BurmaNet News, December 7, 2010

[Editor]

December 7, 2010 Issue #4098


INSIDE BURMA
South African Press Association: SA ambassador meets Suu Kyi
Reuters: U.S. official arrives in Myanmar to meet Suu Kyi, MPs

ON THE BORDER
DVB: Thai and Burmese FM hold secret talks

BUSINESS / TRADE
AFP: Suu Kyi urges aid to boost civil society in Europe message
Reuters: Myanmar gem fair nets record $1.4 bln -govt official

REGIONAL
Mizzima: Suu Kyi appeals to India for strengthened relations

INTERNATIONAL
AFP: Myanmar gets Q and A with Suu Kyi
Irrawaddy: Next two months crucial for Burma: Ban
AP: Michelle Yeoh could play Myanmar icon in film role
AFP: US lawmaker urges world on Suu Kyi safety

OPINION / OTHER
Huffington Post (US): Quest for bona fide democracy: Aung San Suu Kyi in
Myanmar – Sam Sasan Shoamanesh
DVB: Where Chomsky, Caesar and Than Shwe meet – Francis Wade
New York Review of Books: Looking for hope in Burma – Howard W. French






____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

December 7, South African Press Association
SA ambassador meets Suu Kyi

South Africa's ambassador to Thailand, Douglas Gibson, has met with
Myanmar's Leader of the National League for Democracy Aung San Suu Kyi,
the department of international relations and co-operations said on
Tuesday.

The meeting on Monday came after the 65-year-old's recent release from
fifteen-years of house arrest, said departmental spokesman Clayson
Monyela.

“During the meeting, Aung San Suu Kyi hailed South Africa's great moral
authority as an inspiration to those striving for democracy and expressed
hope that people would take a leaf from South Africa.”

Monyela said that Gibson reiterated a commitment by the South African
government to offer its experience on the path to reconciliation and
transition to democracy with the people of Myanmar.

The largely Buddhist South East Asian country has been under military rule
since 1962. In 1990, military rulers refused to hand over power when Suu
Kyi's party won the elections with a landslide victory.
____________________________________

December 7, Reuters
U.S. official arrives in Myanmar to meet Suu Kyi, MPs

Yangon – A United States official arrived in army-ruled Myanmar on Tuesday
for talks with Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, who was recently freed
from house arrest, plus a minister and newly elected lawmakers, a
government official said.

The visit by Joseph Yun, deputy assistant secretary of state for East
Asian and Pacific affairs, is seen as a move by Washington to test the
political waters in Myanmar, a month after a controversial general
election and Suu Kyi's release from years of detention.

Efforts by Barack Obama's administration to improve ties with the regime
have been largely fruitless, and its calls for an inclusive election and
the release of more than 2,100 political prisoners fell on deaf ears.

Two days after Suu Kyi's release on Nov. 13, State Department spokesman
P.J. Crowley said Washington was prepared to have "a different kind of
relationship" with Myanmar, but only under certain conditions. He did not
elaborate.

Analysts believe Washington might be reassessing its stance on sanctions
against the regime, which critics say have failed and simply pushed the
generals closer to China.

Suu Kyi, who has led the fight for democracy in Myanmar, has hinted she
might try to work with the West to review sanctions, which she previously
backed, if she believes they are hurting the Burmese people.

Yun was scheduled to visit Foreign Minister Nyan Win in the capital,
Naypyitaw, a government official told Reuters. It was not known if Yun
would meet with the junta's reclusive leadership.

He next plans to travel to the biggest city, Yangon, to meet Suu Kyi,
political party leaders and representatives of ethnic groups, the official
said, requesting anonymity.

The most recent visitor from Washington was Assistant Secretary of State
Kurt Campbell in May, when he met with several ministers and Suu Kyi while
she was under house arrest.

"I think the main purpose of Yun's visit is to find out the opinions of
different political forces including Aung San Suu Kyi and the regime
before reviewing the Obama administration's policy on Myanmar," said a
retired diplomat in Yangon.

(Reporting by Aung Hla Tun; Writing by Martin Petty; Editing by Alan
Raybould)

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

December 7, Democratic Voice of Burma
Thai and Burmese FM hold secret talks – Naw Noreen

Burma’s foreign minister Nyan Win yesterday travelled to the border town
of Tachilek to meet with his Thai counterpart in what observers claim may
be an attempt to negotiate the re-opening of a key border crossing further
south.

The three-hour meeting was held Monday morning at the Regina Hotel in
Tachilek, which also acts a major trading point between the two countries,
although it was the issue of the closed Friendship Bridge in Mae Sot that
likely topped the agenda.

Nyan Win was reportedly joined by a team of 20 Burmese officials,
including business and trade minister, Tin Naing Thein, temporary border
trade director general, Aung Naing Oo, and the Burmese ambassador to
Thailand, Kyi Thein. Thai foreign minister Kasit Piromya brought with him
a 15-strong delegation.

A Thai journalist from Channel 3 followed the Thai team to the airport in
nearby Chiang Rai, but Kasit reportedly refused to answer his questions.

The closure of the Mae Sot crossing by Burmese authorities in July has
angered Thailand. Burma officially claims the decision was made over
safety concerns for tourists in its border town of Myawaddy, while it is
thought the real reason lies behind Thailand’s construction of a defensive
wall on its side of the Salween river.

Thailand’s countrywide border trade generates around US$4.3 billion each
year for the developing economy. According to TTR Weekly, Thailand is
losing an estimated US$2.7 million day while the Mae Sot crossing is
closed.

Bangkok has also earmarked around $US38.6 million to develop a special
economic zone in the Mae Sot-Myawaddy region, although it is unclear
whether the latest dispute will have any impact on this.

____________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

December 7, Agence France Presse
Suu Kyi urges aid to boost civil society in Europe message

Brussels — Myanmar democracy champion Aung San Suu Kyi called for foreign
aid policies that strengthen civil society in a video message to a
European development forum on Tuesday.

Suu Kyi, who was freed last month after spending most of the last 20 years
under house arrest, made her plea at the closing ceremony of the two-day
European Development Days, which gathered leaders of developing nations.

"If development policies could be linked as strongly to the strengthening
of civil society as to the improvement of the economy, it would create a
strong impetus towards good governance," she said.

"Financial and intellectual investment in civil society would have rich
returns that include accountability and transparency, not just in the
economic sector but also in the political arena," she said.

European development commissioner Andris Pielbags introduced Suu Kyi, a
Nobel peace prize laureate, as the "most famous woman of this planet, or
at least one of the bravest."

"We who are trying to establish a democratic society in Burma do not have
an unrealistic vision of an earthly paradise," Suu Kyi said, standing in
front of a white wall.

"We are simply trying to create a society in which the people will be
allowed to work freely and responsibly towards their own betterment," she
said.

The leader of the National League for Democracy spent 15 of the last 21
years locked up until her release on November 13.

____________________________________

December 7, Reuters
Myanmar gem fair nets record $1.4 bln -govt official

Yangon – Gem traders in Myanmar, one of the world's biggest producers of
precious stones, took in a record 1.08 billion euros ($1.44 billion) at a
13-day emporium last month, a government official said on Tuesday.

The fair in the capital, Naypyitaw, attracted some 6,700 traders, 4,000 of
them from overseas, with 9,157 lots of jade, 273 lots of gems and 237 lots
of pearls sold in auctions, said the official, who requested anonymity.

"These are the highest proceeds from a single sale of jade, gems and
pearls since 1964," he told Reuters.

Gemstones are a lucrative source of income for Myanmar's military
government, despite Western sanctions imposed on the resource-rich
country, some of which outlaw the procurement and sale of Burmese stones.

Myanmar produces more than 90 percent of the world's rubies and
fine-quality jade. Most of Myanmar's jade and gemstone mines are run by
the defence and mines ministries and businessmen with close connections to
the regime.

The United States Congress passed a bill in October 2007 to expand
sanctions prohibiting the domestic sale of rubies, jade and other gems
routed through Myanmar's neighbours. Experts say this has had only a
limited impact on the junta because most buyers are from China, Hong Kong
and Taiwan.

This is the first time in five years that the government has indicated how
much money has been generated from the emporium, which is usually held in
the biggest city, Yangon.

Officials said trade fairs held in March and October generated 400 million
and 700 million euros respectively.

Myanmar recently launched a drive to attract foreign investment,
particularly from Asian countries, to what it says is a market with vast
potential held back by Western sanctions.

Many analysts believe the regime is trying to promote its natural
resources, particularly energy, to attract foreign interest and force a
review of trade embargoes that prevent the powerful military from
procuring better-quality arms. ($1=.7518 Euro) (Reporting by Aung Hla Tun;
Writing by Martin Petty; Editing by Alan Raybould)

____________________________________
REGIONAL

December 7, Mizzima News
Suu Kyi appeals to India for strengthened relations

New Delhi – In a video message, Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi
is calling on Indian leadership, which has for years sought closer
relations with Burma’s military rulers, to increase its support for
Burma’s pro-democracy forces.

During the footage, provided to Mizzima, Suu Kyi renews her appeal for
assistance in returning democracy to Burma and thus providing for
increased peace, prosperity and stability throughout the region.

The video message is to be delivered at today meeting of Burmese and
Indians who are celebrating her freedom at Press Club of India in New
Delhi. Several Indian law makers and Suu Kyi’s supporters will participate
in the celebration which is jointly organized by Burmese democracy
movement in India and Delhi-based Women in Security Conflict Management
and Peace (WISCOMP).

Aung San Suu Kyi who is a recipient of India’s highest civilian ward of
Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding in 1995, reminds
her listeners that over 2,000 political prisoners in Burma, as well as
millions more, remain awaiting their right to live in freedom and “look
toward India as a longstanding friend of Burma to help
in that quest.”

Often compared with India’s Mahatma Gandhi for their similarities in
expounding non-violent solutions to national crises, Suu Kyi also spent a
number of years living in India, graduating from Lady Shri Ram College in
New Delhi with a degree in politics in 1964.

Additionally, the Indian government of Jawaharlal Nehru played a crucial
role in buttressing the besieged democratically elected government of
Burma during the late 1940s and 1950’s.

However, while initially actively supportive of Aung San Suu Kyi and her
National League for Democracy (NLD) party in the wake of the 1988 unrest
and subsequent 1990 general election in which the NLD emerged victorious,
New Delhi has since the mid-1990s increasingly sought to better relations
with Burma’s generals with a focus on securing economic concessions.

Indirectly referencing and questioning Indian foreign policy, Suu Kyi
simply requests, “We would like much closer ties between the government of
India and those working for democracy in Burma.”

In July of this year, Indian leadership feted Burmese leader Than Shwe and
his delegation for nearly a week, agreeing to a number of memorandums
predominantly dealing with business and development pacts.

Nonetheless, Burma’s opposition leader conveys her thankfulness for the
continued actions of Indian authorities in assisting Burmese refugees and
political groups having sought exile in India.

“I appreciate very much what India has done to assist refugees who have
gone to India,” adds the Noble Peace laureate, “and to those of our
political groups who are now in India working for democracy in Burma.”

Tens of thousands of Burmese are estimated to have made their way to
India, with much of the population existing in India’s northeastern border
states with Burma, especially Manipur and Mizoram.

Suu Kyi, during her two-minute greeting, states she looks forward to the
day when all Burmese living abroad in India and elsewhere can feel
confident in returning home to a peaceful and prosperous Burma.

____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

December 7, Agence France Presse
Myanmar gets Q and A with Suu Kyi

Washington— US-funded broadcaster Radio Free Asia has launched a weekly
radio question and answer show with Myanmar democracy champion Aung San
Suu Kyi, who was freed from house arrest last month.

The first episode of the Burmese-language show was broadcast on November
30, featuring six questions from listeners given a rare chance to
communicate directly with the democracy icon.

"'Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the People' invites RFA's audience to submit
questions on any topic, which are then answered by the recently freed
Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Burmese opposition party leader," the radio
station said in a statement.

"After almost two decades under house arrest, Aung San Suu Kyi remains a
beacon of hope and strength to the world," Libby Liu, president of Radio
Free Asia, said in the statement.

"But in her homeland, despite the deep admiration of her country men and
women, her voice was stifled. Now, with this program, the Burmese people
have a unique, public forum in which they can speak freely with their
'Lady.'"

Listeners of the program, which is banned but still airs in Myanmar
itself, send emails to RFA which then gives the questions to Suu Kyi and
broadcasts the responses on Friday evenings.

"In Burma, there is no opinion or perspective expressed on official media
apart from that of the ruling regime," said Nyein Shwe, service director
of RFA Burmese.

"Many Burmese people never in their lifetimes imagined they would be able
to hear Aung San Suu Kyi discuss her views nor ask her their questions on
the radio. For them, it?s a first."

Suu Kyi was freed from detention on November 13, days after a rare
election which has been widely panned by international observers including
US President Barack Obama, who said Myanmar's "bankrupt regime" had stolen
the vote.

The Obama administration launched dialogue with Myanmar's military rulers
last year after concluding that Western attempts to isolate the regime had
produced little success.

Suu Kyi, who spent 15 of the last 21 years locked up, has welcomed this
engagement but warned that greater human rights and economic progress are
still needed.

In the first RFA show, Suu Kyi was asked by one questioner if she still
supported sanctions against the ruling junta.

"We have constantly reviewed our position with regard to sanctions and
once again we are going to see if there is anything we can do to improve
the situation," she replied in an English audio version produced by RFA.

According to state media, junta leader Than Shwe hailed the "free and fair
elections" and said just two of seven steps needed to be completed on his
self-styled "roadmap to democracy."

"There are many things that are not satisfactory about the present roadmap
for democracy," Suu Kyi replied to another question on the RFA show.

"We think that this should be discussed very, very thoroughly between all
those who wish to really promote the process for democracy in Burma."

Myanmar has been ruled by the military since 1962 and has refused to
recognize the results of elections in 1990 that Suu Kyi's party won by a
landslide.

____________________________________

December 7, Irrawaddy
Next two months crucial for Burma: Ban – Lalit K Jha

Washington — UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said on Monday that
developments in the next two months could potentially determine the future
course of Burma, after a general election that was far below the
expectations of the international community.

Ban, who again expressed his disappointment over the developments in
Burma, briefed the Friends of the UN Secretary-General in Burma, in a
closed meeting at the United Nations headquarters in New York.

He was accompanied by his Chef de Cabinet Vijay Nambiar, who also spoke to
the Group of Friends of Burma about his recent visit to Burma in his
capacity as special adviser dealing with that country. The European Union
was a special invitee to the meeting.

Few details of the meeting were forthcoming. “The Secretary-General told
the Group of Friends that, regrettably, the conduct of the elections was
far below the international community’s expectations. Looking ahead, we
need to keep encouraging the authorities to take steps to make the
political transition broad-based and inclusive,” said spokesman Martin
Nesirky.

“He (Ban) said that the next two months will be a crucial period that
could potentially determine the future course of Myanmar’s political
development and its place in the international community. The authorities,
in particular, should be in a better position now to meet their
responsibilities,” Nesirky told UN correspondents at his daily noon
briefing.

Later in the afternoon, Nambiar briefed the members of the UN Security
Council, the details of which were not provided. Nambiar has come under
criticism from some diplomats for his stance on Burma and some diplomats
have urged the secretary-general to replace Nambiar with a full-time envoy
for Burma.

British ambassador to the UN Mark Lyall Grant told reporters that he
raised this issue at the Friends of Burma and the Security Council
meetings.

Mexican Ambassador to the UN Calude Heller also was quoted as saying that
Ban Ki-moon should name a full-time envoy for Burma.

Earlier, a statement issued by the office of the spokesperson of the UN
secretary-general said the meeting called upon Burmese authorities to
build on recent developments, including through the specific steps
proposed by the UN to make the political transition broad-based and
inclusive.

“The authorities should be in a better position now to meet their
responsibilities to move towards greater openness, dialogue and
reconciliation so that all those who have a contribution to make can do
so,” it said, adding that in order for any transition to succeed, it
should involve not only those who participated and won seats in the
election, but also those who did not or could not.

“This must include the release of political prisoners. Addressing concerns
about the credibility of the process to date is also essential for any
next steps to succeed,” the UN statement said.

____________________________________

December 7, Associated Press
Michelle Yeoh could play Myanmar icon in film role

Yangon, Myanmar — Hollywood celebrity Michelle Yeoh has been spending time
with Myanmar's Aung San Suu Kyi to study for a possible film role as the
Nobel Peace laureate.

Yeoh chatted with Suu Kyi in an airport waiting lounge Tuesday as the
pro-democracy leader bid farewell to her youngest son, Kim Aris, 33, who
lives in England and was allowed to visit his mother for the first time in
a decade after her recent release from house arrest.

The former Bond girl had spent the day with Suu Kyi on Monday as part of
research for an apparent upcoming film about the democracy icon, said Suu
Kyi's lawyer Nyan Win. Details of the film were not immediately known.

Yeoh — who starred in the James Bond movie "Tomorrow Never Dies" and in
"Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" — "observed Daw Suu and they had dinner
together Monday night," the lawyer said. Daw is a term of respect.

The actress, the 65-year-old Nobel laureate and her son sat together in a
waiting room of the Yangon International Airport before Yeoh and Suu Kyi's
son boarded flights.

Suu Kyi was released Nov. 13 after more than seven years under house
arrest. Her release came a week after Myanmar's first election in 20 years
in which neither she nor her party could participate. Suu Kyi was first
arrested in 1989 when Kim Aris was 11 and his older brother, Alexander,
was 16. The military junta kept her locked away for 15 of the past 21
years.

Aris arrived in Myanmar on Nov. 23 after waiting several weeks in
Thailand, where he was granted a visa for the first time in years.

During his two-week stay, Aris bought a little brown puppy for his mother
to keep her company when he leaves. Asked at the time if the dog was his
new pet, he replied that it was "May May's pet," using the Burmese word
for mother or mom.

Aris mostly kept a low profile except when he marked World AIDS Day on
Dec. 2 at the headquarters of Suu Kyi's political group, where he played
guitar and entertained HIV/AIDS patients.

He visited the famed Shwedagon Pagoda a day after his arrival and also the
popular Bogyoke Aung San Market with his mother on Nov. 30, drawing huge
crowds who came to greet them. Thw well-wishers shook hands with Suu Kyi
and showered her with gifts ranging from jewelry to longyis, the
traditional Burmese sarong.

Aris last visited his mother in Dec. 2000 when they spent Christmas together.

____________________________________

December 7, Agence France Presse
US lawmaker urges world on Suu Kyi safety

Washington— A US lawmaker said Tuesday he had spoken to Myanmar democracy
icon Aung San Suu Kyi and urged the international community to be
"vigilant" in ensuring her safety.

"This morning, I spoke with Burma's legitimate democratic leader, Daw Aung
San Suu Kyi," said Democratic Representative Joseph Crowley, who called
the discussion "a reminder of the many struggles faced by the Burmese
people."

Crowley called Suu Kyi's release on November 13, after spending most of
the last 21 years locked up, "a step in the right direction" but called on
the country's military rulers to "free the rest of Burma's legitimate
leaders."

"The global community must also be vigilant in ensuring the safety of Aung
San Suu Kyi. When she was last released in 2002, she was nearly
assassinated by the country's military regime and eventually recommitted
to house arrest," said the lawmaker said in a statement.

"Her freedom must be maintained; as it is the first real step toward
reform in Burma," said Crowley, author of a resolution to give Suu Kyi the
US Congressional Gold Medal.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

December 7, Huffington Post
Quest for bona fide democracy: Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar – Sam Sasan
Shoamanesh

The news of Aung San Suu Kyi's release less than a month ago on the
November 13, 2010, after nearly two decades of state surveillance and
house arrest was greeted by jubilation from all four corners, nourishing
the yearning soul of the democracy movement in Burma (or more recently
termed: "The Republic of the Union of Myanmar;" renamed yet again in the
country's tumultuous history).

In a country that has been de facto ruled by a military junta since the
coup of 1962, and only days after a highly disputed parliamentary
elections -- the nation's first since 1990 -- that saw the ruling elite
win by a landslide (a purported 80 percent of the votes were cast in favor
of the Union Solidarity and Development Party), the release of the
prominent pro-democracy leader, Aung San Suu Kyi is no trivial event. Her
new found freedom is not only a testament to her resilience and courageous
personal stance, but also to the enduring strength of the democratic
movement in Burma that she so fittingly personifies.

For those who cherish genuine democracy and -- countless brave souls who
-- struggle against autocratic rule, Aung San Suu Kyi's release is an
important reminder that the path to democracy is long and arduous, but
that it must be travelled to effect gradual change. This process, by
definition, will face ups and downs but the general trajectory is upward
evolutionary towards curbing absolute authority, and ultimately, attaining
democracy.

Aung San Suu Kyi's affection for her country and hope for its future is of
course a family affair. It was after all her father, Bogyoke Aung San, who
is largely credited with freeing the country from colonial rule and
establishing the Union of Burma -- a pivotal event in the country's modern
history he never could witness firsthand as he was callously assassinated
just six months before independence was achieved (he is affectionately
recognized as a national hero and the father of the country's
independence). The Burmese dream of an autonomous, democratic and thriving
homeland post colonial rule was, however, short-lived and soon shattered
through yet other set backs: intense political divisions, and failures in
state governance, only this time indigenously born and sealed at the hands
of a military dictatorship under whose reign the country has become one of
the poorest in Southeast Asia; a tragic fact in view of the vast resources
the country has been blessed with, from forestry goods and extremely
fertile soil to precious stones and sizable offshore reserves of oil and
gas, not to mention that the country possesses the potentials for a most
lucrative tourist industry, which if sensibly managed, could pay
significant financial dividends for the local population.

As is often the case with nations subjected to external exploitation and
subjugation, the domestic governance culture of victimized nations will
suffer from the lack of political maturity. A nation with such a political
stunt-growth will need -- by evolutionary necessity -- time and delicate
nurturing to see it develop the institutions and the political culture
required to realize good governance. During this growing pains period,
which can span across generations, the lives of ordinary citizens can,
alas, become intolerable due to the failures of a system that is incapable
and/or unwilling to deliver 'adult' and refined policies. Burma, while
certainly not alone in this classification, is a tragic case in point.

Seen in this light, the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, while long overdue,
will not be a universal remedy for Burma's countless difficulties; nor
will it result in an overnight transformation of the country. Burma's
challenges -- from ethnic tensions and democratic deficits to a crumbling
economy, abject poverty, forced labor and corruption -- rank amongst the
worst corrupt nations in the world according to the 2010 Corruption
Perceptions Index; quite tellingly, outdone only by Somalia, they are not
going to suddenly vanish. A well entrenched domestic political landscape,
where there is no tolerance for moderate voices; where human rights and
equality are given negligible value, and where democratic principles are
forced to take a back seat to rule by the iron fist, is unlikely to
blossom overnight into a full fledged modern democracy. To effectively
counter a system grounded in avidity for power at any cost and to
establish sustainable democracy and national unity, a long term strategy
of peaceful opposition is required; an indigenous movement averse to
violence and committed to inclusivity, forgiveness and reconciliation.

With independence in 1948, the 1988 uprising and the Saffron revolution of
2007 in their past, the people of Burma should look to Aung San Suu Kyi's
recent release as yet another critical milestone in their collective
journey towards a more hopeful future for their country. Whether Aung San
Suu Kyi is allowed to effectively exercise political influence is a
separate question. Regardless, what is important to acknowledge is that
her inspiring life story and what she stands for is representative of a
simmering political consciousness of a people who have undergone
tremendous hardship, and who tired of the status quo, want to see their
nation prosper and progress in unity, their lives enhanced in freedom and
the future of their children guaranteed.

In the 21st century, kratocratic regimes that lavish in kleptocracy are
draconian oddities in the modern world whose "term in office" will be
short-lived and their transient stop in human history lost to the winds of
change brought by future generations. Despotism by its very existence is
the root of social and political decay; an impurity in governance, which
degenerates the corpus politic. The despot and the system he builds in his
own image, either fail to appreciate or are willfully blind to the fact
that the arbitrary denial of "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" of
the citizen is unnatural and repugnant to human existence and rationality.
In Machiavellian arithmetic, it may seem politically expedient to silent
political dissent in an attempt to maintain one's monopoly on power. Yet
the record of history has demonstrated that ignoring and silencing the
popular aspirations of the people is not sustainable. The winning formula
lies in the supremacy of ideas (democracy v. tyranny), and not sheer force
or physical prowess (of the state security apparatus). The former will
trump and triumph over the latter. It is simply a function of time.

The existing internal political dynamics in Burma, unless it sees
significant reform, will only beget more suffering for the people and
further weaken Burma as a nation. Burma's political leaders must finally
arrive at the realization that continued ill-treatment of their own
citizens will merely deepen the gap between the government and the people;
fuel ethnic tensions and contribute to the loss of the country's most
important asset: its citizens, who continue to flee the country in large
numbers. To liberally label legitimate voices of dissent as enemies of the
state or threats to national security, and then deny them due process and
inalienable fundamental rights is untenable and an affront to the most
basic of human values and sensibilities. Aung San Suu Kyi has been freed.
It is past time for the countless other prisoners of conscience who
continue to be unlawfully detained in prisons across Burma to also have
their freedom and dignity restored.

In lieu of jailing and stifling any expression of political dissent,
Naypyitaw should aim to strengthen the country and national unity through
reconciliation (something Aung San Suu Kyi has declared she is committed
to immediately following her release) and, work to meet the people's
peaceful aspirations for civil rights, democracy and the rule of law. The
establishment, in good faith, of a truth and reconciliation commission to
allow the nation to face its demons, heal and move forward may be
entertained. A further recognition to be had is that repressive domestic
policies of the state in fact jeopardize the country's national interests
at the world stage by diluting and detracting away from the real issues at
stake or any legitimate claim Burma as a sovereign nation may have. When
you marry repressive policies at home, you effectively and for a variety
of reasons -- dearth of credibility and rendering yourself an easy target,
begging to be outflanked by rivals, are two obvious examples -- severely
undermine the ability to advance the country's legitimate interests
abroad.

One day a united and prosperous Burma will come to exist. That day is when
the people of Burma are finally sovereign.

Let us celebrate Aung San Suu Kyi's release and all that it symbolizes:
not the least, that there may be generations of drought, but that the
rains will ultimately fall; dreaming of a bona fide representative
democracy for Burma, Iran et al.

The views expressed herein are those of the author alone and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the International Criminal Court.

____________________________________

December 7, Democratic Voice of Burma
Where Chomsky, Caesar and Than Shwe meet – Francis Wade

The revelation that Burma’s junta supremo had mulled over the purchase
Manchester United in the wake of 2008’s cyclone Nargis is certainly among
the more interesting of the leaked US diplomatic cables, but perhaps it’s
not surprising. He joins a line of very disparate thinkers that see
spectator sports as the opium of the masses; a means to pacify an angry
nation and distract it from the troubles of the day. “It offers people
something to pay attention to that’s of no importance,” leading US
intellectual Noam Chomsky has said. “[It] keeps them from worrying about
things that matter to their lives that they might have some idea of doing
something about.”

According to the leak, Than Shwe would have stumped up $US1 billion to buy
a majority share in the $US1.85 billion-valued English club, of which he
and his grandson, along with much of the Asian world, are loyal
aficionados. This would have come from a man who allocates 0.5 percent of
his government budget to healthcare in a country where the average annual
wage is little over $US200. Unlike Than Shwe, the club he was eyeing 5000
miles away has an estimated 90 million supporters globally, and this year
Forbes ranked it second to the New York Yankees as the most valuable
sports club in the world.

The combination of glitz, success and branding beamed out of Old Trafford
appears to have rubbed off on the reclusive general, whose distinct lack
of charisma or passion, save for himself, makes the disclosure all the
more bizarre. While the club may have been sized up as a gift to his
grandson, whom it is rumoured first prompted the 77-year-old to lodge the
bid, or indeed a feeble attempt to ‘internationalise’ a country whose ruin
Than Shwe is largely responsible for, theorists would suggest otherwise:
when, as one source put it, “the senior general thought that sort of
expenditure could look bad” in the wake of his failure to provide aid for
cyclone victims, he ordered the development of a domestic football league
in Burma, one that has fuelled gambling, provided added business
opportunities for his cronies, and quenched the thirst of Burma’s die-hard
football fans.

It is the latter that eyes have turned to, given the timing of its
creation: one year after the cyclone, and as plans were being hatched to
sentence the popular opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi to another spell
under house arrest. Around 140,000 people died as a result of Nargis, many
from treatable illnesses that broke out in the days after 3 May 2008 when
the junta infamously refused offers of foreign aid. That the purchase of
Manchester United would have looked bad is a no-brainer, given some
estimates that the recovery bill would have equalled that of the bid. But
the creation of a league – Than Shwe’s ‘apology’ to, and show of affection
for, the people – was perhaps a signal that he had subscribed to the old
adage of sport’s dual purpose.

Julius Caesar was the first prominent head of state to turn this theory
into action: ‘Panem et Circenses’, or ‘bread and circuses’, proffered that
various pleasures and spectacles – chariot races, gladiator fights, the
distribution of food, and so – could both keep a population peaceful, and
give them an almost superficial platform to express themselves publicly.
He considered it a formula – a political strategy – for the general
well-being of his people: they are free make themselves heard, but only in
an environment separated from the policy-making arena.

Others claim indeed that sports can be a powerful tool for a country’s
elite to garner political support. Cheering on a competitor is “a way of
building up irrational attitudes of submission to authority and group
cohesion behind leadership elements – in fact, it’s training in irrational
jingoism”, says Chomsky. That suggestion was supported by a survey of
Arab-Palestinian football fans in Israel that found that “the more Arab
citizens are present in the [Israeli] soccer stadium, the more they are
likely to vote for Zionist parties in the parliamentary elections and are
less likely to be proud of their Palestinian identity”.

This stance inevitably has its detractors on both sides of the political
spectrum: prominent leftwing Uruguayan commentator Eduardo Galeano – who
reserves much of his colourful vitriol for the despotic rulers he grew up
around – says he was inspired to write by Diego Maradona, while boxer
Muhammad Ali become a unifying figure between black and white during
America’s civil rights movement. Fans of these two would argue against
being pacified by sports.

It’s perhaps the ‘watch and don’t play’ dictum of spectator sports that
Than Shwe hoped would translate to the political realm. Popularity ratings
for the ageing hermit would place him in the relegation zone of the
proverbial fourth division, so better to keep citizens on the sidelines as
his game – the elections, Suu Kyi’s house arrest, and the day-to-day rape
and pillage of a country and its psyche – ploughs on. Were it not for the
fact that he alone can galvanise a population in the opposite direction,
then the opiates might prove overpowering, but any sinister intentions
behind his football showboating are unlikely to find their target in
Burma.

____________________________________

December 23, New York Review of Books
Looking for hope in Burma – Howard W. French

Than Shwe: Unmasking Burma’s Tyrant
by Benedict Rogers, with a foreword by Václav Havel
Silkworm, 256 pp., $30.00 (paper)

Everything Is Broken: A Tale of Catastrophe in Burma
by Emma Larkin
Penguin, 271 pp., $25.95


Aung San Suu Kyi addressing supporters at the National League for Democracy
headquarters in Rangoon after her release from house arrest, November 14,
2010

In the ordinarily glacial world of Burmese politics, the last few weeks
have been remarkably active. On November 7 the generals who run the
country held the first parliamentary elections in twenty years, and only
the second in half a century; a few days later, on November 13, they
released the country’s preeminent opposition figure, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi,
from seven and a half years of house arrest.

The elections themselves brought little surprise or excitement, and
apparently much lower turnout in this country of more than 50 million
people than the generals would have liked. They were also quickly labeled
unfree and unfair by most Western governments, with the British ambassador
to the country telling the BBC on the day of the vote, “Everything about
this electoral process, I’m afraid, goes toward more of the same.” The
party backed by the military won three quarters of the seats in
Parliament.

Aung San Suu Kyi’s release has initially been a somewhat subdued affair,
and by all indications deliberately so. Smiling, dressed in pink, and
placing a flower in her hair as she leaned over the high, pronged gates of
her lakeside villa on University Avenue in Rangoon, she greeted a crowd of
several thousand enthusiastic supporters with words that made clear that
she would remain firmly engaged in national politics, and yet nonetheless
seemed very carefully measured. “There is a time to be quiet and a time to
talk. People must work in unison. Only then can we achieve our goal,” she
told the crowd, before returning inside to consult with senior members of
her National League for Democracy party, which chose to disband in May
rather than declare void its 1990 electoral victory.

One widespread interpretation of recent events in the country is that the
generals are gambling that after her long detention, Aung San Suu Kyi is a
largely spent force, particularly among many in the country’s educated,
middle, and professional classes. In dozens of interviews during a recent
month I spent there, many such people criticized Suu Kyi for what they see
as her past unwillingness to lower tensions with the military and seek
compromise.1

“I’ve told her to call for a lifting of the [international] sanctions,
which the generals actually like,” said one prominent intellectual who has
maintained good relations with her.

I want to tell her to impose a moratorium on politics for a while and
concentrate on bringing a bowl of rice to the Burmese people, enough to
eat, a bit of cooking oil. Then we can ask for a release of the political
prisoners, and keep working on progress in the humanitarian situation and
with poverty.

Others express dissatisfaction at the international attention focused on
Suu Kyi. “They reduce our story to the lady and the thugs in green
uniforms, turning the story of Burma into a classic fairy tale,” the
leader of a prominent Burmese think tank in Rangoon—called Yangon in
Burmese—told me. “Both sides have been stubborn, both sides have been
arrogant, and both sides are utterly isolated.” Suu Kyi has been cut off
from Burmese society and the world during her long periods of house
arrest, and the military has retreated to its grandiosely monumental new
capital, Naypyidaw, or “abode of kings,” and its illusory atmosphere of
order, prosperity, and progress.

Criticisms like these against someone who has spent fifteen of the last
twenty-one years of her life in detention will strike many as unfair, but
they come mostly from progressives—people involved in social welfare or
efforts to reduce poverty, and not from a merchant class clamoring for an
end to sanctions so they can do business again. Early signs suggest that
Suu Kyi is mindful of such views and is indeed eager to avoid a
confrontation and to explore conciliatory contacts with the military,
including support for the easing of international sanctions, perhaps in
conjunction with the release of over two thousand other political
prisoners who remain in detention. “I think we have to sort out our
differences across the table, talking to each other, agreeing to disagree,
or finding out why we disagree and trying to remove the sources of our
disagreement if we possibly can,” she told the BBC.

Whatever the reservations of the country’s small professional class, the
regime’s calculation that she is a spent force could founder; she appears
to enjoy continuing strong and enthusiastic grassroots support. Her
numerous past arrests came about not because the Western-educated elites
were coalescing around her but because she had a powerful popular
following, first as a leading figure in the 1988 uprising against military
rule, then as the rightful but denied winner of the country’s last
elections, in 1990, which were nullified by the army. In view of what
Burma has been through more recently, especially the horrible destruction
of Cyclone Nargis—which struck on May 2, 2008, killed at least 138,000
people and devastated much of the country’s best rice-growing lands, and
was followed by severe droughts—there is no reason to expect a lessening
of the popular hopes invested in her. Signs of the recent drought were
apparent everywhere I traveled in the middle belt of the country,
particularly in rural areas around Mandalay and Bagan, where automobile
traffic is rare and where villagers complained of major crop failures and
there were many beggars, including children.

Outsiders trying to make sense of developments in Burma, which, renamed
Myanmar, remains one of the world’s most closed and willfully opaque
societies, have tended toward the view that with both her release and the
election that preceded it, the military junta, led by General Than Shwe,
who came to power in 1992, is currying favor with the international
community, hoping to win a measure of respectability. The junta, it is
said, even hopes to eventually build relations with other countries as a
useful counterweight to Myanmar’s increasingly important and imposing
neighbor, China.

In differing degrees, Burmese analysts inside the country acknowledge
these factors, but they tend to ascribe secondary importance to all of
them. For these intellectuals and professionals who have lived through the
country’s tumultuous recent history, the complicated and shadowy maneuvers
now underway all have something to do with the preoccupation of General
Than Shwe—who is officially almost eighty—with succession. They involve a
new constitution carefully engineered to preserve the power of the
military, even as the country has been making a transition to nominal
civilian rule, parliamentary elections, and finally Suu Kyi’s release.

The leader of a prominent local NGO who has extensive contacts with the
military, and advocated participation in the recent elections, tried to
explain the mindset of a leader who by most accounts has made only two or
three broadcasts to the nation in his nearly twenty years in office and
has concentrated power ever more tightly in his own hands during the last
decade of his rule. His style of governing is often likened by Burmese to
that of a king. The NGO official told me:

Our Dear Leader, and I deliberately call him Dear Leader, because here we
have a textbook case of totalitarian rule, doesn’t want to see another
Dear Leader succeed him, because he knows what he did himself to his two
predecessors, and all of these maneuverings are part of a script to
protect his own security and that of his family in the future, and to make
sure that he doesn’t end up at The Hague.

The complicated arrangements underway include a new parliamentary system
that will decentralize power and, many analysts also say, allow the
regime’s current number two and perhaps other military peers of Than Shwe
to be skipped over in favor of more junior army figures who will lead a
new, seemingly civilian regime yet to be formed. Most of the officers
elected to parliament were forced to resign their military commissions
before they ran. They and the military officials will also allow Than Shwe
to continue wielding considerable power from behind the scenes, somewhat
like China’s Deng Xiaoping during the last phase of his long political
life. “Than Shwe is creating a deliberately fractured landscape,” Thant
Myint-U, a New York–based Burmese writer and former official in the UN’s
Department of Political Affairs told me. “This should mean that however
old and decrepit he becomes, he remains more powerful than any other
player.”

Since the army took power in 1962, changes of leadership have often turned
on the sudden and brutal demise of high military officers who have been
pushed aside and eliminated by their former deputies. Although the
circumstances are murky, there is widespread belief among Burmese that
Than Shwe was somehow involved in the deaths of two of the country’s
previous military leaders. Ne Win, the founder of the military junta, was
living in poor health under house arrest, after a long period of
semiretirement, when he is said to have suffered a serious fall while
bathing; he was allegedly denied adequate medical care, which led to his
death. The country’s next head of state, Saw Maung, suffered sudden and
profound mental disability during his four years in power. At virtually
all levels of the society, people claim that he was poisoned by injection
or drugged, preparing the way for Than Shwe to take power in 1992.

The outlines of Than Shwe’s life and rise from obscure origins as a rural
postal clerk and later as a member of the military’s Psychological Warfare
Department to a deeply superstitious and reclusive head of state are
reported as solidly as possible for such an elusive and undocumented
subject by Benedict Rogers in Than Shwe: Unmasking Burma’s Tyrant. Rogers
makes it clear that the long period of Than Shwe’s rule has been marked by
the stark impoverishment of the society—in contrast to other countries in
a region of rapid growth and social transformation—as well as by rampant
corruption and tightening political repression.

“In other Asian economies, rice powerhouses like Vietnam and Thailand, the
governments have invested in rural roads and electricity,” I was told by
the leader of an internationally respected Burmese NGO, who spoke of a
“silent humanitarian crisis” with eight million or more peasants in the
country’s dry zone where lives are at risk. “In our rural areas people are
still using oxcarts. Oxcarts are in museums in Thailand. If you take a
photo of a village in Burma with its thatched huts and rutted roads, it
looks exactly as it would have a hundred years ago.”

Burmese economists say that military rule has decimated the civil service,
which is afraid to pass on bad news or debate policy directives, however
bizarre, or even to maintain accurate records. The result, they say, is
that those wielding power have little or no grasp of economics, and few
sources of feedback.

“We have gotten to the point where mismanagement, isolation, and
disinvestment are all converging,” said one economist, who like most
Burmese professionals spoke only on condition of anonymity. “The military
is isolated from its own society, socially, politically—across the board,
and no bad news filters up to the top, and they’ve gotten even worse since
they moved to Naypyidaw. Sitting there, they think everything is great.”

Burmese General Than Shwe with an aide during a state visit
to Sri Lanka, November 2009

The regime has not published a budget in years but implausibly boasts
economic growth of 7 percent, nearly on par with neighbors like China; yet
most economists estimate inflation at 20 percent, meaning that real growth
is actually starkly negative. If the generals are running a crippled
economy, they have clearly mastered the mechanisms of corruption.
According to one internationally prominent Burmese economist, the state
sells large amounts of natural gas and other resources to China, Thailand,
and others at an official exchange rate of 6 kyat to the dollar while the
real exchange range is actually roughly 1,000 kyat to the dollar. “What is
happening to the other 994 kyat in all of our transactions?” asked the
economist. “Of course it is being pocketed.”

Although Thailand and India do much business with Burma, most of the new
big business, he is quick to add, is with China:

Timber, jade, minerals, and, sad to say, a lot of really rare animals are
being traded across the Chinese border. Timber exports alone to China are
estimated to be twenty-seven times more than the official figures; the
result is that Myanmar, a country that should be rich, is full of poor
people.

Much of the regime’s revenue has gone into building the monumental new
capital at Naypyidaw, two hundred miles north of Rangoon, a place of
immense avenues, steady electricity, and few people that stands in stark
contrast to Rangoon, the moldering and overcrowded former capital, with
four million people, most of whom have electricity for only two or three
hours per day. Much of the teeming city appears untouched since the end of
British colonial rule, with luridly streaked and faded buildings and
shabby side streets, where people lay their produce and goods on the
ground amid the mud and filth to trade and barter. The transportation
system consists mainly of dilapidated jitney buses and equally antiquated
taxis. The city’s greatest charms are its temples, of which there are
many, including the towering, golden Shwedagon Pagoda, the holiest shrine
in the nation, and one of the most spectacular in all of Asia. Foreign
diplomats in Burma say that as much as 40 percent of the national income
has gone into building the new capital and toward the military budget. By
comparison, a Western diplomat estimated that the state spends less than 1
percent of its budget on education and health care combined.

Benedict Rogers tells the bizarre and dramatic story of how Naypyidaw
became the new capital:

At precisely 6:37 a.m. on November 6, 2005, hundreds of government
servants left Rangoon in trucks, shouting: “We are leaving! We are
leaving!” or, according to some reports, “Out! Out! Out!” Five days later,
on November 11, at exactly 11 a.m., a second convoy of eleven hundred
military trucks carrying eleven military battalions and eleven ministries
left Rangoon. Perhaps influenced by astrologers, Than Shwe had decided to
move the country’s capital. He had given government officials just two
days’ notice.

Foreign diplomats, he notes, “were informed of the move a few days later,
and were given one fax number to use to reach the government.”

When I asked travel agents in Rangoon to help with arrangements to visit
Naypyidaw, I was told that it is not possible for foreigners to visit the
city uninvited. “I’m afraid it’s not convenient at this time,” one of them
said politely.

Hiring a car and driver to see the place for myself, I set out one morning
on the broad, multilane highway where we drove for two hours before
encountering the first exit. Along the way, we didn’t see a single
vehicle. The roads in the city itself, as broad as Paris’s Champs-Élysées,
were equally deserted, save for the teams of peasants working in peaked
hats against the brutal sun to keep perfectly manicured the grassy strips
of land dividing the roadways.

I was told that it was impossible, or at least too risky, to try to visit
the quarters where senior officials live and where the main government
ministries are housed. I was limited to driving around a gigantic empty
zone of ersatz monuments, including a towering golden duplicate of
Rangoon’s Shwedagon Pagoda, a water-themed amusement park, a Museum of
Gems, and a forlorn new shopping mall with a large and empty parking lot.

I asked the representative of a major international relief agency who
often visits the vast new city, “Who lives there?” “Government servants,”
he said. “They are trapped there, and can’t leave the city without
authorization. What you have basically are lots of unhappy people in an
enterprise sustained by fear.”

On the second day of my visit to Burma, I was approached in downtown
Rangoon by a young medical doctor who asked, “Have you ever been to North
Korea?” That sounded like a potentially dangerous line of political
questioning from a stranger. I told him yes, I had been to North Korea
twice, thus providing him the opening for what he really wanted to know.
“Which government is worse?” he asked. As I learned more from the doctor,
and from scores of other conversations during my stay, I came to
appreciate that in spite of the obvious differences between the two
countries, the Burmese have a point when they frequently compare their
country to North Korea.

The doctor’s logic was driven by bitter direct experience of the regime’s
behavior. As a medical intern at a major hospital in Rangoon at the time
of the so-called Saffron Rebellion in 2007, when the country’s revered
Buddhist clergy rose in peaceful revolt against the military regime and
demanded the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, the doctor told me how he was
ordered not to provide care for monks who had been shot or severely beaten
by soldiers during the regime’s crackdown:

When I told my supervisor it was a doctor’s moral duty to provide care for
people in urgent need of it, he warned me that if I didn’t follow orders
and mind my own business I might find myself in need of care, too.

His story helps explain what happened after Cyclone Nargis, the largest
natural disaster in the country’s history, which posed the same moral
issues, but on an immensely larger scale. When the storm hit in May 2008,
Burma’s military leaders remained all but silent for the first week or so.
With Rangoon, the country’s economic capital, flooded, and the Irawaddy
Delta to the south devastated, the army for the most part remained in its
barracks in the storm’s early aftermath and left people to fend for
themselves. Thousands died even as the country’s diplomats denied the need
for international aid.

Only after many Burmese attempted to fill the void in a piecemeal and
improvised voluntary action, with celebrities and local NGOs and monks and
ordinary citizens, like my new doctor friend, banding together to organize
relief, did the military government finally take action. It cleared roads
in some cases, but created checkpoints and other obstacles and
restrictions for civilians in many others. Battery-operated radios
distributed by NGOs allowed the disaster-stricken people of the delta to
remain in contact with the world and to hear of the mounting international
relief response.

For a time, the doctor said, he rode hidden behind supplies in the back of
trucks in convoys of monks that delivered food and medicine in the worst-
afflicted areas, until officials learned that he was involved in relief
work; then he was ordered to stay out of the delta and mind his own
business.

In those early days, a flotilla of international ships laden with relief
supplies assembled off the coast of Burma, but was kept at bay. Some
officials alleged that the presence of the United States Navy meant that a
military invasion was imminent. It took the regime nearly a week to grant
landing rights at Rangoon airport for relief flights bringing in supplies.
A statement from the foreign ministry said that Burma was “not yet ready
to receive search-and-rescue teams as well as media teams from foreign
countries.” Once foreigners were allowed in, the regime tried to create
obstacles to their work, for example prohibiting many relief workers from
sleeping in the delta, requiring them to make arduous and time-wasting
trips back and forth to Rangoon every day.

In Everything is Broken: A Tale of Catastrophe in Burma, the reporter Emma
Larkin quotes a telling dispatch from the obscurantist official state
tabloid, the New Light of Myanmar, which perfectly captures the
government’s attitude:

Myanmar people are capable enough of rising from such natural disasters
even if they are not provided with international assistance. Maybe they
need temporarily instant noodle and biscuit packets. However, [they] can
easily get fish for dishes by just fishing in the fields and ditches.

The article concluded by saying people could survive in the Irrawaddy
Delta “even if they are not given chocolate bars from the international
community.”

Larkin is a longtime visitor to the country who writes under a pseudonym,
and as the author of Finding George Orwell in Burma, she has a well-earned
reputation as one of the most perceptive observers of the country’s life,
recent history, and society. After spending much time in Burma in the
immediate aftermath of Cyclone Nargis, she observed that when the
government issued its contemptuous communiqués about foreign aid and the
plentiful availability of food in the delta, the still-swollen waters of
the Irrawaddy River had turned a chalky and unnatural white from the many
carcasses of people and livestock floating in it.

Pondering my doctor acquaintance’s question about North Korea, it is easy
to draw up a list of qualities that the two countries share as isolated,
near-failed states on the booming Asian mainland. Both societies lavish
their meager resources on deeply entrenched military elites. Both are
intensely secretive and heavily policed. And both minimize or deny the
extent of economic devastation, even by enormous disasters like famine or
flooding, because to admit them would amount to an intolerable loss of
face. They build whatever legitimacy they can on the idea of holding their
nations together against dissolution, an argument that relies ultimately
on much crude xenophobia. They both resort to secretive programs for
making weapons of mass destruction, reportedly in close cooperation; the
Burmese are rumored to be making both nuclear and chemical weapons. Both
countries see such weapons as guaranteeing the continuity of their
respective regimes.

The most telling shared trait, however, may be the challenge they pose to
other nations about how to engage with them. Years of Western strategy
toward Burma based on imposing isolation through sanctions and other means
have produced few results. As the Obama administration’s own diplomats
found in the gruff reception they received this summer during the
highest-level contacts with the regime in years, it is not at all clear
that such engagement would produce much better results.

“I was once very strongly in favor of the sanctions,” a Burmese newspaper
editor told me.

It proved to be a naive thought, that a guy like [Than Shwe] should be
punished. The problem is that the sanctions are a noble notion that hasn’t
worked except to hurt the people, and I would be in favor of easing them
selectively if there is some positive signal from the regime. It’s just
that the people in power are doing very well for themselves and they just
don’t care about such things.

Across Burma today, millions of people would like to believe that Aung San
Suu Kyi’s release is a sign, however tentative, to the contrary.

—November 22, 2010