BurmaNet News, October 20, 2010

[Editor]

October 20, 2010 Issue #40616

INSIDE BURMA
Irrawaddy: Post-election Chief Ministers already selected, sources say
KNG: People use posters to show they reject election in Northern Burma
Myanmar Times: Broken structures, fractured alliances for political parties

ON THE BORDER
Irrawaddy: Former political prisoners fear repatriation

ASEAN
Jakarta Post: Myanmar resists scope of ASEAN poll monitors

INTERNATIONAL
Canadian Press: Report: Rwanda and Syria join NKorea, Myanmar, China and
Iran in repressing journalists
DVB: UN targets Burma minority vote

OPINION / OTHER
Reuters: ANALYSIS-China to win as Myanmar heads to the polls
World Today (UK): Burma elections: Voting, but not as we know it – Ashley
South
IPS: Ahead of poll, junta faces off with a familiar foe – radio



____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

October 20, Irrawaddy
Post-election Chief Ministers already selected, sources say - Ba Kaung

The Burmese regime has reportedly already selected several former
high-ranking military officials as the future chief ministers for regional
and state governments to be formed after the Nov. 7 election.

All the selected retired military officials are candidates of the junta's
proxy Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), according to sources.

Myint Swe, the former military chief of the Bureau of Special Operations
(5), is selected to be the chief minister in the Rangoon Region
[previously the Rangoon “Division”] government, while the same posts for
Mandalay Region, Tenasserim Region, Sagaing Region and Mon State would go
respectively to ex-Lt Gen Ye Myint, ex-Lt Gen Khin Zaw, ex-Lt Gen Thar
Aye, ex-Maj Gen Aye Myint.

All were formerly the military commanders in their respective regions and
states.

According to the junta-drafted 2008 Constitution, the country will have a
bicameral parliament at the national level and a regional parliament in
each of seven states and seven regions. The president of the national
government can appoint elected candidates for the positions of chief
ministers of the state and regional governments.

While seven regions are mostly Burman-populated, seven other states have
large ethnic majorities.

Since the governments in ethnic-populated States are expected to have an
ethnic representation, some chief minister posts have reportedly been
reserved for former military officials with an ethnic background.

Retired military colonel Kyaw Zan Hla, an ethnic Arakan and a USDP
candidate running for a parliamentary seat in western Burma's Arakan
State, is rumored to become the chief minister of the Arakan State
government.

Some members of opposition parties contesting the election say they are
not surprised by the news since they have been experiencing different
forms of dishonesty since the election laws were announced.

“We know that the government has set up everything for the post-election
[period], but we are not frustrated,” said Nay Yee Ba Swe, one of the
leaders of the Democratic Party (Myanmar) in Rangoon. “We will try to face
all  obstacles.”
____________________________________

October 20, Kachin News Group
People use posters to show they reject election in Northern Burma

People showed their rejection of the upcoming junta-run election by
pasting up posters today in Myitkyina, the capital of Kachin State,
northern Burma, according to civilian activists.

About 50 A-4 sized posters with the words “No 2010 Election” written in
Burmese were put up this morning at main markets, along roadsides and at
schools in Myitkyina, a local civilian activist by the name of Awng Gam
said.

He said the posters did not suggest people boycott the November 7 election.

He told the Thailand-based Kachin News Group, “We’d like to show our
attitude, that we simply don’t like this election”.

Most of the hand written and computer generated anti-election posters were
taken down quickly by the authorities, but some posters could still be
found in the evening, said a local eyewitness.

The recently announced laws governing the election are based on the 2008
constitution, which analysts argue guarantees the military leaders
administrative, legislative and judiciary control of the country
indefinitely.

The government controlled Union Election Commission used the constitution
to refuse independent political parties, and individual candidates which
are not linked to the junta permission to contest the election.

In Kachin State, no independent Kachin parties or individual candidates
were accepted to run in the election.

The five political parties selected to run are the Union Solidarity and
Development Party (USDP), the Unity and Democracy Party of Kachin State
(UDPKS), the National Unity Party (NUP), the Shan Nationals Democratic
Party (SNDP) and the National Democratic Force (NDF).

Only the NDF is not affiliated with the country’s military rulers. But,
the party’s election campaigns have been disrupted by members of the junta
sponsored USDP and military authorities.

The now dissolved Kachin State Progressive Party (KSPP), led by Dr. Tu Ja,
was quite popular in Kachin State, but it was rejected by the Election
Commission.

Previously, every anti-junta poster movement in Kachin State was led by
All Kachin Students’ Union (AKSU), an underground Kachin student
organization but today was conducted by ordinary people.

____________________________________

October 20, Myanmar Times
Broken structures, fractured alliances for political parties - Sandar Lwin
and Shwe Yinn Mar Oo

POLITICAL analysts have called on parties to reconsider the use of
traditional organisational structures after a democratic political
grouping was wracked by infighting within two weeks of its formation.

Cracks began to form in the six-party “Democratic Friendship Group”
shortly after its establishment on October 2, when a local journal
reported a prominent businessman had provided funding to the group’s
largest party, the National Democratic Force.

The Party for Democracy and Peace was the first to announce it had left
the group and more could possibly depart.

Pe Myint, the editor-in-chief of political affairs journal Pyithu Khit,
also known as The People’s Age, said the lack of time before the November
7 election was a factor in the group’s problems.

“I think they had to form the group in a hurry, before they could really
understand each other” both in terms of their personalities and policies,
he said. “If differences that aren’t picked up before the formation become
an issue later on, any group is likely to collapse.”

Ko Tar, the editor of intellectual magazine Chindwin, said the traditional
power structure of organisations in Myanmar was another factor in the
frequent collapse of political alliances.

“Usually a traditional structure is employed here when a political
grouping is formed. Traditionally, one member will lead the organisation
and the rest will automatically become their followers. But that kind of
structure does not really work,” Ko Tar said.

“The idea of a grouping isn’t to just passively obey all the ideas of a
leader. A grouping in a democratic political system means just
establishing a team to work together. The members don’t necessarily need
to have a strong connection; they can work individually as well. They work
together on some issues, while at the same time they are working on other
issues separately,” he said. “If there are some issues for which there is
no consensus or common vision, they can still work together in a peaceful
manner. How can everybody be identical to each other?”

The split in the parties is in sharp contrast to the cooperation achieved
by two separate networks of independent candidates. While the networks
have founders, prominent members and common ideologies, they are
essentially leaderless.

U Kaung Myint Htut, an independent Pyithu Hluttaw candidate for South
Okkalapa who is a member of a network founded by politicians U Yan Kyaw
and U Ba Tint Swe, said he had “worked with 90 percent of politicians” in
Myanmar.

“I entered the political field at 13 years of age so I am familiar with
nearly all of them. Some work separately [to me] but I can have a working
relationship with almost any politician,” 34-year-old U Kaung Myint Htut
said.

The collapse has also reinforced negative perceptions of political parties
in a country that is notorious for infighting among political groups. But
U Pe Myint said it was not inevitable that alliances would break down.

“[The parties] need to take more time to carefully learn the vision and
stance of any potential partners. They need to know clearly who is
suitable to ally with, which issues they can agree on and to what extent
they can work with each other,” he said.

Ko Tar said the parties needed to put their issues aside and see the
bigger picture.

“They need to agree on the basic concept that we have to work together,
hand-in-hand, for the sake of our country. Our country really needs the
participation of everybody to improve conditions.”

Both analysts said politicians needed to avoid irrevocably splitting
parties and alienating voters at a time when a democratic culture was only
beginning to emerge after almost 50 years.

“There is always competition between candidates who have different ideas
and are trying to influence others,” U Pe Myint said. “If you can’t accept
an idea, you can use evidence to politely refute it. But you should
tolerate these kinds of differences.”

“Resorting to personal attacks is just ugly and unnecessary,” he added.

Ko Tar said politicians should “have enough courage” to listen to
competing views.

“They should be able to search for the good things that may be there in
the different views. They should be able to respect their rivals and
appreciate that they have the right to be different.”

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

October 20, Irrawaddy
Former political prisoners fear repatriation – Alex Ellgeee

Mae Sot, Thailand—For six years, Thiha Yazar was isolated from the world
in a prison cell in eastern Burma. The prison guards had been ordered not
to communicate with him.

“The worst thing about that time was having no sense of the future or the
past,” Thiha told The Irrawaddy. “I was completely alone and lost.”

The cell had one  small window, and to keep himself from being too lonely,
he would talk to birds.  “I would ask them to go and say hello to my
daughter for me.”

At night, he would talk to the moon and stars. “They kept me company; they
were my only friends,” Thiha said.

Despite the isolation and depression he felt over the years, he doesn’t
see that period of  isolation as the worst part of  the 18-years he spent
in prison. The worst part was during  the 25-day period when he was
tortured following his role in a hunger strike over the lack of prison
rights.

They stripped him  and beat him till he couldn’t stand up any more. “The
next day I woke up with bruises all over my body, but they propped me up
and beat me again,” he said, still visibly shaken by the memory. “And the
next day and the next, for 25 days—I thought I would die.”

Thiha’s story is one of thousands which have come out of Burmese prisons,
where many political prisoners are tortured and denied basic prison
rights. Their only crime, Thiha says, “is to fight for democracy, freedom
and basic human rights in our country where the regime has denied the
people everything.”

To raise awareness about the situation of political prisoners, Thiha has
teamed up with Canadian journalist Paul Pickrem and written an account of
his imprisonment. The book, “No Easy Road: A Burmese Political Prisoner’s
Story,”
chronicles his life growing up as the  child of an army colonel,   his
sentence to death for high treason at the age of 25, and up until the time
he fled to the Thai-Burma border.

“I want the international community to know about my life so people can
better understand the situation for all political prisoners, and what our
families go through,” he said.

When he went to prison, his daughter was three years old and on his
release, she didn’t  recognize him.  “She said she knew I was her daddy
but didn’t know who I was. Then she blamed me for her mother’s death.”

Her mother had a heart attack when his  daughter was six years old. She
had a bad heart, and Thiha believes the pressure of having her husband in
prison was too much for her.

“It is not only my case, but all political prisoners. Our families are
bullied and stigmatized by local pro-junta groups. It was too much for
her.”

The book's release has coincided with the upcoming 2010 election, to be
held on on Nov. 7. Like many political prisoners who have sought refuge on
the Thai-Burma border, Thiha sees no hope for any real change after the 
election.

“If we get the rotten food in prison, and then they change the plate from
a red plate to white plate, the food will still taste the same. It means,
if the regime changes their clothes, it will still be a bad situation for
our country,” he said.

“We can see that the generals are doing everything the way they want. How
can we expect change when there are still 2,200 political prisoners inside
prisons on Election Day?”

Bo Kyi, the joint secretary of the Assistance Association for Political
Prisoners-Burma (AAPP), echoed the sentiment. “Now all the key political
leaders are in prison, like Aung San Suu Kyi, Min Ko Naing and other
ethnic leaders; as long as they are in prison there will be no national
reconciliation process,” he said.

“People really trust those leaders. People really want them to lead the
country so people will not want to vote. They will only vote because they
are threatened by the USDP.

“If the regime really wanted  a credible election, then they would release
all political prisoners so they can be included in the national political
process,” he said.

Bo Kyi said that he received messages from some of the student leaders
inside prison, who have stated that they all reject the upcoming
elections.

Although the regime offered them freedom if they publicly supported the
election, they  declared that they stood by the “Maubin Declaration,”  an
agreement between a group of student leaders that said they would not
accept the elections unless all political prisoners are released.

There are currently nearly 2,200 political prisoners  in Burmese prisons
across the country. The AAPP says political prisoners  are denied adequate
medical treatment and placed in prisons far from their families as a form
of psychological torture.

The AAPP has documented the torture of political prisoners in a report
that was released on Tuesday titled “Torture, Political Prisoners and the
Un-rule of Law: Challenges to Peace, Security and Human Rights in Burma.”

In the report, many political prisoners said the effects of torture remain
with them for the rest of their life. Pa Htee Than Hla, a 63-year-old
resident of Umpium refugee camp, said he  still suffers from injuries
sustained during torture.

 An ethnic Karen, he worked with the Karen National Union and received a
death sentence when he was  captured, later changed  to 23 years in
prison.

Like many political prisoners who flee to Thailand, he said his life was
at risk in Burma and he faced constant harassment by the authorities.

Recalling the days after his release, Thiha said members of the Union
Solidarity Development Association would come to his house every day and
try to force him to become an informer.

“I just wanted to live with my daughter, but it got worse and worse.
Finally, they were physically attacking me in the street and shouting that
I was a terrorist when I visited the market,” said Thiha.

Although many former political prisoners come to Thailand with high hopes
of a better life and freedom in a new country, their dreams are often
shattered. In this area, more than 120 former political prisoners are
unrecognized by the United Nations as refugees, and they live in fear of
arrest and repatriation by Thai authorities.

Aye Myin Soe, a spokesman for a campaign recently launched to try and
bring attention to the plight of unrecognized political prisoners, said:
“We asked the UN why we cannot be registered, and they said it is out of
their hands, only Thailand decides that. So we are left in limbo,
concerned about our future, and our families’ future.”

Many unrecognized political prisoners icing in Thailand say it sometime
feels like prison here because they are always worried about being
arrested.

With the election just weeks away and with little hope that it will change
the political situation in Burma, many political former prisoners are
concerned that Thai authorities will repatriate them, and they are
preparing for the worst.
Thiha said he has already made up his mind about what he will do, should
that happen.

“I will commit suicide before being sent back,” he said. “It doesn’t
matter. If we are sent back, the regime will take away our lives. We will
have no future.”

____________________________________
ASEAN

October 20, The Jakarta Post
Myanmar resists scope of ASEAN poll monitors – Mustaqim Adamrah

Jakarta – As Myanmar’s first election in 20 years loses credibility,
experts and activists are urging other ASEAN members to ask Myanmar to
loosen up on restrictions on poll observers.

Chairwoman of the Institute for Democracy and Human Rights at the Habibie
Center, Dewi Fortuna Anwar, said Tuesday the Myanmar government’s recent
restrictive decision would only justify international suspicions that the
Nov. 7 election in Myanmar “would not be fair, transparent and
democratic”.

She said that what ASEAN members, like Indonesia, Thailand and the
Philippines, could do was advise Myanmar to allow some observers to enter
the country.

“If there are [observers and journalists] from, say, ASEAN allowed to
monitor and cover the election in Myanmar, I believe it will open fellow
ASEAN members’ eyes more toward Myanmar,” Dewi said.

She said she believed international journalists would also report good
news, if any, such as the enthusiasm of voters during the election, or the
smooth process of election.

“Say, if Indonesian journalists who have witnessed election fraud during
the New Order, they would probably have more empathy toward Myanmar and
would not expect a democratic Myanmar to emerge overnight, and would also
make comparisons,” said Dewi.

Human Rights Resource Center for ASEAN chairman Marzuki Darusman said the
Indonesian government should lobby the Myanmar government so it would make
“an exception for observers from Indonesia or ASEAN to come and monitor
Myanmar’s election” even if it was impossible for Myanmar to do so for
other international observers from outside the region.

Myanmar’s military rulers announced Monday that international monitors and
coverage would be restricted during the restive country’s election.

University of Indonesia international relations expert Hariyadi Wirawan
said from Myanmar’s point of view, the decision the military government
took was understandable although he said it was not
acceptable.

“The Myanmar government believes that the international call for Myanmar
to open up during the election is nothing but the hidden agenda of the
West to oust the current regime,” he said.

“It feels sorry that ASEAN has to bow to the West’s wishes — this will
eventually make Myanmar see ASEAN as the West’s ally.”

And the decision to bar international polls monitors and foreign
journalists from covering the Myanmar’s election is actually a
manifestation of greater confidence Myanmar has gained after India
promised it to help develop its economy.

Human Rights Watch deputy director for Asia division Phil Robertson said
the Myanmar government’s decision was not a surprising decision, and
nothing was going to change fundamentally there.

“[Therefore] the Indonesian government should support the international
call for inquiries into crimes against humanity in Burma,” he said.

____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

October 20, The Canadian Press
Report: Rwanda and Syria join NKorea, Myanmar, China and Iran in
repressing journalists – Edith M. Lederer

Rwanda and Syria joined a list of the 10 most repressive countries toward
journalists alongside North Korea, Myanmar, China and Iran, according to a
global media watchdog which warned Tuesday that the crackdown on reporters
in authoritarian countries is worsening.

Reporters Without Borders said press freedom in the 10 countries —
including Yemen, Sudan, Turkmenistan and Eritrea — continues to
deteriorate.

"It is getting harder to say which is worse than the other," the group
said, with all 10 persecuting the media and blocking news and information
to their citizens.

The Paris-based organization said Cuba was not in the bottom 10 for the
first time since the index was created in 2002, due mainly to the release
of 14 journalists and 22 activists over the summer. But it said the
political dissidents and journalists still have to deal with censorship
and repression by the Communist government on a daily basis.

Reporters Without Borders' annual ranking of press freedom in 178
countries praised six northern European countries — Finland, Iceland,
Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland — for topping the index since
it was created in 2002 and setting an example for respecting journalists
and protecting the media from judicial abuse.

But it warned that the European Union risks losing its position as world
leader in respecting freedom of the press, noting that while 13 of the
EU's 27 members are in the top 20 some of the other 14 are very low in the
rankings including Italy at 49, Romania at 52 and Greece and Romania tied
at 70.

"The defence of media freedom continues to be a battle — a battle of
vigilance in the democracies of old Europe and a battle against oppression
and injustice in the totalitarian regimes still scattered across the
globe," Reporters Without Borders Secretary-General Jean-Francois Julliard
said in the report.

He said the fate of human rights activists, journalists and bloggers "who
bravely defend the right to speak out ... is our constant concern."

He reiterated the organization's call for China to release the new Nobel
Peace Prize winner, Liu Xiaobao, "the symbol of the pressure for free
speech building up in China, which censorship for the time being is still
managing to contain."

"And we warn the Chinese authorities against taking a road from which
there is no way out," Julliard said.

According to the report, Asia's four Communist regimes are among the 15
lowest-ranked countries with North Korea at 177th place, China at 171,
Vietnam at 165 and Laos at 168.

"China, despute its dynamic media and Internet, remains in a low position
because of non-stop censorship and repression, notably in Tibet and
Xinjiang," it said, while in "hellish totalitarian North Korea" where Kim
Jong-il has set up his son's succession "crackdowns have become even
harsher."

The 2010 index highlights major differences in press freedom in the four
major emerging economies — China, India, Brazil and Russia.

Thanks to favourable legislative changes, Brazil rose 12 places to 58
while India dropped 17 places to 122, mainly due to extreme violence in
Kashmir, the report said. In Russia, at 140, "the system remains as
tightly controlled as ever, and impunity reigns unchallenged in cases of
violence against journalists," it said.

Reporters Without Borders said political violence produced "very troubling
tumbles in the rankings."

Thailand lost 23 places and is now at 153 after two journalists were
killed and 15 wounded covering the army crackdown on the anti-government
"Red Shirt" movement in Bangkok.

The Philippines fell 34 places to 156 following last November's massacre
of 30 media workers travelling in an election convoy in southern
Maguindanao, allegedly at the hands of the governor's supporters. It was
the deadliest single attack on reporters in the world.

Rwanda fell 12 places to 169 following "the closure of leading independent
publications, the climate of terror surrounding the presidential election,
and Umuvugizi deputy editor Jean-Leonard Rugambage's murder in Kigali,"
the report said. He was shot dead outside his home hours after the paper
published an online article linking Rwandan intelligence to the shooting
of a former army chief in South Africa.

"Journalists are fleeing the country because of the repression, in an
exodus almost on the scale of Somalia's," Reporters Without Borders said.

In Syria, which dropped eight places to 173, and Yemen, down three places
to 170, the report said "press freedom is fast shrinking away" and
"arbitrary detentions are still routine, as is the use of torture."

For the fourth straight year Eritrea was at the bottom of the list, at 178.

The report said 30 journalists and four media contributors are being held
incommunicado "in the most appalling conditions without any right to
trial."

____________________________________

October 20, Democratic Voice of Burma
UN targets Burma minority vote – Francis Wade

Looming elections in Burma will only be credible if opposition leaders and
ethnic minorities can fully participate, the UN’s special rapporteur to
Burma has said.

The comment comes as UN chief Ban Ki-moon prepares for a visit to
Southeast Asia next week to attend a regional summit and embarking on a
four-country tour that will take in China and Thailand. The issue of the 7
November elections are expected to feature high on the agenda at the
summit.

Burma’s first polls in 20 years have attracted widespread criticism, not
least because the winner of the 1990 elections, Aung San Suu Kyi, is
barred from running for office.

Tomas Ojea Quintana, the UN’s chief rights investigator on Burma, said
that while “genuine elections call for broad participation”, the
likelihood of this happening in the pariah state was slim, with opposition
groups and ethnic minorities sidelined.

“These people have a legitimate role to play in these historic elections.
An immediate, unconditional release of all prisoners of conscience is
necessary for the elections to be credible,” he said in a report made
public before its presentation to the General Assembly in New York on
Wednesday.

Many of Burma’s volatile ethnic regions, whose history since the end of
British colonial rule in 1948 has been pockmarked with low-intensity
conflict, are not able to participate. The government has scrapped voting
in around 3,400 villages in the ethnic Mon, Karen, Karenni, Shan and
Kachin border regions, while up to 500,000 people displaced inside Burma
cannot vote.

One Shan leader told AFP that in that state alone about two million people
– around 30 percent of the population there – would not get the
opportunity to vote.

How far Ban Ki-moon will go to pressure Burma’s neighbours into taking a
tougher stance on the election remains to be seen. The Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) maintains a policy of non-interference in
the domestic affairs of member states, meaning condemnation has been
scarce.

He is also likely to come up against stern resistance when he visits
Beijing next week, with China’s economic interests in Burma – massaged by
the ruling generals – rapidly growing.

“The Burmese need Beijing for international protection, and the Chinese
need the Burmese for raw materials, and perhaps more importantly for
strategic access to the Indian Ocean,” Burma analyst Maung Zarni told
Reuters.

“Whoever comes to power it won’t make any difference 
 It’s not like the
Burmese generals are fond of the Chinese. They are not. It’s basically a
marriage of convenience.”

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

October 20, Reuters
ANALYSIS-China to win as Myanmar heads to the polls – Ben Blanchard

Beijing – Myanmar's secretive election is still a few weeks off, but one
winner is already clear: China.

The controlled vote in the Southeast Asian nation is sure to produce a
government intent on sticking close to its huge neighbour, even as China
frets longer-term that its sway could be dented by Washington's tentative
detente with the former Burma.

Beijing has long cast wary looks at its restive southern neighbour, and
suspicions based on a troubled history fester on both sides, despite broad
Chinese support for Myanmar in the face of wide-ranging Western sanctions.

Myanmar's ruling generals, led by the aged and reclusive Than Shwe, fought
Chinese-backed Communist guerrillas during the Cold War. China remembers
with bitterness anti-Chinese riots and the storming of its embassy in
Rangoon in 1967.

Yet there is scant chance the United States or Europe will lift their
sanctions on Myanmar, and the new nominally civilian but
military-influenced government will stick to their friendship with their
powerful patron to the north.

"The Burmese need Beijing for international protection, and the Chinese
need the Burmese for raw materials, and perhaps more importantly for
strategic access to the Indian Ocean," said Maung Zarni, a Myanmar expert
at the London School of Economics' Centre for the Study of Global
Governance.

"Whoever comes to power it won't make any difference ... It's not like the
Burmese generals are fond of the Chinese. They are not. It's basically a
marriage of convenience."

In some regards, Myanmar is already gaining more power over China, thanks
to the political clout bought by strategic pipelines being built that will
bring oil and gas overland into southwestern China in the next few years.

Myanmar has been working hard to allay Chinese fears.

Than Shwe reassured Beijing during a rare visit last month that China was
a vital ally and that the election and planned power transfer would not
affect relations.

"The current military government will continue to control Myanmar's
politics," Wang Zichang of Guangzhou's Jinan University wrote in the
latest issue of the Chinese journal Southeast Asian Studies.

"No matter what the outcome, the elections will not affect Myanmar's
foreign policy. The West's sanctions will continue or be increased ...
China and India will maintain their policy of engagement," Wang wrote.
"Because of China's position, the U.N. Security Council cannot really put
sanctions on Myanmar."

China has pumped billions of dollars into Myanmar, mostly in energy
projects, with Chinese firms taking advantage of Myanmar's desperation for
hard currency and the unwillingness of Western firms to do business in a
country condemned for rights abuses.

WHAT ELECTIONS?

Still, China does not have the sway over Myanmar that many in the west
assume it does, and China's stability-obsessed rulers have long worried
about the flow of drugs and AIDS across a border controlled in parts by a
plethora of rebel groups.

Last year, clashes between Myanmar's army and rebels pushed some 37,000
refugees in the southwestern Chinese province of Yunnan, prompting a rare
and angry public rebuke from Beijing.

Relations have improved of late though. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited
Myanmar in June, a few months after Xi Jinping, the vice president and
presumed heir to President Hu Jintao.

However, Chinese media has given little coverage to the elections, nervous
of giving China's public any suggestion of democracy in a much-lauded
ally.

"The government does not want people to ask the awkward question of why
can these people in this small country on our border have some kind of
election and we cannot," one reporter at a state-run newspaper told
Reuters, requesting anonymity.

JITTERS ABOUT WASHINGTON

China has a broader worry too -- any sign of improvement in relations
between Washington and the generals in their new jungle capital Naypyitaw.

China has been pondering how to deal with slowly thawing ties between
Myanmar and the United States since President Barack Obama began tentative
contacts last year, culminating in a rare meeting with Prime Minister
Thein Sein in Singapore.

Beijing fears "containment" by the United States, whether by Washington's
increasingly close links with India or U.S. military bases in South Korea,
Japan and Kyrgyzstan.

The thought of Washington and Myanmar's generals making up may appear
outlandish, and the Obama administration is most unlikely to welcome the
results of elections it has already slammed as unfair. But the very idea
pinches nerves in Beijing.

During last year's refugee crisis, some Chinese academics wondered whether
Myanmar purposely wanted to irritate Beijing and so ingratiate itself with
Washington.

"If the United States and Myanmar normalise relations, then that will
certainly threaten China's security strategy," Peking University Myanmar
expert Zhang Xizhen told the state-run Guangzhou Daily earlier this year.

"China's economic position and existing advantages will be seriously
challenged in the event of better ties between Myanmar and the West," Yu
Changsen, a professor at Guangzhou's Sun Yat-sen University, told the same
newspaper.

This, added to the billions being invested in the pipelines running
through an unstable country run by highly nationalistic military men with
an instinctive distrust of China, does not set the minds of Chinese
policy-makers at ease.

"These investments, along with the U.S. administration's engagement policy
... contribute to China's perception that Naypyitaw may be gaining
leverage in the relationship," the International Crisis Group wrote in a
report last month. (Editing by Alex Richardson)

____________________________________

October 20, The World Today (UK)
Burma elections: Voting, but not as we know it – Ashley South

On November 7 Burma goes to the polls, for the first time in twenty years.
The elections will be neither free nor fair, and are likely to result in
military-dominated national and provincial administrations. However, a
large number of independent parties will participate, hoping that this
imperfect process will at least bring some change, slowly opening up
accountability and political debate in a country dominated by the military
for half a century. Will the polls have the minimal credibility for them
to be endorsed by western countries? China, India andother regional powers
are likely to have fewer scruples.

The 1990 elections in Burma - or Myanmar, AS the country is now officially
called - were won by the National League for Democracy (NLD), with two
thirds of the vote, under its charismatic General Secretary, Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi. However, the military regime, which has run the country since
1962, refused to hand over power, and has ruled by decree ever since.

The past two decades have seen economic stagnation, widespread corruption
and misgovernance, systematic human rights abuses by the military against
ethnic nationalist insurgents in the borderlands and the often brutal
suppression of urban dissent.
Isolation & Sanctions

Three years ago last September, the military regime cracked-down against
civilian protesters, led by revered Buddhist monks, demonstrating against
the social and economic malaise. The "saffron revolution" illustrated the
deep-seated and widespread unpopularity of the regime; its suppression
showed that the generals were still willing to use lethal force to
maintain their rule, and could get away with it.

Just as after the 1988 'democracy uprising', and the military's failure to
recognise the 1990 election results, the suppression of the saffron
revolution generated international outrage, at least among those western -
primarily European and North American - states which enjoy the luxury of
not sharing Burma's strategically important neighbourhood.

Since 1988, in an effort to promote democratisation and respect for human
rights, western nations have sponsored sanctions against, and
international isolation of, the military government. Despite its symbolic
power however, this policy has pushed Burma further into the Chinese
sphere of influence, and consolidated the position of hardliners.

Meanwhile, Burma's other giant neighbour, India, has chosen to engage and
compete with China to gain access to Burma's extensive natural resources:
gas and hydropower, as well as timber. The government has been able to
play off these two emerging superpowers, and the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations, (ASEAN) regional grouping, making the sanctions largely
ineffective.
Hand Of Friendship

Given the hand of friendship extended to other 'rogue states' by United
States President Barack Obama's administration, it was not surprising that
last year Washington sought to engage Burma. However, vociferous
pro-sanctions lobbies in western countries - particularly the US and
Britain - are highly sceptical of this approach. Although they lack much
traction back home, Burmese politicians in exile and their support
networks have been able to 'capture' western policy. They are likely to
fight hard to frame the forthcoming elections as entirely illegitimate,
thereby resisting any change in the regime's international pariah status.

In this context, US State Department and British Foreign Office officials
are asking whether the elections will have a minimal degree of
credibility, producing a Burmese government with which they can do
business, despite the bluster of opposition groups.
Whatever government emerges, it will continue to be dominated by the
military. It should be noted that the 2008 constitution - passed by an
improbably large majority, in a referendum conducted shortly after the
devastation of Cyclone Nargis - provides for a presidential system.
Citizens will not be voting directly for an executive, but rather for
quasi-legislative national and provincial bodies.

In the best-case, able and independent individuals elected to these
positions may be able to hold the executive to account, on at least some
aspects of governance. For ethnic nationality communities in particular,
the elections open up the prospect of levels of government closer to the
ground than the current junta, with the possibility of elected officials
needing to pay closer attention to local needs.

Nationally, the two main pro-regime parties enjoy huge advantage over
their opponents in access to financial and human resources, and the media,
and also because independent parties remain subject to sometimes quite
heavy-handed surveillance and suppression.

Indeed, the top leaders of the Union Solidarity Development Party
aremostly recently retired generals. Some are reportedly not pleased to
have been required to take off their uniforms to promote the grand plan of
junta supremo, Senior General Than Shwe.

Some observers look - more in hope than realistic expectation - for
divisions in the military to provide an avenue for political transition.
Others argue that it is important for proregime parties to do well, so the
military accepts the results, and the generals feel secure enough to allow
independent parties some operating space in post-election politics.

About two thirds of the 37 parties competing in the elections are either
fully or somewhat independent from the government. They are not so naive
as to expect that the elections will introduce anything approaching
democracy, even in a limited sense. It seems probable that - unlike in
1990 - the military regime will be able to control the process without
resorting to clumsy ballot stuffing, or other electoral fraud.

Already, some opposition parties have been refused permission to register;
most notably, the main ethnic-nationalist party in the northern Kachin
State. Those still in the race have been restricted by hefty candidate
registration fees, and ongoing state-suppression, aswell as limited human
resources.

Nevertheless, some parties expect significant numbers of votes. Ethnic
nationalist parties, associated particularly with the Shan, Mon and Karen
communities, anticipate doing well, if given half a chance. Most are
concentrating on the provincial assemblies.

For ethnic nationality communities - including hundreds of thousands of
displaced people - one of the key post-election issues will be the
relationship between the government and a variety of non-state armed
groups. Most of these agreed ceasefires with the government in the
1990s.However, over the past year-and-a-half, themilitary has sought to
bring non-state armed ceasefire groups directly under Burma army control.

While several of the less powerful ceasefire groups have complied, three
of the strongest are refusing. Will a future government be satisfied with
the current, tense status quo, or seek to persuade the remaining groups to
becomegovernment-controlled militias, or perhaps use its consolidated
position to launch military campaigns against non-compliant armed groups?
Election By Proxy

Nationally, several non-government parties are hoping for protest votes.
Among these, most notable is the National Democratic Force (NDF),made up
of ex-NLDmembers, who - unlike Aung San Suu Kyi - are willing tomake
themost of a deeply flawed electoral process. Reflecting the fractious and
polarised nature of politics, NDF and independent ethnic nationality
parties have been criticised in opposition circles for their supposed
collaboration with a 'shamelection'.

Such criticisms help explain why many politicians are not directly
contesting the polls, but rather seeking to mobilise others to do so in
their place. Thismay be an 'election by proxy'.

Given such complexities, it may be several months before observers - or
those involved - can make sound judgements about any electoral changes in
the balance of power. In the meantime, exiled and other opposition figures
will no doubt continue to criticise the polls, and any resulting
administration - and also probably castigate those who participate.

Serious disturbances around the elections seem unlikely, given the
weakness of opposition groups and the entrenched power of the military.
However, popular protests cannot be entirely ruled out, as the regime is
deeply unpopular in most circles, reflected in widespread participation in
the 2007 saffron revolution.

Barring such unforeseen developments however, the credibility benchmark
has been set very low. It seems highly likely that China, India and most -
but perhaps not all - ASEAN states will accept the outcome, and regard the
resulting government as legitimate. Opposition activists will no doubt
protest strongly at this. It remains to be seen whether the US and other
western governments will, at least implicitly, endorse the process, by
seeking to do business with the new regime.

Rights And Wrongs

A precedent was established elsewhere earlier this year in relation to
Sudan, when shortly after very problematic elections, the US accepted the
reality of the Khartoum government. The indictment by the International
Criminal Court of Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir provides another
parallel with Burma.

Over the past two years, international human rights organisations and
exiled opposition and activist groups have called for a commission of
inquiry into alleged crimes against humanity in Burma, amove which gained
added momentum with recent White House endorsement.

Such a commission could only be established by the United Nations'
Security Council in the unlikely event of China not exercising its veto.
Otherwise, the most that can realistically be expected is a symbolic, and
ultimately powerless, body convened by the UN General Assembly, or
possibly the Human Rights Council. This would no doubt inconvenience a new
government, whilst discouraging progressives and empowering anti-western
hardliners.

One of the most encouraging recent developments has been the re-emergence
of widespread civil society networks, both in government-controlled and
conflict affected areas. However, armed, exiled and domestic opposition
groups have declined in influence at the same time.

Given the lack of viable alternatives, it seems likely that regional
powers - China, India and ASEAN - will endorse the polls. In the case of
China, not least to avoid its client state moving closer to America.

Independent candidates and parties are hoping to produce at least some
limited space as a result of their participation. Western governments may
also act pragmatically, or feel obliged to maintain an isolation-and
sanctions policy which has done very little to promote democratisation in
this troubled country.


Ashley South, Independent Analyst, working on politics and humanitarian
issues in Burma/Myanmar and Southeast Asia.

____________________________________

October 20, Inter Press Service
Ahead of poll, junta faces off with a familiar foe – radio – Marwaan
Macan-Markar

Bangkok – As military-ruled Burma heads towards its first general election
in two decades in November, its citizens are tuning in to their enduring
faith in the old communication order – the power of the radio.

The key role that radio plays – more than newer communication platforms
like Facebook and Twitter – is at the heart of an Amnesty International
campaign that has been seeking to "break the silence" in the South-east
Asian nation.

By polling day on Nov. 7, the London-based Amnesty International hopes to
have distributed over 4,000 radio sets to people living in a country under
the iron grip of a military regime.

"Amnesty International just wants people in Burma to hear the truth," said
Niall Couper of the British branch of Amnesty, in an e-mail interview. "
It is the first time we have done a campaign like this."

Amnesty International’s supply of radios, in addition to 60 walkie-talkie
kits and six satellite kits, is being directed towards people living in
the hinterland where "there aren’t that many radios," reveals Couper. But
details such as the brand of the radio units and how they are being
delivered are being kept a closely guarded secret because of "security
reasons."

This faith in this traditional medium is echoed by Burmese pro-democracy
activists familiar with its dominance as an information source in the
country’s media landscape. A flourishing border trade with China has been
a driver behind the supply of cheap Chinese-made radios across the
country.

"Radio is a very powerful tool to open the iron curtain of a closed-door
society like Burma," said Aung Din, head of U.S. Campaign for Burma, a
Washington DC-based lobby group championing political reform. "It is also
a major threat to the regime, effectively undermining its ability to
control the flow of information in the media."

Regular radio broadcasts have been pivotal to keep the people informed
about the "2008 constitution, electoral laws, election campaigns and the
illegal campaigns of the regime’s party," Aung Din told IPS. "They have
also broadcast voices of NLD (National League for Democracy) leaders and
ethnic party leaders who have been calling the people to boycott the
poll."

The NLD, headed by pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, was disbanded in
mid-September after it refused to re- register as a political party
contesting the coming poll.

The NLD won the last general election in 1990 with a thumping majority,
but the military leaders refused to recognise the results and denied the
elected civilian government the opportunity to replace successive military
regimes that had been in power since a 1962 coup.

The two decades since the last poll have also seen a shift in the media
outlets that dominate the airwaves. The Burmese language services of the
British Broadcasting Corp and Voice of America, which held sway during the
1990 poll, now have stiff competition from the Democratic Voice of Burma
(DVB), an Oslo-based broadcaster run by Burmese journalists in exile.

"Various kinds of election programmes are being produced and aired by DVB
radio," said Khin Maung Win, deputy executive director of the station.
"Programme themes range from 
 criterion of a democratic general election
in other countries to (the) undemocratic nature of elections in Burma."

"DVB itself is not taking any sides editorially, either pro- or against
elections," he said in an e-mail interview. "While we broadcast
pro-election campaigns and preparation for elections, we also broadcast
voices of those against the elections."

It has not been an easy journey for this radio station, set up by exiles
in 1992, to offer news, analysis and commentary to counter the propaganda
machine of the regime.

Burma’s jails have an estimated 2,190 political prisoners, of whom 17 are
DVB journalists. Hla Hla Win, who received a 20-year sentence in January,
is among them. Her crime: violating the draconian Electronic Act, which
bans the unauthorised use of electronic media.

The junta’s oppressive record is also confirmed in this week’s release of
the ‘2010 Press Freedom Index’ by Reporters Without Borders, the global
media freedom watchdog. Burma was placed among the five worst abusers of
media freedom, ranked 174th out of a list of 178 countries, according to
the Paris-based watchdog.

"Freedom is not allowed any space in Burma, where a parliamentary election
is due to be held next month, and the rare attempts to provide news or
information are met with imprisonment and forced labour," the annual
report revealed.

A Burmese political analyst inside the country expects the junta to
suppress reportage around the election as it did in September 2007, when
Buddhist monks led a peaceful anti-government protest that was crushed,
and in May 2008, when the powerful Cyclone Nargis tore through the south-
western delta and killed over 140,000 people.

"They have already announced that foreign journalists would not get visas,
so they want this election to be held under a cloud of secrecy," the
Rangoon-based analyst said on condition of anonymity.

But this seems to be just the challenge that the likes of DVB are
preparing for – to assert the power of radio against the junta’s
propaganda and censorship on polling day.

"We anticipate there would be obvious and unknown threats from the
government to supporters of opposition parties and candidates. And there
will be cheating in many places," said Khin Maung Win. "We will try to
document and report all about these."