BurmaNet News, September 30, 2010

[Editor]

September 30, 2010 Issue #4053


INSIDE BURMA
AFP: Myanmar to free Suu Kyi days after election: officials
AP: Myanmar courts sentence activists, monk to jail
Irrawaddy: Junta-backed USDP campaigning through Nargis projects

HEALTH
Irrawaddy: In Burma's public hospitals, you get what you pay for

REGIONAL
Jakarta Post: Regional efforts needed to push for democracy
Bangkok Post: PM to visit Burma next month

INTERNATIONAL
Irrawaddy: Tay Za's son takes sanctions case to court of justice
Asian Tribune: Recognize Rohingyas as “full and equal citizens of Burma,”
urged US Congress

OPINION / OTHER
IHT: An election not worthy of support – Win Tin
Himal Southasian (Nepal): The general’s election – Maung Zarni
Irrawaddy: Cyber attacks seek to suppress the truth
Foreign Policy: The junta's soft landing – Daron Acemoglu, James A. Robinson

PRESS RELEASE
International Federation for Human Rights: Burma/Myanmar: FIDH calls for
the public and unequivocal support of the European Union for the creation
of a United Nations commission of inquiry on atrocities in Burma





____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

September 30, Agence France Presse
Myanmar to free Suu Kyi days after election: officials

Yangon — Democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi will be released in November just
days after Myanmar's first election in two decades, officials said
Thursday.

The Nobel Peace laureate, who has been detained for most of the last
twenty years since winning the country's last poll in 1990, will be freed
when her current house arrest expires on November 13, the unnamed sources
said.

"November will be an important and busy month for us because of the
election and because of Aung San Suu Kyi's release," a Myanmar official
told AFP, noting the release would come soon after the country's November
7 vote.

A second Myanmar official, who also declined to be named, confirmed the
date, adding "she will be released on that day according to the law."

Neither Suu Kyi nor her National League for Democracy (NLD) party will
participate in the upcoming vote, which opponents have dismissed as a sham
aimed at hiding military power behind a civilian facade.

Uncertainty over whether the military regime will indeed release the
65-year-old, known reverently among Myanmar's people as "The Lady", will
remain until the moment she appears in public.

The junta, humiliated by its crashing defeat in the last election, has
prolonged Suu Kyi's confinement almost continuously ever since.

She has been detained since May 2003 and has only enjoyed fleeting periods
of freedom since 1990.

Thailand-based analyst Aung Naing Oo said any release would come with
conditions and she "won't be free to go out".

"It's a military dictatorship. No matter what the legal background of the
issue -- if they don't want to release her, she won't be released," he
said. "I'll believe it when I see it".

Suu Kyi's current spell of detention stems from her imprisonment in May
last year -- just days before a previous period of house arrest came to an
end -- due to a bizarre incident in which an American swam to her lakeside
home.

She was initially given three years in jail and hard labour but was
returned to her crumbling family home in August 2009 after her sentence
was commuted to one and a half years' house arrest by junta leader Than
Shwe.

Suu Kyi's lawyer Nyan Win said the period of detention started with her
imprisonment on May 14 and authorities would have to release her in
November because "there is no law to extend her house arrest".

"So far we have no plan in advance for her release date. We will do and
follow whatever she asks for. We are waiting for that day," Nyan Win
added.

Government mouthpiece New Light of Myanmar recently warned an unnamed
party -- thought to be the NLD -- to drop protests against its
dissolution, and threatened jail for anyone impeding the upcoming vote.

The party was disbanded after it opted to boycott the election in response
to rules barring serving prisoners -- like Suu Kyi and other members --
from standing.

A UN ministerial group has said that the election will not be credible
unless military rulers release Suu Kyi and other opposition detainees.

But on Tuesday Myanmar's foreign minister Nyan Win rejected international
criticism, insisting that the junta is committed to a "free and fair"
vote.

Myanmar has been ruled by the military since 1962 and the generals have
stacked the cards in their favour for the poll.

A new constitution, which comes into force with the election, ring-fences
a quarter of the legislature for the army, while junta-friendly parties
are seen as having a major advantage in the contest for the remaining
seats.

Opposition parties face formidable hurdles, including a fee of 500 dollars
per candidate -- the equivalent of several months' wages for most people.

The National Democratic Force (NDF), a breakaway opposition party created
by former NLD members, is among those planning to contest the vote, a
decision that put it at odds with Suu Kyi, who favoured a boycott.

____________________________________

September 30, Associated Press
Myanmar courts sentence activists, monk to jail

Yangon, Myanmar — Courts in military-ruled Myanmar have given long prison
sentences to 13 people, including a Buddhist monk, who were accused of
planning bombings and other activities to disrupt upcoming elections,
lawyers said Thursday.

The sentencing is the first major crackdown on dissent since campaigning
officially began last week for the Nov. 7 general elections, the first in
20 years. The ruling junta is eager to promote the polls as a key step in
a return to democracy after almost four decades of military rule.

However, many opposition activists are already in jail or in exile, and
critics say the election rules are unfair and undemocratic. Detained Nobel
laureate Aung San Suu Kyi's party, which won a landslide victory in the
last elections in 1990 but was never allowed to take power by the
military, has decided to boycott this year's vote.

Lawyer Myint Thaung said a special court inside Yangon's Insein prison
sentenced a group of 12 people, including one woman, to prison sentences
ranging from five to 23 years. He said authorities accused them of
planning bombings and activities to disrupt the elections, but they were
convicted on other charges including immigration law violations, links
with illegal organizations and possession of arms.

Another lawyer, Khin Htay Kywe, said the monk, identified as Okkantha, was
sentenced by a separate court to 15 years in prison for alleged
anti-election activities and links to illegal opposition groups.

Myint Thaung said many of his clients were unfairly charged and "there was
no proof" that they were planning bombings.

He said they are carpenters and construction workers who were arrested in
January after a construction site boss, Kyaw Zin Lin, was arrested for
allegedly planning bombings on the outskirts of Yangon.

Okkantha, a monk belonging to the ethnic Mon minority, was arrested in
January in southeastern Myanmar and was charged with violating the
Electronic Act, Printing and Publishing law and disrupting peace and
tranquility, his lawyer said. The Electronic Act, Printing and Publishing
law is a catchall statute that can be used against people who disseminate
information that the government doesn't like.

"Authorities said they seized some leaflets that called for the release of
political prisoners before the elections and were against the 2008
constitution. Authorities also seized a computer and camera and accused
the monk of sending photos to the Mon News Agency," Khin Htay Kywe said.

The Mon News Agency is an opposition news service that operates on the
border with Thailand. The constitution was written under military
supervision and ensures that the army will control a large number of seats
in the new parliament.

Also Thursday, a student exile group, the All Burma Federation of Student
Union, condemned the arrest of six student activists who had called for a
boycott of the elections, according to Mizzima, an opposition website also
run by exiles.

An official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not
authorized to provide information to the media confirmed that six
university students were arrested earlier this month for distributing
anti-government leaflets.

____________________________________

September 30, Irrawaddy
Junta-backed USDP campaigning through Nargis projects – Wai Moe

Junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) candidates are
using Cyclone Nargis rehabilitation projects in the Irrawaddy delta and
other state projects across the country to campaign for the election.

According to the state-run-newspaper, The New Light of Myanmar on
Thursday, Burmese Prime Minister Thein Sein who is also the USDP chairman
attended the opening ceremony of a hospital and a youth training school in
the cyclone-hit area of Laputta Township alongside other USDP key leaders
who retired from their military posts in April including Thein Nyunt, the
minister of Progress of Border Areas and National Races and Development
Affairs, and Maung Maung Swe, the minister of Social Welfare, Relief and
Resettlement.

Ahead of the Nov.7 elections, the state-run-media are full of reports that
USDP leaders who are also sitting ministers are traveling to state
projects and attending openings of completed projects. Observers said the
military junta allowed state media to highlight USDP activities but
limited publicity to other political parties.

Although Thein Sein seemed to be focusing USDP campaign activities through
the state projects in the Irrawaddy delta this week, his election campaign
last week focused on the west bank of the Irrawaddy River in the Magway
Region, the location of government arms factories as well as alleged work
on military missiles and nuclear projects.

Thein Sein appeared in the state media where he was shown Sept. 20 opening
the Minhla-Minbu section of the railway line from Kyangin in the Irrawaddy
Region to Pakokku in the Magway Region.

The New Light of Myanmar also reported on Sept. 25 that Thein Sein opened
a hospital in Zabuthiri Township in Naypyidaw. According to the Naypyidaw
candidate list, Thein Sein is running for the People’s Assembly (Lower
House) seat in Zabuthiri Township.

Along with USDP top leaders and senior military officials, the state-run
newspapers on Thursday highlighted one of richest tycoons in the country,
Zaw Zaw, the head of the Max Group of Companies and the newly formed
Ayeyawady Bank. Zaw Zaw appeared in a front page photo in The New Light of
Myanmar along with USDP leaders and senior military officers including
Maj-Gen Hla Min, the chief of the Bureau of Special Operations-3.

Zaw Zaw and other US-sanction list tycoons including Tay Za, Htay Myint,
Khin Shwe and Dagon Win Aung were awarded construction projects in the
Irrawaddy delta following Cyclone Nargis in May 2008.

Khin Shwe of the Zay Gabar Company is a USDP candidate for the
Nationalities Assembly (Upper House) in Twantay Township in the Rangoon
region, which was hard hit by Cyclone Nargis.  He told The Monitor Journal
recently that he had done campaign activities while also working on Nargis
work projects.

“For me, I don’t need to do election campaigning in the area. Following
Nargis, I had worked there for a year doing reconstruction on pagodas and
feeding people food. So people tell me, ‘Please come here!’ I don’t need
to do any extra campaigning like other candidates,” Khin Shwe was quoted
as saying in the journal.

____________________________________
HEALTH

September 30, Irrawaddy
In Burma's public hospitals, you get what you pay for – Hsat Linn

Rangoon — “Where's the patient's relative? Where is she?”

It's the voice of a female duty doctor who appears to be around 25 years
old. There is a male patient, about 50 years old, lying in bed No. 12 in
Ward No. 12 of the Rangoon General Hospital.

Ward No. 12 is for patients with diseases affecting the lungs, liver,
kidney and stomach.

“When a patient's relatives can't afford medical expenses, they just leave
their relative and sneak out of the hospital. How can we treat them
without medicine?” said the angry young doctor before she turned and
walked away.

A signboard near the entrance to Ward No. 12, read: “Share expenses for
health” The ward is hopelessly overcrowded with patients, who line both
sides of the hallway. The floor of the ward and many bed sheets are
stained with spots—whether of blood or something else.

“A woman was here before, but I don't know where she went,” said a
relative of another patient next to bed No. 12.

Shortly after the doctor left, the patient in bed No. 12 pulled out the
needle of an intravenous transfusion he was receiving in his arm and
rolled over. Blood flowed out of his arm. Several people rushed to him
while others ran to tell the doctor and nurses, who appeared shortly and
with others' help they put him back onto his bed.

The patient never said a word, but showed his resistance by shaking his
head and hands, as his relative returned to the ward.

“Where have you been? How come you left him alone?” said the angry doctor.

“I went to get money from my nephew because you said we needed to buy
medicine,” said the relative, holding up about 1,000 kyat [US $1.07].

Scenes such as this occur daily at Rangoon General Hospital and other
public hospitals across Burma, according to Myo Min, a relative who had
been looking after his father for 24 days at the hospital while he
received treatment for kidney disease.

Burma is ranked among the countries that provide the least health care
service to its citizen, who regularly complain about the treatment
available in public hospitals but who have little recourse other than
private clinics which are beyond their means.

Once a patient is taken into the emergence room, said Myo Mind, the
doctors and nurses question them about their identity and family
registration before any treatment is given. Many people don't bring such
documents with them, he said, because many illnesses arrive unexpected and
demand immediate attention.

“When I first took my father to hospital, I had to deal with such
questions. Later I took others' advice to use a broker's service for
admission and things went more smoothly,” said Myo Min.

He said many patients pay 3,000 kyat ($3.2) to brokers who take care of
all the procedures for hospital admission.

“No matter how serious the condition the patient is in, he or she will
receive no attention unless his or her relative can provide the required
medicines,” said Myo Min.

“Once you see the doctors, you're asked to buy medicine at a drug store in
the emergency ward. You have to provide everything such as needles,
syringes, gauze and plaster. They don't have any medicine. They start
giving treatment only when they have everything they need,” he said.

Once they enter the hospital, patients are charged for all equipment such
as a wheelchair or handcart as well, he said.

Myo Min recalled that when one patient was released from the emergency
room, additional fees for using a handcart were charged in order to carry
the patient to a hospital ward where he or she will be admitted and
another 500 kyat ($0.53) would be charged for cleaning the bed that the
patient used when he or she was in the emergency room. In fact, the same
bed would be used for another patient without cleaning, he said.

Myo Min said there are two common problems in the hospital. The first is
that a patient's relatives cannot afford medicine and the cost of other
equipment. The other is that patients are abandoned by the relatives.

“Look at the woman over there,” he said. “She is the only person to look
after that patient. Around noon, she often goes away somewhere. Maybe she
goes out to find money,” said Myo Min.

“Sometimes, patients relatives just sit still no matter how many times
doctors ask them to buy medicine because they don't have money. Some
patients can live for two or three days, that's all,” Myo Min said.

About 3 a.m. the following morning, the sound of crying was heard around
bed No. 12.

“He didn't want to receive treatment anymore, because he didn't want to be
a burden. I said his life is more important than money, but he didn't
accept it,” said the crying woman. The woman could not mourn the death of
the man, her husband, because soon two men came with a stretcher to take
the body to the mortuary. The men asked for money, and she gave them 1,000
kyat ($1.07).

When the woman was ready to leave the hospital to inform other family
members, a doctor asked her instead to go see the duty doctor.

“Once a patient dies in the hospital, anyone related to the deceased is
asked to remain and the hospital informs the family via phone because many
people try to leave the hospital quietly after their relatives die,” said
Myo Min. “Even under such tight restrictions, I saw three dead bodies that
were abandoned by their relatives. People had no choice but to leave them.
Some people also leave the patients alone in the hospital.”

A young doctor who worked at the Rangoon General Hospital for five years,
and who now works as a project manager at an NGO, said there were many
cases in which relatives knew their loved ones would survive with medicine
but they had to watch them die because they couldn't afford the cost.

According to a study by the Washington-based United States Institute of
Peace, Burma's military regime allocates a little under $3 billion to the
Ministry of Defense while spending less than 1 percent for public health
care for a population of almost 60 million people  from the overall
national budget of around $6.6 billion.

The lack of funding is reflected in the lack of equipment and laboratory
services that are available at Rangoon General Hospital and other public
hospitals. For instance, there is usually a long queue of patients waiting
to undergo radiotherapy. Depending on the number of patients, it may take
a week to receive a gastroscopy.

“I was told by the hospital to wait for 10 days to receive a gastroscopy
for my younger brother,” said a relative of a patient who was transferred
from the hospital to a private clinic. “I took him to the Aung Yadana
private clinic where we were given good service but charged about a
million kyat ($1,075).”

Most poor and middle class people know that they will receive inadequate
service at public hospitals, but they have no other options because
treatment at a private clinic is too costly. A deposit for a private
clinic in Rangoon is about 200,000 kyat ($215); a room cost about 25,000
kyat ($27) a day.

In small clinics like Shwe Baho, Bahosi, Shinpagu and Aung Yadana at least
500,000 kyat ($538) is needed to be able to receive treatment. However,
for the best clinics such as SSC, Asia Royal and Pan Hlaing, a deposit is
about one million kyat ($1,075) and medical bills for in-patients range
from $1,612 to $2,150 for a two to three-day stay.

According to Myo Min and others who look after their relatives at the
Rangoon General Hospital, there are few senior doctors present in the
hospital during day or night. Usually, only junior doctors and house
surgeons work there to obtain a medical license.

“Although they have duties at the hospital, surgeons always spend time at
their private clinics,” he said.

He said there appears to be few experienced doctors and surgeons at the
hospital to train junior doctors.

All patients and family members hope for sympathetic treatment from
doctors and nurses, Myo Min said, but, “We don’t hear any kind words—only
yelling and scolding.”

____________________________________
REGIONAL

September 30, The Jakarta Post
Regional efforts needed to push for democracy – Mustaqim Adamrah

All eyes are now turned to Indonesia as one of the few countries in the
region believed to be capable of taking the lead in helping bring about
change in Myanmar, formerly known as Burma.

Experts and Myanmarese activists agreed during a discussion here on
Wednesday that Indonesia, which would chair ASEAN next year, should use
its chairmanship to form an agenda on Myanmar, which was scheduled to
conduct widely anticipated elections in November.

They also said that through ASEAN, Indonesia should ask for assistance
from China and India to put more pressure on the military rulers in
Myanmar.

China and India, which have interests in Myanmar’s energy resources,
choose to keep silent over the lack of democracy and the human rights
abuses in the restive country, despite international expectations of their
participation in concerted efforts to uphold democracy in Myanmar.

“I believe it’s important for Indonesia to invite other ASEAN countries to
form ASEAN’s [strategy] to push for change and democracy in Burma,” Centre
for Strategic and International Studies executive director Rizal Sukma
said during a dialogue organized by KBR68H radio’s international news
program Asia Calling.

Such an agenda, he said, was reasonable as Myanmar had been a thorny issue
for ASEAN’s internal performance and in ASEAN’s relationship with the rest
of the world.

Rizal said the time was ideal for Indonesia — whose “high profile is on
the rise” as claimed by Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono — to
conduct public advocacy campaigns and invite all elements in Indonesia and
other ASEAN countries to help the Burmese people.

He added that ASEAN’s policy of non-interference was expected to be more
flexible in this matter, citing an example in 2008 when Myanmar was hit by
Cyclone Nargis.

He said the government  allowed in global aid packages after being
persuaded by Indonesia.

However, Rizal said, it would be hard to involve China and India in
efforts to bring the country to democracy because they feared that a
transitional period in Myanmar would be followed by instability, which
would hurt their business interests.

Burma Partnership coordinator Khin Ohmar said there were some problems in
expecting China and India to join pro-democracy efforts.

“Over the years we see all these players play each other. Why does ASEAN
have to do something about Burma, where is China? China has to do
something about it. And [finally] no body wants to take the lead,” she
said.

“China is not going to start no matter what. China will probably come to
us if it sees [the efforts] as a strategic partnership, like the [one] it
has with Indonesia [who is] China’s strategic partner politically and
economically.”

Indonesia and other countries, Ohmar said, would probably need to have a
“very aggressive diplomatic engagement” in dealing with Myanmar’s rulers.

“We can’t just have an engagement to appease the regime. We have to really
hit hard on that door,” she said.

“Indonesia has to tell them, ‘look, we’re not going to recognize your
election or the results of the election. If you do this, we will [take
certain measures]’.”

____________________________________

September 30, Bangkok Post
PM to visit Burma next month

New York -- Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva plans to pay a one-day visit
to Burma next month to confirm cooperation between the two countries.

Mr Abhisit will hear the Burmese government’s plans for after the election
on Nov 7 and discuss the status of former opposition leader Aung San Suu
Kyi, other jailed prisoners and the problems of some ethnics minorities
groups.

He is scheduled to visit the neighbouring country on Oct 11.

Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya said Thailand will assure Burma about the
preparation of the border negotiation, connectivity, roads and bridges
building as well as the progress of the roads building project at Kho
Khareng which is funded by the Thai government.

“The Thai government also wants to learn more about the Burmese
privatization which has just started with its state enterprises and the
open market policy. We are interested to learn which sectors will be of
interest to the Thai private sector and confirm our readiness to cooperate
on the economic front,’’ said the foreign minister.

____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

September 30, Irrawaddy
Tay Za's son takes sanctions case to court of justice – Simon Roughneen

Pye Phyo Tay Za, the son of Tay Za, a businessman with close links to
Burma's military government, is appealing a decision taken earlier this
year which maintains European Union (EU) financial sanctions and travel
ban against him.

The case is now before the Court of Justice in Luxembourg, which is the
highest court in the EU in terms of EU law, and pits Pye Phyo against the
Council of the European Union, the European Commission and the United
Kingdom.

On May 19, Pye Phyo Tay Za lost a legal bid at the General Court to have
EU sanctions overturned. He was ordered to pay the court costs for the
Council of the EU. He is seeking that the entire May 19 decision be
overturned, that the sanctions regulations be rendered null and void in
his case, and that the Council foot the bill for this appeal and for the
previous case.

Pye Phyo's legal team is challenging the May 19 decision on a number of
grounds pertaining to what it terms “particular legal flaws in the General
Court's judgment.” His lawyers and solicitors are again focusing on “the
link between the Appellant and the military regime of Burma/Myanmar.”

The appeal was lodged on July 27, and details were published in the EU
official journal on Sept. 25. It says that Pye Phyo “is not a ruler of
Burma/Myanmar, nor a person associated with a ruler, and is not
controlled, directly or indirectly, by a ruler. The fact that he is the
son of someone whom the Council considers to have benefited from the
regime is insufficient.”

This echoes the case made at the General Court, in which Pye Phyo argued
that he is neither a member of Burma’s military government nor associated
with it, and does not benefit from “the administration of that
government.”

However, in the original General Court case, it was claimed that “neither
the applicant [Pye Phyo] nor his father received any benefits from the
regime.” However, it now appears that the Court of Justice appeal will not
go so far as to question whether Tay Za is “someone whom the Council
considers to have benefited from the regime.”

In defending the General Court case to have sanctions against Pye Phyo
retained, the Council said that the appeal could be a way for Tay Za to
circumvent the sanctions against himself. The Council stated: “The
applicant was aware of the reasons for which such restrictive measures
specifically apply to him, since he states in paragraph 37 of the
originating application that there may be a risk of his father
circumventing the freeze on his own assets by transferring his funds to
other family members.”

Tay Za owns the Htoo Group of Companies, which has stakes in major
economic sectors in the country such as logging, tourism, hotels,
airlines, transport and construction. He also owns Air Bagan, which
dominates domestic air travel inside Burma.

In early September, The Irrawaddy received information from junta
officials that most of the telecommunication services of the Ministry of
Communications, Posts and Telegraphs in Burma will be taken over by the
Htoo Group. Tay Za is among a group of four businessmen who will be
allowed to open new private banks in Burma ahead of the Nov. 7 general
election. The quadrumvirate run conglomerates and are considered top
beneficiaries of a wave of privatization in which about 300 state assets,
including everything from real estate to ports, shipping companies and an
airline were sold amid growing Chinese, Indian, Thai and Singaporean
investment in the military-run country.

Tay Za has worked side-by-side with Aung Thet Mann, the son of ex-Gen Shwe
Mann, who is the third-ranked figure in the ruling junta and a possible
president of the country after the November elections.

The upcoming election is expected to be dominated by the Union Solidarity
and Development Party (USDP) and the National Unity Party (NUP), two
junta-linked parties who will contest most or all of the 1,096
constituencies across the country at regional, lower and upper house
levels. A number of businessmen close to the military government will run
as election candidates for the USDP.

____________________________________

September 30, Asian Tribune
Recognize Rohingyas as “full and equal citizens of Burma,” urged US Congress

London – US Congressman Christopher Smith has introduced a resolution in
the House of Representatives calling on Burma’s military regime to
immediately recognize the Rohingya people “as full and equal citizens of
Burma”, and to lift all restrictions on movement, marriage and access to
education. The resolution also calls for an end to the regime’s campaign
of religious and ethnic persecution “amounting to crimes against humanity
throughout Burma”.

Congressman Smith met Maung Tun Khin, President of the Burmese Rohingya
Organisation UK (BROUK), earlier this year, during a visit to Washington
DC organized by Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW). Speaking about
today’s resolution, Congressman Smith said, “This legislation underscores
the plight and human rights abuses endured by the Rohingyas with the hope
and expectation that the light of scrutiny will result in new actions by
the many governments that can and should provide assistance and refuge to
the Rohingyas. It is an international call to action to alleviate their
suffering and persecution in every way that we can.”

In addition to highlighting the suffering of the Rohingyas in Burma, the
resolution urges the government of Bangladesh to address “the dire
humanitarian conditions and food insecurity in the makeshift camps” along
its border with Burma, in co-operation with the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and to “desist from forcing
unregistered Rohingya to return to Burma”. It also highlights the
situation of Rohingyas in Saudi Arabia, and urges the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia to allow Rohingyas “access to education and livelihoods”.

Addressing Burma’s crimes against humanity, the resolution urges the
United States Government to “proactively support” the recommendation by
the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Burma for the establishment
of a UN Commission of Inquiry.

Maung Tun Khin, President of BROUK, said, “This is an extremely important
resolution, not only for the Rohingya people but for all the people of
Burma. We are in full support of the call for a UN Commission of Inquiry
to investigate crimes against humanity committed by the regime against its
people, and we are grateful to Congressman Smith for his support.”

CSW’s East Asia Team Leader Benedict Rogers said, “We are delighted that
Congressman Smith has introduced this very important resolution, which is
the first time the plight of the Rohingyas has been given such attention.
We hope that the regime in Burma will sit up, listen, end the cruel and
dehumanizing treatment of the Rohingya people and restore their
citizenship. We hope the Bangladeshi government will take action to
improve the plight of Rohingya refugees, and that the United States will
make the Rohingyas’ situation a priority.”

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

September 30, International Herald Tribune
An election not worthy of support – Win Tin

Yangon, Myanmar — Navi Pillay, the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights, recently said the world must exercise “utmost vigilance” to
ensure the approaching elections in Myanmar (Burma) are free and fair.

We are disappointed in such comments, which focus on the election as
something important for our country, as something worth waiting and
watching for, although this election is not the solution for Burma.

The elections, scheduled for Nov. 7, are designed to legalize military
rule in Burma under the 2008 constitution, which was written to create a
permanent military dictatorship in our country.

After the election, the constitution will come into effect, a so-called
civilian government will be formed by acting and retired generals who all
are under the military commander-in-chief, and the people of Burma will
legally become the subjects of the military.

Our party, the National League for Democracy, and our ethnic allies have
refused to accept the regime’s constitution and have decided to boycott
the elections. The military regime’s constitution and severely restricting
election laws demonstrated to all of us the true intention the regime has
for this election — the legalization and legitimization of military rule
in our country.

We refuse to abandon our aspirations for democracy in Burma and give the
regime the legitimacy it wants for its elections. With millions of people
of Burma supporting our position, we hoped the international community
would understand the regime’s intentions as clearly as we do and pressure
the regime to stop its unilateral and undemocratic process.

Until recently, the United Nations demanded the regime commit itself to an
all-parties inclusive, participatory, free and fair process through
political dialogue with democratic opposition and representatives of
ethnic minorities. But now an important phrase — “all-parties inclusive” —
is surprisingly excluded from their statements and speeches.

Although Ms. Pillay urged the world to exercise “utmost vigilance,” there
is no need to wait until the Election Day to make a judgment. The election
commission was appointed by the regime and filled with loyalists who
unilaterally decided that many candidates are ineligible to run. The
electoral laws and by-laws impose severe restrictions on political
parties. Thousands of political prisoners — including our leader, Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi — are not allowed to participate in the election or be members
of the parties.

The regime’s prime minister and cabinet ministers have switched to
civilian dress, transformed their mass organization into their political
party, and are campaigning with the use of state properties, resources,
funds and threats. The election commission is shamelessly violating its
own rules in favor of the prime minister’s party and other proxy parties
of the regime.

Is it really necessary for the international community to wait until
election day to see whether the elections are free and fair?

Unfortunately, some European countries are not only watching the regime’s
elections, but also supporting them. They discussed with us their belief
that the election is the only game in town, and suggested that we, the
National League for Democracy, should participate.

When we explained our rationale for not legitimizing military rule, they
turned to others and now help them to make their way in the regime’s
election game. They have gone so far as to help pro-regime academics and
opportunists travel to Europe to promote the regime’s election and gather
support for their favorite parties.

Even though some democratic parties have European support, their chances
of winning seats in the election are very slim, as more restrictions on
their campaign activities are revealed each day. The regime is determined
to capture almost all of the contested seats in the national and state
parliaments by use of fraud and threats.

With 25 percent of the seats in Parliament reserved for the military, it
is more and more clear that almost all the seats will be controlled by the
military and its cronies. Even if some lucky candidates get elected, they
will have no authority to promote change. The Parliament has no power to
form the government, no authority to legislate military affairs, and no
right to reject the president’s appointees and budget.

One might ask what is the solution, if it is not the election. It is
dialogue, which we have been calling for for many years. Meaningful
political dialogue between the military, the National League for Democracy
led by Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, and ethnic representatives is the only way to
solve problems in Burma peacefully.

The military has no desire to talk. But if the international community
seriously exercises strong and effective pressure on the regime, the
combination of pressure from outside and peaceful resistance inside the
country will force the regime to come to the dialogue table.

I wish that our friends in Europe would abandon their dream of expecting
something impossible from the election, and start taking serious action
against the regime with the aim of starting a dialogue. They should begin
by creating a U.N. commission of inquiry to investigate human rights
violations in Burma.

Win Tin is a founder of Burma’s National League for Democracy party and a
member of its central executive committee. He was a political prisoner
from 1989 to 2008.

Win Tin is a founder of Burma’s National League for Democracy party and a
member of its central executive committee. He was a political prisoner
from 1989 to 2008.

____________________________________

September 30, Himal Southasian (Nepal)
The general’s election – Maung Zarni

In the run-up to Burma’s fraught polls, some of the junta’s leading
cheerleaders are Western governments who are bending over backwards to
justify their stance.

Burma’s military regime has learned to speak election double-speak,
framing the upcoming ‘selection by the generals’ as ‘democratic
elections’. But there are few takers among the Burmese people, other than
vocal election cheerleaders and regime apologists. And it is the country’s
aging despot, ‘Senior’ General Than Shwe, who is said to be directly
managing the military’s attempted transition from direct rule to indirect
rule with a civilian mask. The general is holding the cards close to his
chest, at times leaving his subordinates and deputies in the dark while he
markets his moves as the final step in the Roadmap to Democracy.

The neighbours, meanwhile, from ASEAN as well as China and India, cannot
wait for the end of the ‘election’ episode – currently slated to take
place on 7 November – so that they can deflect international criticism
over their cosy ties with the only true military dictatorship in South or
Southeast Asia. For their part, most global Burma experts (at the
Brookings Institution, for instance, and the International Crisis Group)
have been harping on the need to seize the opportunity of the purported
changing of the guard in Naypyidaw to nudge the next generation of
military officers towards economic reforms – which, they argue, will bring
about political liberalisation. However, the living evidence of
post-Maoist China stands in the way of validating such a half-baked
‘development-democracy’ theory.

Still, the opposition within Burma is also not completely united. Much to
the dismay of Aung San Suu Kyi of the National League for Democracy (NLD)
and other leading dissidents, some European Union governments (for
instance, Germany) are supporting a small group of NLD renegades with no
public following, who are treating the election as ‘the only game in
town’, to borrow the pragmatic words of David Lipman, EU ambassador in
Bangkok. Clearly Suu Kyi and her several thousand colleagues behind bars,
as well as thousands more in exile, do not share such pragmatic
resignation.

Watering the poison ivy

If the unfettered market is the raison d’être of the post-USSR world, then
what is referred to as ‘civil society’ has become a key political
instrument, policy objective and funding programme. This highly contested
academic construct – manufactured in 18th-century feudal Germany –
suddenly found itself in vogue, especially among policymakers, journalists
and clever interns in Western capitals. In place of genuine political
solidarity with the several thousand Burmese dissidents behind bars and
the public at large, these Western election cheerleaders have offered both
podiums and per diems for bogus ‘civil society’ activists who are not at
all representative of the public sentiment.

Germany’s Friedrick-Ebert Stiftung (FES) is one such EU-based entity.
Despite its declared aim of supporting ‘global justice’ (and it being
named after that country’s first democratically elected president), this
influential political foundation keeps tight relations with the regime’s
external propaganda wing, such as the Myanmar Institute of Strategic and
International Studies, and supports controversial local NGOs such as
Myanmar Egress. NLD leader U Tin Oo has aptly described this relationship
as ‘a broker between the regime’s cronies and the National Democratic
Force’, made up of pro-election NLD renegades. Recently, FES organised a
public forum in Berlin with two of Burma’s most vociferous pro-election
voices, Khin Zaw Win, a former political prisoner cum NGO worker, and Nay
Win Maung, the head of Myanmar Egress, purportedly to promote Burmese
civil society’s diverse voices. The duo was joined by Andreas List, the EU
official in charge of the Burma portfolio, who holds strong pro-election
views. For many observers, this seemed to run counter to the FES mission
of promoting pluralistic voices from and on Burma.

This prompted 90-year-old U Tin Oo, the NLD cofounder and senior colleague
of Suu Kyi, to officially write to List, registering his party’s ‘grave’
concerns about EU officials amplifying these unrepresentative voices. In
fact, the manufacturing of elitist ‘civil society voices’ has been in the
work for some years. Several European entities – such as the European
Commission, Britain’s Department of International Development (DFID) and
the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Netherlands’s Oxfam Novib, and
Action Aid, to name just a few – have played paymasters in the creation
and promotion of a small but influential pool of ‘civil-society actors’.
In so doing, they have primed their native proxies for the marketisation
of the Burmese economy and the NGO-isation of local politics, at the
expense of the opposition in particular and the public in general.

In many a closed-door Burma policy discussions that this writer has
attended in London, Bangkok, Washington and Brussels over the past several
years, self-styled ‘nation-builders’ and their Western ‘donors’ have
promoted a deeply troublesome perspective. Incredibly, they say that it is
the 2000 Burmese dissidents in captivity, including Suu Kyi, and their
supporters in exile, who constitute the real obstacle in Burma’s economic
development. This is their message to sympathetic audiences, including
representatives from Western governments, UN officials and think tanks, as
well as representatives of the multilateral financial institutions. In
some instances, deviating sharply from the firm pro-democracy stance of
their own governments’ official policies, Burma-based diplomats have
privately trashed jailed dissidents and their ‘incapacity to bring
pragmatic and practical changes’, even while their governments at home are
loudly condemning Burma’s regime for its alleged crimes against humanity.

In general, the Burmese people are dismayed by the outsiders’ embrace of
such false logic as the idea that a flawed election is better than no
election. In so doing, this embrace is taking in local elites – such as
Khin Zaw Win and Nay Win Maung – who have learned to speak the language of
‘civil society’, while viewing themselves as a cut above the rest of
Burma. U Aye Thar Aung, the prominent elderly Arakanese political leader,
has characterised the current strain of misguided external support for the
pro-election NGO elite as ‘watering the poison ivy’. Nonetheless, today a
mantra of ‘get ready to exploit the post-election landscape’ fills much of
the faddish policy discourse from Washington and Bangkok to Brussels and
Berlin – a significant shift from the earlier spin, from the same
quarters, that the election itself was the train for the opposition to
hijack.

However, the greatest paradox in advancing civil society as the main
game-changer in Burma is the fact that it makes no place for the
proverbial masses. This is so, even while the Burmese public itself has
refused to buy into the paternalistic view that economic prosperity,
political freedoms and ethnic equality can be delivered by ‘Made in EU’
civil society.

Going ‘as planned’

The bulk of the Burmese opposition is not caving in to the regime’s
two-decade-long campaign of cooptation and annihilation; nor does the
Burmese public expect much from the post-election ‘structural changes’.
Despite international media speculation playing up the unwarranted
optimism of real structural changes in post-election Burma, the majority
of the population has adopted ‘indifference’ to the upcoming polls,
something even Khin Maung Swe of the pro-election NDF, has publicly
acknowledged. This popular indifference might be an act of political
reciprocity on the part of the public, which knows that the regime has
been pursuing a policy of complete neglect towards public welfare. This is
the case not just in normal times (for instance, the complete absence of
state-provided social safety nets and social services) but also in the
face of national emergency, as in the immediate aftermath of the May 2008
Cyclone Nargis.

Why should the Burmese electorate care about the upcoming election, after
the regime has permitted none of the publicly respected dissidents to
participate? Every dissident whom the generals perceive as a threat to
their widely unpopular rule of 22 years remains locked up in the country
or has been pushed into exile. Thus, that gives a count of 2000-plus
potential candidates who are not part of the election – individuals with
valuable professional background, years of experience building political
organisations, and genuine popular support and following, and from diverse
multiethnic and religious backgrounds.

Just as the regime is telling the neighbours and the world at large that
election preparations are going ahead as planned, its Union Election
Commission has been gagging candidates on important policy issues, and
dissolved (ie, banned) ten established political parties, including the
NLD. In addition, since the regime has realised that candidates from its
Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) cannot win in ethnic
minority communities such as Kachin, Karenni, Karen, Mon and Shan states,
it has cancelled holding elections in some 200 villages, declaring that in
these constituencies ‘free and fair election could not be held’ due to
security concerns. This latest move is a win-win situation for the
generals, since it has now paved the way for declaring these ‘black
areas’, a vast conflict zone where local populations will be subject to
‘shoot-to-kill’ policies. At the same time, the Election Commission has
refused to register 14 ethnic Kachin politicians, as they fear these could
enjoy strong local support as well as the backing of the Kachin
Independence Army, a ceasefire group that has refused to capitulate to the
regime’s pressure to place its troops under the latter’s central command.

The regime also set the registration fee per candidate at USD 500, an
incredibly high sum in a country where annual per capita income is roughly
USD 200, and the result has been predictable. Even the NDF (the largest
new pro-democracy party, made up of NLD renegades) and the Democracy Party
(Myanmar), spearheaded by the three well-known daughters of former prime
ministers from the long-bygone civilian parliamentary era, can only field
a combined total of some 200 candidates, out of around 1000 available
slots. By contrast, the regime’s USDP and the pro-regime National Unity
Party (NUP), made up of ex-military personnel who served under the
country’s first dictator, General Ne Win, are both contesting in
practically all constituencies.

During the previous election, held in 1990, the Burmese generals had
imposed equally draconian election laws, and dozens of parties, including
the NLD, took part. Originally convinced that the popular opposition was
too fractured to beat the pro-regime military-filled NUP, the generals
were stunned by the NLD’s landslide victory, winning 82 percent of all
parliamentary seats and 60 percent of the popular vote. This has since
been put down to tactical voting by the voters, many of whom registered
with different parties but ultimately voted overwhelmingly for the NLD.
This time, the generals are taking no such chances. The regime might even
disqualify the NLD renegade party, the NDF, which is currently fielding
the third-largest number of candidates, at 161. It is an open secret that
the NDF has received political support and, allegedly, funding from
foreign sources such as EU governments and foundations through proxy NGOs
such as Egress – both of which are barred under the Burmese Constitution
of 2008.

More civilianizing

Any student of democratic transitions knows that elections are a necessary
ingredient in all emerging democratic or semi-democratic political
systems. But in and of itself, an election amounts to nothing, especially
when the larger context remains oppressive. In light of Burma’s
exceedingly repressive political context, even the proponents of the logic
that flawed elections are better than no election would be hard-pressed to
find a silver lining in the gathering dark clouds of the upcoming polls.

Today, one central criticism against the principled opposition to the
polls is that Burma’s ‘people power’ revolts have been resounding
failures, with every wave of mass opposition since 1962 having been met
only with bullets and bayonets. But what the proponents of this view
conveniently overlook is the fact that successful mass revolts, from
Marcos’s Philippines to Suharto’s Indonesia, were aided by external
events. In the Philippines, for instance, this was the withdrawal of US
support for Marcos; in Indonesia, the collapse of Asian financial markets
decisively loosened Suharto’s grip. In fact, no colonial rule or fascist
occupation in history has ended without serious external impetus, while
international solidarity has also been a crucial factor in successful
revolutions. However, the Burmese people have been left to themselves in
fighting the regime, with the international community paying lip service –
even though a person of the stature of Suu Kyi is at the centre of the
people’s existential fight against the generals. On the other hand,
blaming the victims – and dissidents alike – as is currently happening in
the Burma context, without being prepared to offer concrete support, adds
insult to injury.

To the individuals and institutions, local and global, who are currently
advocating the ‘generals’ election’, the uncertainties inherent in the
post-election structures and institutions are preferable to the certainty
of the continued political stalemate between the opposition and the ruling
military. The Burmese have been through this before. On the 12th
anniversary of the Revolutionary Council rule of Gen Ne Win, in 1974, the
Burmese electorates were offered a new constitution, which the ruling
generals at the time said was approved by 91 percent of all eligible
voters; thereafter, elections were held within a one-party socialist
system. Overnight, the public was presented with a nominal division of
power, a people’s parliament, a council of state, a council of inspectors,
a people’s court and a broad-based mass party, all headed by
‘civilianised’ generals. Fast-forward to 1988, and these structures and
institutions collapsed like a house of cards in the midst of a series of
countrywide popular revolts.

Historical amnesia might be a trademark for some peoples, but the Burmese
are a historically conscious lot. They know the changes now on offer are
cosmetic, particularly the generations of Burmese who survived the first
period of military rule with a civilian mask. They even have a saying, ‘We
have been dead once, and we know the cost of a coffin,’ meaning, We don’t
intend to commit our own political suicide and play with death. Europe,
which lived through Fascist and Nazi occupations only 60 years ago, has
already largely forgotten the most vital lesson from its own history: that
no tyrannical power concedes without a fight.

What the Burmese public – and 2000 jailed dissidents – need from Western
governments and other institutions today is for the latter to stop acting
as if foreign offices in Europe, policy wonks in Washington or the global
humanitarian industry know what is best for the people of Burma. They need
to stop parroting the generals’ election double-speak. And if they are
unprepared to offer real solidarity for Burma’s decades-long struggle
against home-grown tyrants, in uniform or in mufti, the least they can do
is follow a new mantra: Do no harm to the Burmese opposition in
particular, and the public in general.

____________________________________

September 30, Irrawaddy
Cyber attacks seek to suppress the truth

Websites operated by The Irrawaddy and other such independent but critical
media as Mizzima and the Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB) were shut down
this week in a high volume attack which overloaded their capacity to
provide service—a so-called Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) assault.

Targeted DDoS attacks against Internet communities working to promote
press freedom and access to unbiased information are a technically
sophisticated but nevertheless crude effort to silence the voices of
freedom and truth. The Irrawaddy believes that this is a politically
motivated and well-organized cyber crime.

The attacks coincided with the anniversary of the 2007 “Saffron
Revolution.” A similar attack was launched against exile media in
September 2008, on the uprising's first anniversary. Websites were
crippled for several days.

The Irrawaddy’s website host in the US reported that the volume of the
DDoS attack on The Irrawaddy was 4 gigabytes, 3 gigabytes larger than in
September 2008.

The massive cyber attacks that shut down The Irrawaddy and Mizzima came
largely from Chinese internet provider addresses, while the attacks on the
DVB website, measuring about 120 megabytes per second, came from Russia,
Georgia, Israel, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Vietnam.

"Although it's unclear who launched these debilitating attacks, they are
consistent with the Burmese government's past attempts to censor the
Internet and block critical foreign news," said Shawn Crispin, senior
Southeast Asia representative of the New York-based Committee to Protect
Journalists. "We condemn these efforts to silence the few news outlets
covering events in Burma."

The Irrawaddy also believes that the attackers are testing the
technological strength of the Burmese exile media ahead of the Nov. 7
election, and suspects that they may systemically launch further cyber
assaults at that time.

Burma's Internet community plans to monitor the election in the absence of
 independent foreign observers, who are banned. Visa restrictions are also
being applied against foreign tourists wishing to visit Burma in the
period before and during the election.

Equipped with cell phones and digital cameras, and with access to the
Internet, determined young Burmese are enthusiastically communicating with
each other and the outside world in their own campaign to expose the
truth.

The regime is unlikely to stand aside and allow this to happen—after all,
in 2007, it pulled the plug on Internet services in a bid to prevent the
outside world knowing the full extent of the brutal suppression of the
September demonstrations.

The DDoS attacks represent a new instrument of suppression of the truth,
and provide yet another cruel example of the military government's
hostility toward any media attempt to expose the reality of events in
Burma.

____________________________________

September 30, Foreign Policy
The junta's soft landing – Daron Acemoglu, James A. Robinson

Why a sham election may be even better for the people of Burma than a
legitimate one.

With Burma's government holding a rare election in November, it's fair to
wonder whether the military junta has real changes in store for the
beleaguered country. Last Friday, a Burmese official at the United Nations
even went so far as to insist that the leader of the Burmese opposition,
Aung San Suu Kyi, will have a chance to cast a ballot. Unfortunately, the
full evidence suggests that the regime isn't inclined to initiate any deep
reforms after 48 years of autocratic rule: Although Suu Kyi will be able
to vote, she was barred from running for office, and her imposed house
arrest has yet to be lifted.

Nonetheless, Burma's rulers may be paving the way for their own eventual
eclipse.

Even flawed elections can make a meaningful difference to the people of
Burma. Indeed, things could hardly get worse for them. For the duration of
the junta's rule, the Burmese have been plagued by terrible government and
a barely functioning economy: They have suffered rulers who were insecure
in their hold on power, but who were capable of easily enriching
themselves through natural resources like timber and opium.

One of the reasons that Burma's economy is in such dire shape is that the
junta has felt that economic growth would imperil their rule. The military
junta, after all, hadn't merely imposed itself on an anarchic society --
it overthrew a popular democracy. Starving the country of dynamism has
been one of the ways that the military has managed to consolidate its rule
against the specter of an uprising among Burma's minorities.

By introducing mild liberal reforms, the junta now wants to shift from
near-constant crisis management to the cultivation of longer-term
legitimacy and stability for the current regime. That's what these
elections are more-or-less explicitly about -- in contrast to the
country's last elections, which were held 20 years ago, in 1990. Then, the
junta was taken by surprise by the victory of Suu Kyi. The regime's
response was to reverse the results, and rescind all of its nascent
democratic reforms at the time.

This time, military leaders are making sure in advance that the outcome
will be to their liking. Aung San Suu Kyi has been barred from running for
president, 25 percent of legislative seats have been reserved for the
military, and a powerful national defense and security council has been
established that will be free of democratic oversight. Already, more than
20 high-ranking officials in the junta have resigned from the army to
re-invent themselves as civilian candidates under the banner of a new
party, Union Solidarity and Development Association.

It's clear that the regime is less interested in establishing a democracy
than in resisting pariah status on the international stage and
forestalling discontent at home. Whether they're motivated by the bite of
sanctions, the restiveness of domestic ethnic minorities, or the
discontent of a younger generation of officers among the junta, Burma's
rulers want to restore some measure of legitimacy for themselves --
without, of course, loosening their grip on the country's levers of power.

But loosen it they eventually will. History shows that gradual,
half-hearted reforms of this sort are exactly how many autocracies
successfully transition to democracy. Rulers gradually liberalize laws
while ensuring that they maintain their privileges and status, come what
may. Chile's move to democracy, for example, was facilitated by
protections that the new constitution gave to Pinochet and other leading
generals. The process of political reform in 19th-century Britain was also
smoothened by the ability of existing elites to protect their interests
via the House of Lords. And the world's longest-running constitutional
democracy -- the United States -- got its start because its "founding
fathers" were convinced that the establishment of indirect elections for
senators and the president would prevent radical, popular reforms. But, in
all the above cases, the new openness produced a spurt of economic growth
that eventually dislodged the old ruling class from its privileged perch
over society.

An instructive comparison is also offered by the experiences of Egypt and
Iraq since the 1950s. In Egypt, Colonel Nasser initiated a new tradition:
Rulers were still invariably drawn from the military ranks, but they would
henceforth present themselves as civilian presidents -- highly restricted
elections would even be set up to validate their rule. Iraq did nothing of
the kind. While the Egyptian economy has achieved sustained growth since
the 1950s, Iraq is probably poorer today than it was then. Egypt is still
unfortunately far from being a full democracy, but far fewer of its
citizens are in poverty than they were 50 years ago, and many more of them
are educated.

Flawed as Burma's current reforms are, they are unlikely to be the
country's last. Once a process of liberalization has begun, it usually
continues, however gradually. One instructive example is Taiwan. The
island was long a one-party state dominated by Chiang-Kai Shek's
Kuomintang. The group decided in the mid-1990s to introduce constitutional
changes that would establish the country's first real elections, confident
that the Kuomintang would continue to rule comfortably. They did, in fact,
win the first election handily, but the process of competition forced the
party to move away from its militarized roots and eventually allowed an
opposition to flourish and challenge its monopoly. The gradual process
also allowed the ruling and the opposition to normalize their
relationship, so that the new leaders weren't fueled by revolutionary
rage, and the old leaders were prepared to tolerate having lost their
authority.

Taiwan's experience offers a portrait of the most optimistic scenario for
Burma -- that the new constitution and the upcoming elections will be the
beginning of a process of gradual reform that improves the economy and
political participation, while avoiding a serious backlash against the
ruling generals. The alternative path to political change -- a push for
radical reform that destabilizes the country and potentially produces a
civil war -- is much more grim and, unfortunately, all too plausible.


Daron Acemoglu is professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and James A. Robinson is professor of government at Harvard
University. Their forthcoming book, Why Nations Fail, will be published by
Crown in 2011.

____________________________________
PRESS RELEASE

September 30, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
Burma/Myanmar: FIDH calls for the public and unequivocal support of the
European Union for the creation of a United Nations commission of inquiry
on atrocities in Burma

Paris – Brussels – Bangkok – The International Federation for Human Rights
(FIDH) addressed today an open-letter to H.E. Catherine Ashton, High
Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security
Policy and vice-President of the European Commission calling upon the
European Union to support the establishment of a United Nations commission
of inquiry in Burma/Myanmar.

With this letter, FIDH, transmitted to the High Representative the latest
report of its affiliated league, the Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma
(ALTSEAN - Burma), documenting the latest grave violations committed in
Burma. FIDH reiterated its call to the High Representative and the
European Union to assist the Burmese people’s quest for justice and truth,
by supporting the establishment of a UN Commission of Inquiry in the
current session of the United Nations General Assembly and include such a
demand in the proposed resolution to be adopted by the Assembly, with a
specific fact-finding mandate to investigate allegations on war crimes and
crimes against humanity, committed by all actors, state and non-state, in
the country.

Under the international human rights law and the relevant resolutions of
the UN Security Council as well as the doctrine of the "responsibility to
protect", the European Union should take concrete actions in order to
guarantee the security and the basic rights of large part of Burmese
population.


Contact:
Emmanouil Athanasiou
Responsable du Bureau Asie - Head of Asia Desk

FIDH - International Federation for Human Rights
Fédération Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l'Homme
17, Passage de la Main d'Or
75011 Paris, France

Tél.: 0033 1 43 55 25 18
Fax.: 0033 1 43 55 18 80