Activists call new SE Asia rights body toothless
By GRANT PECK, Associated Press Writer – Fri Oct 23, 7:19 am ET
CHA-AM, Thailand (AP) – Southeast Asian nations inaugurated their first regional human rights commission Friday, a watchdog immediately derided as toothless by activists who walked out of a meeting to protest being snubbed by five of the governments involved.
The annual summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations earlier began inauspiciously when half the bloc's 10 leaders failed to show up at the opening of the three-day conference due to a tropical storm, domestic politics, a VIP visit and a possible illness.
One of the first orders of business was the inauguration of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights. Critics say the commission will do little to deter human rights violators because it focuses on promotion — rather than protection — of human rights and has no authority to impose punishments.
Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva defended the commission a "a significant milestone" — it is the first human rights watchdog in ASEAN's 42-year history.
"The issue of human rights is not about condemnation, but about awareness," Abhisit said, adding that improving human rights is an "evolutionary process."
Activists, however, condemned both the commission's powerlessness and the exclusion of members of civil society from Thursday's summit.
"It is a big shame to our dreams for genuine democracy in the region. It's like all of the human rights of the people in this region have been violated," said Sister Crescenia L. Lucero, a leading rights advocate and Roman Catholic nun.
Lucero was to have represented the Philippines at the dialogue. But she and other civil society representatives were excluded from Thursday's meeting, according to Debbie Stothard of The ASEAN People's Forum, an umbrella group of non-governmental organizations.
Stothard said the governments of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Singapore and the Philippines rejected meeting with the activists as previously scheduled. Instead, she said, Singapore and Myanmar flew in substitutes from government-sponsored agencies, with Myanmar including a former high-ranking police officer.
In response, activists from Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia walked out of the meeting in protest.
The exclusion of activists from the summit — held under the motto of "Empowering the Peoples" — also drew fire from a leading international human rights group.
"This confirms our worst fears, because an intergovernmental body has always been second best, but an intergovernmental body that won't even talk to its own citizens is a joke, is worthless," said Brad Adams, Asia director of the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
ASEAN's 10 member countries include military-run Myanmar, communist-run Laos and Vietnam plus several countries whose governments routinely persecute opposition parties or political activists.
Members of ASEAN have recently escalated their criticism of Myanmar, particularly over the detention of democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. But the summit will again likely act by consensus, avoid confrontations and maintain that the group's approach to engaging Myanmar works better than the West's sanctions and threats.
The summit will also sign a declaration on climate change and discuss food security, bio-energy, disaster management and how trade barriers can be brought down to bring about a European Union-style grouping by 2015.
The bloc will also meet with leaders of China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand.
The opening of the summit came with only half of the region's leaders in attendance.
Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen was busy hosting an official visit by South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, Indonesia is swearing in a new government and Malaysia's government was presenting its budget to Parliament, said Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya.
Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was running late due to Typhoon Lupit, the third storm in a month due to hit the Philippines, her spokeswoman Lorelei Fajardo said.
Brunei's Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah was in Cha-am but didn't show up at the opening ceremony amid reports that he was not feeling well.
Thailand has deployed more than 36,000 military and police to keep security both in Bangkok and at the beach resort of Cha-am, 200 kilometers (120 miles) south of the capital.
The government is still smarting from the storming of the East Asian Summit in April in the coastal city of Pattaya, where anti-government protesters charged through thin police ranks and forced the evacuation of several leaders by helicopter and boat.
A main protest organizer said no new demonstrations are planned this week in Bangkok or at the summit venue.
By GRANT PECK, Associated Press Writer – Fri Oct 23, 7:19 am ET
CHA-AM, Thailand (AP) – Southeast Asian nations inaugurated their first regional human rights commission Friday, a watchdog immediately derided as toothless by activists who walked out of a meeting to protest being snubbed by five of the governments involved.
The annual summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations earlier began inauspiciously when half the bloc's 10 leaders failed to show up at the opening of the three-day conference due to a tropical storm, domestic politics, a VIP visit and a possible illness.
One of the first orders of business was the inauguration of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights. Critics say the commission will do little to deter human rights violators because it focuses on promotion — rather than protection — of human rights and has no authority to impose punishments.
Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva defended the commission a "a significant milestone" — it is the first human rights watchdog in ASEAN's 42-year history.
"The issue of human rights is not about condemnation, but about awareness," Abhisit said, adding that improving human rights is an "evolutionary process."
Activists, however, condemned both the commission's powerlessness and the exclusion of members of civil society from Thursday's summit.
"It is a big shame to our dreams for genuine democracy in the region. It's like all of the human rights of the people in this region have been violated," said Sister Crescenia L. Lucero, a leading rights advocate and Roman Catholic nun.
Lucero was to have represented the Philippines at the dialogue. But she and other civil society representatives were excluded from Thursday's meeting, according to Debbie Stothard of The ASEAN People's Forum, an umbrella group of non-governmental organizations.
Stothard said the governments of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Singapore and the Philippines rejected meeting with the activists as previously scheduled. Instead, she said, Singapore and Myanmar flew in substitutes from government-sponsored agencies, with Myanmar including a former high-ranking police officer.
In response, activists from Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia walked out of the meeting in protest.
The exclusion of activists from the summit — held under the motto of "Empowering the Peoples" — also drew fire from a leading international human rights group.
"This confirms our worst fears, because an intergovernmental body has always been second best, but an intergovernmental body that won't even talk to its own citizens is a joke, is worthless," said Brad Adams, Asia director of the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
ASEAN's 10 member countries include military-run Myanmar, communist-run Laos and Vietnam plus several countries whose governments routinely persecute opposition parties or political activists.
Members of ASEAN have recently escalated their criticism of Myanmar, particularly over the detention of democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. But the summit will again likely act by consensus, avoid confrontations and maintain that the group's approach to engaging Myanmar works better than the West's sanctions and threats.
The summit will also sign a declaration on climate change and discuss food security, bio-energy, disaster management and how trade barriers can be brought down to bring about a European Union-style grouping by 2015.
The bloc will also meet with leaders of China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand.
The opening of the summit came with only half of the region's leaders in attendance.
Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen was busy hosting an official visit by South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, Indonesia is swearing in a new government and Malaysia's government was presenting its budget to Parliament, said Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya.
Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo was running late due to Typhoon Lupit, the third storm in a month due to hit the Philippines, her spokeswoman Lorelei Fajardo said.
Brunei's Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah was in Cha-am but didn't show up at the opening ceremony amid reports that he was not feeling well.
Thailand has deployed more than 36,000 military and police to keep security both in Bangkok and at the beach resort of Cha-am, 200 kilometers (120 miles) south of the capital.
The government is still smarting from the storming of the East Asian Summit in April in the coastal city of Pattaya, where anti-government protesters charged through thin police ranks and forced the evacuation of several leaders by helicopter and boat.
A main protest organizer said no new demonstrations are planned this week in Bangkok or at the summit venue.
***********************************************************
U.N. slams Myanmar, North Korea, Palestinian rights ills
By Michelle Nichols – Thu Oct 22, 4:32 pm ET
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – Human rights violations in Myanmar are alarming, North Koreans are starving and living in continual fear and Palestinians are suffering amid Middle East tensions, U.N. rights envoys said on Thursday.
Special rapporteurs appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva described the human rights conditions in each country to a meeting of the 192 U.N. member states.
While Myanmar rights envoy Tomas Ojea Quintana was able to visit the military-ruled Asian country twice, communist North Korea denied entry to envoy Vitit Muntarbhorn and envoy Richard Falk was stopped by Israel from entering Palestinian areas.
"The situation of human rights in Myanmar remains alarming. There is a pattern of widespread and systematic violations which in many conflict areas results result in serious abuses of civilian rights and integrity," Quintana said.
"The prevailing impunity allows for the continuation of violations," he added.
He also criticized the military junta for keeping opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi detained. Western officials fear the government wants to keep her under house arrest during next year's election so that she is unable to run.
Myanmar's representative, who U.N. officials identified as Thaung Tun, described Quintana's report as less than objective, saying insurgents and anti-government groups had been given a "sympathetic ear" and that all the allegations made "should be taken with a grain of salt."
He said steps were being taken to organize 2010 elections in the country, which he said would be "free and fair."
Myanmar also reprimanded the United States and Britain during the meeting for referring to the country by its former name, Burma, while North Korea admonished the United States for not calling it DPRK -- Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
"PERVASIVE REPRESSION"
In North Korea, envoy Muntarbhorn said the food aid situation was desperate with the World Food Program only able to feed about one third of the people in need. He said torture is extensively practiced and described prisons as purgatory.
"Freedoms associated with human rights and democracy, such as the freedom to choose one's government, freedom of association, freedom of expression ... privacy and freedom of religion are flouted on a daily basis by the nature and practices of the regime in power," he said.
"The pervasive repression imposed by the authorities ensures the people live in continual fear and are impressed to inform on each other," he said. "The state practices extensive surveillance over its inhabitants."
North Korea's deputy U.N. ambassador Pak Tok Hun rejected the report and said the country, which has also drawn international condemnation for nuclear and missile tests, was being "singled out for sinister political purposes."
Falk's report on the Palestinian territories focused on human rights concerns related to issues including the war in December and January between Islamist militant group Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, as well as Israel's construction of a land barrier and disputed housing settlements.
He said an Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip means "insufficient basic necessities are reaching the population."
Falk also spoke of the "unlawful, noncooperation" of Israel which prevented him from visiting the Palestinian territories. Israel did not respond to Falk's reports at the meeting.
By Michelle Nichols – Thu Oct 22, 4:32 pm ET
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – Human rights violations in Myanmar are alarming, North Koreans are starving and living in continual fear and Palestinians are suffering amid Middle East tensions, U.N. rights envoys said on Thursday.
Special rapporteurs appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva described the human rights conditions in each country to a meeting of the 192 U.N. member states.
While Myanmar rights envoy Tomas Ojea Quintana was able to visit the military-ruled Asian country twice, communist North Korea denied entry to envoy Vitit Muntarbhorn and envoy Richard Falk was stopped by Israel from entering Palestinian areas.
"The situation of human rights in Myanmar remains alarming. There is a pattern of widespread and systematic violations which in many conflict areas results result in serious abuses of civilian rights and integrity," Quintana said.
"The prevailing impunity allows for the continuation of violations," he added.
He also criticized the military junta for keeping opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi detained. Western officials fear the government wants to keep her under house arrest during next year's election so that she is unable to run.
Myanmar's representative, who U.N. officials identified as Thaung Tun, described Quintana's report as less than objective, saying insurgents and anti-government groups had been given a "sympathetic ear" and that all the allegations made "should be taken with a grain of salt."
He said steps were being taken to organize 2010 elections in the country, which he said would be "free and fair."
Myanmar also reprimanded the United States and Britain during the meeting for referring to the country by its former name, Burma, while North Korea admonished the United States for not calling it DPRK -- Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
"PERVASIVE REPRESSION"
In North Korea, envoy Muntarbhorn said the food aid situation was desperate with the World Food Program only able to feed about one third of the people in need. He said torture is extensively practiced and described prisons as purgatory.
"Freedoms associated with human rights and democracy, such as the freedom to choose one's government, freedom of association, freedom of expression ... privacy and freedom of religion are flouted on a daily basis by the nature and practices of the regime in power," he said.
"The pervasive repression imposed by the authorities ensures the people live in continual fear and are impressed to inform on each other," he said. "The state practices extensive surveillance over its inhabitants."
North Korea's deputy U.N. ambassador Pak Tok Hun rejected the report and said the country, which has also drawn international condemnation for nuclear and missile tests, was being "singled out for sinister political purposes."
Falk's report on the Palestinian territories focused on human rights concerns related to issues including the war in December and January between Islamist militant group Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, as well as Israel's construction of a land barrier and disputed housing settlements.
He said an Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip means "insufficient basic necessities are reaching the population."
Falk also spoke of the "unlawful, noncooperation" of Israel which prevented him from visiting the Palestinian territories. Israel did not respond to Falk's reports at the meeting.
***********************************************************
Thaksin, trade rows erupt at Southeast Asian summit
By Jeremy Laurence – 1 hr 12 mins ago
HUA HIN, Thailand (Reuters) – A Southeast Asian summit got off to a troubled start on Friday as hosts Thailand faced off against two neighbours in trade and diplomatic spats, and a new regional human rights body drew withering criticism.
Determined to avoid a rerun of embarrassing mishaps at past summits, Thailand deployed a security force of 18,000 backed by naval gunships to the seaside resort town of Hua Hin as leaders gathered. Tensions rose to the surface within hours.
In a slap in the face to Thailand's rulers, Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen offered fugitive former Thai premier Thaksin Shinawatra a job as economic adviser.
Thaksin, ousted in a 2006 coup, heavily influences a red-shirted, anti-government protest movement from self-imposed exile in Dubai. Thailand is seeking to extradite him to serve a jail term for corruption.
"Thaksin can stay in Cambodia as the guest of Cambodia and also be my guest as my adviser on our economy," said Hun Sen, who described the former telecommunications tycoon on Wednesday as an "eternal friend" who had a residence in Cambodia waiting for him.
He likened Thaksin to pro-democracy figure and Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who has spent 14 of the past 20 years under house arrest or in jail in military-ruled Myanmar.
Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva had tough words for Hun Sen, calling him "seriously misinformed" as the row threatened to overtake other issues at the summit of leaders from the 10-member Association of South East Nations (ASEAN).
A trade dispute with the Philippines also deepened.
Last week Thailand, the world's biggest rice exporter, threatened to delay an ASEAN free trade pact unless it could get a "fair deal" on tariffs from the Philippines, the world's biggest buyer of the food staple.
Those differences could derail an ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement expected to be signed this weekend, undermining a key plank of an ambitious bid by Southeast Asia and its 540 million people to build an EU-style economic community by 2015.
"It's a very sensitive issue, we're friends, we need to talk this through," Thailand's deputy commerce minister Alongkorn Polabutr told Reuters.
RIGHTS BODY LAUNCHED
Thailand had hoped for a smooth summit after hundreds of anti-government protesters broke through security barriers six months ago at a gathering at Thailand's resort town of Pattaya, forcing some Asian leaders to flee by helicopter and abruptly ending the summit.
Protests at Bangkok's airport last year forced another summit to be abandoned.
ASEAN leaders plan a series of meetings in Hua Hin, first among themselves and later with counterparts from China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand at the weekend.
ASEAN also launched a human rights watchdog, which critics say is toothless and already discredited by having military-ruled Myanmar, seen as a serial rights abuser, as part of the mechanism.
The new body, called the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, has no power to punish members such as Myanmar and aims to promote rather than protect human rights.
Non-governmental rights organisations and London-based Amnesty International have expressed concerns over the body, while the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights says it has no clear mandate for victims of abuse.
Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum said five of the 10 governments had also rejected nominees from civil society groups for the watchdog and have replaced them with their own.
She said observers at Friday's meeting were instructed not to question the leaders.
"It's a big slap in the face for civil society. We are trying to engage with them (ASEAN)," she said. "This situation and the gag order is an irresponsible move by ASEAN governments and it will damage the credibility of the grouping."
ASEAN foreign ministers raised pressure on Myanmar on Thursday to hold "free and fair" elections next year, and urged the junta to free Suu Kyi.
The sentencing of Suu Kyi to a further 18 months of detention this year has prompted Western critics to dismiss next year's polls -- the first in two decades -- as a sham.
By Jeremy Laurence – 1 hr 12 mins ago
HUA HIN, Thailand (Reuters) – A Southeast Asian summit got off to a troubled start on Friday as hosts Thailand faced off against two neighbours in trade and diplomatic spats, and a new regional human rights body drew withering criticism.
Determined to avoid a rerun of embarrassing mishaps at past summits, Thailand deployed a security force of 18,000 backed by naval gunships to the seaside resort town of Hua Hin as leaders gathered. Tensions rose to the surface within hours.
In a slap in the face to Thailand's rulers, Cambodia's Prime Minister Hun Sen offered fugitive former Thai premier Thaksin Shinawatra a job as economic adviser.
Thaksin, ousted in a 2006 coup, heavily influences a red-shirted, anti-government protest movement from self-imposed exile in Dubai. Thailand is seeking to extradite him to serve a jail term for corruption.
"Thaksin can stay in Cambodia as the guest of Cambodia and also be my guest as my adviser on our economy," said Hun Sen, who described the former telecommunications tycoon on Wednesday as an "eternal friend" who had a residence in Cambodia waiting for him.
He likened Thaksin to pro-democracy figure and Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who has spent 14 of the past 20 years under house arrest or in jail in military-ruled Myanmar.
Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva had tough words for Hun Sen, calling him "seriously misinformed" as the row threatened to overtake other issues at the summit of leaders from the 10-member Association of South East Nations (ASEAN).
A trade dispute with the Philippines also deepened.
Last week Thailand, the world's biggest rice exporter, threatened to delay an ASEAN free trade pact unless it could get a "fair deal" on tariffs from the Philippines, the world's biggest buyer of the food staple.
Those differences could derail an ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement expected to be signed this weekend, undermining a key plank of an ambitious bid by Southeast Asia and its 540 million people to build an EU-style economic community by 2015.
"It's a very sensitive issue, we're friends, we need to talk this through," Thailand's deputy commerce minister Alongkorn Polabutr told Reuters.
RIGHTS BODY LAUNCHED
Thailand had hoped for a smooth summit after hundreds of anti-government protesters broke through security barriers six months ago at a gathering at Thailand's resort town of Pattaya, forcing some Asian leaders to flee by helicopter and abruptly ending the summit.
Protests at Bangkok's airport last year forced another summit to be abandoned.
ASEAN leaders plan a series of meetings in Hua Hin, first among themselves and later with counterparts from China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand at the weekend.
ASEAN also launched a human rights watchdog, which critics say is toothless and already discredited by having military-ruled Myanmar, seen as a serial rights abuser, as part of the mechanism.
The new body, called the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, has no power to punish members such as Myanmar and aims to promote rather than protect human rights.
Non-governmental rights organisations and London-based Amnesty International have expressed concerns over the body, while the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights says it has no clear mandate for victims of abuse.
Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum said five of the 10 governments had also rejected nominees from civil society groups for the watchdog and have replaced them with their own.
She said observers at Friday's meeting were instructed not to question the leaders.
"It's a big slap in the face for civil society. We are trying to engage with them (ASEAN)," she said. "This situation and the gag order is an irresponsible move by ASEAN governments and it will damage the credibility of the grouping."
ASEAN foreign ministers raised pressure on Myanmar on Thursday to hold "free and fair" elections next year, and urged the junta to free Suu Kyi.
The sentencing of Suu Kyi to a further 18 months of detention this year has prompted Western critics to dismiss next year's polls -- the first in two decades -- as a sham.
***********************************************************
Asian leaders to launch 'historic' rights body
by Rachel O'Brien – Fri Oct 23, 1:00 am ET
HUA HIN, Thailand (AFP) – Southeast Asian leaders are to officially launch a "historic" human rights body on Friday, despite criticisms that it will be too soft on members such as military-ruled Myanmar.
Leaders of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) opened an annual regional summit in the elite Thai resort town of Hua Hin, with security forces locking down the area to prevent anti-government protests.
The UN has urged leaders to make "credible" the long-awaited ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), which is meant to answer claims that the bloc has fallen short on rights during its 42-year history.
A draft of the declaration to be issued at the launch of the commission, seen by AFP, described it as a "historic milestone".
Formally opening the summit, Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said the signing of the agreement would mark the realisation of a 15-year dream.
"The principles enshrined in the ASEAN charter, including the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms should be translated into concrete actions," he told the gathered heads of state.
"This important body... will generate momentum on efforts to promote and protect human rights in the region."
But the commission, which will cover a region of nearly 600 million people, has been criticised for having no power to punish member nations and for focusing on the promotion of rights rather than protection.
"It is a start, but far short of a mechanism that speaks to the credibility of the countries in the region supporting human rights in any substantive form," said Bridget Welsh, a Southeast Asia expert at Singapore Management University.
Myanmar is likely to come under the international spotlight for its continued detention of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, but Welsh said human rights issues extended across the region, and encompassed the treatment of ethnic minorities in Thailand.
"Given that ASEAN moves slowly, I do not expect... change to occur rapidly," she added.
Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya said late Thursday that Myanmar had endorsed the human rights body and would be appointing a representative to it, but ducked questions about pressing Myanmar to free Suu Kyi.
The US recently embarked on a major policy shift to re-engage the junta after decades of hostility and is planning a rare mission to the country next week.
But at breakfast in his Hua Hin hotel Friday morning, Myanmar Foreign Minister Nyan Win brushed off questions about the visit, saying he did not know the schedule for the
trip.
The bloc was embroiled in a fresh row over rights after five of the 10 representatives due to meet ASEAN leaders for a so-called civil society interface were rejected, a leading rights group said.
Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum said the last-minute barring of the rights activists -- from Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines and Singapore -- was an "outrageous development".
"It is a rejection of civil society and of the democratic process by which they were selected. This really does not bode well," she said.
The Southeast Asian leaders were arriving amid rigid security measures in Hua Hin, where 18,000 security personnel were deployed in the town under harsh laws invoked by the government, backed up by dozens of armoured vehicles.
The meeting was originally to be held in the popular tourist destination of Pattaya in April but was called off after anti-government protesters stormed the venue and forced foreign leaders to flee.
This weekend's summit involving Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam will be followed by talks with China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand.
The leaders are also expected to grapple with climate change, disaster management and ways to deepen economic ties and sustain the region's rebound from the recent global downturn.
by Rachel O'Brien – Fri Oct 23, 1:00 am ET
HUA HIN, Thailand (AFP) – Southeast Asian leaders are to officially launch a "historic" human rights body on Friday, despite criticisms that it will be too soft on members such as military-ruled Myanmar.
Leaders of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) opened an annual regional summit in the elite Thai resort town of Hua Hin, with security forces locking down the area to prevent anti-government protests.
The UN has urged leaders to make "credible" the long-awaited ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), which is meant to answer claims that the bloc has fallen short on rights during its 42-year history.
A draft of the declaration to be issued at the launch of the commission, seen by AFP, described it as a "historic milestone".
Formally opening the summit, Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said the signing of the agreement would mark the realisation of a 15-year dream.
"The principles enshrined in the ASEAN charter, including the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms should be translated into concrete actions," he told the gathered heads of state.
"This important body... will generate momentum on efforts to promote and protect human rights in the region."
But the commission, which will cover a region of nearly 600 million people, has been criticised for having no power to punish member nations and for focusing on the promotion of rights rather than protection.
"It is a start, but far short of a mechanism that speaks to the credibility of the countries in the region supporting human rights in any substantive form," said Bridget Welsh, a Southeast Asia expert at Singapore Management University.
Myanmar is likely to come under the international spotlight for its continued detention of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, but Welsh said human rights issues extended across the region, and encompassed the treatment of ethnic minorities in Thailand.
"Given that ASEAN moves slowly, I do not expect... change to occur rapidly," she added.
Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya said late Thursday that Myanmar had endorsed the human rights body and would be appointing a representative to it, but ducked questions about pressing Myanmar to free Suu Kyi.
The US recently embarked on a major policy shift to re-engage the junta after decades of hostility and is planning a rare mission to the country next week.
But at breakfast in his Hua Hin hotel Friday morning, Myanmar Foreign Minister Nyan Win brushed off questions about the visit, saying he did not know the schedule for the
trip.
The bloc was embroiled in a fresh row over rights after five of the 10 representatives due to meet ASEAN leaders for a so-called civil society interface were rejected, a leading rights group said.
Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum said the last-minute barring of the rights activists -- from Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, Philippines and Singapore -- was an "outrageous development".
"It is a rejection of civil society and of the democratic process by which they were selected. This really does not bode well," she said.
The Southeast Asian leaders were arriving amid rigid security measures in Hua Hin, where 18,000 security personnel were deployed in the town under harsh laws invoked by the government, backed up by dozens of armoured vehicles.
The meeting was originally to be held in the popular tourist destination of Pattaya in April but was called off after anti-government protesters stormed the venue and forced foreign leaders to flee.
This weekend's summit involving Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam will be followed by talks with China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand.
The leaders are also expected to grapple with climate change, disaster management and ways to deepen economic ties and sustain the region's rebound from the recent global downturn.
***********************************************************
INO News - U.S. Engagement With Myanmar Set For Next Week: Campbell
8 hours ago
(RTTNews) - The U.S. will begin its engagement with Myanmar, also known as Burma, after a decade-long freeze next week by sending a top diplomat to Yangon, in line with Washington's new policy of engaging the military-ruled Southeast Asian nation, reports say.
A fact-finding delegation led by Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, will head to Myanmar as part of an exploratory dialogue with that country's military junta.
Campbell said he would travel to Myanmar to continue talks that he began in September in New York with senior Myanmar officials, the highest level U.S. contact with the military regime in last ten years.
On his way to Yangon, the top American diplomat is planning a stop-over in India to discuss with its leaders the objectives of the Obama administration's new Burma policy of pursuing deeper engagement with Myanmar's military rulers to try to incite democratic reform.
The U.S. diplomat, who was in Beijing last week and met senior Chinese officials dealing with Myanmar issue, said in his testimony before the House Foreign Affairs committee that he thought the Chinese are intensely interested in the proposed dialogues.
"They see that the U.S. is stepping up its overall engagement in Southeast Asia. They are watching that carefully," he said.
Campbell told the lawmakers he specifically asked for Chinese assistance particularly in terms of establishing a dialogue with internal parties in advance of the 2010 elections, and for Beijing's overall support for the U.S. policy of engagement.
Meanwhile, the U.S. diplomat rebuffed calls by some lawmakers to ease tight curbs on trade and investment in Myanmar, saying at the hearing that the talks "will supplement rather than replace the sanctions regime."
Emphasizing that the engagement with Burma would be a long drawn-out, slow, painful and step by step process he cautioned that "it will take more than a single conversation to resolve our differences."
"The conclusions of our policy review, announced last month, reaffirmed our fundamental interests in Burma: We support a unified, peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Burma," America's top diplomat for Asia told the lawmakers.
Referring to military junta as "a group of men who had self isolated themselves", Campbell said Myanmar was a country even lesser known than North Korea.
The U.S. State Department officials told the committee that the U.S. mission hopes to meet with the military junta as well as detained democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi and representatives of ethnic groups.
8 hours ago
(RTTNews) - The U.S. will begin its engagement with Myanmar, also known as Burma, after a decade-long freeze next week by sending a top diplomat to Yangon, in line with Washington's new policy of engaging the military-ruled Southeast Asian nation, reports say.
A fact-finding delegation led by Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, will head to Myanmar as part of an exploratory dialogue with that country's military junta.
Campbell said he would travel to Myanmar to continue talks that he began in September in New York with senior Myanmar officials, the highest level U.S. contact with the military regime in last ten years.
On his way to Yangon, the top American diplomat is planning a stop-over in India to discuss with its leaders the objectives of the Obama administration's new Burma policy of pursuing deeper engagement with Myanmar's military rulers to try to incite democratic reform.
The U.S. diplomat, who was in Beijing last week and met senior Chinese officials dealing with Myanmar issue, said in his testimony before the House Foreign Affairs committee that he thought the Chinese are intensely interested in the proposed dialogues.
"They see that the U.S. is stepping up its overall engagement in Southeast Asia. They are watching that carefully," he said.
Campbell told the lawmakers he specifically asked for Chinese assistance particularly in terms of establishing a dialogue with internal parties in advance of the 2010 elections, and for Beijing's overall support for the U.S. policy of engagement.
Meanwhile, the U.S. diplomat rebuffed calls by some lawmakers to ease tight curbs on trade and investment in Myanmar, saying at the hearing that the talks "will supplement rather than replace the sanctions regime."
Emphasizing that the engagement with Burma would be a long drawn-out, slow, painful and step by step process he cautioned that "it will take more than a single conversation to resolve our differences."
"The conclusions of our policy review, announced last month, reaffirmed our fundamental interests in Burma: We support a unified, peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Burma," America's top diplomat for Asia told the lawmakers.
Referring to military junta as "a group of men who had self isolated themselves", Campbell said Myanmar was a country even lesser known than North Korea.
The U.S. State Department officials told the committee that the U.S. mission hopes to meet with the military junta as well as detained democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi and representatives of ethnic groups.
***********************************************************
EarthTimes - Cambodian premier compares Thaksin to Aung San Suu Kyi - Summary
Posted : Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:16:41 GMT
Cha-am, Thailand - Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen on Friday reiterated his support for Thailand's fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, comparing the ousted politician with jailed Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. "If millions of Thais support Thaksin, why can't I?" asked Hun Sen upon his arrival at Cha-am, Thailand, to attend a summit of the Assocation of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which both Thailand and Cambodia are members.
"If people can talk about Aung San Suu Kyi, why can't I talk about Thaksin?" Hun Sen said, comparing the Thai leader sentenced to two years in prison on corruption charges with Myanmar's democracy icon and the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate.
Suu Kyi has spent 14 of the past 20 years under house detention and was recently sentenced to another 18 months of house arrest. Thaksin was sentenced last year for abuse of power for allowing his wife to bid on a plot of land at a public auction when he was still prime minister in 2003.
Cambodia and Thailand have sunk into a diplomatic spat over Thaksin - who was ousted in a 2006 coup and now lives in self-imposed exile - on the eve of the ASEAN summit intended to demonstrate the region's growing cooperation and connectivity.
Cambodia ratcheted up the war of words Friday with a statement that it would not permit Thaksin's extradition if he comes to Cambodia.
The Cambodian Council of Ministers said in a statement that it would not extradite Thaksin even if the Thai government requested it.
It said Cambodia would invoke an article in the 1991 extradition agreement between the two nations that permits one side to refuse an extradition request if it deems the offence on which the request is based to be politically motivated.
"Allowing H.E. Thaksin to stay in Cambodia is reflecting the virtuous behaviour of Prime Minister Hun Sen, [who is] Thaksin's longtime friend," it said, adding that this "virtuous attitude" did not constitute interference in Thailand's internal politics.
Government spokesman Phay Siphan said in Phnom Penh that Thaksin was welcome to come to Cambodia.
"We stipulate that Cambodia has a right to offer Thaksin to visit Cambodia, and we have no obligation to send him back to Thailand," he said Friday.
The words marked the latest round in an ongoing verbal joust between Hun Sen and his Thai counterpart, Abhisit Vejjajiva. Thailand was incensed earlier this week when Hun Sen reportedly offered a home in Cambodia to Thaksin.
Late on Thursday, Cambodia said Hun Sen had been misquoted in reports in Cambodian and Thai media, but by that time, Thai Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban had warned that Thaksin risked being extradited back to Thailand if he took up Hun Sen's offer.
About 18,000 soldiers and police have been deployed to protect the 16 leaders attending the ASEAN summit, 130 kilometres south-west of Bangkok, from protestors loyal to the populist Thaksin. A summit in April had to be cancelled when pro-Thaksin demonstrators broke into the venue.
Thaksin is loathed by much of the Thai elite and middle class, but his populist economic policies have given him a big following among the poor. His critics have accused him of seeking to become an authoritarian leader, a label often also applied to Hun Sen.
Posted : Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:16:41 GMT
Cha-am, Thailand - Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen on Friday reiterated his support for Thailand's fugitive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra, comparing the ousted politician with jailed Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. "If millions of Thais support Thaksin, why can't I?" asked Hun Sen upon his arrival at Cha-am, Thailand, to attend a summit of the Assocation of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which both Thailand and Cambodia are members.
"If people can talk about Aung San Suu Kyi, why can't I talk about Thaksin?" Hun Sen said, comparing the Thai leader sentenced to two years in prison on corruption charges with Myanmar's democracy icon and the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize laureate.
Suu Kyi has spent 14 of the past 20 years under house detention and was recently sentenced to another 18 months of house arrest. Thaksin was sentenced last year for abuse of power for allowing his wife to bid on a plot of land at a public auction when he was still prime minister in 2003.
Cambodia and Thailand have sunk into a diplomatic spat over Thaksin - who was ousted in a 2006 coup and now lives in self-imposed exile - on the eve of the ASEAN summit intended to demonstrate the region's growing cooperation and connectivity.
Cambodia ratcheted up the war of words Friday with a statement that it would not permit Thaksin's extradition if he comes to Cambodia.
The Cambodian Council of Ministers said in a statement that it would not extradite Thaksin even if the Thai government requested it.
It said Cambodia would invoke an article in the 1991 extradition agreement between the two nations that permits one side to refuse an extradition request if it deems the offence on which the request is based to be politically motivated.
"Allowing H.E. Thaksin to stay in Cambodia is reflecting the virtuous behaviour of Prime Minister Hun Sen, [who is] Thaksin's longtime friend," it said, adding that this "virtuous attitude" did not constitute interference in Thailand's internal politics.
Government spokesman Phay Siphan said in Phnom Penh that Thaksin was welcome to come to Cambodia.
"We stipulate that Cambodia has a right to offer Thaksin to visit Cambodia, and we have no obligation to send him back to Thailand," he said Friday.
The words marked the latest round in an ongoing verbal joust between Hun Sen and his Thai counterpart, Abhisit Vejjajiva. Thailand was incensed earlier this week when Hun Sen reportedly offered a home in Cambodia to Thaksin.
Late on Thursday, Cambodia said Hun Sen had been misquoted in reports in Cambodian and Thai media, but by that time, Thai Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban had warned that Thaksin risked being extradited back to Thailand if he took up Hun Sen's offer.
About 18,000 soldiers and police have been deployed to protect the 16 leaders attending the ASEAN summit, 130 kilometres south-west of Bangkok, from protestors loyal to the populist Thaksin. A summit in April had to be cancelled when pro-Thaksin demonstrators broke into the venue.
Thaksin is loathed by much of the Thai elite and middle class, but his populist economic policies have given him a big following among the poor. His critics have accused him of seeking to become an authoritarian leader, a label often also applied to Hun Sen.
***********************************************************
The New York Times - Asean Inaugurates Human Rights Commission
By THOMAS FULLER
Published: October 23, 2009
CHA-AM, Thailand — Southeast Asian governments inaugurated their first human rights commission on Friday in what they hailed as a milestone for a region ruled by governments as diverse as the thriving democracy in Indonesia, the hermetic communist regime in Laos and the repressive military dictatorship in Myanmar.
The secretary general of Asean, Surin Pitsuwan, right, linking hands with the Cambodian deputy prime minister Keat Chhon, as he looks at Brunei's Pehin Dato Lim Jock Seng, second from left, and Myanmar Prime Minister Thein Sein, left, on Friday.
But human rights activists called the body toothless and walked out of a meeting here Friday when “civil society” representatives from five countries were rejected by their governments.
“The commission has not been designed to be effective and impartial,” said Debbie Stothard, a human rights activist from Malaysia.
Establishing credibility for the Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, as the body is formally named, was one of several challenges for leaders gathering at this seaside resort south of Bangkok for a three-day summit meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or Asean.
Poor attendance marred the start of the meeting, when leaders from some of the largest Southeast Asian countries, including Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia, did not show up for the opening ceremony Friday, citing reasons ranging from weather disturbances to domestic obligations. They were scheduled to arrive later during the weekend.
The meeting, which follows one in April that was canceled when Thai anti-government protesters stormed the summit venue, will address preparedness for natural disasters, the response to future economic crises and free-trade agreements, among other issues.
The leaders of several non-Asean members — Australia, China, India, New Zealand and South Korea — were scheduled to join the meeting later during the weekend.
In his opening address on Friday, Thailand’s prime minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, emphasized the achievements of Asean, which was initially set up more than four decades ago partly as a bulwark against communism. In recent years, Asean has adopted a charter for the grouping, signed free trade agreements with other countries in the region and reduced tariff levels to negligible levels — although numerous other barriers to trade still exist between member countries.
“What remains is the onus that lies on Asean to prove that it can implement whatever has been agreed, declared, or envisioned,” Mr. Abhisit said, in an apparent response to criticism that the grouping is more talk than substance.
The human rights body inaugurated Friday appeared to reinforce that criticism. The job of the commission will be to promote human rights, but it will have no power to investigate governments or impose sanctions.
A statement distributed by the Thai government here said the commission would “promote and protect human rights by promoting public awareness and education.”
Mr. Abhisit acknowledged concerns that the commission’s scope was too limited but said it was part of an “evolutionary” process.
“The issue of human rights is not about condemnation, but about awareness, empowerment and improvement,” Mr. Abhisit said. “We shall not only demonstrate to the world that human rights is a priority but also show them realistic and constructive ways to deal with it.”
Yuyun Wahyuningrum, an Indonesian human rights delegate who walked out of the meeting with government representatives Friday, said human rights groups supported the creation of the commission, but were concerned that it was not independent enough. Commissioners were chosen by governments without outside consultation, she said.
“The process was very secretive,” she said.
Southeast Asia’s human rights record is blemished at best. Myanmar’s military government, which is a member of Asean, is currently detaining more than 2,000 political prisoners including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the democracy leader whose party won a landslide election victory in 1990 that the ruling generals ignored. Cambodia’s parliament passed a law on Wednesday that bars demonstrations of more than 200 people. Malaysia’s government detains people it deems threats to domestic security without trial and maintains tight controls on television stations and newspapers.
Asean has ambitions to create a single market by 2015 among its 10 member nations, which have a combined population of nearly 600 million people, twice the population of the United States.
But its main challenge in recent months has been to tamp down long-running conflicts and disagreements. Relations between Thailand and Cambodia have worsened over a border dispute near an ancient hilltop temple, Preah Vihear. Over the past year, troops in the border area have skirmished several times, leaving seven people dead.
Cambodia’s nationalistic and authoritarian prime minister, Hun Sen, regularly delivers diatribes against Thailand and has pointedly offered asylum to Thaksin Shinawatra, the ousted Thai prime minister who is sought by the Thai authorities on outstanding arrest warrants.
Soon after arriving at the meeting Friday afternoon Mr. Hun Sen said Mr. Thaksin would be allowed to stay in Cambodia and serve as his economic adviser.
“People talk about Aung San Suu Kyi from Myanmar. Why can’t we talk about Thaksin?” he asked.
The Cambodian government said Friday it would reject any extradition request from Thailand if Mr. Thaksin moved to Cambodia.
The host of the meeting, Thailand, deployed more than 30,000 security personnel for the summit to deter supporters of Mr. Thaksin from disrupting the event. Mr. Thaksin was removed from power in a 2006 military coup.
Elsewhere in the region, Indonesia and Malaysia have failed to resolve disputes over territory on Borneo island. Emotionally charged disagreements over the origins of songs, traditional dances and batik cloth-printing techniques have flared in recent months.
Territorial disputes also strain relations between the Philippines and Malaysia and Singapore and Malaysia. In the South China Sea, Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines and Vietnam all have claims to areas rich in natural gas deposits.
By THOMAS FULLER
Published: October 23, 2009
CHA-AM, Thailand — Southeast Asian governments inaugurated their first human rights commission on Friday in what they hailed as a milestone for a region ruled by governments as diverse as the thriving democracy in Indonesia, the hermetic communist regime in Laos and the repressive military dictatorship in Myanmar.
The secretary general of Asean, Surin Pitsuwan, right, linking hands with the Cambodian deputy prime minister Keat Chhon, as he looks at Brunei's Pehin Dato Lim Jock Seng, second from left, and Myanmar Prime Minister Thein Sein, left, on Friday.
But human rights activists called the body toothless and walked out of a meeting here Friday when “civil society” representatives from five countries were rejected by their governments.
“The commission has not been designed to be effective and impartial,” said Debbie Stothard, a human rights activist from Malaysia.
Establishing credibility for the Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, as the body is formally named, was one of several challenges for leaders gathering at this seaside resort south of Bangkok for a three-day summit meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or Asean.
Poor attendance marred the start of the meeting, when leaders from some of the largest Southeast Asian countries, including Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia, did not show up for the opening ceremony Friday, citing reasons ranging from weather disturbances to domestic obligations. They were scheduled to arrive later during the weekend.
The meeting, which follows one in April that was canceled when Thai anti-government protesters stormed the summit venue, will address preparedness for natural disasters, the response to future economic crises and free-trade agreements, among other issues.
The leaders of several non-Asean members — Australia, China, India, New Zealand and South Korea — were scheduled to join the meeting later during the weekend.
In his opening address on Friday, Thailand’s prime minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, emphasized the achievements of Asean, which was initially set up more than four decades ago partly as a bulwark against communism. In recent years, Asean has adopted a charter for the grouping, signed free trade agreements with other countries in the region and reduced tariff levels to negligible levels — although numerous other barriers to trade still exist between member countries.
“What remains is the onus that lies on Asean to prove that it can implement whatever has been agreed, declared, or envisioned,” Mr. Abhisit said, in an apparent response to criticism that the grouping is more talk than substance.
The human rights body inaugurated Friday appeared to reinforce that criticism. The job of the commission will be to promote human rights, but it will have no power to investigate governments or impose sanctions.
A statement distributed by the Thai government here said the commission would “promote and protect human rights by promoting public awareness and education.”
Mr. Abhisit acknowledged concerns that the commission’s scope was too limited but said it was part of an “evolutionary” process.
“The issue of human rights is not about condemnation, but about awareness, empowerment and improvement,” Mr. Abhisit said. “We shall not only demonstrate to the world that human rights is a priority but also show them realistic and constructive ways to deal with it.”
Yuyun Wahyuningrum, an Indonesian human rights delegate who walked out of the meeting with government representatives Friday, said human rights groups supported the creation of the commission, but were concerned that it was not independent enough. Commissioners were chosen by governments without outside consultation, she said.
“The process was very secretive,” she said.
Southeast Asia’s human rights record is blemished at best. Myanmar’s military government, which is a member of Asean, is currently detaining more than 2,000 political prisoners including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the democracy leader whose party won a landslide election victory in 1990 that the ruling generals ignored. Cambodia’s parliament passed a law on Wednesday that bars demonstrations of more than 200 people. Malaysia’s government detains people it deems threats to domestic security without trial and maintains tight controls on television stations and newspapers.
Asean has ambitions to create a single market by 2015 among its 10 member nations, which have a combined population of nearly 600 million people, twice the population of the United States.
But its main challenge in recent months has been to tamp down long-running conflicts and disagreements. Relations between Thailand and Cambodia have worsened over a border dispute near an ancient hilltop temple, Preah Vihear. Over the past year, troops in the border area have skirmished several times, leaving seven people dead.
Cambodia’s nationalistic and authoritarian prime minister, Hun Sen, regularly delivers diatribes against Thailand and has pointedly offered asylum to Thaksin Shinawatra, the ousted Thai prime minister who is sought by the Thai authorities on outstanding arrest warrants.
Soon after arriving at the meeting Friday afternoon Mr. Hun Sen said Mr. Thaksin would be allowed to stay in Cambodia and serve as his economic adviser.
“People talk about Aung San Suu Kyi from Myanmar. Why can’t we talk about Thaksin?” he asked.
The Cambodian government said Friday it would reject any extradition request from Thailand if Mr. Thaksin moved to Cambodia.
The host of the meeting, Thailand, deployed more than 30,000 security personnel for the summit to deter supporters of Mr. Thaksin from disrupting the event. Mr. Thaksin was removed from power in a 2006 military coup.
Elsewhere in the region, Indonesia and Malaysia have failed to resolve disputes over territory on Borneo island. Emotionally charged disagreements over the origins of songs, traditional dances and batik cloth-printing techniques have flared in recent months.
Territorial disputes also strain relations between the Philippines and Malaysia and Singapore and Malaysia. In the South China Sea, Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines and Vietnam all have claims to areas rich in natural gas deposits.
***********************************************************
The Pendulum - A hopeful future for Burma
Cook-Deegan shares his experience and optimisim
by Caitlin O’Donnell, October 22, 2009
Patrick Cook-Deegan shared a message of change and hope for the oppressed ethnic groups of Burma in a packed classroom in Koury Business Center.
After traveling around the world as a student and seeing the atrocities taking place in Southeast Asia, Cook-Deegan, a Brown University graduate, decided that something needed to be done.
In 2006, he embarked on a bike trip across the area, gained $22,500 through sponsors to build a school in Laos and provide scholarships for girls.
Specifically, his passion lies with the people of Eastern Burma who are being forced out of their homes and into refugee camps by a military junta.
The Dictator of Burma, Than Shwe, has ruled for 15 years and repeatedly targeted the various ethnic groups on the border of the nation. His goal is to take over all land and subjugate the groups to government rule.
Cook-Deegan spoke with anyone living in the Burmese refugee camps who knew English and was willing to share their story.
A particularly significant story came from a 16 year old boy who had lost a leg in a land mine.
"That's life in Eastern Burma. Walking alone in the woods, having your leg blown off, and not being able to scream," he said.
Upon returning from his trip, Cook-Deegan became an active member of the U.S. Campaign for Burma. This group works to bring the Burmese government before the International Criminal Court in
the Netherlands.
"In order for Burma to move ahead and become a functioning and stable democracy, crimes must be addressed and brought before the public," he said.
Though Cook-Deegan admits that the process will not be easy, he strongly believes that democracy in Burma and the end of genocide globally is an attainable goal.
"My hope is that my grandkids will think the idea of genocide is horrendous. But if people don't rally around the cause, it won't happen," he said.
For Cook-Deegan, student and family education is perhaps the most important key to achieving these plans.
"US students can play a large part in the Burmese democracy movement," he explained.
Cook-Deegan, a strong advocate of the STAND (a student anti-genocide group), knows that with effort there is hope for the Burmese people.
"I don't want you to think that there is no hope," he said. "I work because there is hope."
Cook-Deegan shares his experience and optimisim
by Caitlin O’Donnell, October 22, 2009
Patrick Cook-Deegan shared a message of change and hope for the oppressed ethnic groups of Burma in a packed classroom in Koury Business Center.
After traveling around the world as a student and seeing the atrocities taking place in Southeast Asia, Cook-Deegan, a Brown University graduate, decided that something needed to be done.
In 2006, he embarked on a bike trip across the area, gained $22,500 through sponsors to build a school in Laos and provide scholarships for girls.
Specifically, his passion lies with the people of Eastern Burma who are being forced out of their homes and into refugee camps by a military junta.
The Dictator of Burma, Than Shwe, has ruled for 15 years and repeatedly targeted the various ethnic groups on the border of the nation. His goal is to take over all land and subjugate the groups to government rule.
Cook-Deegan spoke with anyone living in the Burmese refugee camps who knew English and was willing to share their story.
A particularly significant story came from a 16 year old boy who had lost a leg in a land mine.
"That's life in Eastern Burma. Walking alone in the woods, having your leg blown off, and not being able to scream," he said.
Upon returning from his trip, Cook-Deegan became an active member of the U.S. Campaign for Burma. This group works to bring the Burmese government before the International Criminal Court in
the Netherlands.
"In order for Burma to move ahead and become a functioning and stable democracy, crimes must be addressed and brought before the public," he said.
Though Cook-Deegan admits that the process will not be easy, he strongly believes that democracy in Burma and the end of genocide globally is an attainable goal.
"My hope is that my grandkids will think the idea of genocide is horrendous. But if people don't rally around the cause, it won't happen," he said.
For Cook-Deegan, student and family education is perhaps the most important key to achieving these plans.
"US students can play a large part in the Burmese democracy movement," he explained.
Cook-Deegan, a strong advocate of the STAND (a student anti-genocide group), knows that with effort there is hope for the Burmese people.
"I don't want you to think that there is no hope," he said. "I work because there is hope."
***********************************************************
Oct 24, 2009
Asia Times Online - US zeroes in on China's clout in Myanmar
By Brian McCartan
BANGKOK - A high-level American delegation will travel to Myanmar in coming weeks on a fact-finding mission as part of the United States' new engagement policy with the military ruled country. The talks will center on improving Myanmar's human-rights situation and its claimed intention to move towards democracy, but the subtext will be improving diplomatic relations and fostering influence in a country widely viewed as a key regional ally of China .
US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific affairs, Kurt Campbell, said on October 21 during hearings before the House Foreign Affairs Committee that he will lead a fact-finding trip to Myanmar in coming weeks to hold discussions with the regime and meet with democracy leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, as well as ethnic group representatives. Campbell said the trip is designed to build momentum behind the policy shift, however, no other details or dates were publicly disclosed.
During the hearings, Campbell reiterated that the new policy does not mean the end of US economic and financial sanctions against the regime and its members. "Our dialogue with [Myanmar] will supplement rather than replace the sanction regimes that have been at the center of our Burma [Myanmar] policy for many years," he told the committee.
The US says sanctions will only be removed when the regime makes tangible steps towards starting a dialogue with the democratic opposition and ethnic groups, as well as release over 2,000 political prisoners, including Suu Kyi.
There is, however, more to the new policy than mere democracy and human-rights promotion. A desire to build stronger ties with Southeast Asia became clear during US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's inaugural tour through Asia in February when she attended the opening of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) secretariat in Jakarta.
This was followed by her attendance at the ASEAN Regional Forum in Phuket, Thailand, in July. Policy analysts say a major reason for this new gambit is a realization that Chinese influence in the region has blossomed in the past decade while US attention was largely diverted elsewhere, especially on the "war on terror".
Washington has become increasingly concerned about China's growing power and influence in the region. While much of the focus has been on China's rapidly modernizing military and its growing capacity to project power beyond its immediate borders, including towards nearby US ally Taiwan, a quieter competition is emerging between Washington and Beijing for influence in Southeast Asia.
In the late 1990s, China switched to a strategy of improving diplomatic relations and investing heavily in economic and infrastructure development projects in Southeast Asia, a gambit many analysts have referred to as China's "soft power". The strategy is a departure from its previous approach to the region which emphasized confrontation and even armed struggle as a way of pushing its interests.
Under the new approach, China has made efforts to work with the various authoritarian and quasi-democratic regimes in the region. This has included invitations to meetings and trade fairs, training for government officials and special scholarships to study in Chinese universities. Chinese development aid is often highly publicized and includes high-profile infrastructure projects such as roads and hydro-electric dams and prestige projects such as the main stadium for the 2009 Southeast Asia Games to be held in Vientiane, Laos, in December and the recently completed Council of Ministers building in the capital of Cambodia, Phnom Penh.
China has also emerged as an increasingly important source of low-interest loans, grants, development projects, technical assistance and foreign investment. These projects combined with China's "no strings attached" approach to aid have made Beijing an attractive partner to regimes with questionable human-rights and democracy records.
In contrast, much of the West's aid comes with demands for improvements in political freedoms and human rights and initiatives to counter corruption.
Anxious policymakers
China's inroads have made US policymakers anxious about its possible effects on Washington's political clout and position in the region. Opinions among analysts vary on whether China is seeking to dominate the region to the detriment of the US or simply securing its interests in a region contiguous to its southern provinces. Either way, the consensus is that if the US is to remain a power in the region, China's soft power needs to be balanced, especially in the three countries identified as China's main allies in the region: Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar.
The US has increased development and military aid to Laos and Cambodia. While some of this effort began in the last years of the George W Bush administration, renewed US intent was signaled in concrete terms when President Barack Obama removed Cambodia and Laos from a trade blacklist. This opened the way for more American companies to apply for financing through the US Export-Import Bank for working capital guarantees, export credit insurance and loan guarantees. Although neither country represents a major market for the US, the move signaled US intentions to improve relations through commercial diplomacy.
In September, US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg met in Washington with Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Tea Banh to discuss security cooperation. During the same month, the US Embassy in Phnom Penh announced the donation of some US$6.5 million in military equipment through the Foreign Military Financing program. Cambodian national defense spokesman, General Chhim Socheat, also announced in September that about 1,500 American soldiers would participate for the first time in joint military exercises in mid-2010, supported under a US program dubbed the "Global Peace and Operations Initiative" designed to expand global peacekeeping capabilities.
Even Thailand, usually considered one of the US's staunchest allies in the region, is receiving more attention due to a perceived shift towards China begun under the premiership of now exiled former prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra. The latest sign of a renewed US interest in democracy promotion in the kingdom is a forthcoming United States Agency for International Development program aimed at improving civil society structures and media capacity across the country. The nationwide program is also slated to include projects in Thailand's restive southern region, an area where both Thailand and the US had previously wanted to keep US involvement to a minimum.
To US policymakers keen to counterbalance China's influence in Southeast Asia, Myanmar provides a conundrum. China has made strong inroads into Myanmar, and the US, due to its adversarial stance to the regime, currently has very little leverage to counter it. Unlike in Laos, Cambodia and Thailand, the US has no aid programs, civil society building projects or military-to-military exchanges. American interests are currently served by a charge d' affaires, since the US removed their ambassador to the country after the military regime violently crushed pro-democracy protesters in 1988.
During October 21 hearings before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the chairman, Howard Berman, summed up US policy shortcomings in regards to Chinese influence in Myanmar. "It is also clear that our policy of isolation over the past two decades has resulted in China's growing political and commercial influence in [Myanmar], and little progress in supporting those calling for reform," he said. "Historically, China's relationship with [Myanmar] has been precarious, but in our absence it has been strengthened."
Years of aggressive posturing towards the junta have made the generals wary of the US and its intentions. Generals have said that the extensive bunker and tunnel complex being constructed around the new capital at Naypyidaw is to protect against a possible US invasion. Army contingency defense plans and the creation of civilian paramilitary groups across the country are as much about controlling the population as they are about preparing for a theoretical US-led armed intervention.
In the wake of the devastating Cyclone Nargis in May 2008, a US naval task force carrying much-needed relief supplies, helicopters and other vehicles as well as manpower was denied permission to land on junta fears it could be a prelude to a military invasion.
Deficit of influence
With this deficit in influence in mind, the Obama administration needed a way into Myanmar and the policy review provided the opportunity to change tack. However, with a high-profile international campaign accusing Myanmar's regime of gross human-rights violations and a strong anti-junta lobby in the US Congress backed up by sanctions legislation, the latest of which, the Tom Lantos Jade Act passed in 2007 with overwhelming support, the administration could not simply step up funding of development and capacity building programs as it had with Laos, Cambodia and Thailand.
Instead, the US has adopted a policy that keeps sanctions in place, but also allows for high-level diplomatic engagement. Washington also reserves the right to put in place new punitive measures should the regime step out of line, as it did during the 2007 crackdown on peaceful demonstrations led by Buddhist monks.
In the policy announcement and during testimony before a senate hearing on the new policy last month, Campbell said that he is skeptical that nationwide elections scheduled for next year will be free and fair. He has also made it clear that progress in Myanmar will be long and slow. In the meantime, through diplomatic exchanges, the US can create a dialogue to potentially balance China's influence in Myanmar.
China's economic and strategic interests, as well as political clout, have steadily risen in Myanmar since Beijing reversed previous policies and withdrew support from the insurgent Communist Party of Burma (BCP) in the 1980s. This contributed to the BCP's later collapse through a mutiny in 1989, and in its splintering the formation of several ethnic-based insurgent organizations, including the narcotics trafficking United Wa State Army, now active along the China-Myanmar border.
Following the suppression of pro-democracy demonstrators in 1988, China stepped in with massive military aid enabling Myanmar's military to expand to some 500,000 men, the second-largest standing army in Southeast Asia. China has also supported Myanmar in the United Nations, frequently blocking moves by the US and its allies to censure the junta through the Security Council. In the latest move, earlier this month, China agreed not to question rising civilian deaths as a result of US bombing campaigns in Afghanistan in return for the US and its allies refraining from focusing on Myanmar's political and human-rights situation.
Like Cambodia and Laos, Myanmar has also become a major recipient of Chinese economic assistance in the past decade. This help has often been in the form of interest-free loans, grants, concessional loans and debt relief. China will likely remain a key source for this kind of assistance due to its "no strings attached" approach.
In return, China has been given preferential access to exploit Myanmar's natural resources and port facilities along Myanmar's coast. China has become Myanmar's largest investor, with junta figures claiming that 90% of recent investment came from China. In addition, tens of thousands of Chinese have migrated to Myanmar seeking work and business opportunities, especially in the north and to the second city, Mandalay, which some Myanmar citizens refer to as a "Chinese city".
Chinese investment also includes involvement in the controversial Shwe gas project off Myanmar's western coast. Rights organizations say the offshore project and a dual oil and gas pipeline being constructed from the coast up the length of the country to the southern Chinese city of Kunming have already resulted in human-rights abuses and will likely result in many more as the projects progress.
China also views Myanmar as an essential component in its plans to develop its landlocked southwestern Yunnan province. Beijing is keen to develop road networks and port facilities to facilitate the transportation of goods through Myanmar for export to the rest of the world. A new oil and gas terminal at Kyaukphyu on Myanmar's western coast together with the pipeline will allow China to import oil and gas without having to send its tankers through the narrow and strategically insecure Malacca Straits.
Love-hate relations
The closeness of the relationship between Beijing and Naypyidaw, however, is often overstated. A Myanmar army offensive against ethnic Kokang Chinese insurgents in August along the China-Myanmar border was a case in point. Despite clear warnings from Beijing against such a move, Myanmar's army went ahead without providing China forewarning. China responded to the offensive with a rare rebuke of the regime and called for stability. China also joined in a call at the UN Human Rights Council on October 2 for the release of political prisoners and a free and fair election process in 2010.
While China has been able to cultivate civil officials and military officers and improve its image with the general population through high-profile cultural projects, including the promotion of Chinese language studies and scholarships to study in China, in Cambodia, Laos and Thailand, Beijing's efforts in Myanmar have run into a pervasive xenophobia and wariness of dependence on any singular foreign power.
Knowing the limitations in its own relationship with Myanmar's generals, China is reportedly watching developments closely to determine how serious the US and Myanmar are about improving bilateral relations. A US-Myanmar detente would undoubtedly be viewed as a threat to Beijing's strategic interests in the region. A Myanmar more sympathetic to the US may be less willing to support China's projection of power into the Indian Ocean and risks negating advantages gained for the security of its sea lines of communication through avoiding the Malacca Straits.
Chinese officials already suspect that the swift campaign against the Kokang in August may have been motivated by signals allegedly given by US Senator Jim Webb during his visit to Myanmar this month. If true, then China's leaders would be justifiably concerned that Myanmar's generals may feel safe enough in their dialogue with Washington to follow up with attacks against the other ethnic armies along the border. Chinese authorities have already started to build refugee camps should this happen.
In conceding that the engagement process will be long and slow, US policy is aimed more at how Myanmar will change after the scheduled 2010 elections. Should the elections result in a genuine move towards democracy, the US is expected to increase its engagement beyond mere diplomatic exchanges towards concrete assistance.
A repeal of some sanctions could soon put the US in direct competition politically and economically with China for influence in Myanmar. And a sudden move towards a democratic federal state would be at odds with China's apparent preference for Myanmar's political scene to evolve through a gradual process guided by a strong central government.
Already, Myanmar's regime has made some tentative signals that it is willing to acquiesce to at least some of Washington's aims, at least in the short term. Two meetings were held this month between the junta's liaison officer, Labor Minister and retired Major General Aung Kyi, and pro-democracy leader Suu Kyi. Consequently, Suu Kyi was 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 Tuesday with the US charge d' affaires, Larry Dinger. United States officials announced on October 8 that a senior Myanmar official - most observers believe it will be Prime Minister Lieutenant General Thein Sein - will be at a November meeting held between Obama and ASEAN in Singapore during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit.
What is not yet clear is why the generals have appeared to change their stance. It may be yet another attempt to put off international pressure only to revert back to repression and intransigence once attention has shifted elsewhere. Or the generals may be purposefully playing the US against China, knowing that any improvement in relations with Washington will improve its negotiating leverage with Beijing.
Conceptually, the US makes for a perfect counterbalance to what the Myanmar generals see partially as a threat posed by Chinese domination through its fast expanding economic influence. The US also makes for a much stronger countervailing weight in balancing China's influence than Beijing's current major rival for influence, India.
A closer relationship with the US would certainly force China to revise its relations with the regime in order to safeguard its interests in an area that it previously had almost monopolistic control. US influence in Myanmar could also go some way to negate the strategic advantages China has gained through moves to turn Myanmar into a corridor for trade and oil and gas distribution to its landlocked southwest and its ability to bypass the Malacca Straits, which Beijing fears the US navy could blockade in case of any conflict.
One area that could see immediate change is China's support for ethnic insurgents along its border with Myanmar. The junta is placing heavy pressure on the ceasefire groups to become border guard units under army control and join in the 2010 elections. Ethnic leaders have so far resisted the demand and with a deadline set for the end of this month, civil war has become a real possibility.
So far, China has been careful to provide only enough support to deter the Myanmar army from making any rash moves and some have questioned the apparent lack of Chinese support for ethnic Chinese Kokang insurgents who were routed in September.
This may change, however, as closer ties with the US could push China to maintain or even strengthen relations with ceasefire groups along the border in a show of strength to safeguard its interests. Unless Myanmar's rulers are serious about change in their country that conforms to US criteria, it will be some time before relations between the two countries normalize.
In the meantime, the US now at least has a seat at the table with the generals to discuss China's role in Myanmar, and with concessions could potentially provide the regime with diplomatic and economic alternatives that gradually shift the region's balance of power.
Brian McCartan is a Bangkok-based freelance journalist. He may be reached at brianpm@comcast.net.
Asia Times Online - US zeroes in on China's clout in Myanmar
By Brian McCartan
BANGKOK - A high-level American delegation will travel to Myanmar in coming weeks on a fact-finding mission as part of the United States' new engagement policy with the military ruled country. The talks will center on improving Myanmar's human-rights situation and its claimed intention to move towards democracy, but the subtext will be improving diplomatic relations and fostering influence in a country widely viewed as a key regional ally of China .
US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific affairs, Kurt Campbell, said on October 21 during hearings before the House Foreign Affairs Committee that he will lead a fact-finding trip to Myanmar in coming weeks to hold discussions with the regime and meet with democracy leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, as well as ethnic group representatives. Campbell said the trip is designed to build momentum behind the policy shift, however, no other details or dates were publicly disclosed.
During the hearings, Campbell reiterated that the new policy does not mean the end of US economic and financial sanctions against the regime and its members. "Our dialogue with [Myanmar] will supplement rather than replace the sanction regimes that have been at the center of our Burma [Myanmar] policy for many years," he told the committee.
The US says sanctions will only be removed when the regime makes tangible steps towards starting a dialogue with the democratic opposition and ethnic groups, as well as release over 2,000 political prisoners, including Suu Kyi.
There is, however, more to the new policy than mere democracy and human-rights promotion. A desire to build stronger ties with Southeast Asia became clear during US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's inaugural tour through Asia in February when she attended the opening of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) secretariat in Jakarta.
This was followed by her attendance at the ASEAN Regional Forum in Phuket, Thailand, in July. Policy analysts say a major reason for this new gambit is a realization that Chinese influence in the region has blossomed in the past decade while US attention was largely diverted elsewhere, especially on the "war on terror".
Washington has become increasingly concerned about China's growing power and influence in the region. While much of the focus has been on China's rapidly modernizing military and its growing capacity to project power beyond its immediate borders, including towards nearby US ally Taiwan, a quieter competition is emerging between Washington and Beijing for influence in Southeast Asia.
In the late 1990s, China switched to a strategy of improving diplomatic relations and investing heavily in economic and infrastructure development projects in Southeast Asia, a gambit many analysts have referred to as China's "soft power". The strategy is a departure from its previous approach to the region which emphasized confrontation and even armed struggle as a way of pushing its interests.
Under the new approach, China has made efforts to work with the various authoritarian and quasi-democratic regimes in the region. This has included invitations to meetings and trade fairs, training for government officials and special scholarships to study in Chinese universities. Chinese development aid is often highly publicized and includes high-profile infrastructure projects such as roads and hydro-electric dams and prestige projects such as the main stadium for the 2009 Southeast Asia Games to be held in Vientiane, Laos, in December and the recently completed Council of Ministers building in the capital of Cambodia, Phnom Penh.
China has also emerged as an increasingly important source of low-interest loans, grants, development projects, technical assistance and foreign investment. These projects combined with China's "no strings attached" approach to aid have made Beijing an attractive partner to regimes with questionable human-rights and democracy records.
In contrast, much of the West's aid comes with demands for improvements in political freedoms and human rights and initiatives to counter corruption.
Anxious policymakers
China's inroads have made US policymakers anxious about its possible effects on Washington's political clout and position in the region. Opinions among analysts vary on whether China is seeking to dominate the region to the detriment of the US or simply securing its interests in a region contiguous to its southern provinces. Either way, the consensus is that if the US is to remain a power in the region, China's soft power needs to be balanced, especially in the three countries identified as China's main allies in the region: Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar.
The US has increased development and military aid to Laos and Cambodia. While some of this effort began in the last years of the George W Bush administration, renewed US intent was signaled in concrete terms when President Barack Obama removed Cambodia and Laos from a trade blacklist. This opened the way for more American companies to apply for financing through the US Export-Import Bank for working capital guarantees, export credit insurance and loan guarantees. Although neither country represents a major market for the US, the move signaled US intentions to improve relations through commercial diplomacy.
In September, US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg met in Washington with Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Tea Banh to discuss security cooperation. During the same month, the US Embassy in Phnom Penh announced the donation of some US$6.5 million in military equipment through the Foreign Military Financing program. Cambodian national defense spokesman, General Chhim Socheat, also announced in September that about 1,500 American soldiers would participate for the first time in joint military exercises in mid-2010, supported under a US program dubbed the "Global Peace and Operations Initiative" designed to expand global peacekeeping capabilities.
Even Thailand, usually considered one of the US's staunchest allies in the region, is receiving more attention due to a perceived shift towards China begun under the premiership of now exiled former prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra. The latest sign of a renewed US interest in democracy promotion in the kingdom is a forthcoming United States Agency for International Development program aimed at improving civil society structures and media capacity across the country. The nationwide program is also slated to include projects in Thailand's restive southern region, an area where both Thailand and the US had previously wanted to keep US involvement to a minimum.
To US policymakers keen to counterbalance China's influence in Southeast Asia, Myanmar provides a conundrum. China has made strong inroads into Myanmar, and the US, due to its adversarial stance to the regime, currently has very little leverage to counter it. Unlike in Laos, Cambodia and Thailand, the US has no aid programs, civil society building projects or military-to-military exchanges. American interests are currently served by a charge d' affaires, since the US removed their ambassador to the country after the military regime violently crushed pro-democracy protesters in 1988.
During October 21 hearings before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the chairman, Howard Berman, summed up US policy shortcomings in regards to Chinese influence in Myanmar. "It is also clear that our policy of isolation over the past two decades has resulted in China's growing political and commercial influence in [Myanmar], and little progress in supporting those calling for reform," he said. "Historically, China's relationship with [Myanmar] has been precarious, but in our absence it has been strengthened."
Years of aggressive posturing towards the junta have made the generals wary of the US and its intentions. Generals have said that the extensive bunker and tunnel complex being constructed around the new capital at Naypyidaw is to protect against a possible US invasion. Army contingency defense plans and the creation of civilian paramilitary groups across the country are as much about controlling the population as they are about preparing for a theoretical US-led armed intervention.
In the wake of the devastating Cyclone Nargis in May 2008, a US naval task force carrying much-needed relief supplies, helicopters and other vehicles as well as manpower was denied permission to land on junta fears it could be a prelude to a military invasion.
Deficit of influence
With this deficit in influence in mind, the Obama administration needed a way into Myanmar and the policy review provided the opportunity to change tack. However, with a high-profile international campaign accusing Myanmar's regime of gross human-rights violations and a strong anti-junta lobby in the US Congress backed up by sanctions legislation, the latest of which, the Tom Lantos Jade Act passed in 2007 with overwhelming support, the administration could not simply step up funding of development and capacity building programs as it had with Laos, Cambodia and Thailand.
Instead, the US has adopted a policy that keeps sanctions in place, but also allows for high-level diplomatic engagement. Washington also reserves the right to put in place new punitive measures should the regime step out of line, as it did during the 2007 crackdown on peaceful demonstrations led by Buddhist monks.
In the policy announcement and during testimony before a senate hearing on the new policy last month, Campbell said that he is skeptical that nationwide elections scheduled for next year will be free and fair. He has also made it clear that progress in Myanmar will be long and slow. In the meantime, through diplomatic exchanges, the US can create a dialogue to potentially balance China's influence in Myanmar.
China's economic and strategic interests, as well as political clout, have steadily risen in Myanmar since Beijing reversed previous policies and withdrew support from the insurgent Communist Party of Burma (BCP) in the 1980s. This contributed to the BCP's later collapse through a mutiny in 1989, and in its splintering the formation of several ethnic-based insurgent organizations, including the narcotics trafficking United Wa State Army, now active along the China-Myanmar border.
Following the suppression of pro-democracy demonstrators in 1988, China stepped in with massive military aid enabling Myanmar's military to expand to some 500,000 men, the second-largest standing army in Southeast Asia. China has also supported Myanmar in the United Nations, frequently blocking moves by the US and its allies to censure the junta through the Security Council. In the latest move, earlier this month, China agreed not to question rising civilian deaths as a result of US bombing campaigns in Afghanistan in return for the US and its allies refraining from focusing on Myanmar's political and human-rights situation.
Like Cambodia and Laos, Myanmar has also become a major recipient of Chinese economic assistance in the past decade. This help has often been in the form of interest-free loans, grants, concessional loans and debt relief. China will likely remain a key source for this kind of assistance due to its "no strings attached" approach.
In return, China has been given preferential access to exploit Myanmar's natural resources and port facilities along Myanmar's coast. China has become Myanmar's largest investor, with junta figures claiming that 90% of recent investment came from China. In addition, tens of thousands of Chinese have migrated to Myanmar seeking work and business opportunities, especially in the north and to the second city, Mandalay, which some Myanmar citizens refer to as a "Chinese city".
Chinese investment also includes involvement in the controversial Shwe gas project off Myanmar's western coast. Rights organizations say the offshore project and a dual oil and gas pipeline being constructed from the coast up the length of the country to the southern Chinese city of Kunming have already resulted in human-rights abuses and will likely result in many more as the projects progress.
China also views Myanmar as an essential component in its plans to develop its landlocked southwestern Yunnan province. Beijing is keen to develop road networks and port facilities to facilitate the transportation of goods through Myanmar for export to the rest of the world. A new oil and gas terminal at Kyaukphyu on Myanmar's western coast together with the pipeline will allow China to import oil and gas without having to send its tankers through the narrow and strategically insecure Malacca Straits.
Love-hate relations
The closeness of the relationship between Beijing and Naypyidaw, however, is often overstated. A Myanmar army offensive against ethnic Kokang Chinese insurgents in August along the China-Myanmar border was a case in point. Despite clear warnings from Beijing against such a move, Myanmar's army went ahead without providing China forewarning. China responded to the offensive with a rare rebuke of the regime and called for stability. China also joined in a call at the UN Human Rights Council on October 2 for the release of political prisoners and a free and fair election process in 2010.
While China has been able to cultivate civil officials and military officers and improve its image with the general population through high-profile cultural projects, including the promotion of Chinese language studies and scholarships to study in China, in Cambodia, Laos and Thailand, Beijing's efforts in Myanmar have run into a pervasive xenophobia and wariness of dependence on any singular foreign power.
Knowing the limitations in its own relationship with Myanmar's generals, China is reportedly watching developments closely to determine how serious the US and Myanmar are about improving bilateral relations. A US-Myanmar detente would undoubtedly be viewed as a threat to Beijing's strategic interests in the region. A Myanmar more sympathetic to the US may be less willing to support China's projection of power into the Indian Ocean and risks negating advantages gained for the security of its sea lines of communication through avoiding the Malacca Straits.
Chinese officials already suspect that the swift campaign against the Kokang in August may have been motivated by signals allegedly given by US Senator Jim Webb during his visit to Myanmar this month. If true, then China's leaders would be justifiably concerned that Myanmar's generals may feel safe enough in their dialogue with Washington to follow up with attacks against the other ethnic armies along the border. Chinese authorities have already started to build refugee camps should this happen.
In conceding that the engagement process will be long and slow, US policy is aimed more at how Myanmar will change after the scheduled 2010 elections. Should the elections result in a genuine move towards democracy, the US is expected to increase its engagement beyond mere diplomatic exchanges towards concrete assistance.
A repeal of some sanctions could soon put the US in direct competition politically and economically with China for influence in Myanmar. And a sudden move towards a democratic federal state would be at odds with China's apparent preference for Myanmar's political scene to evolve through a gradual process guided by a strong central government.
Already, Myanmar's regime has made some tentative signals that it is willing to acquiesce to at least some of Washington's aims, at least in the short term. Two meetings were held this month between the junta's liaison officer, Labor Minister and retired Major General Aung Kyi, and pro-democracy leader Suu Kyi. Consequently, Suu Kyi was 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 Tuesday with the US charge d' affaires, Larry Dinger. United States officials announced on October 8 that a senior Myanmar official - most observers believe it will be Prime Minister Lieutenant General Thein Sein - will be at a November meeting held between Obama and ASEAN in Singapore during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit.
What is not yet clear is why the generals have appeared to change their stance. It may be yet another attempt to put off international pressure only to revert back to repression and intransigence once attention has shifted elsewhere. Or the generals may be purposefully playing the US against China, knowing that any improvement in relations with Washington will improve its negotiating leverage with Beijing.
Conceptually, the US makes for a perfect counterbalance to what the Myanmar generals see partially as a threat posed by Chinese domination through its fast expanding economic influence. The US also makes for a much stronger countervailing weight in balancing China's influence than Beijing's current major rival for influence, India.
A closer relationship with the US would certainly force China to revise its relations with the regime in order to safeguard its interests in an area that it previously had almost monopolistic control. US influence in Myanmar could also go some way to negate the strategic advantages China has gained through moves to turn Myanmar into a corridor for trade and oil and gas distribution to its landlocked southwest and its ability to bypass the Malacca Straits, which Beijing fears the US navy could blockade in case of any conflict.
One area that could see immediate change is China's support for ethnic insurgents along its border with Myanmar. The junta is placing heavy pressure on the ceasefire groups to become border guard units under army control and join in the 2010 elections. Ethnic leaders have so far resisted the demand and with a deadline set for the end of this month, civil war has become a real possibility.
So far, China has been careful to provide only enough support to deter the Myanmar army from making any rash moves and some have questioned the apparent lack of Chinese support for ethnic Chinese Kokang insurgents who were routed in September.
This may change, however, as closer ties with the US could push China to maintain or even strengthen relations with ceasefire groups along the border in a show of strength to safeguard its interests. Unless Myanmar's rulers are serious about change in their country that conforms to US criteria, it will be some time before relations between the two countries normalize.
In the meantime, the US now at least has a seat at the table with the generals to discuss China's role in Myanmar, and with concessions could potentially provide the regime with diplomatic and economic alternatives that gradually shift the region's balance of power.
Brian McCartan is a Bangkok-based freelance journalist. He may be reached at brianpm@comcast.net.
***********************************************************
Oct 24, 2009
Asia Times Online - COMMENT: How Australia can help Myanmar
By David Scott Mathieson
BANGKOK - The long-anticipated review of United States policy towards Myanmar was rolled out recently, and it was anti-climactic. Announced in February by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who argued that neither engagement nor sanctions had worked, the review dragged on for months before concluding that the US would begin tentative "pragmatic engagement" with the ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC). It would also keep in place sanctions and other punitive measures. Senior members of the US State Department have already begun initial talks with various members of the regime.
Australia has an often overlooked key role to play in drawing military ruled Myanmar out of its isolation, and is well placed to play a prominent supporting position in international efforts to engage the SPDC. Australia's Myanmar policy [1] is probably one of the "best rounded" in the international community, with its emphasis on rigorous, principled diplomacy, generous humanitarian assistance, a ban on defense exports, and targeted sanctions against hundreds of key Myanmar military leaders and their close family and business associates.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Foreign Minister Stephen Smith are tough talking and principled on human rights in Myanmar, especially after the September 2007 Buddhist monk-led uprising was brutally crushed, the initial official blocking of foreign relief aid after the May 2008 cyclone, and the political show trial this year of detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Kevin Rudd called Nobel Peace Prize winner Suu Kyi's conviction and sentencing to a further 18 months under house arrest in August a "new low for the Burmese [Myanmar] regime". Stephen Smith raised the "need to put even more pressure on the [Myanmar] regime to move down the path of democracy" and promised to update Australia's extant sanctions on the regime "and keep them focused for maximum impact".
This is precisely what the SPDC needs to hear. The message roughly is: "We don't like what you're doing, but we are dead-set on continuing to help your people." This is also what the dithering optimism and business-focused engagement of Myanmar's neighbors China, India, Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries need to recognize, and modify their approaches. Engagement is urgently needed with many facets of Myanmar state and society, including, and in many respects especially, the military itself.
There is a long list of issues that Australia and the rest of the international community must not concede. The immediate and unconditional release of more than 2,100 political prisoners in Myanmar [2], including Suu Kyi, and serious steps taken to make the scheduled elections in 2010 genuinely fair and inclusive are core concerns that must remain atop of the agenda.
The cessation of military operations against ethnic nationalities along Myanmar's borderlands is crucial, as is opening up the space for foreign and domestic humanitarian assistance programs, especially the resumption of all International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) activities [3] in the country, most of which have been suspended since early 2006.
Emphasize teamwork
Australia can recalibrate its Myanmar policy for more bilateral effect and multilateral influence in three key areas: diplomacy, humanitarian assistance and sanctions.
Australia is already on the outspoken end of international frustration with the SPDC. This must continue, and can in an important way if the government appoints a specific Myanmar envoy to coordinate bilateral diplomatic efforts, Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) programs, and multilateral initiatives in the United Nations, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and with other key states such as China, Japan, India, the US, European Union member states and Russia.
A potential Australian Myanmar envoy, ideally an eminent Australian who wields the sort of international gravitas the prestige-conscious Myanmar military respects, can coordinate with other country envoys and the efforts by the UN secretary general's (UNSG) special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari.
Someone with solid regional experience like former Australian army General John Sanderson, who led the UN peacekeeping operation in Cambodia in the 1990s, or even General Peter Cosgrove, the leader of the international intervention in East Timor, would likely impress the military-led SPDC and certainly gain support from key ASEAN states.
The US has congressional legislative provisions to appoint their own Myanmar envoy and policy advisor, but nearly two years after it was announced as part of the JADE Act the administration has yet to name anyone to that post. Australia can set an example by taking this important initiative first.
The appointment of country-specific envoys would not just bolster the "Good Offices" mission of the UNSG, which has unfortunately shown little progress so far with the SPDC, but could also propel the formation of a "Contact Group" of key states on Myanmar: China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Thailand, and Australia, to move beyond the perception that international criticism of Myanmar just emanates from Western countries.
Currently, most multilateral efforts reside in the so-called "Group of Friends of Myanmar" in the United Nations, a limp sounding and largely supine collective predicated on less confrontational approaches to dealing with the Myanmar government. These feckless multilateral initiatives need to be bolstered by a more hard-core grouping, with less vocal US leadership and more multilateral solidarity.
The SPDC thrives on divide and rule, domestically and internationally, so more purpose must be shown in speaking with a unified voice. Australia and Indonesia, as key middle-ranking states in the region, and largely of similar mind if different public statements on Myanmar could take the lead in forming such a Contact Group.
One of the most important considerations for Australia's regional security concerns is Myanmar's links with North Korea and the long speculated but unverified collusion on a nuclear program in Myanmar. Kurt Campbell, the US State Department Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, gave a briefing on the Myanmar policy review on September 28 in which he said, "Concerns have emerged in recent days about [Myanmar] and North Korea's relationship that require greater focus and dialogue", and specifically cited UN Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874 on North Korea's proliferation of weapons of mass-destruction as points of cooperation with the SPDC.
Australia too has deep concerns about the possibility, even if at this point very distant, of Myanmar acquiring a nuclear capability. Taking diplomacy more seriously should not just work towards a better human rights situation inside Myanmar, but it should also address the numerous unknowns of the SPDC's military buildup.
Donate generously, but fairly
On humanitarian assistance, Australia is already one of the best donors addressing Myanmar's immense developmental challenges of poverty alleviation, deteriorating health conditions, and in human rights protection. AusAID provisions to Myanmar [4] are an annual A$29 million (US$26 million), with an extra A$55 million for post cyclone relief.
Much of this funding goes in the right direction. If anything, Australia could be more generous, something that could be said of most international humanitarian donors who are only now realizing the immense needs inside Myanmar. The reality is that with all the impediments and ineptitude placed in donors' paths by the SPDC, a lot of good can be done by supporting communities survive the capricious and self-centered regime, which must take the blame for most of the humanitarian misery produced by military rule.
Australia is also very generous in its acceptance of refugees from Myanmar, resettling thousands of mostly ethnic-Karen from long standing camps situated on the Thailand-Myanmar border, while also continuing to fund agencies supporting an estimated 140,000 civilians still languishing in those camps. However, there appears to be reluctance within the Australian bureaucracy to support urgently needed humanitarian assistance to Myanmar civilians in conflict zones, often erroneously termed "cross-border assistance".
In fact, supporting health and livelihood initiatives "cross-border" is actually providing humanitarian assistance to Myanmar: all of the existing programs in conflict areas are conducted by ethnic Myanmar groups, often on the run from the SPDC army, and necessarily clandestine, but definitely needed. Providing financial assistance to these projects from Thailand, China, India or Bangladesh is more efficient, realistic and practical than going through Yangon, as most UN and other international aid groups must do.
In essence, such support is keeping alive thousands of people in desperate situations, something the Myanmar military and their routinely brutal campaigns to interdict livelihoods in conflict areas want to stamp out. These military operations often represent brazen breaches of international humanitarian law. Many other donors already support such initiatives and they don't advertise it for security reasons. Australia can take the same approach very easily, by recognizing that even a little money goes a long way to supporting people to survive.
Target sanctions effectively
Lastly is the vexed issue of sanctions. It is impossible to conclude that international sanctions have had their desired effect: for the SPDC to respect the human rights of the Myanmar people. Yet they retain a certain symbolic utility, reminding the regime of how their reprehensible actions transgress international norms of acceptable behavior. Removing the sanctions too fast sends the wrong message, especially when the SPDC makes their repeal such a prominent condition for negotiation. Sanctions, therefore, have a prime usefulness, and should be scrapped only incrementally in line with significant concessions from the regime.
Asia Times Online - COMMENT: How Australia can help Myanmar
By David Scott Mathieson
BANGKOK - The long-anticipated review of United States policy towards Myanmar was rolled out recently, and it was anti-climactic. Announced in February by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who argued that neither engagement nor sanctions had worked, the review dragged on for months before concluding that the US would begin tentative "pragmatic engagement" with the ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC). It would also keep in place sanctions and other punitive measures. Senior members of the US State Department have already begun initial talks with various members of the regime.
Australia has an often overlooked key role to play in drawing military ruled Myanmar out of its isolation, and is well placed to play a prominent supporting position in international efforts to engage the SPDC. Australia's Myanmar policy [1] is probably one of the "best rounded" in the international community, with its emphasis on rigorous, principled diplomacy, generous humanitarian assistance, a ban on defense exports, and targeted sanctions against hundreds of key Myanmar military leaders and their close family and business associates.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Foreign Minister Stephen Smith are tough talking and principled on human rights in Myanmar, especially after the September 2007 Buddhist monk-led uprising was brutally crushed, the initial official blocking of foreign relief aid after the May 2008 cyclone, and the political show trial this year of detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Kevin Rudd called Nobel Peace Prize winner Suu Kyi's conviction and sentencing to a further 18 months under house arrest in August a "new low for the Burmese [Myanmar] regime". Stephen Smith raised the "need to put even more pressure on the [Myanmar] regime to move down the path of democracy" and promised to update Australia's extant sanctions on the regime "and keep them focused for maximum impact".
This is precisely what the SPDC needs to hear. The message roughly is: "We don't like what you're doing, but we are dead-set on continuing to help your people." This is also what the dithering optimism and business-focused engagement of Myanmar's neighbors China, India, Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries need to recognize, and modify their approaches. Engagement is urgently needed with many facets of Myanmar state and society, including, and in many respects especially, the military itself.
There is a long list of issues that Australia and the rest of the international community must not concede. The immediate and unconditional release of more than 2,100 political prisoners in Myanmar [2], including Suu Kyi, and serious steps taken to make the scheduled elections in 2010 genuinely fair and inclusive are core concerns that must remain atop of the agenda.
The cessation of military operations against ethnic nationalities along Myanmar's borderlands is crucial, as is opening up the space for foreign and domestic humanitarian assistance programs, especially the resumption of all International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) activities [3] in the country, most of which have been suspended since early 2006.
Emphasize teamwork
Australia can recalibrate its Myanmar policy for more bilateral effect and multilateral influence in three key areas: diplomacy, humanitarian assistance and sanctions.
Australia is already on the outspoken end of international frustration with the SPDC. This must continue, and can in an important way if the government appoints a specific Myanmar envoy to coordinate bilateral diplomatic efforts, Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) programs, and multilateral initiatives in the United Nations, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and with other key states such as China, Japan, India, the US, European Union member states and Russia.
A potential Australian Myanmar envoy, ideally an eminent Australian who wields the sort of international gravitas the prestige-conscious Myanmar military respects, can coordinate with other country envoys and the efforts by the UN secretary general's (UNSG) special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari.
Someone with solid regional experience like former Australian army General John Sanderson, who led the UN peacekeeping operation in Cambodia in the 1990s, or even General Peter Cosgrove, the leader of the international intervention in East Timor, would likely impress the military-led SPDC and certainly gain support from key ASEAN states.
The US has congressional legislative provisions to appoint their own Myanmar envoy and policy advisor, but nearly two years after it was announced as part of the JADE Act the administration has yet to name anyone to that post. Australia can set an example by taking this important initiative first.
The appointment of country-specific envoys would not just bolster the "Good Offices" mission of the UNSG, which has unfortunately shown little progress so far with the SPDC, but could also propel the formation of a "Contact Group" of key states on Myanmar: China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Thailand, and Australia, to move beyond the perception that international criticism of Myanmar just emanates from Western countries.
Currently, most multilateral efforts reside in the so-called "Group of Friends of Myanmar" in the United Nations, a limp sounding and largely supine collective predicated on less confrontational approaches to dealing with the Myanmar government. These feckless multilateral initiatives need to be bolstered by a more hard-core grouping, with less vocal US leadership and more multilateral solidarity.
The SPDC thrives on divide and rule, domestically and internationally, so more purpose must be shown in speaking with a unified voice. Australia and Indonesia, as key middle-ranking states in the region, and largely of similar mind if different public statements on Myanmar could take the lead in forming such a Contact Group.
One of the most important considerations for Australia's regional security concerns is Myanmar's links with North Korea and the long speculated but unverified collusion on a nuclear program in Myanmar. Kurt Campbell, the US State Department Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs, gave a briefing on the Myanmar policy review on September 28 in which he said, "Concerns have emerged in recent days about [Myanmar] and North Korea's relationship that require greater focus and dialogue", and specifically cited UN Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874 on North Korea's proliferation of weapons of mass-destruction as points of cooperation with the SPDC.
Australia too has deep concerns about the possibility, even if at this point very distant, of Myanmar acquiring a nuclear capability. Taking diplomacy more seriously should not just work towards a better human rights situation inside Myanmar, but it should also address the numerous unknowns of the SPDC's military buildup.
Donate generously, but fairly
On humanitarian assistance, Australia is already one of the best donors addressing Myanmar's immense developmental challenges of poverty alleviation, deteriorating health conditions, and in human rights protection. AusAID provisions to Myanmar [4] are an annual A$29 million (US$26 million), with an extra A$55 million for post cyclone relief.
Much of this funding goes in the right direction. If anything, Australia could be more generous, something that could be said of most international humanitarian donors who are only now realizing the immense needs inside Myanmar. The reality is that with all the impediments and ineptitude placed in donors' paths by the SPDC, a lot of good can be done by supporting communities survive the capricious and self-centered regime, which must take the blame for most of the humanitarian misery produced by military rule.
Australia is also very generous in its acceptance of refugees from Myanmar, resettling thousands of mostly ethnic-Karen from long standing camps situated on the Thailand-Myanmar border, while also continuing to fund agencies supporting an estimated 140,000 civilians still languishing in those camps. However, there appears to be reluctance within the Australian bureaucracy to support urgently needed humanitarian assistance to Myanmar civilians in conflict zones, often erroneously termed "cross-border assistance".
In fact, supporting health and livelihood initiatives "cross-border" is actually providing humanitarian assistance to Myanmar: all of the existing programs in conflict areas are conducted by ethnic Myanmar groups, often on the run from the SPDC army, and necessarily clandestine, but definitely needed. Providing financial assistance to these projects from Thailand, China, India or Bangladesh is more efficient, realistic and practical than going through Yangon, as most UN and other international aid groups must do.
In essence, such support is keeping alive thousands of people in desperate situations, something the Myanmar military and their routinely brutal campaigns to interdict livelihoods in conflict areas want to stamp out. These military operations often represent brazen breaches of international humanitarian law. Many other donors already support such initiatives and they don't advertise it for security reasons. Australia can take the same approach very easily, by recognizing that even a little money goes a long way to supporting people to survive.
Target sanctions effectively
Lastly is the vexed issue of sanctions. It is impossible to conclude that international sanctions have had their desired effect: for the SPDC to respect the human rights of the Myanmar people. Yet they retain a certain symbolic utility, reminding the regime of how their reprehensible actions transgress international norms of acceptable behavior. Removing the sanctions too fast sends the wrong message, especially when the SPDC makes their repeal such a prominent condition for negotiation. Sanctions, therefore, have a prime usefulness, and should be scrapped only incrementally in line with significant concessions from the regime.
The list of targeted officials and individuals by the Reserve Bank [5] updated in October 2008 lists 463 people who substantially benefit from military rule in Myanmar. This all sounds great, but its only half-way there. Australia has measures it is not yet using - for example, Australia's sanctions regime currently applies to hundreds of designated Myanmar individuals but not any of the companies under their control or others known to underwrite the junta's abusive rule. The list of sanctions targets should be extended to cover companies owned, controlled by, or substantially benefiting Myanmar's military. This information is readily available if the resources are directed to investigate it.
Also, Australia specifically blocks transfers of funds or payments involving designated persons, yet does not bar other types of financial services and transactions. Most notably, Australia's current measures do not fully freeze assets held by such persons in Australia, nor clearly block dealings with those individuals that involve Australian persons and institutions operating from other countries. Firm steps are needed to fully enforce sanctions so that key Myanmar officials named as targets are not able to derive benefit from assets in Australia or handled by Australian institutions.
Australia must not wait for evidence of genuine concessions from the SPDC to repeal its present sanctions, it should wrest the initiative back from the regime by re-calibrating its targeted measures now. It can do this in two important ways. First, by tightening up its list of SPDC officials and by including specific key companies or Myanmar military controlled entities with direct links to the regime. Second, Australia can make more effort in coordinating sanctions with the US, European Union, Switzerland, and Canada to target key individuals, both military and civilian, who bear responsibility for abuses and whose considerable financial support of the SPDC could undermine these sanctions. These individuals are at the apex of the system inside Myanmar and susceptible to this kind of pressure.
More effective coordination could also lead to greater support from other key states such as Japan, Singapore and Thailand. Australia should work with European and other countries to adopt full financial sanctions and encourage other governments to impose complementary measures. Slow implementation by sanctioning governments, including Australia, and poor coordination internationally have undermined financial and other sanctions, and kept them from realizing their potential. Australia can remedy this by taking a more robust multilateral leadership in coordinating one list of persons and companies for all sanctioning countries to agree on, making it small, effective and adaptable for maximum effect.
Listen to the Lady
In a letter sent by Suu Kyi to President Than Shwe on September 25, the detained democracy leader urged negotiations on the lifting of sanctions, and specifically requested leave to consult with the Australian ambassador in Yangon, something she did recently (albeit with a lower official because the ambassador was on holiday at the time), as well as the UK ambassador and a representative of the European Union.
This is an important step, and countries with sanctions already in place should consult not just with Suu Kyi but many other opposition figures and business leaders to think of a gradual repeal of sanctions - but only when there is a complete release of political prisoners and genuine progress on opening up the political system to encourage community participation ahead of the elections in 2010.
In the interim, tightening specific targeted sanctions is one way of focusing the SPDC's attention on what they stand to lose from treating enhanced talks with the international community with their instinctively cynical self-interest, and importantly on what they should be considering: the welfare of their own people and a real chance to start a genuine process of national reconciliation. A more effective sanctions regime, targeted, nuanced, adaptive and effective, also sends clear messages to sanctions-skeptic countries such as Singapore, Japan, Thailand, India and China, that they can have an effect and also disrupt the flow of SPDC funds and regime members' private finances.
Recent sanctions called for by the Burma Campaign Australia, supported by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), on Australian-owned budget airline JetStar Asia flights between Singapore and Yangon, and some textiles imports, hark back to the consumer boycotts of the 1990s and not on the sort of better-targeted measures designed to genuinely impact on the regime rather than the people of Myanmar, who have suffered enough.
There is also the sanctions option that no state in the international community has seriously considered: a multilateral arms embargo on Myanmar through the UN Security Council. Australia is probably the best placed of Western countries to support this initiative, potentially with Canada, within the UN system.
Australia's Myanmar policy should be lauded for its considered balance and the continued expression of support for a free and democratic Myanmar by most if not all members of the federal parliament. With just a few policy tweaks, a little more money, and a substantial investment in multilateral diplomacy, Australia could provide the kind of renewed international and regional guidance on engaging Myanmar that is now desperately needed.
David Scott Mathieson is Burma researcher in the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch.
Also, Australia specifically blocks transfers of funds or payments involving designated persons, yet does not bar other types of financial services and transactions. Most notably, Australia's current measures do not fully freeze assets held by such persons in Australia, nor clearly block dealings with those individuals that involve Australian persons and institutions operating from other countries. Firm steps are needed to fully enforce sanctions so that key Myanmar officials named as targets are not able to derive benefit from assets in Australia or handled by Australian institutions.
Australia must not wait for evidence of genuine concessions from the SPDC to repeal its present sanctions, it should wrest the initiative back from the regime by re-calibrating its targeted measures now. It can do this in two important ways. First, by tightening up its list of SPDC officials and by including specific key companies or Myanmar military controlled entities with direct links to the regime. Second, Australia can make more effort in coordinating sanctions with the US, European Union, Switzerland, and Canada to target key individuals, both military and civilian, who bear responsibility for abuses and whose considerable financial support of the SPDC could undermine these sanctions. These individuals are at the apex of the system inside Myanmar and susceptible to this kind of pressure.
More effective coordination could also lead to greater support from other key states such as Japan, Singapore and Thailand. Australia should work with European and other countries to adopt full financial sanctions and encourage other governments to impose complementary measures. Slow implementation by sanctioning governments, including Australia, and poor coordination internationally have undermined financial and other sanctions, and kept them from realizing their potential. Australia can remedy this by taking a more robust multilateral leadership in coordinating one list of persons and companies for all sanctioning countries to agree on, making it small, effective and adaptable for maximum effect.
Listen to the Lady
In a letter sent by Suu Kyi to President Than Shwe on September 25, the detained democracy leader urged negotiations on the lifting of sanctions, and specifically requested leave to consult with the Australian ambassador in Yangon, something she did recently (albeit with a lower official because the ambassador was on holiday at the time), as well as the UK ambassador and a representative of the European Union.
This is an important step, and countries with sanctions already in place should consult not just with Suu Kyi but many other opposition figures and business leaders to think of a gradual repeal of sanctions - but only when there is a complete release of political prisoners and genuine progress on opening up the political system to encourage community participation ahead of the elections in 2010.
In the interim, tightening specific targeted sanctions is one way of focusing the SPDC's attention on what they stand to lose from treating enhanced talks with the international community with their instinctively cynical self-interest, and importantly on what they should be considering: the welfare of their own people and a real chance to start a genuine process of national reconciliation. A more effective sanctions regime, targeted, nuanced, adaptive and effective, also sends clear messages to sanctions-skeptic countries such as Singapore, Japan, Thailand, India and China, that they can have an effect and also disrupt the flow of SPDC funds and regime members' private finances.
Recent sanctions called for by the Burma Campaign Australia, supported by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), on Australian-owned budget airline JetStar Asia flights between Singapore and Yangon, and some textiles imports, hark back to the consumer boycotts of the 1990s and not on the sort of better-targeted measures designed to genuinely impact on the regime rather than the people of Myanmar, who have suffered enough.
There is also the sanctions option that no state in the international community has seriously considered: a multilateral arms embargo on Myanmar through the UN Security Council. Australia is probably the best placed of Western countries to support this initiative, potentially with Canada, within the UN system.
Australia's Myanmar policy should be lauded for its considered balance and the continued expression of support for a free and democratic Myanmar by most if not all members of the federal parliament. With just a few policy tweaks, a little more money, and a substantial investment in multilateral diplomacy, Australia could provide the kind of renewed international and regional guidance on engaging Myanmar that is now desperately needed.
David Scott Mathieson is Burma researcher in the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch.
***********************************************************
The Jakarta Post - UN human rights investigator spars with Myanmar
The Associated Press , United Nations | Fri, 10/23/2009 7:07 AM | World
An independent U.N. investigator clashed with Myanmar's representative over the nation's human rights record Thursday and called for the release of all 2,000 political prisoners before national elections in 2010.
Tomas Ojea Quintana, who was appointed the U.N.'s special rapporteur for Myanmar in March 2008 by the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva, said he saw "a pattern of widespread and systematic violations" of human rights during two trips to Myanmar this year. Those ranged from forced labor to political prisoners to abuses of women and children in a nation that has been ruled by the military since 1962.
Quintana also described a "starvation situation" in many parts of the country, including Kayin, North Rakhine, Chin, North Shan and East Shan states, compounded by dire living conditions.
"The situation of human rights in Myanmar remains alarming," he told the U.N. General Assembly's committee for social and humanitarian issues. "There is a pattern of widespread and systematic violations which in many conflict areas results result in serious abuses of civilian rights and integrity."
Quintana, a lawyer from Argentina, said the judiciary delivered harsh sentences against prisoners of conscience - most notably Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi - and that a culture of "prevailing impunity" under the military government allows abuses to continue unchecked. Next month he plans his third visit this year.
Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, recently has allowed Suu Kyi, the detailed democracy leader, some contact with Western diplomats as the United States has launched a new policy of trying to engage the country's leaders.
But a recent court ruling upheld her August conviction for breaking the terms of her house arrest by briefly sheltering an uninvited American at her home earlier this year. She was sentenced to an additional 18 months of house arrest, meaning she cannot participate in elections scheduled for next year, the first in Myanmar in two decades.
Myanmar diplomat U Thaung Tun hotly disputed Quintana's assessment as "less than objective" but said the ruling military junta is ready to cooperate with him.
"It is regretable that allegations of human rights violations from exiled groups have found their way into the report. These allegations should be taken with a grain of salt," U Thaung Tun said. "We find it perturbing, troubling that the report focuses principally on selected individuals and groups, instead of engagement with the Myanmar authorities to grow cooperation."
U Thaung Tun sought, in particular, to deflect widespread concern about the scheduled 2010 elections next year in Myanmar.
"We are deeply disappointed that the special rapporteur casts doubts on the elections and the judicial system. ... Let there be no doubt that the government's determination is to hold them and that they will be free and fair," he said.
The Associated Press , United Nations | Fri, 10/23/2009 7:07 AM | World
An independent U.N. investigator clashed with Myanmar's representative over the nation's human rights record Thursday and called for the release of all 2,000 political prisoners before national elections in 2010.
Tomas Ojea Quintana, who was appointed the U.N.'s special rapporteur for Myanmar in March 2008 by the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva, said he saw "a pattern of widespread and systematic violations" of human rights during two trips to Myanmar this year. Those ranged from forced labor to political prisoners to abuses of women and children in a nation that has been ruled by the military since 1962.
Quintana also described a "starvation situation" in many parts of the country, including Kayin, North Rakhine, Chin, North Shan and East Shan states, compounded by dire living conditions.
"The situation of human rights in Myanmar remains alarming," he told the U.N. General Assembly's committee for social and humanitarian issues. "There is a pattern of widespread and systematic violations which in many conflict areas results result in serious abuses of civilian rights and integrity."
Quintana, a lawyer from Argentina, said the judiciary delivered harsh sentences against prisoners of conscience - most notably Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi - and that a culture of "prevailing impunity" under the military government allows abuses to continue unchecked. Next month he plans his third visit this year.
Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, recently has allowed Suu Kyi, the detailed democracy leader, some contact with Western diplomats as the United States has launched a new policy of trying to engage the country's leaders.
But a recent court ruling upheld her August conviction for breaking the terms of her house arrest by briefly sheltering an uninvited American at her home earlier this year. She was sentenced to an additional 18 months of house arrest, meaning she cannot participate in elections scheduled for next year, the first in Myanmar in two decades.
Myanmar diplomat U Thaung Tun hotly disputed Quintana's assessment as "less than objective" but said the ruling military junta is ready to cooperate with him.
"It is regretable that allegations of human rights violations from exiled groups have found their way into the report. These allegations should be taken with a grain of salt," U Thaung Tun said. "We find it perturbing, troubling that the report focuses principally on selected individuals and groups, instead of engagement with the Myanmar authorities to grow cooperation."
U Thaung Tun sought, in particular, to deflect widespread concern about the scheduled 2010 elections next year in Myanmar.
"We are deeply disappointed that the special rapporteur casts doubts on the elections and the judicial system. ... Let there be no doubt that the government's determination is to hold them and that they will be free and fair," he said.
***********************************************************
The Jakarta Post - Rights tops Jakarta's ASEAN agenda
Lilian Budianto , The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Fri, 10/23/2009 12:11 PM | World
Indonesia will highlight issues of human rights, climate change, disasters and the global economy, at the 15th ASEAN Summit in Thailand this weekend, amid pressing concerns over Myanmar's Aung San Suu Kyi and the Copenhagen climate talks.
In its efforts to push forwards with democratic reforms, Jakarta would voice concerns over the extension of the house arrest of Suu Kyi at a meeting with Myanmar, Foreign Ministry's ASEAN Affairs Director General Djauhari Oratmangun said.
"Concerns about Suu Kyi will remain one of the main topics of discussion at the meeting, as Indonesia has remained firm in promoting rights enforcement and democratic reforms in Myanmar," Djauhari said.
Despite Indonesia being consistently critical of Myanmar's poor human rights record, it has not supported sanctions against Yangon as imposed by the West. The Indonesian government had said that imposing sanctions would not help to pressure on the Myanmar junta, and could have an adverse impact on its people, whose economy has already been hurt by the global crisis. Myanmar has imprisoned more than 2,000 political activists.
The ASEAN Summit will commence on Oct. 23 and close with the ASEAN+3 Summit and East Asian Summit on Oct. 25.
The 42-year-old ASEAN grouping will soon establish its own human rights commission, but at this stage this will not have the power to punish perpetrators of human-rights abuses.
Responding to critics saying Indonesia had watered down its commitment to rights enforcement in Asean, Djauhari said Jakarta expected within the next five years to see the commission having the power to protect human rights.
The ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, to be launched during the weekend summit, has just selected its ten commissioners representing each member state, and Indonesia is represented by activist Rafendi Djamin, who will become the only commissioner from a civil group.
"We envision that the commission will be able to apply international conventions in future," Djauhari said, requesting the public to allow the chosen commissioners to "further discuss the mechanism to be used *in seeking justice*".
Indonesia's delegates would also brief the 10-nation ASEAN grouping on the results of the G20 meeting in Pittsburg, since Indonesia was the only ASEAN member state present at the developing and developed nations meeting. ASEAN chair Thailand was also present at the G20 meeting, but attended as representative of ASEAN.
"We will also discuss climate change, ahead of the Copenhagen meeting this December. Indonesia was the host of the Bali climate talks, back in December 2007, and we want to make sure the Bali talks can lead to significant results at the Copenhagen meeting," Djauhari said. The Copenhagen meeting will determine the future successor of the Kyoto Protocol, which is due to expire in 2012.
ASEAN member-states would also discuss the possibility of establishing a body similar to Indonesia's Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Body (BRR) for disaster management in the ASEAN region. The BRR was established to cope with the 2004 tsunami in Aceh province.
The ASEAN comprises Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Vietnam and Thailand.
ASEAN+3 comprises of the ten nations, together with Japan, China and South Korea. The East Asian Summit will convene the ASEAN+3 members, together with India, Australia, and New Zealand.
Lilian Budianto , The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Fri, 10/23/2009 12:11 PM | World
Indonesia will highlight issues of human rights, climate change, disasters and the global economy, at the 15th ASEAN Summit in Thailand this weekend, amid pressing concerns over Myanmar's Aung San Suu Kyi and the Copenhagen climate talks.
In its efforts to push forwards with democratic reforms, Jakarta would voice concerns over the extension of the house arrest of Suu Kyi at a meeting with Myanmar, Foreign Ministry's ASEAN Affairs Director General Djauhari Oratmangun said.
"Concerns about Suu Kyi will remain one of the main topics of discussion at the meeting, as Indonesia has remained firm in promoting rights enforcement and democratic reforms in Myanmar," Djauhari said.
Despite Indonesia being consistently critical of Myanmar's poor human rights record, it has not supported sanctions against Yangon as imposed by the West. The Indonesian government had said that imposing sanctions would not help to pressure on the Myanmar junta, and could have an adverse impact on its people, whose economy has already been hurt by the global crisis. Myanmar has imprisoned more than 2,000 political activists.
The ASEAN Summit will commence on Oct. 23 and close with the ASEAN+3 Summit and East Asian Summit on Oct. 25.
The 42-year-old ASEAN grouping will soon establish its own human rights commission, but at this stage this will not have the power to punish perpetrators of human-rights abuses.
Responding to critics saying Indonesia had watered down its commitment to rights enforcement in Asean, Djauhari said Jakarta expected within the next five years to see the commission having the power to protect human rights.
The ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, to be launched during the weekend summit, has just selected its ten commissioners representing each member state, and Indonesia is represented by activist Rafendi Djamin, who will become the only commissioner from a civil group.
"We envision that the commission will be able to apply international conventions in future," Djauhari said, requesting the public to allow the chosen commissioners to "further discuss the mechanism to be used *in seeking justice*".
Indonesia's delegates would also brief the 10-nation ASEAN grouping on the results of the G20 meeting in Pittsburg, since Indonesia was the only ASEAN member state present at the developing and developed nations meeting. ASEAN chair Thailand was also present at the G20 meeting, but attended as representative of ASEAN.
"We will also discuss climate change, ahead of the Copenhagen meeting this December. Indonesia was the host of the Bali climate talks, back in December 2007, and we want to make sure the Bali talks can lead to significant results at the Copenhagen meeting," Djauhari said. The Copenhagen meeting will determine the future successor of the Kyoto Protocol, which is due to expire in 2012.
ASEAN member-states would also discuss the possibility of establishing a body similar to Indonesia's Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Body (BRR) for disaster management in the ASEAN region. The BRR was established to cope with the 2004 tsunami in Aceh province.
The ASEAN comprises Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Vietnam and Thailand.
ASEAN+3 comprises of the ten nations, together with Japan, China and South Korea. The East Asian Summit will convene the ASEAN+3 members, together with India, Australia, and New Zealand.
***********************************************************
October 23, 2009 12:03 PM
Five Countries Reject Civil Society Reps At Asean Summit
By D Arul Rajoo
HUA HIN, Oct 23 (Bernama) -- The governments of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, the Philippines and Singapore have rejected members of civil groups from their respective countries at the 15th Asean Summit here.
Debby Stothard, of the Alternative Asean Network, said they were informed by the Thai Foreign Ministry at 11pm yesterday that the leaders would not meet the five people nominated by the civil groups.
"Some governments like Singapore have even replaced the nominees with their own representatives," she said as the summit kicked off at the Dusit Thani Hotel in the seaside resort here Friday.
She said the remaining five representatives from Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam were told to come to the meeting at 7am Friday, five hours before the scheduled Informal Meeting between the Leaders and the civil society groups.
Stothard said the civil groups were disappointed that the representatives were not allowed to speak at the 30-minute meeting, and instead only an academician from the Chulalongkorn University would be allowed to talk.
"We are still trying to get more people to talk at the meeting," she said.
The rejected civil society representatives are Khin Ohmar (Myanmar), Sister Crescencia L. Lucero (Philippines), Sinapan Samydorai (Singapore), Manichanh Philaphanh (Laos) and Nay Vanda (Cambodia).
Malaysia is represented by Moon Hui Tah, campaign coordinator of Suaran, a Malaysian human rights organisation.
The dialogue between the 10 Asean Leaders and civil society groups was introduced during the 14th Asean Summit held here last February.
The first meeting itself was embroiled in controversy after leaders of Myanmar and Cambodia refused to meet the representatives from their respective countries.
Among the highlights of the 15th Summit is the launch of the Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (Aichr).
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) commissioner, Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah has been appointed Malaysia's representative to the body.
Five Countries Reject Civil Society Reps At Asean Summit
By D Arul Rajoo
HUA HIN, Oct 23 (Bernama) -- The governments of Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, the Philippines and Singapore have rejected members of civil groups from their respective countries at the 15th Asean Summit here.
Debby Stothard, of the Alternative Asean Network, said they were informed by the Thai Foreign Ministry at 11pm yesterday that the leaders would not meet the five people nominated by the civil groups.
"Some governments like Singapore have even replaced the nominees with their own representatives," she said as the summit kicked off at the Dusit Thani Hotel in the seaside resort here Friday.
She said the remaining five representatives from Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam were told to come to the meeting at 7am Friday, five hours before the scheduled Informal Meeting between the Leaders and the civil society groups.
Stothard said the civil groups were disappointed that the representatives were not allowed to speak at the 30-minute meeting, and instead only an academician from the Chulalongkorn University would be allowed to talk.
"We are still trying to get more people to talk at the meeting," she said.
The rejected civil society representatives are Khin Ohmar (Myanmar), Sister Crescencia L. Lucero (Philippines), Sinapan Samydorai (Singapore), Manichanh Philaphanh (Laos) and Nay Vanda (Cambodia).
Malaysia is represented by Moon Hui Tah, campaign coordinator of Suaran, a Malaysian human rights organisation.
The dialogue between the 10 Asean Leaders and civil society groups was introduced during the 14th Asean Summit held here last February.
The first meeting itself was embroiled in controversy after leaders of Myanmar and Cambodia refused to meet the representatives from their respective countries.
Among the highlights of the 15th Summit is the launch of the Asean Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (Aichr).
Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) commissioner, Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah has been appointed Malaysia's representative to the body.
***********************************************************
CNA News - Myanmar touts its potential at 6th China-ASEAN expo
By Channel NewsAsia's East Asia Bureau Chief Maria Siow |
Posted: 24 October 2009 0050 hrs
NANNING, Guangxi: Officials from Myanmar are keen to promote the country as an ideal investment destination at the 6th China-ASEAN expo here, from October 20 to 24.
Myanmar is touting its potential in mining, manufacturing, food processing, as well as agriculture and fisheries, to attract investment dollars. The country's largest overseas investors are Thailand, the United Kingdom, Singapore and China.
The dominance of Chinese investment is expected to increase further, with Myanmar's biggest business association setting up a representative office in Nanning.
Zaw Min Win, vice-president, Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry said: "In other countries and other cities in China - like maybe in Guangzhou, Ningbo and Shanghai - we will have representative offices.
"So we're coming here today to expand more businesses, not only with China but also ASEAN member countries, especially in agricultural products."
Bilateral trade between China and Myanmar amounted to US$2.62 billion in 2008, and many are expecting the growing trade to bring prosperity.
"My products are wood-based as Mynamar has abundant wood resources. The Chinese like our products a lot. Apart from the retail sales, I also sign contracts with Chinese partners here," said Khin Htay Kywe, a businesswoman.
Apart from the growing trade and economic ties, the influence that China has on Myanmar also includes foreign aid and assistance, and even the training of agricultural experts in the Southeast Asian country. But this influence does not necessarily translate into economic and political dominance.
"We have our stand, our own country, our own policy. Anyway, China is our good neighbour. Not only China but also our ASEAN countries, we have a good relationship, we will do business," added Mr Zaw.
Analysts said Myanmar's strategic location is potentially important for China, especially in containing India's influence.
However, despite China's dominance in the country's economy, Myanmar's strong sense of nationalism and its resilience against foreign pressures means that it will continue to decide its own path.
By Channel NewsAsia's East Asia Bureau Chief Maria Siow |
Posted: 24 October 2009 0050 hrs
NANNING, Guangxi: Officials from Myanmar are keen to promote the country as an ideal investment destination at the 6th China-ASEAN expo here, from October 20 to 24.
Myanmar is touting its potential in mining, manufacturing, food processing, as well as agriculture and fisheries, to attract investment dollars. The country's largest overseas investors are Thailand, the United Kingdom, Singapore and China.
The dominance of Chinese investment is expected to increase further, with Myanmar's biggest business association setting up a representative office in Nanning.
Zaw Min Win, vice-president, Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry said: "In other countries and other cities in China - like maybe in Guangzhou, Ningbo and Shanghai - we will have representative offices.
"So we're coming here today to expand more businesses, not only with China but also ASEAN member countries, especially in agricultural products."
Bilateral trade between China and Myanmar amounted to US$2.62 billion in 2008, and many are expecting the growing trade to bring prosperity.
"My products are wood-based as Mynamar has abundant wood resources. The Chinese like our products a lot. Apart from the retail sales, I also sign contracts with Chinese partners here," said Khin Htay Kywe, a businesswoman.
Apart from the growing trade and economic ties, the influence that China has on Myanmar also includes foreign aid and assistance, and even the training of agricultural experts in the Southeast Asian country. But this influence does not necessarily translate into economic and political dominance.
"We have our stand, our own country, our own policy. Anyway, China is our good neighbour. Not only China but also our ASEAN countries, we have a good relationship, we will do business," added Mr Zaw.
Analysts said Myanmar's strategic location is potentially important for China, especially in containing India's influence.
However, despite China's dominance in the country's economy, Myanmar's strong sense of nationalism and its resilience against foreign pressures means that it will continue to decide its own path.
***********************************************************
The Nation - Asean needs electoral standards before it can become a community
By SOMRI HANANUNTASUK
Published on October 23, 2009
AS A MEMBER of Asean, Burma is a sham. Since its admission into the grouping in 1997, the pariah state has violated international norms unabated. Even though the Asean Charter came into force last December, the Rangoon regime continues to defy several fundamental principles contained in the charter, such as the respect for the rule of law, good governance, democracy, human rights and social justice.
In the absence of an environment conducive to the freedom of assembly, association and expression of all the people (including all ethnic groups and political parties) inside Burma, any move towards holding elections - given the standards outlined in the Inter Parliamentary Union's "Free and Fair Elections" - would be a farce.
Is there any hope of putting into place the required minimum international standards before holding the Burmese election next year?
To ensure the successful outcome of the Asean Summit in Cha-am it is imperative to review all existing electoral standards within Asean.
The Burmese situation underscores the need for minimum standards to be met before holding an election. The Asean leaders (elected, nominated or appointed) must realise that a peaceful and unified Asean Community as envisaged in the charter requires systems that uphold international norms and standards on free and fair elections. There is an urgent need for collaboration among the Asean Secretariat, Asean governments and regional civil society groups in developing, strengthening and maintaining electoral processes that are free and fair within member countries.
Most Asean governments are averse to civil society groups raising the issue of electoral standards because it reflects the ongoing poor practice of undemocratic governance lacking transparency and accountability in selecting parliaments. Apparently Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia have developed better electoral mechanisms by setting up independent bodies such as election commissions (the EC, Comelec and KPU), to oversee and monitor elections.
The other Asean countries do not have independent institutions dealing with electoral processes. These countries use political parties (Cambodia), the military (Burma) and government bodies (Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Laos) to influence electoral compositions, administration and functions. Thus they lack neutrality and transparency.
At this juncture, the Asean grouping has been perceived as a backward one because the member countries cannot step further beyond their traditional rules, regulations and beliefs. With a huge uneducated population within Asean, lots of poor and economically underprivileged voters cast their ballots according to monetary benefits (vote-buying) offered to them or under duress of personal threat and harm. Doubtless, unqualified politicians are elected who have subsequently ignored their constituencies. Indeed, they have made a mockery of the motto "Democracy of the people, by the people and for the people."
It is well known that Asean governments generally have little tolerance for these democratic ideals and hardly permit people and media to directly participate in the political discourse at the grass-roots and national levels. In some form or other, there is curtailment of the freedom of expression, assembly and association. The system of checks and balances is only practised marginally in a few Asean countries that have a minimum of respect for a free media.
Over the past decade, voters throughout the world have become aware of the role played by election monitoring organisations (EMOs) and international observers. But Asean members such as Singapore, Vietnam, Laos, Brunei and Burma are still hostile to EMOs, refusing to allow them to observe and monitor local polls.
The EMOs have inspired citizens, including minority and vulnerable groups, to want to increase participation in public affairs and transform electoral processes into transparent and accountable ones. Local and international monitoring organisations have emerged in the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia and Malaysia, and their activities have included review of election laws and voter education. They even engage in post-election observation and monitoring activities that promote good governance, and monitor government projects to minimise if not eliminate corruption.
But only half of the Asean members have ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which enshrines the principle of elections. Article 25 of the ICCPR clearly identifies the right and opportunity of people to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives. It also stipulates the right to vote and to be elected in genuine periodic elections that shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electorate.
Do all of the Asean governments and their election commissions uphold this principle?
By SOMRI HANANUNTASUK
Published on October 23, 2009
AS A MEMBER of Asean, Burma is a sham. Since its admission into the grouping in 1997, the pariah state has violated international norms unabated. Even though the Asean Charter came into force last December, the Rangoon regime continues to defy several fundamental principles contained in the charter, such as the respect for the rule of law, good governance, democracy, human rights and social justice.
In the absence of an environment conducive to the freedom of assembly, association and expression of all the people (including all ethnic groups and political parties) inside Burma, any move towards holding elections - given the standards outlined in the Inter Parliamentary Union's "Free and Fair Elections" - would be a farce.
Is there any hope of putting into place the required minimum international standards before holding the Burmese election next year?
To ensure the successful outcome of the Asean Summit in Cha-am it is imperative to review all existing electoral standards within Asean.
The Burmese situation underscores the need for minimum standards to be met before holding an election. The Asean leaders (elected, nominated or appointed) must realise that a peaceful and unified Asean Community as envisaged in the charter requires systems that uphold international norms and standards on free and fair elections. There is an urgent need for collaboration among the Asean Secretariat, Asean governments and regional civil society groups in developing, strengthening and maintaining electoral processes that are free and fair within member countries.
Most Asean governments are averse to civil society groups raising the issue of electoral standards because it reflects the ongoing poor practice of undemocratic governance lacking transparency and accountability in selecting parliaments. Apparently Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia have developed better electoral mechanisms by setting up independent bodies such as election commissions (the EC, Comelec and KPU), to oversee and monitor elections.
The other Asean countries do not have independent institutions dealing with electoral processes. These countries use political parties (Cambodia), the military (Burma) and government bodies (Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Laos) to influence electoral compositions, administration and functions. Thus they lack neutrality and transparency.
At this juncture, the Asean grouping has been perceived as a backward one because the member countries cannot step further beyond their traditional rules, regulations and beliefs. With a huge uneducated population within Asean, lots of poor and economically underprivileged voters cast their ballots according to monetary benefits (vote-buying) offered to them or under duress of personal threat and harm. Doubtless, unqualified politicians are elected who have subsequently ignored their constituencies. Indeed, they have made a mockery of the motto "Democracy of the people, by the people and for the people."
It is well known that Asean governments generally have little tolerance for these democratic ideals and hardly permit people and media to directly participate in the political discourse at the grass-roots and national levels. In some form or other, there is curtailment of the freedom of expression, assembly and association. The system of checks and balances is only practised marginally in a few Asean countries that have a minimum of respect for a free media.
Over the past decade, voters throughout the world have become aware of the role played by election monitoring organisations (EMOs) and international observers. But Asean members such as Singapore, Vietnam, Laos, Brunei and Burma are still hostile to EMOs, refusing to allow them to observe and monitor local polls.
The EMOs have inspired citizens, including minority and vulnerable groups, to want to increase participation in public affairs and transform electoral processes into transparent and accountable ones. Local and international monitoring organisations have emerged in the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia and Malaysia, and their activities have included review of election laws and voter education. They even engage in post-election observation and monitoring activities that promote good governance, and monitor government projects to minimise if not eliminate corruption.
But only half of the Asean members have ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which enshrines the principle of elections. Article 25 of the ICCPR clearly identifies the right and opportunity of people to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives. It also stipulates the right to vote and to be elected in genuine periodic elections that shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electorate.
Do all of the Asean governments and their election commissions uphold this principle?
***********************************************************
The Irrawaddy - Release Political Prisoners before Elections: UN Official
By LALIT K JHA, Friday, October 23, 2009
WASHINGTON — The Burmese military junta should release all political prisoners before the country’s 2010 elections in order to make it as inclusive as possible, the UN special rapporteur on human rights in Burma said on Thursday.
“I told the government that these elections should be fair and transparent, that freedom of speech, movement and association should be guaranteed in the country, and of course that all prisoners of conscience should be released before those elections,” said Tomás Ojea Quintana, addressing a press conference at UN headquarters in New York.
Quintana also urged the military junta to take prompt measures to establish accountability and responsibility regarding widespread and systematic human rights violations.
Referring to starvation and reports of dire socio-economic conditions in many parts of the country, he also asked the Burmese government and the international community to find solutions to eradicate poverty in the country.
Recounting his recommendations to the Burmese junta, he said he called for the release of all prisoners of conscience; the review and reform of national legislation that was not in compliance with international human rights standards; the reform of the judiciary to assure independence and impartiality; and the reform of the military which needed to respect international humanitarian law in conflict areas, as well as the rights of civilians.
Quintana said he told the UN General Assembly committee dealing with social and humanitarian issues that the situation of human rights in Burma remained “alarming,” with “a pattern of widespread and systematic violations.” The prevailing military impunity allowed for the continuation of the violations, he sad.
“I urge the government to take prompt measures to establish accountability and responsibility with regard to those widespread and systematic human rights violations,” he said.
Quintana, who has visited Burma twice since being appointed special rapporteur in May 2008, said he will make a third trip from Nov. 22 to 27. The itinerary of the visit would depend on the agenda agreed to by the government, but one of the issues of interest to him related to serious human rights violations with regard to the country’s Muslim communities.
In response to a question, he described a recent favorable ruling by Burma’s Supreme Court with regard to the situation of Muslims and their rights to marry each other. That positive development had been included in his report, he said.
Asked to comment on reports that provision of food aid in Burma was conditional on work, he said that he had not mentioned that in his report because he had not had any reliable evidence on that point. But his report did contain information on food assistance.
In regard to Burma’s judiciary, he said he had met with the attorney-general, with whom he had a frank discussion on the issue of independence. He said it was significant that during his last visit, the chief justice had accepted a mission by the special rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers, which had initially been denied by the government.
By LALIT K JHA, Friday, October 23, 2009
WASHINGTON — The Burmese military junta should release all political prisoners before the country’s 2010 elections in order to make it as inclusive as possible, the UN special rapporteur on human rights in Burma said on Thursday.
“I told the government that these elections should be fair and transparent, that freedom of speech, movement and association should be guaranteed in the country, and of course that all prisoners of conscience should be released before those elections,” said Tomás Ojea Quintana, addressing a press conference at UN headquarters in New York.
Quintana also urged the military junta to take prompt measures to establish accountability and responsibility regarding widespread and systematic human rights violations.
Referring to starvation and reports of dire socio-economic conditions in many parts of the country, he also asked the Burmese government and the international community to find solutions to eradicate poverty in the country.
Recounting his recommendations to the Burmese junta, he said he called for the release of all prisoners of conscience; the review and reform of national legislation that was not in compliance with international human rights standards; the reform of the judiciary to assure independence and impartiality; and the reform of the military which needed to respect international humanitarian law in conflict areas, as well as the rights of civilians.
Quintana said he told the UN General Assembly committee dealing with social and humanitarian issues that the situation of human rights in Burma remained “alarming,” with “a pattern of widespread and systematic violations.” The prevailing military impunity allowed for the continuation of the violations, he sad.
“I urge the government to take prompt measures to establish accountability and responsibility with regard to those widespread and systematic human rights violations,” he said.
Quintana, who has visited Burma twice since being appointed special rapporteur in May 2008, said he will make a third trip from Nov. 22 to 27. The itinerary of the visit would depend on the agenda agreed to by the government, but one of the issues of interest to him related to serious human rights violations with regard to the country’s Muslim communities.
In response to a question, he described a recent favorable ruling by Burma’s Supreme Court with regard to the situation of Muslims and their rights to marry each other. That positive development had been included in his report, he said.
Asked to comment on reports that provision of food aid in Burma was conditional on work, he said that he had not mentioned that in his report because he had not had any reliable evidence on that point. But his report did contain information on food assistance.
In regard to Burma’s judiciary, he said he had met with the attorney-general, with whom he had a frank discussion on the issue of independence. He said it was significant that during his last visit, the chief justice had accepted a mission by the special rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers, which had initially been denied by the government.
***********************************************************
Court hears witnesses in trial against Burmese-American
by Mungpi
Friday, 23 October 2009 19:54
New Delhi (Mizzima) – A special court in Rangoon’s notorious Insein prison on Friday heard two prosecution witnesses in the trial of Burmese born American Kyaw Zaw Lwin (a.k.a) Nyi Nyi Aung.
Kyi Win, one of the defense attorneys, said the testimony on Friday by an officer of the Rangoon Special Branch Police and an Immigration officer in the special court presided over by a Minglardon Township court judge, were not convincing and were vague.
“But we still have 13 more prosecution witnesses. It would be too early to comment on the case, but so far we cannot call Nyi Nyi Aung guilty,” said Kyi Win, adding that the next hearing has been scheduled for October 30.
The prosecution has charged Nyi Nyi Aung under article 420 and 468, of fraud and forgery. He is accused of possessing a fake Burmese national identity card, where he had allegedly placed his photograph.
“The two prosecution witnesses today produced the Burmese national identity card that was said to have been forged by Nyi Nyi Aung,” said Kyi Win, but he added that the witnesses failed to provide specific answers to several questions, which was unconvincing to the lawyers.
The Burmese born American was arrested on September 3, at the Rangoon International Airport while entering Burma from Bangkok. He was detained and later charged. The US embassy has contacted high court advocates Kyi Win and Nyan Win to defend him.
On Friday, two officials from the US embassy – a consular officer and a Burmese official – attended the hearing. But families of Nyi Nyi Aung, two of his aunts, were barred from entering the court room.
Though Nyi Nyi Aung is accused of fraud and forgery, the Burmese junta’s official mouthpiece, the New Light of Myanmar newspaper, accused him of collaborating with activists in exile and trying to instigate unrest in the country.
The newspaper also accused him of providing financial assistance to underground activists inside Burma to carry out explosions in public places.
“None of these are included in the charges,” Kyi Win said.
The Burmese-American was a student activist during the popular 1988 uprising in Burma. But he fled to neighbouring Thailand along with fellow students in the wake of the military crack-down on protesters. He later migrated to Maryland in United States, where he was naturalized as a citizen.
His fellow activists said he had a valid US passport and valid Burmese Visa, provided by the Burmese embassy in Bangkok, before flying to Rangoon.
by Mungpi
Friday, 23 October 2009 19:54
New Delhi (Mizzima) – A special court in Rangoon’s notorious Insein prison on Friday heard two prosecution witnesses in the trial of Burmese born American Kyaw Zaw Lwin (a.k.a) Nyi Nyi Aung.
Kyi Win, one of the defense attorneys, said the testimony on Friday by an officer of the Rangoon Special Branch Police and an Immigration officer in the special court presided over by a Minglardon Township court judge, were not convincing and were vague.
“But we still have 13 more prosecution witnesses. It would be too early to comment on the case, but so far we cannot call Nyi Nyi Aung guilty,” said Kyi Win, adding that the next hearing has been scheduled for October 30.
The prosecution has charged Nyi Nyi Aung under article 420 and 468, of fraud and forgery. He is accused of possessing a fake Burmese national identity card, where he had allegedly placed his photograph.
“The two prosecution witnesses today produced the Burmese national identity card that was said to have been forged by Nyi Nyi Aung,” said Kyi Win, but he added that the witnesses failed to provide specific answers to several questions, which was unconvincing to the lawyers.
The Burmese born American was arrested on September 3, at the Rangoon International Airport while entering Burma from Bangkok. He was detained and later charged. The US embassy has contacted high court advocates Kyi Win and Nyan Win to defend him.
On Friday, two officials from the US embassy – a consular officer and a Burmese official – attended the hearing. But families of Nyi Nyi Aung, two of his aunts, were barred from entering the court room.
Though Nyi Nyi Aung is accused of fraud and forgery, the Burmese junta’s official mouthpiece, the New Light of Myanmar newspaper, accused him of collaborating with activists in exile and trying to instigate unrest in the country.
The newspaper also accused him of providing financial assistance to underground activists inside Burma to carry out explosions in public places.
“None of these are included in the charges,” Kyi Win said.
The Burmese-American was a student activist during the popular 1988 uprising in Burma. But he fled to neighbouring Thailand along with fellow students in the wake of the military crack-down on protesters. He later migrated to Maryland in United States, where he was naturalized as a citizen.
His fellow activists said he had a valid US passport and valid Burmese Visa, provided by the Burmese embassy in Bangkok, before flying to Rangoon.
***********************************************************
Money for rights at the ASEAN summit
Joseph Allchin
Oct 22, 2009 (DVB)–In recent days civil society groups have convened in Thailand to thrash out their own version of the official regional summit, starting tomorrow, and plain to see was the frustration at the gulf between the two.
Yesterday, the exiled Burmese activist Khin Ohmar was chosen by civil society groups to attend the 15th ASEAN summit as representative of Burmese Civil Society Organisations (CSO). Yet, according to Khin Ohmar, domestic Burmese organisations riled against her exiled status as being not representative of Burma. “There were a number of [Burmese] junta-backed agencies who were present at the ASEAN Peoples’ Forum, and they wanted to have somebody that they can influence,” she told DVB. This ‘somebody’ would be from a local group inside Burma “who is not able to have an independent voice to speak on the key problems that the Burmese people are facing.”
Whilst several of the more ‘modern’ ASEAN leaders play lip-service to Western discourse on human rights, it seems to have about as much currency as oil companies who talk about the environment: it’s a co-option of a ‘nice idea’. This ‘nice idea’ was recently honoured with a fresh ASEAN human rights monitor who would be answerable too, amongst other notable human rights abusers, the Burmese junta. It will have no punitive powers but would instead ‘promote’ human rights. “It’s a human rights commission for the government; it’s already so weak in so many ways,” Ohmar said.
What will no doubt be more on the minds of every well-funded leader, the military ones included, will be the future of trade both within ASEAN and between other international blocs and nations. In the pipeline is the intriguing potential of a free trade agreement (FTA) with China, India and the European Union, whilst human rights will likely form a pretty part of the packaging. The diversity of ASEAN will mean that trade agreements will mean different things to different nations; Burma will be affected in a very different manner to somewhere like Malaysia or Thailand, for instance. Many in India are concerned that the industrial might of nations like Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia will have a negative impact on India’s own industrial development, with those economies being able to out-do their Indian rivals.
This alone could have an effect on Burma, whose cheap labour and absence of industry regulations on the surface provide a tantalizing prospect for multinationals. It’s an issue that Burma economics expert Sean Turnell has termed a ‘race to the bottom’ with standards. In a turbulent future economy, without the debt-led spending of Western nations, Asian nations may have to compete for bargain basement industry. Labour and environmental standards could be the first casualty in such a race. Indian economist Asseem Srinavastava had suggested that a venture into Burma earlier this year by Tata motors of India provided an example of this, with the probability that it was done to bypass strict laws in India. In similar fashion it could induce other ASEAN nations to cut standards.
Burma is already believed to have some of the cheapest extraction costs for gas and oil, and is a Mecca for other controversial extractive industries like rare animal parts, traded openly in Burmese markets and logging. As Jon Buckrell from Global Witness told DVB yesterday, illegal logging has drastically eaten away at Burma’s forests, with a ton of Burmese teak now being sold for as little as $US300.
However, according to Turnell, “political instability tends to trump these sorts of concerns [over industry competition]”, with companies now “desperate not to locate in Burma”; the lack of infrastructure, rule of law, a credible banking system and trustworthy exchange rate are destroying Burma’s chances.
Burma has been a sort of bit part on the side of the more dynamic economies of ASEAN. Whilst its resources are eagerly tapped by companies in Singapore and elsewhere, its governance and development has remained more in league with tiger despots than tiger economies. A way round Burma’s domestic quagmire has been to bring its cheap labour to Thailand or Malaysia, which has now created special economic zones to accommodate the influx of industry. Yet Ohmar speaks of “major concern” over agreements which “have not consulted the people or civil society and do not have people integrated into the processes [of formulating trade regulations]”.
At the ASEAN people’s forum this week, Joy Chavez, an economics and agricultural expert from the Philippines, warned that the current crop of FTA agreements are “exclusionary…they do not link with the people of ASEAN [and] without people’s input there is a big danger”. Turnell further expressed angst about binding trade agreements with powerful blocs like the EU: “For me the worry would be the extent that the EU and other countries could lever away to express their unhappiness about human rights issues” if they signed an FTA.
The ASEAN policy of ‘non-interference’ is also key: like most bilateral agreements and bodies, all parties will seek to get the most out of it, whilst giving the least. So whilst ASEAN intends to become an EU-style free trade zone by 2020, the member states “will be desperate to protect their own industry”, according to Turnell, with ‘non-interference’ used to prevent other nations from upholding regulations. It’s the great legal expression of conservatism at the heart of the region, and will keep the economic powerhouses from spreading the potential wealth that exists in the region.
The cohesion of the group, whether horizontally, between national governments, or vertically, between its leaders and their subjects, is a major cause for concern. Essentially ASEAN will never achieve its targets of being a free trade bloc or of having progressive human dignity for all if leaders are not prepared to have the humility to submit to principles, rules and standards that that require interference or accountability. Its efficacy will be at the mercy of ‘big men’ who, for Khin Ohmar, have failed to show commitment. “Now we always make a joke; with ASEAN its one step forward, two steps backward. It’s like the same old story again”.
Joseph Allchin
Oct 22, 2009 (DVB)–In recent days civil society groups have convened in Thailand to thrash out their own version of the official regional summit, starting tomorrow, and plain to see was the frustration at the gulf between the two.
Yesterday, the exiled Burmese activist Khin Ohmar was chosen by civil society groups to attend the 15th ASEAN summit as representative of Burmese Civil Society Organisations (CSO). Yet, according to Khin Ohmar, domestic Burmese organisations riled against her exiled status as being not representative of Burma. “There were a number of [Burmese] junta-backed agencies who were present at the ASEAN Peoples’ Forum, and they wanted to have somebody that they can influence,” she told DVB. This ‘somebody’ would be from a local group inside Burma “who is not able to have an independent voice to speak on the key problems that the Burmese people are facing.”
Whilst several of the more ‘modern’ ASEAN leaders play lip-service to Western discourse on human rights, it seems to have about as much currency as oil companies who talk about the environment: it’s a co-option of a ‘nice idea’. This ‘nice idea’ was recently honoured with a fresh ASEAN human rights monitor who would be answerable too, amongst other notable human rights abusers, the Burmese junta. It will have no punitive powers but would instead ‘promote’ human rights. “It’s a human rights commission for the government; it’s already so weak in so many ways,” Ohmar said.
What will no doubt be more on the minds of every well-funded leader, the military ones included, will be the future of trade both within ASEAN and between other international blocs and nations. In the pipeline is the intriguing potential of a free trade agreement (FTA) with China, India and the European Union, whilst human rights will likely form a pretty part of the packaging. The diversity of ASEAN will mean that trade agreements will mean different things to different nations; Burma will be affected in a very different manner to somewhere like Malaysia or Thailand, for instance. Many in India are concerned that the industrial might of nations like Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia will have a negative impact on India’s own industrial development, with those economies being able to out-do their Indian rivals.
This alone could have an effect on Burma, whose cheap labour and absence of industry regulations on the surface provide a tantalizing prospect for multinationals. It’s an issue that Burma economics expert Sean Turnell has termed a ‘race to the bottom’ with standards. In a turbulent future economy, without the debt-led spending of Western nations, Asian nations may have to compete for bargain basement industry. Labour and environmental standards could be the first casualty in such a race. Indian economist Asseem Srinavastava had suggested that a venture into Burma earlier this year by Tata motors of India provided an example of this, with the probability that it was done to bypass strict laws in India. In similar fashion it could induce other ASEAN nations to cut standards.
Burma is already believed to have some of the cheapest extraction costs for gas and oil, and is a Mecca for other controversial extractive industries like rare animal parts, traded openly in Burmese markets and logging. As Jon Buckrell from Global Witness told DVB yesterday, illegal logging has drastically eaten away at Burma’s forests, with a ton of Burmese teak now being sold for as little as $US300.
However, according to Turnell, “political instability tends to trump these sorts of concerns [over industry competition]”, with companies now “desperate not to locate in Burma”; the lack of infrastructure, rule of law, a credible banking system and trustworthy exchange rate are destroying Burma’s chances.
Burma has been a sort of bit part on the side of the more dynamic economies of ASEAN. Whilst its resources are eagerly tapped by companies in Singapore and elsewhere, its governance and development has remained more in league with tiger despots than tiger economies. A way round Burma’s domestic quagmire has been to bring its cheap labour to Thailand or Malaysia, which has now created special economic zones to accommodate the influx of industry. Yet Ohmar speaks of “major concern” over agreements which “have not consulted the people or civil society and do not have people integrated into the processes [of formulating trade regulations]”.
At the ASEAN people’s forum this week, Joy Chavez, an economics and agricultural expert from the Philippines, warned that the current crop of FTA agreements are “exclusionary…they do not link with the people of ASEAN [and] without people’s input there is a big danger”. Turnell further expressed angst about binding trade agreements with powerful blocs like the EU: “For me the worry would be the extent that the EU and other countries could lever away to express their unhappiness about human rights issues” if they signed an FTA.
The ASEAN policy of ‘non-interference’ is also key: like most bilateral agreements and bodies, all parties will seek to get the most out of it, whilst giving the least. So whilst ASEAN intends to become an EU-style free trade zone by 2020, the member states “will be desperate to protect their own industry”, according to Turnell, with ‘non-interference’ used to prevent other nations from upholding regulations. It’s the great legal expression of conservatism at the heart of the region, and will keep the economic powerhouses from spreading the potential wealth that exists in the region.
The cohesion of the group, whether horizontally, between national governments, or vertically, between its leaders and their subjects, is a major cause for concern. Essentially ASEAN will never achieve its targets of being a free trade bloc or of having progressive human dignity for all if leaders are not prepared to have the humility to submit to principles, rules and standards that that require interference or accountability. Its efficacy will be at the mercy of ‘big men’ who, for Khin Ohmar, have failed to show commitment. “Now we always make a joke; with ASEAN its one step forward, two steps backward. It’s like the same old story again”.
No comments:
Post a Comment