction efforts to deter previously documented human rights abuses, such as forced labor, forced relocation and land seizure. The Burmese government has a long history of human rights abuses carried out in pursuit of self-defined “development” projects. Villagers in Burma have had their land forcibly confiscated and have been conscripted for forced labor in road construction and development of biofuel and hardwood plantations. In the aftermath of the cyclone, the government has forcibly relocated thousands of displaced persons, at times placing them beyond the reach of humanitarian assistance. Donors should carefully design and monitor reconstruction projects to deter the government from using such abusive practices, particularly in the rehabilitation of infrastructure and the rice paddies, where the danger of forced labor practices are greatest. The donor community should ensure that international monitoring organizations like the ILO have sufficient capacity to monitor reconstruction projects.
- Consult with affected communities, ethnic minorities, religious communities, and a broad range of civil society groups when considering, designing, and implementing reconstruction projects. The Burmese government has a long history of disregarding the voices of civil society and the needs of the population in all facets of governance, and with development projects in particular. It considers independent views as a threat to its monolithic rule. Donors should set a strong and principled example in determining reconstruction needs by consulting a wide spectrum of individuals and groups, including local communities, ethnic minorities, religious communities, and a broad range of civil society actors, to ensure that reconstruction projects meet the needs of the affected populations. Such consultation requirements are now mainstreamed into projects of the World Bank and many other donors. While the government may object and try to limit contacts and communication between implementing agencies and local residents, donors should insist on the need for broad-based consultation.
- Do not award contracts for reconstruction projects to any Burmese company or individual under international sanctions, or with companies owned or controlled by the Burmese military. Donor states have placed a number of individuals and companies under international sanctions because of their direct role in supporting government repression and human rights abuses. The military junta has already put many of these individuals and companies in charge of major reconstruction projects in the Irrawaddy Delta. The donor community should not support any reconstruction efforts conducted by individuals or companies under international sanctions, and should not engage companies owned or controlled by the Burmese military in reconstruction projects.
- Provide humanitarian and reconstruction aid on the basis of need, and guard against government discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, religion, perceived political affiliation, or other basis. The Burmese government has a long record of discrimination against and marginalization of ethnic and religious minorities, independent religious authorities, and independent civil society groups, and of politicizing humanitarian and development assistance. Consider supporting small-scale, community-based reconstruction efforts in health, education, water and sanitation, agriculture, and other essential sectors that directly benefit the poorest and most affected, and not just “prestige” infrastructure projects that may not bring the same benefits to those most in need. Donors should ensure that the humanitarian and reconstruction needs of all affected communities are met on a nondiscriminatory basis.
- Before committing to reconstruction projects, require that the Burmese government, which has an estimated US$3.5 billion in foreign reserves and receives an estimated US$150 million in monthly gas exports revenues, formally commit to making a significant contribution to reconstruction efforts. While much of the Burmese population lives in dire poverty with meager access to education and health care, the country’s leadership has accumulated huge wealth through government economic enterprises. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) calculates that one-third of the population lives below the poverty line, with much higher rates of absolute poverty in regional areas. And while the government is demanding huge reconstruction sums from foreign donors, its own accumulated wealth is given little consideration. The government’s foreign reserves and gas revenues are not allocated to address the basic needs of the population, causing Burma to be ranked 132 out of 177 in the latest UNDP Human Development Index. The government spends a paltry 1.1 percent of Gross Domestic Product on health and education, and Burma’s health care system is the second worst in the world after Sierra Leone. An estimated 75 percent of hospitals and clinics in cyclone affected areas were destroyed or damaged and urgently need to be replaced. At the same time, the SPDC spends enormous sums on an oversized military and wasteful projects, such as the construction of the new capital in Naypyidaw. Were the donor community to fully fund the reconstruction effort without addressing the government’s horrendous misallocation of resources, it risks being complicit in the government’s continuing disregard for the health, education, and other basic needs of the population.
- Use reconstruction projects to promote respect for human rights in Burma. Some donors have been reluctant to discuss human rights abuses or the lack of progress in political negotiations while meeting Burmese government officials or in donor coordination meetings, fearing that this would complicate discussions on relief and reconstruction. While this may have been sensible in the immediate aftermath of the cyclone, it is now critical to address the connection between the government’s dismal human rights record and its disregard for the Burmese people’s welfare following the cyclone. Cyclone Nargis was a natural disaster that became a man-made disaster. While donors rightly are focusing on a massive humanitarian and reconstruction effort in Burma, they must simultaneously engage with the Burmese government on its atrocious human rights record. These two aims not only are not mutually exclusive, but can and should be pursued in tandem if the aid effort is to reach its intended targets and goals.
Establish an Independent Monitoring Body
Finally, because of the complex and exceptional challenges faced by the donor community in funding, implementing, and monitoring humanitarian and reconstruction projects in Burma, donors should establish an “Independent Monitoring Body.” This body should be co-managed by the donor community and the United Nations to ensure the integrity of the reconstruction and humanitarian effort, and to provide transparency and accountability in the effort. Such a body would be tasked with implementing the basic principles of assistance set out above.
While the above list of basic principles is long, it reflects the enormous challenges to providing effective assistance in a country ruled for decades by a highly repressive and corrupt regime. In addressing the enormous humanitarian and reconstruction needs of the people affected by Cyclone Nargis, it is essential that the donor community ensure that international efforts contribute to greater respect for basic human rights and do not have the unintended consequence of contributing to the further consolidation of illegitimate military rule at the expense of the Burmese people.
We look forward to discussing these matters further at your convenience. Thank you for your consideration.
Yours sincerely,
Brad Adams
Executive Director
Asia division
Human Rights Watch remains deeply concerned about the dire plight of Burmese severely affected by Cyclone Nargis, which struck Burma’s Irrawaddy Delta on May 2-3, 2008. The United Nations estimates that the cyclone left at least 140,000 persons dead or missing and that approximately 2.4 million more were severely affected, many of whom are still in need of urgent and sustained humanitarian assistance.
Human Rights Watch recognizes the strong and committed role played by international relief agencies and organizations in responding to the crisis and the difficulties of operating in an environment where there is little infrastructure and many government barriers. We support the continued efforts by international and Burmese organizations and individuals to respond to the disaster.
The Burmese authorities’ reaction to the cyclone shocked the world. Instead of allowing humanitarian assistance to be delivered urgently to survivors, as did countries affected by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, the Burmese military government prevented international humanitarian agencies from entering the delta during the crucial first weeks after the cyclone. An untold number of people died and suffered needlessly as the junta treated the cyclone as a national security problem instead of a natural disaster, demonstrating the shocking disregard that Burma’s ruling generals hold for the welfare of their own people.
While the government has improved its cooperation with aid agencies, the authorities continue to obstruct humanitarian relief efforts in various ways. More than two months after the cyclone, just 1.3 million out of the 2.4 million Burmese severely affected have received any form of international humanitarian assistance. While restrictions on international relief workers visiting affected areas have been eased, official permission to travel to the delta still takes many days and does not allow the full access required to reach all at risk.
From Relief to Reconstruction
Even when the immediate needs for food, temporary shelter, clean water, and medical assistance have been met, major efforts will be necessary to help people rebuild their lives and livelihoods. The cyclone swept away entire villages and hundreds of thousands of survivors have lost their homes. The United Nations estimates that between 77 to 85 percent of houses in Bogale and Lapputa townships were completely destroyed. Public infrastructure, including roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, and other essential services, have largely disappeared in many areas. The rice cultivation paddies of the Irrawaddy Delta have been inundated with salt water and require a massive rehabilitation effort. Livestock populations, including the water buffaloes used for rice cultivation, have been decimated. Rehabilitating the Irrawaddy Delta region will require a massive reconstruction effort, including the financial support of the international community.
The Tripartite Core Group (TCG)—comprising the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the United Nations and the Burmese ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC)—has completed its needs assessment of the affected areas and presented its formal findings at a meeting in Singapore on July 21. The total cost of relief and reconstruction was estimated at US$1 billion. On July 10 a Revised Flash Appeal for humanitarian assistance was raised from an initial US$201 million to US$481 million for relief operations lasting until April 2009. For the 13 UN agencies and 23 international humanitarian organizations involved in operations in the cyclone-affected areas, adequate funding is urgent and crucial to alleviate suffering and prepare the way for reconstruction.
Human Rights Watch has long supported humanitarian aid to Burma so long as it is provided in an accountable, transparent and principled manner. Unfortunately, the Burmese authorities have long refused to allow aid to be provided in this way.
As the donor and humanitarian community move towards considering support for major reconstruction efforts in the cyclone-affected regions of Burma, Human Rights Watch believes it is of utmost importance that clear principles be established for the provision of aid. Aid provided without respect for clear principles—as detailed below—and without careful monitoring, will invariably be misused and fail to meet the needs of cyclone victims.
The greatest obstacle faced by the international community in addressing the large-scale reconstruction needs of the Irrawaddy Delta is Burma’s abusive military leadership. The Burmese government has a long record of severe human rights violations against its own people, which have repeatedly been raised at the UN Security Council, the Human Rights Council (and its predecessor the Commission on Human Rights), and other international bodies. Many abuses previously reported will directly impact on the reconstruction effort, such as the widespread use of forced labor, documented by the International Labor Organization (ILO) and other independent international organizations.
In order to ensure that future reconstruction meets the needs of the affected population and does not contribute to further human rights abuses, donors should adopt the following basic principles when planning, funding and implementing reconstruction projects in Burma:
- Insist that the continuing humanitarian needs of the affected population are immediately addressed. Soon after the cyclone, the Burmese government claimed that the “emergency phase” of the crisis had been completed and that the focus should shift to long-term reconstruction. This view reflected not only the military leadership’s disregard for the welfare of the affected population, but its own political and financial interest in being the recipient of multi-million dollar donor-funded infrastructure development projects. As more than one million of those affected by the cyclone have still not been reached by international humanitarian agencies, the donor community should insist that the immediate humanitarian needs of the population be addressed before embarking on large-scale reconstruction efforts.
- Insist on unimpeded humanitarian access for local and international humanitarian organizations to the affected population and to determine reconstruction needs. Despite promises made nearly two months ago by the military junta to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the government continues to place significant obstacles in the path of international humanitarian agencies and local volunteer organizations in meeting the needs of the affected population. Two months after the cyclone, international humanitarian efforts remain severely impeded and far less effective than after other large-scale disasters, such as the response to the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the May 2008 earthquake in Sichuan, China. While the government has granted 1,670 visas to aid workers from UN agencies, private nongovernmental organizations and ASEAN officials, many humanitarian relief professionals lose crucial time waiting for official permission to travel and are still prohibited from spending extended time in the delta. The authorities have also arbitrarily detained and harassed some local volunteers, such as the prominent comedian Zargana. The limited reach of international aid is almost entirely due to obstacles created by the government. The donor community should continue to insist on unimpeded access for humanitarian workers to the affected population, and make further assistance contingent on greater access and a removal of obstacles. The Burmese government has requested billions of dollars in reconstruction assistance but has provided almost no documentation to support its request. In order to accurately assess the reconstruction needs, countries considering pledges should insist on full and unimpeded access to affected areas to do their own independent assessments of reconstruction needs. The Post-Nargis Joint Assessment (PONJA) conducted by ASEAN, Burmese officials, and UN officials, is an important step towards an accurate assessment of the reconstruction needs, but further assessment efforts will be required.
- Ensure that all internationally funded reconstruction activities be conducted by independent humanitarian and development organizations, rather than by providing funding directly to the Burmese government, and that local participation be monitored by the donor. Many donors have long refused to provide aid directly to the government because of grave concerns over widespread human rights violations, corruption, and a lack of accountability and transparency in spending of donor funds. In recent years The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and Medecins Sans Frontieres (France) terminated their programs because of excessive government interference in aid activities. In light of these concerns, reconstruction funding should not go directly to the government, but should be conducted by qualified independent organizations that can be adequately monitored by the donor. Donors should insist that implementing organizations be freely allowed to recruit and hire local staff, and respond promptly should the authorities seek to intimidate or otherwise improperly interfere with local staff. Donors should take sufficient measures, including the creation of independent structures within Burma, to monitor aid to ensure that it is not diverted to the authorities.
- Monitor reconstruction efforts to deter previously documented human rights abuses, such as forced labor, forced relocation and land seizure. The Burmese government has a long history of human rights abuses carried out in pursuit of self-defined “development” projects. Villagers in Burma have had their land forcibly confiscated and have been conscripted for forced labor in road construction and development of biofuel and hardwood plantations. In the aftermath of the cyclone, the government has forcibly relocated thousands of displaced persons, at times placing them beyond the reach of humanitarian assistance. Donors should carefully design and monitor reconstruction projects to deter the government from using such abusive practices, particularly in the rehabilitation of infrastructure and the rice paddies, where the danger of forced labor practices are greatest. The donor community should ensure that international monitoring organizations like the ILO have sufficient capacity to monitor reconstruction projects.
- Consult with affected communities, ethnic minorities, religious communities, and a broad range of civil society groups when considering, designing, and implementing reconstruction projects. The Burmese government has a long history of disregarding the voices of civil society and the needs of the population in all facets of governance, and with development projects in particular. It considers independent views as a threat to its monolithic rule. Donors should set a strong and principled example in determining reconstruction needs by consulting a wide spectrum of individuals and groups, including local communities, ethnic minorities, religious communities, and a broad range of civil society actors, to ensure that reconstruction projects meet the needs of the affected populations. Such consultation requirements are now mainstreamed into projects of the World Bank and many other donors. While the government may object and try to limit contacts and communication between implementing agencies and local residents, donors should insist on the need for broad-based consultation.
- Do not award contracts for reconstruction projects to any Burmese company or individual under international sanctions, or with companies owned or controlled by the Burmese military. Donor states have placed a number of individuals and companies under international sanctions because of their direct role in supporting government repression and human rights abuses. The military junta has already put many of these individuals and companies in charge of major reconstruction projects in the Irrawaddy Delta. The donor community should not support any reconstruction efforts conducted by individuals or companies under international sanctions, and should not engage companies owned or controlled by the Burmese military in reconstruction projects.
- Provide humanitarian and reconstruction aid on the basis of need, and guard against government discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, religion, perceived political affiliation, or other basis. The Burmese government has a long record of discrimination against and marginalization of ethnic and religious minorities, independent religious authorities, and independent civil society groups, and of politicizing humanitarian and development assistance. Consider supporting small-scale, community-based reconstruction efforts in health, education, water and sanitation, agriculture, and other essential sectors that directly benefit the poorest and most affected, and not just “prestige” infrastructure projects that may not bring the same benefits to those most in need. Donors should ensure that the humanitarian and reconstruction needs of all affected communities are met on a nondiscriminatory basis.
- Before committing to reconstruction projects, require that the Burmese government, which has an estimated US$3.5 billion in foreign reserves and receives an estimated US$150 million in monthly gas exports revenues, formally commit to making a significant contribution to reconstruction efforts. While much of the Burmese population lives in dire poverty with meager access to education and health care, the country’s leadership has accumulated huge wealth through government economic enterprises. The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) calculates that one-third of the population lives below the poverty line, with much higher rates of absolute poverty in regional areas. And while the government is demanding huge reconstruction sums from foreign donors, its own accumulated wealth is given little consideration. The government’s foreign reserves and gas revenues are not allocated to address the basic needs of the population, causing Burma to be ranked 132 out of 177 in the latest UNDP Human Development Index. The government spends a paltry 1.1 percent of Gross Domestic Product on health and education, and Burma’s health care system is the second worst in the world after Sierra Leone. An estimated 75 percent of hospitals and clinics in cyclone affected areas were destroyed or damaged and urgently need to be replaced. At the same time, the SPDC spends enormous sums on an oversized military and wasteful projects, such as the construction of the new capital in Naypyidaw. Were the donor community to fully fund the reconstruction effort without addressing the government’s horrendous misallocation of resources, it risks being complicit in the government’s continuing disregard for the health, education, and other basic needs of the population.
- Use reconstruction projects to promote respect for human rights in Burma. Some donors have been reluctant to discuss human rights abuses or the lack of progress in political negotiations while meeting Burmese government officials or in donor coordination meetings, fearing that this would complicate discussions on relief and reconstruction. While this may have been sensible in the immediate aftermath of the cyclone, it is now critical to address the connection between the government’s dismal human rights record and its disregard for the Burmese people’s welfare following the cyclone. Cyclone Nargis was a natural disaster that became a man-made disaster. While donors rightly are focusing on a massive humanitarian and reconstruction effort in Burma, they must simultaneously engage with the Burmese government on its atrocious human rights record. These two aims not only are not mutually exclusive, but can and should be pursued in tandem if the aid effort is to reach its intended targets and goals.
Establish an Independent Monitoring Body
Finally, because of the complex and exceptional challenges faced by the donor community in funding, implementing, and monitoring humanitarian and reconstruction projects in Burma, donors should establish an “Independent Monitoring Body.” This body should be co-managed by the donor community and the United Nations to ensure the integrity of the reconstruction and humanitarian effort, and to provide transparency and accountability in the effort. Such a body would be tasked with implementing the basic principles of assistance set out above.
While the above list of basic principles is long, it reflects the enormous challenges to providing effective assistance in a country ruled for decades by a highly repressive and corrupt regime. In addressing the enormous humanitarian and reconstruction needs of the people affected by Cyclone Nargis, it is essential that the donor community ensure that international efforts contribute to greater respect for basic human rights and do not have the unintended consequence of contributing to the further consolidation of illegitimate military rule at the expense of the Burmese people.
We look forward to discussing these matters further at your convenience. Thank you for your consideration.
Yours sincerely,
Brad Adams
Executive Director
Asia division
US Lawmakers Vote to Extend Sanctions Against Burma
By Dan Robinson
Robinson report - Download (MP3)
Robinson report - Listen (MP3)
(VOA)- U.S. lawmakers have been commenting on the situation in Burma as the U.S. Congress advanced legislation to strengthen and renew unilateral U.S. economic sanctions against the Burmese military government. More from VOA's Dan Robinson on Capitol Hill.
The House of Representatives voted to extend U.S. trade sanctions against Burma's military government for one year, as companion legislation moved ahead in a Senate committee.
Sanctions prohibiting U.S. imports from Burma were first put into place in 2003, as a U.S. response to the refusal of Burma's military go restore democracy and improve human rights conditions.
In Wednesday's floor debate, Democrats and Republicans rose to support the extension, citing the Burmese military's use of force against democracy demonstrators last year, and its initial blocking of international relief aid for cyclone victims.
"While there can be concerns about the universal effectiveness of unilateral sanctions, Burma clearly presents a unique situation. There is overwhelming evidence that Burma continues to blatantly disregard HR (human rights) and suppress democracy and it is therefore important to continue the important ban for another yearm" said Sander Levin, a Michigan Democrat.
Republican Wally Herger describes himself as a skeptic where sanctions are concerned, suggesting that the U.S. import ban does not appear to have pushed Burma's military toward democracy and greater respect for human rights.
Despite this, he says U.S. sanctions must continue because the situation has been getting worse rather than better. "That said, in light of the events of the past year I believe we have no choice but to continue these sanctions, not only to remind Burma's leaders that their actions are inexcusable but also to communicate to the impoverished Burmese people that we have not abandoned their cause," he said.
In addition to moving toward renewal of the U.S. import ban, Congress has acted on the Burmese JADE Act, which closes a gap relating to gem stones reaching the U.S from Burma through third countries.
Approved by the Senate Tuesday after earlier House passage, that measure also makes members of Burma's ruling military government along with other military officials and family members ineligible for U.S. visas.
At the same time, lawmakers stopped short of including a stronger provision that would have required the U.S. Chevron company to give up its share of the Yadana natural gas project in Burmese waters.
Instead, the JADE Act contains only non-binding language urging Chevron to consider divestment from the project if the military government does not move toward democratic and other reforms.
Burma also came up in a separate House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing focusing on China and the 2008 Olympics.
There, Republican Dana Rohrabacher criticized Beijing for its support of Burma's military and its involvement in such places as Sudan. "Let's note, why is the dictatorship in Burma in place? Because of the dictatorship in Beijing. Burma is a vassal state of the Chinese Communist party," he said.
The primary House sponsor of U.S. import ban legislation, Democrat Joseph Crowley, called Wednesday for the Association of Southeast Asian nations (ASEAN) and the European Union to do more to step up financial and other pressure on Burma's military.
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice told ASEAN leaders meeting in Singapore that it is in the organization's interest to press Burmese military rulers to begin a dialogue with democracy leaders.
Robinson report - Download (MP3)
Robinson report - Listen (MP3)
(VOA)- U.S. lawmakers have been commenting on the situation in Burma as the U.S. Congress advanced legislation to strengthen and renew unilateral U.S. economic sanctions against the Burmese military government. More from VOA's Dan Robinson on Capitol Hill.
The House of Representatives voted to extend U.S. trade sanctions against Burma's military government for one year, as companion legislation moved ahead in a Senate committee.
Sanctions prohibiting U.S. imports from Burma were first put into place in 2003, as a U.S. response to the refusal of Burma's military go restore democracy and improve human rights conditions.
In Wednesday's floor debate, Democrats and Republicans rose to support the extension, citing the Burmese military's use of force against democracy demonstrators last year, and its initial blocking of international relief aid for cyclone victims.
"While there can be concerns about the universal effectiveness of unilateral sanctions, Burma clearly presents a unique situation. There is overwhelming evidence that Burma continues to blatantly disregard HR (human rights) and suppress democracy and it is therefore important to continue the important ban for another yearm" said Sander Levin, a Michigan Democrat.
Republican Wally Herger describes himself as a skeptic where sanctions are concerned, suggesting that the U.S. import ban does not appear to have pushed Burma's military toward democracy and greater respect for human rights.
Despite this, he says U.S. sanctions must continue because the situation has been getting worse rather than better. "That said, in light of the events of the past year I believe we have no choice but to continue these sanctions, not only to remind Burma's leaders that their actions are inexcusable but also to communicate to the impoverished Burmese people that we have not abandoned their cause," he said.
In addition to moving toward renewal of the U.S. import ban, Congress has acted on the Burmese JADE Act, which closes a gap relating to gem stones reaching the U.S from Burma through third countries.
Approved by the Senate Tuesday after earlier House passage, that measure also makes members of Burma's ruling military government along with other military officials and family members ineligible for U.S. visas.
At the same time, lawmakers stopped short of including a stronger provision that would have required the U.S. Chevron company to give up its share of the Yadana natural gas project in Burmese waters.
Instead, the JADE Act contains only non-binding language urging Chevron to consider divestment from the project if the military government does not move toward democratic and other reforms.
Burma also came up in a separate House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing focusing on China and the 2008 Olympics.
There, Republican Dana Rohrabacher criticized Beijing for its support of Burma's military and its involvement in such places as Sudan. "Let's note, why is the dictatorship in Burma in place? Because of the dictatorship in Beijing. Burma is a vassal state of the Chinese Communist party," he said.
The primary House sponsor of U.S. import ban legislation, Democrat Joseph Crowley, called Wednesday for the Association of Southeast Asian nations (ASEAN) and the European Union to do more to step up financial and other pressure on Burma's military.
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice told ASEAN leaders meeting in Singapore that it is in the organization's interest to press Burmese military rulers to begin a dialogue with democracy leaders.
ASEAN risks being sidelined
By Ruth Youngblood
(Kuwait Times) Praise heaped on the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) for persuading Myanmar's reluctant junta to open its doors to foreign aid have not halted nagging questions about the organization's future. While the group's credibility received a boost for brokering the arrangement enabling access for foreign aid and rescue workers following the devastating cyclone that hit Myanmar in May, analysts said the 41-year-old organization was in danger of being marginalized in Asia. As relations between major
powers improve, alternative platforms for regional interactions are emerging.
Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting Monday that only 30 per cent of the group's agreements and commitments have been honoured and implemented, describing the record as "somewhat patchy." ASEAN needs to implement many of the agreements it has adopted, said Mely Caballero-Anthony, associate professor at Singapore's S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. "By walking the talk, ASEAN builds up its credibility as a serious player in regional affairs, which in turn
enhances its standing in the wider international community," she said.
Progress on ASEAN's charter was essential, as it called for greater institutional capacity and accountability, she added. Ratification by all members is expected in December. The charter, signed by the 10 ASEAN leaders in November, seeks to commit the disparate nations to promote human rights and democratic ideals. Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines still need to ratify. ASEAN started working on a dispute settlement mechanism and a human rights body. The human rights body is to have no power to impose
sanctions and would rely on peer pressure, an official said. A database on human rights violations was to be created and periodic explanations sought, he said.
Critics have long branded ASEAN as ineffective, with non-interference in each other's affairs being its basic tenet. The charter's toothless enforcement mechanism was more of the same, they said. Myanmar only met its ASEAN counterparts nearly three weeks after the cyclone Nargis, the region's worst natural disaster since the tsunami of 2004, its critics pointed out.
As long as ASEAN stayed cohesive and effective, it should keep its place on the top of the regional arrangements, said Ong Keng Yong, director of the Institute of Policy Studies and former ASEAN secretary-general. ASEAN's ability to bring countries together was an asset, analysts said. The 27-member ASEAN Regional Forum, the region's premier security platform, meets today. Top diplomats from North Korea, the United States, China, South Korea, Japan and Russia are also set to gather on the sidelines for an
informal session. - dpa
(Kuwait Times) Praise heaped on the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) for persuading Myanmar's reluctant junta to open its doors to foreign aid have not halted nagging questions about the organization's future. While the group's credibility received a boost for brokering the arrangement enabling access for foreign aid and rescue workers following the devastating cyclone that hit Myanmar in May, analysts said the 41-year-old organization was in danger of being marginalized in Asia. As relations between major
powers improve, alternative platforms for regional interactions are emerging.
Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting Monday that only 30 per cent of the group's agreements and commitments have been honoured and implemented, describing the record as "somewhat patchy." ASEAN needs to implement many of the agreements it has adopted, said Mely Caballero-Anthony, associate professor at Singapore's S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. "By walking the talk, ASEAN builds up its credibility as a serious player in regional affairs, which in turn
enhances its standing in the wider international community," she said.
Progress on ASEAN's charter was essential, as it called for greater institutional capacity and accountability, she added. Ratification by all members is expected in December. The charter, signed by the 10 ASEAN leaders in November, seeks to commit the disparate nations to promote human rights and democratic ideals. Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines still need to ratify. ASEAN started working on a dispute settlement mechanism and a human rights body. The human rights body is to have no power to impose
sanctions and would rely on peer pressure, an official said. A database on human rights violations was to be created and periodic explanations sought, he said.
Critics have long branded ASEAN as ineffective, with non-interference in each other's affairs being its basic tenet. The charter's toothless enforcement mechanism was more of the same, they said. Myanmar only met its ASEAN counterparts nearly three weeks after the cyclone Nargis, the region's worst natural disaster since the tsunami of 2004, its critics pointed out.
As long as ASEAN stayed cohesive and effective, it should keep its place on the top of the regional arrangements, said Ong Keng Yong, director of the Institute of Policy Studies and former ASEAN secretary-general. ASEAN's ability to bring countries together was an asset, analysts said. The 27-member ASEAN Regional Forum, the region's premier security platform, meets today. Top diplomats from North Korea, the United States, China, South Korea, Japan and Russia are also set to gather on the sidelines for an
informal session. - dpa
Monday, 21 July 2008
Observers doubt Myanmar on ASEAN charter pledges
SINGAPORE (AFX-Thomson Financial) - Military-ruled Myanmar on Monday formally ratified the ASEAN Charter but observers doubted the junta will live up to the document's ideals on democracy and human rights.
Foreign Minister Nyan Win presented his country's ratification during an annual meeting of foreign ministers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
In the charter, ASEAN members commit "to strengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the rule of law, and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms."
ASEAN has been widely criticised for its policy of "constructive engagement" regarding member Myanmar, which is under European Union and United States sanctions over its human rights record.
Myanmar was also severely criticised internationally for its delay in allowing foreign aid into the country after a May 2-3 cyclone that left 138,000 people dead or missing.
It subsequently belatedly allowed aid workers to enter under an arrangement with ASEAN and the United Nations.
"Myanmar's ratification of the charter today demonstrates our strong commitment to embrace the common values and aspirations of the people of ASEAN to build the ASEAN community, one that's together in partnership in a caring and sharing community," said the junta's foreign minister Nyan Win.
But Egoy Bans, a Filipino activist pushing for democratisation in Myanmar, said he "does not believe that there is sincerity" by the junta to go through democratic change.
He said ASEAN must work toward "concrete reforms" inside Myanmar, as implied by the charter.
"I know it's sort of a challenge for ASEAN to really stand by its charter," said Bans, of the Free Burma Coalition group of independent democracy advocates.
Just seven days after the cyclone, Myanmar insisted on holding a referendum on a military-backed constitution. It said that despite the devastation, 98 percent of voters turned out for the ballot and more than 92 percent endorsed their constitution.
The opposition party of detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, held under house arrest for most of the past 18 years, dismissed the referendum outcome as a "sham."
Trevor Wilson, a former Australian ambassador to Myanmar, noted there are differing definitions of democracy, good governance and human rights.
He said Myanmar knows that other ASEAN countries also have similar difficulties conforming to outside standards.
"They're not going to take the view that they have to change their approach to 'disciplined democracy'," he said of Myanmar.
Wilson, now a visiting fellow at the Australian National University, said that despite its pledge to strengthen democracy and the rule of law, the charter "doesn't have the same force or meaning... that in Western countries we would expect it to have."
The charter aims to give ASEAN a legal framework and sets out principles and rules for members.
It also transforms ASEAN, established in 1967, into a legal entity, a move that will give the group greater clout in international negotiations.
The charter resulted from a long and controversial drafting process that saw some of the strong recommendations from ASEAN elder statesmen watered down or dropped, including provisions on sanctions and expulsion.
ASEAN Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan said the document will come into force on the 30th day after the 10th member ratifies.
Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines are the remaining members of the 10-nation ASEAN which must still ratify the document, although Manila has said it will not do so until Myanmar improves its human rights record.
But Surin said he was "very optimistic" all members would ratify the charter in time for the ASEAN summit in Bangkok later this year.
Foreign Minister Nyan Win presented his country's ratification during an annual meeting of foreign ministers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
In the charter, ASEAN members commit "to strengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the rule of law, and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms."
ASEAN has been widely criticised for its policy of "constructive engagement" regarding member Myanmar, which is under European Union and United States sanctions over its human rights record.
Myanmar was also severely criticised internationally for its delay in allowing foreign aid into the country after a May 2-3 cyclone that left 138,000 people dead or missing.
It subsequently belatedly allowed aid workers to enter under an arrangement with ASEAN and the United Nations.
"Myanmar's ratification of the charter today demonstrates our strong commitment to embrace the common values and aspirations of the people of ASEAN to build the ASEAN community, one that's together in partnership in a caring and sharing community," said the junta's foreign minister Nyan Win.
But Egoy Bans, a Filipino activist pushing for democratisation in Myanmar, said he "does not believe that there is sincerity" by the junta to go through democratic change.
He said ASEAN must work toward "concrete reforms" inside Myanmar, as implied by the charter.
"I know it's sort of a challenge for ASEAN to really stand by its charter," said Bans, of the Free Burma Coalition group of independent democracy advocates.
Just seven days after the cyclone, Myanmar insisted on holding a referendum on a military-backed constitution. It said that despite the devastation, 98 percent of voters turned out for the ballot and more than 92 percent endorsed their constitution.
The opposition party of detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, held under house arrest for most of the past 18 years, dismissed the referendum outcome as a "sham."
Trevor Wilson, a former Australian ambassador to Myanmar, noted there are differing definitions of democracy, good governance and human rights.
He said Myanmar knows that other ASEAN countries also have similar difficulties conforming to outside standards.
"They're not going to take the view that they have to change their approach to 'disciplined democracy'," he said of Myanmar.
Wilson, now a visiting fellow at the Australian National University, said that despite its pledge to strengthen democracy and the rule of law, the charter "doesn't have the same force or meaning... that in Western countries we would expect it to have."
The charter aims to give ASEAN a legal framework and sets out principles and rules for members.
It also transforms ASEAN, established in 1967, into a legal entity, a move that will give the group greater clout in international negotiations.
The charter resulted from a long and controversial drafting process that saw some of the strong recommendations from ASEAN elder statesmen watered down or dropped, including provisions on sanctions and expulsion.
ASEAN Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan said the document will come into force on the 30th day after the 10th member ratifies.
Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines are the remaining members of the 10-nation ASEAN which must still ratify the document, although Manila has said it will not do so until Myanmar improves its human rights record.
But Surin said he was "very optimistic" all members would ratify the charter in time for the ASEAN summit in Bangkok later this year.
Myanmar regime ratifies Asean charter including human rights body
MYANMAR (ST)has ratified a proposed international charter that includes controversial human rights provisions, officials said on Monday, a day after regional powers slammed the nation's ruling junta for extending opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi's detention.
Myanmar's ratification of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) charter is to be formalised at a ceremony later Monday.
But question marks remain about whether Myanmar's junta, which has jailed hundreds of political dissidents, including Nobel peace laureate Suu Kyi, is willing to adhere to the principles of human rights and respect for rule of law enshrined in the charter.
It was also unclear whether the proposed Asean human rights body, the details of which have yet to be hammered out, will have any substantive enforcement or monitoring power.
The charter, expected to come into force by next year, aims to strengthen the 10-member group of Asian nations, giving it power to sue and be sued, and establishing enforceable financial, trade and environmental rules.
The most controversial part of the charter is a proposed human rights body.
'It's high time that we concretize the human rights of the people of Asean', said Ms Rosario Manalo, the Philippine representative to the panel.
Still, it is clear that the body will not have the power to sanction countries that violate the rights of its citizens.
The Philippines and possibly Thailand will push for the body to have the power to at least monitor human rights violations, said one South-east Asian diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity because she was not authorised to speak to the media.
Myanmar is the seventh member of Asean to ratify the charter. The Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia have balked at endorsing it, demanding that Myanmar first give firmer commitments to democracy.
The human rights panel, which will hold its first meeting Monday to determine the scope of the human rights body, is expected to submit a draft of its recommendations to the Asean leaders' summit in December.
Ignoring international criticism, Myanmar's junta on May 27 extended Suu Kyi's detention by another year, drawing an extraordinary rebuke Sunday from Asean members who usually shy from criticising each other.
Myanmar officials have issued no public response to that criticism, although its representative at the meeting, Foreign Minister Nyan Win, suggested Sunday that Suu Kyi could be freed from house arrest in about six months.
Suu Kyi has now been detained for more than 12 of the last 18 years at her home in Myanmar, formerly known as Burma. -- AP
Myanmar's ratification of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) charter is to be formalised at a ceremony later Monday.
But question marks remain about whether Myanmar's junta, which has jailed hundreds of political dissidents, including Nobel peace laureate Suu Kyi, is willing to adhere to the principles of human rights and respect for rule of law enshrined in the charter.
It was also unclear whether the proposed Asean human rights body, the details of which have yet to be hammered out, will have any substantive enforcement or monitoring power.
The charter, expected to come into force by next year, aims to strengthen the 10-member group of Asian nations, giving it power to sue and be sued, and establishing enforceable financial, trade and environmental rules.
The most controversial part of the charter is a proposed human rights body.
'It's high time that we concretize the human rights of the people of Asean', said Ms Rosario Manalo, the Philippine representative to the panel.
Still, it is clear that the body will not have the power to sanction countries that violate the rights of its citizens.
The Philippines and possibly Thailand will push for the body to have the power to at least monitor human rights violations, said one South-east Asian diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity because she was not authorised to speak to the media.
Myanmar is the seventh member of Asean to ratify the charter. The Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia have balked at endorsing it, demanding that Myanmar first give firmer commitments to democracy.
The human rights panel, which will hold its first meeting Monday to determine the scope of the human rights body, is expected to submit a draft of its recommendations to the Asean leaders' summit in December.
Ignoring international criticism, Myanmar's junta on May 27 extended Suu Kyi's detention by another year, drawing an extraordinary rebuke Sunday from Asean members who usually shy from criticising each other.
Myanmar officials have issued no public response to that criticism, although its representative at the meeting, Foreign Minister Nyan Win, suggested Sunday that Suu Kyi could be freed from house arrest in about six months.
Suu Kyi has now been detained for more than 12 of the last 18 years at her home in Myanmar, formerly known as Burma. -- AP
Saturday, 19 July 2008
from one godfather to the next rein's of Thailand in 2008-2009
Burma once again likely to steal ASEAN show
By Ruth Youngblood
The Nation-Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Ministers from the Association of of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) are expected to tackle soaring fuel and food prices and a barrage of other problems at their meeting Monday, but Burma is once again likely to steal the show.
Senior officials from the 10-member grouping well remember how the signing in November of the landmark ASEAN Charter - meant to transform the 10-member grouping into a legal entity - was set to be a historic event.
It was abruptly overshadowed by the Burma regime's decision to call off a scheduled ASEAN leaders meeting with UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari, an embarrassment for the organization and host Singapore.
With an assessment report of the damage wrought by Cyclone Nargis to be presented Monday at the ASEAN foreign ministers meeting, Burma will again take centre stage. The United Nations is hoping for an outpouring of 480 million dollars over the next year in emergency relief for the victims of Cyclone Nargis.
"It's been a long year, quite an eventful one year" under Singapore's chairmanship of ASEAN, said the city-state's Foreign Minister George Yeo.
The cyclone in early May led to a stand-off between a suspicious Burmese government and a global community eager to render aid but kept at bay as the ruling junta initially rejected outside assistance and foreign relief workers. ASEAN was the catalyst to get the aid moving, but it was nearly three weeks after the disaster.
In a positive move, Burma has become the latest to sign the ASEAN charter, leaving Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam as the only ones yet to do so.
The charter commits ASEAN members "to strengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the rule of law, and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms."
The ministers will focus on two key components of the charter: creation of a human-rights council and a mechanism for dispute settlement.
On human rights, Yeo said that ASEAN wants to build an agreed foundation of common human rights that would serve the group's regional construction and the interests of its people.
"Whether or not the human right body we establish will have teeth, I don't know. But it will certainly have a tongue, and I hope it will have a sharp tone," he said.
Burma's dismal human rights record has prompted sanctions by both the United States and European Union.
Senior officials preparing for the ministerial session want a recommendation that Burma release all political detainees included in a joint statement to be issued after the ministers' meeting.
If accepted, it would indicate a further toughening of ASEAN's stance.
"ASEAN could have done much more in responding to Cyclone Nargis if the Burma government had been forthcoming earlier to the receipt of international assistance," said K Kesavapany, director of the Institute of South-East Asian Studies.
"Despite this, it was ASEAN's persistence which finally enabled the international community to gain entry into Burma and facilitate the flow of trade."
The rotating ASEAN chairmanship passes to Thailand on July 24.
ASEAN includes Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Burma.
By Ruth Youngblood
The Nation-Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Ministers from the Association of of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) are expected to tackle soaring fuel and food prices and a barrage of other problems at their meeting Monday, but Burma is once again likely to steal the show.
Senior officials from the 10-member grouping well remember how the signing in November of the landmark ASEAN Charter - meant to transform the 10-member grouping into a legal entity - was set to be a historic event.
It was abruptly overshadowed by the Burma regime's decision to call off a scheduled ASEAN leaders meeting with UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari, an embarrassment for the organization and host Singapore.
With an assessment report of the damage wrought by Cyclone Nargis to be presented Monday at the ASEAN foreign ministers meeting, Burma will again take centre stage. The United Nations is hoping for an outpouring of 480 million dollars over the next year in emergency relief for the victims of Cyclone Nargis.
"It's been a long year, quite an eventful one year" under Singapore's chairmanship of ASEAN, said the city-state's Foreign Minister George Yeo.
The cyclone in early May led to a stand-off between a suspicious Burmese government and a global community eager to render aid but kept at bay as the ruling junta initially rejected outside assistance and foreign relief workers. ASEAN was the catalyst to get the aid moving, but it was nearly three weeks after the disaster.
In a positive move, Burma has become the latest to sign the ASEAN charter, leaving Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam as the only ones yet to do so.
The charter commits ASEAN members "to strengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the rule of law, and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms."
The ministers will focus on two key components of the charter: creation of a human-rights council and a mechanism for dispute settlement.
On human rights, Yeo said that ASEAN wants to build an agreed foundation of common human rights that would serve the group's regional construction and the interests of its people.
"Whether or not the human right body we establish will have teeth, I don't know. But it will certainly have a tongue, and I hope it will have a sharp tone," he said.
Burma's dismal human rights record has prompted sanctions by both the United States and European Union.
Senior officials preparing for the ministerial session want a recommendation that Burma release all political detainees included in a joint statement to be issued after the ministers' meeting.
If accepted, it would indicate a further toughening of ASEAN's stance.
"ASEAN could have done much more in responding to Cyclone Nargis if the Burma government had been forthcoming earlier to the receipt of international assistance," said K Kesavapany, director of the Institute of South-East Asian Studies.
"Despite this, it was ASEAN's persistence which finally enabled the international community to gain entry into Burma and facilitate the flow of trade."
The rotating ASEAN chairmanship passes to Thailand on July 24.
ASEAN includes Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Burma.
Friday, 18 July 2008
ASEAN officials say Myanmar should release political detainees
SINGAPORE (Channelasia): Myanmar should release all political detainees, senior Southeast Asian officials say in a recommendation to their foreign ministers.
"The SOM (senior officials' meeting)... called on the release of all political detainees," a senior Southeast Asian official said.
If endorsed, the recommendation will be included in a joint statement to be issued after a two-day meeting of the ministers that starts Sunday, the official said.
The proposed paragraphs on Myanmar also call on the military government "to take bolder steps in what they're doing to move along the roadmap to democracy," the official said.
However, it could still be amended by the ministers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
The 10-member ASEAN has been widely criticised for its policy of "constructive engagement" regarding Myanmar, which is under EU and US sanctions over its human rights record.
Myanmar's detainees include democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been held under house arrest for most of the past 18 years. - AFP/ms
"The SOM (senior officials' meeting)... called on the release of all political detainees," a senior Southeast Asian official said.
If endorsed, the recommendation will be included in a joint statement to be issued after a two-day meeting of the ministers that starts Sunday, the official said.
The proposed paragraphs on Myanmar also call on the military government "to take bolder steps in what they're doing to move along the roadmap to democracy," the official said.
However, it could still be amended by the ministers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
The 10-member ASEAN has been widely criticised for its policy of "constructive engagement" regarding Myanmar, which is under EU and US sanctions over its human rights record.
Myanmar's detainees include democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been held under house arrest for most of the past 18 years. - AFP/ms
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)