Type your summary here
Tint Swe, a member of Burma’s government-in-exile, says that reports on forced labour and non-binding resolutions against the junta are ineffective tools against Myanmar’s military leadership. The support of China, India and Russia guarantee impunity to country’s junta. The people of Burma are ...
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
New Delhi – For Tint Swe, the latest criticism of Myanmar by UN agencies is a useless exercise. A member of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB) set up by Burmese refugees who fled the country after the 1990 elections, Mr Tint said that the recent UN resolution against Myanmar and the report by the International Labour Organisation accusing Myanmar of using forced labour and child soldiers are rituals that will not effect change in his country.
“The people of Burma are not excited by news from the UN,” he said. “As long as power is in the hands of the military junta, UN bodies will have to go through the annual rituals.”
The reasons for the condemnation “are always the same”, namely “grave concerns” over the fate of Aung San Suu Kyi, who was tried and convicted again this year, as well as concern over “arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment”. Yet, nothing has changed.
Myanmar’s military rulers have benefitted from the support of countries like “China, Russia, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Egypt, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Cuba, and Libya”. Other member-states like Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brazil have openly disagreed with the UN resolution.
“Approving a resolution against Myanmar in an international forum is a routine practice that might embarrass the junta, but will not bring any change to the country,” the NCGUB member said. “So far, more than 30 [of them] have been approved, but none are binding.”
What is new is the focus on next year’s parliamentary elections in Myanmar. The United Nations has urged the country’s rulers to ensure that they are “free, fair, transparent and inclusive”.
Yet, as pressure from the General Assembly on member states grows weaker, hope for the country’s democratisation remains slim.
“On the same day the International Labour Organisation criticised Burma’s widespread and documented forced labour practices, [. . .] India promised Senior General Than Swe that it would defend his country at the UN and ILO.” (NC)
Spero News
http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=23151&t=MYANMAR+%96+INDIA+++Useless+UN+and+ILO+rituals+bring+no+change%2C+Burmese+dissidents+says
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
25-11-09 INDIA Useless UN and ILO rituals bring no change, Burmese dissidents says (Spero News)
25-11-09 Indian influence on Myanmar (The New Nation Bangladesh Newspaper)
Mayanmar is strategically situated to take the advantages of competition and cooperation between China and India over oil and gas resources.
Both China and India are seeking to control the Indian Ocean for strategic military and economic reasons. The United States has been trying to militarise the region on the ground of fighting possible terrorist attacks and has already established an airbase on Banda Ache, Indonesia. Apprehending that the US is hell-bent on a unilateral militarisation of the entire region from the Middle East oil fields to the Strait of Malacca, Beijing has stepped up its engagement in Mayanmar. The Strait of Malacca, linking the Indian and Pacific Oceans, is the shortest sea route between the Persian Gulf and China. Myanmar also presents a possible supply route for oil and other commodities for China. An oil pipeline linking Mayanmar's deep-water port of Kyaukpyu with Kunming in China's Yunnan province was approved by Beijing in 2006. China is also Myanmar's most important defense ally, providing most of its military hardware and training.
In order to counter the increased Chinese influence on Myanmar, India has been trying to strengthen its ties with her eastern neighbour. She is spending millions of dollars to fund different projects in Myanmar which carry strategic significance for India. She is especially worried about the "maritime encirclement of India", with the Chinese bases at Gwadar in Pakistan and at Coco Island in Myanmar. India has been building up its military strength for a long time to close the gap with China. Recently India has also started pursuing closer relations with the United States.
Taking into account the above realities in international relations, Bangladesh need to develop cautiously and efficiently its own policies and programs to safeguard her vital national interests when dealing with her neighbors.
Nuruddin Azam
Australia
http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2009/11/25/news0507.htm
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
24-11-09 Useless UN and ILO rituals bring no change, Burmese dissidents says
MYANMAR – INDIA
Useless UN and ILO rituals bring no change, Burmese dissidents says
Tint Swe, a member of Burma’s government-in-exile, says that reports on forced labour and non-binding resolutions against the junta are ineffective tools against Myanmar’s military leadership. The support of China, India and Russia guarantee impunity to country’s junta. The people of Burma are under no illusions.
New Delhi (AsiaNews) – For Tint Swe, the latest criticism of Myanmar by UN agencies is a useless exercise. A member of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB) set up by Burmese refugees who fled the country after the 1990 elections, Mr Tint said that the recent UN resolution against Myanmar and the report by the International Labour Organisation accusing Myanmar of using forced labour and child soldiers are rituals that will not effect change in his country.
“The people of Burma are not excited by news from the UN,” he said. “As long as power is in the hands of the military junta, UN bodies will have to go through the annual rituals.”
The reasons for the condemnation “are always the same”, namely “grave concerns” over the fate of Aung San Suu Kyi, who was tried and convicted again this year, as well as concern over “arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment”. Yet, nothing has changed.
Myanmar’s military rulers have benefitted from the support of countries like “China, Russia, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Egypt, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Cuba, and Libya”. Other member-states like Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brazil have openly disagreed with the UN resolution.
“Approving a resolution against Myanmar in an international forum is a routine practice that might embarrass the junta, but will not bring any change to the country,” the NCGUB member said. “So far, more than 30 [of them] have been approved, but none are binding.”
What is new is the focus on next year’s parliamentary elections in Myanmar. The United Nations has urged the country’s rulers to ensure that they are “free, fair, transparent and inclusive”.
Yet, as pressure from the General Assembly on member states grows weaker, hope for the country’s democratisation remains slim.
“On the same day the International Labour Organisation criticised Burma’s widespread and documented forced labour practices, [. . .] India promised Senior General Than Swe that it would defend his country at the UN and ILO.” (NC)
AsiaNews
Monday, November 23, 2009
ျမန္မာ့ ဒီမိုကေရစီအေရး အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈအေၾကာင္း ေဆြးေႏြး
Monday, 23 November 2009 17:22 ဇာနည္မာန္
အိႏၵိယႏိုင္ငံတြင္ က်င္းပေနေသာ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈညီလာခံတြင္ ျမန္မာ့ ဒီမိုကေရစီေရး အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈမ်ား အေၾကာင္းကိုလည္း ထည့္သြင္း ေဆြးေႏြးခဲ့သည္ဟု သိရသည္။
ယင္းညီလာခံကို အိႏၵိယႏုိင္ငံ ဟာရီယာနား ျပည္နယ္၊ ဖရီဒါဘတ္ၿမိဳ႕ ဆူရဂ်္ခန္းအရပ္တြင္ အၾကမ္းမဖက္လႈပ္ရွားမႈျဖင့္ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး တည္ေဆာက္ရန္အတြက္ ရည္ရြယ္၍ Hind Swaraj Centenary Commemoration Committee က ဦးစီး က်င္းပခဲ့ျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။
ႏို၀င္ဘာလ ၁၉ ရက္ေန႔မွ ၂၂ ရက္ေန႔အထိ ၄ ရက္ၾကာ က်င္းပသည့္ ထိုညီလာခံတြင္ ျမန္မာႏွင့္ တိဘက္ အပါအ၀င္ ႏိုင္ငံတကာတြင္ ျဖစ္ေပၚေနသည့္ အေျခအေနမ်ား၊ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လမ္းစဥ္ျဖင့္ ဒီမိုကေရစီေရး၊ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး လႈပ္ရွားမႈမ်ားကို ေဆြးေႏြးခဲ့ၾကသည္။
“လက္ရွိ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ ဆက္လက္ႀကိဳးစားေနဆဲျဖစ္တဲ့ အၾကမ္းမဖက္လႈပ္ရွားမႈအေၾကာင္းကုိ က်ေနာ္ တင္ျပ ေဆြးေႏြးခဲ့ပါတယ္။ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈကို ကမၻာမွာ ေရွ႕ကေန ဦးေဆာင္ႏုိင္တဲ့ ေခါင္းေဆာင္ဆိုလို႔ ဘုန္းေတာ္ႀကီး ဒလိုင္းလားမားရယ္၊ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ရယ္ေပါ့ေလ၊ တနည္းအားျဖင့္ တိဘက္အေရးနဲ႔ ျမန္မာ့အေရးက အားလံုးသိၾကၿပီးသား။ အင္မတန္မွ စိတ္ဝင္စားၾကတဲ့ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံရဲ႕ ႀကိဳးစားမႈေတြျဖစ္ပါတယ္” ဟု ျမန္မာ့အေရး တက္ေရာက္ ေဆြးေႏြးခဲ့ေသာ NCGUB ၀န္ႀကီး ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြက ဧရာ၀တီသို႔ ေျပာသည္။
ညီလာခံ တက္ေရာက္လာသူမ်ားက မဟတၱမဂႏီၵ၏ အၾကမ္းမဖက္လမ္းစဥ္ျဖင့္ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး၊ ဒီမိုကေရစီေရးမ်ား လုပ္ေဆာင္ ေနေသာ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ႏွင့္ တိဘက္ ဘာသာေရးေခါင္းေဆာင္ ဘုန္းေတာ္ႀကီး ဒလိုင္းလားမားတို႔၏ လုပ္ေဆာင္ခ်က္ မ်ားကို စံနမူနာထား ထည့္သြင္း ေဆြးေႏြးၾကသည္ဟု သိရသည္။
ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြက “ဒီညီလာခံမွာ အခုလို တင္ျပေဆြးေႏြးခြင့္ရေတာ့ အားရေက်နပ္မိပါတယ္။ က်ေနာ္တို႔ကို စစ္အစိုးရက အၾကမ္းဖက္ သမားေတြလို႔ ေျပာေျပာေနတာေတြကို ဒီညီလာခံက ျပန္လည္ေခ်ပေပးတယ္လို႔ပဲ ေျပာလိုပါတယ္” ဟု ေျပာသည္။
အိႏၵိယႏိုင္ငံ၏ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး ေခါင္းေဆာင္ မဟတၱမဂႏၵီ ေရးသားျပဳစုခဲ့သည့္ “ကိုယ့္ထီးကိုယ့္နန္းႏွင့္ ကိုယ္ပိုင္ အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေရး” (Hind Swaraj) စာတမ္း ႏွစ္ ၁၀၀ ျပည့္ အထိမ္းအမွတ္အျဖစ္ ႏို၀င္ဘာ ၁၃ ရက္ေန႔က အဆိုပါ ညီလာခံကို က်င္းပခဲ့သည္။
အဆိုပါ ညီလာခံကို က်င္းပရသည့္ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္မွာ ကမၻာ့ႏိုင္ငံ အသီးသီးတြင္ ျဖစ္ေပၚေနေသာ အၾကမ္းဖက္မႈမ်ား၊ ပဋိပကၡမ်ား ခ်ဳပ္ၿငိမ္းေရးအတြက္ မဟတၱမဂႏီၵ ခ်မွတ္က်င့္သံုး ခဲ့ေသာ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈလမ္းစဥ္ကို ပိုမို ျပန္႔ပြား ရွင္သန္ေစရန္ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း သိရသည္။
“ျမန္မာ့ဒီမိုကေရစီေရးအတြက္ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ရဲ႕ ဦးေဆာင္မႈေအာက္ကေန လုပ္ေဆာင္ေနၾကတဲ့သူေတြ အားလံုးဟာ မဟတၱမဂႏီၵႀကီးရဲ႕ ဒီလမ္းစဥ္၊ ဒီအသံေတြကို ကိုယ္စားျပဳတဲ့သူေတြပဲျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ ျမန္မာ့အေရးကိုလည္း ဒီမွာ ထည့္သြင္းေဆြးေႏြးတာပါ” ဟု ညီလာခံကို ဦးေဆာင္က်င္းပသည့္ အဖြဲ႔၀င္ တဦးျဖစ္သူ Dr. Rajiv Vora က ဧရာ၀တီကို ေျပာသည္။
ျပည္သူလူထုကို မတရား ဖိႏွိပ္အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေနေသာ ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရ၏ လုပ္ရပ္မ်ားမွာ ျမန္မာျပည္၏ တိုးတက္မႈကို ေႏွာင့္ေႏွး ေစသည္ဟု သူကဆို၍ ၁၉၈၈ ႏွင့္ ၂၀၀၇ ခုႏွစ္ စက္တင္ဘာ ကာလမ်ားက ဒီမိုကေရစီေရးအတြက္ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းစြာ ဆႏၵျပခဲ့ေသာ ရဟန္းရွင္လူတို႔ကို စစ္အစိုးရက ပစ္ခတ္ႏွိမ္နင္းခဲ့မႈအေပၚ ေထာက္ျပ ေ၀ဖန္သြားသည္။
ဆက္လက္၍ ၎က “တိုင္းျပည္တခု တိုးတက္ဖို႔ဆိုတာ တိုင္းသူျပည္သားေတြရဲ႕ လြတ္လပ္စြာ ေျပာဆိုႏိုင္ခြင့္၊ လုပ္ပိုင္ခြင့္ ေတြအေပၚမွာ အမ်ားၾကီးမူတည္တယ္။ ဂႏီၵႀကီး ခ်မွတ္ခဲ့တဲ့ လမ္းစဥ္မွာ ဒီလြတ္လပ္ခြင့္ေတြအတြက္၊ အၾကမ္းမဖက္မႈေတြအတြက္ အမ်ားႀကီးပါတယ္” ဟု ဆိုသည္။
ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္သည္ မိမိတိုင္းျပည္ေကာင္းစားေရးအတြက္ မဟတၱမဂႏၵီ၏ လမ္းစဥ္အတိုင္း လိုက္နာ ေဆာင္ရြက္ေနၿပီး ျမန္မာျပည္သူတို႔သည္လည္း အၾကမ္းဖက္မႈမ်ားကို လုပ္ေဆာင္ျခင္းမရွိသည့္အတြက္ ျမန္မာ စစ္အစိုးရအေနျဖင့္ ျပည္သူလူထုကို စာနာ ေထာက္ထားသင့္သည္ဟု သူကေျပာသည္။
မဟတၱမဂႏီၶ၏ အၾကမ္းမဖက္လမ္းစဥ္ျဖင့္ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး လႈပ္ရွားမႈမ်ား ေဆာင္ရြက္ေနေသာ အိႏၵိယ အဖြဲ႔အစည္း တခုျဖစ္သည့္ Swaraj Peeth မွ ဒါ႐ိုက္တာ Dr. Niru Vora ကလည္း မိတ္ေဆြႏိုင္ငံျဖစ္ေသာ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ ျပည္သူလူထု၏ လူသားဆိုင္ရာ ဂုဏ္သိကၡာ၊ ဒီမိုကေရစီနည္းလမ္းက်မႈ၊ ရပိုင္ခြင့္၊ လုပ္ပိုင္ခြင့္မ်ားအတြက္ အေလးထားေၾကာင္း ေျပာဆိုသည္။
“ျမန္မာျပည္ကို အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေနတဲ့သူေတြအေပၚမွာ က်မတို႔အေနနဲ႔ ဆန္႔က်င္ဖက္ လကၡဏာေဆာင္တဲ့ ခံစားခ်က္မ်ိဳး မရွိပါဘူး။ ေႂကြးေၾကာ္သံေတြ ေအာ္ဟစ္တာမ်ိဳးလည္း မလုပ္လိုပါဘူး။ ဒါေပမယ့္ ကိုယ့္တိုင္းျပည္ အက်ိဳးအတြက္ လုပ္ေနတဲ့ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔ ဒီမိုကေရစီေရးလုပ္ေနသူေတြကို အခြင့္ေရးတခါေလာက္ေတာ့ေပးပါ။ ျမန္မာျပည္သူေတြကို ဒီမိုကေရစီရဲ႕ အရသာကို ခံစားခြင့္ေပးပါ ဆိုတာကိုပဲ ေမတၱာရပ္ခံခ်င္တာပါပဲ” ဟု သူက ဆိုသည္။
ညီလာခံေနာက္ဆံုးေန႔တြင္ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး ႏိုဗဲလ္ဆုရွင္ တိဘက္ဘာသာေရးေခါင္းေဆာင္ ဘုန္းေတာ္ႀကီး ဒလိုင္းလားမားက ႏိုင္ငံတကာႏွင့္ ကမၻာ့ေခါင္းေဆာင္မ်ား၊ ႏိုင္ငံေရး လႈပ္ရွားေနသူမ်ားအေနျဖင့္ ေမတၱာတရား ေရွ႕ထား၍ ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးအတြက္ ဆက္လက္ လုပ္ေဆာင္သြားၾကရန္ တိုက္တြန္းမိန္႔ၾကားသြားခဲ့သည္။
ညီလာခံအျပီးတြင္ တက္ေရာက္လာသည့္ ႏိုင္ငံအသီးသီးမွ မိမိတို႔လုပ္ေဆာင္ေနသည့္ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈမ်ားအတိုင္း ဆက္လက္ လုပ္ေဆာင္သြားရန္၊ ကမၻာ့ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးကို ဆက္လက္ထိန္းသိမ္းသြားရန္ သေဘာတူခဲ့ၾကသည္။
ညီလာခံတြင္ အိႏၵိယ၊ ျမန္မာ၊ ကေနဒါ၊ မေလးရွား၊ ဂ်ပန္၊ ကိုရီးယားႏွင့္ ထိုင္းအစရွိသည့္ ႏိုင္ငံေပါင္း ၁၂ ႏိုင္ငံမွ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈျဖင့္ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးလုပ္ငန္းမ်ား လုပ္ကိုင္ေနသူမ်ား၊ အဖြဲ႔အစည္းမ်ား၊ ကိုယ္စားလွယ္မ်ား စုစုေပါင္း ၁၀၀ ေက်ာ္ တက္ေရာက္ေဆြးေႏြးခဲ့ၾကသည္။
The Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 is now available
PRESS RELEASE
The Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 is now available
Monday, 23 November 2009
The single largest and most comprehensive report ever produced to document the human rights situation in Burma is now available online.
(BANGKOK, THAILAND) The Human Rights Documentation Unit (HRDU) is pleased to announce the release of the Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008, marking the 15th anniversary of the publication. At 1,092 pages in length and comprised of approximately half a million words in 21 separate thematic chapters, the Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 represents the single largest, most comprehensive and most inclusive report ever compiled meticulously detailing the appalling human rights situation in Burma.
The year 2008 proved to be a critical year in Burma’s recent history. Compounding an environment of ongoing human rights abuse, 2008 was a year characterized by natural disaster, severe political repression and the reverberations of the previous year’s popular uprising. The advent of Tropical Cyclone Nargis in May provided the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) military junta with an opportunity to demonstrate to the international community that political differences could be set aside for the good of those affected by the devastating storm. Instead, regime recalcitrance, obfuscation and outright corruption cost untold Burmese lives and showed a weary international community that the situation Burma may well get worse before its gets better.
While regime reluctance to permit foreign assistance in the cyclone relief effort could have been explained as the paranoia of a reclusive and xenophobic Police State after many years of isolation, the cynicism of conducting a referendum on the SPDC-backed draft Constitution in the middle of a national emergency could be afforded no such concessions. The stage management of the May 2008 referendum and concomitant abuses of fundamental freedoms carefully documented in the Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 provide an ominous warning that the forthcoming 2010 parliamentary elections are unlikely to be free or fair.
In addition to the SPDC’s gross negligence and mishandling of cyclone relief efforts and the convening of a referendum widely viewed as fraudulent, a broad spectrum of human rights abuses continued to be perpetrated across the country. Burma’s civilian population continued to be subject to systematic violations including arbitrary arrest, torture and extra-judicial execution, rape, forced labour, extortion, the curtailment of fundamental freedoms, religious and ethnic discrimination, forced relocation, recruitment of child soldiers, deprivation of livelihood and the destruction of property, among others. The Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 presents clear evidence that all of these violations and more were ongoing throughout 2008 in a climate of near-complete impunity and are designed to keep Burma’s civilian population subservient to the autocratic rule of the military.
With the proposed 2010 parliamentary elections looming, the Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 provides an excellent contextual tool and platform for a discussion of continued political repression within Burma and the ramifications of rights abuse, particularly the doubling of political prisoners over the course of 2008, suffocation of political space and prospects for inclusion of ethnic minorities in the post-election political landscape.
In spite of the sheer volume of evidence clearly demonstrating the SPDC’s unrelenting oppression of the Burmese population, several of Burma’s neighbours, including China, India and Thailand continue to prop up the regime as they vie for a percentage of Burma’s considerable natural resources. However, this kind of engagement can easily lead to maintenance of the status quo; economic interests must not be allowed to subjugate the rights of the Burmese people.
It is with a considerable measure of regret that the HRDU reflects on the last 15 years of comprehensive human rights documentation and sees very little improvement in the rights situation of Burma’s citizens. Sadly, many of the issues examined in the Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 are the same as those discussed in the very first Burma Human Rights Yearbook, 15 years ago. Despite the frustrating lack of progress, the circumstances in Burma demand that documentation and advocacy efforts continue to ensure that the abuses of the SPDC remain at the forefront of international attention.
The Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 is now available for download in PDF format (1,092 A4 pages / 13.3 MB) from the Online Burma Library. To download your copy, please visit: http://www.burmalib rary.org/ docs08/HRYB2008. pdf.
The HRDU is the research and documentation department of Burma’s opposition government-in- exile, the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB). The HRDU was formed in 1994 to comprehensively document the human rights situations in Burma, in order to protect and promote the internationally recognized human rights of those persons in the country.
The Burma Human Rights Yearbook 2008 can be downloaded in PDF format (1,092 pages / 13.3 MB) from the NCGUB website at www.ncgub.net or on the Online Burma Library at www.burmalibrary. org. All previous editions of the Burma Human Rights Yearbook may also be found on the NCGUB website, along with the highly-acclaimed HRDU thematic report, Bullets in the Alms Bowl ; An Analysis of the Brutal SPDC Suppression of the September 2007 Saffron Revolution Protests.
Questions, comments and requests for further information may be forwarded to the HRDU via email at enquiries.hrdu@ gmail.com.
21-11-09 Another meet held to foster border trade
The Sangai Express
Moreh, November 20 2009: In connection with Border Trade Fair and Tourism Expo, 2009 which is scheduled to be organised sometime in January, 2010 in Myanmar, a joint meeting of the Indian and the Myanmarese delegates was held at Tamu today.
The Indian delegation comprising president of Nirvana Pilgrim Society (NPS), Kolkata N Padhi, secretary of the Society Tarun Das, vice president of North East Federation of International Trade (NEFIT) and traders participated in the meeting.
The Myanmarese delegation was led by chairman of Tamu Town Kuang San OO and secretary of Border Trade Chamber of Commerce U Aye Ko.
It may be recalled here that in an earlier India and Myanmar have already given their approval on organising the Border Trade Fare and Tourism Expo, 2009 in Tamu town of Myanmar sometime in January 2010 .
However, during the meeting today, the Myanmarese delegation proposed for shifting the venue from Tamu to Kalimiyu town in view of infrastructural requirements and urged the Indian delegates for approval in this regard.
The proposed Expo aims to focus on development and promotion of industries, border trade, medical tourism and cultural tourism among the ASEAN countries.
Thailand would also be participating as a partner country in ensuring the success of the event.
After the meeting between the delegates, a press briefing of the print and electronic media based in Moreh was held at the conference of Trade Centre, Moreh later during the day.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
21-11-09 Burma UN Resolution 2009: A paper punch
by Dr. Tint Swe
Passing a resolution on Burma in an international forum is an annual routine practice which can embarrasses the ruling military junta but as that cannot make a change in the country it is not impressed by the severely oppressed people of Burma. There have been over 30 resolutions already passed by unanimously and later by voting at the UN bodies such as UN General Assembly and UN Human Rights Commission. It is because none of them is binding and the condemned junta is just to say a few words of anger after the resolution is passed.
However at the 64th UN General Assembly the document of 19th November on the situation of human rights in Burma has something to be noted by serious observers. The Assembly again strongly condemned the systematic violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms of the people of Burma.
Nonetheless even a paper jab is not an easy job. One month ahead of days for Burma at UN, the Burmese government in exile has annual task of holding a series of meetings with foreign missions in New York. The National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB) although composed of duly elected Parliamentarians has no mandate to represent the people of Burma not only in their national Parliament but also at the United Nations. The UN is the largest body of the governments no matter elected or not. So the people’s representatives have to approach to the missions from friendly nations. Within a month, they have talks with 30 to 40 approachable missions asking for sponsorship of the draft resolution and the important points to be included in it.
Obviously EU countries are champions of Burma resolutions at the UN. This year 47 countries including one from Asia, Republic of Korea sponsored the resolution on Burma of the Third Committee Agenda item 69 (c). In the UN documents, the language is important and critical. The sponsor countries have to bargain the language in the document with the friends of Burmese military junta. The ASEAN countries which recently established human right body in their own bloc are native defenders of human rights perpetrator, the regime of Burma.
In this year’s UN document there are 5 welcomes, 5 urges, 5 strongly calls upon and simply calling upon for 8 times. It was mixed with 3 deeply concerns and 1 strongly condemn.
There was only one “note with appreciation” followed by two “expressions of grave concerns”. One of which said, “Expresses grave concern at the recent trial, conviction and sentencing of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, resulting in her return to house arrest, and calls for her immediate and unconditional release; Expresses grave concern at the continuing practice of arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and strongly calls upon the Government of Myanmar to allow a full, transparent, effective, impartial and independent investigation into all reports of human rights violations, and to bring to justice those responsible in order to end impunity for such crimes.”
The Third Committee passed the motion by voting with 92 in favor, 26 against with 65 abstentions. Those countries opposed or abstained took their position on voting based on their policy on country specific resolution, not on the situation in Burma.
The ambassadors from Israel, Sweden and Japan gave sound-bites to Burmese language radios. The people of Burma learn that about ten countries namely China, Russia, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Egypt, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Cuba, and Libya are aggressively on the side of the military regime of Burma.
The second-line countries such as Indonesia, Brazil, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Bangladesh took the floor to express their disagreement to the resolution but most of the neighboring countries either abstained or opposed expressed their support to the effort of UN Secretary General in their deliberations. This year the mandate of the UN Secretary General has been spelled out in detail and strengthened.
Most of the condemnations and concerns are more or less the same as those of previous years. But the fresh noteworthy paragraph is focus on the election to be held in 2010. It said, “The UN strongly urged the Government of Myanmar to ensure the necessary steps to be taken towards a free, fair, transparent and inclusive electoral process and calls on the Government to take such steps without delay, including by enacting the required electoral laws and allowing the participation of all voters, all political parties, and all other relevant stakeholders in the electoral process.”
The world body is changing. Year by year, it becomes more difficult to maintain a country specific resolution of such. This year there are only three countries specific resolutions: Burma, Iran and North Korea. Developing countries attempted to wipe out the country specific resolution given the reasons that naming and shaming can't improve the HRs situation of a country and they want Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism in place where a country specific situation should be scrutinized.
The other important development at UN is the call for independent investigation on violations of human rights and humanitarian law and to end impunity. It may lead towards the direction of the Commission of Inquiry.
As the previous President has promised to Senior General Than Shwe of Burma in March 2006, India keeps assurance and defends at the UN and also at the ILO. It is coincidence that on the same day the International Labor Organization also made a decision on Burma’s widespread and documented forced labor practice. ILO has charged Burma of using forced labor since 1998. ILO criticized Burmese authorities for failing to abolish forced labor and called for the release of imprisoned people who have complained about forced labor.
The people of Burma are not excited to listen to news from UN. They realize very well what UN is and what the military rulers of Burma is all about. As long as the junta is in power the UN bodies have to do their annual rituals.
Dr. Tint Swe
21-11-09
20-11-09 Spirit of Panglong in Kolkata Court by Nandita Haksar
Friday, 20 November 2009
Mizzima News
For the lawyers practicing at the city sessions court in Kolkata, the capital of West Bengal Thursday, November 12th, 2009 was just another busy day. They passed by the court of Ms Kavita Dey without as much as a second look. For them the scene was familiar – lawyers dressed in their black gowns, the court clerks sitting at the table and the judge dictating to the stenographer.
The curiosity of some lawyers was aroused when they heard some passionate arguments and they may have drifted into the room in the hope of hearing some interesting point of law. The Public Prosecutor was telling the Judge that foreigners could not be allowed to depose without proper summons. He argued that summons for foreigners had to be served in accordance with the proper procedure laid down under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
A look at the large wooden cage at the back of the airy courtroom held 34 men.
Most of them were too tired to stand and were squatting on the cold stone floor. In any case they could not understand English or the intricacies of the legal points being debated. There were, however, some men who were holding the bars straining to listen to the arguments. Anxiety writ large on their faces.
On the last of the three rows of chairs in the large court room sat two men, looking calm and unperturbed, but listening carefully.
Finally the lawyer for the 34 men inside the wooden cage had persuaded the judge to allow him to call his witness. The lawyer informed the Judge that the first defence witness was Mr Harn Yawnghwe.
Mr Yawnghwe stood up and walked to the witness box. The other person sitting next to him was requested to go out of the court. The rules did not allow the defence witnesses to listen to each other before they themselves had deposed.
Harn Yawnghwe stepped into the rickety wooden witness box and was told to take oath and was ready to depose. The men in the wooden cage could not hear him but his dignified presence and his calm demeanor commanded respect. The Bengali stenographer‘s struggle with Burmese names and unfamiliar accent lent a slightly comic air.
Harn Yawnghwe was born in Burma 62 years ago. Both his parents came from Shan aristocracy and that was evident in his bearing. In quiet, measured words he told the Court that his father had been the first President of the Union of Burma in 1948. However, when Gen Ne Win staged a coup his father was imprisoned and died in jail. His older brother was executed by Gen Ne Win. These tragic circumstances had forced his family to take refuge in neighbouring Thailand and after that Harn got asylum in Canada and was a Canadian citizen.
It was not only his parentage but his professional qualifications that were impressive. He was a trained mining engineer and financial analyst, living in Canada. But all his life he had been involved in the movement for the restoration of democracy in Burma.
Harn Yawnghwe had traveled all the way from Canada to testify in the court. He told the Judge that the 34 Burmese being held inside the wooden cage at the back of the court were genuine freedom fighters. He also told the court that he was now the executive director of the Euro Burma Office with its headquarters at Brussels. The Euro Burma Office had released funds for the costs of the trial. There was no way that such funding could be given if there was even a suspicion that the 34 were gun runners involved in violating Indian security interests.
After he finished his deposition he stepped down and the second witness was called. The second witness was Dr Tint Swe. Dr Tint Swe told the Court that he was a professional doctor and had practiced for 15 years before resigning from his job and joining the National League for Democracy, the party of the legendary Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. The doctor stood for election in 1990 and won. But the military junta refused to hand over power to the democratically elected representatives of the people. Instead they sentenced Dr Tint Swe to 25 years of imprisonment and he had to leave his home and country by walking six days and five nights to reach Mizoram, India.
Dr Tint Swe told the court that he knew that the 34 Burmese accused were framed by an Indian military intelligence officer called Lt Col Grewal. He told the court that he knew Grewal personally and he had been instrumental in deporting 11 other Burmese in 1996. Dr Tint Swe conveyed to the court that the Prime Minister of the Government in exile (National Coalition Government of Union of Burma) had wanted to depose in the court but he had not been given a visa.
That afternoon Mr Harn Yawnghwe and Dr Tint Swe were given permission to meet the men in the cage. Each of them shook hands with all the 34 freedom fighters, Arakans and Karens.
At that moment it seemed that Gen Aung San’s spirit descended in the court. Here were the leaders of the Burmans and ethnic nationalities working together for the release of Burmese freedom fighters. The 34 Burmese were Arakans and Karens, Harn Yawnghwe, a proud Shan, representing the Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC) and Tint Swe, a nationalist Burman, representing the NCGUB. Was it the Spirit of Panglong that had come alive in the Kolkata court?
The majority of the Burmese media had failed to fully grasp the relevance of the moment, capture the poignancy of the handshakes. For 47 years the Burmese military has justified itself by following Buda-batha Myanmar-lumyo policy. The military has denied the people democracy and sought to obliterate the memory of Gen Aung San’s vision of a democratic and federal Burma. And that vision came alive in a Kolkata court.
In defiance of the Myanmar Junta the representatives of the Ethnic nationalities and the Burman majority community had come together to fight for the lives of 34 Burmese freedom fighters.
Indian human rights activists and Indian media were both absent. There was neither a sense of solidarity with the Burmese peoples’ struggle against the most brutal regime in the world, nor were they outraged by the fact that democratic India had kept Burmese freedom fighters in jail for more than 12 years. Indians could have learnt important lessons on the Panglong spirit and the need to build an inclusive democracy based on federalism.
As I walked out of the court that day I knew that the Panglong spirit had touched the court and perhaps the 34 Burmese freedom fighters would be free soon. But I felt an overwhelming sadness that we, Indians and Burmese, had missed an opportunity to learn a lesson from the moment in history when the Panglong spirit came alive in the court in Kolkata.
The author is a prominent Indian human rights lawyer and a writer. She had taken up the case of 34 Burmese freedom fighters since 1999. Her latest book “Rogue Agent: How India's Military Intelligence Betrayed the Burmese Resistance Movement” reveals that an Indian Military Intelligence officer named Lt. Col V.S. Grewal as the man masterminding the plot to betray the Burmese freedom fighters.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
အႏွစ္သံုးဆယ္ ခ်စ္တုန္းကြယ္
ဒီႏွစ္ေတြမွာ
ငါတို႔ဟာ
အရာရာကို ရင္ဆိုင္ခဲ့တယ္…။
သမီးတေယာက္
သားေလးေယာက္
ေနာက္ထပ္ဆင့္ပြား
ေျမးေလးမ်ားေတာင္ ရၿပီကြယ္…။
ၾကည့္စမ္းပါကြယ္
ႏွစ္သံုးဆယ္ဆိုတာ
ဘာၾကာလိုက္လို႔လဲ…
ခိုင္ျမဲတဲ့အခ်စ္နဲ႔
ဖိုင္တြဲရမယ့္ ႏွစ္ေတြဟာ
တကယ္ေတာ့
တထိုင္ထဲ က,တဲ့ မိနစ္ေတြပါပဲ…။
စကၠန္႔က အခ်စ္
မိနစ္က ကဗ်ာ
ႏွစ္သံုးဆယ္ဆိုတာ
ဒါေတြပါပဲ…။
အိမ္ေထာင္ေရးရဲ႕ဇစ္ျမစ္
အခ်စ္ကို အေျခတည္…
ေဟာဒီအိမ္ေထာင္ေရးဟာ
ေမတၱာကို သြန္းထု
'မိသားစု'…ရယ္လို႔
ဖိအားတခု တိုးပြား
ငါတုိ႔ ပိုခ်စ္သြားၾကတယ္…။
သားေတြ သမီးေတြနဲ႔
ပြားေစ ၾကီးေစဟဲ့လို႔
အားေတြ မီးေတြအထည့္
စနစ္ရဲ႕ခြင့္ျပဳခ်က္
သိပ္ရက္စက္လြန္းတယ္ကြယ္…။
မုန္တိုင္းတခ်က္
ကဆုန္စိုင္းႏွက္ေတာ့
တိုင္းပ်က္ ျပည္ပ်က္
အိုးခြက္တျခား
ဟိုး…ရက္မ်ားက
တို႔မ်ား ခြဲသြားရဖူးတယ္…။
သားတေယာက္ လက္ဆြဲ
အဖတေယာက္ရဲ႕ရက္စြဲေတြဟာ
ဘယ္ေနရာမွာ ေျခာက္ကပ္လို႔
ဘယ္ႏွစ္ၾကိမ္ ဘယ္ႏွစ္ခါ
ဂေယာက္ဂယက္ျဖစ္ခဲ့ပါသလဲ…
သမီးတေယာက္
သားသံုးေယာက္ရဲ႕
ပါးစပ္ေပါက္ေတြ ခြန္႔ေကၽြး
သနပ္ခါး မေမႊးႏိုင္တဲ့မိခင္ဟာ
ဘယ္ေနရာမွာ တေပါက္က်လို႔
ဘယ္ေန ဘယ္ကမွာ ေပ်ာက္ခဲ့ရပါသလဲ…
ေတြးဆၾကည့္ဖို႔ေတာင္မွ
ငလ်င္ဆန္လြန္းလွတယ္ကြယ္…။
အဲဒီရဲ႕ေနာက္
တို႔ႏွစ္ေယာက္
တေခါက္ျပန္ဆံုၾကရတယ္…
ဘယ္မလဲအတိတ္
အႏွစ္ႏွစ္ဆယ္စိတ္ဓါတ္နဲ႔
အသစ္ကြယ္ တံဆိပ္ကပ္ၿပီး
ခ်စ္စဖြယ္ နိမိတ္ဖတ္ခဲ့ၾကတယ္…။
ေလာကဓံတရားကို
မေနာခံအားနဲ႔
ေလွ်ာလန္သြားေအာင္ တိုက္ခဲ့တယ္…
ခ်စ္ထံုးရယ္မေျပ
ႏွစ္သံုးဆယ္ေလ
သက္ေသ…ကြဲ႕…။
ကဲ
ေနာက္ထပ္တရစ္
အႏွစ္ေျခာက္ဆယ္
အခ်စ္…ေလွ်ာက္မယ္မဟုတ္လား…။ ။
(အေဖနဲ႔အေမတို႔ရဲ႕မဂၤလာပုလဲရတုသို႔)
ေနမင္းနီ
22.7.1999
04:20 am
ေနာက္ထပ္ အႏွစ္သံုးဆယ္ ခ်စ္အံုးမယ္။
ႏွစ္ေယာက္ထဲကတည္းက အစပ်ိဳး၊
ကေလးတေယာက္ တိုးတာဟာ
ခ်စ္စရာတေယာက္ တိုးတာပါ။
ကေလးက တေယာက္ျပီး တေယာက္၊
ခ်စ္စရာေတြ အသစ္အသစ္ ေရာက္လာၾက။
ခ်စ္စရာေတြ အသစ္အသစ္ ေပါက္လာၾက။
သားသမီးအခ်စ္ ေျမးအႏွစ္၊
အႏွစ္ေတြကလဲ တေယာက္ျပီးတေယာက္၊
အခ်စ္ေတြက ေတာက္ေလွ်ာက္။
ေနာက္ေပါက္ေတြ တိုးလာမွ သေဘာေပါက္ရတာရွိေသး။
ဆီမီးကို ကူးေပးေပမဲ့ ကုန္မသြားဘူးတဲ့၊
ပညာဆီမီးကို ခ်ီးက်ဴးၾက။
ခ်စ္စရာေတြ မ်ားမ်ားလာလဲ အခ်စ္ေတြက ရွားရွားမသြား၊
အခ်စ္ေတြက ပါးပါးမသြား။
မိဘလိုခ်စ္ရ၊ အဖိုးအဖြါးလိုခ်စ္ရ၊
အခ်စ္က ေလ်ာ့မက်၊ အသက္ပါ ငယ္သြားရ။
ေျမးမကို ေက်ာင္းပို႔ရရင္ အဖိုးလို႔ မထင္၊
အျမင္ကိုက မအိုလွတဲ့။
မိတ္ဆက္ရရင္
I’m grandfather of four!
ကြ်န္ေတာ္ ကဗ်ာဆရာ့ သမီးရဲ႕အဖိုး။
၂၂-၁၁-၀၉
Friday, November 20, 2009
20-11-09 ကာလကတၱား တရား႐ံုးအတြင္းမွ ပင္လံုစိတ္ဓာတ္
နန္ဒီတာဟက္ဆာ (Nandita Haksar)
အေနာက္ဘဂၤလားျပည္နယ္ ကာလကတၱား စက္ရွင္တရား႐ုံးမ်ားအတြင္း ေရွ႕ေနလိုက္ေနၾကေသာ ဥပေဒအက်ဳိးေဆာင္ၾကီးမ်ားအတြက္ ၂၀၀၉ ခုႏွစ္ ႏိုဝင္ဘာလ ၁၂ ရက္ေန႔ ၾကာသပေတးေန႔သည္ ခါတိုင္းလို အလုပ္မ်ားလွေသာ ေန႔တေန႔သာျဖစ္သည္။
သူတို႔သည္ တရားသူႀကီး မစၥ ကယ္ပါနာေဒး (Ms. Kalpana Dey) ႐ုံးထိုင္ေသာ တရားခြင္ေရွ႕မွ ငဲ့ေစာင္း၍ပင္ ျပန္မၾကည့္ဘဲ ေက်ာ္ျဖတ္သြားၾကသည္။ သူတို႔အတြက္ေတာ့ ျမင္ကြင္းမွာ ဘာမွမထူးဆန္း။ ေရွ႕ေနမ်ားက အနက္ေရာင္ ဝတ္႐ုံမ်ားၿခံဳ၍၊ တရားခြင္စာေရးမ်ားက စားပြဲတြင္ထိုင္၍၊ တရားသူႀကီးက တရားခြင္မွတ္တမ္းကို သူ႔လက္ေရးတို စာေရးကို ႏႈတ္တိုက္ခ်ေပးေန၍၊ ျမင္ေနက်ျမင္ကြင္းမ်ားပင္။
တရားခြင္မွ အသည္းအသန္ ေျပာဆိုေနၾကေသာ ေလွ်ာက္လဲခ်က္မ်ားကို ၾကားလိုက္ရသည့္ ေရွ႕ေနတခ်ဳိ႕ကေတာ့ ဥပေဒေရးရာႏွင့္စပ္လ်ဥ္း၍ ထူးတာေလးမ်ား ၾကားရမလားဟူေသာ ေစ့ငုလုိစိတ္ျဖင့္ အခန္းတြင္းသို႔ ဝင္လာၾကတာလည္း ရွိသည္။ အစိုးရေရွ႕ေနႀကီးက ႏိုင္ငံျခားသားမ်ားကို ေသေသခ်ာခ်ာ သမၼန္စာဆင့္ဆိုျခင္း မရွိဘဲ တရား႐ုံးတြင္ သက္ေသထြက္ခြင့္ မျပဳသင့္ေၾကာင္း ႐ုံးေတာ္ကို ေလွ်ာက္လဲကန္႔ကြက္ေနသည္။ ႏိုင္ငံျခားသားမ်ားကို ျပစ္မႈဆိုင္ရာက်င့္ထံုး ဥပေဒပါ ျပ႒ာန္းခ်က္မ်ား အတိုင္းသာ သမၼန္စာဆင့္ဆိုရမည္ဟု သူက ဆိုသည္။
ဤေလေကာင္းေလသန္႔ရ၍ က်ယ္ဝန္းေသာ ႐ုံးေတာ္၏ေနာက္ရွိ သစ္သားအခ်ဳပ္ခန္းထဲတြင္မူ လူ ၃၄ ဦးကို ခ်ဳပ္ေႏွာင္ထားသည္။
သူတို႔ထဲမွ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားမွာ ပင္ပန္းလြန္း၍ ရပ္မေနႏိုင္ေတာ့ဘဲ ေအးစက္ေနသည့္ ေက်ာက္တံုးၾကမ္းခင္းေပၚတြင္ ေဆာင့္ေၾကာင့္ထိုင္ေနၾကသည္။ မည္သုိ႔ပင္ျဖစ္ေစ သူတို႔သည္ အဂၤလိပ္ စကားလည္း မတတ္၊ ျငင္းခံုေျပာဆိုေနၾကသည့္ ရႈပ္ေထြးေပြလီလွသည့္ ဥပေဒေရးရာ အခ်က္အလက္ အေၾကာင္းအရာမ်ားကိုလည္း သူတို႔မသိၾက။ သုိ႔ေသာ္ တခ်ဳိ႕ကေတာ့ အခ်ဳပ္ခန္း သစ္သားတန္းမ်ားကိုကိုင္၍ အျပန္အလွန္ ေလွ်ာက္လဲခ်က္မ်ားကို နားေထာင္ေနၾကသည္။ သူတို႔ မ်က္ႏွာမ်ားေပၚတြင္ေတာ့ ပူပန္ေသာကမ်ားက အထင္းသား ေပၚေနသည္။
က်ယ္ဝန္းလွေသာ တရား႐ုံးအတြင္း ခ်ထားသည့္ ခံုတန္း ၃ တန္းအနက္ ေနာက္ဆံုးခံုတန္းတြင္ ထိုင္ေနသူ ၂ ဦးကမူ ေအးေဆးစြာ အေႏွာင့္အယွက္မရွိ အေသအခ်ာ နားစိုက္ေထာင္ေနသည္။
ေနာက္ဆံုးတြင္ သစ္သားေလွာင္အိမ္တြင္းမွ အခ်ဳပ္သား ၃၄ ဦး၏ ေရွ႕ေနၾကီးက သူ႔သက္ေသမ်ားကို ေခၚယူ စစ္ေဆးခြင့္ ျပဳပါရန္ တရားသူႀကီးကို ေဖ်ာင္းဖ်ေျပာဆိုလိုက္သည္။ ပထမဆံုး သက္ေသမွာ ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊ ျဖစ္သည္ဟု ေရွ႕ေနႀကီးက တရားသူႀကီးကို အသိေပးလိုက္သည္။
ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊက ေနရာမွထၿပီး သက္ေသခံုရွိရာသို႔ ေလွ်ာက္လာသည္။ သူ႔ေဘးတြင္ ကပ္လ်က္ထိုင္ေနသူကို တရား႐ုံးျပင္ပသို႔ ထြက္ခြာေပးရန္ ေမတၱာရပ္ခံလိုက္သည္။ ဥပေဒအရ တရားခံျပ သက္ေသမ်ားသည္ တဦး ထြက္ဆုိေနသည္ကို ေနာက္တဦးက နားေထာင္ေနခြင့္ မရွိပါ။
ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊ ခေနာ္နီခေနာ္နဲ႔ သက္ေသဝက္ၿခံအတြင္းသို႔ ဝင္လိုက္ၿပီး က်မ္းက်ိန္ရသည္။ ထို႔ေနာက္ သူသက္ေသထြက္ရန္ အသင့္ျဖစ္ေနပါၿပီ။ သစ္သားေလွာင္အိမ္အတြင္းမွ တရားခံမ်ားအေနျဖင့္ သူဘာေျပာေနသည္ကို မၾကားရႏိုင္ပါ။ သို႔ေသာ္ သူ၏ ၾကက္သေရရွိမႈႏွင့္ ေအးေဆးၿငိမ္သက္ေသာ ကိုယ္ႏႈတ္အမူအရာတို႔ေၾကာင့္ မေလးစားဘဲ မေနႏိုင္ၾကပါ။ ဘဂၤါလီလူမ်ဳိး လက္ေရးတိုစာေရးက သူအကြ်မ္းတဝင္ မရွိေသာ ေလယူေလသိမ္းႏွင့္ ျမန္မာအမည္မ်ားကို မနည္းႀကိဳးစားကာ ေရးမွတ္ေနရသည္။
ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊကို လြန္ခဲ့ေသာ ၆၂ ႏွစ္တြင္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၌ ေမြးဖြားခဲ့သည္။ ရွမ္းမင္းမ်ဳိးမင္းႏြယ္မွ ေပါက္ဖြားလာသူ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္းကို သူ႔ဟန္ပန္အမူအယာကို ၾကည့္႐ုံျဖင့္ သိႏိုင္သည္။ သူ႔ဖခင္သည္ ၁၉၄၈ ခုႏွစ္က ျပည္ေထာင္စု ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ပထမဆံုး သမၼတႀကီးျဖစ္ခဲ့ေၾကာင္း ေအးေဆးတည္ၿငိမ္စြာျဖင့္ စကားလံုးမ်ားကို ေသခ်ာစြာ ေရြးခ်ယ္ ေျပာၾကားေနသည္။ သုိ႔ေသာ္ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေနဝင္းက အာဏာသိမ္းလိုက္ေသာအခါ သူ႔ဖခင္မွာ ဖမ္းဆီးခံရၿပီး ေထာင္ထဲ၌ပင္ ေသဆံုးသြားခဲ့ရသည္။ သူ႔အကိုတဦးမွာလည္း ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေနဝင္း၏ ကြပ္မ်က္ျခင္း ခံခဲ့ရသည္။
ဤေၾကကြဲဖြယ္ အျဖစ္ဆိုးမ်ားေၾကာင့္ မိသားစုလိုက္ အိမ္နီးခ်င္း ထုိင္းႏိုင္ငံသို႔ ထြက္ေျပးခိုလံႈခဲ့ၾကရသည္။ ထို႔ေနာက္ ဦးဟန္မွာ ကေနဒါႏိုင္ငံတြင္ ေျပာင္းေရႊ႕ခိုလံႈခဲ့ၿပီး ေနာက္ပိုင္းတြင္ ကေနဒါႏိုင္ငံသားအျဖစ္ ခံယူခဲ့သည္။
မ်ဳိး႐ိုးဂုဏ္ေၾကာင့္သာမဟုတ္၊ သူ႔ပညာရပ္ဆုိင္ရာ အရည္အခ်င္းမ်ားကလည္း အထင္ႀကီးစရာပင္။ သူသည္ သတၱဳတြင္းတူး အင္ဂ်င္နီယာတဦးျဖစ္ၿပီး ဘ႑ာေရးဆိုင္ရာ စိစစ္ေလ့လာသူတဦးလည္းျဖစ္ကာ ကေနဒါႏိုင္ငံတြင္ ေနထိုင္သူတဦးျဖစ္သည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ သူ႔ဘဝတခုလံုးကို ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ ဒီမိုကေရစီရရွိေရး လႈပ္ရွားမႈအတြင္း၌သာ ျမႇဳပ္ႏွံထားခဲ့သည္။
ဤတရား႐ုံးတြင္ သက္ေသထြက္ဆိုရန္အတြက္ ကေနဒါႏိုင္ငံမွ တနံတလ်ားလာခဲ့ရသည္။ တရားခြင္ေနာက္ သစ္သားေလွာင္အိမ္တြင္းရွိ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံသား ၃၄ ဦးလံုးမွာ လြတ္လပ္ေရး တိုက္ပြဲဝင္ ေတာ္လွန္ေရးသမား အစစ္အမွန္မ်ား ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း သူက ႐ုံးေတာ္သို႔ ထြက္ဆိုသည္။ သူသည္ ဘရပ္ဆဲလ္တြင္ ဌာနခ်ဳပ္ရွိေသာ ယူ႐ိုဘားမား႐ုံး (EBO) ၏ အမႈေဆာင္ ညႊန္ၾကားေရးမႉးတဦး ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း၊ သူတို႔႐ုံးမွ ဤအမႈအတြက္ ကုန္က်စရိတ္မ်ားကို ထုတ္ေပးေနခဲ့ေၾကာင္း၊ အကယ္၍ ဤတရားခံ ၃၄ ဦးသည္ အိႏၵိယႏိုင္ငံ လံုၿခံဳေရး အက်ဳိးစီးပြားမ်ားကို ေဖာက္ဖ်က္ခဲ့သည့္ လက္နက္ေမွာင္ခိုသမားမ်ား ျဖစ္သည္ဟု သံသယရွိခဲ့လွ်င္ ဤသို႔ေငြေၾကးမ်ား ေထာက္ပံ့ေပးကမ္းရန္ လံုးဝ အေၾကာင္းမရွိပါဟု သူက ႐ုံးေရွ႕တြင္ ထြက္ဆိုေျပာၾကားခဲ့သည္။
သူသက္ေသထြက္ၿပီးေသာအခါ သက္ေသခံုမွဆင္း၍ ေနာက္သက္ေသတဦးကို ေခၚသည္။ ဒုတိယ တရားခံျပ သက္ေသမွာ ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြ ျဖစ္သည္။ ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြက သူသည္ ဆရာဝန္တဦး ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း၊ အလုပ္မွ မႏုတ္ထြက္မီအထိ ေဆးကုသျခင္း လုပ္ငန္းကို ၁၅ ႏွစ္ၾကာ မွ်လုပ္ကိုင္ခဲ့ေၾကာင္း၊ ထုိ႔ေနာက္ ထင္ရွားလွသည့္ ေခါင္းေဆာင္တဦးျဖစ္ေသာ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္၏ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီအဖြဲ႔ခ်ဳပ္သို႔ ဝင္ေရာက္ခဲ့ေၾကာင္း ထြက္ဆိုသြားသည္။ သူသည္ ၁၉၉ဝ ခုႏွစ္ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲတြင္ ဝင္ေရာက္ယွဥ္ၿပိဳင္ခဲ့ၿပီး အႏိုင္ရခဲ့သည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ စစ္အစိုးရက ဒီမိုကေရစီနည္းက် ေရြးခ်ယ္တင္ေျမႇာက္ခံရေသာ ျပည္သူ႔ကိုယ္စားလွယ္မ်ားကို အာဏာလႊဲေျပာင္း မေပးခဲ့ပါ။ ထုိသို႔ လႊဲမေပးသည့္အျပင္ ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြမွာ စစ္အစိုးရက ေထာင္ဒဏ္ ၂၅ ႏွစ္ ခ်မွတ္ျခင္း ခံခဲ့ရသည္။ ထို႔ေၾကာင့္ အိမ္မွထြက္ခြာလာခဲ့ရရာ အိႏၵိယႏိုင္ငံ မီဇုိရမ္ျပည္နယ္အေရာက္ ၅ ညအိပ္၊ ၆ ရက္ခရီးကို ေျခလ်င္ေလွ်ာက္ခဲ့ရသည္။
ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြကလည္း ဤျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသား စြပ္စြဲခံရသူ ၃၄ ဦးမွာ အိႏၵိယ စစ္ေထာက္လွမ္းေရး အရာရွိ ဒု-ဗိုလ္မႉးႀကီး ဂေရးဝါးလ္၏ အမႈဆင္ဖမ္းဆီးျခင္း ခံခဲ့ရေၾကာင္းကို သူသိေၾကာင္း ႐ုံးေတာ္ကို ထြက္ဆိုသည္။ သူ ဂေရးဝါးလ္ကို လူကိုယ္တိုင္သိေၾကာင္း၊ ၁၉၉၆ ခုႏွစ္က အျခား ျမန္မာလူမ်ဳိး ၁၁ ဦးကို ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသုိ႔ ျပန္ပို႔ခဲ့ရာတြင္ သူသည္ အဓိကအခန္းမွ ပါဝင္ခဲ့သူတဦး ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း သူက ႐ုံးတြင္ ထြက္ဆိုသည္။ အေဝးေရာက္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံအစိုးရ (ျပည္ေထာင္စု ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ အမ်ဳိးသားညြန္႔ေပါင္းအစိုးရ NCGUB) ၏ ဝန္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္ ေဒါက္တာစိန္ဝင္းကိုယ္တုိင္ ႐ုံးေရွ႕သို႔ လာေရာက္ထြက္ဆိုလိုေသာ္လည္း ဗီဇာမရ၍ မလာႏိုင္ေၾကာင္းကိုလည္း သူက ႐ုံးေတာ္သို႔ အသိေပး ေျပာျပခဲ့သည္။
ထိုေန႔မြန္းလြဲပိုင္းက ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊႏွင့္ ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြတို႔ ၂ ဦးလံုးကို ေလွာင္အိမ္တြင္းမွ အက်ဥ္းသားမ်ားႏွင့္ ေတြ႔ဆံုခြင့္ျပဳခဲ့သည္။ ရခုိင္ႏွင့္ ကရင္လူမ်ဳိး လြတ္လပ္ေရးတိုက္ပြဲဝင္ ေတာ္လွန္ေရးသမား ၃၄ ဦးလုံးႏွင့္ သူတို႔ ၂ ဦးက တဦးခ်င္း လက္ဆြဲႏႈတ္ဆက္ခဲ့သည္။
ထုိအခိုက္အတန္႔ေလးတြင္ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ေအာင္ဆန္း၏ စိတ္ဓာတ္မွာ တရား႐ုံးအတြင္းသို႔ သက္ဆင္းက်ေရာက္လာသလို ရွိသည္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသား လြတ္လပ္ေရးတုိက္ပြဲဝင္သူမ်ား လြတ္ေျမာက္ေရးအတြက္ ျမန္မာလူမ်ဳိးမ်ားႏွင့္ တိုင္းရင္းသား လူမ်ဳိးမ်ား၏ ေခါင္းေဆာင္မ်ားက အတူတကြ လက္တြဲၾကိဳးပမ္းေနၾကသည္။ ထိုျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသား ၃၄ ဦးမွာ တိုင္းရင္းသား ရခိုင္ႏွင့္ ကရင္ လူမ်ဳိးမ်ား ျဖစ္ၾကသည္။ ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊမွာ တိုင္းရင္းသားလူမ်ဳိးမ်ား ေကာင္စီ (ENC) ကုိ ကိုယ္စားျပဳေနသည့္ ဂုဏ္သိကၡာၾကီးမားသည့္ ရွမ္းအမ်ဳိးသားတဦးျဖစ္ၿပီး၊ ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြမွာ ျမန္မာလူမ်ဳိး တဦးျဖစ္ၿပီး အေဝးေရာက္ ညြန္႔ေပါင္းအစိုးရ (NCGUB) ကုိ ကိုယ္စားျပဳလာေရာက္ခဲ့ျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္။ ဒါ ကာလကတၱား တရား႐ုံးအတြင္း ပင္လံုစိတ္ဓာတ္ ျပန္လည္ရွင္သန္ေနျခင္း မဟုတ္ေပဘူးလား။
ျမန္မာမီဒီယာအမ်ားစုက ဤတဒဂၤတြင္ ဤသို႔ ဆက္စပ္ေနပံုကုိ မျမင္လုိက္ၾက၊ လက္ဆြဲႏႈတ္ဆက္ေနၾကပံု၏ ဆြတ္ပ်ံ႕ဖြယ္အျဖစ္ကို သတိမမူမိလုိက္ၾက။ ျမန္မာစစ္တပ္က ၄၇ ႏွစ္လံုးလံုး ဗုဒၶဘာသာ ျမန္မာလူမိ်ဳးဟု ေၾကြးေၾကာ္ၿပီး ဝါဒျဖန္႔ သိမ္းသြင္း အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ခဲ့သည္။ လူထု၏ ဒီမိုကေရစီ ေတာင္းဆိုမႈကို ျငင္းဆန္ခဲ့သည္။ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ေအာင္ဆန္း၏ ဒီမိုကေရစီ ဖက္ဒရယ္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ အျမင္သေဘာထားကို ေခ်ဖ်က္ရန္ ၾကိဳးစားခဲ့သည္။
ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရကို အာခံ၍ တုိင္းရင္းသားလူမ်ဳိးမ်ားႏွင့္ လူမ်ားစု ျမန္မာလူမ်ဳိးမ်ား၏ ကိုယ္စားလွယ္မ်ား ဤေနရာတြင္ စု႐ုံးေရာက္ရွိလာကာ ျမန္မာႏို္င္ငံသား လြတ္ေျမာက္ေရး တုိက္ပြဲဝင္သူ ၃၄ ဦး၏ ဘဝမ်ားကို ကယ္တင္ႏိုင္ေရးအတြက္ အတူတကြ ေဆာင္ရြက္ေနၾကသည္။
ဤတရားခြင္သို႔ အိႏၵိယလူ႔အခြင့္အေရး တိုက္ပြဲဝင္သူမ်ားႏွင့္ အိႏၵိယမီဒီယာလည္း ေရာက္မလာခဲ့ပါ။ သူတုိ႔သည္ ကမၻာေပၚတြင္ အရက္စက္ဆံုး စစ္အစိုးရကို ဆန္႔က်င္တိုက္ပြဲဝင္ေနသည့္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသားမ်ားႏွင့္ ေသြးစည္း ညီညြတ္မႈကုိလည္း ျပသရန္ စိတ္မပါၾက၊ ဤလြတ္လပ္ေရး တိုက္ပြဲဝင္သူမ်ားကို ဒီမိုကရက္တစ္ အိႏၵိယႏိုင္ငံက ၁၂ ႏွစ္ေက်ာ္ ေထာင္သြင္းအက်ဥ္းခ်ထားခဲ့သည္ကိုလည္း ေဒါသထြက္ရေကာင္းမွန္း မသိၾကပါ။ အိႏၵိယႏိုင္ငံသားမ်ားသည္ ဖက္ဒရယ္စနစ္ေပၚ အေျခခံသည့္ အားလံုး ပါဝင္ႏိုင္သည့္ ဒီမိုကေရစီစနစ္ကို တည္ေဆာက္ရန္ လုိအပ္ပံုႏွင့္ ပင္လံုစိတ္ဓာတ္တို႔မွ သင္ခန္းစာမ်ား အမ်ားၾကီး ရယူႏိုင္ပါသည္။
ထုိေန႔က က်မ တရား႐ုံးအတြင္းမွ ထြက္ခြာလာခ်ိန္တြင္ ပင္လံုစိတ္ဓာတ္က တရား႐ုံးကို လႊမ္းၿခံဳေနခဲ့ေၾကာင္းႏွင့္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသား တရားခံ ၃၄ ဦးလံုးလည္း မၾကာခင္ လြတ္ေျမာက္လာေတာ့မည့္အေၾကာင္း က်မ သိလိုက္သည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ က်မစိတ္ထဲတြင္ ဝမ္းနည္းစိတ္ ေပၚလာသည္မွာ က်မတို႔ အိႏၵိယလူမ်ဳိးမ်ားႏွင့္ ျမန္မာလူမ်ဳိးမ်ားက ကာလကတၱား တရား႐ုံးအတြင္း ပင္လံုစိတ္ဓာတ္ ျပန္လည္ရွင္သန္ ႏိုးထလာခ်ိန္ သမိုင္းသင္ခန္းစာ ေကာင္းေကာင္း ယူႏိုင္သည့္ တဒဂၤေလးကို လက္လြတ္သြားခဲ့ရျခင္းပင္။
စာေရးသူသည္ ထင္ရွားသည့္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ေရွ႕ေနတဦးႏွင့္ စာေရးဆရာတဦး ျဖစ္သည္။ သူသည္ ဤ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသား ၃၄ ဦးအမႈကို ၁၉၉၉ ခုႏွစ္ကတည္းက စတင္ကိုင္တြယ္ခဲ့သည္။ သူမ၏ ေနာက္ဆံုးထုတ္ စာအုပ္မွာ `သူလွ်ဳိငလိမ္ စစ္ေထာက္လွမ္းေရး -ျမန္မာ့ခုခံဆန္႔က်င္ေရး လႈပ္ရွားမႈကို အိႏၵိယ စစ္ေထာက္လွမ္းေရးက မည္သို႔မည္ပံု သစၥာေဖာက္ခဲ့ပံုအေၾကာင္း´ ျဖစ္သည္။ ဤစာအုပ္တြင္ အိႏၵိယစစ္ေထာက္လွမ္းေရး အရာရွိ ဒုဗိုလ္မႉးႀကီး V.S. Grewal ျမန္မာ့လြတ္လပ္ေရး တုိက္ပြဲဝင္သူမ်ားကို သစၥာေဖာက္ရန္ ဦးေဆာင္ႀကံစည္ခဲ့ပံုအေၾကာင္း ေဖာ္ထုတ္ ေရးသားထားသည္။
20-11-09 အၾကမ္းမဖက္နည္းသာ အကိုက္ညီဆံုးဟု အေဝးေရာက္ ဝန္ႀကီး ေျပာၾကား
နယူးေဒလီ (မဇိၥ်မ)။ နန္းေဒဝီ
ျမန္မာ့အေရး လႈပ္ရွားမႈတြင္ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ နည္းလမ္းသည္သာ အကိုက္ညီဆံုးျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း အေဝးေရာက္ ညြန္႔ေပါင္း အစိုးရ NCGUB ဝန္ၾကီး ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြက ေျပာသည္။
အိႏၵိယ၊ ဂ်ပန္၊ ထိုင္းႏွင့္ ပါလက္စတိုင္း အပါအဝင္ ႏုိင္ငံအမ်ားအျပားမွ အစိုးရမဟုတ္ေသာ လူမႈအဖြဲ႔အစည္း ေခါင္းေဆာင္ ၁၀၀ ေက်ာ္ျဖင့္ နယူးေဒလီတြင္ ၄ ရက္ၾကာ က်င္းပေနသည့္ အိႏိၵယ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးဖခင္ မဟတၱမဂႏီၶ ေရးသားခဲ့သည့္ Hind Swaraj (self-rule) ေခၚ ကိုယ္ပိုင္အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေရးစာအုပ္ ျဖန္႔ခ်ီသည့္ ႏွစ္ ၁၀၀ ျပည့္ေန႔ အခမ္းအနား၌ ေျပာသြားျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္။
“အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈဟာ လူထုလည္း ပါဝင္မႈရွိတယ္။ ျမန္မာ့ဒီမုိကေရစီေရး လႈပ္ရွားမႈအတြက္ အသင့္ေတာ္ဆံုး ျဖစ္တယ္။ စစ္တပ္ကလည္း ၿဖိဳခြင္းရခက္တဲ့ အလုပ္ျဖစ္ေနတယ္။ ေတာတြင္း လက္နက္ကိုင္လမ္းစဥ္ မလိုအပ္ေတာ့ဘူးလို႔ က်ေနာ္ဆိုလိုတာ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး” ဟု သူက ေျပာသည္။
အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈသည္ မည္ေရြ႕မည္မွ် ကာလၾကာျမင့္မည္ကို မေျပာဆိုႏုိင္ေသာ္လည္း အဆံုးသတ္တြင္ ေအာင္ပဲြခံရမည္ဟု သူက ဆုိသည္။
ျမန္မာ့သမိုင္းတေလွ်ာက္ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈျဖစ္စဥ္မ်ားကို စစ္တပ္က လက္နက္သံုး၍ ၿဖိဳခြင္းခဲ့ေသာ္လည္း ယေန႔ထိတိုင္ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈမ်ား ဆက္လက္တည္ရွိေနျခင္းသည္ သာဓကအျဖစ္ သူက ေထာက္ျပသည္။
ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြသည္ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမုိကေရစီအဖြဲ႔ခ်ဳပ္၊ စစ္ကိုင္းတိုင္း၊ ပုလဲၿမိဳ႕နယ္၊ အမွတ္ - ၂ တြင္ ျပည္သူ႔ ကိုယ္စားလွယ္အျဖစ္ ၁၉၉၀ ခုႏွစ္ အေထြေထြေရြးေကာက္ပြဲတြင္ ေရြးခ်ယ္ခံခဲ့ရသည္။
စင္ၿပိဳင္အစိုးရ ဖြဲ႔စည္းေရးအတြက္ မႏၲေလးၿမိဳ႕တြင္ အႏိုင္ရ လႊတ္ေတာ္ကိုယ္စားလွယ္မ်ား အစည္းအေဝးျပဳလုပ္ခဲ့ရာ စစ္အစိုးရက သိရွိခဲ့ၿပီး လိုက္လံဖမ္းဆီးခဲ့သျဖင့္ ၁၉၉၀ ခုႏွစ္၊ ဒီဇင္ဘာလတြင္ အိႏိၵယႏုိင္ငံသို႔ ထြက္ခြာ ခိုလႈံခဲ့သည္။
“Burma VJ လို ေရႊဝါေရာင္ေတာ္လွန္ေရး မွတ္တမ္း႐ုပ္ရွင္ဟာ ၂၀၀၉ ခုႏွစ္ ေအာ္စကာဆုအတြက္ ပဏာမ အေရြးခံရသလို၊ ရတနာပံုမွာ စာလံုးေပါင္းမွားတဲ့ (ဆူပူမႈျဖင့္ ဒီမိုကေရစီရႏုိင္) ကိစၥေတြ၊ ဒါေတြဟာ သာဓက ျဖစ္ေနပါတယ္” ဟု NCGUB ျပန္ၾကားေရးဝန္ႀကီး ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြက ဆိုသည္။
လက္ရွိ နအဖ စစ္တပ္သည္ အာဏာရွင္ေဟာင္း ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေနဝင္း လက္ထက္တြင္ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈကို တင္းက်ပ္သည့္ စစ္အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေရး ဥပေဒက်င့္သံုးျခင္း၊ ေထာက္လွမ္းေရးစနစ္ကို ထိေရာက္က်ယ္ျပန္႔စြာ က်င့္သံုး ေနျခင္းအျပင္၊ လူထုကို အခင္းအက်င္း (space) မေပးဘဲ ဆင္းရဲတြင္းေရာက္ေအာင္ ျပဳလုပ္ျခင္း၊ အစဥ္အဆက္ ၿဖိဳခြင္းမႈမ်ားျဖင့္ ျပဳလုပ္ေနေၾကာင္း သူေရးသားတင္သြင္းသည့္ စာတမ္းထဲတြင္ ေရးသားထားသည္။
ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးနိဘယ္ဆုရွင္ ျမန္မာ့ဒီမိုကေရစီေခါင္းေဆာင္ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္သည္ အိႏၵိယက မဟတၱမ ဂႏၶီႀကီး၏ အၾကမ္းမဖက္ ႏွလံုးရည္တိုက္ပြဲကို ႀကိဳက္ႏွစ္သက္သူ ျဖစ္သည္။ သူမ၏ပါတီ အန္အယ္ဒီသည္ မဲအေရအတြက္ ၈၂ ရာခိုင္ႏႈန္းေက်ာ္ျဖင့္ အႏိုင္ရခဲ့ေသာ္လည္း စစ္အစိုးရက အာဏာလႊဲေပးရန္ ျငင္းဆန္ခဲ့သည္။
ယခုလ ၁၉ ရက္ေန႔မွ ၂၂ ရက္ေန႔အထိ က်င္းပမည့္ Hind Swaraj ႏွစ္ ၁၀၀ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ ညီလာခံကို နယူးေဒလီရွိ ဆူရကူး Surajkund ခန္းမေဆာင္တြင္ ျပဳလုပ္ေနရာ အခမ္းအနား ေနာက္ဆံုးရက္တြင္ ႏိုဘယ္ၿငိမ္းေရးဆုရွင္ တိဘက္ဘုန္းေတာ္ႀကီး ဒလိုင္းလားမားလည္း ၾကြေရာက္လာမည္ ျဖစ္သည္။
17-11-09 Corruption watchdog rules Somalia still worst; followed by Afghanistan, Myanmar
Associated Press: Corruption watchdog rules Somalia still worst; followed by Afghanistan, Myanmar
Berlin — An international watchdog says Canada is tied for eighth place in a survey that examined levels of corruption in 180 countries.
International watchdog says war-ravaged Somalia remains the world’s most corrupt country, followed by Afghanistan, Myanmar and Sudan. Transparency International says New Zealand is the most principled country, followed by Denmark, Singapore and Sweden.
It says the top rankings are partly due to political stability and long-established conflict of interest regulations.
Canada is tied for eighth place with Australia and Iceland – up one spot from the 2008 survey – while the United States is ranked 19th.
The Transparency International website did not include any specific reasons for the Canadian ranking.
The annual ranking from the Berlin-based agency drew on surveys of businesses and experts.
-With file from The Associated Press
Thursday, November 19, 2009
အိႏိၵယ soft ပါဝါ (၁)
ေန႔သစ္ Renaissance
မန္ဇူး(ဘာသာျပန္သည္)
ၿပီးခဲ့သည့္ ဆယ္စုႏွစ္တာ ကာလေတြအတြင္း အိႏိၵယႏွင့္ တ႐ုတ္ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံ ႐ုတ္ျခည္းဆိုသလို တိုးတက္ ျဖစ္ထြန္းလာမႈဟာ ပထဝီႏိုင္ငံ ေရးလမ္းေၾကာင္းအေပၚ ဘယ္လိုအက်ဳိးသက္ေရာက္မႈေတြ ရွိလာႏိုင္ မလဲဆိုၿပီး အေတာ္ေလးကို အျငင္းပြားခဲ့ၾကတယ္။ ကမၻာ့စီးပြား ပ်က္ ကပ္ ဝဲၾသဃအတြင္း စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ငန္းေဆာင္တာရပ္ အမ်ားစုအ က်ပ္တည္းဆိုက္ၿပီး ယက္ကန္ေနရာမွ မနည္း႐ုန္းထဖို႔ရာ ႀကိဳးစား ေနရခ်ိန္ဝယ္ အာရွႏိုင္ငံႏွစ္ႏို္င္ငံမွ လာမည့္ဘ႑ာေရးႏွစ္ေတြအတြင္း ၇ မွ ၈ % အတိုင္းအတာထိ မထီမဲ့ျမင္ျပဳစြာနဲ႔ တိုးတက္ ျဖစ္ထြန္း လာျခင္း၊ ဒီအေတာအတြင္း သတင္းမီဒီယာေတြရဲ႕ ထုတ္ျပန္ေၾကျငာ ခ်က္အရ တ႐ုတ္-အိႏိၵယ Himalayas နယ္စပ္မ်ဥ္း တေလွ်ာက္ မီးခိုး အမွ်င္တန္း တင္းမာေနတဲ့ျပႆနာရပ္ အနယ္ထိုင္သြားျခင္း၊ ႏွစ္ဆယ့္ တရာစုအတြင္း သိသာထင္ရွားစြာနဲ႔ တရွိန္တိုး ထိုးထြက္လာတဲ့ ေဒလီ ႏွင့္ ပီကင္းရဲ႕ အျပန္အလွန္ဆက္စပ္မႈဟာ အျခားေသာ တိုင္းႏိုင္ငံ ေတြႏွင့္ ဆက္ဆံရာဝယ္ ဘယ္ပံုနည္းနာျဖင့္ ထုဆစ္ ႐ုပ္လံုးေဖာ္ဖို႔ရာ သတ္မွတ္ျပ႒ာန္းထားျခင္း မရွိေသာ္ျငား ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံစလံုးအေနနဲ႔ ေရြးခ်ယ္ၿပီးသား ျဖစ္တန္ေကာင္းပါရဲ႕။
အာရွရပ္ဝန္းေဒသအတြင္း အိႏိၵယ-တ႐ုတ္ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံ တၿပိဳင္နက္တည္းဆိုသလို ခၽြန္းထြက္လာမႈကို တကယ္တမ္း ဆန္းစစ္ေျပာဆိုရ ေသာ္ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံစလံုး မတူကြဲျပားသည့္ လားရာအသြင္သဏၭာန္နဲ႔ တိုးတက္ ျဖစ္ထြန္း လာၾကသည့္အတြက္ အမ်ဳိးအမည္ ကြဲျပားျခားနား ေနသျဖင့္ ယွဥ္ၿပိဳင္ထိုးစစ္ဆင္ျခင္းကင္းမဲ့သည့္ အေနအထားတရပ္သို႔ ေရာက္ရွိလာျခင္းျဖစ္တယ္။ သမ႐ိုးက် စစ္ေရးစြမ္းေဆာင္ရည္ ျဖစ္တဲ့ hard ပါဝါပိုင္းဆိုင္ရာမွာ အိမ္နီးခ်င္း Himalayan ထက္ကိုတ႐ုတ္ျပည္ေက်ာ္လြန္ၿပီး ဦးေဆာင္ေရွ႕ေျပးေနတယ္လို႔ ဆိုရမယ္နဲ႔ တူတယ္။ ဤအေၾကာင္းခ်င္းရပ္ေတြဟာျဖင့္ အေလးထားကိုင္တြယ္လုပ္ေဆာင္ရမယ္ဆိုတဲ့ ေတြးေတာစဥ္းစား ဆံုးျဖတ္ခ်က္နဲ႔ တစ ထက္တစဆိုသလို တိုးျမႇင့္လုပ္ေဆာင္လာလိုက္ရာ အိႏိၵယ စစ္အသံုးစရိတ္ဟာျဖင့္ ၂ဝဝ၈-၂ဝဝ၉ ခုႏွစ္ တာကာလေတြမွာ စာရင္းဇ ယားေဖာ္ျပခ်က္ေတြအရ ၂၆.၈ ဘီလီယံ ေဒၚလာသံုးစြဲခဲ့ရာ (တခ်ဳိ႕ေသာ ပင္တဂြန္မွ ေဝဖန္အကဲျဖတ္ သံုးသပ္သူေတြရဲ႕ ခန္႔မွန္းတြက္ ဆခ်က္အရဆိုရင္ ေဒၚလာ ၁၄ဝ ဘီလီယံ နီးပါးသံုးစြဲထားေၾကာင္း၊) လက္ရွိကာလ တ႐ုတ္ျပည္ စစ္ဖက္ဆိုင္ရာအသံုးစရိတ္ နီးနီးသံုး စြဲထားတယ္လို႔ ဆိုရမွာပဲ။
(တ႐ုတ္ျပည္ဟာ ကန္႔လန္႔ကာခ်ထားရာဝယ္ နာမည္ဆိုးျဖင့္ ထင္ရွားေက်ာ္ေစာၿပီး တိုးျမႇင့္လာတဲ့ စစ္ဖက္ဆိုင္ရာ အသံုးစရိတ္ကို အ ေသးစိတ္ေဖာ္ျပဖို႔ရာ အလ်ဥ္းမရွိျခင္း၊) ကမၻာ့ကုလသမဂၢ လံုျခံဳေရးေကာင္စီ အၿမဲတမ္း အဖြဲ႔ဝင္ႏို္င္ငံျဖစ္ေသာ တ႐ုတ္ႏွင့္ အၿမဲတမ္းအဖြဲ႔ ဝင္ႏိုင္ငံမဟုတ္ေသာ အိႏိၵယႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံတို႔ဟာ လံုျခံဳေရးေကာင္စီကို ျပန္လည္အသက္သြင္းပံုေဖာ္ဖို႔ရာ အားေပးေထာက္ခံသမႈျပဳေသာ္ ျငား သံခင္းတမန္ခင္းနည္းနာေတြျဖင့္သာ သံုးႏႈန္းေျပာဆိုေနၾကတယ္။ အဆံုးသတ္ဆိုရေသာ္ စီးပြားေရးအင္အားအရာမွာ တ႐ုတ္ျပည္ အသီးအပြင့္ ေဝဆာ ေနခ်ိန္ၾကမွ အိႏိၵယႏိုင္ငံဟာ ႏွစ္ႏွစ္ဆယ္ၾကာပိတ္ဆို႔ထားသည့္ စီးပြားေရးလြတ္လပ္မႈတံခါးကို ဖြင့္လွစ္ၿပီး ကနဦးမွ ျပန္စေနရသည္ျဖစ္၍ ျပည္တြင္းအသားတင္ ထုတ္ကုန္တန္ဖိုးမွာ တ႐ုတ္ျပည္ ၄.၂ ထရီလီယံရွိေနခ်ိန္မွာ အိႏိၵယအေနျဖင့္ ၁.၂ ထရီလီယံသာရွိသျဖင့္ သံုးဆခြဲနီးပါးေနာက္ေကာက္ၾကေနတယ္လို႔ ဆိုရမွာပဲ။
soft ပါဝါကို အဝန္းအဝိုင္း တခုအတြင္းထက္ ပိုမိုက်ယ္ဝန္းသည့္ အခင္းအက်င္းေတြထဲ ဘက္ေပါင္းစံုမွ ခ်ျပ ခင္းက်င္းၾကည့္ေသာ္ စီးပြားေရး အင္အားအရာသက္သက္မွ်တင္မကပဲ ရံဖန္ရံခါတိုင္းဆိုသလို တျခားေသာ အျခင္းအရာေတြႏွင့္ ေပါင္းစပ္စုစည္းမႈရွိတာကို ေတြ႔ရတယ္။ Joseph Nye ေထာက္ျပေျပာဆိုခ်က္အရ တကယ့္ လက္ေတြ႔နယ္ပယ္မွာျဖင့္ တ႐ုတ္ soft ပါဝါ ထင္တာထက္ ပိုမိုနက္ ႐ိႈင္းက်ယ္ျပန္႔သည့္အတြက္ ပို႔ကုန္ အက်ဳိး ျဖစ္ထြန္းေအာင္ျမင္ျခင္းႏွင့္ စဥ္ဆက္မျပတ္ ဖြံ႔ၿဖိဳးတိုးတက္မႈႏႈန္းကို ထိန္းထားႏိုင္ျခင္း အစရွိသည့္ လုပ္ေဆာင္ခ်က္ေတြဟာျဖင့္ တိုးတက္ေရးလားရာဆီသို႔ ပီကင္း ဒီ့ထက္ပို ဦးတည္ေရြ႕လ်ား သြားႏို္င္ဖို႔ရာ ရင္းခံ အေၾကာင္းျခင္းရာ ေတြသာလ်င္ျဖစ္လိမ့္မယ္။
ယဥ္ေက်းမႈ ထံုးတမ္းအစဥ္အလာေတြႏွင့္ အေတြးအေခၚအယူအဆတရပ္သာလ်င္ တိုင္းႏိုင္ငံတရပ္ကို ၾသဇာသက္ေရာက္ ဆြဲေဆာင္ ႏိုင္စြမ္းရွိတယ္လို႔ soft ပါဝါနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ ေကာက္ႏႈတ္တင္ျပထားေလရဲ႕။ သတင္းနည္းပညာ ေခတ္ကာလသမယအတြင္း က်ေနာ္ တို႔ ေနထိုင္ၾကရာဝယ္ တိုင္းႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕အဆင္းသြင္ျပင္နဲ႔ သေကၤတအမွတ္အသား သ႐ုပ္ဟာျဖင့္ လိုလားႏွစ္သက္ဖြယ္ အေၾကာင္း ရင္းခံတရပ္ အျဖစ္တည္ရွိေနမွသာ တင့္တယ္သည့္ ဂုဏ္အဂၤါရပ္ေတြျဖင့္ ခန္႔ညားထယ္ဝါႏို္င္မွာျဖစ္သည့္အတြက္ အထူးသျဖင့္ တိုင္း ႏိုင္ငံႏွစ္ရပ္ဆိုတဲ့ ဆက္ဆံေရး နယ္နမိတ္ေဘာင္တရပ္အတြင္း ကန္႔သတ္မေနပဲ ေခတ္မီလူ႔အဖြဲ႔အစည္းတရပ္အျဖစ္ ရပ္တည္ႏိုင္ဖို႔ရာ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ အသိုက္အဝန္းရိပ္ျမံဳနဲ႔ ဆက္စပ္လုပ္ေဆာင္မွသာ သင့္ျမတ္ဆီေလ်ာ္မွာျဖစ္တယ္။
ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံစလံုး soft ပါဝါရဲ႕ အေရးပါအရာေရာက္ပံုကို ဂ႐ုျပဳမိသည့္အတြက္ ယဥ္ေက်းမႈျဖင့္ ဆြဲေဆာင္ သိမ္းသြင္းကိုင္တြယ္ရာဝယ္ အိႏိၵယရဲ႕ တ႐ုတ္ႏွင့္ မတူျခားနားသည့္ျဖစ္စဥ္မွာ ကမၻာတလႊားသို႔ ယဥ္ေက်းမႈ ပံုေဖာ္တင္ဆက္ရာတြင္ ပိုမိုအက်ဳိးျဖစ္ထြန္းေအာင္ျမင္မႈ ရွိတယ္လို႔ဆိုရမွာပဲ။ အိႏိၵယရဲ႕ ရွည္ၾကာလွၿပီျဖစ္တဲ့ သမိုင္းဆိုင္ရာရပ္တည္ခ်က္ အေမြအႏွစ္ေတြကေန သေႏၶတည္ေပါက္ဖြားလာ တဲ့ အေတြးအေခၚအယူအဆႏွင့္ တည္ၿငိမ္ေအးေဆးသည့္ ယဥ္ေက်းမႈဆိုင္ရာ အေမြအႏွစ္ေတြဟာ တစထက္တစဆိုသလို ေနရာအ ႏွံ႔ျပားစိမ့္ဝင္ စီးဆင္းသြားရျခင္း ရင္းခံအေၾကာင္းတရားျဖစ္စဥ္က ေရခံေျမခံ သဘာဝတရား ကိုယ္ထည္အတြင္းမွာကို ကိန္းေအာင္းခို ဝပ္ေနတဲ့ ယဥ္ေက်းမႈဆိုင္ရာ အေမြအႏွစ္ေတြသာလ်င္ျဖစ္တယ္။
အေစာပိုင္းရာစုႏွစ္ကာလေတြအတြင္း ဗီယက္နမ္အေပၚ တ႐ုတ္ ဝင္ေရာက္က်ဴးေက်ာ္သိမ္းပိုက္ျခင္းနဲ႔ ခိုင္းႏိႈင္း တင္ျပေျပာဆိုရေသာ္ ဗုဒၶဝါဒႏွင့္ ဟိႏၵဴအေတြးအေခၚအယူအဆတရပ္ အေရွ႕ေတာင္အာရွ သက္ဦးဆံပိုင္ ဘုရင္ေတြအေပၚ ယံုၾကည္သက္ဝင္ကိုးစားလာ ေအာင္ လုပ္ေဆာင္ရာဝယ္ တုတ္၊ ဓားရမ္းၿပီး မာန္ထဝင့္ႂကြားစြာနဲ႔ သိမ္းသြင္းခဲ့ျခင္း မဟုတ္ေသာ္ျငား ကုန္စည္ကူးသန္းေရာင္းဝယ္ျခင္း ႏွင့္ သာသနာ ပ်ံ႕ပြားဖို႔ရာအတြက္ ႂကြခ်ီ လုပ္ေဆာင္ျခင္းေတြသာ ရွိခဲ့တယ္။ ေရွးပေဝသဏီ ေခတ္ကာလေတြထဲမွအစျပဳ၍ အိႏိၵယဟာ အေရွ႕ေတာင္အာရွ ေဒသတြင္းသို႔ ႏွစ္ပရိေစၦဒမ်ားစြာ က်ဴးေက်ာ္သိမ္းပိုက္ထားျခင္း (သို႔) ထိုးေဖာက္ပ်ံ႕ႏွံ႔ ဝင္ေရာက္ႏိုင္ဖို႔ရာအတြက္ အတင္းအက်ပ္ ပံုေဖာ္လုပ္ေဆာင္ခဲ့ျခင္းမ်ဳိး ေရွာင္ၾကဥ္ခဲ့တာကို ဆိုလိုျခင္းျဖစ္တယ္။
ေထာင္စုႏွစ္ အေစာပိုင္းကာလမ်ားထဲက အာရွတိုက္တဝွမ္းသို႔ ဗုဒၶသာသနာေတာ္ ပ်ံ႕ပြားဖို႔ရာ အတြက္ လုပ္ေဆာင္ရာဝယ္ စာေပက်မ္း ဂန္ေတြရဲ႕ အေရးပါမႈ စြမ္းေဆာင္ရည္ ပါဝါကိုအေလးထားကိုင္တြယ္ၿပီး ယဥ္ေက်းမႈတရပ္လံုးကို ဆြဲေဆာင္သိမ္းသြင္းလိုက္ျခင္းျဖစ္ တယ္။ ထင္ရွားေပၚလြင္တဲ့ မတူျခားနားမႈေတြက တ႐ုတ္ကြန္ျဖဴးရွပ္ဝါဒဟာ ဗဟိုဦးစီးခ်ဳပ္ကိုင္မႈ တင္းက်ပ္ျခင္းႏွင့္ အထက္တန္းစား လူ႔မလိုင္အလႊာတရပ္ကို ေမြးထုတ္ေပးႏိုင္မွသာ အျခားေသာတိုင္းႏိုင္ငံေတြကို ဦးေဆာင္လႊမ္းမိုးႏို္င္မွာဟု က်ိန္းေသထင္ျမင္ယူဆ ထားေသာ္ျငား ေရွးယခင္က ဆင္းရဲသည့္ ဗီယက္နမ္လို တိုင္းႏိုင္ငံမ်ဳိးကိုေတာင္မွ ဆြဲေဆာင္သိမ္းသြင္းႏိုင္စြမ္း မရွိခဲ့ဘူး။
ယေန႔ေခတ္သစ္သမယ အိႏိၵယရဲ႕ soft ပါဝါကို အဓိပၸါယ္ဖြင့္ဆို သတ္မွတ္ရာဝယ္ ပမာျပဳကိုးကားေဖာ္ျပရေသာ္ Bollywood သာ လ်င္ ခိုင္းႏႈိင္းတင္စားရာအတြက္ အသင့္ေလ်ာ္ဆံုးလို႔ဆိုရလိမ့္မယ္။ မြန္ဘိုင္း ႐ုပ္ရွင္ ထုတ္လုပ္ေရးလုပ္ငန္းမွ ျဖန္႔ခ်ိတင္ဆက္မႈေတြဟာ ျဖင့္ ႀကီးက်ယ္ခန္႔ညားသည့္ အႏုပညာ ဖန္တီးမႈ စြမ္းရည္ေတြေၾကာင့္ ကမၻာ့ရပ္ဝန္းေဒသအေတာ္မ်ားမ်ား အထူးသျဖင့္ အေရွ႕အလယ္ ပိုင္း ေဒသေတြမွာ ႏွစ္ရွည္လမ်ားစြာ ေအာင္ျမင္ျဖစ္ထြန္း ေျခကုပ္ ေနရာယူထားႏိုင္ျခင္းျဖစ္တယ္။ သို႔ဆိုသည့္တိုင္ ၿပီးခဲ့သည့္ ဆယ္စု ႏွစ္လြန္ ကာလေတြအတြင္း ေနရာအႏွံ႔ဆိုသလုိကို Bollywood ႐ုပ္ ရွင္ကားေတြဟာ လမ္းတကာအႏွံ႔ ထိုးေဖာက္ဝင္ေရာက္ ပ်ံ႕ႏွံ႔ေန ေလရဲ႕။ လက္ရွိေအာင္ျမင္ ထင္ရွားေက်ာ္ၾကားသည့္ အိႏိၵယ ဗီဒီယို ေဖ်ာ္ေျဖ တင္ဆက္မႈမွ အႏုပညာ ကူးစက္ပ်ံ႕ႏွံ႔မႈဟာ တာဂ်စ္ကစၥ တန္ အမ်ဳိးသားတဦးရဲ႕ ရင္တြင္းခံစားခ်က္ကို လႈပ္ခါ ပစ္လိုက္သည့္ အတြက္ လူတိုင္းပါးစပ္ဖ်ားမွ မခ်ႏိုင္ရေလာက္ေအာင္ကို ေတးသြား သီဆို ညည္းတြား ေနလိုက္ၾကတာဟာျဖင့္ Bollywood သံစဥ္ေတး သြားေတြအေပၚ နားလည္လက္ခံႏိုင္စြမ္းမရွိသူ တိုင္းတပါးသားေတြ ေတာင္မွ ဟင္ဒီ ေတးသြားသံစဥ္ေတြအေပၚ ရင္တြင္းဝယ္စြဲၿငိထင္ က်န္ ေနရစ္ခဲ့ၾကရတယ္။
အိႏိၵယ ဘဝသ႐ုပ္ေဖာ္ ႐ုပ္သံဇတ္လမ္းတြဲျဖစ္သည့္ Kynunki Saas Bhi ကို Dari မွာ အျခားေသာ ဘာသာစကားျဖင့္ အစားထိုးတင္ ျပေဖ်ာ္ေျဖတင္ဆက္ျခင္းႏွင့္ အာဖဂန္နစၥတန္ Tolo ႐ုပ္သံအစီအစဥ္မွာ ထင္မွတ္မထားသည့္ အတိုင္းအတာတရပ္ထိ ထိုးေဖာက္ဝင္ ေရာက္သြားႏိုင္ျခင္းဟာ တမ်ဳိးသားလံုးနီးပါးကို ဆြဲေဆာင္ သိမ္းသြင္း လိုက္ႏိုင္ျခင္းျဖစ္ၿပီး ႐ုပ္ျမင္သံၾကားပိုင္ဆိုင္သည့္ အာဖဂန္မိသား စု ၉ဝ% ဟာ ဒီေဖ်ာ္ေျဖတင္ဆက္မႈေနာက္ ေကာက္ေကာက္ပါေအာင္လိုက္ေနၾကသည့္အတြက္ ညခင္းပိုင္း ဗလီတက္ဝတ္ျပဳဆု ေတာင္းျခင္းအမႈျပဳရာမွာ ပ်က္ကြက္မိ၍ အစၥလာမ္ဘာသာေရးတရားေဟာ ဆရာမူလာႀကီးေတြရဲ႕ အမ်က္ေဒါသထြက္ျခင္းနဲ႔ ရံဖန္ရံခါ ဆိုသလို ၾကံဳႀကိဳက္ရေလရဲ႕။
အာဖရိကတိုက္မွ ဆီနီေဂါႏွင့္ မာလီ ႏိုင္ငံေတြမွာၾကျပန္ေတာ့လည္း ေက်းလက္ေဒသေန လူထုဟာ ေနာက္ဆံုး တင္ဆက္႐ိုက္ကူးၿပီး စီးသည့္္ Bollywood ႐ုပ္သံဇာတ္လမ္းၾကည့္ႏိုင္ဖို႔အေရး ျပဇာတ္႐ံုသို႔ မိုင္နဲ႔ခ်ီၿပီး ေျခလ်င္ခရီးျဖင့္ အခါအခြင့္သင့္တိုင္းဆိုသလို သြား ေရာက္အားေပး ၾကည့္႐ႈၾကတယ္။ ဘာသာစကား ရင္းႏွီး ကၽြမ္းဝင္ နားလည္ျခင္းမရွိျခင္း (သို႔) ေရေျမသဘာဝ တူညီျခင္းမရွိပဲ ကြဲျပား ျခားနားတာက အခရာမက်ေသာ္ျငား ဇာတ္အိမ္ ဖြဲ႔စည္းပံု ေက်ာ႐ိုးမ႑ိဳင္ဟာ ခ်စ္ျခင္းေမတၲာကိုေဖာ္က်ဴးထားျခင္း၊ မိသားစုအဝန္းအ ဝိုင္းႏွင့္ ထိမ္းျမားလက္ထပ္ျခင္း အစရွိသည္တို႔ဟာျဖင့္ တေလာကလံုး သေဘာအသြင္ေဆာင္သည့္အတြက္ ပရိသတ္၏ ႏွလံုးအိမ္ကို လႈပ္ခါ ႏိုင္စြမ္းရွိျခင္းနဲ႔ ၿပိဳးျပက္ထည္ဝါလွသည့္ ကႀကိဳးကကြက္ေတြျဖင့္ တင္ဆက္ေဖ်ာ္ေျဖထားျခင္း၊ ႐ိုးရာဓေလ့ ဆင္ျမန္းဝတ္ဆင္ၿပီး ကျပအသံုးေတာ္ခံတင္ဆက္ထားျခင္းႏွင့္ ေတးသြားစာသားႏွင့္ သီဆိုရင့္က်ဴးပံုဟာ ဓာတ္ရွင္ၾကည့္ပရိသတ္ရဲ႕ ႏွလံုးစိတ္ဝမ္းကို ေျပ ေပ်ာက္ေစႏိုင္သည့္အေၾကာင္းခ်င္း ဂုဏ္အဂၤါရပ္ေတြေၾကာင့္ ဥေရာပ ႐ုပ္သံဇာတ္လမ္းေတြထက္စာရင္ ေရွ႕ေျခတလွမ္းေျပးေနျခင္း ျဖစ္တယ္။
ဖြံ႔ၿဖိဳးဆဲႏိုင္ငံေတြမွာ အိႏိၵယယဥ္ေက်းမႈ ၾသဇာလႊမ္းမိုး သက္ေရာက္မႈ အားေလ်ာ့နည္းသည္ဆိုသည့္တိုင္ အိႏိၵယ ႏြယ္ဖြား စာေရးဆရာ ေတြျဖစ္တဲ့ Vikram Seth, Amitav Ghosh ႏွင့္ Arundhati Roy တို႔ရဲ႕အဂၤလိပ္လို ေရးသား ထုတ္ေဝသည့္ ဂႏၶဝင္ဝတၴဳေတြဟာျဖင့္ ကမၻာတဝွမ္း လူ ႀကိဳက္မ်ား ေအာင္ျမင္ေက်ာ္ၾကားတယ္လို႔ ဆိုရမယ္။ ႐ုပ္ ရွင္႐ိုက္ကူးထုတ္လုပ္ရာမွာ ေအာင္ျမင္ထင္ရွားသည့္ အိႏိၵ ယ အမ်ဳိးသမီး ဒါ႐ိုက္တာေတြျဖစ္ၾကတဲ့ Mira Nairႏွင့္ Deepa Mehta တို႔ရဲ႕တင္ဆက္ျပသပံုေတြဟာ လက္ေတြ႔ ဘဝကို ထင္ဟပ္ေစသည့္ ေၾကာင္းက်ဳိးခိုင္လံုေသာ ေဖ်ာ္ ေျဖမႈမ်ဳိးျဖင့္သာ အႏုပညာတရပ္ကို ပံုေဖာ္ထုဆစ္ထား ျခင္းျဖစ္တယ္။ ၿပီးခဲ့သည့္ႏွစ္ အကယ္ဒမီ ဆုလက္ခံရရွိ ခဲ့သည့္ Slumdog Millionnaire ဇာတ္ကားရဲ႕ေအာင္ျမင္မႈကို ခြဲျခမ္းစိတ္ျဖာသံုးသပ္ၾကည့္ရင္ ဂုဏ္ယူဝင့္ႂကြားရေလာက္ေအာင္ သပ္ ရပ္တင့္တယ္ၿပီး လြန္က်ဴးစြာျဖင့္ ဇာတ္အိမ္ဖြဲ႔စည္းတည္ေဆာက္ထားျခင္းမ်ဳိး မရွိသည့္တိုင္ အေကာင္း အဆိုး ေရာေထြးေနသည့္ အိႏိၵ ယ မ်က္ေမွာက္ကာလ အေနအထားတရပ္ကို ႐ုပ္လံုးေဖာ္သည့္အျပင္ တရားစီရင္ေရး ႏွလံုးသည္းပြတ္အူတိုင္ကို လႈပ္ခါရမ္းႏိုင္စြမ္း ရွိတာကေတာ့ အမွန္ပဲလို႔ဆိုရမွာပဲ။
ဆက္ရန္…
Reference: India’s Soft Power Advantage
Saturday,10 October 2009
http://www.naytthit.com/internationalnews/Nov09/mz_nov19.html
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
15-11-09 India-Myanmar ties: A strategic perspective
By Brig Gurmeet Kanwal (retd)
Recent developments indicate that the international community has initiated the first steps to gradually open up to Myanmar. Ms Aung San Suu Kyi, perhaps the most famous prisoner in the world after Nelson Mandela, has met Western diplomats in Yangon. Speculation is rife that sanctions may soon be lifted.
India’s relations with Myanmar, a devoutly Buddhist country, have been traditionally close and friendly. Geographically, India and Myanmar share a long land and maritime boundary, including in the area of the strategically important Andaman and Nicobar islands where the two closest Indian and Myanmarese islands are barely 30 km apart.
Myanmarese ports provide India the shortest approach route to several of India’s north-eastern states.
India’s national interest lies in a strong and stable Myanmar that observes strict neutrality between India and China and cooperates with India in the common fight against the insurgencies raging in the border areas of both the countries. For India, Myanmar is a bridge with Southeast Asia. In fact, it is a bridge between all the countries comprising the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC – Myanmar has observer status) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
The first decade of the 21st century has witnessed growing strategic engagement between India and Myanmar. According to the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, relations with Myanmar have become truly multi-faceted… “with cooperation in a range of developmental and other projects in the areas of roads, power, hydro-carbon, oil refinery, transmission lines, telecommunications and information technology.”
The key drivers of the India-Myanmar strategic relationship are cooperation in counter-insurgency operations and the need for India to ensure that Myanmar is not driven into Chinese arms through Indian neglect of its security concerns and arms requirements. Indian insurgent groups (the NSCN, ULFA and Manipur rebels among others) have been operating out of bases in the weakly controlled areas across the borders of the Indian states of Manipur and Mizoram and Myanmarese rebels, primarily the Chins and the Arakanese, have often taken shelter on the Indian side.
It is in the interest of both the countries to cooperate with each other to fight these insurgent groups in a coordinated manner.
In April-May 1995, during Operation Golden Bird, a joint operation, approximately 40 insurgents were been killed and a huge cache of arms was recovered. Since then, the two armies have been cooperating with each other for mutual benefit.
In November 2001, the Myanmar Army had raided several Manipuri rebel bases, rounded up almost 200 rebels and recovered 1,500 guns. India-Myanmar cooperation is also essential to control narcotics trafficking and to curb the proliferation of small arms in the region.
China has made rapid advances into Myanmar and established close political, military and economic relations. Myanmar provides China the shortest land route access to the northern Indian Ocean. China has signed a long-term agreement with Myanmar for the exploitation of its hydrocarbon reserves and for the transportation of oil and gas through a 1,100 km overland pipeline from Kyaukryu port in Myanmar to the border city of Ruili in Yunnan.
This pipeline will reduce the distance by 1,200 km and make China less dependent on the Malacca Straits. China is also developing Sittwe as a commercial port on the west coast. It is natural that Chinese naval activity in the Bay of Bengal will soon follow.
China has also been stepping up arms sales to Myanmar as other nations, including India, are loathe to sell offensive military hardware to the country. China is reported to have told Myanmar to take artillery guns from North Korea in return for rice.
Radars have been reported to have been erected on Myanmar’s west coast to monitor Indian missile tests. This is not a positive development as it will further increase Myanmar’s dependency on China. However, indications from the military regime are that it does not want China to exercise undue influence in Myanmar’s internal affairs.
Reports of Myanmar’s quest for the acquisition of nuclear weapons from North Korea (with Chinese and Pakistani help), though uncorroborated, are of concern to India as nuclear weapons in the hands of another military regime would not be conducive to long-term strategic stability in South Asia.
If the news about Myanmar’s nuclear ambitions is true, the international community must adopt all measures to necessary to prevent the emergence of another nuclear weapon state in the region.
While India is concerned with the slow pace of progress on the issue of national reconciliation and the consequent delay in installing a democratically elected government in power in Yangon, the strategic scenario compels India to balance its security concerns with its support for the emergence of democratic rule.
It is only through close engagement that India can promote leverages with the ruling regime to nudge it gently towards national reconciliation. India must also increase its economic footprint in Myanmar, particularly in areas that are contiguous to India.
The military regime is firmly entrenched in power — the monks’ agitation notwithstanding. Sanctions and other diplomatic pressures have not worked in the past and are unlikely to work in the future.
The fear psychosis of Myanmar’s military junta is being exploited by China and this cannot be in the interest of either India or any of the other democracies of the free world. It is important to end Myanmar’s isolation and to allay its fears that the whole world is ganging up against it.
India and the other regional powers can play a positive role in the re-entry of Myanmar into the international mainstream so that it can be nudged towards becoming a strong democracy that is also mature and responsible and willing to play by the rules and traditions governing international relations.
Perhaps multi-national talks, which include India, China, Japan, ASEAN and other stakeholders, would be the best way forward. At least in the initial stages it may be prudent for the US to stay away from such talks.
The writer is Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies, New Delhi
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20091115/edit.htm#1
Monday, November 16, 2009
China’s Policy Towards Myanmar
In the history of the Peoples Republic of China (PRC), there had always been firm links between its domestic goals and foreign policy. In the Mao Zedong era, the national goal of “self reliant development” was accompanied by an external strategy of “leaning to one side” i.e. with socialist allies, in order to resist “imperialist” interventions in China. China’s internal priorities underwent a major change in the post-1978 period, with veteran leader Deng Xiaoping initiating a path of “socialism with Chinese characteristics”. Correspondingly a foreign policy based on ‘open-door, anti-hegemony and independence’ principles was evolved. Basically, this continues till today, with some nuanced positions introduced by the post-Deng leadership. President Jiang Zemin, visualising three major tasks for the country – modernisation, unification of Taiwan and safeguarding world peace, fine-tuned Deng’s foreign policy, calling it as an “independent foreign policy of peace”. Under the regime of his successor Hu Jintao, China’s GDP-centric development model hitherto adopted, has been replaced by one aiming at balanced development leading to the creation of a “harmonious socialist society” at home. This is being matched by a foreign policy based on the concept of “harmonious world” which seeks to achieve a ‘win-win situation in international relations’. It was left to the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao to unambiguously elucidate the linkage between the PRC’s domestic and foreign policy goals. He has said, “What China needs for its development first and foremost is an international environment of long term stability and a stable surrounding environment” . A “peaceful periphery” has thus emerged as a pre-requisite for realisation of China’s modernisation task and the PRC’s policy specifically towards its neighbour, Myanmar, needs to be understood in that context.
What are the motivating factors behind China’s policy to strengthen economic, political and military ties with Myanmar? Firstly, as pointed out above, China perceives that stability in Myanmar is essential for its development and that the same is contributing to the security of its borders with Myanmar where a sizeable ethnic Chinese population live. Second come the economic imperatives for China based on the need to tap Myanmar’s rich energy resources to benefit its modernisation efforts. Beijing’s energy security requirements are compelling it to build pipelines from Myanmar to China’s bordering Yunnan province as an alternative to the shipping of resources through piracy-prone Malacca Straits, through which much of energy requirements from abroad are being shipped. Thirdly, the strategic location of Myanmar has become important for China. The PRC’s port construction activities in Myanmar are part of its “string of pearls” strategy aimed at protecting the sea-lanes of communication (SLOC) in the region, vital for the country’s energy imports. Whether such strategy would ultimately lead to China’s projection of naval power into the Indian Ocean, is anybody’s guess.
Given the motivating factors as above, it is not surprising that China is actively wooing Myanmar with energy contracts, trade deals and regular, substantial economic assistance, not to speak of its political support including blocking sanctions against Myanmar in the United Nations and other international bodies on issues like human rights. As a notable instance, Beijing is downplaying the negative impact coming from some bilateral political tensions, which have arisen of late. It has cautiously responded to the Myanmar army’s attacks in August 2009 on the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA) consisting of ethnic Chinese in Kokang region bordering China, which resulted in an influx of refugees into the Chinese territory. This clearly shows that Myanmar continues to be important for China.
Energy cooperation occupies a prominent place in China-Myanmar relations. It is natural that Myanmar, with proven oil and gas reserves, has emerged as China’s important target in terms of energy sources. Demonstrating the same has been the January 2007 agreement between the PRC’s State-owned CNPC and the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) providing for Chinese exploration of oil and gas at an area of approximately 10,000 square kilometres off the Arakan coast. The PRC signed a contract with Myanmar worth US$ 2.5 billion in the same year on building a 2000- km cross border oil and gas pipeline, linking the latter’s south-western port of Sittwe with Chongqing municipality in south-western China after passing through Ruili and Kunming (both in Yunnan) and Guizhou province. The political nature of the contract became clear, as its signing closely followed the Chinese veto of a punitive resolution in the UNSC against Myanmar on human rights issue. The pipeline’s construction is to start in the first half of 2009 as part of Yunnan’s overall energy development plan for the year worth US$ 15.9 billion (72 billion Yuan). Once completed, it would strengthen China’s access to Myanmar’s rich energy reserves and more importantly, would reduce the level of China’s dependence on the piracy-prone Malacca Straits, which also involves long distances, for energy transport.
Worth paying attention is also China-Myanmar cooperation in infrastructure building. China is also to help in the development of hydroelectric projects in Myanmar . A China- Myanmar-Bangladesh tri-nation road network is also being planned. Beijing has a transport project in Myanmar, known as ‘Irrawaddy corridor’ which envisages establishment of road links between China’s Yunnan province with Myanmar and a railway connection between Kunming (China) and Lashio (Northern Myanmar). The corridor is expected to facilitate the economic development of the three southwestern provinces of China – Sichuan, Guizhou and Yunnan, through achieving their connectivity with Myanmar.
On China’s trade with Myanmar, it is on the rise concomitant with their deepening energy ties. According to Chinese official statistics, from January to December in 2008, bilateral trade between the two nations stood at US$ 2.626 billion, a rise of 26.4 percent from the corresponding period in 2007. China has become the No.4 foreign investor in Myanmar as against its No.6 rank in the past.
Military cooperation is another area defining China-Myanmar ties. China is also wooing Myanmar with arms sales. Its military supplies to Myanmar include F-7 fighters, K-8 Trainer aircraft, C-801 Ship-to-Ship missiles and ship-borne diesel engines for Chinese naval patrol ships.
Politically, China’s attitude towards Myanmar seems to have undergone a modification since 2006. The Chinese exhortation to Myanmarese Junta to move towards political reforms and adopt a less confrontational course with the UN (State Councillor Tang Jiaxuan, Feb 2007) is an example. This, however, does not mean any basic change in the Chinese position of opposing sanctions against Myanmar; such a stand is being viewed as reflecting the PRC’s new approach of ‘real politic’ towards Myanmar in recognition of the presence and prominence of the regional normative structure and its firm support to it .
China is however, increasingly coming under compulsions to respond to latest political trends emerging in Myanmar. The first is the apparent US policy shift towards Myanmar. The US Assistant Secretary of State, Kurt Campbell, is to pay a visit to Myanmar in the near future to hold discussions with the military Junta besides holding talks with pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi as well as representatives from ethnic communities. Strong voices in the US prefer an end to the US policy of isolation towards Myanmar in the past few decades, which had resulted in China’s growing political and commercial influence in Myanmar. Suu Kyi has met Junta’s liaison officer Aung Kyi following which she was allowed to meet with representatives from the US, Australia and the European Union. Prime Minister Thein Sein is expected to take part in the APEC Summit, scheduled in Singapore in November 2009, when he may attend a meeting between President Obama and the ASEAN leaders. Beijing should be closely watching the shifting US policy towards Myanmar. For it, a US-Myanmar détente will definitely be against China’s strategic interests. Some PRC officials are even reportedly suspecting the US hand behind the aforesaid Myanmar army’s attack against Kokang rebels in August 2009, linking it with the visit of US Senator Jim Webb to Myanmar . Secondly, China may have to respond to some internal developments in Myanmar. Elections in Myanmar are in the offing in 2010 and the country will have a new constitution. Democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi has been disqualified from participating in the election and the army is to have 25 per cent of the parliamentary seats reserved for it.
Beijing may also have to deal with the hypothetical situation concerning Myanmar – North Korea nuclear co-operation. Based on information given by Burmese defectors, some Australian academicians suggested in August 2009 that Burma might be constructing two nuclear reactors – one with Russian assistance under IAEA safeguards and the other with North Korean assistance in Naung Laing near Mandalay. If the information is true Myanmar – ASEAN relations may come under strains, which, in turn, will affect China-Myanmar ties.
The key question now is whether China’s policy towards Myanmar can change under the new situation? What we can say at the moment is that basically, Beijing would continue to support the military rulers, while at the same time encouraging the reconciliation process in Myanmar, but at terms fixed by the Junta. A signal to this effect, can be seen in Premier Wen Jiabao’s hopes for Myanmar realising ‘stability, reconciliation and development’, expressed during his talks with his Myanmar counterpart, Thein Sein (Hua Hin, 24 October 2009). China would keenly watch the internal dynamics in Myanmar from now on, particularly the developing power-equation between the Junta and democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. On the question of US role in Myanmar, Beijing can certainly be expected to be uneasy for strategic reasons.
China’s evolving policy towards Myanmar needs to be studied in the overall context of the former’s latest perceptions on ties with neighbouring nations. As Beijing sees, the negative factors affecting such ties include (i) the ‘historical legacy’ concerning China’s border issues with neighbouring countries, for e.g. Sino-Indian border issue, the Diaoyu (Senkakus) issue with Japan and the South China Sea question. Also, some countries are attempting to actually occupy the disputed areas taking advantage of China’s pacifist policy, so as to create a fait accompli against China in self-interest and strengthen their positions in the border talks, (ii) the changes in the balance of power in the region as a result of China’s rise, for e.g. Japan’s leading economic status in East Asia is getting challenged and to restrict China’s growing influence, it is developing a joint approach with other countries. Also, India is not convinced about China’s rise and so, looking from a political and security point of view, the unresolved border issue dividing them would mean that their ties cannot become quiet within a certain period in future and (iii) The US alliance system, comprising Japan, South Korea, and Australia and partnerships with the Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, India and Pakistan; the US wants to prevent China’s rise and its impact on China’s neighbourhood environment cannot be ignored, though there is a degree of uncertainty in this regard. China wants to remove such negative factors through improving strategic relations with its neighbours giving up its present overemphasis on economic cooperation with the latter. This implies in particular that China will promote ‘strategic’ relation with Myanmar, irrespective of changes that are happening there.
Implications for India
India became the fifth largest consumer of oil in the world during 2006. As its economy grows, the country’s energy consumption is rising; a 50% increase in 2015 is estimated, based on 2005 levels; with no prospects of improvement in the availability of domestic resources, India may have to continue its reliance on imports from abroad. Imports now contribute to 70% of the oil consumed in the country. According to International Energy Agency’s survey, by 2030, oil imports may rise to 90% and gas imports to 40% to meet India’s energy demand. To meet its future energy requirements, India’s partnerships with other countries, which have surplus energy, are necessary. Signing of India-US civil nuclear energy cooperation agreement has been a step to increase the share of non-fossil fuel based energy resources in India’s energy mix. The overall energy situation in India is in essence marked, like in China, by the continuing gap domestically between the energy supply and demand; it is the primary reason for India’s reaching out to the world energy markets in order to get uninterrupted resource supplies essential for the country’s sustainable economic growth. In such a scenario, relations with Myanmar, assume importance for India.
In pursuing its energy drive abroad, New Delhi no doubt faces a tough challenge, against the background of India’s simultaneous rise along with China, a nation conducting an aggressive resource hunt, backed by its active diplomacy through out the world. A Sino-Indian competition in accessing overseas resources looks natural. Their targets are almost the same resource -rich regions, particularly their respective neighbourhood that offers advantages in terms of logistics and cost (Iran, Bangladesh and Myanmar for India, and Russia, Central Asia and Myanmar for China). It would be important for New Delhi to watch for the likely commercial and strategic impact of Beijing’s resource diplomacy on its foreign relations, particularly with energy –rich Myanmar and formulate suitable responses.
India should note that China’s success in accessing resources abroad including in Myanmar, has been due to its strategy of mixing its energy search overseas with trade, aid, diplomacy and arms sales; this point should not be missed by India when it develops relations with Myanmar and other resource-rich nations. Also, India- China energy relations themselves require a further boost. The two sides have already signed a memorandum for enhancing cooperation in the field of oil and natural gas in January 2006. Through their “Shared Vision” declaration (Beijing, 14 January 2008), both have expressed their commitment to make joint efforts to diversify the global energy mix and enhance the share of clean and renewable energy, so as to meet the energy requirements of all countries. Also, Beijing has offered New Delhi cooperation in the civil nuclear energy sector, for the first time.
Beijing is developing military capabilities for use in conflict over resources or disputed territories. It is promoting its investment in military programmes designed to improve ‘extended range projection’. China’s ‘string of pearls’ strategy is meant to establish connectivity between it and the oil sources in the Middle East via India’s neighbourhood. China is making efforts to engage its South Asia neighbours in military and economic fields. Beijing also wants to control the Indian Ocean, a vital transit route for energy import sources from West Asia and Africa. It considers its presence in the Indian Ocean as a strategic leverage against India. The above have naturally become New Delhi’s concerns, requiring it to be watchful of the strategic implications of the same.
In the Asia-Pacific region, India’s counter-strategy vis-à-vis China is already becoming evident. New Delhi is projecting its own power in the region, through naval deployments and maritime diplomacy. It is trying to neutralise the growing Chinese influence in Myanmar through its own initiatives (for e.g. India-Myanmar Kaladan river transportation agreements of April 2008, involving India’s upgradation of Sittwe, a place for refuelling for China’s naval forces, to be connected to Eastern India ports). It is taking steps to expand its reach to areas close to the Malacca Strait. (For e.g., INS Viraat went to the Strait in 2005 and India and other powers held military exercises in an area close to the Strait in September 2007). India’s relations with South China Sea littorals have also grown, to the consternation of Beijing. China specifically objected to Vietnam’s grant of exploratory rights to India near the disputed Paracel islands. India considers its presence in South China Sea as deterrent against Beijing. India is also actively pursuing ‘naval diplomacy’ by intensifying its naval cooperation with littoral nations like Myanmar, Iran and Indonesia. Specifically important has been the beginning of India-Maldives cooperation in patrolling waters along the latter’s Exclusive Economic Zone.
India’s interests lie in ‘engaging’ China both bilaterally and globally, while at the same adopting policies to protect the country’s strategic interests in the region including in Myanmar. New Delhi should be prepared to adopt suitable new policies to deal with the changing political situation in Myanmar. India should build strategic deterrence against China, by seeking strong ties with countries like Japan, Vietnam and Southeast Asian nations, which are all wary of the growing Chinese military strength. India should use its defence relationship with the US for balancing China’s military rise, without being seen as an US ally. In short, the growth in India’s involvement in the wider East Asia including Myanmar under its Look East policy is bound to result in competition with China. India’s foreign policy should aim at reducing any aggravation in this competition, particularly in the context of the continuing core issues still dividing them like the boundary problem. Needless to say that China has an equal responsibility in this regard.
(This formed the basis of a presentation made by Mr.D.S.Rajan, Director, Chennai Centre for China Studies, at a joint seminar organised by the Department of Politics and Public Administration of the University of Madras and the Center for Asia Studies at Chennai on 29 October, 2009).
http://www.c3sindia.org/india/1047
14-11-09 India, US and Burma's Unity
ႈIndian Express
C Raja Mohan
India has every reason to welcome US President Barack Obama's new engagement with the Burmese government that could help end the prolonged international isolation of our eastern neighbour so critical to our internal security and Asian strategy.
For years now Delhi had cautioned Washington against the policy of isolating Burma and urged the US to recognise the genuine insecurities of the Burmese ruling elite. In a speech at Tokyo that set the tone for his first presidential tour of Asia, Obama has made a long overdue political gesture to Burma's military rulers.
In explicitly underlining the American support for Burma's territorial integrity, Obama was offering reassurance to the Generals who see themselves as the sole custodians of the nation's unity and fear that political reform might unleash uncontrollable ethnic warfare.
Even the most trenchant critics of Burmese military rule have argued that Western support for the nation's unity and territorial integrity must be an early critical step in any international effort to promote internal political change.
Ads by Google HDFC Bank Savings Account Open A Savings Account And Get Get Maximum Saving Benefits . ApplyHDFCBank-Savings.co.Aung San Suu Kyi US envoys meet Suu Kyi, Burmese leaders.www.France24.com/AunTimes of india Do you think you are a Business Champion? Then Enter FedEx IBL!InternationalBusines
In Tokyo, Obama did precisely that. "We support a Burma that is unified, peaceful, prosperous, and democratic. And as Burma moves in that direction, a better relationship with the United States is possible," Obama said in Tokyo.
Obama's public emphasis on Burma's national unity is believed to be part of the broader political framework for the bilateral engagement that had been negotiated in recent weeks between the two sides.
The Obama Administration has also consulted Aung San Suu Kyi, who is the voice of Burma's democratic aspirations in reversing the previous American policies. This framework is said to lay out a series of reciprocal actions that will lead to the end of US and Western sanctions against Burma.
In Tokyo, Obama argued that "despite years of good intentions, neither sanctions by the US nor engagement by others succeeded in improving the lives of the Burmese people." "So we are now communicating directly with the leadership to make it clear that existing sanctions will remain until there are concrete steps toward democratic reform," Obama declared.
The US President also laid out the expectations from the American side for lifting the sanctions: "There are clear steps that must be taken--the unconditional release of all political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi; an end to conflicts with minority groups; and a genuine dialogue between the government, the democratic opposition and minority groups on a shared vision for the future".
With the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) endorsing Obama's initiative, the stage is set for a new phase in Burma's international relations. As the rest of the world returns to Burma, India can more effectively contribute to its neighbour's political and economic modernisation.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india-us-and-burmas-unity/541515/2
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Magic of Tooth Relic
Burma and Sri Lanka has some shared facts such as colonialism, Theravada Buddhism, Non-allied Movement, and protracted armed resistance by minority.
Apart from that Than Shwe’s trip to Venerable Island is not significant like General Aung San’s visit to Kandy to sign an agreement with Lord Mountbatten in September 1945.
His visit is somewhat noteworthy. Burmese military dictator rarely goes out of his den as he has very limited friends who are willingly to lay out red carpet. The chosen timing is also shrewd because his counterpart President Mahinda Rajapaksa has completed his use of military might to vanquish LTTE. That admires Than Shwe who is yet to be successful to do so. The difference between Tamil resistance and ethnic nationalities’ fight in Burma is use of terrorist means. Hereditarily Burmese peoples are not like Tamils or Al-Qa’ida. Throughout history there is no suicide bomber or assassin who conducts the mission outside Burma. All armed resistant groups in Burma chose only armed targets not civilians.
Than Shwe’s visit to Sri Lanka was reciprocal to Mahinda Rajapaksa’s June visit marking the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations. It was preceded by Thein Sein visit in August 2007 and Nyan Win in March this year and all were after Ratnasiri Wickramanayaka’s Burma trip in 2006. In fact, between Burma and Sri Lanka it can be said of elephant tusker diplomacy. So not only leaders but elephants also will be travelling from Burma to Sri Lanka.
There are reports that Sri Lanka got humanitarian as well as military hardware assistance through Burma waters. Therefore just after that historic victorious operation against LTTE, Mahinda Rajapaksa flew to Naypyidaw to express gratitude to senior General Than Shwe and visited Shwedagon Pagoda. Then Burmese tyrant got an opportunity to go abroad after 5 years and to visit the Temple of the Tooth where the Sacred Tooth Relic of Buddha is being enshrined. Thanks to Buddhism and those two Heads of the State from Buddhist dominated nations become real friends in need.
General Than Shwe also needs fresh air as he has been occupied with exit strategy as 2010 is drawing nearer and nearer. While the western bloc though engaging directly is not going to accept the junta’s plan of the election next year as it is, So Than Shwe has to collect signatures from possible allies. Sri Lanka is one of them.
The visit also signifies because it is shortly after the Burmese Buddhist monks have had religious boycott against the personals of the regime for the third time. Than Shwe wants to show that he nonetheless has Buddhist monks and a Buddhist president on his side in a foreign country. This is outrage to Burmese Buddhist monks.
While Than Shwe enjoyed traditional dances here and there, Mangala Pinsiri Samawareera, former Foreign Affairs Minister and the leader of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party called Than Shwe as the dictator who killed over 138 Buddhist monks in cold blood. Thanks to Sri Lanka democracy.
The coincidence or similarity of two countries was news reports of top level military leaders of both countries. Lt. General Thiha Thura Tin Aung Myint Oo, the Secretary 1 and Minister of Military Affairs of Burma was clipped intelligent chief wings and Sri Lanka General Sarath Fonseka, Chief of Defense Staff was permitted to retire.
It can be concluded that Than Shwe tries to seek blessing of the most sacred Tooth Relic for 2010 election as he knows by hook or by crook means is not enough. In Burmese it is called use of both Superior and Inferior means.
Dr. Tint Swe
14-11-09
Saturday, November 14, 2009
13-11-09 HRW Calls on India to Change its Burma Policy
Sources: Irrawaddy News
November 13, 2009: A leading human rights group says India should do more to promote democracy in Burma, despite its concerns about China’s growing influence in the Southeast Asian country.
At a press conference in New Delhi on Thursday, New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) said that India, as the world’s most populous democratic country, should consider the good of the people of Burma when dealing with the country’s ruling junta.
“The Indian government is saying that it will support democracy in Burma, but it isn’t doing much to promote that. We think that should change,” said Brad Adams, HRW’s executive director for Asia.
He said that India should export its democracy, press freedom and strong civil society to Burma instead of competing with China for influence over the country’s military leaders.
“We want the Indian government to have a much more proactive foreign policy in promoting democracy in Burma. It’s a major neighbor and a major influence, but it has been quiet for the last 10 or 15 years,” said Adams, describing the country’s Burma policy as “primitive.”
Critics say that New Delhi’s relations with Burma are narrowly focused on improving trade and combating insurgents in India’s restive northeastern border areas. India has also come under fire for its silence on the continuing detention of democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners.
Adams also criticized the Burmese junta for clinging to power since losing the country’s last national election in 1990. He highlighted the regime’s brutal crackdown on monk-led protests in 2007, and condemned its efforts to impose a military-drafted Constitution on Burma through last year’s rigged referendum and an election slated for next year.
The 2010 election will not be free and fair unless everything about it is changed. [The junta] lost the 1990 election, and again in 2008, they said that more than 90 percent accepted the Constitution. It’s not credible. It’s a joke,” he said.
Burmese activists who attended the meeting said they also hoped to see changes in the relationship between India and Burma.
“We hope the meeting will have some effect on the Burma issue because [Adams] can tell Indian policymakers that it is more beneficial for the Indian government to promote democracy in Burma,” said Thin Thin Aung, presidium board member of the Women’s League of Burma.
In the early 1990s, India actively supported democratization in Burma, but later changed course with its “Look East” policy, designed to counter Chinese influence in Southeast Asia.
Ties between Burma and India have strengthened steadily since 1993. India is currently the fourth largest investor in Burma, after China, Singapore and Thailand.
Burmese official statistics show that Burma-India bilateral trade reached US $995 million in 2007-08, with Burma’s exports to India accounting for $810 million.
In October, Indian Army Chief Gen Deepak Kapoor visited Burma and met junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe.
The two countries reached an agreement to begin work on the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project, including the Sittwe seaport in Arakan State, in December. India will provide $117 million.
13-11-09 Closing Ceremony of BCRC Sport Festival for Free Burma
.JPG)
Venue: C-Block, DDA ground, Vikas Puri, New Delhi
Opening Ceremony: 11 November 2009 at 10:30 AM
Chief Guest: Hon’ble Shri Nand Kishore, MLA Vikas Puri
Closing Ceremony cum Prizes distribution: 13 November 2009 at 3:30 PM
Chief Guest: Hon’ble Shri Mahabal Mishra, MP West Delhi
Special guests: Dr. Tint Swe (NCGUB) and Jan Kreuter (Czech embassy)
Friday, November 13, 2009
13-11-09 သူပုန္ ၃၄ ဦးအမႈတြင္ အေဝးေရာက္ အစိုးရ သက္ေသထြက္ဆို
မံုပီး - နယူးေဒလီ (မဇၩိမ)
ေသာၾကာေန႔၊ ႏုိဝင္ဘာလ 13 ရက္ 2009 ခုႏွစ္
ကိုလ္ကာတာၿမိဳ႕ စက္ရွင္တရားသူႀကီး႐ုံးတြင္ အမႈရင္ဆိုင္ေနရေသာ ျမန္မာသူပုန္ ၃၄ ဦး သည္ လြတ္ေျမာက္ေရး အတြက္ တိုက္ပြဲဝင္ေနသူမ်ားသာ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း အေဝးေရာက္ အစိုးရအဖြဲ႔ျဖစ္ေသာ ျပည္ေထာင္စုျမန္မာႏို္င္ငံ အမ်ဳိးသား ညြန္႔ေပါင္းအစိုးရ (NCGUB)၏ ကိုယ္စားလွယ္က သက္ေသအျဖစ္ ထြက္ဆိုခဲ့သည္။
NCGUB မွ နယူးေဒလီအေျခစိုက္ ဝန္ႀကီး ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြက ၾကာသပေတးေန႔က တရား႐ုံးတြင္ ထြက္ဆိုရာ၌ ေလာေလာဆယ္ ကိုလ္ကာတာၿမိဳ႕ ပရက္စီဒင္စီ (Presidency) အက်ဥ္းေထာင္တြင္ ခ်ဳပ္ေႏွာင္ခံေနရေသာ ရခိုင္ႏွင့္ကရင္ လူမ်ဳိး ၃၄ ဦးသည္ ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဆန္႔က်င္တုိက္ခိုက္ တိုက္ပြဲဝင္ေနသည့္ လြတ္ေျမာက္ေရး တိုက္ပြဲဝင္ေနသူမ်ား ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ေျပာဆိုသြားသည္။
`အိႏၵိယတရားေရး စနစ္က ဒီ ၃၄ ဦးအမႈကို စံုစမ္းစစ္ေဆးဖို႔ ပ်က္ကြက္မွာ မဟုတ္သလို တရားမွ်တစြာနဲ႔ ဆံုးျဖတ္ေပးလိမ့္မယ္လို႔ က်ေနာ္ ယံုၾကည္ပါတယ္။ တရားမွ်တမႈရၿပီး သူတို႔ လြတ္ေျမာက္လာလိမ့္မယ္လို႔ က်ေနာ္အေကာင္းျမင္ ေမွ်ာ္လင့္ပါတယ္´ ဟု ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြက မဇၩိမ ကိုေျပာသည္။
ၾကာသပေတးေန႔က လာေရာက္သက္ေသ ထြက္ဆိုခဲ့သည့္ တရားဆိုင္ျပ သက္ေသ ၃ ဦးအနက္ ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြသည္ တဦး အပါအဝင္ ျဖစ္သည္။ ၃၄ ဦးသည္ လက္နက္ႏွင့္ခဲယမ္း မီးေက်ာက္မ်ား ပိုင္ဆိုင္ထားရွိမႈ၊ ေဖာက္ခြဲေရး ပစၥည္းမ်ား လက္ဝယ္ထားရွိမႈ၊ ႏို္င္ငံျခားသား အက္ဥပေဒအရ အိႏၵိယႏိုင္ငံတြင္းသို႔ တရားမဝင္ ဝင္ေရာက္လာမႈတို႔ျဖင့္ စြဲခ်က္တင္ စစ္ေဆးေနသည္။
သူတို႔သည္ ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဆန္႔က်င္ တိုက္ခိုက္ေနၾကသည့္ လက္နက္ကိုင္ အဖြဲ႔မ်ား ျဖစ္ေသာ ရခိုင္အမ်ဳိးသား ညီညြတ္ေရးပါတီ (NUPA) ႏွင့္ ကရင္အမ်ဳိးသား အစည္းအ႐ုံး (KNU) အဖြဲ႔ဝင္မ်ားျဖစ္ၿပီး ၁၉၉၈ ခုႏွစ္ ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီလ အတြင္း အိႏၵိယေရတပ္က `ပင္လယ္ေမွ်ာ့´ဟု အမည္ဝွက္ ေပးထားေသာ စစ္ဆင္ေရးျဖင့္ ဖမ္းဆီးမိခဲ့သည္။
ဖမ္းဆီးၿပီး ရက္ပိုင္းအတြင္းမွာပင္ သူတို႔ထံမွ ေဖာက္ခြဲေရးပစၥည္းမ်ားႏွင့္ လက္နက္ခဲယမ္း အမ်ားအျပား ဖမ္းဆီးရမိေၾကာင္း အိႏၵိယ ကာကြယ္ေရး ဝန္ႀကီးဌာနက ေၾကျငာခဲ့သည္။
သို႔ေသာ္ ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရ၏ ခိုင္းေစခ်က္အရ အိႏၵိယ ေထာက္လွမ္းေရးအဖြဲ႔က အကြက္ခ် ဖမ္းဆီးခဲ့ျခင္းသာ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း သူပုန္မ်ားက တရား႐ုံးတြင္ ထြက္ဆိုခဲ့သည္။
အန္ဒမန္ နီကိုဘာကၽြန္းစုရွိ လင္းေဖာ (Landfall) ကၽြန္းကို အိႏၵိယဘက္က အသံုးျပဳခြင့္ ေပးမွာျဖစ္ၿပီး အျပန္အလွန္ အားျဖင့္ တ႐ုတ္ေရတပ္ လႈပ္ရွားမႈကို ေထာက္လွမ္းေပးပို႔ရမွာျဖစ္သည္ဟု သူတို႔ႏွင့္ အိႏၵိယ ေထာက္လွမ္းေရးတု႔ိ သေဘာတူညီခဲ့ၾကသည္ဟု သူပုန္မ်ားက ေျပာသည္။
ေထာက္လွမ္းေရးဘက္က သေဘာတူညီခ်က္ကို ခ်ဳိးေဖာက္ခဲ့ၿပီး သူတို႔ေခါင္းေဆာင္ ၆ ဦးကို လန္းေဖာကၽြန္းသို႔ေရာက္အၿပီး ေနာက္တရက္တြင္ ေသြးေအးေအးျဖင့္ သတ္ျဖတ္ခဲ့သည္ဟု သူတို႔က ေျပာသည္။
`ဒီသူပုန္ ၃၄ ဦးဟာ လြတ္ေျမာက္ေရး တိုက္ပြဲဝင္ေနသူမ်ားသာ ျဖစ္တယ္ဆိုတာ ထြက္ဆိုဘို႔ NCGUB ဝန္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္ ေဒါက္တာ စိန္ဝင္းကလည္း က်ေနာ့္ဆီကို စာတေစာင္ ေပးပို႔ခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ဒီစာကို က်ေနာ္ တရား႐ုံးမွာ တင္ျပခဲ့ပါတယ္´ ဟု ေဒါက္တာ တင့္ေဆြက ေျပာသည္။
အေနာက္ ဘဂၤလားျပည္နယ္ အားကစားဌာန အရာရွိတဦးကလည္း သူတို႔ဌာန အေနျဖင့္ ျမန္မာ ၃၄ ဦး ကိုေထာက္ခံသည့္ အေနႏွင့္ လြတ္ေျမာက္ေရး တိုက္ပြဲဝင္သူမ်ား ေသြးစည္းညီညြတ္ေရး ေကာ္မတီႏွင့္ပူးတြဲကာ ေဘာလံုးပြဲတပြဲကို ၂၀၀၈ ခုႏွစ္ အတြင္း ကိုလ္ကာတာၿမိဳ႕၌ စီစဥ္က်င္းပခဲ့ေၾကာင္း တရား႐ုံးေတာ္ေရွ႕ေမွာက္ ထြက္ဆိုသြားသည္။
ေသြးစည္း ညီညြတ္ေရး ေကာ္မတီကို ေဒါက္တာ (ဗိုလ္မႉးႀကီး) လက္ရွမီးဆာဂါးလ္ (Lakshmi Sahgal) က ဦးေဆာင္သည္။
`အေနာက္ ဘဂၤလားျပည္နယ္ အစိုးရအရာရွိရဲ့ ထြက္ဆိုခ်က္က ျမန္မာလူမ်ဳိး ၃၄ ဦးဟာ ရာဇဝတ္သားေတြ မဟုတ္ဘူး။ လြတ္ေျမာက္ေရး တိုက္ပြဲဝင္သူေတြသာ ျဖစ္တယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ အေနာက္ ဘဂၤလားျပည္နယ္ အစိုးရအေနနဲ႔ သူတို႔နဲ႔ ေပါင္းသင္းဆက္ဆံဖို႔ သင့္တယ္လို႔၊ ယူဆခဲ့တာျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ဆိုလိုတာျဖစ္တယ္´ ဟု တရားဆိုင္ေရွ႕ေနတဦးျဖစ္သူ ဆစ္ဒတ္သ္အဂါဝါလ္ (Siddarth Aggarwal) က မဇၩိမကို ေျပာသည္။
ေနာက္ထပ္ သက္ေသတဦးမွာ ျမန္မာတိုင္းရင္းသား ေခါင္းေဆာင္တဦး ျဖစ္သူ ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊ (Harn Yanghwe) ျဖစ္သည္။ သူသည္ ဘရပ္ဆဲလ္ရွိ ယူ႐ိုျမန္မာ႐ုံး (Euro-Burma Office) ညႊန္ၾကားေရးမႉး တဦးလည္း ျဖစ္သည္။
ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊက သူသည္ ၃၄ ဦး၏ မိခင္အဖြဲ႔အစည္းမ်ား ျဖစ္ေသာ NUPA, KNU တို႔ႏွင့္ အဆက္အသြယ္မ်ား ရွိေၾကာင္း၊ EBO သည္ သူတို႔၏ တရား႐ုံးစရိတ္မ်ားအတြက္ ဘ႑ာေရး အေထာက္အပံ့မ်ား ေပးအပ္ခဲ့ေၾကာင္း ထြက္ဆိုသြားသည္။
`ဒီ ျမန္မာလူမ်ဳိး ၃၄ ဦးကို က်ေနာ့္အဖြဲ႔အစည္းျဖစ္တဲ့ တိုင္းရင္းသား လူမ်ဳိးစုမ်ား ေကာင္စီ (ENC) နဲ႔ ယူ႐ိုျမန္မာ႐ုံး (EBO) တို႔ကတဆင့္ သိရွိပါတယ္´ ဟု ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊက ေျပာသည္။
ENC သည္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံရွိ တိုင္းရင္းသား လူမ်ဳိးစုမ်ားကို ကိုယ္စားျပဳသည့္ ထီးရိပ္ အဖြဲ႔အစည္းတခု ျဖစ္သည္။
ထင္ရွားေသာ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးေရွ႕ေနတဦးျဖစ္သူ နန္ဒီတာဟက္ဆာ (Nandita Haksar) သည္ ဗုဒၶဟူးေန႔က တရား႐ုံးတြင္ ျမန္မာလူမ်ဳိး ၃၄ ဦးအမႈကို ကာကြယ္ထြက္ဆိုရာတြင္ ၆ ႏွစ္မွ် ၾကာသည္အထိ ဗဟိုေထာက္လွမ္းေရး ဗ်ဴ႐ို (CBI) က တရားစြဲတင္ျခင္း မရွိသည့္အတြက္ ေဒါသထြက္မိေၾကာင္း ပါရွိသည္။
ေနာက္ဆံုးတြင္ တရားမွ်တမႈကို ရရွိလိမ့္မည္ဟု သူမအေနျဖင့္ ေမွ်ာ္လင့္ေၾကာင္းႏွင့္ တရားလိုဘက္မွ စြဲခ်က္ကို အေထာက္အကူ ျပဳမည့္ သက္ေသခံမ်ား လံုေလာက္စြာ ျပသႏိုင္ခဲ့ျခင္း မရွိေၾကာင္း နန္ဒီတာဟက္ဆာက ေျပာၾကားသြားသည္။
အမႈသည္ ၃၄ ဦးက သူတို႔ကို ဒုကၡသည္အျဖစ္ အသိအမွတ္ျပဳရန္ နယူးေဒလီၿမိဳ႕ရွိ ကုလသမဂၢ ဒုကၡသည္မ်ားဆိုင္ရာ မဟာမင္းႀကီး႐ုံး (UNHCR) သုိ႔ တင္ျပထားရာ `ေလွ်ာက္လႊာအား လက္ခံ စဥ္းစားေနေၾကာင္း´ အသိအမွတ္ျပဳ စာရြက္စာတန္းမ်ား ထုတ္ေပးၿပီး ျဖစ္သည္ဟု ဟက္ဆာက မဇၩိမသို႔ ေျပာသည္။
နယူးေဒလီၿမိဳ႕ရွိ UNHCR ႐ုံး ေျပာေရးဆိုခြင့္ရွိသူက ဤသတင္းကို ျငင္းဆိုျခင္း ေသာ္လည္းေကာင္း၊ အတည္ျပဳျခင္း ေသာ္လည္းေကာင္း၊ မလုပ္ေသာ္လည္း ဟက္ဆာကမူ ဤအခ်က္သည္ ေမွ်ာ္လင့္ခ်က္ လကၡဏာတရပ္ပင္ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ေျပာသည္။
တရားဆုိင္ျပ သက္ေသမ်ား၏ ထြက္ဆိုခ်က္မ်ား ၾကားနာမႈ ၿပီးဆံုးသြားၿပီ ျဖစ္ၿပီး တရားလိုဘက္မွ ေလွ်ာက္လဲခ်က္ ေပးရန္ ဒီဇင္ဘာ ၁၅ ရက္ေန႔ကို ခ်ိန္းဆို သတ္မွတ္လိုက္သည္။
`က်ေနာ့္အထင္ တရားလိုဘက္က ေလွ်ာက္လဲခ်က္ကို ဒီဇင္ဘာမွာ ေပးမယ္၊ တရားဆိုင္ဘက္က ဇန္နဝါရီလ အတြင္းေလာက္ ေလွ်ာက္လဲခ်က္ေပးႏိုင္မယ္´ ဟု တရားဆိုင္မ်ား၏ ေရွ႕ေန အဂါဝါးလ္က ေျပာသည္။ ႏွစ္ဘက္လံုးမွ ေလွ်ာက္လဲခ်က္ ေပးၿပီးသည့္အခါ တရား႐ုံးက အမိန္႔ခ်မွတ္ႏိုင္လိမ့္မည္ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း သူက ဆက္လက္ ေျပာၾကားသည္။
ဤအမႈသည္ ျမန္မာ့ဒီမိုကေရစီ လႈပ္ရွားမႈတခုလံုးကို ကိုယ္စားျပဳေနေၾကာင္း ေဒါက္တာတင့္ေဆြ ကေျပာသည္။
`ပိုက်ယ္က်ယ္ျပန္႔ျပန္႔ၾကည့္ရင္ သူတို႔ (ျမန္မာ ၃၄ ဦး) ဟာ ျမန္မာ့ဒီမိုကေရစီ လႈပ္ရွားမႈရဲ့ အစိတ္အပိုင္းတရပ္ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္´ ဟု သူက ေျပာသည္။
Saturday, November 7, 2009
US-Burma relation: Expectations are expectations
These days everybody is talking about Aung San Suu Kyi and America-Burma relationship with high and low hopes. Most of them are favorably optimistic thinking that America will bring about miracle in Burma.
But it should remember the days when Aung San Suu Kyi was treated as a VIP by allowing her to inspect the government development projects and shown on the state-run newspapers and television. Because it has been over a decade and as nothing positive comes out, it turned out to be propaganda exploit for international consumption. Don’t forget that the senior general is trained as psychological warfare expert.
The American diplomats who personally had two-hour dialogue session with Aung San Suu Kyi seem to be realistic as they do not expect much. The Americans spoke correctly that 2010 election must be comprehensive. They said America wanted not superficial but the real progress. It was said that the elections could be an opportunity. But the opportunity which Ban Ki-moon termed during his visit to Burma May 2008 was not utilized by the junta. For the junta opportunity means how to exploit for staying in power.
The debate on whether pressure or engagement is the right approach to deal with the junta has been widely talked. Each side defends and advocates on its own. So far American new approach seems rational. In the eyes of Burmese people the countries of engagement side are craving only for own interest without honest desire for democratic change in Burma. The people realize that those countries do not care for human rights or democracy.
Only sanctions and outside as well as domestic pressure brought about regime change in South Africa, Philippines and Nepal. Use of sanctions as an effective tool is definitely wise.
US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell and Scot Marciel Marciel who is also the US ambassador to Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) said the new administration is not lifting sanctions right away. Accordingly the junta supreme leader Than Shwe did not give audience to them.
As the election is basic element in a democracy and the promise of holding an election can woo many countries. Even the Rangoon-based diplomats said that the elections may not be free and fair, but they need to be there anyway. NLD will not contest that election as it is. Those who are talking critical of an election are seen as odds. But many tried to ignore the fate of election of 1990 and how freely and fairly elected parties and representatives have to suffer. All truthful ethnic political parties are forced to dissolve. All intolerant elected members are detained, jailed, killed and forced to run away from country.
Now including the US, many countries are telling the election of 2010 to be credible and inclusive. Remember that Aung San Suu Kyi’s application as a candidate was rejected in 1990 election. The regime knows that by being kept her under house arrest the National League for Democracy (NLD) has won landslide. This time they won’t let it happen again. So Aung San Suu Kyi won’t be allowed to participate in the election and the voting will not be conducted free and fair.
The Burmese people are not contented with the expectations of many foreign nations which aim to undergo a gradual transition of power to a civilian government. It means military will be granted two to three decades to rule with full recognition. Hoping for the emergence of splinter groups or factions within the military is the most unlikely expectation.
It is also likely that following the US example the EU will soon open up its own dialogue with the junta. But it is long way to go for lifting of different sanctions from the US, the EU, Canada and Australia including accessibility to international financial institutions like the World Bank (WB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
Anyhow the US-Burma dialogue will continue. But in the ASEAN, Thailand and Cambodia are having a diplomatic crisis. China and India maintain wait and see practice. America can’t do it alone. So is Aung San Suu Kyi.
This time, the generals did not speak out much because the sole dictator was absent and wanted to learn from American tone. Burmese ambassadors around the world will shut their mouth as a former foreign minister Win Aung died in prison a day after American diplomats left Burma.
The TV report on the latest development on US-Burma relation tried to blame at Aung San Suu Kyi who denied meeting of her deputies as the Vice Chair U Tin Oo was excluded. The regime wanted to tell that they were flexible she was unyielding. They again come to know that Aung San Suu Kyi is not an easy challenger.
The NLD and ethnic parties which won the 1990 election are calling for review of the 2008 constitution. According to that constitution, the election will mean just voting for collaborators who will have no chance for debate. There will be no ruling or opposition parties in the Parliament. All elected Parliamentarians have to work under the Commander in Chief.
It will be something like the in-cage wrestling match.
Dr. Tint Swe
6-11-09
Thursday, October 29, 2009
29-10-09 India-Myanmar Relations: A Review
R.Swaminathan, C3S Paper No.396 dated October 29, 2009
Relations between India and Myanmar over nearly five decades have been governed by many complex factors. Amongst them are the strategic location of Myanmar, India’s commitment to idealism-driven support to the restoration of democracy in Myanmar, realism-driven need to deal with those actually governing the country, the implications of China’s increasing presence and role in Myanmar etc. China, fortunately for it, has been able to make its foreign policy decisions without having to bother about the nature of the regime in any country.
India and Myanmar share a complicated and delicate history, marked as much by mistrust as amity. For those who may be interested, a “Historical Background” is annexed to this paper.
P O L I T I C A L
Pro-Democracy Protests in 2007
A series of anti-government protests started in Myanmar on 15 August 2007. The immediate and stated cause of the protests was mainly the decision of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) to remove fuel subsidies, resulting in very steep increases in the prices of diesel, petrol and compressed natural gas. The first demonstrations were dealt with quickly and harshly, with many arrested and detained. Starting 18 September, the protests were led by thousands of Buddhist monks, and those were also allowed to proceed. Initially, only a few hundred monks walked down the streets but, by end-September, the protesting crowds had grown to 100,000 – both monks and democracy activists. There was a renewed government crackdown on 26 September.
The military junta’s actions against the “peaceful” and “almost Gandhian” ptotestors evoked a considerable amount of international condemnation. However, Beijing expectedly showed more interest in maintaining stability than in pushing for democracy.
In an official statement issued in the wake of the violence, India expressed its support for the “undaunted resolve of the Burmese people to achieve democracy”. The Burmese language service of All-India Radio (AIR) was more outspoken in its criticism of Myanmar’s military government. It said that India was gradually succeeding in weaning Myanmar away from its near-total dependence on China for economic and military support. It could not therefore be expected to take the strong position that the US, the European Union and Myanmar dissidents were asking her to take; and thus risk – to China’s benefit – the precious foothold it had achieved in Myanmar over the previous decade.
Ibrahim Gambari, the United Nations special envoy to Myanmar, undertook a tour across Asia, with the hope of cajoling Asian governments to take a tougher stance on the junta’s crushing of the protests. When he called on India (in October 2007) to join other countries in pressing Myanmar’s military rulers to stop their campaign of repression against pro-democracy protesters, the Indian government described Myanmar as its “close and friendly neighbor” and assured that it would help in Myanmar’s national reconciliation. India’s decision to avoid direct criticism of the military regime came in for a lot of adverse comments. However, it is not as if India was totally silent on the issue. When Myanmar Foreign Minister Nyan Win, who visited India in January 2008, called on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, the PM emphasized that there was need for greater urgency in bringing about political reforms and national reconciliation. “This process has to be broad-based to include all sections of society, including Aung San Suu Kyi and the various ethnic groups.”
Aung San Suu Kyi
Aung San Suu Kyi (the daughter of “General” Aung San) has been under house arrest almost continually since 1989. When anti-government protests intensified in September 2007, hundreds of monks paid respects to her at the gate of her home. This was the first time in four years that people were able to see her in public. On 29 September, she was allowed to leave her house briefly to meet with a UN envoy who was trying to persuade (eventually, successfully) the junta to ease its crackdown against pro-democracy protesters.
On 4 May 2009, a mentally unbalanced American (John Yettaw) swam across the lake and entered the house of Aung San Suu Kyi, uninvited, and remained there for two nights. Instead of faulting those in charge of security, both the intruder and Suu Kyi were held in prison and put on trial. While the intruder was sentenced to imprisonment, Suu Kyi was awarded (on 11 August 2009) an additional 18 months of house arrest – beyond the earlier term which was due to end on 27 May 2009. The sentencing once again showed how the milit.ary junta was determined to stop her participation in the elections to be held in 2010. In a declared act of “benevolence”, the government had commuted the court’s original sentence of three-years hard labour.
Aung San Suu Kyi’s conviction drew almost universal condemnation. President Obama demanded her immediate release while British Prime Minister Gordon Brown stated that “This is a purely political sentence designed to prevent her from taking part in the regime’s planned elections next year” and called for a UN embargo on all arms exports to Burma. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France sought fresh restrictions on Myanmar’s two important export items – rubies and hardwood. Thailand was even more explicit and urged Myanmar to immediately free Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest to allow her to play a role in next year’s general election. However, action by the U.N. Security Council was stalled due to reservations on the part of Russia and China. “India’s reaction to the conviction of Aung San Suu Kyi was shameful to say the least. It had not one word of condemnation or even ‘disappointment”, wrote Col. Hariharan, a very senior analyst of intelligence and security issues.
Suu Kyi is said to have written a letter to Than Shwe, offering to work towards reducing international sanctions on Myanmar, and asked to meet representatives of the US, EU and Australia. Either in a reaction to this or in response to US overtures and demands, two meetings were held in October 2009 between the junta’s liaison officer (Labor Minister and retired Major General Aung Kyi) and Suu Kyi. She was also allowed to meet with representatives from the US, Australia and the European Union. Her National League for Democracy (NLD) party has also been allowed to meet with foreign diplomats, including a meeting (on 20 October 2009) with the US charge d’ affaires. Cynical observers may say that the generals are making yet another attempt to put off international pressure, only to revert back to repression once attention shifts elsewhere. Or, are the generals playing the US card against China, knowing that any improvement in relations with Washington will improve its leverage with Beijing?
Prime Minister General Thein Sein told (on 25 October 2009) the leaders attending the East Asian Summit in Thailand that the junta will consider relaxing the terms of Suu Kyi’s house arrest if she “maintains a good attitude”. He also said that she can contribute to national reconciliation.
Sanctions Regime
World governments remain divided on how to deal with the military junta in Myanmar. Calls for further sanctions by Canada, United Kingdom, United States, and France are opposed by some countries (including China) on the ground that “sanctions or pressure will not help to solve the issue”. India had also resolutely opposed the US call for sanctions on Myanmar. There is some disagreement over whether sanctions are the most effective approach to dealing with the junta, with some opining that sanctions may have caused more harm than good to the people.
The International Labour Organization (ILO) has estimated that about 800,000 people are subject to forced labour in Myanmar. It announced in November 2006, that it will seek to prosecute members of the ruling junta – at the International Court of Justice – for crimes against humanity, over this issue.
The military junta moved the national capital from Yangon to a site near Pyinmana in November 2005, and officially named the new capital as Naypyidaw (meaning “city of the kings”) on 27 March 2006. In a futile gesture of criticism, many countries still consider the capital to be Rangoon.
Shifting US Position
India has been advising the west to engage with Myanmar and take off the pressure of sanctions. Many in the west thought this was India’s way of keeping up with China. The Obama Administration, after an eight-month-long review, has apparently decided to engage with Myanmar’s generals. On 29 September 2009, US Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell held his first meeting with Myanmar’s Science Minister U Thaung in New York. One of the key issues that India may take up during discussions with Campbell when he transits New Delhi this week, en route to Yangon, will be the delinking of the fledgling engagement process from next year’s elections in Myanmar. This, incidentally, will be the first US official visit to Myanmar in decades. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said (after the East Asian Summit in Thailand) that there was an “atmosphere of hope” about improving relations between Myanmar and the United States.
Dr. Subash Kapila, a noted International Relations and Strategic Affairs analyst, has very recently written a scholarly paper, which can be seen at www.southasiaanalysis.org. He has argued that the United States has for decades shunned Myanmar politically and economically, on the grounds of human rights abuses and democracy. India adopted the same stance till the early 1990s. In the process, both succeeded in pushing Myanmar closer to China. India has to some extent retrieved its strategic losses by a political and economic reach-out to Myanmar. The US is still dithering, though the Obama Administration has made some tentative moves towards normalization of relations with Myanmar. The strategic key for checkmating in South East Asia lies in Myanmar. Dr. Kapila has advocated that the US should frame its future policy towards Myanmar based on the considerations that Myanmar is of geo-strategic significance for US Naval interests, that Myanmar has not been adversarial to the US geo-politically, Myanmar’s importance for South East Asian Security, and that the US could use India as a bridge to reach-out politically to Myanmar. He has also emphasized that Myanmar has not yet become a full strategic satellite of China and that such an eventuality can be pre-empted.
Almost simultaneously, the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee was told on 21 October 2009 that a high-level US delegation is expected to visit Myanmar in the coming weeks, in an attempt to progress the US efforts to engage with the military junta. The talks will center on improving the human-rights situation in Myanmar, the claimed intention to move towards democracy, and increasing US influence in a country widely viewed as a key regional ally of China – through improved diplomatic relations. The delegation is hoping to meet Aung San Suu Kyi and representatives of ethnic groups. This policy shift is apparently a part of the US desire to build stronger ties with South East Asia. Some analysts say that it is caused by the realization that Chinese influence in the region has increased considerably in the past decade, when US attention was diverted elsewhere. This may be the beginning of a quiet competition between Washington and Beijing for influence in South East Asia. A US-Myanmar detente would undoubtedly be viewed as a threat to Beijing’s strategic interests in the region. A repeal of even some sanctions (before or after the 2010 election) would put the US in direct competition with China for influence in Myanmar.
The US efforts to counterbalance China’s influence in South East Asia have a difficult road ahead in Myanmar. China has already secured a strong position in Myanmar, but the US currently has very little leverage. It has no aid programs, civil society building projects or military-to-military exchanges. Even the US diplomatic mission is headed by a charge d’ affaires, since the US withdrew its ambassador in 1988.
India-Myanmar Bilateral Relations : Realism Influencing Policy
As a legacy of British rule, Indians had to face (not so latent) resentment amongst the Burmese; due to Indian soldiers (under the British Army) having fought against BIA, due to the perception that Indian officers and staff functioned as tools of the British colonial regime and due to the alleged exploitation by Indian traders and businesses.
India’s relations with Burma were mostly cordial in the early years after independence. Prime Ministers U Nu and Jawaharlal Nehru were close personal and were both prominent figures in Non-Aligned Movement. India helped Myanmar survive its first difficult years as an independent state, including crucially when various political and ethnic insurgent groups threatened to break the new country apart. Without India’s massive military and economic aid, U Nu’s government may probably have collapsed. However, Indo-Myanmar relations chilled after General Ne Win’s military coup in March 1962. Many former democratic leaders of the Myanmar, including U Nu, were given asylum in India.
Personal relations between Indira Gandhi and Ne Win were good. The xenophobic policies of his Revolutionary Council and the nationalization of privately owned businesses and factories (of which an estimated 60% were owned by people of Indian origin) made thousands lose their properties and livelihood. During the four-year period spanning 1964-68, nearly 150,000 Indo-Burmese had to leave the country.
Myanmar is of great strategic significance to both India and China, thanks to its location and long borders with both countries. In the early years of the military regime, India pushed hard for democracy. Myanmar thus gradually moved to embrace China. China has the advantage of being able to work comfortably with authoritarian and quasi-democratic regimes, without any schizophrenic (ideological) commitment to democracy. China has become to Myanmar an increasingly attractive source of low-interest loans, grants, development projects, technical assistance etc. Combined with China’s “no strings attached” approach to aid, this is making China a more attractive partner to regimes with questionable records in human-rights and democracy.
By 1993, it seemed obvious that, despite the charisma of Aung San Suu Kyi, the movement for democracy was not making much progress and that the military regime was going ahead with making peace with the ethnic minorities. There was little or no possibility of the military regime relinquishing power to the National League for Democracy. In the absence of dialogue with the Myanmar military, insurgency and narcotics smuggling were assuming alarming proportions in the states bordering Myanmar. In a classic example of how a nation’s interests often override normally expected human behavior, pragmatism became the hallmark of India’s relations with Myanmar. Quiet contacts were established and a series of agreements signed to deal with cross-border terrorism and narcotics smuggling and to promote trade and economic development along the Indo-Myanmar border.
During the tenure of Narasimha Rao as Prime Minister, India realized that giving too much weight to human rights and democracy in Myanmar over strategic considerations may not be in its long term interests. It started basing its policy not on idealistic ‘isms’ but on national security considerations. It was increasingly felt that the way to bring about change is not through isolation, but through active engagement and persuasion. Accepting the realities, India’s call for democracy in Myanmar has been muted in recent years. This has invited a lot of criticism from “purists”. There has also been severe international criticism of India’s closer engagement with the military junta, at a time when the US and EU were concentrating on sanctions, driving Myanmar into even greater isolation.
The success of a nation’s foreign policy is not judged by the high moral grounds that it adopts, but by the advantages that accrue to it. India also realized that the main beneficiary of strained India-Myanmar relations was China, whether for access to all-important hydrocarbon energy sources, transport corridors or strategic control of the Indian Ocean. Thus, a new chapter began.
Energy-starved India has been courting Myanmar, which is rich in natural gas. India has been trying to look after its own practical interests by maintaining good relations with the military junta in Myanmar. Not only is India eager to cash in on Myanmar’s substantial reserves of natural gas, but Indian officials also hope that Myanmar government would help in controlling anti-Indian insurgents along the border.
Rajiv Sikri (a former Secretary in the Ministry of External affairs) has said that India is obviously not doing enough in Myanmar. Decision-makers in New Delhi are not bestowing serious and sustained attention to Myanmar, since the bordering North East states are themselves political lightweights in the eyes of geographically distant New Delhi. This is in sharp contrast to the attention that, for example, Sri Lanka or Afghanistan gets. If Myanmar were to get even half of the grant assistance and the attention that India has given Sri Lanka and Afghanistan, India would considerably improve her position there. There is no time for India to lose in giving much higher priority to relations with Myanmar.
As Kris Srinivasan, a former Foreign Secretary, has observed “The rationale for India’s policy to befriend Myanmar despite that regime’s ill-treatment of people of Indian origin and repression of its own citizens is understandable, but the lack of beneficial results from the new orientation is harder to comprehend. The new strategy has failed even partially to open a closed polity.”
E C O N O M I C
Economic Cooperation
Fruitful and balanced economic cooperation may be the most effective method of engaging with Myanmar. During the 9th round of consultations between foreign offices of the two countries in November 2008, the two delegations being led by the Foreign Secretaries, it was decided to implement promptly the bilateral agreements [a framework agreement on the construction and operation of a multi-modal transit and transport facility on the Kaladan River, a MOU on intelligence exchange to combat transitional crime including terrorism, and an agreement on avoidance of double taxation and prevention of fiscal evasion] signed in April during the visit to India by Maung Aye. Vice Chairman of the SPDC (also Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Defense Services and Commander-in-Chief of the Army). In June 2008, Myanmar and India had reached four more economic cooperation agreements, during the visit of Minister of State for Commerce and Power (Jairam Ramesh). These agreements related to bilateral investment promotion, a USD 20-million credit line between the Exim Bank of India and the Myanmar Foreign Trade Bank (MFTB) for the establishment of a manufacturing facility, another 64-million-dollar credit line for three 230 KV transmission lines; and for establishing banking arrangement between the Myanmar Investment and Trade Bank and the United Bank of India.
Most of the economic transactions have so far been between the two governments, in areas like agriculture, telecommunications, aviation and gas exploration. Myanmar has been trying to entice Indian companies to invest in sectors like pharmaceuticals, cement, fertilizer, steel, IT and food processing; but Indian firms seem reluctant to invest, for fear of a repetition of the earlier nationalization drive.
Myanmar-compiled figures show that India’s contracted investments in Myanmar reached USD 219.57 million as of January 2008, of which USD 137 million was in the oil and gas sector. India has given USD 100 million credit for Myanmar’s infrastructure, while USD 57 million has been offered to upgrade the railway system. A further USD 27 million in grants has been pledged for road and rail projects, but there is little yet to show in terms of concrete benefit.
Trade
India-Myanmar bilateral trade reached USD 995 million in 2007-08, with Myanmar’s exports accounting for USD 810 million. India is Myanmar’s fourth largest trading partner (after Thailand, China and Singapore) and absorbs about 25% of its total exports. India hopes to double by 2010 the bilateral trade that now stand at $ one billion.
It is axiomatic that Myanmar needs help from her friends. In order to improve Myanmar’s multi-lateral trade, India can take the initiative by bringing in the ambit of bilateral trade products like bicycles and spare parts, life saving drugs, fertilizers, textiles, gold plated jewelry, fruits, pulses, tea, gems etc. Already, India imports about 60% of Myanmar’s export of pulses. India can provide the technology to improve productivity in Myanmar’s tea industry. Indian expertise in gem cutting and polishing can be harnessed to provide a boost to the semi-precious gem industry in Myanmar.
Border Trade
It was hoped that greater border trade with Myanmar, on the basis of the agreement signed in 1994, would help revitalize the economy of the North East and help to quell narcotic and arms trafficking, but the hope has not been fulfilled. Only one of the two proposed border posts is open. The road on the Indian side to Moreh is sub-standard. Two-way trade is constrained by the small list of tradable goods, excessive regulation and restrictions; and is negligible compared to trade across the Myanmar’s borders with China and Thailand. India’s North East is swamped by goods of Chinese origin, but there is hardly any movement of Indian exports in the opposite direction.
India and Myanmar are considering the upgradation of the border trade carried out at Reedkhoda (India) and Tamu-Moye (Myanmar) to “normal” trade. This was discussed at the third meeting of Myanmar-India Joint Trade Committee held in October 2008 during the second visit of Indian Minister Jairam Ramesh.
Quest for Energy
Nearly seventy percent of India’s oil is imported and only half its gas demand of 170 million cubic meters a day is met internally. China also imports about 40% of its demand. The two countries account for almost 35% of the growth in the global demand for energy. This dependence on imports has forced both countries to bid aggressively for overseas oil assets.
Expecting an exponential growth in its energy demands due to its expanding economy, India has been trying hard in recent years to secure energy supplies. Unfortunately, India’s oil diplomacy has not been sufficiently geared to meet the challenge; and its oil companies have been outsmarted (or under-bid) by Chinese firms in several deals. In the last few years, ONGC has been thwarted by Chinese firms in Kazakhstan, Ecuador and Angola. Top Chinese offshore producer CNOOC Ltd. acquired a 45 % stake in a Nigerian oil and gas field for USD 2.3 billion. ONGC was also in this race, but withdrew due to objections in the cabinet.
Most embarrassingly, India also lost a deal in Myanmar where no open bidding was held. Myanmar decided to decline gas supply to the (proposed-but-grounded) Myanmar-Bangladesh-India pipeline. Instead, it signed an agreement with Petrochina, under which Myanmar’s ministry of energy agreed to sell 6.5 TCF from A-1 block (Rakhine coastline) reserve through an overland pipeline to Kunming, for 30 years. All this happened despite the fact that India’s ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) and GAIL (India) Ltd., between them, hold 30% participating interest in this block. Anyhow, Myanmar could not be expected to have waited indefinitely for India and Bangladesh to resolve their mutual differences over a project based on sound economic logic but delayed because of domestic political compulsions. Myanmar, however, says that it could still supply gas to the tri-nation gas pipeline from other gas blocks if Bangladesh and India were successful in ironing out their differences. In answer to the question as to who lost Myanmar, Rajiv Sikri (a former Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs) has written “Various actors bear a collective responsibility”.
In return for various economic concessions (and support in the UN), China seems to have been given preferential access to exploit Myanmar’s natural resources and port facilities along Myanmar’s coast. Chinese investment includes involvement in the Shwe gas project off Myanmar’s western coast. Human rights organizations allege that the offshore project and a dual oil and gas pipeline being constructed from the coast to Kunming have already resulted in human rights abuses and will likely result in many more as the projects progress.
China was scheduled to begin (in September 2009) the laying of 1,100 kms-long, parallel oil and natural gas pipelines from the deep-sea port at Kyaukpyu (on Myanmar’s Arakan coast in the Bay of Bengal) to Kunming. The pipeline will also tap into key blocks in Myanmar’s energy-rich Shwe gas fields that have been given on a 30-year lease to a Chinese-led consortium. The pipeline project was agreed to during the visit Maung Aye to Beijing in mid-June 2009. It will reduce China’s dependence on the narrow Malacca Straits, through which 80% of its oil imports of four million barrels per day currently pass. When the oil and gas pipelines are completed by 2013, Chinese tankers will dock at Kyaukpyu port to transport 600,000 barrels per day from West Asia and Africa. The gas pipeline can move about 12 billion cubic meters of gas annually.
In late September 2007, when the pro-democracy protests were under way, India’s Minister for Petroleum (Murli Deora) visited Myanmar and secured a contract for three deep-water gas exploration projects for the ONGC.
Infrastructure Projects
Both India and China are interested in implementing infrastructure projects in Myanmar, to get access to the Bay of Bengal, India for the North-East and China for its landlocked Yunnan province. India and China had planned to rebuild the (World War II) Stillwell Road, on which work by the Chinese has already started. Recent reports say that India has lost interest in the project. A 1,500 km Trans-Asian Highway between India and Thailand and a railway from Hanoi to Imphal are still being talked about.
The 160 km India-Myanmar Friendship Road, between Tamu and Kalemayo (Myanmar) and going on to Kalewa, was built by India in 2001. It is now being strengthened and resurfaced. It effectively links Manipur with Myanmar. Two other sections at Rhi-Tidim and Rhi-Falam across the border from Mizoram are under way.
An optical fibre network has been laid from linking Kolkata with Yangon and Mandalay.
Kaladan Project
The Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit-cum-Transport Project is essentially transportation project on the River Kaladan, which flows in and out of Mizoram and is navigable all the way to the sea. It empties into the Bay of Bengal near the port of Sittwe (formerly known as Akyab). This port will be developed by India into a major commercial hub, to distribute Mizoram’s bamboo crops and Myanmar’s forest wealth. Besides 225-km waterway, the project also envisages construction of two roads, ie.e 117 km extending NHI54 to the border and 52 km from the border to Kaleutwa. Sea lanes are also to be developed between Sittwe and Kolkata and Visakhapatnam. Sittwe could also become a major distribution center for oil and gas supplies to India’s North-East.
Kaladan, a wide river with perennial water flow, originates in the upper reaches of Myanmar, enters Mizoram and then meanders back into Myanmar to continue its passage south to the Bay of Bengal. Navigation with 500-ton river crafts is possible all the way from Mizoram. Gooda from the North-East could easily be transported by river to the Bay of Bengal and then onwards to markets in India and elsewhere. The circuitous surface route via Assam and through the Siliguri Corridor could be avoided, cutting transportation costs by nearly half.
Union Minister of State for Commerce and Industry, Jairam Ramesh, announced on 7 January 2008 that India has decided to undertake the project at a cost of more than USD 120 million. The port will be India’s gift to Myanmar, but India would have usage rights. Ramesh termed it as “the most significant initiative the Indian government has taken in South-East Asia”.
When Myanmar realizes the full potential of this project, it may begin utilizing the river for domestic navigational purposes also. Sittwe could eventually become the onshore hub of Myanmar’s gas industry once the vast reserves in the Shwe fields in the Bay of Bengal are developed. It is a win-win situation for both India and Myanmar. Further development of the Sittwe port into a gas and oil transshipment terminal may add to its importance. More funds will be required to develop Sittwe to its full potential, but India may (and should) not be averse to putting up the additional funds.
Cyclone Nargis
Cyclone Nargis hit Myanmar on 3 May 2008, causing heavy damage in the densely populated, rice-farming delta of the Irrawaddy Division. There were reports that more than 200,000 people were dead or missing, in the worst recorded natural disaster in Myanmar’s history. UN estimates projected that as many as one million people were left homeless. In the immediate days following the disaster, the military regime complicated recovery efforts by delaying the entry of planes delivering medicine, food, and other supplies. A US naval task force carrying much-needed relief supplies, helicopters and other vehicles as well as manpower was denied permission, based on fears that it could be a prelude to a military invasion. Indian leaders sent condolence messages and rushed urgently needed relief and medical supplies to the affected areas, using two naval ships from Port Blair.
M I L I T A R Y
Insurgencies
In Myanmar
About twenty minority groups have been carrying on insurgency against the Government of Myanmar, with the Karen being the largest of them. The BBC had estimated in 2004 that upto 200,000 Karen have been driven from their homes during decades of war, with 120,000 more refugees from Myanmar, mostly Karen, living in refugee camps in Thailand, across the border. Another estimate says that more than two million people have fled from Myanmar to Thailand. There are accusations against the military government of “ethnic cleansing”.
Since Beijing reversed its previous policy and withdrew support to the insurgent Burmese Communist Party (BCP) in the 1980s, the BCP collapsed in 1989 resulting in the formation of several ethnic-based insurgent organizations, including narcotics trafficking by the United Wa State Army, now active along the China-Myanmar border.
In early August 2009, in the Kokang incident in Shan State in northern Myanmar, junta troops fought for several weeks against ethnic minorities including Han Chinese, Wa and Kachin. In the first days of the conflict, as many as 10,000 Burmese civilians are said to have fled to Yunnan province in neighboring China. The incident annoyed China.
The military junta has been applying pressure for the ceasefire groups to become border guard units, under army control. Ethnic leaders have so far resisted the demand and with a deadline set for the end of October 2009, civil war may become a possibility. So far, China has been careful to provide only enough support to ethnic insurgents to deter the Myanmar Army from making any rash moves (like at Kokang). This situation may change if closer ties develop between Myanmar and the US.
In India, a limited joint Indo-Myanmar military operation against insurgents (striding the Indo-Myanmar border) was undertaken in 1995. However, cooperation in taking action against the cross-border militants petered out. India and Myanmar have varying problems with different sets of insurgents and do not share the same priorities in addressing them. During his visit to India in April 2008, Maung Aye (Vice Chairman of SPDC) assured that Myanmar will never allow the use of its territory by any organization that harms neighboring countries. At the same time, he acknowledged that, likewise, India does not allow its territory to be used by any organization against Myanmar.
Defence Relations
High-level military-to-military contacts began in 2000. In January, Indian Army Chief General Ved Prakash Malik paid a two-day visit to Myanmar. This was followed by the reciprocal visit by his Myanmar counterpart, General Maung Aye, to the northeast Indian city of Shillong. In the aftermath of these meetings, India began to provide non-lethal military support to Myanmar troops along the border. Most of the Myanmar troops’ uniforms and other combat gear originated from India, as were the leased helicopters Myanmar needed to counter the ethnic insurgents operating from sanctuaries along both sides of the border.
Since the initial exchange of visits, there has been a steady flow of high level visits from both sides. Junta chief, General Than Shwe, visited India In 2004, followed in December 2006 by the third-highest ranking officer in Myanmar’s military hierarchy, General Thura Shwe Mann. The latter toured the National Defense Academy in Khadakvasla and the Tata Motors plant in Pune, which manufactures vehicles for India’s military.
After the relatively small-scale pro-democracy demonstrations in 1988, China stepped in with enhanced military aid, enabling Myanmar’s army to expand to some 500,000 men, the second-largest standing army in South east Asia. Indian military is also concerned about China modernizing the naval bases at Hanggyi, Cocos, Akyab,, Mergui and the port at Kyauk Phuy. The situations seems to have become an unequal triangular relationship, where one party seems to be reaping all the benefits.
SOME CONCLUSIONS
Though China has been able greatly to improve its position in Myanmar and has cultivated civil and military officials, Beijing’s efforts in Myanmar may have started running into the pervasive xenophobia and wariness of dependence on any singular foreign power.
Myanmar is not a democracy or a pluralistic society where clamour for human rights, adherence to international norms and standards have much chance of strict observance. It is one of the few bastions of totalitarian governance in the world today. India may have been making a mistake in looking at Myanmar through the Indian prism and experience. The people, the civil society (what there is left of it) and the media behave very differently than in India. The junta seems to believe that they do not matter much and behaves very differently from the governments in India. It should be taken into account that the Myanmar leadership is perceived as being reclusive and essentially xenophobic, almost happy to be in their own “time warp”, wish to be left alone (except as demanded by the changing international situation) and do not want the dominance of any country in Myanmar’s affairs. They also display occasional touches of racialism. Myanmar’s leadership is able to afford the luxury of such positions mainly because of the country’s strategic geographic location and because it has perhaps the largest military in South East Asia. This view of an untrained amateur student of human behavior (like me) may or may not be valid, but is worth consideration by Indian policy-makers.
With all his experience, Rajiv Sikri feels that Myanmar regards China’s growing influence with suspicion and sees India as the only viable means to balance China’s increasing encroachment, especially in the Kachin and Shan states. For this and other reasons, Myanmar is keen to have good relations with India. India needs to fine-tune its strategy for dealing with Myanmar, focusing not on what should be or might have been, but on what can be done.
Apart from inadequate awareness and respect for the psyche of the leadership in Myanmar, India has not shown much subtlety or finesse (not even matching the limited subtlety or finesse shown in Sri Lanka) in dealing with them. There is no evidence of a clear vision about what we want and how to get it. There is hardly any visible coordinated stance or approach, with too many loose cannons around. Often, India seems to be shooting at its own toes instead of at the target. On the commercial and trade fronts, where most deals are government-to-government, the government’s bureaucratic procedures seem to dominate the decision-making process in the public sector oil companies. There is an urgent need to change this to become commercially competitive in today’s fast-paced international milieu.
Fortunately, India currently enjoys fairly good political, economic and military-relations with Myanmar. India is also involved in infrastructure projects for better India-Myanmar connectivity. However, one cannot but agree with Kris Srinivasan when he concludes that “The outcomes of the energies expended by India over the past two decades have been negligible. The situation calls for a re-appraisal designed to turn the tide more in our favour.
[This paper was prepared by Mr. R.Swaminathan, President & DG, International Institute for Security and Safety Management (New Delhi), former Special Secretary, DG (Security),Govt. of India and Vice-President, Chennai Centre for China Studies, for presentation on 29 October 2009 at the National Seminar on “Recent Developments in Myanmar : Implications for India”, organized jointly by the Department of Politics & Public Administration(University of Madras) and Center for Asia Studies (Chennai). He can be contacted at rsnathan@gmail.com]
A N N E X U R E
Historical Background
The Union of Myanmar, known as Burma till 1989, is the largest country by geographical area (678,500 sq kms) in mainland Southeast Asia. It is bordered by China on the northeast (with the Hengduan Shan mountains as the boundary), Laos on the east, Thailand on the southeast, Bangladesh on the west, India on the northwest and the Bay of Bengal to the southwest. One-third of Myanmar’s total perimeter forms an uninterrupted coastline of 1,930 kilometres. Myanmar and India share a border of over 1,600 kilometers. The country’s culture, heavily influenced by its neighbours, is based on Theravada Buddhism.
Known human habitation in Myanmar goes back nearly 5000 years, from when the Mon, considered to be the first inhabitants, settled in central Myanmar and along the eastern coast of Bay of Bengal. It is believed that the Mon established some trade and cultural contacts with the early inhabitants of India. The Burmans (originally from Yunnan), who established their first kingdom in Myanmar in 849 A.D., eventually absorbed the communities of the Mon and Pyu people. King Anawrahta (r 1044-1077) set up the Pagan Kingdom bringing about the first unified state of Myanmar. Kublai Khan’s victory in 1287 started a period of continual conflicts that continued for many centuries. The appearance of Europeans had little effect on Myanmar due to these conflicts, until they infringed on the British Raj in Bengal. This brought about British intervention (from 1824) and, though Rangoon was occupied in 1853, all of Burma was formally annexed to British India only in 1886. Burma was administered as a province of British India until 1937, when it became a separate colony. One of the results of the British occupation was the flow of Chinese and Indian immigrants, who tended to exploit the Burmans. Indians were drafted in large numbers into the colonial army during the three Anglo-Burma wars in the 19th century, and about 400,000 Indians were taken there to run various public services. The persons of Indian origin on the eve of the Japanese invasion numbered about 1.1 million.Strong Burmese resentment against the British was noticed as early as 1919. It was often vented in violent riots that paralyzed Yangon on occasion. Much of the discontent was caused by a perceived disrespect for Burmese culture and traditions, like the British not removing their shoes upon entering Buddhist temples or other holy places. When scandalized Buddhist monks attempted to physically expel a group of shoe-wearing British in Eindawya Pagoda (Mandalay) in October 1919, the leader of the monks was sentenced to life imprisonment for attempted murder. Such incidents inspired the Burmese resistance to use Buddhism as a rallying point for their cause. Buddhist monks became the vanguards of the independence movement, and many died while protesting. Students were also active participants in anti-British activities.Nationalist sentiments became more evident with the start of World War II. A student leader, Aung San (and his “thirty comrades”) went to Japan for “training”. On return, they founded the Burma Independence Army (BIA) in Bangkok (which was then under Japanese occupation) on 26 December 1941, with the help of Japanese intelligence. When Rangoon fell in March 1942, the BIA formed an administration for the country that operated in parallel with the Japanese military administration. On 1 August 1943, the Japanese declared Burma to be an “independent” nation, and Aung San was appointed War Minister. Later, Aung San became skeptical of the Japanese promises and made plans to organize an uprising in Burma (in cooperation with Communist leaders Thakin Than Tun and Thakin Soe), with help from the British authorities in India. On 27 March 1945, he led the BNA in a revolt against the Japanese occupiers and helped the Allies defeat the Japanese; and the British established a military administration.The Anti-Fascist Organisation (formed in August 1944) was transformed into the Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League (AFPFL), a united front consisting of the BNA, the Communists and the Socialists. The BNA was gradually disarmed by the British, when the Japanese were driven out of Burma. Aung San turned down the rank of Deputy Inspector General of the Burma Army and became the military leader of the People’s Volunteer Organisation. He was popularly referred to as Bogyoke (meaning General). After civilian government was restored in Burma in October 1945, Aung San became the President of the AFPFL in January 1946. In September, he was appointed Deputy Chairman of the Executive Council of Burma by the new British Governor, and was made responsible for defence and external affairs. [This was analogous to the appointment of Jawahar Lal Nehru as the Vice President of the Interim Government in India, in June 1946.] The communists left the AFPFL, when Aung San and others accepted seats on the Executive Council. Aung San (at the age of 31) was to all intents and purposes the Prime Minister. On 27 January 1947, Aung San and Clement Attlee signed an agreement in London guaranteeing Burma’s independence within a year. In April, the AFPFL won 196 out of 202 seats in the Constituent Assembly. Tragedy struck on 19 July 1947, when a gang of armed paramilitaries broke into the Secretariat Building and assassinated Aung San and six of his cabinet ministers, who were participating in a meeting of the Executive Council. [The assassination was allegedly carried out on the orders of political rival U Saw, who was subsequently tried and hanged.] U Nu, (a former student leader) and Foreign Minister Ba Maw took over the leadership of the government and AFPFL. The country became independent on 4 January 1948, as the “Union of Burma”. It became the “Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma” on 4 January 1974, before reverting to the “Union of Burma” on 23 September 1988. On 18 June, 1989, the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) adopted the name “Union of Myanmar”.Military RuleCivilian government ended in 1962 when General Ne Win led a military coup and put U Nu in prison. Myanmar now has one of the longest surviving military regimes in the world. Ne Win ruled for nearly 26 years and pursued policies in the name of “Burmese Way to Socialism”. Between 1962 and 1974, Burma was ruled by a Revolutionary Council headed by the general, and almost all aspects of society (business, media, production – including the Boy Scouts) were nationalized or brought under government control. In an effort to consolidate power, General Ne Win and many top generals “resigned” from the military and took civilian posts. They held “elections” under a one-party system and Ne Win ruled Burma between 1974 and 1988, through the Burma Socialist Programme Party (BSPP), which was the sole political party allowed to function. The Burmese Way to Socialism adopted Soviet-style nationalization and central planning and was a kind of an amalgam of Buddhism and Marxism. During this period, Burma became one of the world’s most impoverished countries.People whose ancestors were not from the “original” Myanmar races, i.e. Sino-Burman and Indo-Burman communities, were classified as “associate citizens” or “resident aliens”, with the right to vote, but not allowed to be elected or hold government positions above a certain level. This and the wholesale nationalisation of private enterprises led to the exodus of about 300,000 Burmese Indians.Almost from the beginning of military rule, there were sporadic protests against it, many organized by students, and were almost always violently suppressed by the government. Student protests were violently broken up every year during 1974-77. Unrest over economic mismanagement and political oppression led to widespread pro-democracy demonstrations throughout the country in 1988. Security forces killed thousands of demonstrators. Ne Win stepped down in July. Aung San Suu Kyi (the daughter of Aung San), in partnership with Brigadier Aung Gyi and General Tin U, tried to appease those who resented the military rule and was only partly successful. Defense Minister General Saw Maung staged a coup in September and formed the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC). In 1989, SLORC declared martial law after widespread protests. In July, Aung San Suu Kyi was placed under house arrest and General Tin U put in prison.In May 1990, the government held free elections for the first time in almost 30 years. The National League for Democracy (NLD), the party of Aung San Suu Kyi, won 392 out of a total 489 seats, and 60 % of the votes. The election results were, however, annulled by SLORC, which arrested most of its top leaders and declared that a non-military government could not be established in Myanmar, without a new constitution. The award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Aung San Suu Kyi in 1991 put a lot of pressure on the SLORC. When General Than Shwe took over as SLORC chairman in 1992, many political prisoners were released and Aung San Suu Kyi was allowed visits from her family; and later allowed to meet a U.S congressman, a UN official and an American reporter. In 1992, SLORC unveiled plans to create a new constitution through the National Convention, which began 9 January 1993. When the military directed it to give it a major role in the government, NLD party members walked out the convention. The National Convention continues to convene and adjourn. Many major political parties, particularly the NLD, have been absent or excluded, and little progress has been made.The State Law and Order Restoration Council was renamed as the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) in 1997, with the same leadership as the SLORC. On 7 February 2008, SPDC announced that a referendum would soon be held relating to the new Constitution, and that elections would be held by 2010. The referendum, held on 10 May 2008, promised a “discipline-flourishing democracy” for the country. The referendum is seen by many as an effort to “legalise” the perpetuation of the military rule.
http://www.c3sindia.org/india/1012
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
28-10-09 Shwe Gas Campaign staged demonstration in New Delhi
.JPG)
တရုတ္အစိုးရ ကုမၸဏီမ်ားသည္ ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရႏွင့္ ပူးေပါင္းကာ ျမန္မာျပည္အႏွံ႔ ေျမေပၚ၊ ေျမေအာက္ရွိ သစ္ေတာ ႏွင့္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာ သယံဇာတ တြင္းထြက္ ပစၥည္းမ်ားကို လက္နက္ပစၥည္းႏွင့္ အလဲအလွယ္ ျပဳလုပ္လာခဲ့သည္မွာ ႏွစ္ေပါင္း မ်ားစြာ ၾကာျမင့္လ်က္ ရွိ္ေပသည္။
ယခု ေနာက္ဆုံးအေနျဖင့္ ဗမာ စစ္အစုိးရအား ႏွစ္စဥ္ ေဒၚလာ သန္းေပါင္း (၅၀၀) ႏွင့္ (၈၀၀) အၾကား ဝင္ေငြ ရရွိေစမည့္ အေနာက္ဘက္ ရခုိင္ ကမ္းလြန္ေဒသမွ ေရႊသဘာဝ ဓါတ္ေငြ႔မွ ဓါတ္ေငြ႔မ်ားကုိ တရုပ္ျပည္သုိ႔ သယ္ယူရန္အတြက္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံအား ခါးလယ္မွ ျဖတ္သန္းကာ ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ ပုိက္လုိင္း ေဖာက္လုပ္ရန္ျဖစ္သည္။ ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ ပိုက္လိုင္း ေဖါက္လုပ္ ျဖတ္သန္းမည့္ ေဒသမ်ားမွာ ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္၊ မေကြးတိုင္း၊ မႏၲေလးတိုင္း ႏွင့္ ရွမ္းျပည္နယ္ တုိ႔ ျဖစ္ၾကၿပီး ပုိက္လုိင္း လမ္းေၾကာင္း တေလွ်ာက္ရွိ လယ္ယာ ေျမဧက ေျမာက္မ်ားစြာႏွင့္ ေက်းရြာေျမာက္မ်ားစြာကို ေလ်ာ္ေၾကး မေပးဘဲ အတင္းအဓမၼ ဖ်က္သိမ္းလ်က္၊ ပုိက္လုိင္း လုံၿခံဳေရးအတြက္လည္း စစ္တပ္မွ တပ္ရင္းေပါင္း ၄၀ ကို္လည္း လမ္းေၾကာင္း တေလွ်ာက္တြင္ တုိးခ်ဳဲ႕ ခ်ထားလုိက္သည္။ ပုိက္လုိင္း ေဖာက္လုပ္မည့္ လမ္းေၾကာင္း တေလွ်ာက္ရွိ ျပည္သူ လူထုမွာ အတင္းအဓမၼ လုပ္အားေပး ေစခုိင္းျခင္းမ်ား၊ လိင္ပုိင္းဆုိင္ရာ အတင္းအဓမၼ ျပဳက်င့္ ခံရမည့္ အႏၱရယ္မ်ား ႏွင့္ မတရား ဖမ္းဆီး ညႇင္းပန္း ႏွိပ္စက္ သတ္ျဖတ္ခံရျခင္းမ်ားျဖင့္ ရင္ဆိုင္္ခံရဖြယ္ ရွိေနသည္။
ထုိ႔ေၾကာင့္ ေရႊသဘာဝ ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ လႈပ္ရွားမႈအဖြဲ႔မွ ကမကထျပဳလုပ္ၿပီး ႏုိင္ငံေပါင္း ၁၀ ႏုိင္ငံေက်ာ္မွွ ေဒသခံမ်ား ႏွင့္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံသားမ်ားက တရုတ္အစိုးရအား ျမန္မာ့ သယံဇာတမ်ား ေခါင္းပုံျဖတ္ အျမတ္ ထုတ္ယူေနမႈမ်ားကုိ ရုပ္သိမ္းေပးပါရန္ ေတာင္းဆိုမည္ျဖစ္၍ အိႏၵိယႏုိင္ငံေရာက္ ျမန္မာ ႏုိင္ငံသားမ်ားကလည္း တရုပ္အစုိးရအား ျမန္မာ စစ္အစုိးရအား ဆန္႔က်င္ကန္႔ကြက္သည့္ ပူးေပါင္း ဆႏၵျပပဲြ တရပ္ကို ျပဳလုပ္မည္ ျဖစ္ေသာေၾကာင့္ မပ်က္မကြက္ ပါဝင္ အားေပးၾကပါရန္ ဖိတ္ၾကား အပ္ပါသည္။
Monday, October 26, 2009
26-10-09 Optimism about Aung San Suu Kyi is unjustified, no change in Myanmar, Burmese exile says
by Tint Swe
Military junta envisages “easing” the terms of the Nobel Prize laureate’s house arrest and the possibility of giving her a role in the process of national reconciliation. ASEAN, Chinese and Indian leaders react positively to the announcement, but the euphoria it generated will not help the country’s process of democratisation.
New Delhi (AsiaNews) – Burma’s military junta is considering easing the terms of the house arrest of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who spent 14 of the past 20 years in some form of detention. The signal of openness came from Prime Minister General Thein Sein during the ten-nation ASEAN summit in Thailand. He said the Nobel Prize laureate could “contribute to the process of national reconciliation.”
Here is an analysis by Tint Swe, member of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), which was set up by Myanmar exiles in the wake of the 1990 elections won by the National League for Democracy, but never recognised by the military.
After fleeing to India in 1990, and taking up residence in New Delhi on 21 December 1991, he became the NCGUB information minister responsible for South Asia and East Timor.
Signals of optimism are coming from all corners, but when it comes to Burma, there are four strategically important nations and blocs, namely China, ASEAN, India as well as America and the European Union, whose views must be taken into consideration. Hence, the news might seem good and full of hope. It is something like the days when Aung San Suu Kyi was first freed from house arrest in 1995. It is wise however to point out what happened in the 14 years that followed her release: generals remained on top, prisoners went to jail, Aung San Suu Kyi was kept in her home; in short, no changes.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) welcomed a new US policy of engagement with Burma and the sixteen leaders attending the fourth East Asia Summit in Thailand agreed to encourage the regime to ensure a fair general election in 2010. ASEAN leaders are fans of the military junta. They easily accept the excuses given by their Burmese counterpart.
However, when Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said that Suu Kyi might be able to play an active role in society and possibly, in politics again, he was using a diplomatic expression that can be interpreted as meaning “no”.
Still, all participants were overwhelmed as Burma’s prime minister said that the ruling junta saw a role for Aung San Suu Kyi in the process of reconciliation leading up to elections in 2010.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh spoke of an atmosphere of hope and said that next year's elections are a sign of reconciliation of the various segments of Myanmar society.
After meeting with his Burmese counterpart, China's Prime Minister Wen Jiabao also expressed confidence and pledged more financial aid to Burma.
Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee rightly said that political reforms and national reconciliation should be expedited and must involve all stakeholders.
However, Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy (NLD) called for reforms to the constitution the junta unilaterally adopted in the middle of last year’s devastating cyclone Nargis. Even without changes to the constitution, the junta may still invite NLD at last minute. Only then would ASEAN leaders have anything good to say, as they did last Sunday in Thailand.
US Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell will be travel to India for consultation before the second round of talks with Myanmar’s State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) starts.
Meanwhile, India is taking credit for all good news regarding Burma. In a report, it claims that former Indian foreign secretaries were able to convince the US to accept engagement with Myanmar. The report also said that India passed high-level messages from the junta to the US.
Before Campbell announced this week that the US would work closely with India and China regarding Myanmar, the United States during the Bush administration had already tried to work with the United Nations and Burma’s two big neighbours.
Still, India knows very well that with regard to next year’s election, the military regime will not meet ASEAN’s expectations and the NLD’s legitimate demands. Instead, India is likely to urge the US to engage Burma independently of the elections.
In the end, Indian and ASEAN leaders will be satisfied with the junta’s words about softening the terms of Aung San Suu Kyi’s house arrest. Maybe, she will be allowed to see her physician and lawyers a couple of times more.
For some, there might be euphoria, but it will not lead Burma anywhere.
(Nirmala Carvalho contributed to this article)
http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=16691&size=A#
26-10-09 US 'softens' Myanmar stance, thanks to India
ႊThe Times of Inia
Indrani Bagchi, TNN 26 October 2009, 01:28am IST
NEW DELHI: In the past couple of years, India has taken a lot of international heat for its close engagement with Myanmar’s ruling junta when the US and EU were slamming on sanctions, essentially driving Myanmar into even greater isolation.
But the US policy was singularly unsuccessful, as many Indian officials said it was bound to be. It took US secretary of state Hillary Clinton to signal a change, when she announced the review saying the sanctions weren’t working. This week, when US assistant secretary of state Kurt Campbell stops by New Delhi on his way to Yangon, India aims to keep “engagement” on top of the agenda.
India, like China, had two mantras for the West — engage with Myanmar and take the sanctions pressure off. Most in the west thought this was India’s way of keeping up with the Joneses, in this case China, particularly as China made further inroads into Myanmar. In fact, one of the key issues India will discuss with the US will be to delink the fledgling engagement process from next year’s elections in Myanmar. That, India feels, would put almost unbearable pressure.
India looks upon the softening by US and Myanmar as significant, said sources. In a clear sign of
reciprocity to the US signals, Myanmar’s prime minister Thein Sein reportedly indicated to his Asean colleagues on the sidelines of the East Asia Summit this weekend that the junta government might soften the terms of Aung San Suu Kyi’s house arrest.
Earlier, the 15th Asean Summit issued a statement saying the Asean leaders discussed the Myanmar situation and underscored “that the general elections to be held in Myanmar in 2010 must be conducted in a fair, free, inclusive and transparent manner in order to be credible to the international community”.
Fresh from the failure of the isolation policy in both North Korea and Myanmar, the Obama administration, after an eight-month-long review, has decided to engage with Myanmar’s generals. On September 29, Campbell held his first meeting with Myanmar’s science minister U Thaung in New York.
Though it did not yield much, it certainly paved the way for the first official visit from Washington to Yangon in decades. The basic idea here is not to repeat the mistakes of North Korea, that could push isolationist regimes like Myanmar closer to countries like North Korea.
Campbell announced this week that the US would closely work with India and China regarding Myanmar.
In India, former foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon as well as his successor Nirupama Rao have used the foreign office consultations with the US to push for engagement with Myanmar and a sensitisation of the US to Myanmarese concerns. India is a reluctant mediator, but at Myanmar’s request, India has even passed on messages from the junta to the US at a reasonably high level. This was one of many signals that Myanmar sent to the US indicating it was ready to open up.
India sees an unprecedented desire for openness with the Myanmarese generals. This has been helped by an important development — a letter by jailed leader Suu Kyi to Than Shwe declaring she would work to reduce international sanctions on Myanmar. She also asked in the letter to meet representatives of the US, EU and Australia, which was allowed.
That started an internal thaw, which contributed to the new western approach. India, said sources, has conducted an equal number of confidential conversations with the Myanmarese as well.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
20-10-09 Census of Burmese population in Mizoram
Khonumthung News
20 October 2009: The Young Mizo Association (YMA) in Mizoram, in northeast India, has been compiling a list of Burmese people in the state. The census started in June and so far the numbers have crossed 6,000, including Chin people.
There are 772 branches of the YMA in Mizoram state. The census is being conducting in each branch in their respective locations and 173 branches have completed their work. It is revealed that there are 6375 Chin/Burmese people. There are 4808 Chin females and 1567 Chin males. The census figures of the rest of the 559 branches of YMA will be available soon.
The census list of YMA shows that the density of population of Chin people are mostly in locations such as Airfield, Bethlehem Vengtlang, Bawngkawn, Chaltlang, Chhinga veng, Dawrpui, Dawrpui vengthar, Electric Veng, Ramhlun Venglai, Ramthar Veng, Rangvamual, Vaivakawn, Zemabawk and Zuangtui.
Although the purpose behind the census has not yet been revealed, some people feel that it is because of the report regarding Chin people’s condition in Mizoram by the Human Rights Watch based in USA early this year.
Some records highlighted that there are more than 70,000 Chin/Burmese in Mizoram while some claim the figure is more than 100,000. However, it will become clear when the YMA census is done. -
Monday, October 19, 2009
18-10-09 Bangladesh fears Myanmar may attack their island in Bengal bay
Dhaka, Oct 18 : Bangladesh, which is currently engaged in a dispute with Myanmar over border fencing, fears that Yangon may attack its St. Martin's Island in the Bay of Bengal, a media report said.
Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), which guards the land border, has identified the St Martin's Island as the "probable main target" of Myanmar and has asked the government to immediately strengthen its defence by constructing aircraft landing zones and concrete bunkers.
This is contained in a "strategic proposal" that came in the wake of constant military build-up and intimidation by Myanmar, The Daily Star newspaper said.
The St Martin's Island, the only coral island of the country and the main attraction for local and foreign tourists for its panoramic beauty and pristine marine life, is under the jurisdiction of the Bangladesh Coastguards.
The island, which is located in a mineral rich region in the Bay of Bengal, is 8 km west of Myanmar coast.
The BDR has submitted its proposal to the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Prime Minister's Office, the navy and air force headquarters and the director general of Coastguards.
It has also urged the government to increase defence capability of land and sea borders to "repulse any possible aggression by the neighbouring country".
Both Dhaka and Yangon have moved in more forces along the border and deployed naval ships and fighter jets in the last ten days since Yangon erected a barbed wire fence and allegedly pushed in thousands of Rohingya Muslim tribals who inhabit the western flank of the Arakan ranges close to the Bangladesh border.
Bangladesh, which has over 4,300 km border with India, shares 300 km of its border with Myanmar.
Marking a 148 km stretch of border with Myanmar and India as 'unguarded', the border force has suggested setting up temporary frontier camps until a new battalion is set up in Ali Kadam area as per the BDR restructuring proposal.
The restructuring proposal has been made as part of the changes Dhaka wants to effect after sections of the border guards staged a mutiny in February in which 74 people were killed.
It has asked the government to arm the paramilitary force with more manpower and modern military equipment, the report said.
The border guards say that the Myanmar military often crosses the zero line at the Bandarban frontier and carry out operations to combat various separatist organisations. Apart from erecting barbed-wire fences and unilaterally mobilising the army, the Myanmar authorities are forcing their nationals to enter Bangladesh territory.
A senior home ministry official Saturday said the Prime Minister's Office is dealing with the "very sensitive and serious matter", the newspaper said.
--IANS
18-10-09 Go closer to Indo-Myanmar border: Govt to Assam Rifles
Source: The Sangai Express / PTI
New Delhi, October 18 2009: The Centre has directed the Assam Rifles to move its troops closer to the sensitive Indo-Myanmar frontier in order to curb cross-border movement of arms, drugs and militants.
Most of the troops of the 174 year-old paramilitary force, which functions under the administrative control of the Ministry of Home Affairs and operational command of the Army, are currently deployed 40 kilometres away from the international border.
"We have directed the Assam Rifles to deploy forces closer to the border to stop militants and smugglers having a free run," a Home Ministry official said.
Many North-east insurgent groups still maintain their camps and training centres across the 1,631 km-long border that runs along the four frontier States of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram.
Smuggling of arms and ammunition across the border is also rampant, the official said.
Besides this, cross-border smuggling of narcotics is always a concern for the security forces since such substances always find markets in metros and other major cities.
"Because of hostile terrain and dense forests, the militants find it easy to cross the border and set up their bases there.
The border is also free for drug smugglers," the official said.
17-10-09 Army working on flushing out NE UG camps in Myanmar
Source: Hueiyen News Service
Imphal, October 17 2009: Lt gen NK Singh, AVSM, VSM, General Officer Commanding, 3 Corps has said that operation at Loktak to flush out insurgents from the lake will be carried out again at any opportune moment.
He was replying to a journalist's question during a media interaction with the GOC on the occasion of releasing a book titled "3 Corp's Kaleidoscope: The North East Palette" at Rangapahar Military Station near Dimapur in Nagaland on the evening of October 15 .
The GOC said, it's true that the military operation carried out recently at the Loktak lake was a great success.
However, Loktak is not like any other lake where a boat can easily cover.
There are too many cultivations, and it's possible that some of the underground insurgents were still hiding out there.
But the Army is using sophisticated tracking system to keep track of their movement on the lake, he said.
Regarding the existence of camps of the insurgent outfits of Manipur in Myanmar, Lt Gen NK Singh said that there are different kinds of camps of the insurgent outfits in Myanmar-transit camps, permanent camps and training camps.
Some camps are there with sanction of local authority, he said.
The GOC, 3 Corps further said that Army has brought up the issue at various levels of the Myanmar authority.
The Myanmar government has been very supportive and cooperative.
The Chief of Army Staff, Gen Deepak Kapoor had been to Yangon, Myanmar on a three day visit from October 11 to 13 and had discussions with the highest level of authority there, Lt Gen NK Singh informed the journalists from different parts of the North Eastern region.
He further said that some UG camps which were set up near the India-Myanmar international border withdrew far back into Myanmar territory due to operations launched by the security forces recently.
The GOC did not rule out launching a major operation along with the cooperation of Myanmar authority to flush out the insurgent camps of the North East in Myanmar.
Expressing sadness over the current crisis in Manipur which came about after July 23 incident of Khwairamband market, Lt Gen NK Singh said that prior to July 23, there was good progress in Manipur in respect counter-insurgency operations.
But due to the developments that followed the incident, the situation in Manipur is somewhat bad.
He lamented that the students of Manipur valley have not been able to attend school due to the class boycott stir called by a few student organisations for over one month now.
However, the Government of Manipur is opening new channels to resolve the crisis.
Hopefully, it will be over soon, the GOC said adding that once the problem is resolved, the Army and Para Military organisations will try to bring the situation in Manipur to that which prevailed prior to July 23 .
It may be mentioned here that 3 Corps looks after the security aspects including counter-insurgency operations and protection of territorial integrity of India in six North Eastern states namely, Manipur, Nagaland, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Tripura and Southern Assam.
The GOC, 3 Corps said that by and large, the situation in Tripura is normal.
In Arunachal Pradesh also, the situation is normal.
The recent assembly election was peaceful.
The voter turn out was really large.
In Mizoram, there is complete peace, he said.
In North Cachar Hills in southern Assam, the leadership and cadres of DHD(J) had surrendered.
The security forces are dominating the areas there, he said.
In respect of Nagaland, the Union Home Secretary, GK Pillai was in the state recently.
A political package is being prepared by the Government of India, and it will be ready by the end of November.
The Government of India is sincere in arriving at a solution, Lt Gen Singh said.
He clarified that the ceasefire with the NSCN-IM is effective only in Nagaland.
Actions are taken and NSCN-IM cadres are arrested elsewhere.
The NSCN-IM and other groups are using Arunachal Pradesh as their trasit areas, he said.
Replying to a question from a journalist about the whereabouts of ULFA supremo Paresh Baruah, Lt Gen Singh said, all reports about him being in China or India-Myanmar border or elsewhere are mostly speculative and not authentic.
There are agents tracking him.
There is no report of Paresh Baruah having official contact with China.
But there could be clandestine contacts between him and certain agents, the GOC said.
Before the media interaction, Lt Gen NK Singh released a 240-page book containing well-researched articles and breath-taking photographs on people, cultures and region of the six North Eastern states.
The book, a special edition, which is not for sale, was published by Headquarters 3 Corps.
The photographs were taken by Kunal Verma and Dipti Bhalla and also by Ministry of Defence and 13 Mechanised Infantry (18 Rajput).
The team leader is Brig Souresh Bhattacharya, VSM.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
ဥေရာပသံကုိယ္စားလွယ္ အဖြဲ႔နဲ႔ အမ်ိဳးသားဒီမုိကေရစီအဖြဲ႔ခ်ဳပ္ ေတြ႔ဆုံ
ဆီြဒႏိုင္ငံ သံအမတ္ၾကီႏ ေခါင္းေဆာင္တဲ့ ထုိင္းႏုိင္ငံအေျခစုိက္ အီးယူ ဥေရာပသံရံုးေတြက ကုိယ္စားလွယ္ အဖြဲ႔တဖြဲ႔ဟာ အန္အယ္လ္ဒီ အမ်ိဳးသားဒီမုိကေရစီ အဖြဲ႔ခ်ဳပ္ စီအီးစီ ဗဟုိအလုပ္အမႈေဆာင္ အဖြဲ႔နဲ႔ အန္အယ္လ္ဒီရံုးခ်ဳပ္မွာ ဒီကေန႔ ေအာက္တိုဘာ ၁၄ ရက္က လာေရာက္ ေတြ႔ဆံုခဲ့ပါတယ္။
ဒီေတြ႔ဆံုပြဲကုိ အီးယူအဖြဲ႔ကုိယ္စားလွယ္ အေယာက္ ၂၀ နဲ႔ အန္အယ္လ္ဒီ စီအီးစီအဖြဲ႔ဝင္ ၆ ဦး တက္ေရာက္ခဲ့တယ္လုိ႔ ပါတီေျပာခြင့္ရပုဂၢိဳလ္ တဦးျဖစ္သူ ေဒါက္တာ ၀င္းႏိုင္က RFA ကုိ ေျပာပါတယ္။
ေဒါက္တာ ဝင္းႏုိင္။ ။ “ဒီေန႔ ကြ်န္ေတာ္တို႔ အဖြဲ႔ခ်ဳပ္ကို ဥေရာပသမဂၢ ကိုယ္စားလွယ္ ၂၀ လာျပီးေတာ့ ကြ်န္ေတာ္တို႔ CEC အဖြဲ႔နဲ႔ ေတြ႔ဆံုတယ္။ CEC အဖြဲ႔မွာ ဦးသန္းထြန္း၊ ဦးလွေဖ၊ ဦးညြန္႔ေဝ၊ ဦးစိုးျမင့္၊ ဦးဝင္းတင္နဲ႔ ဦးခင္ေမာင္ေဆြတို႔ ပါတယ္။ အဲ သူတို႔က လက္ခံ ေတြ႔ဆံုျပီးေတာ့ ေဆြးေႏြးၾကတယ္ေပါ့။”
ဒီကေန႔ ေတြ႔ဆံုပြဲမွာ အီးယူသံကုိယ္စားလွယ္အဖြဲ႔ဘက္က ၂၀၁၀ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲနဲ႔ပတ္သက္လုိ႔ အန္အယ္လ္ဒီ ပါတီရဲ့ သေဘာထား ရပ္တည္ခ်က္ကုိ အဓိကထား ေမးျမန္းခဲ့ျပီး၊ အန္အယ္ဒီ စီအီးစီအဖြဲ႔ဘက္က ေရႊဂံုံုတုိင္ေၾကညာစာတမ္းပါ ေတာင္းဆုိခ်က္ ၃ခုကုိ စစ္အစုိးရဘက္က လုိက္ေလ်ာရင္ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲဝင္မဲ့ အေၾကာင္း ျပန္လည္ရွင္းျပခဲ့တယ္လုိ႔ ပါတီ စီအီးစီအဖြဲ႔ဝင္ ဦးခင္ေမာင္ေဆြက ေျပာပါတယ္။
ဦးခင္ေမာင္ေဆြ။ ။ “Election က်ရင္ ဘယ္လို လုပ္မလဲေပါ့ဗ်ာ။ 2010 ကိုေပါ့။ ဘယ္လို လုပ္ၾကမလဲဆိုေတာ့ ကြ်န္ေတာ္တို႔က elelection ေတာ့ ေရႊဂံုတိုင္ ညီလာခံထဲမွာ ပါတဲ့အတိုင္း ကြ်န္ေတာ္တို႔ ရပ္တည္ေနပါတယ္။ အဲ option သံုးခုကို ကြ်န္ေတာ္တို႔ ေတာင္းထားပါတယ္။ ေတာင္းထားတာကို၊ ေတာင္းထားတာနဲ႔ ကြ်န္ေတာ္တို႔ သက္ဆိုင္ရာ အာဏာပိုင္ဖက္က လိုက္ေလ်ာျပီးေတာ့ ေပးမယ္ဆိုလို႔ရွိရင္ေတာ့ ကြ်န္ေတာ္တို႔ ဝင္ၾကဖို႔ပဲ ရွိပါတယ္။ ”
အန္အယ္ဒီပါတီ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ ဝင္ေရာက္ေရးနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လုိ႔ ေလာေလာဆယ္ တိတိက်က် ဆံုးျဖတ္ထားတာ မရွိေသးေၾကာင္း၊ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ ဥပေဒနဲ႔ စည္းမ်ဥ္းစည္းကမ္းေတြ တရားဝင္ ထုတ္ျပန္တဲ့ အခါမွသာ ပါတီညီလာခံတရပ္ က်င္းပျပီးေနာက္ ဆံုးျဖတ္ခ်က္ ခ်မွတ္မွာျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း အီးယူအဖြဲ႔ကုိ ရွင္းျပခဲ့တယ္လုိ႔ ဦးခင္ေမာင္ေဆြက ေျပာပါတယ္။
ဒီကေန႔ ေတြ႔ဆံုပြဲဟာ ၁ နာရီေက်ာ္ ၾကာျမင့္ခဲ့ျပီး တျခား စီအီးစီအဖြဲ႔ဝင္ေတြ ျဖစ္တဲ့ ဦးေအာင္ေရႊ၊ ဦးလြင္နဲ႔ ဦးလြန္းတင္တုိ႔ေတာ့ တက္ေရာက္ႏိုင္ျခင္း မရွိဘူးလုိ႔ သိရပါတယ္။
ရန္ကုန္ျမိဳ႕မွာ ရွိတဲ့ အေမရိကန္၊ ျဗိတိန္နဲ႔ ၾသစေၾတးလ်ႏိုင္ငံ သံရံုးေတြက သံတမန္ေတြလည္း ျပီးခဲ့တဲ့ ေသာၾကာေန႔က ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔ သြားေရာက္ ေတြ႔ဆံုျပီးေနာက္ အန္အယ္လ္ဒီ ဗဟုိအလုပ္အမႈေတြအဖြဲ႔နဲ႔ ပါတီရံုးခ်ဳပ္မွာ ေတြ႔ဆံုခဲ့ပါေသးတယ္။
အီးယူသံတမန္အဖြဲ႔နဲ႔ အန္အယ္ဒီ ဗဟုိအလုပ္အမႈေဆာင္အဖြဲ႔တုိ႔ ဒီကေန႔ ေတြ႔ဆံုမႈနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လုိ႔ စီအီးစီအဖြဲ႔ဝင္ ဦးခင္ေမာင္ေဆြနဲ႔ RFAအဖြဲ႔သား ကုိေက်ာ္ေက်ာ္ေအာင္ ဆက္သြယ္ ေမးျမန္းထားပါတယ္။
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
12-10-09 The President of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, Dr. Jose Ramos-Horta, has today issued the following statement
For Immediate Release
12 October, 2009
Earlier this month, Burma’s military regime provided a further example of its extraordinary inhumanity and intransigence, with its decision to reject the appeal by my fellow Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi against the verdict last month which imposed a further term of eighteen months under house arrest. I deplore this decision, and call for her immediate and unconditional release.
The events of the past two years in Burma have shocked the world. The military regime’s brutal suppression of the peaceful protests led by Buddhist monks in 2007, followed by the assassination of Karen leader Padoh Mahn Sha Lah Phan, the tragedy of Cyclone Nargis, the sham constitutional referendum, the escalation in the military offensive against civilians in eastern Burma, the famine in Chin State, attacks on ethnic groups on the China-Burma border and the trial and continued imprisonment of my fellow Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi are all examples of the desperate political, human rights and humanitarian crisis in Burma today.
The deterioration in the political and humanitarian situation calls for a clear response by the international community. I welcome the initiatives taken by the UN Secretary-General, and the recent statements by the US Administration. I also welcome Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s clear reiteration of her call for dialogue with the regime. A combination of high-level, principled engagement with specific targeted pressure is what is required to bring the Generals to the negotiating table.
It is time for the international community to increase and intensify its efforts. In particular, it is time for the UN Security Council to introduce an arms embargo on the regime. There can be no justification for selling arms to a regime which has no external threats and uses those arms simply to suppress its owns people. As President of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, I therefore call on all members of the UN Security Council to give serious consideration to this question, and to pass a resolution imposing a total, comprehensive, mandatory arms embargo.
12-10-09 India’s Army Chief visits Burma
ႈThe Irrawaddy magazine
By Wai Moe
The chief of India’s army, General Deepak Kapoor, kicked off a three-day visit to Burma on Sunday to meet with Burmese generals to enhance military-to-military cooperation.
“We have always had close ties with them [Burma], including in counter-insurgency training,” an Indian army officer told Press Trust of India (PTI) on Sunday.
The PTI reported that the Indian generals’ visit to Burma “comes at a time when China has unveiled plans to construct a railway line up to its border” with military-ruled Burma.
Commenting on Beijing’s influence in the region, Deepak Kapoor, in a TV interview on Oct. 6, said, “The Indian army is capable of looking after and ensuring the defense of the country. It would take care of any aggression against Indian territory.”
“The charter of the Indian army is to defend India’s territory and that will be ensured at all costs. Any talks of a repeat of 1962, I think that it is totally incorrect and uncalled for and it’s not fair,” he said, referring to the Sino-India border conflict in 1962 when the Chinese People’s Liberation Army advanced into India’s territory.
Recently, India media have accused the Chinese military of transgressions in 2008 and 2009.
“As far the transgressions are concerned, in the year 2009 so far, they are almost exactly at the same level as they were in the same corresponding period in 2008,” Deepak Kapoor said.
Burmese state-run media have not reported on the meeting with India’s military chief.
Following the crackdown on the 1988 democracy uprising in Burma, India was a strong supporter of the Burmese pro-democracy movement, and it is now home of tens of thousands of Burmese refugee.
India’s pro-democracy policy on Burma made a sudden turn when the world’s largest democracy launched its “Look East Policy” in the 1990s to counter Chinese influence in Southeast Asia.
Since then, India has built a closer relationship with the Burmese junta, engaging in increased trade and providing it with military hardware, while toning down its pro-democracy stance.
“The Sino-Burmese gas pipeline and the Kumming-Singapore railway route through Burma are concerns for India. Apart from their Chinese concerns, the Indian insurgency in the northwest is another significant issue in the Indo-Burmese relationship,” said Tint Swe, an exiled Burmese politician in New Delhi.
The Burmese military cooperated more closely with its Indian counterparts in counter insurgency along the border after New Delhi toned down its pro-democracy policy on Burma. However, Indian insurgents are still based in Burmese jungles along the border and they frequently clash with the Indian army using Chinese-made weapons.
The Jame’s Intelligence Review reported in 2008 that Indian insurgents bought Chinese weapons through the biggest non-state armed group in Burma, the United Wa State Army, based on the Sino-Burmese border.
Burma military experts say the junta wants a good relationship with India to balance its dependency on China. The Burmese military has imported arms from India and also sent military officers to attend India’s military academies.
The junta’s No.2, Vice Snr-Gen Maung Aye, is the key player in improving the Indo-Burma relationship. His last visit to India was in early April 2008. During the trip, India signed mult-million dollar agreements for the construction of a seaport and transportation system in Burma.
According to India’s media, former Indian Army chief Gen. J. J. Singh and Navy chief Admiral Arun Prakash visited Burma in November 2005 and January 2006.
Meanwhile, US President Barrack Obama’s new Burma policy calls for more pro-active cooperation from Burma’s neighbors, such as India and China, in promoting democracy in the military-ruled state.
Irrawaddy correspondent Zarni Mann contributed to this story from New Delhi.
Monday, October 12, 2009
19-10-09 Getting to Know Burma's Ruling General (Time magazine)
Monday, Oct. 19, 2009
By Andrew Marshall
Among Manchester United Football Club's 300 million or so supporters worldwide are two Burmese men whose love of the game spans generations. One is a stout, bespectacled, betel nut — chewing septuagenarian, the other his favorite teenage grandson, and like many of their soccer-mad compatriots they stay up late into Burma's tropical nights to watch live broadcasts from faraway England. So far, so normal. But knowing the grandfather in this touching scene is Senior General Than Shwe, the xenophobic chief of Burma's junta, makes it seem all wrong. Rabidly anti-Western, yet pro-Wayne Rooney, is this the tyrant we know and hate?
That English football is one of Than Shwe's surprise passions might seem trivial, but it raises a serious question. With U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying on Sept. 24 that Washington would begin "engaging directly" with Burma's military leaders after 20 years of American censure and sanctions, how well do we really know the junta? "We don't understand it very well at all, although it's not very easy to understand," says Donald M. Seekins, a Burma scholar at Meio University in Okinawa, Japan. Trying to fathom the regime's worldview doesn't mean we condone its human-rights abuses; many believe that ongoing atrocities by the Burmese military constitute war crimes. But policies based on a flawed understanding of Than Shwe and his men will be ineffective or even counterproductive, warn Burma experts. Now, therefore, is time to get to know the generals — starting with the man his soldiers call Aba Gyi, or Grandfather. (See TIME's photo essay "Burma: 19 Years of Protest.")
Loyalty — and Dishonor
Than Shwe, the junta's chief since 1992, is Burma's enigmatic but undisputed leader. "He exercises almost absolute power," says Seekins. "Nobody wants to challenge him, at least openly." His origins were humble. Born in a village not far from Mandalay, Burma's last royal capital, he dropped out of high school and worked in a post office before joining officer-training school and rising up through the military ranks, specializing in psychological warfare. Unquestioning loyalty was "the secret of his success," says Benedict Rogers, co-author of a forthcoming book called Than Shwe: Unmasking Burma's Tyrant. "He always followed orders. He was never seen by anyone as a threat, and therefore was rewarded with promotions, precisely because he didn't really demonstrate any flair or initiative."
Since reaching the top, Than Shwe has shown "a talent for hanging on to power," says Seekins. Rivals are ruthlessly purged: Khin Nyunt, his ambitious former spy chief, has been under house arrest since 2004. Burma watchers say loyal officers are rewarded with opportunities to enrich themselves through graft and rent-seeking.
The West might regard him as backward, but Than Shwe, 76, sees himself as a bold reformer who took a bankrupt nation and threw it open to foreign investment, who built not just roads and bridges but a grand new capital called Naypyidaw — "Abode of Kings." The reality is a little different. Foreign trade has enriched the junta; the Yadana natural-gas project alone has earned the regime $4.83 billion since 2000, according to the Washington-based nonprofit EarthRights International in a recent report. But most Burmese still live in wretched poverty. The new capital is an expensive boondoggle.
And yet to write off Than Shwe as the deluded head of a hermit regime is a mistake. The junta has shrewdly adapted to 20 years of breakneck growth in Asia, first drawing investment from Southeast Asian neighbors — until a new regional giant emerged. "In 1988, nobody in the Burmese military knew how quickly China would grow economically," says Seekins. "But as this was happening [the regime] took advantage of that situation to promote close ties to China." Burma joined ASEAN in 1997, gaining further allies against Western criticism and more trade opportunities (Thailand gets most of its natural gas from Burma), and is improving ties with India. Even at Naypyidaw, once a symbol of seclusion, the junta plans to build an international airport to handle over 10 million passengers a year. "They're much less isolationist than we think, although they choose their friends carefully," says Rogers. "Those friends tend to be countries that turn a blind eye to their conduct." (Read "Why Violence Erupted on the China-Burma Border.")
Even the junta's notorious xenophobia is rooted less in a desire for isolation than in an ingrained fear of invasion. Burma has been occupied by many foreign powers over the centuries and riven by ethnic insurgencies since its independence from Britain in 1948. The Burmese military's historical role is to safeguard the country from all foes, foreign and domestic. The generals regard a threat to their regime as a threat to the nation. This might seem "misguided, even deluded," observes Andrew Selth, a Burma analyst with Australia's Griffith University, but the generals' fear of invasion is real and has been constantly stoked by Western actions and rhetoric. During pro-democracy protests in 1988, the U.S. deployed a naval taskforce off Burma's coast and later lumped the country with Iran and North Korea as an "outpost of tyranny." Whether real or perceived, Western hostility has prompted the junta to take two concrete actions: building one of Asia's largest standing armies, and seeking closer links with China and Russia, both permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Suu Kyi's party hopeful she can meet Myanmar junta chief
Asia Pacific News
09 October 2009 1456 hrs
YANGON - Aung San Suu Kyi's opposition party is hoping the pro-democracy leader will soon meet Myanmar's junta chief after signs of a resumed dialogue between the two sides, a spokesman said Friday.
The detained Nobel Laureate was granted rare permission to meet Western diplomats in Yangon Friday and in the past week has twice held talks with a junta minister, following a letter she wrote to Senior General Than Shwe.
"We are hoping that the Senior General and Aung San Suu Kyi will meet soon," said her lawyer and spokesman for her National League for Democracy (NLD) party Nyan Win. It would be the first meeting between the pair in several years.
After years of advocating punitive measures against the junta, Suu Kyi's letter marked an easing of her stance, offering suggestions for getting Western sanctions lifted and requesting a meeting with diplomats to discuss this.
"The authorities allowing Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's request is good -- she is getting what she needs," said Nyan Win. Daw is a term of respect in Myanmar.
"I think they will be discussing mainly the lifting of sanctions. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi wanted to get the facts and figures on Western sanctions," he added.
He said the meeting with diplomats meant she "could get chances to do politics, as she is a politician".
On Saturday and Wednesday the Nobel Laureate had meetings with Myanmar labour minister Aung Kyi, the official liaison between herself and the junta -- the first time they have met for talks since January 2008.
State media reported Sunday that they discussed her letter at the first meeting, but further details of the talks have not yet emerged.
The US recently unveiled a major policy shift to re-engage the junta, but has warned against lifting sanctions until there is progress towards democracy and repeatedly pressed for Suu Kyi's release.
Lawyers for the frail 64-year-old, kept in detention by the ruling generals for much of the past 20 years, say she welcomes US re-engagement.
Her NLD won the last elections by a landslide in 1990, a result the junta refused to acknowledge, leading the US and the European Union to impose sanctions.
- AFP/ir
၂၄-၉-၀၉ စီးပြါးေရးပညာရွင္ ဦးစိန္ေဌးႏွင့္စကားေျပာျခင္း
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ ေငြေၾကးစနစ္ရဲ့ လက္ရွိအေျခအေနနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ယေန႔ျမန္မာသတင္းဌာနအေနနဲ႔ ၀ါရွင္တန္ဒီစီအေျခစိုက္ ျမန္မာ့ရန္ပံုေငြအဖြဲ႔ (Burma Fund) က စီးပြားေရးပညာရွင္ ဦးစိန္ေ႒းကို ၂၀၀၉ စက္တင္ဘာ ၂၄ ရက္ေန႔က ဆက္သြယ္ ေမးျမန္းခဲ့ပါတယ္။
ၾကပ္ေျပးေနျပည္ေတာ္ အေျခစိုက္ ျမန္မာစစ္ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးမ်ားဟာ ၂၀၀၉ ေအာက္တိုဘာ ၁ ရက္ေန႔ကစတင္ၿပီး ျမန္မာျပည္တြင္းသံုး က်ပ္ ၅၀၀၀ တန္ ေငြစကၠဴမ်ားကို ထုတ္ေ၀ေတာ့မွာျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း စက္တင္ဘာ ၂၄ ရက္ေန႔က
ေၾကျငာခဲ့ပါတယ္။ လက္ရွိ ျမန္မာျပည္မွာ ၅၀ ျပားတန္မွ ၁၀၀၀ က်ပ္တန္ ေငြစကၠဴမ်ားကို ရိုက္ႏွိပ္ သံုးစြဲေနၿပီး
အနိမ့္ဆံုး အသံုးျပဳတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴမ်ားဟာ က်ပ္ ၁၀၀၊ ၂၀၀ တန္ ေငြစကၠဴမ်ားျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ဆယ္ဂဏန္းတန္ဖိုးရွိတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴမ်ားကေတာ့ သံုးစြဲမွဳမရွိသေလာက္ ရွားပါးသြားၿပီ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ထို႔အျပင္ သံုးစြဲေနေသာ က်ပ္ ၁၀၀၊ ၂၀၀ တန္ စသည္ျဖင့္ အေၾကြဟု လူအမ်ား ေခၚေ၀ၚၾကတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴမ်ားဟာလည္း ေဟာင္းႏြမ္း စုတ္ျပတ္ေနေၾကာင္း သိရပါတယ္။
ပထမဆံုး ေမးျမန္းျဖစ္တာကေတာ့ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံေငြေၾကးစနစ္ရဲ့ လက္ရွိအေျခအေန၊ ေငြစကၠဴသစ္ရဲ့ အခန္းက႑၊ ေဟာင္းႏြမ္းကာ သံုးမရေလာက္ေအာင္ ျဖစ္ေနတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴမ်ားနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္တဲ့ ဦးစိန္ေ႒းရဲ့ သံုးသပ္ခ်က္ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ ေငြေၾကးစနစ္က ပ်က္ေနၿပီ ဗ်။ တခြန္းထဲေျပာရင္ အဲဒီလိုပဲ ေျပာရမယ္။ ဟိုက က်ားကန္ ဒီက က်ားကန္ ျဖစ္သလို လုပ္ေနေတာ့ ဒီလို ျဖစ္ေနမွာပဲ။ မတည္ၿငိမ္ဘူးေလ၊ မတည္ၿငိမ္ရင္ ပ်က္ေနတာေပ့ါ မဟုတ္ဘူးလား။ တိုးတက္တဲ့ႏိုင္ငံေတြမွာဆိုရင္ တျပားကအစသူ႔တန္ဖိုးနဲ႔သူ သံုးလို႔ရတယ္။ ပိုက္ဆံဆိုရင္ ေဟာင္းရင္ ျပန္လဲေပးတယ္၊
ေငြေၾကးတည္ၿငိမ္တယ္ ေခၚတာေပါ့။ အခု ဗမာျပည္မွာက မဆလ ေခတ္ကတည္းက ကေမာက္ကမေတြ ျဖစ္၊ က်တယ္ဆိုတာ မရွိ၊ အားလံုး တက္တာခ်ည္းပဲ။ က်တာကေတာ့ စိတ္ဓါတ္ေပါ့။ ဒါေတြက ပ်က္စီးေနတဲ့သေဘာေပါ့ဗ်ာ။
အဓိကအခ်က္ကေတာ့ တန္ဖိုးမ်ားတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴ ရိုက္ထုတ္ရၿပီဆိုကတည္းက ဒီတိုင္းျပည္ရဲ့ ေငြေၾကးစနစ္ မတည္ၿငိမ္ဘူး၊ ကုန္ေစ်းႏွဳန္း အဆမတန္ တက္ေနတယ္၊ ေငြေၾကးပမာဏ မ်ားေနတယ္ စတ့ ဲ သေကၤတေတြ ျဖစ္ေနတာေပါ့။
ႏိုင္ငံတကာသုံး ေငြေၾကးစနစ္ကို သြားေနတဲ့ အေမရိကန္ေငြေၾကးစနစ္မွာ အႀကီးဆံုး ေငြစကၠဴသည္ တရာတန္ ပဲ။ ဒါ အေမရိကန္ကို ညႊန္းဖြဲ႔ ေျပာေနတာ မဟုတ္ဘူး။ ႏိုင္ငံတကာက လက္ခံထားၿပီဆိုကတည္းက တည္ၿငိမ္လို႔ ေပါ့။ မပ်က္စီးလို႔ ေပါ့။ အဲဒီသေဘာကို ေျပာတာပါ။
ျမန္မာေငြစကၠဴသစ္ ရိုက္ထုတ္လိုက္တာနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ဘယ္လိုအက်ိဳးဆက္ေတြ ျဖစ္လာႏိုင္ပါသလဲ ခင္ဗ်။
ဗမာျပည္မွာ တန္ဖိုးႀကီးတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴသစ္ ရိုက္ထုတ္ရၿပီဆိုကတည္းက ေငြေၾကးပမာဏမ်ားလို႔ ေပ့ါ။ ဥပမာ ကေမၻာဒီးယား၊ အင္ဒိုနီးရွားမွာလည္း တန္ဖိုးမ်ားတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴေတြ ရွိပါတယ္။ ျပႆနာက ဘာလဲဆိုေတာ့ ေငြစကၠဴ ႀကီးတာေသးတာထက္ လွည့္လည္ေနတဲ့ ေငြေၾကးပမာဏက တိုင္းျပည္မွာ ရွိတဲ့ ထုတ္လုပ္မွဳတန္ဖိုးနဲ႔ ကိုက္ညီေနရင္ေတာ့ ျပႆနာ မရွိဘူးေပါ့ဗ်ာ။ ဗမာႏိုင္ငံရဲ့ျပႆနာက ဘာလဲဆိုေတာ့ လွည့္လည္ သံုးစြဲတဲ့ ေငြေၾကးပမာဏမ်ားတယ္၊ ေငြေၾကးပမာဏနဲ႔
ကုန္ထုတ္လုပ္မွဳက မညီဘူး။ ဒါကို ေျပလည္ေအာင္မလုပ္ဘဲ ငါးေထာင္တန္ ေငြစကၠဴ ရိုက္ႏွိပ္ သံုးစြဲတာက ခဏေတာ့
ေျပလည္မွာေပါ့။ ၾကာလာရင္ ေျပလည္မွာ မဟုတ္ဘူး။ တိုင္းျပည္ ေငြေၾကးစနစ္က မတည္ၿငိမ္ဘူး။ မတည္ၿငိမ္တဲ့အျပင္ မလုိလားအပ္တဲ့ အသံုးစရိတ္ေတြ မ်ားတဲ့အတြက္ေၾကာင့္ ဒီျပႆနာ ျဖစ္တာ။
ေမာ္ေတာ္ကားတစီး ၀ယ္မယ္ဆိုရင္ပဲ ေငြေတြကို ဂံုနီအိတ္နဲ႔ ထုတ္သြားရတယ္ မဟုတ္လား။ တိုက္တို႔ဘာတို႔ ၀ယ္မယ္ဆိုရင္ေတာ့ ေငြေတြကို ကားနဲ႔ကို တင္သြားရမွာ။ အဲဒီပိုက္ဆံေတြ ဘယ္သြားထားမလဲ။ ထားတဲ့အခါမွာ
အႏၱရာယ္ရွိတယ္။ ဒီေတာ့ ေငြစကၠဴႀကီးေတြ ရိုက္ထုတ္လိုက္တာ။ သာမာန္ၾကည့္ရင္ေတာ့ ေကာင္းတယ္လို႔ ေျပာခ်င္
ေျပာႏိုင္တာေပါ့။ သို႔ေသာ္ ဘာ့ေၾကာင့္ အခုလို တန္ဖိုးႀကီးတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴေတြ ရိုက္ထုတ္ရတာလဲဆိုတာက ျပႆနာ ျဖစ္တာကိုးဗ်။
တစ္အခ်က္ ေငြေၾကးပမာဏေတြက အမ်ားႀကီး ျဖစ္ေနတယ္။ ႏွစ္အခ်က္ ဘာလို႔ မ်ားေနရတာလဲ။ တိုင္းျပည္မွာ လွည့္လည္ေနတဲ့ ေငြေၾကးနဲ႔ ကုန္ထုတ္လုပ္မွဳဟာ အခ်ိဳးအစား မညီဘူး။ မညီတဲ့အခါက်ေတာ့ အဲဒါကို ကာမိေအာင္ ေငြစကၠဴေတြ ရိုက္တာ။ ေနာက္တခုက ငါးေထာင္တန္ ထုတ္တယ္။ ဒါေပမယ့္ အခုနက ခင္ဗ်ားေျပာတဲ့ တိုင္းျပည္မွာ
လည္ပတ္သံုးစြဲေနတဲ့ ညစ္ႏြမ္းေနတဲ့ ေငြစကၠဴေတြက်ေတာ့ ရွင္းမေပးဘူး။ တက်ပ္တန္၊ ႏွစ္က်ပ္တန္က သံုးလို႔ မရေတာ့ဘူး။ အေၾကြဆိုတာ မရွိသေလာက္ ျဖစ္သြားၿပီ။ ဒါ့ေၾကာင့္ ေငြေၾကးပမာဏ မတည္ၿငိမ္ဘူး။ တိုင္းျပည္ေငြေၾကးစနစ္က ယိုယြင္းေနတယ္ဆိုတာကို ကၽြန္ေတာ္တို႔ ေထာက္ျပတာ။ ဒါကို ေျပလည္ဖို႔ ေငြစကၠဴႀကီးေတြ ရိုက္ထုတ္လည္း ေျပလည္မွာ မဟုတ္ဘူး။ ငါးေထာင္တန္ၿပီးရင္ ေနာက္ထပ္ တေသာင္းတန္ ထုတ္ရမွာပဲ။ ေနာက္ထပ္ ဒိထက္ႀကီးတာ ထုတ္ရမွာပဲ။ ဒ့ါေၾကာင့္ ဒီ ျပႆနာကို ေျဖရွင္းမယ္ဆုိရင္ ဒီနည္းနဲ႔ ရွင္းလို႔ မရဘူး။
ျမန္မာျပည္မွာ သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔က ရရွိတဲ့ အေမရိကန္ေဒၚလာေတြလည္း အေတာ္မ်ားေနၿပီ ေပါ့ေနာ္။ လာမည့္ႏွစ္ေတြဆိုရင္လည္း တရုပ္ျပည္ကို သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ပိုက္လိုင္းေတြ စတင္ သြယ္တန္းၿပီး ရခိုင္ကမ္းလြန္က သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ေတြ ေရာင္းေတာ့မယ္။ ဆိုလိုခ်င္တာက ေနာက္ လာမယ့္ ၅ ႏွစ္ ၁၀ ႏွစ္ေလာက္ဆိုရင္ ျမန္မာအုပ္ခ်ဳပ္သူအေနနဲ႔ ႏိုင္ငံျခားသံုးေငြေတြ အမ်ားႀကီး ပိုင္ဆိုင္ေတာ့မယ္။ ဒီ ဓနအင္အားကေရာ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံရဲ့
ေငြေၾကးတည္ၿငိမ္မွဳ ျဖစ္ေပၚေစႏိုင္မလား။ ဘာေတြ ျဖစ္ႏိုင္ပါသလဲ ခင္ဗ်။
အဲဒီ ၀င္လာမယ့္ ေငြေတြကို တိုင္းျပည္အတြက္ ကုန္ထုတ္လုပ္မွဳအတြက္ မွန္မွန္ကန္ကန္ သံုးမယ္၊ ျပည္သူလူထုအတြက္ သံုးမယ္ဆိုရင္ တည္ၿငိမ္မွဳ ျဖစ္တာေပါ့ဗ်ာ။ ေသခ်ာတာေပါ့။ သို႔ေသာ္လည္း မသံုးတာက ျပႆနာဗ်။
ကေမၻာဒီးယားႏိုင္ငံမွာလည္း အဲဒီလိုပဲ၊ သူတို႔ဆီကမွာက သဘာ၀သယံဇာတ နည္းေတာ့ သူတို႔ ေငြေၾကးကို တည္ၿငိမ္ေအာင္ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ ေငြေၾကး ရန္ပံုေငြအဖြဲ႔ (IMF International Monetary Fund) က အကူအညီနဲ႔ ႀကိဳးစားလာခဲ့တာ အခုဆိုရင္ အေတာ္ေလး ၿငိမ္ေနၿပီ။ ေငြေၾကး တည္ၿငိမ္ေစလိုတယ္ဆိုရင္ ႏိုင္ငံတကာက ေငြေၾကးအဖြဲ႔အစည္းေတြရဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေငြ ပံ့ပိုးမွဳနဲ႔ တိုင္းျပည္ရဲ့ေငြေၾကးကို တည္ၿငိမ္ေအာင္လုပ္တဲ့အခါ ဒီႏိုင္ငံေတြမွာ
တိုးတက္လာတယ္။
ဗမာႏိုင္ငံက တကယ္တမ္း ေစတနာရွိမယ္ဆိုရင္ (ခင္ဗ်ား အခုနက ေျပာတဲ့အခ်က္က သိတ္ေကာင္းတဲ့အခ်က္ ပဲ။) ရလာတဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေငြေတြကို ျပည္သူလူထုအတြက္ သံုးမယ္ဆိုရင္ အဲဒါေတြနဲ႔ ေထာက္ကူၿပီးမွ တိုင္းျပည္ရဲ့ေငြေၾကးစနစ္ကို တည္ၿငိမ္ေအာင္ လုပ္မယ္ဆိုရင္ ကုန္ေစ်းႏွဳန္းလည္း က်မွာပဲ။ ေငြစကၠဴႀကီးေတြလည္း ထုတ္စရာ မလိုဘူး၊ ဟိုးအရင္ကလို ျပန္ျဖစ္လာမွာ။
(ဦးစိန္ေ႒းဆိုလိုတာက ၁၉၆၂ မတိုင္မီေခတ္ကို ဆိုလိုပါတယ္။) မလုပ္တာက ျပႆနာဗ်။
ျမန္မာျပည္ကို အခု ေနာက္ဆံုးအုပ္ခ်ဳပ္တဲ့ စစ္အစိုးရ ေျပာေနတာက ႏွစ္ ၂၀ ေလာက္အတြင္း တိုင္းျပည္ရဲ့ စီးပြားေရးျပႆနာကို မေျဖရွင္းႏိုင္တာဟာ ႏိုင္ငံတကာက စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔ထားလို႔၊ ဒီမိုကေရစီေရး လွဳပ္ရွားသူေတြက ႏိုင္ငံတကာက စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ငန္းေတြ ျမန္မာျပည္မွာ မလုပ္ကိုင္ႏိုင္ေအာင္ လွံဳ႔ေဆာ္တဲ့အတြက္ ေငြေၾကးတည္ၿငိမ္မွဳ သို႔မဟုတ္ တိုင္းျပည္အတြက္ လိုအပ္တဲ့ အကူအညီေတြ မရရွိတဲ့အတြက္ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ဆိုပါတယ္။ စီးပြားေရးပိတ္ဆို႔မွဳမ်ား
မရွိေတာ့ရင္ တိုင္းျပည္ႀကီး တိုးတက္လာႏိုင္တယ္လို႔ စစ္အစိုးရ သို႔မဟုတ္ စစ္အစိုးရနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္သူေတြ ေျပာၾကတာ ရွိတယ္။ ဒီ အျမင္ေတြနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ဦးစိန္ေ႒းရဲ့သံုးသပ္ခ်က္ သိပါရေစ ခင္ဗ်။
အဲဒါက စကားတလံုးထဲ ေျပာရရင္ေတာ့ မင္းသမီး မကတတ္လို႔ ထိုင္မသိမ္း အျပစ္တင္တာပါ။ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။ ဘာ့ေၾကာင့္လဲဆိုေတာ့ ခင္ဗ်ား
ကၽြန္ေတာ္ေျပာမယ္၊ စီးပြားေရးပိတ္ဆို႔တာက သူတို႔ တက္လာကတည္းက ပိတ္တာမွ မဟုတ္တာပဲ။ ၁၉၉၇
ခုႏွစ္မွာ ကလင္တန္က စၿပီးေတာ့ ပိတ္ဆို႔မွဳ လုပ္တယ္။ လုပ္တာကလည္း ေနာက္ထပ္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားရင္းႏွီးျမွဳပ္ႏွံမွဳကို မျပဳတာ။ ယူႏိုကယ္လ္တို႔ လုပ္ေနတာပဲ။ ၁၉၈၈ ခုႏွစ္က အာဏာသိမ္းတယ္။ ၁၉၉၇ ခုႏွစ္အထိ ၉ ႏွစ္ရွိတယ္။ ၉ ႏွစ္အတြင္းမွာ သူတို႔အလုပ္ျဖစ္ေအာင္ လုပ္ပါလား။ မလုပ္ဘူးဗ်ာ။
ေနာက္တခါ တကယ္တမ္း ျပင္းျပင္းထန္ထန္ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မွဳ လုပ္တာက ၂၀၀၃ ခုႏွစ္မွ လုပ္တာ၊ ဒီပဲယင္းလူသတ္ပြဲ ၿပီးမွ။ ၂၀၀၃ ခုႏွစ္အထိဆိုရင္ ၁၅ ႏွစ္ ရွိတယ္။ ၁၅ ႏွစ္အတြင္း တိုင္းျပည္ တိုးတက္ေအာင္ လုပ္ပါလား။ အေမရိကန္က ျမန္မာျပည္ကို သြားတာက ေဒၚလာ သန္း ၄၀၀ ေလာက္ပဲ ရွိတယ္။ ဘာမွ မ်ားတာ မဟုတ္ဘူး။ ဥေရာပသမဂၢကလည္း
တကယ္တမ္း ျပင္းျပင္းထန္ထန္ ပိတ္တာမဟုတ္ဘူး။ ေရႊ၀ါေရာင္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးၿပီးမွ ျပင္းျပင္းထန္ထန္ လုပ္လာတာ။
ျပင္းျပင္းထန္ထန္ လုပ္တာက အခုႏွစ္ေတြပိုင္းမွ လုပ္တာပါဗ်ာ။
၁၅ ႏွစ္၊ အႏွစ္ ၂၀ အတြင္း တိုင္းျပည္အတြက္ လုပ္လို႔ရလ်က္သားနဲ႔ ဘာလို႔ မလုပ္ခဲ့သလဲ။ စီးပြားေရးပိတ္ဆို႔တယ္ဆိုတာက တိုင္းျပည္တြင္း လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ခ်ိဳးေဖာက္တာ၊ ႏိုင္ငံေရး စီးပြားေရး လူမွဳေရး
အကုန္လံုးမွာ မတရား လုပ္ေနတာေၾကာင့္ ဒဏ္ခတ္တာ။ စီးပြားေရးတင္မကဘူး။ သူ႔ကို တန္းတူ မဆက္ဆံတာ၊ အျပစ္ရွိလို႔ အျပစ္ေပးတာ။
ေနာက္ အေရးႀကီးတာက အခုနက ခင္ဗ်ား ေမးခဲ့တဲ့ ေမးခြန္း။ သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ေရာင္းခ်မွဳက ရတ့ ဲ ေငြေတြ ဘယ္ေရာက္ေနသလဲ။ အားလုံး သိတာေပါ့။ အရင္ရက္ေတြက ထုတ္ ေျပာၿပီ။ ေဒၚလာ ၄.၈၃ ဘီလ်ံ စင္ကာပူဘဏ္မွာ
ထားတယ္ တဲ့။ ဒါလည္း စာရင္းမွာ ေပၚေနတယ္ ေလ။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ အနည္းဆံုး ႏိုင္ငံျခားေငြ လဲလွယ္ႏွဳန္း ႏွစ္မ်ိဳး
ျဖစ္ေနတာ ၾကည့္။ တကယ္ေတာ့ ႏွစ္မ်ိဳးေတာင္ မကဘူး။ Multi Exchange Rate (ေငြလဲႏွဳန္းမ်ိဳးစံု) ျဖစ္ေနတယ္။ (စစ္အစိုးရ သတ္မွတ္ႏွဳန္း၊ ျပင္ပေဒၚလာေပါက္ေစ်း၊ အက္ဖ္အီးစီ ေပါက္ေစ်းအျပင္ ျပည္ပႏိုင္ငံမ်ားက
ျမန္မာျပည္တြင္းကို လႊဲတဲ ့ေငြလဲႏွဳန္းမ်ားကို ဆိုလိုတာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။) စစ္အစိုးရသတ္မွတ္ႏွဳန္း ၆ က်ပ္ေက်ာ္ ရွိတယ္။ အျပင္မွာက တေထာင္ေက်ာ္ ရွိတယ္။ အဆ ၂၀၀ ေလာက္ ျဖစ္ေနၿပီ။ ရလာတဲ့ အေမရိကန္ေဒၚလာကို
ျပည္တြင္းမွာ ၆ က်ပ္နဲ႔ စာရင္းျပတယ္။ ပိုတဲ့ အဆ ၂၀၀ နီးပါးက ႏိုင္ငံျခားဘဏ္မွာ ထည့္ထားတယ္။ အဲဒီပိုက္ဆံေတြသာ
ျပည္သူ႔အတြက္ သံုးလို႔ရွိရင္ ဘယ္ႏိုင္ငံ ပိတ္ပိတ္ ေၾကာက္စရာမလိုဘူး။
ေနာက္တခ်က္ကလည္း ခင္ဗ်ား စဥ္းစားၾကည့္။ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံတခ်ိဳ႔ကသာ ပိတ္တာဗ်။ အကုန္ပိတ္တာ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။ ထိုင္း၊ တရုပ္၊ စင္ကာပူ စသည္ျဖင့္ ပတ္၀န္းက်င္ႏိုင္ငံေတြ ျမန္မာျပည္နဲ႔ စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ေနတာ နည္းတာမွ မဟုတ္တာ။ ဒါက သက္သက္မဲ့ ၀ါဒျဖန္႔ဖို႔ အေၾကာင္းရွာ ထိုးႏွက္တာ ဘာမွ အဓိပၸါယ္ မရွိဘူး။ ဖြင့္လိုက္ရင္ ပို ဆိုးသြားမွာေပါ့။
ပိတ္ထားတာေတာင္ သူတို႔ လုပ္ခ်င္ရာ လုပ္ေနတာပဲ။
ကၽြန္ေတာ္တို႔ အၿမဲ ေျပာတယ္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံဟာ စိုက္ပ်ိဳးေရးႏိုင္ငံ၊ လယ္ယာက႑မွာ လူ အမ်ားဆံုး အလုပ္လုပ္ေနတယ္။
ေတာေနလူတန္းစား ၈၀ ရာႏွဳန္း အလုပ္လုပ္တယ္။ အဲဒီလုပ္ငန္းမွာ ရင္းႏွီးျမွဳပ္ႏံွမွဳက ၀.၂ ရာႏွဳန္း ရွိတယ္။ ရလာတဲ့ပိုက္ဆံေတြကို ျပည္သူ႔အတြက္ မသံုးဘူး။ ၾကပ္ေျပးေနျပည္ေတာ္ ေဆာက္ေနတယ္။ ႏ်ဴးကလီးယား
လုပ္ေနတယ္။ ဂူေတြ ေဖာက္ေနၾကတယ္။ ဒါေတြက အေထာက္အထား အမ်ားႀကီး ရွိတယ္။ ဒါကို စီးပြားေရး ဖြင့္ေပးလိုက္ရင္ သူခိုးဓါးရိုးကမ္းသလို ျဖစ္သြားမွာ ပဲ။ လူမိုက္အားေပး ပဲ။ လူမိုက္က တိုင္းျပည္ကို ေနာက္ထပ္ ႏွစ္ ၁၀၀ ေလာက္ အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္သြားမွာ ေသခ်ာတယ္ဗ်။
၁၉၆၂ မတိုင္မီကာလက ျမန္မာက်ပ္ေငြဟာ အာမခံခ်က္ရွိၿပီး တကမၻာလံုးမွာ ရွိတဲ့ ေငြလဲလွယ္ရာ႒ာနတိုင္းမွာ လဲလွယ္ႏိုင္ေၾကာင္း အာမခံရွိပါတယ္။ သို႔ေသာ္ ၁၉၆၂ စစ္အစိုးရအာဏာသိမ္းၿပီးေနာက္ ကမၻာ့ေစ်းကြက္မွာ
ျမန္မာက်ပ္ေငြဟာ အာမခံခ်က္ မရွိေတာ့ပါဘူး။ အဲဒီလို အာမခံခ်က္ မရွိေအာင္လည္း အဲဒီအခ်ိန္ စစ္အစိုးရ (ေတာ္လွန္ေရးေကာင္စီ) က ေပါင္စတာလင္ေငြေၾကးစနစ္ထဲက ျမန္မာက်ပ္ေငြကို ဆြဲထုတ္ခဲ့ပါတယ္။ အခုေတာ့ အေမရိကန္တေဒၚလာ ေငြလဲႏွဳန္းအျဖစ္ စစ္အစိုးရ သတ္မွတ္တာက ၆ က်ပ္ေက်ာ္ ရွိတယ္။
အျပင္ေငြလဲႏွဳန္းက တေထာင္ေက်ာ္ ရွိတယ္။ ၁၉၈၈ လြန္ကာလေတြမွာလည္း ေဒၚလာေငြလဲႏွဳန္း ေျပာင္းဖို႔ ႀကိဳးစားခဲ့တာ ရွိတယ္။ အဲဒီအခ်ိန္က ေျပာင္းရင္ ၂၀ က်ပ္ေလာက္ပဲ ရွိႏိုင္ပါတယ္။ ေနာက္ပိုင္းမွာ ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရက တရား၀င္ ေငြလဲႏွဳန္းဆိုတာကို မေျပာင္းဘဲနဲ႔ ျမန္မာျပည္တြင္းသံုး အေမရိကန္ေဒၚလာေတြ ရိုက္ထုတ္လိုက္တယ္။ အက္ဖ္အီးစီ (FEC Foreign Exchange Certificate) လို႔ အလြယ္ေခၚၾကပါတယ္။ တရုပ္ျပည္မွာလည္း အဲဒါမ်ိဳးေတြ သံုးပါတယ္။ ဒီေတာ့
လက္ရွိအေျခအေနကေန ကမၻာႀကီးက ေလးစားေလာက္တဲ့ ေငြေၾကးစနစ္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ ေပၚေပါက္လာဖို႔ ဘယ္လို အေျခခံေတြ လိုအပ္ပါသလဲ။ ဘယ္လို လုပ္ကိုင္သင့္ပါသလဲ။
ရိုးရိုးေလး ရွင္းရွင္းေလး ေျပာရင္ ေစတနာရွိဖို႔ လိုတာေပါ့ဗ်ာ။ ေစတနာရွိရင္ လုပ္တတ္သူေတြက ၀ိုင္းကူမွာပဲ။ ေစတနာ မရွိလို႔။ ဘာ့ေၾကာင့္ ဒီစကားကို သံုးရသလဲဆိုရင္ အခုနက ကၽြန္ေတာ္ ေျဖတဲ့အထဲမွာပါပါတယ္။ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေငြနဲ႔ ေထာက္ကူတယ္ဆိုရင္ ဒီ ျပႆနာဟာ ေျပလည္တယ္။ ေနာက္တခု ခင္ဗ်ားေျပာတဲ့ အက္ဖ္အီးစီကိစၥ။ ေငြလဲႏွဳန္း ကြာဟလာရင္ ၾကားခံသံုးပစၥည္းတခု ေပၚလာတယ္။ တရုပ္က လုပ္တဲ့နည္းလမ္းကို ယူတာက သီအိုရီ စာေတြ႔အရေတာ့ မွန္တာေပါ့။ လက္ေတြ႔မွ မလုပ္တာ။ ဒါ့ေၾကာင့္ ကၽြန္ေတာ္ ေျပာတာ ေစတနာရွိဖို႔ လိုတယ္။ အက္ဖ္အီးစီ ေဒၚလာအတုေတြကို သံုးၿပီး ေဒၚလာအစစ္ေတြကို သူတို႔ အိတ္ထဲထည့္။ သူတို႔ဘဏ္ေတြထဲ ေရာက္။ က်န္တာေတြ မစို႔မပို႔ သံုး။ အဲဒီလိုနည္းနဲ႔ ေျဖရွင္းတာကိုး။ ဒီလိုနည္းနဲ႔ ေျဖရွင္းလို႔ မရဘူး။ တကယ္ ေစတနာရွိဖို႔ လိုတယ္။
ေနာက္တခါ ရလာတဲ့ ေဒၚလာေတြကို မွန္မွန္ကန္ကန္ သံုးေပ့ါ။ ဘာလို႔မို႔ မသံုးသလဲ။ မွန္မွန္ကန္ကန္ သံုးလို႔ရွိရင္ ခင္ဗ်ား အခုနက ေျပာတဲ့ ေငြလဲလွယ္ႏွဳန္းတခုထဲ ျဖစ္ဖို႔ဆိုတာ ဘာမွ ခက္တဲ့အလုပ္ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။ အက္ဖ္အီးစီနဲ႔ က်ားကန္တဲ့နည္း ရွိတယ္။ အျပည္ျပည္ဆိုင္ရာ ေငြေၾကးအဖြဲ႔အစည္းေတြက အေထာက္အကူယူၿပီး လုပ္တဲ့နည္း ရွိတယ္။
ျမန္မာျပည္မွာ အားသာတာက သူမ်ားႏိုင္ငံေတြက ႏိုင္ငံျခားေငြ မရွိလို႔ သူမ်ားကို အကူအညီေတာင္းရတာ။ ကိုယ့္ႏိုင္ငံမွာက ဒီေလာက္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေငြေတြ ၀င္ေနတာ။ ခင္ဗ်ား အခုနက ေျပာၿပီးၿပီ။
ေနာက္ဆိုရင္ သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ ေရာင္းတဲ့ေငြေတြ တရုပ္က ၀င္လာဦးမယ္။ ေနာက္ပိုင္းဆို ပိုၿပီး ၀င္ဦးမွာ။ (သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ကို ေအာက္ေစ်းနဲ႔ ေရာင္းတဲ့၀င္ေငြအျပင္ သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔ပိုက္လိုင္းနဲ႔အၿပိဳင္ တည္ေဆာက္မယ့္
ေရနံပိုက္လိုင္းကို သံုးၿပီး တရုပ္ျပည္တြင္း ေရနံျဖတ္ေက်ာ္သယ္ပို႔မွဳက ရတဲ့ အခေၾကးေငြလည္း တရုပ္ျပည္ဆီက ရရွိမွာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။) အဲဒီပိုက္ဆံေတြနဲ႔ ဘာ့ေၾကာင့္ မလုပ္ႏိုင္ရမွာလဲ။
ဒါ့ေၾကာင့္ ကၽြန္ေတာ္ ေျပာတာက ေစတနာရွိဖို႔ လိုပါတယ္။ ေစတနာရွိရင္ ျပည္တြင္း ျပည္ပမွာ လုပ္တတ္တဲ့သူ အမ်ားႀကီး ပါ။ ဒီဘက္မွာလည္း ပညာရွင္ေတြ အမ်ားႀကီးရွိတယ္။ သူတို႔က ပိတ္ဆို႔ထားလို႔ ဒီျပႆနာ ျဖစ္ေနတာ။ အဓိက အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေနတဲ့သူေတြက ဒီ ျပႆနာေျပလည္ေအာင္လုပ္ရင္ ေျပလည္တယ္။ ဒါေပမယ့္ လုပ္မွာ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။
ႏ်ဴးကလီးယားေတြ လုပ္ေနတယ္။ လွဳိဏ္ဂူေတြ တူးေနတယ္။ လူေတြက ငတ္ျပတ္ေနတဲ့အခ်ိန္မွာ ဘာ့ေၾကာင့္ ဒါေတြ လုပ္ဖို႔ လိုသလဲ။
ေျပာရင္ အမ်ားႀကီးပါဗ်ာ။ အဓိက ခ်ဳပ္ ေျပာရင္ေတာ့ တိုင္းျပည္အေပၚမွာ ေစတနာရွိရင္ ဒီ ျပႆနာဟာ ေျပလည္တယ္။ ေတာင္ကိုရီးယား ပတ္ခ်ံဳဟီးကို ၾကည့္။ အာဏာရွင္ပဲ။ တိုင္းျပည္တိုးတက္သြားတယ္။ အင္ဒိုနီးရွားက ဆူဟာတိုလည္း အာဏာရွင္ ပဲ။ တိုင္းျပည္အေပၚ ေစတနာ ရွိတယ္။ သူ႔ႏိုင္ငံ တိုးတက္တယ္။ ျပႆနာက အဲဒါပဲ။ တိုင္းျပည္အေပၚ ေစတနာမရွိတဲ့ ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရေခါင္းေဆာင္ေတြအေနနဲ႔ တိုင္းျပည္ရဲ့ ေငြေၾကးခိုင္မာမွဳကို တကယ္တမ္း လုပ္ကိုင္လိုမယ္ဆိုရင္ အစ္ကို႔အေနနဲ႔ ဘယ္လို စကားမ်ိဳး ေျပာခ်င္ပါသလဲ။
အခုနကလည္း ကၽြန္ေတာ္ ေျပာၿပီးပါၿပီ။ သူတို႔ ေစတနာရွိလို႔ တကယ္ လုပ္ခ်င္တယ္ဆိုရင္ ျပည္တြင္းျပည္ပက တတ္သိနားလည္သူေတြနဲ႔ တိုင္ပင္ၿပီး အစကေန လုပ္ရင္ ေျပလည္တာပါပဲ။ အိမ္နီးနားခ်င္းႏိုင္ငံေတြမွာလည္း ေျပာင္းလဲမွဳ လုပ္ၿပီးသြားၿပီ။ တရုပ္လည္း ဒီအတိုင္းပဲ။ ဗဟို စီမံကိန္းခ်စနစ္ကို က်င့္သံုးတဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံေတြဟာ ေစ်းကြက္စီးပြားေရးစနစ္ကို
ေျပာင္းလဲခ်င္လို႔ရွိရင္ လုပ္လို႔ရတယ္။ တရုပ္ ဗီယက္နမ္တို႔လည္း အဲဒီလို လုပ္ကိုင္ခဲ့လို႔ တိုးတက္လာတာပဲ။
စာလို ေျပာရင္ ႏွစ္မ်ိဳးပဲ ရွိတယ္ ဗ်။ တစ္အခ်က္က တိုင္းျပည္ရဲ့ ကုန္ေစ်းႏွဳန္းနဲ႔ ေစ်းကြက္ကို တည္ၿငိမ္ေအာင္ လုပ္ရမယ္။ ၿပီးတဲ့အခါ Structure Reform လို႔ ေခၚတယ္။ အေျခခံအေဆာက္အဦေတြ ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲမွဳကို လုပ္ရမယ္။ အဓိကက႑ေတြျဖစ္တဲ့ ဘ႑ာေရး၊ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံက စိုက္ပ်ိဳးေရးႏိုင္ငံျဖစ္တဲ့အတြက္ စိုက္ပ်ိဳးေရး၊ သဘာ၀
သယံဇာတ၊ ကုန္သြယ္ေရး၊ စက္မွဳလက္မွဳက႑စတာေတြကို အသြင္ကူးေျပာင္းေရးကာလမွာ လိုအပ္တဲ့ အဂၤါရပ္ေတြနဲ႔ ညီေအာင္ လုပ္မယ္ဆိုရင္ တိုင္းျပည္က ေကာင္းလာမွာ။ မလုပ္တာက ျပႆနာ။
ဒီလို ေျပာင္းလဲတဲ့အခါ ဥပေဒ စည္းမ်ဥ္းေတြကအစ ေျပာင္းရမွာ။ လာဘ္စားမွဳေတြ ရွင္းပစ္ႏိုင္ရမယ္။ လုပ္ခ်င္တာေတြ စိတ္ကူးေပါက္ရာ လုပ္တာေတြ ရပ္ရမယ္။ ကာလတိုမွာ တည္ၿငိမ္ေအာင္ လုပ္။ တၿပိဳင္နက္ထဲမွာလည္း ကာလရွည္မွာ ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲမွဳေတြကို လုပ္။ ဒါဆိုရင္ တိုင္းျပည္က ေကာင္းသြားမယ္။ အေရွ႔ဥေရာပမွာလည္း ဒီအတိုင္း သြားခဲ့တာပဲ။
တရုပ္၊ ကေမၻာဒီယား၊ ဗီယက္နမ္ ဒီအတိုင္း လုပ္တာပဲ။
ဗမာႏိုင္ငံက သဘာ၀သယံဇာတအမ်ားႀကီး ရွိတဲ့အတြက္ ခင္ဗ်ား ေျပာသြားခဲ့တဲ့ ျပႆနာေတြလည္း အကုန္ ေျပလည္မွာပဲ။ သို႔ေသာ္လည္း သူတို႔က အဲဒီ သယံဇာတေတြကို အလြဲသံုးစား လုပ္ေနတာ။ ဒို႔ ႏိုင္ငံမွာ သယံဇာတေတြ ေပါတယ္ကြလို႔ ေၾကြးေက်ာ္ေနခ်ိန္ တိုင္းျပည္က ကမၻာေပၚမွာ ဒုတိယ အမြဲဆံုးႏိုင္ငံေလာက္ ေရာက္ေနၿပီ။ အဲဒါေၾကာင့္ သူတို႔ လုပ္ဖို႔ လိုတယ္လို႔ ေျပာတာပါ ခင္ဗ်။
ျမန္မာ့ရန္ပံုေငြအဖြဲ႔မွ ဦးစိန္ေ႒းနဲ႔ ဆက္သြယ္ ေမးျမန္းခဲ့တာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
9-10-09 Myanmar opposition leader holds rare talks with diplomats
Yangon - Myanmar pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi on Friday held a rare meeting with foreign diplomats, presumably to discuss Western sanctions imposed on the pariah state, sources said.
Suu Kyi was escorted from her home-cum-prison Friday morning to the state-owned Seinle Kantha Guesthouse where she met with US Deputy Head of Mission Thomas Vajta, British Ambassador Andrew Heyn, who represented the European Union, and Australian Deputy Head of Mission Simon Christopher Starr, government sources said.
The surprise meeting followed two sessions of talks between Suu Kyi and junta liaison Relations Minister Aung Kyi earlier this month to discuss her proposal to help end sanctions against the regime that has kept her under house arrest for 14 years.
Although details have not been made available, government sources confirmed the meetings were about Suu Kyi's September 25 letter to junta leader Senior General Than Shwe, offering to help persuade Western democracies to lift their economic sanctions.
Suu Kyi, 64, the leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD) opposition party, has spent 14 of the past 20 years under house arrest and is currently serving another 18-month sentence in her family compound.
In her letter, Suu Kyi and asked permission to meet with Western diplomats and expressed willingness to cooperate with the junta regarding the sanctions issue if three points were discussed: which countries imposed economic sanctions, their impact and the reason why they were imposed.
International sanctions have been imposed on Myanmar since 1988, when the military brutally cracked down on pro-democracy demonstrations, leaving an estimated 3,000 people dead.
The US and the European Union have increased their sanctions as the junta first refused to acknowledge the NLD's victory in the 1990 elections, and then arrested critics and suppressed all forms of dissent. Many of the sanctions target the top generals specifically.
Earlier this year, Than Shwe hinted that he would be willing to open a political dialogue with Suu Kyi if she agreed to cooperate on the sanctions issue.
Most Western nations have demanded that Than Shwe release Suu Kyi and some 2,000 other political prisoners as a first step towards democratization in the country, which has been under military rule since 1962. Suu Kyi and the NLD demand the same thing.
Washington recently announced a new policy of greater 'engagement' with Myanmar. It is calling on the military to improve its human rights record, allow democratic reforms and release political prisoners ahead of a planned general election in 2010.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
8-10-09 Exiled Myanmar activist backs sanctions
CNN News
NEW YORK (CNN) -- An activist exiled from Myanmar called for the government to release pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and urged the U.S. to continue sanctions against it.
Protesters demand release of Aung San Suu Kyi in front of the United Nations in New York on Wednesday.
Protesters demand release of Aung San Suu Kyi in front of the United Nations in New York on Wednesday.
Thaung Htun, Myanmar's government-in-exile's unofficial representative to the United Nations, on Wednesday told CNN's Christiane Amanpour that "it is not the right time even to think about lifting sanctions." He wants the United States to continue to pressure Myanmar's military regime with economic sanctions as it pursues talks with the south Asian nation, also known as Burma.
Sanctions will continue, according to the Obama administration, but it noted that such a policy has not worked as a one-tiered strategy. Even as the United States has settled on moving toward diplomacy, detained leader Suu Kyi has called for lifting the sanctions.
Suu Kyi's detention has been a key component in the United States' political tangle with Myanmar.
Critics of the country's ruling junta have accused the regime of convicting Suu Kyi, 64, to keep her from participating in 2010 elections.
Sanctions coupled with diplomacy could be most effective in dealing with Myanmar, Htun said on the CNN interview program "Amanpour."
In advocating tougher sanctions, Htun said economic restrictions target the regime and do not affect the nation's people.
According to the CIA, more than 30 percent of Myanmar's population lives in poverty.
"The Burmese people are poor, and economy is getting worse because of the mismanagement of the regime," Htun said. "Actually, the regime is getting more money, you know, in the last 20 years. Now they are having $2.6 billion ... just from the sale of gas to Thailand, but they don't use that money for the people."
Others disagree on the effects of sanctions on the country's people.
"[Suu Kyi] does not want to hurt the people of Myanmar," Ibrahim Gambari, the U.N. envoy to Myanmar, told Amanpour. "Some of the sanctions do hurt the people."
Myanmar Prime Minister Gen. Thein Sein has called the sanctions "a form of violence" that do not "promote human rights and democracy."
Senator Jim Webb, the first congressman to visit Myanmar in a decade, said the U.S. State Department "has been clear that they're not going to move forward on issues like sanctions unless there are further reciprocal gestures.
"But we have seen the beginning of a removal of the paralysis," the Virginia Democrat said on "Amanpour" on Wednesday. "Aung San Suu Kyi has been able to meet twice now over the past week with government leaders."
But she is still detained and last week she lost the appeal of the 18-month sentence recently added to time she was already serving. She was sentenced in August for breaching the terms of her house arrest after an incident in May in which an uninvited American, John Yettaw, stayed at her home. Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, has been confined in her house for about 14 of the past 20 years.
Htun says it's too early to tell whether more talks with Myanmar will affect Suu Kyi's detention or how the regime treats political adversaries.
"If we look at the reality on the ground, there is no improvement," he said.
"There is more violence in the last seven months, more political prisoners, more arrests, and more military attacks in the ethnic minority areas. That's why we need to be very cautious and we need to put pressure on the regime until these benchmarks can be fulfilled by the regime."
7-10-09 'ULFA camps may shift to China from Bangladesh, Myanmar'
Guwahati, Oct 7 : In a startling revelation, Prabal Neogi, leader of the powerful separatist group in Assam, has said that the ultras may plan to set up camps in China consequent to their losing bases in Bangladesh and Myanamar.
He said this while interacting with the media persons on the sidelines of a symposium on Conflict Management and Transformation of Ethics Nationalist and Societal Conflicts held at Guwahati on Wednesday.
Neogi's disclosure is of great significance since he reportedly spent nearly ten years in Myanmar training insurgents for the cause of United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA).
"I don't know if the ULFA is able to create a direct link with the Chinese government but I think we can from our long experience that, as a long time dweller of Myanmar, there was no direct connection but there was an indirect connection... not only with the ULFA but with all the groups of the North East," said Neogi.
"It was under the Kachin Army, that the ULFA underwent training... in Burma and many camps of the Kachin Army are on the Chinese soil, and thus many of our cadres had stayed in China.
"Since then there is connection though not directly...But now since the cadres had to leave Bangladesh and the situation in Myanmar is also not good with political changes... and so may be the ULFA might establish camps in China...we cannot rule out such a situation totally," added Neogi, who had stayed for nearly a decade in Myanmar.
The ULFA is among more than two dozen armed rebel groups active in the north-eastern region, either fighting for independent homeland, or for more political autonomy.
In the last few years, Indian security forces stepped up its campaign against ULFA by capturing or killing many of its cadres.
--ANI