BurmaNet News, March 9, 2007

[Editor]

March 9, 2007 Issue # 3158


INSIDE BURMA
AFP: Myanmar releases protest leader
Mizzima: Court rejects defamation suit against journalists

ON THE BORDER
Irrawaddy: Education may limit abuse of migrant children
SHAN: Reconciliation meet declared a success

HEALTH / AIDS
Xinhua: Dengue fever cases drop in Yangon, Myanmar in 2006

ASEAN
Irrawaddy: Blackout Burma set to host Asean energy conference

REGIONAL
AP: Report: Malaysia says it does not recognize refugees to prevent flood
of economic migrants

INTERNATIONAL
DVB: KNU leader briefs Oslo meeting on Burma conflict

OPINION / OTHER
Irrawaddy: Dirty hands can’t clean up government
Conservativehome.com - Burma, the case for sanctions – Ben Rogers

____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

March 9, Agence France Presse
Myanmar releases protest leader

Military-run Myanmar on Friday released the leader of last month's protest
demanding better living conditions a day after he was arrested for the
third time in three weeks, an activist said.

Htin Kyaw, 44, was detained Thursday after holding a press conference in
Yangon to urge the junta to improve Myanmar's dire living conditions and
release seven people still under detention over the demonstration.

Win Naing, a 71-year-old veteran politician who organised the press
conference, was also detained along with Htin Kyaw, but he told AFP that
they were both were released Friday.

"We were interrogated separately at the home affairs ministry. They said
we were wrong to hold the news conference," said Win Naing. He did not
join the February 22 protest, the first public demonstration against the
regime in a decade.

During the 30-minute protest, about 25 people marched through a Yangon
market urging lower prices for basic commodities, more jobs and 24-hour
electricity.

Win Naing said seven of the protesters were still detained by the junta.

"They were just demanding better living conditions. I don't understand the
government's motive for arresting people, including myself and Htin Kyaw,"
the pro-democracy activist said.

He said he had little information about the detained seven, including
their whereabouts.

Protests of any kind are rare in Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, which
has been under military rule since 1962.

The ruling junta has long feared that the country's crumbling economy,
driven into the ground by decades of mismanagement and hobbled by Western
sanctions, could spark urban unrest.

____________________________________

March 9, Mizzima News
Court rejects defamation suit against journalists

The Sanchaung Court today dismissed Naw Ohn Hla's defamation suit she had
filed against 123 editors and publishers attached to 30 Rangoon based
journals.

"Today the court rejected the case. It said it did so following police
investigations. But the reports are made and it could be obtained on
Monday," U Nyunt Hlaing, a elected Member of Parliament of the 1990
elections from Aung Hlan Township, told Mizzima.

In January, 30 weekly journals in Rangoon carried an article written by a
writer using a pseudonym "Yan Yan", which linked Naw Ohn Hla to a known,
now deceased pimp from an area in Rangoon where she lives now.

Follow the publication of the articles, Naw Ohn Hla, a former National
League for Democracy member and resident of Hmawby Township filed a
defamation law suit against 123 editors and publishers of the journals at
the Sanchaung Township Court.

The judge, Daw Khin San Myint reportedly said that 'the case needed
further investigation' and postponed trial of the case several times ---
from January 13 to 15 and again to January 27 and then to March 9, 2007.
And finally today, the judge announced that the case has been dismissed.

However, U Nyunt Hlaing said "With the help of lawyer Khin Maung Shein, we
will file the case in a district court."

Naw Ohn Hla filed the law suit against the editors and publishers of the
journals after failing to receive any redressal despite making an appeal
in writing to authorities including junta supremo Senior General Than
Shwe.

Naw Ohn Hla has been praying every Tuesday at the Shwe Dagon pagoda for
the release and good health of Burmese pro-democracy leader Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi. Despite authorities, the Union Solidarity and Development
Association members, and pagoda security groups' creating disturbances and
restrictions, Naw Ohn Hla visited Shwe Dagon Pagoda for the 139th time on
Tuesday and prayed for Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

March 9, Irrawaddy
Education may limit abuse of migrant children - Marwaan Macan-Markar

Troubled by the exploitation of migrant child on the Thai-Burma border, a
labour rights group is seeking an unusual pact with the Thai government.
The Migrant Action Programme (MAP) wants support to help educate the
victims.

''The child workers are entitled to social services such as education
under the law. They are entitled to days off for education with pay,''
says Pranom Somwong, an activist at MAP, which is based in the northern
Thai city of Chiang Mai. ''It is one way of teaching them their rights and
stopping any abuse.''

More importantly, she told IPS, this initiative to aid children working in
factories in the border town of Mae Sot ties in with the objective of the
government, since it is legally bound to help vulnerable employees. ''We
want to help the government to implement its own law.''

The initial groundwork being laid for this education drive in Mae Sot
comes in the wake of a disturbing report about the scale of abuse children
from Burma are subjected to in garment factories, where owners frequently
stamp on international and local labour standards.

''Every factory is violating one law or another,'' Philip Robertson,
editor of the 100-page report published by the International Labour
Organisation, told IPS. ''The factories are making maximum use of a
disempowered work force, child workers who are easily controllable and
exploitable.''

The research findings concluded that factory owners are ''trying to hire
more young women'' from Burma, he added. ''Their ideal worker is a 15 to
17- year- old girl who is not going to cause trouble like forming a union
and simply be a follower.''

Factory owners in Mae Sot get away with several violations, including
''excessive working hours, lack of time off and unhealthy proximity to
dangerous machines and chemicals,'' states the report, 'The Mekong
Challenge: Working Day and Night—The Plight of Migrant Child Workers in
Mae Sot, Thailand.'

In fact, the report argues that these children who have come for jobs to
escape grinding poverty and conflict at home in Burma are being subjected
to the ''worst forms of child labor,'' which is prohibited by an
international treaty—ILO Convention 182—which Thailand ratified in 2001.
''Mae Sot has perfected a system where children are literally working day
and night, week after week, for wages that are far below the legal minimum
wage, to the point of absolute exhaustion.''

Over 80 percent of the 313 Burmese children surveyed in this study—ranging
from 12 to 17 years—are forced to toil for 11 or 12 hours daily, and
nearly half of them get no days off at any time of the month, the report
revealed. ''A total of 30 percent of the child workers reported that they
were required to live at the factory as a condition of employment, further
underlining the absolute control exerted over their lives by factory
owners.''

Aye, a 14-year-old from Burma's Mon ethnic community is a typical migrant
child worker in Mae Sot. She has to work 12 hours daily through the week,
according to the report. ''Long hours at work have taken a toll on her
health. She has persistent headaches and suffers from back strain.''

At a factory employing 300 migrant workers, both adults and children, the
owner maintains a tight control on the production floor by mounting a
personal vigil, often ''armed with a pistol,'' adds the report. ''The
amount of wages paid is given according to the owner's discretion, and
what he thinks the worker in question should receive that month.''

The plight of the child worker has been worsened by the absence of a
mechanism for the victims to seek help for oppressive work conditions or
the regular cut in the legal minimum wage they are entitled to.

That stems from the ''labour inspection services of the (Thai) government
being under-staffed and under-resourced,'' Tim De Meyer, specialist on
international labour standards and laws at the ILO's East Asia office,
told IPS. ''Regular labour inspection is exactly the sort of thing you
need here for things to work. Having a political commitment is not
enough.''

The problem that Thailand faces in Mae Sot has been compounded by
political and economic instability in Burma, he added. ''The labour supply
is abundant due to the large number of people moving across the border for
jobs. People are desperate to get a job.''

Tak province, where Mae Sot is located, currently ranks second after
Bangkok for the number of Burmese migrant workers registered for
employment in jobs that are described as ''dirty and dangerous.'' In 2004,
there were some 1.2 million migrant workers registered with Thailand's
ministry of labour, over 70 percent of who came from Burma. Tak had over
120,000 registered migrant workers.

The flow of migrant workers to Mae Sot gained pace in the mid 1990s when
it was converted into a production centre for garment factories, now
estimated to be over 200. Many workers were fleeing a country that has
been under the grip of a harsh military rule since a 1962 coup. Critics
have accused the Burmese junta of destroying the country's economy,
transforming it from a country of surplus in the 1950s to one reduced to a
Least Developed Country, with over a fifth of the population living in
poverty and over a third of the children, under five years, malnourished.

''The factory owners have total power in Mae Sot, because they can kick
out a worker anytime they want,'' says Tin Tin Aung, a ranking member of
the Federation of Trade Unions-Burma, a labour rights lobby with
headquarters in Washington DC ''They can always find new workers from the
many migrants coming from Burma.''

Children are kept on the staff because they are easy to exploit, he told
IPS. ''Factory managers do this by changing the age of the children to
meet the labour standards in Thailand. Then they threaten the children
with punishment if they complain or speak to NGOs.''

____________________________________

March 9, Shan Herald Agency for News
Reconciliation meet declared a success

The two-day annual consultation organized by the National Reconciliation
Programme (NRP) on the Thai-Burma border concluded yesterday with a formal
declaration of success by the programme committee chairman, David
Thackerbaw of the Karen National Union (KNU).

While the first day was spent entirely on the issues relating to running
the Programme, its guidelines and procedures on how projects were decided,
the second day focused on politics and humanitarian assistance to Burma.

"The need for the opposition to be seen as a viable alternative (to the
military rulers of Burma) has become paramount," Soe Pyne from the
National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB) exile told the
103 participants.

Dr Kyaw Nyunt of the National Council of the Union of Burma (NCUB),
another panelist, also spoke in favour of enhanced concerted efforts,
consolidation and cohesion among Burma's myriad opposition movements and
alliances in exile. "Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the CRPP (Committee
Representing People's Parliament) and the rest inside continue to be a
staunch bulwark against the SPDC (State Peace and Development Council),"
he said. "However, as they are being hamstrung at every turn, the time has
come for us to carry the greater burden of responsibility."

The opposition in exile had already met last month for Strategic
Coordination and Consultation (SCC), the outcome of which was reported by
Rimond Htoo of the Karenni National Progressive Party (KNPP). The common
strategic agreement reached include, among others:

    * Reconfirmation of anti-military dictatorship and establishment of a
federal union
    * Emergence of a tripartite dialogue based on the results of the 1990
general elections
    * Campaigning against the SPDC's 7-point roadmap at every phase
    * Increased focus on activities on the home front
    * Emergence of a common roadmap among the opposition
    * Eight point guidelines for international humanitarian assistance

"As for more details, you can refer to the New Light of Myanmar (February
27)", he quipped, generating laughter among participants.

On the sidelines of the meeting, many had blamed the inordinate number of
activists, who had attended the February 21to 23 get-together to map out a
common strategy, for the premature leak. "The newspaper report had also
conveyed a clear cut two-point message", said one. "First, countering the
statement released by the SCC and second, letting it be known that the
junta has successfully planted moles among the opposition."

The NRP was formed in 1999 "to bring about a peaceful transition to
democracy and the establishment of a Federal Union of Burma by assisting
the Ethnic Nationalities in preparing for Tripartite Dialogue." It is
supported by the Danish Burma Committee, Canadian Lutheran World Relief,
Olof Palme International Center, Trocaire, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Burma
Centrum Netherlands and Euro Burma Office.

____________________________________
HEALTH / AIDS

March 9, Xinhua General News Service
Dengue fever cases drop in Yangon, Myanmar in 2006

Dengue fever cases have dropped in Myanmar's Yangon city in 2006 due to
preventive measures taken by the authorities and social organizations, the
local Myanmar Times reported Friday.

The dengue fever cases in the former capital city declined to 1, 531 with
18 deaths in 2006 from 5,621 cases with 40 deaths in 2005, the report
quoted health officials as saying.

In 2006, a mass prevention campaign against the dengue fever was launched
in Yangon in the wake of increased threat of widespread infection of the
disease carried through from the previous year, especially during the
rainy season.

The authorities attributed the high infection rate of dengue fever in
Yangon to heavy population and poor stream-water flow in some areas. The
680-square-kilometer Yangon has a population of 6 million.

The health authorities have occasionally advised people to take necessary
measures in the prevention and control including hygienic use of drinking
water, combating of larvae, week-end sanitation activities and educative
talks on the dengue fever.

According to official statistics, nearly 13,000 dengue fever cases
occurred in Myanmar in 2005, a sharp increase from the previous year's
6,000. The figures represented the second biggest outbreak of the
mosquito-borne viral disease since 2001 when it was reported as 15,695.

The authorities warned that the Aedes mosquito carrying the virus put
residents in heavily populated areas at increased risk than other urban
areas, adding that there is no specific treatment or vaccine for the
dengue fever.

Dengue fever usually breaks out during and after the rainy season and
children aged under 12 are particularly vulnerable to the disease.

Broken out in Myanmar intermittently, the dengue fever was first detected
in Yangon in 1969 and a major outbreak of the disease followed in 1970,
which was confined in Yangon until 1973. The first case in northern
Mandalay division was detected in 1974 and major outbreaks had occurred in
the division about every four years with most recent in 2001 and 2005.

____________________________________
ASEAN

March 9, Irrawaddy
Blackout Burma set to host Asean energy conference

Rangoon is set to host an Asean meeting including China, Japan and South
Korea, to discuss ways of enhancing renewable energy systems in Southeast
Asia to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

The choice of venue is somewhat ironic, say energy industry analysts,
given Burma’s huge recently discovered offshore gas reserves—and the lack
of electricity.

The two-day meeting, on March 15-16, is part of Asean’s ongoing objectives
of closer cooperation in energy and transport infrastructure between the
ten member-countries and non member neighbors.

Several countries, notably Malaysia, have begun producing large quantities
of ethanol from plant feedstock to produce biofuels. Thailand and
Indonesia are following suit, switching large swathes of farmland to
feedstock crop production of palm, cassava and sugar cane.

The Burmese regime has meanwhile been pressuring millions of Burmese to
grow jatropha plants, supposedly to also produce ethanol, although
production remains close to zero, say observers.

Travelers in Burma recently returned to Bangkok say one of the country’s
most popular tourist destinations, Mandalay, is currently experiencing
power blackouts from 5 pm until 5 am. “It’s crazy. That’s the time when
you need electricity most!” said Jeff and Linda Newzinsky, visitors from
the US.

Presumably the regime will make extra special efforts to ensure the
Rangoon venue for the Asean meeting is blackout free.

____________________________________
REGIONAL

March 9, Associated Press
Report: Malaysia says it does not recognize refugees to prevent flood of
economic migrants

Kuala Lumpur: Malaysia does not recognize refugees because it fears an
onslaught of migrants fleeing poverty, a news report said Friday.

"If we recognize refugees, we could open the floodgates and encourage them
to come here just to escape economic hardship in their own country,"
Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar said, according to the New Straits
Times.

The Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees in Malaysia said
Thursday 27,000 refugees have come from military-ruled Myanmar, and 12,000
from Aceh in Indonesia.

Ethnic minorities in Myanmar, also known as Burma, have long faced
persecution from the military junta, and many are hiding in jungles, or
have attempted to leave the country.

The paper quoted Syed Hamid as saying its reasons for non-recognition were
purely "economic, and not political."

"Not all who say they are refugees are political refugees," Syed Hamid
told the paper. "Some are here for economic reasons and this is a burden
to society."

Malaysia has long attracted migrants, many fleeing poverty, from Southeast
and South Asian countries like Indonesia, Myanmar, India, Bangladesh and
China. Many of them end up doing menial work spurned by locals on
plantations and in the construction industry, and are widely blamed for
crime and social problems.

Authorities often launch raids to weed out the estimated 700,000 illegal
migrants in Malaysia. Such raids have been condemned by rights groups in
the past, claiming authorities were heavy-handed in dealing with
foreigners.

Aides to Syed Hamid were not immediately available for comment.

On Thursday, UNHCR's office in Malaysia urged citizens not to look at all
refugees as criminals, as they generally do not commit crime fore fear of
being sent home. It also urged Malaysian not to view refugees as migrants,
saying they want to return home but sometimes cannot.

Malaysia's Home Affairs Ministry has said it does not recognize the
UNHCR's powers and that the refugee agency was making it difficult for
officials to crack down on illegal immigrants.

_____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

March 9, Democratic Voice of Burma
KNU leader briefs Oslo meeting on Burma conflict

Colonel Nada Mya, son of the late Karen National Union leader Bo Mya,
addressed a group of prominent politicians and diplomats in Norway on
Thursday, wearing full KNU uniform.

Nada Mya told an audience a seminar at the Grand Hotel in Oslo, organised
by the Foundation Northern Alliance, that the lower ranks of the Burmese
military were struggling under poor economic conditions.

“We talked about [the SPDC] soldiers poor food and living conditions while
senior leader are at Pyinmana enjoying their privileges. Basic privates
among the SPDC troops are not willing to fight any more,” Nada Mya told
DVB.

“This shows the effectiveness of sanctions laid against the Burmese
government. SPDC forces used to be very strong. There used to be about 600
soldiers in each battalion. But now they can’t afford to feed them there’s
only 100 soldiers per battalion.”

Nada Mya also said he also held no prejudices against the ethnic majority
Burmans despite being locked in a fight against the predominantly Bama
Burmese military for autonomy.

“I love Burmese people. I am involved in this fight because I love Burmese
people. Not because I hate them. There are times when I talk to Burmese
troops on air and we question our reasons for fighting each other,” he
said.

_____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

March 9, Irrawaddy
Dirty hands can’t clean up government

Burma’s military regime is busy tidying up its house with a “clean
government” program to fight corruption and achieve good governance. It’s
certainly a welcome initiative—provided it’s sincere.

Prime Minister Gen Soe Win pledged to establish “clean government” in a
speech in October 2004 after succeeding former Prime Minister Gen Khin
Nyunt. Since then, state-run newspapers have been promoting the campaign.

Last year the regime seemed to be taking Soe Win’s pledge seriously. In
May 2006, an anti-corruption aggressive crackdown was launched at the
Ministry of Finance’s Customs Department, notorious for its kickbacks and
bribery. More than 500 officials were arrested. The department’s director
general was sentenced to 66 years imprisonment, and more than 100 other
officials received prison sentences.

The Irrawaddy has learned that the anti-corruption campaign will probably
be conducted in other ministries, including home affairs, education and
telecommunications, posts and telegraphs.

Burmese people are asking themselves, however, why only one high-ranking
Custom Department official, Director General Khin Maung Lin, was arrested
in a sweep that otherwise netted only low and middle-ranking officials.
How about other ministers and top military leaders?

The military government has used “corruption” charges as a tool to remove
its enemies or juniors it suspects of disloyalty. When former prime
minister Khin Nyunt was sacked in 2004, he was charged with responsibility
for a major corruption scandal involving his subordinates. And when the
government sacked a number of ministers in the late 1990s and early 2000s,
all of them were ousted on charges of corruption. Khin Nyunt was sentenced
to 44 years imprisonment, but was then placed under house arrest.

A more credible reason for Khin Nyunt’s ouster was his disobedience
towards his boss, Snr-Gen Than Shwe. The corruption charges against him
were, in effect, just an excuse, although that doesn’t mean he had clean
hands. Since 1988, when the military junta assumed power, nepotism and
cronyism have been rampant, especially among the very military leaders who
have now declared an anti-corruption campaign.

Families and friends of the military leaders, including Than Shwe, have
become involved in lucrative businesses. Tay Za is a typical example—he is
one of Burma’s wealthiest tycoons as a result of cozying up to Than Shwe.

Under the “clean government” plan, the regime has been selecting young and
educated local leaders since last year. Ironically, reliable sources say
that only a large bribe can secure selection. The government recently set
up hot lines for the public to phone in their complaints to the
authorities, but nobody dares to call for fear of being identified and
landing in jail.

When Khin Nyunt faced corruption charges, the junta’s No 3, Gen Thura Shwe
Mann, said: “No one is above the law.” He’s right, but in reality almost
all the military leaders are immune and reserve the right to decide who
should be above the law—usually their relatives and friends.

Ideologically, the junta’s “clean government” campaign is to be welcomed.
But it has to do more than clean the ranks of the civil servants. Members
of the junta themselves have to clean their own hands. Dirty hands can’t
clean up anything.

[The above editorial appeared in the March issue of The Irrawaddy]

____________________________________

March 9, Conservativehome.com
Burma, the case for sanctions – Ben Rogers

I have just returned from my 13th visit to the Thai-Burma border – which,
when added to my visits to the India-Burma border, the China-Burma border
and Rangoon and Mandalay mean I have so far made a total of 17 visits to
the Burma region since 2000. On each visit, I have talked with people who
have seen their villages burned, loved ones killed, women raped and
tortured, and have been used for forced labour. This time was no
different.

In a camp of 3,000 internally displaced people (IDPs) on the banks of the
Salween River, I met a woman whose 15 year-old son had been killed by the
Burma Army. He had been tied to a tree, his head cut off. I met another
woman whose husband had been mutilated and killed. Burma Army soldiers had
gouged out his eyes, tore off his lips and cut off his ears. And I met a
third woman whose husband had been hung upside down from a tree, tortured,
his eyes gouged out, and then drowned. This is the terrible truth about
Burma today.
Tell the world

And so it begs the question: what should the international community do?
First of all, pay attention. With some welcome exceptions, the world’s
media and politicians have ignored the terrible situation in Burma for far
too long, and yet it ranks as one of the world’s worst human rights
catastrophes. I will never forget, on a previous trip through the jungle,
meeting a 15 year-old boy whose parents had been killed and his village
burned, and he had been taken as a forced porter for the Burma Army. He
looked me in the eye and said:

 “Please tell the world to put pressure on the regime to stop killing its
people. Please tell the world not to forget us.”

A brutal military regime rules the country by force, having lost elections
in 1990 to the National League for Democracy (NLD), led by Nobel Laureate
Aung San Suu Kyi. Yet those elected in 1990 are either in exile or in
prison, and Aung San Suu Kyi has spent more than 12 years under house
arrest. In 2003, the regime attempted to assassinate her.

Karen_village_children_1 More than 1,100 political prisoners remain in
jail, subjected to the most barbaric forms of torture. Over a million
people are internally displaced in eastern Burma, victims of the regime’s
policy of ethnic cleansing bordering on a slow attempted genocide against
the Karen, Karenni, Shan and other ethnic groups. More than 3,000 villages
in eastern Burma have been destroyed since 1996.

When the military attacks, they loot and destroy everything – rice barns,
crops, livestock, cooking instruments and homes, and lay landmines at the
entrance to villages to stop those who have escaped from returning.
Civilians are used as human minesweepers, forced to walk across fields of
landmines to clear them for the military – losing their limbs and often
their lives in the process. On top of all this, Burma has the world’s
highest number of forcibly conscripted child soldiers – some as young as
9, taken from bus stops and street corners and forced to join the
military.

Genocide?

Some argue that these violations are simply part of a counter-insurgency
policy to crush ethnic armed resistance groups. But it is much more than
that. To call it counter-insurgency is to add unwarranted legitimacy to
the regime’s policies, and to pin the blame unfairly on the ethnic groups.
The armed resistance groups exist to defend their people and their land
against an aggressive, brutal dictatorship. They are fighting a struggle
for survival. Civilians are targeted – raped, tortured and beheaded. And
even in areas where ceasefires exist, such as Kachin and Mon States,
forced labour, land confiscation and rape continue.

So the international community should start by calling the crimes by their
proper name: crimes against humanity. Although ‘genocide’ is a debatable
term, and what is happening is not on the same dramatic scale as Rwanda or
the Holocaust, if you read the Genocide Convention and subsequent
interpretations, several of the definitions fit Burma. It is perhaps a
slow attempted genocide. Certainly it is crimes against humanity and
ethnic cleansing – and there is a case to investigate regarding genocide.

The myths about sanctions

There is a debate emerging over the question of sanctions. Some people
question whether sanctions against Burma work. Others argue sanctions hurt
the people, not the regime. Some believe we can open up Burma through
economic investment. Yet all these arguments are founded on several myths.

Myth 1 is that sanctions have failed. But the truth is, sanctions have not
really been tried. Only the United States has meaningful trade and
investment sanctions. The European Union (EU) bans investment in certain
State-owned enterprises in Burma, who are named in a list produced by
Brussels. On that list are a tailor shop and a pineapple juice factory –
but not a single company in the oil, gas, timber or gem sectors, the major
sources of revenue for the regime. The regime’s two major conglomerates –
the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd (UMEH) and the Myanmar Economic
Corporation (MEC) – are exempt from sanctions. Yet the UMEH, whose
shareholders are limited to the military establishment, has as its stated
objective “to support military personnel and their families” and “to try
and become the main logistics and support organisation for the military”.
By 1999, the UMEH had established nearly 50 joint ventures with foreign
firms.

If the EU banned investment in the UMEH and the MEC, and froze the
regime’s assets, it would hit the Generals where they would feel it most –
in their pockets. As it is, French oil company Total remains one of the
single largest foreign investors in Burma – and one of the single largest
sources of revenue for the regime. And it is a regime which spends almost
half its budget on the military, and less than $1 per person per year on
health and education combined. It has expanded the military to up to
400,000 – yet it has no external enemies. The military is used solely for
internal repression.

Myth 2 is that sanctions hurt the people. No one is talking about
Iraqi-style blanket-sanctions. Those who campaign on this issue want
targeted sanctions, aimed at the regime and its assets. No foreign
investment in Burma really benefits the people. Three-quarters of the
population live in the subsistence agriculture sector, outside the realms
of foreign investment. They do not see the benefits of investment, and
they are not hurt by sanctions. A minority of people working in the
affected sectors may lose their jobs as a result of sanctions, but we face
a stark choice: to allow the regime the finance it needs for its survival,
thereby condemning Burma to continued oppression and violence, or to cut
the regime’s financial lifelines, forcing it to come to the table.

Myth 3 is to compare Burma with countries like Cuba. But while Cuba has
its grave human rights problems, Burma is far worse. Burma ranks alongside
North Korea and Sudan as one of the world’s worst. Indeed, it could even
be in a category all on its own. What other regime has imprisoned and
attempted to kill a Nobel Laureate, ignored the results of an election,
forcibly recruited more than 70,000 child soldiers, and carried out
systematic rape, torture, forced labour, religious persecution and ethnic
cleansing?

Myth 4 is that sanctions are an imposition by well-intentioned but naïve
Westerners. This could not be more wrong. Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD
have repeatedly called for sanctions. All the major representatives of the
ethnic groups call for sanctions. The overwhelming majority of Burmese
people I have met call for sanctions. Surely we should respect the will of
the Burmese people and their democratically elected leaders?

Myth 5 is that if you are pro-sanctions, you are pro-isolation and against
engagement. This is one of the most polarising, destructive and inaccurate
myths of all. I am not against talking to the regime. Indeed, I, along
with the rest of the Burma pro-democracy movement, call for tripartite
dialogue between the regime, the NLD and the ethnic groups. The ethnic
groups and the NLD have consistently shown they are willing to talk. Only
the regime has refused.

The recent campaign to bring the issue of Burma to the agenda of the UN
Security Council proves this point. In the resolution, tabled by the US
and the UK and vetoed by China and Russia, no punitive action was
mentioned. The resolution was an entirely reasonable call for the regime
to release political prisoners, open up the country to international
humanitarian aid, and enter into dialogue.

Nobody is talking about isolation. The question is not whether to engage,
but how and on whose terms? The UK tried has tried economic investment
before. In the 1980s and 1990s, we regularly held trade fairs in Rangoon –
while the regime was bombing Karen villages. The regime did not change as
a result of us pumping money into its coffers.

What is needed is financial support for the pro-democracy movement, not
the regime. If the UK provided assistance to Burmese human rights groups
within the country and in exile to develop their capacity, it would make a
difference. Some of these groups risk their lives gathering much-needed
information inside Burma, and disseminating it to the world. Others are
engaged in human rights education and civil society development. There are
broadcasters and publications devoted to the spread of information within
Burma. We should be supporting them.

Myth 6 is that sanctions drive the regime into the hands of China, India
and other countries in the region. But the regime has always been more
friendly with these countries anyway. Burma is a member of the Association
of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN). Western foreign investment is never
going to counter the regime’s attitudes – and it will simply enable them
to buy more arms. Instead, the US and the EU must embark on a concerted
effort to put pressure on China, India and the ASEAN member states to use
the influence they have with the regime to bring about change. If it was
properly co-ordinated, the international community could develop an
effective “good cop, bad cop” strategy – with the US and the EU providing
the stick, and China, India and ASEAN the carrot. If China, India and
ASEAN could be persuaded that the regime itself is the cause of
instability in the region, they may be persuaded to have some tough words
with their friends the Generals. If China, India and ASEAN can be
persuaded that it is in their interests to use their influence for change,
they may just do so. It will be hard work, but it is worth trying.

At the end of the day, sanctions are only one tool in the toolbox. No one
believes sanctions alone will change the situation. They must be used
alongside other measures. But people should not underestimate the effect
of US and EU sanctions. Withdrawing Western investment cuts off some of
the regime’s revenues – meaning it can buy fewer arms than it would
otherwise have done. If we had tougher measures from the EU, combined with
pressure on China, India and ASEAN to do more, it would have even more
effect. Greater engagement by the UN Security Council and the UN
Secretary-General would also help. And there is one thing we can be sure
of: lifting sanctions, before there is any meaningful progress towards
democracy, would send entirely the wrong message to the regime. And in any
case, is a regime which gouges out the eyes and cuts off the ears of its
people really one we would want to invest in?

For readers who wish to know more, I would recommend the following papers
published by Burma Campaign UK:

    * Pro-Aid, Pro-Sanctions, Pro-Engagement
    * The European Union and Burma: The Case for Targeted Sanctions
    * Failing the People of Burma? A call for a review of DFID policy on
Burma

Benedict Rogers is Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party Human Rights
Commission, and was Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for the City of
Durham in 2005. He works for the human rights charity Christian Solidarity
Worldwide , and is the author of A Land Without Evil: Stopping the
Genocide of Burma’s Karen People.



Ed, BurmaNet News