Clinton lambastes global 'anti-defamation' trend
Mon Oct 26, 8:56 pm ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton came out strongly against laws around the world that make religious defamation a crime, saying freedom of speech and religion should be equally upheld.
"Some claim that the best way to protect the freedom of religion is to implement so-called 'anti-defamation' policies that would restrict freedom of expression and the freedom of religion," she said on presenting a department report on religious freedom.
"I strongly disagree. The United States will always... stand against discrimination and persecution... But an individual's ability to practice his or her religion has no bearing on others' freedom of speech," Clinton said.
"The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faith will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions. These differences should be met with tolerance, not with the suppression of discourse," she added.
In a draft resolution adopted last month by the UN Human Rights Council, Egypt and the United States raised concerns over the rise of "negative racial and religious stereotyping of religions and racial groups" around the world.
The resolution, which the European Union and Latin America criticized for touching on the thorny issue of religious defamation, "condemns... any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence."
The State Department report on religious freedom in some 200 countries serves as a basis for an upcoming US list of nations that raise the most concern.
The last US list in January included Saudi Arabia, Myanmar, China, North Korea, Eritrea, Iran, Sudan and Uzbekistan, the same countries that made the list in 2008.
Michael Posner, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, noted "interesting trends" on both sides of the issue this year, along with "a growing recognition that there needs to be more dialogue and more effort... across faiths" to find common ground.
He singled out the Philippines, Jordan, Qatar and Spain for their efforts and initiatives in mitigating religious differences.
However, Posner cited "plenty of individual incidents that are mentioned throughout the report" including "blasphemy laws, tremendous interfaith tensions" and "more restrictions by government ministries on the right of religious groups to register."
The State Department report was especially critical of Cuba and Venezuela, where it said religious institutions come under "harassment and intimidation," while praising progress made in Brazil, Spain and Argentina.
Mon Oct 26, 8:56 pm ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton came out strongly against laws around the world that make religious defamation a crime, saying freedom of speech and religion should be equally upheld.
"Some claim that the best way to protect the freedom of religion is to implement so-called 'anti-defamation' policies that would restrict freedom of expression and the freedom of religion," she said on presenting a department report on religious freedom.
"I strongly disagree. The United States will always... stand against discrimination and persecution... But an individual's ability to practice his or her religion has no bearing on others' freedom of speech," Clinton said.
"The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faith will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions. These differences should be met with tolerance, not with the suppression of discourse," she added.
In a draft resolution adopted last month by the UN Human Rights Council, Egypt and the United States raised concerns over the rise of "negative racial and religious stereotyping of religions and racial groups" around the world.
The resolution, which the European Union and Latin America criticized for touching on the thorny issue of religious defamation, "condemns... any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence."
The State Department report on religious freedom in some 200 countries serves as a basis for an upcoming US list of nations that raise the most concern.
The last US list in January included Saudi Arabia, Myanmar, China, North Korea, Eritrea, Iran, Sudan and Uzbekistan, the same countries that made the list in 2008.
Michael Posner, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, noted "interesting trends" on both sides of the issue this year, along with "a growing recognition that there needs to be more dialogue and more effort... across faiths" to find common ground.
He singled out the Philippines, Jordan, Qatar and Spain for their efforts and initiatives in mitigating religious differences.
However, Posner cited "plenty of individual incidents that are mentioned throughout the report" including "blasphemy laws, tremendous interfaith tensions" and "more restrictions by government ministries on the right of religious groups to register."
The State Department report was especially critical of Cuba and Venezuela, where it said religious institutions come under "harassment and intimidation," while praising progress made in Brazil, Spain and Argentina.
***********************************************************
U.S. sees "mixed picture" on world religious liberty
By Andrew Quinn – Mon Oct 26, 4:36 pm ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States sees a mixed picture on world religious freedom, with progress in interfaith dialogue weighed against government repression and sectarian strife in many countries.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday unveiled the latest State Department report on global religious freedom, which particularly criticized Iran and North Korea among other countries for harsh limits on religious expression.
"It is our hope that the ... report will encourage existing religious freedom movements around the world," Clinton said, adding that all people should have the right to believe or not as they see fit.
The report tagged North Korea, Iran, Myanmar, China, Sudan, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan among the worst offenders, placing them on a watch list put out earlier this year.
Officials said the latest review would help determine whether they stay on the list, which could leave some open to additional U.S. sanctions.
Michael Posner, the State Department's top official for democracy and human rights, said President Barack Obama's call this year for a new beginning between the United States and Muslims did not mean sidelining religious liberty.
"Religious freedom is a fundamental right, a social good, a source of stability, and a key to international security," Posner said in the introduction to the report.
Posner praised interfaith dialogue efforts promoted by Jordan, Spain and other countries. But religious repression and discrimination remained huge problems worldwide.
"We're fully aware that even in countries with robust legal safeguards, including the United States, we're not immune from acts of intolerance," he said.
The annual report, compiled from sources including journalists, academics, non-governmental organizations, and human rights and religious groups, provides a long list of both setbacks and progress on religious freedom around the world.
RELIGION DOESN'T TRUMP FREE SPEECH - CLINTON
Clinton said she opposed efforts promoted by some Islamic countries to establish a global benchmark for what constitutes "defamation of a religion," saying it could be an unacceptable intrusion on free speech rights.
"The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faith will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions," she said.
The report detailed how religious repression is the norm in many countries.
North Korea, which U.S. officials believe has between 150,000 and 200,000 people in political prison camps, some for religious reasons, has been on the U.S. list since 2001.
"Genuine religious freedom does not exist," the report said, noting that North Korea, which does not have formal diplomatic relations with the United States, blocks almost all independent assessment of conditions within its borders.
Iran and Saudi Arabia, the first a foe, the second an ally of the United States, were both criticized for extremely repressive religious attitudes.
China, which U.S. President Barack Obama is due to visit in November, was cited for some improvements, including increased tolerance of some religious groups the government sees as nonthreatening.
But the report criticized Beijing for repression in Tibet of followers of the Dalai Lama and in the western region of Xinjiag, which saw a wave of violence in July after a crackdown on protests by traditionally Muslim Uighurs.
By Andrew Quinn – Mon Oct 26, 4:36 pm ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States sees a mixed picture on world religious freedom, with progress in interfaith dialogue weighed against government repression and sectarian strife in many countries.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Monday unveiled the latest State Department report on global religious freedom, which particularly criticized Iran and North Korea among other countries for harsh limits on religious expression.
"It is our hope that the ... report will encourage existing religious freedom movements around the world," Clinton said, adding that all people should have the right to believe or not as they see fit.
The report tagged North Korea, Iran, Myanmar, China, Sudan, Eritrea, Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan among the worst offenders, placing them on a watch list put out earlier this year.
Officials said the latest review would help determine whether they stay on the list, which could leave some open to additional U.S. sanctions.
Michael Posner, the State Department's top official for democracy and human rights, said President Barack Obama's call this year for a new beginning between the United States and Muslims did not mean sidelining religious liberty.
"Religious freedom is a fundamental right, a social good, a source of stability, and a key to international security," Posner said in the introduction to the report.
Posner praised interfaith dialogue efforts promoted by Jordan, Spain and other countries. But religious repression and discrimination remained huge problems worldwide.
"We're fully aware that even in countries with robust legal safeguards, including the United States, we're not immune from acts of intolerance," he said.
The annual report, compiled from sources including journalists, academics, non-governmental organizations, and human rights and religious groups, provides a long list of both setbacks and progress on religious freedom around the world.
RELIGION DOESN'T TRUMP FREE SPEECH - CLINTON
Clinton said she opposed efforts promoted by some Islamic countries to establish a global benchmark for what constitutes "defamation of a religion," saying it could be an unacceptable intrusion on free speech rights.
"The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faith will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions," she said.
The report detailed how religious repression is the norm in many countries.
North Korea, which U.S. officials believe has between 150,000 and 200,000 people in political prison camps, some for religious reasons, has been on the U.S. list since 2001.
"Genuine religious freedom does not exist," the report said, noting that North Korea, which does not have formal diplomatic relations with the United States, blocks almost all independent assessment of conditions within its borders.
Iran and Saudi Arabia, the first a foe, the second an ally of the United States, were both criticized for extremely repressive religious attitudes.
China, which U.S. President Barack Obama is due to visit in November, was cited for some improvements, including increased tolerance of some religious groups the government sees as nonthreatening.
But the report criticized Beijing for repression in Tibet of followers of the Dalai Lama and in the western region of Xinjiag, which saw a wave of violence in July after a crackdown on protests by traditionally Muslim Uighurs.
***********************************************************
The Justice - Burmese monks address human rights abuses
by Erin Doniger
News | 10/27/09
Posted online at 1:33 AM EST on 10/27/09
Three Burmese monks with refugee status in Utica, N.Y., shared their personal stories from the 2007 Saffron Revolution and commented on the human rights crisis in Burma last Wednesday.
The event was hosted by the Brandeis chapter of Amnesty International and co-sponsored by the Southeast Asia Club and the Brandeis International Relations Council.
Monks U Agga, U Gawsita and U Pyinya Zawta spoke in particular about their involvement in the Saffron Revolution, a series of anti-government protests spurred by the ruling military's sudden removal of fuel subsidies.
These peaceful protests against the Burmese ruling military junta were led by thousands of Burmese monks and caused police and troops to fire on protesters, raid and shut down Buddhist monasteries, cut Internet traffic and imprison protestors in attempt to curb the events from traveling the globe.
The monks said that human necessities were nearly impossible to afford during this time.
With the assistance of a translator, U Gawasita emphasized that "if the international community speaks with one voice, ... Burma will change."
U Pyinya Zawta was imprisoned and tortured for nine years in Burma before fleeing to the United States.
He is a founding member and executive director in exile of the All Burma Monks' Alliance and said that as refugees, they now have three main objectives.
"Firstly, we support the monks who have been arrested and are now in prisons. Secondly, we support who are working for Burma's democracy such as monks, students and activists inside Burma. Finally, we support the monks who were able to flee Burma and … who are now staying in Thailand, India and refugee camps."
U Agga, the youngest of the three, made it clear that the monks still send "loving kindess" to the oppresive military regime.
"We don't have hatred; we are not angry," he said.
In a slideshow, Gawasita presented photographs depicting a peaceful march that he led and the cruel response it received from the military.
The photographs showed thousands of monks and students running from attacking soldiers and a Japanese journalist being killed point-blank. Gawasita recalled that after the march he was followed and beaten on the head.
"I realized that I couldn't die in a prison, and I would rather leave Burma and continue the struggle for Burma [in the U.S.]," Gawasita said.
The monks now travel to universities as a part of a tour organized by Amnesty International USA's Group 113 based in Somerville, Mass., to share their inspirational stories of a peaceful effort to gain democracy in their home country.
At the end of the event, students and faculty were asked to sign a petition addressed to leaders of the Burmese government to free Burma.
The petition asked Dictator Senior General Than Shwe, in particular, the Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, who is currently placed under detention by the militia.
Amnesty International Brandeis chapter co-president Chris Lau '12 said that he was very happy with the event turnout.
"[The event] was a great chance for Amnesty International to gain visibilty on campus," he said.
Attendee Matthew Zunitch '13 said in an interview, "I might be a little biased because I am in the 'War and Possibilities of Peace class' and have seen a lot of similar events recently, … but I thought their individual testimonies were really moving."
by Erin Doniger
News | 10/27/09
Posted online at 1:33 AM EST on 10/27/09
Three Burmese monks with refugee status in Utica, N.Y., shared their personal stories from the 2007 Saffron Revolution and commented on the human rights crisis in Burma last Wednesday.
The event was hosted by the Brandeis chapter of Amnesty International and co-sponsored by the Southeast Asia Club and the Brandeis International Relations Council.
Monks U Agga, U Gawsita and U Pyinya Zawta spoke in particular about their involvement in the Saffron Revolution, a series of anti-government protests spurred by the ruling military's sudden removal of fuel subsidies.
These peaceful protests against the Burmese ruling military junta were led by thousands of Burmese monks and caused police and troops to fire on protesters, raid and shut down Buddhist monasteries, cut Internet traffic and imprison protestors in attempt to curb the events from traveling the globe.
The monks said that human necessities were nearly impossible to afford during this time.
With the assistance of a translator, U Gawasita emphasized that "if the international community speaks with one voice, ... Burma will change."
U Pyinya Zawta was imprisoned and tortured for nine years in Burma before fleeing to the United States.
He is a founding member and executive director in exile of the All Burma Monks' Alliance and said that as refugees, they now have three main objectives.
"Firstly, we support the monks who have been arrested and are now in prisons. Secondly, we support who are working for Burma's democracy such as monks, students and activists inside Burma. Finally, we support the monks who were able to flee Burma and … who are now staying in Thailand, India and refugee camps."
U Agga, the youngest of the three, made it clear that the monks still send "loving kindess" to the oppresive military regime.
"We don't have hatred; we are not angry," he said.
In a slideshow, Gawasita presented photographs depicting a peaceful march that he led and the cruel response it received from the military.
The photographs showed thousands of monks and students running from attacking soldiers and a Japanese journalist being killed point-blank. Gawasita recalled that after the march he was followed and beaten on the head.
"I realized that I couldn't die in a prison, and I would rather leave Burma and continue the struggle for Burma [in the U.S.]," Gawasita said.
The monks now travel to universities as a part of a tour organized by Amnesty International USA's Group 113 based in Somerville, Mass., to share their inspirational stories of a peaceful effort to gain democracy in their home country.
At the end of the event, students and faculty were asked to sign a petition addressed to leaders of the Burmese government to free Burma.
The petition asked Dictator Senior General Than Shwe, in particular, the Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, who is currently placed under detention by the militia.
Amnesty International Brandeis chapter co-president Chris Lau '12 said that he was very happy with the event turnout.
"[The event] was a great chance for Amnesty International to gain visibilty on campus," he said.
Attendee Matthew Zunitch '13 said in an interview, "I might be a little biased because I am in the 'War and Possibilities of Peace class' and have seen a lot of similar events recently, … but I thought their individual testimonies were really moving."
***********************************************************
Aljazeera News - Rohingya forced to build fence
By Nicolas Haque on the Bangladesh-Myanmar border
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
On Myanmar's side of the Naf River that marks border with Bangladesh, labourers are hard at work building a fence that will prevent them fleeing persecution.
They will not be paid for their work. Instead the men, who come from the persecuted Rohingya ethnic group, have been coerced into erecting the 230km long fence by the threat of violence against their families.
The Rohingyas are a distinct ethnic group from Myanmar's Rakhine State. The authorities in Yangon have refused to recognise them as citizens and they have been persecuted for their cultural difference and practice of Islam.
For many, life in Myanmar has become so difficult that they have fled across the border to Bangladesh. Over the past year 12,000 Rohingyas have been caught crossing the border illegally.
Now they are being forced to build a fence to prevent such escapes.
"The Myanmar army have forced all of the men living in the villages on the border to work on the fence," a worker involved in the construction says. "Most of them are Rohingyas. If we don't do as they say they beat us and our families."
So far they have fenced off 70km of border in what experts believe is an attempt by Yangon to increase control of the lucrative smuggling trade that flourishes in the area.
"Illegal trade between Myanmar and Bangladesh has formerly been in favour of Bangladesh, but this will change now,"explains Professor Imtiaz Ahmed, from Dhaka University. "The country that controls the barriers between borders can also assert greater control over the illegal trade."
Disputed border
Bangladesh and Myanmar have never agreed on their borders, and an ongoing dispute over where their maritime frontiers lie has seen tension rise along the Naf river.
The contested maritime border involves a patch of sea believed to contain valuable oil and gas. Control of these waters could make either country very rich, and experts say that diplomatic relations between the two countries has deteriorated as a result of the dispute.
"The tension was heightened last November when the Myanmar Navy came in to put a rig in what Bangladesh claims, rightly, to be our own territorial water," says Retired Major General ANM Muniruzzaman, from the Bangladesh Institute of Peace and Security Studies.
"Eventually the Bangladeshi diplomatic efforts diffused the situation, and the Myanmar navy rig went back, but the Myanmar government has consistently told Bangladesh that this is their water, and that they will come back. When that happens, perhaps the Myanmar government wants to put a dual pressure on Bangladesh, not only from the sea but also from the land border."
That process may have already started. Myanmar has deployed 50,000 men to the border with Bangladesh, and in the past month alone, Dhaka has responded by sending an additional 3000 troops to the area in a manoeuvre codenamed "Operation Fortress."
Officially, the Bangladeshi government denies there is tension along the border. The troops say they are there to monitor and stop the illegal trafficking of goods and people.
But the soldiers know that relations between the two countries are strained.
"We have a border through which we can observe the other side of the river. Our troops morale is very high, under any circumstances we are ready to protect the integrity and sovereignty of our country," says Lieutenant Colonel Mozammel, commanding officer of Border Guards Bangladesh in Teknaf.
Unregistered refugees
Meanwhile, the horrific conditions faced by the Rohingyas in Myanmar are prompting thousands to flee to Bangladesh.
Malika is one of those who crossed the Naf river illegally. Her feet are swollen from the three-day walk to escape Yangon's soldiers.
She says she suffered horrific abuse there and had no choice but to leave.
"I couldn't stay there, the soldiers raped me over and over again," she says. "The Myanmar army do not consider us as humans."
But once in Bangladesh, the refugees face new problems. Of more than 400,000 Rohingyas believed to have slipped across the border into Bangladesh, just 26,000 have been offically recognised as refugees by the Bangladeshi government and the United Nations.
The authorities refuse to feed and house the rest.
Even the handful of NGOs working here are not allowed to provide food or medical aid or education facilities to unregistered Rohingyas because the government fears that this would spark tensions between poor local villagers and the new arrivals.
Fadlullah Wilmot, the director of Muslim Aid in Bangladesh, explains: "More than 44 per cent of the population in this area are ultra poor, that means that their daily income only provides their basic food needs. The literacy rate is about 10 per cent. The wage rate is low, so of course there are tensions."
In limbo
In 1992, the Bangladeshi government, under the supervision of UNHCR, organised the forced repatration of 250,000 Rohingyas on the basis that the refugees would be given citizenship by the Myanmar authorities. That promise was never kept.
Professor Ahmad believes the refugees are trapped between a rock and a hard place.
"Myanmar's position is they do not recognise them as citizens, they are stateless within Myanmar, and they are also stateless when they come to Bangladesh," he says.
"If you build the fence now Myanmar will probably say it is ready to take the 26,000 legal refugees from the camp but not the unregistered because they don’t know who they are."
Trapped in limbo between two countries that don't want them, the Rohingyas have become a bargaining chip for both Bangladesh and Myanmar as they try to settle their border dispute.
In Bangladesh's refugee camps, frustration and anger are rife amongst the beleagured minority.
"We cannot work. Our children can't go to school. Our wives aren't allowed to see doctors," one man says. "We cannot receive any food aid. No one wants us. This is humiliating, we have no arms, but we are ready to fight and to blow ourselves up. People need to know that we exist."
By Nicolas Haque on the Bangladesh-Myanmar border
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
On Myanmar's side of the Naf River that marks border with Bangladesh, labourers are hard at work building a fence that will prevent them fleeing persecution.
They will not be paid for their work. Instead the men, who come from the persecuted Rohingya ethnic group, have been coerced into erecting the 230km long fence by the threat of violence against their families.
The Rohingyas are a distinct ethnic group from Myanmar's Rakhine State. The authorities in Yangon have refused to recognise them as citizens and they have been persecuted for their cultural difference and practice of Islam.
For many, life in Myanmar has become so difficult that they have fled across the border to Bangladesh. Over the past year 12,000 Rohingyas have been caught crossing the border illegally.
Now they are being forced to build a fence to prevent such escapes.
"The Myanmar army have forced all of the men living in the villages on the border to work on the fence," a worker involved in the construction says. "Most of them are Rohingyas. If we don't do as they say they beat us and our families."
So far they have fenced off 70km of border in what experts believe is an attempt by Yangon to increase control of the lucrative smuggling trade that flourishes in the area.
"Illegal trade between Myanmar and Bangladesh has formerly been in favour of Bangladesh, but this will change now,"explains Professor Imtiaz Ahmed, from Dhaka University. "The country that controls the barriers between borders can also assert greater control over the illegal trade."
Disputed border
Bangladesh and Myanmar have never agreed on their borders, and an ongoing dispute over where their maritime frontiers lie has seen tension rise along the Naf river.
The contested maritime border involves a patch of sea believed to contain valuable oil and gas. Control of these waters could make either country very rich, and experts say that diplomatic relations between the two countries has deteriorated as a result of the dispute.
"The tension was heightened last November when the Myanmar Navy came in to put a rig in what Bangladesh claims, rightly, to be our own territorial water," says Retired Major General ANM Muniruzzaman, from the Bangladesh Institute of Peace and Security Studies.
"Eventually the Bangladeshi diplomatic efforts diffused the situation, and the Myanmar navy rig went back, but the Myanmar government has consistently told Bangladesh that this is their water, and that they will come back. When that happens, perhaps the Myanmar government wants to put a dual pressure on Bangladesh, not only from the sea but also from the land border."
That process may have already started. Myanmar has deployed 50,000 men to the border with Bangladesh, and in the past month alone, Dhaka has responded by sending an additional 3000 troops to the area in a manoeuvre codenamed "Operation Fortress."
Officially, the Bangladeshi government denies there is tension along the border. The troops say they are there to monitor and stop the illegal trafficking of goods and people.
But the soldiers know that relations between the two countries are strained.
"We have a border through which we can observe the other side of the river. Our troops morale is very high, under any circumstances we are ready to protect the integrity and sovereignty of our country," says Lieutenant Colonel Mozammel, commanding officer of Border Guards Bangladesh in Teknaf.
Unregistered refugees
Meanwhile, the horrific conditions faced by the Rohingyas in Myanmar are prompting thousands to flee to Bangladesh.
Malika is one of those who crossed the Naf river illegally. Her feet are swollen from the three-day walk to escape Yangon's soldiers.
She says she suffered horrific abuse there and had no choice but to leave.
"I couldn't stay there, the soldiers raped me over and over again," she says. "The Myanmar army do not consider us as humans."
But once in Bangladesh, the refugees face new problems. Of more than 400,000 Rohingyas believed to have slipped across the border into Bangladesh, just 26,000 have been offically recognised as refugees by the Bangladeshi government and the United Nations.
The authorities refuse to feed and house the rest.
Even the handful of NGOs working here are not allowed to provide food or medical aid or education facilities to unregistered Rohingyas because the government fears that this would spark tensions between poor local villagers and the new arrivals.
Fadlullah Wilmot, the director of Muslim Aid in Bangladesh, explains: "More than 44 per cent of the population in this area are ultra poor, that means that their daily income only provides their basic food needs. The literacy rate is about 10 per cent. The wage rate is low, so of course there are tensions."
In limbo
In 1992, the Bangladeshi government, under the supervision of UNHCR, organised the forced repatration of 250,000 Rohingyas on the basis that the refugees would be given citizenship by the Myanmar authorities. That promise was never kept.
Professor Ahmad believes the refugees are trapped between a rock and a hard place.
"Myanmar's position is they do not recognise them as citizens, they are stateless within Myanmar, and they are also stateless when they come to Bangladesh," he says.
"If you build the fence now Myanmar will probably say it is ready to take the 26,000 legal refugees from the camp but not the unregistered because they don’t know who they are."
Trapped in limbo between two countries that don't want them, the Rohingyas have become a bargaining chip for both Bangladesh and Myanmar as they try to settle their border dispute.
In Bangladesh's refugee camps, frustration and anger are rife amongst the beleagured minority.
"We cannot work. Our children can't go to school. Our wives aren't allowed to see doctors," one man says. "We cannot receive any food aid. No one wants us. This is humiliating, we have no arms, but we are ready to fight and to blow ourselves up. People need to know that we exist."
***********************************************************
United Press International
ASEAN members to focus on more free trade
Published: Oct. 26, 2009 at 1:49 PM
BANGKOK, Oct. 26 (UPI) -- Asian leaders ended their 15th ASEAN regional summit by agreeing to improve their internal free trade and work closely with their newly formed human-rights commission.
Pre-summit handwringing was replaced by handholding on the last day of meetings as the 16 leaders posed in a final photo call in the fashionable seaside resort of Hua Hin, southern Thailand.
A move towards a more EU-style of organization will be considered by the 10 member countries of Association of Southeast Asian Nations -- Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar, Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Cambodia, Laos, Brunei and Indonesia.
The subject was raised in private meetings of ASEAN leaders with leaders of the six nations considered partners in the region and with whom good relations are essential for economic progress -- China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand.
On Saturday Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama faced the media and urged ASEAN members to open up their borders to more free trade in the fashion of the European Union and do it by 2015. Southeast Asia is bouncing back from the global financial downturn more rapidly than expected, and Hatoyama said the countries should not lose this momentum.
The idea of a free-trade area is not new to ASEAN.
In 1992 the then six members of ASEAN formed the ASEAN Free Trade Area, a common external preferential tariff scheme to promote the free flow of goods within the member countries. The signatories were Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. The newer members are still adapting to AFTA rules, and establishing a level playing field for common tariffs has proved difficult.
Just before the summit a war of words over tariffs broke out between Thailand, the world's biggest producer of rice, and its major market, the Philippines. Thailand said it would drag its heels over lowering tariffs in general under AFTA rules unless the Philippines reduced their rice duties.
In an agreement to disagree, the subject was removed from the summit's agenda so as not to derail any general economic cooperation meetings, according to media reports.
ASEAN is also talking with the European Union to establish more formal free-trade ties. But here the continuing issue of human rights in Myanmar, in particular the ongoing detention of Nobel Peace Prize laureate and pro-democracy advocate Aung San Suu Kyi, remains an obstacle to breaking down trade barriers between the two blocs.
ASEAN has insisted that it would not kick Myanmar out of the bloc over its human-rights record, as some European critics have wanted before more preferential trade is set up. ASEAN countries have insisted on a continued dialogue with Myanmar and have from time to time urged the ruling military to free political prisoners including Suu Kyi and the junta to hold the free elections they promised for next year.
ASEAN members did, however, go some way to putting more pressure on Myanmar on the opening day of the summit by officially setting up a long-proposed ASEAN commission on human rights. But critics have said it is just window dressing because it has no formal powers of punishment for countries falling foul on any issues.
The next big gathering of ASEAN countries will take place at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in Singapore Nov. 12-14. ASEAN leaders have a one-hour meeting planned with President Barack Obama.
ASEAN members to focus on more free trade
Published: Oct. 26, 2009 at 1:49 PM
BANGKOK, Oct. 26 (UPI) -- Asian leaders ended their 15th ASEAN regional summit by agreeing to improve their internal free trade and work closely with their newly formed human-rights commission.
Pre-summit handwringing was replaced by handholding on the last day of meetings as the 16 leaders posed in a final photo call in the fashionable seaside resort of Hua Hin, southern Thailand.
A move towards a more EU-style of organization will be considered by the 10 member countries of Association of Southeast Asian Nations -- Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar, Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Cambodia, Laos, Brunei and Indonesia.
The subject was raised in private meetings of ASEAN leaders with leaders of the six nations considered partners in the region and with whom good relations are essential for economic progress -- China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand.
On Saturday Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama faced the media and urged ASEAN members to open up their borders to more free trade in the fashion of the European Union and do it by 2015. Southeast Asia is bouncing back from the global financial downturn more rapidly than expected, and Hatoyama said the countries should not lose this momentum.
The idea of a free-trade area is not new to ASEAN.
In 1992 the then six members of ASEAN formed the ASEAN Free Trade Area, a common external preferential tariff scheme to promote the free flow of goods within the member countries. The signatories were Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. The newer members are still adapting to AFTA rules, and establishing a level playing field for common tariffs has proved difficult.
Just before the summit a war of words over tariffs broke out between Thailand, the world's biggest producer of rice, and its major market, the Philippines. Thailand said it would drag its heels over lowering tariffs in general under AFTA rules unless the Philippines reduced their rice duties.
In an agreement to disagree, the subject was removed from the summit's agenda so as not to derail any general economic cooperation meetings, according to media reports.
ASEAN is also talking with the European Union to establish more formal free-trade ties. But here the continuing issue of human rights in Myanmar, in particular the ongoing detention of Nobel Peace Prize laureate and pro-democracy advocate Aung San Suu Kyi, remains an obstacle to breaking down trade barriers between the two blocs.
ASEAN has insisted that it would not kick Myanmar out of the bloc over its human-rights record, as some European critics have wanted before more preferential trade is set up. ASEAN countries have insisted on a continued dialogue with Myanmar and have from time to time urged the ruling military to free political prisoners including Suu Kyi and the junta to hold the free elections they promised for next year.
ASEAN members did, however, go some way to putting more pressure on Myanmar on the opening day of the summit by officially setting up a long-proposed ASEAN commission on human rights. But critics have said it is just window dressing because it has no formal powers of punishment for countries falling foul on any issues.
The next big gathering of ASEAN countries will take place at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in Singapore Nov. 12-14. ASEAN leaders have a one-hour meeting planned with President Barack Obama.
***********************************************************
United Press International
Where are ASEAN’s moral values?
By Zin Linn
Column: Burma Question
Published: October 27, 2009
Bangkok, Thailand — Leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Thailand last weekend issued a statement saying they had discussed the situation in Myanmar (Burma) and highlighted “that the general elections to be held in Myanmar in 2010 must be conducted in a fair, free, inclusive and transparent manner in order to be credible to the international community.”
Burma's Prime Minister Thein Sein told his Asian counterparts on Oct. 24 that the ruling junta could relax the conditions of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi's detention, the Japanese delegation spokesman Kazuo Kodama said. The Nobel Peace laureate had "softened" her attitude toward the military regime since her house arrest was extended in August for a further 18 months, the official quoted Thein Sein as saying.
Whereas Thein Sein announced at the regional summit in Thailand that Burma also wants elections next year to be "inclusive," he did not state whether Suu Kyi would be allowed to participate.
Asian leaders expressed rare optimism about military-ruled Burma on Oct. 25, expressing hopes of stability on its insecure northern border as well as hopes of a shift in attitude toward detained pro-democracy figure Aung San Suu Kyi.
After talks with Thein Sein during the summit, Asian leaders said the reclusive state acknowledged it needed to show the world it can hold free elections. But the sentencing of opposition leader Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, to a further 18 months of detention in August has raised questions over whether next year's election will be a charade.
Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, after a meeting with Thein Sein on the sidelines of the meeting, said the two had talked about the election and Burma’s national reconciliation process, along with other issues. Thein Sein also told Abhisit that Burma’s ruling military junta would soon announce an electoral law for next year’s planned election, but provided no further details.
However, many critics are skeptical, saying the regime has made such promises in the past without honoring them. Kraisak Choonhavan, president of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus, said the junta has often stated that it would respect democratic values, but has constantly refused to let its opponents participate freely in the political process.
Burma has suffered under military boots since 1962. The regime has earned a reputation as one of the world's worst human rights violators. It brutally suppressed pro-democracy movements in 1988, during the Depayin conspiracy on May 30, 2003, and the Saffron Revolution in September 2007, as well as many other sporadic crackdowns.
The junta has arrested over 2,000 political dissidents including Suu Kyi, who has been confined to her residence for 14 of the last 20 years.
The regime held a unilateral referendum at gunpoint in May, 2008, just a few days after Cyclone Nargis devastated the country. The junta said its 2008 Constitution was “approved” by more than 90 percent of eligible voters in the referendum, which has been widely dismissed as a sham.
The regime has ignored calls from the international community and Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, to review the Constitution, which will only bring further troubles to the Burmese people.
The elections planned for 2010 are intended to legalize military rule. People are convinced that, like the referendum held at gunpoint, they will not be free or fair. The junta may not be able to manage the worsening socio-economic situation if it continues to refuse the national reconciliation process being urged by the opposition NLD, the United Nationalities Alliance and exiled dissident groups.
The NLD and UNA have pointed out that the ratification of the Constitution staged by the junta was carried out against the will of the people and without observing international norms.
The junta has shown no respect for successive resolutions adopted by the U.N. General Assembly calling for the return of a democratic system in Burma through a tripartite dialogue between the junta, led by Senior General Than Shwe, democratic forces led by Aung San Suu Kyi and representatives of ethnic nationalities. It is clear that the junta has no plan to heed the U.N. call to release political prisoners, which is a precondition to the tripartite dialogue.
Looking at facts on the ground, there are more acts of violence these days, more military attacks in the ethnic minority areas, more arrests, more political prisoners, more restrictions toward the media, more control on Internet users and civil society groups. The situation needs to be handled carefully, with more pressure put on the regime to meet the U.N. demands.
ASEAN leaders must consider whether Burma is heading toward an authoritarian empire or a democratic state. According to a Burmese saying, while the elephant is in front of you, you needn’t search for its footprints. Building an army of 500,000 soldiers and digging tunnels for warfare purposes without facing any external threat, can anyone dare say Burma is on the way to democracy? It is obvious that Burma’s generals are on the road to autocracy and enslaving their own people.
The new ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights – which critics say is toothless and already discredited by including military-ruled Burma – has no power to punish members such as Burma. Nongovernmental rights organizations 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 to help victims of abuse.
Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum pointed out that five of the 10 governments had rejected nominees from civil society groups for the watchdog and replaced them with their own agents. She said observers at a meeting of the group on Oct. 23 were instructed not to question the leaders.
According to Stothard, this was a big slap in the face for civil society groups trying to engage with ASEAN.
"This situation and the gag order is an irresponsible move by ASEAN governments and it will damage the credibility of the grouping," she said.
There are good arguments for ASEAN to abandon its longstanding policy of noninterference in a country's internal affairs, if the affairs of a country spill over and affect regional security and development.
The United Nations has urged ASEAN leaders to insure the credibility of their Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights in light of claims that the group has fallen short on rights during its 42-year history. In this context ASEAN must review its policy toward Burma’s military autocracy.
Burma is likely to remain in the international limelight as a violator of human rights for its continued detention of Suu Kyi and over 2,000 political prisoners. AICHR must step in and flex its muscles if it hopes to represent any kind of moral authority. Until it does, ASEAN remains an organization completely lacking in moral values.
--
(Zin Linn is a freelance Burmese journalist living in exile in Bangkok, Thailand. He works at the NCGUB East Office as an information director and is vice president of Burma Media Association, which is affiliated with the Paris-based Reporters Sans Frontiers. ©Copyright Zin Linn.)
Where are ASEAN’s moral values?
By Zin Linn
Column: Burma Question
Published: October 27, 2009
Bangkok, Thailand — Leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Thailand last weekend issued a statement saying they had discussed the situation in Myanmar (Burma) and highlighted “that the general elections to be held in Myanmar in 2010 must be conducted in a fair, free, inclusive and transparent manner in order to be credible to the international community.”
Burma's Prime Minister Thein Sein told his Asian counterparts on Oct. 24 that the ruling junta could relax the conditions of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi's detention, the Japanese delegation spokesman Kazuo Kodama said. The Nobel Peace laureate had "softened" her attitude toward the military regime since her house arrest was extended in August for a further 18 months, the official quoted Thein Sein as saying.
Whereas Thein Sein announced at the regional summit in Thailand that Burma also wants elections next year to be "inclusive," he did not state whether Suu Kyi would be allowed to participate.
Asian leaders expressed rare optimism about military-ruled Burma on Oct. 25, expressing hopes of stability on its insecure northern border as well as hopes of a shift in attitude toward detained pro-democracy figure Aung San Suu Kyi.
After talks with Thein Sein during the summit, Asian leaders said the reclusive state acknowledged it needed to show the world it can hold free elections. But the sentencing of opposition leader Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, to a further 18 months of detention in August has raised questions over whether next year's election will be a charade.
Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, after a meeting with Thein Sein on the sidelines of the meeting, said the two had talked about the election and Burma’s national reconciliation process, along with other issues. Thein Sein also told Abhisit that Burma’s ruling military junta would soon announce an electoral law for next year’s planned election, but provided no further details.
However, many critics are skeptical, saying the regime has made such promises in the past without honoring them. Kraisak Choonhavan, president of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus, said the junta has often stated that it would respect democratic values, but has constantly refused to let its opponents participate freely in the political process.
Burma has suffered under military boots since 1962. The regime has earned a reputation as one of the world's worst human rights violators. It brutally suppressed pro-democracy movements in 1988, during the Depayin conspiracy on May 30, 2003, and the Saffron Revolution in September 2007, as well as many other sporadic crackdowns.
The junta has arrested over 2,000 political dissidents including Suu Kyi, who has been confined to her residence for 14 of the last 20 years.
The regime held a unilateral referendum at gunpoint in May, 2008, just a few days after Cyclone Nargis devastated the country. The junta said its 2008 Constitution was “approved” by more than 90 percent of eligible voters in the referendum, which has been widely dismissed as a sham.
The regime has ignored calls from the international community and Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, to review the Constitution, which will only bring further troubles to the Burmese people.
The elections planned for 2010 are intended to legalize military rule. People are convinced that, like the referendum held at gunpoint, they will not be free or fair. The junta may not be able to manage the worsening socio-economic situation if it continues to refuse the national reconciliation process being urged by the opposition NLD, the United Nationalities Alliance and exiled dissident groups.
The NLD and UNA have pointed out that the ratification of the Constitution staged by the junta was carried out against the will of the people and without observing international norms.
The junta has shown no respect for successive resolutions adopted by the U.N. General Assembly calling for the return of a democratic system in Burma through a tripartite dialogue between the junta, led by Senior General Than Shwe, democratic forces led by Aung San Suu Kyi and representatives of ethnic nationalities. It is clear that the junta has no plan to heed the U.N. call to release political prisoners, which is a precondition to the tripartite dialogue.
Looking at facts on the ground, there are more acts of violence these days, more military attacks in the ethnic minority areas, more arrests, more political prisoners, more restrictions toward the media, more control on Internet users and civil society groups. The situation needs to be handled carefully, with more pressure put on the regime to meet the U.N. demands.
ASEAN leaders must consider whether Burma is heading toward an authoritarian empire or a democratic state. According to a Burmese saying, while the elephant is in front of you, you needn’t search for its footprints. Building an army of 500,000 soldiers and digging tunnels for warfare purposes without facing any external threat, can anyone dare say Burma is on the way to democracy? It is obvious that Burma’s generals are on the road to autocracy and enslaving their own people.
The new ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights – which critics say is toothless and already discredited by including military-ruled Burma – has no power to punish members such as Burma. Nongovernmental rights organizations 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 to help victims of abuse.
Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum pointed out that five of the 10 governments had rejected nominees from civil society groups for the watchdog and replaced them with their own agents. She said observers at a meeting of the group on Oct. 23 were instructed not to question the leaders.
According to Stothard, this was a big slap in the face for civil society groups trying to engage with ASEAN.
"This situation and the gag order is an irresponsible move by ASEAN governments and it will damage the credibility of the grouping," she said.
There are good arguments for ASEAN to abandon its longstanding policy of noninterference in a country's internal affairs, if the affairs of a country spill over and affect regional security and development.
The United Nations has urged ASEAN leaders to insure the credibility of their Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights in light of claims that the group has fallen short on rights during its 42-year history. In this context ASEAN must review its policy toward Burma’s military autocracy.
Burma is likely to remain in the international limelight as a violator of human rights for its continued detention of Suu Kyi and over 2,000 political prisoners. AICHR must step in and flex its muscles if it hopes to represent any kind of moral authority. Until it does, ASEAN remains an organization completely lacking in moral values.
--
(Zin Linn is a freelance Burmese journalist living in exile in Bangkok, Thailand. He works at the NCGUB East Office as an information director and is vice president of Burma Media Association, which is affiliated with the Paris-based Reporters Sans Frontiers. ©Copyright Zin Linn.)
***********************************************************
Asian Tribune - ASEAN’S Human rights body must flex its muscles
Tue, 2009-10-27 01:33 — editor
By Zin Linn
The 15th Asean summit held at a Thai resort town, has given room for hope that the conditions governing the detention of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi would be relaxed. Her detention figured in the talks Prime Minister Thein Sein had with the Asean leaders on the sidelines of the summit. And the summit also came out with a categorical call to the Junta to hold a free, fair, inclusive and transparent election next year.
We don’t know the reaction of Thein to the Asean demand but he must he realized that the regime cannot hope to push its envelop any further with impunity. This much becomes clear from his assurance on the detention of Aung San Suu Kyi.
Going by the official media version, he also told his interlocutors that the Nobel Peace laureate had "softened" her attitude towards the military regime since her house arrest was extended in August for a further 18 months. Interestingly, the official media was quite silent on what the Prime Minister had said if any on whether Suu Kyi would be allowed to participate in the election.
Not too long ago, when Suu Kyi was still free and was able to move around the country, she led her party to a triumphant victory in the one and only fair general election the country has witnessed. She and her party were denied the fruits of popular verdict and in fact made to face the brutalities of a regime to which popular will remains an anathema.
If she continues to remain under house arrest and political parties are barred from reaching out to the people, the next election will remain a charade. Thein Sein is not oblivious to the repercussions of such an election to the credibility and standing of the government and the constitution the Junta has drafted in a bid to perpetuate its hold on the country. Otherwise he would not have volunteered to say that soon would be announced an electoral law for next year’s planned election. He offered no further details during his meeting with the host, Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva. So it will be interesting to see how Rangoon will address these twin issues
True, the regime had made such promises in the past too but failed to honour them. Kraisak Choonhavan, the president of the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar (Burma) Caucus (AIPMC), said the junta often assured that it would respect democratic values, but has constantly refused to let its opponents to participate freely in the political process.
Burma has been fallen under military boots since 1962. The regime has earned the distrustful reputation of being one of the world's worst human rights violators. It brutally suppressed pro-democracy movements in 1988, May 30, 2003, Depayin conspiracy and Saffron Revolution in Sept 2007. There were many more sporadic crackdowns. The junta has arrested over two thousands political dissidents including Suu Kyi, who has been confined to her residence for 14 of the last 20 years.
The regime held a unilateral referendum at gun point on May 10 and 24. The 2008 Constitution, the junta said, was “approved” by more than 90 percent of eligible voters during a referendum in May 2008; just a few days after Cyclone Nargis devastated the country. The outcome of the referendum was widely dismissed as a sham, but the regime has ignored calls from the international community and Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, to review the Constitution which will cause trouble upon the Burmese people.
The 2010 elections will legalize military rule. Hence the fear that the poll procedure will not be free and fair just like the referendum held at gun-point. The socio-economic scene is worsening. The junta will not be able to manage the socio-economic indicators which are falling like ninepins. It will soon come face-to-face with a "desolate" future if it continues to refuse the national reconciliation process being urged by the opposition the National League for Democracy (NLD), the United Nationalities Alliance (UNA) and the exile dissident groups.
For NLD and UNA the ratification of the constitution staged by the Junta is unacceptable. Both declare that the ratification was carried out against the will of the people and without observing internationally known norms for referendums. The junta also does not show respect to the successive resolutions adopted by the UN General Assembly (UNGA) calling for return of democratic system in Burma through a tripartite dialogue between the Junta led by Senior General Than Shwe, democratic forces led by Aung San Suu Kyi and representatives of ethnic nationalities. From turn of events it is clear that the junta has no plan to heed the UN call and to release political prisoners, which is a pre-condition to facilitate the tripartite dialogue.
Looking at ground reality, there is more belligerence in these days, more military attacks on ethnic minorities, more arrests, more political prisoners, and more restrictions on media, more control on Internet and civil societies. So, there is an urgency to continue to put pressure on the regime till the bench marks are met.
Today's question for ASEAN is whether Burma is an authoritarian or a democratic state? According to a Burmese saying, a tiger is a tiger and it never lives on grass. Then, if someone says a dictator would build a democratic country, it may be an object of ridicule.
For instance, ASEAN’s newly formed human rights watchdog, ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), according to critics, is toothless. It has no power to punish members such as Burma. Non-governmental rights organizations and London-based Amnesty International have expressed their concerns over the body, while the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said it has no clear mandate for victims of abuse.
Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum pointed out 5 of the 10 governments had rejected nominees from civil society groups for the watchdog and have replaced them with their own agents. According to Debbie, it was a big slap on the face of civil society while they were trying to engage with the ASEAN. "This situation and the gag order is an irresponsible move by ASEAN governments and it will damage the credibility of the grouping," she said.
There are still arguments for ASEAN to abandon its long standing policy of non-interference in another country's internal affairs if the affairs of a country spilled over and affected regional security. ASEAN's policy-makers have to debate on the Burma Question in the future ASEAN meetings.
ASEAN should review its policy towards Burma under the military dictatorship for the sake of the association's opportunity in favor of the whole region. The UN has also urged Asean leaders to make trustworthy the long-awaited ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), which is meant to answer claims that the grouping has fallen short on rights during its 42-year history.
Burma is likely to come under the international limelight for its continued detention of democracy figure Aung San Suu Kyi and over 2100 political prisoners. AICHR must flex its muscles as much as possible.
Tue, 2009-10-27 01:33 — editor
By Zin Linn
The 15th Asean summit held at a Thai resort town, has given room for hope that the conditions governing the detention of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi would be relaxed. Her detention figured in the talks Prime Minister Thein Sein had with the Asean leaders on the sidelines of the summit. And the summit also came out with a categorical call to the Junta to hold a free, fair, inclusive and transparent election next year.
We don’t know the reaction of Thein to the Asean demand but he must he realized that the regime cannot hope to push its envelop any further with impunity. This much becomes clear from his assurance on the detention of Aung San Suu Kyi.
Going by the official media version, he also told his interlocutors that the Nobel Peace laureate had "softened" her attitude towards the military regime since her house arrest was extended in August for a further 18 months. Interestingly, the official media was quite silent on what the Prime Minister had said if any on whether Suu Kyi would be allowed to participate in the election.
Not too long ago, when Suu Kyi was still free and was able to move around the country, she led her party to a triumphant victory in the one and only fair general election the country has witnessed. She and her party were denied the fruits of popular verdict and in fact made to face the brutalities of a regime to which popular will remains an anathema.
If she continues to remain under house arrest and political parties are barred from reaching out to the people, the next election will remain a charade. Thein Sein is not oblivious to the repercussions of such an election to the credibility and standing of the government and the constitution the Junta has drafted in a bid to perpetuate its hold on the country. Otherwise he would not have volunteered to say that soon would be announced an electoral law for next year’s planned election. He offered no further details during his meeting with the host, Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva. So it will be interesting to see how Rangoon will address these twin issues
True, the regime had made such promises in the past too but failed to honour them. Kraisak Choonhavan, the president of the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar (Burma) Caucus (AIPMC), said the junta often assured that it would respect democratic values, but has constantly refused to let its opponents to participate freely in the political process.
Burma has been fallen under military boots since 1962. The regime has earned the distrustful reputation of being one of the world's worst human rights violators. It brutally suppressed pro-democracy movements in 1988, May 30, 2003, Depayin conspiracy and Saffron Revolution in Sept 2007. There were many more sporadic crackdowns. The junta has arrested over two thousands political dissidents including Suu Kyi, who has been confined to her residence for 14 of the last 20 years.
The regime held a unilateral referendum at gun point on May 10 and 24. The 2008 Constitution, the junta said, was “approved” by more than 90 percent of eligible voters during a referendum in May 2008; just a few days after Cyclone Nargis devastated the country. The outcome of the referendum was widely dismissed as a sham, but the regime has ignored calls from the international community and Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, to review the Constitution which will cause trouble upon the Burmese people.
The 2010 elections will legalize military rule. Hence the fear that the poll procedure will not be free and fair just like the referendum held at gun-point. The socio-economic scene is worsening. The junta will not be able to manage the socio-economic indicators which are falling like ninepins. It will soon come face-to-face with a "desolate" future if it continues to refuse the national reconciliation process being urged by the opposition the National League for Democracy (NLD), the United Nationalities Alliance (UNA) and the exile dissident groups.
For NLD and UNA the ratification of the constitution staged by the Junta is unacceptable. Both declare that the ratification was carried out against the will of the people and without observing internationally known norms for referendums. The junta also does not show respect to the successive resolutions adopted by the UN General Assembly (UNGA) calling for return of democratic system in Burma through a tripartite dialogue between the Junta led by Senior General Than Shwe, democratic forces led by Aung San Suu Kyi and representatives of ethnic nationalities. From turn of events it is clear that the junta has no plan to heed the UN call and to release political prisoners, which is a pre-condition to facilitate the tripartite dialogue.
Looking at ground reality, there is more belligerence in these days, more military attacks on ethnic minorities, more arrests, more political prisoners, and more restrictions on media, more control on Internet and civil societies. So, there is an urgency to continue to put pressure on the regime till the bench marks are met.
Today's question for ASEAN is whether Burma is an authoritarian or a democratic state? According to a Burmese saying, a tiger is a tiger and it never lives on grass. Then, if someone says a dictator would build a democratic country, it may be an object of ridicule.
For instance, ASEAN’s newly formed human rights watchdog, ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), according to critics, is toothless. It has no power to punish members such as Burma. Non-governmental rights organizations and London-based Amnesty International have expressed their concerns over the body, while the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights said it has no clear mandate for victims of abuse.
Debbie Stothard of the ASEAN People's Forum pointed out 5 of the 10 governments had rejected nominees from civil society groups for the watchdog and have replaced them with their own agents. According to Debbie, it was a big slap on the face of civil society while they were trying to engage with the ASEAN. "This situation and the gag order is an irresponsible move by ASEAN governments and it will damage the credibility of the grouping," she said.
There are still arguments for ASEAN to abandon its long standing policy of non-interference in another country's internal affairs if the affairs of a country spilled over and affected regional security. ASEAN's policy-makers have to debate on the Burma Question in the future ASEAN meetings.
ASEAN should review its policy towards Burma under the military dictatorship for the sake of the association's opportunity in favor of the whole region. The UN has also urged Asean leaders to make trustworthy the long-awaited ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR), which is meant to answer claims that the grouping has fallen short on rights during its 42-year history.
Burma is likely to come under the international limelight for its continued detention of democracy figure Aung San Suu Kyi and over 2100 political prisoners. AICHR must flex its muscles as much as possible.
***********************************************************
Oct 28, 2009
Asia Times Online - As ASEAN dithers, the US circles
By Simon Roughneen
HUA HIN, Thailand - While the bland regimen of inter-governmental summits does not usually spark juxtaposition with, say, Bob Dylan, there was a mocking appropriateness to the American singer's The Times They Are A Changin' ringing through the lobby at the Hua Hin Sheraton, one of the venues for 15th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit held over the past weekend.
Times might be changing across the 10-state regional bloc [1], but whether this means lofty goals, like implementing an ASEAN community by 2015, will be realized any time soon still seems unlikely. Outgoing ASEAN chair and Thai Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, spoke of "realizing a people-centered ASEAN community", but a good post-summit press sound bite does not easily translate into a viable policy platform.
Indeed, such grandiose language risks generating false expectations of making ASEAN appear more like a nascent European Union (EU)-style body than is the case. Walter Lohman, head of the Asia section of the Heritage Foundation, a US-based conservative think-tank said, "At best, ASEAN economic integration will mean a broad lowering of trade and investment barriers."
However, even the wheels of that project are spinning in the political sands. With Thailand and the Philippines failing to cut a deal on rice trade over the weekend, a bilateral roadblock has been raised that will impede the goal of an ASEAN free-trade area by January 1, 2010.
In what was meant to be the highlight of the meeting, ASEAN inaugurated a new Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). This features a majority of government appointees, and can only promote human rights as a concept, with no enforcement mechanism to take countries to task for human-rights abuses. Government-centered, rather than people-centered, some said on the meeting's sidelines.
Such a low expected yield does not augur well for growth toward an ASEAN community. "The idea of an economic community is an ideal, and, given the implementation of other mechanisms such as the human-rights community, a goal that will not be reached in any substantive form," said Bridget Welsh of the Singapore Management University.
Some of the changes in ASEAN seem retrograde. According to the final ASEAN summit statement, the grouping "had extensive, open and fruitful discussions under the theme of 'Enhancing Connectivity, Empowering Peoples'." Yet some people were in fact disempowered at the meeting, symbolic of the millions disenfranchised across the diverse region.
A scheduled meeting between heads of government and civil society groups from across ASEAN was scuttled, as five governments - Singapore, Cambodia, Laos, the Philippines and Myanmar - refused to meet the delegates selected for the ASEAN People's Forum, a gathering of non-governmental leaders from across the region, and instead put forward government-appointed candidates.
The Myanmar representatives were said to include two former junta anti-narcotics officials, according to Myanmar human-rights activist Khin Ohn Mar, who was selected to represent her country by the ASEAN People's Forum.
Substantial differences
There are still substantial political and economic differences between ASEAN countries. Singapore is an authoritarian city-state, but one of the most modern economies in the world. Indonesia is a vast, poly-religious democracy stretched over 17,000 islands. Thailand remains politically divided and unstable, with a Muslim rebellion in its south, partly paralleled by the Philippines, whose politics remain mired in the clutches of a wealthy and connected oligarchy. Newer ASEAN members, such as Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar, are among Asia's poorest.
Such disparities go against the grain of economic integration experiences elsewhere, such as in the EU, where political and economic gaps between countries must be narrowed before a candidate country can join the club. Still, the impression given at the meeting was of an ASEAN - and an Asia - on the up and up.
After the ASEAN members held their series of meetings, the proceedings moved to include heads of government from Asia's giants: China, Japan and India, as well as Australia, New Zealand and South Korea. The ASEAN secretary general, Surin Pitsuwan, spoke in faux-diligent terms about "not disappointing the international community" by "undertaking our heavy responsibility to pull the world economy along".
China and India will both soon launch free-trade areas with ASEAN, and pan-Asian cooperation has been stepped up in areas such as currency support and infrastructure funding. On Monday, Malaysia and New Zealand signed a free-trade agreement that is hoped will increase their US$1.8 billion in bilateral trade. Under the agreement to come into effect in 2010, Malaysia will eliminate import taxes on 10,293 products by 2016. New Zealand will end import tariffs on 7,238 products imported from Malaysia by 2016.
Statements released after the summit suggested that Asia needed to boost domestic consumption and lessen export reliance on the debt-addled US and European consumer markets.
Asia Times Online - As ASEAN dithers, the US circles
By Simon Roughneen
HUA HIN, Thailand - While the bland regimen of inter-governmental summits does not usually spark juxtaposition with, say, Bob Dylan, there was a mocking appropriateness to the American singer's The Times They Are A Changin' ringing through the lobby at the Hua Hin Sheraton, one of the venues for 15th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit held over the past weekend.
Times might be changing across the 10-state regional bloc [1], but whether this means lofty goals, like implementing an ASEAN community by 2015, will be realized any time soon still seems unlikely. Outgoing ASEAN chair and Thai Prime Minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, spoke of "realizing a people-centered ASEAN community", but a good post-summit press sound bite does not easily translate into a viable policy platform.
Indeed, such grandiose language risks generating false expectations of making ASEAN appear more like a nascent European Union (EU)-style body than is the case. Walter Lohman, head of the Asia section of the Heritage Foundation, a US-based conservative think-tank said, "At best, ASEAN economic integration will mean a broad lowering of trade and investment barriers."
However, even the wheels of that project are spinning in the political sands. With Thailand and the Philippines failing to cut a deal on rice trade over the weekend, a bilateral roadblock has been raised that will impede the goal of an ASEAN free-trade area by January 1, 2010.
In what was meant to be the highlight of the meeting, ASEAN inaugurated a new Inter-governmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). This features a majority of government appointees, and can only promote human rights as a concept, with no enforcement mechanism to take countries to task for human-rights abuses. Government-centered, rather than people-centered, some said on the meeting's sidelines.
Such a low expected yield does not augur well for growth toward an ASEAN community. "The idea of an economic community is an ideal, and, given the implementation of other mechanisms such as the human-rights community, a goal that will not be reached in any substantive form," said Bridget Welsh of the Singapore Management University.
Some of the changes in ASEAN seem retrograde. According to the final ASEAN summit statement, the grouping "had extensive, open and fruitful discussions under the theme of 'Enhancing Connectivity, Empowering Peoples'." Yet some people were in fact disempowered at the meeting, symbolic of the millions disenfranchised across the diverse region.
A scheduled meeting between heads of government and civil society groups from across ASEAN was scuttled, as five governments - Singapore, Cambodia, Laos, the Philippines and Myanmar - refused to meet the delegates selected for the ASEAN People's Forum, a gathering of non-governmental leaders from across the region, and instead put forward government-appointed candidates.
The Myanmar representatives were said to include two former junta anti-narcotics officials, according to Myanmar human-rights activist Khin Ohn Mar, who was selected to represent her country by the ASEAN People's Forum.
Substantial differences
There are still substantial political and economic differences between ASEAN countries. Singapore is an authoritarian city-state, but one of the most modern economies in the world. Indonesia is a vast, poly-religious democracy stretched over 17,000 islands. Thailand remains politically divided and unstable, with a Muslim rebellion in its south, partly paralleled by the Philippines, whose politics remain mired in the clutches of a wealthy and connected oligarchy. Newer ASEAN members, such as Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar, are among Asia's poorest.
Such disparities go against the grain of economic integration experiences elsewhere, such as in the EU, where political and economic gaps between countries must be narrowed before a candidate country can join the club. Still, the impression given at the meeting was of an ASEAN - and an Asia - on the up and up.
After the ASEAN members held their series of meetings, the proceedings moved to include heads of government from Asia's giants: China, Japan and India, as well as Australia, New Zealand and South Korea. The ASEAN secretary general, Surin Pitsuwan, spoke in faux-diligent terms about "not disappointing the international community" by "undertaking our heavy responsibility to pull the world economy along".
China and India will both soon launch free-trade areas with ASEAN, and pan-Asian cooperation has been stepped up in areas such as currency support and infrastructure funding. On Monday, Malaysia and New Zealand signed a free-trade agreement that is hoped will increase their US$1.8 billion in bilateral trade. Under the agreement to come into effect in 2010, Malaysia will eliminate import taxes on 10,293 products by 2016. New Zealand will end import tariffs on 7,238 products imported from Malaysia by 2016.
Statements released after the summit suggested that Asia needed to boost domestic consumption and lessen export reliance on the debt-addled US and European consumer markets.
In July, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the US was "back" in Southeast Asia. Despite his statements suggesting that East Asia "should lead the world", Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama wants the US involved in his East Asia Community (EAC) brainchild, perhaps after realizing that his leadership claims might be taken as something of a challenge in Washington. He might also have broached the idea to needle China, which has its own ideas on how to take Asian economic development forward.
In any case, his about-turn might be a more realistic assessment of the numbers - despite the debt-laden US economy. Arpitha Bykere is senior Asia analyst at Roubini Global Economics - which is run by Nouriel Roubini, the "Dr Doom" who predicted the 2008 economic crisis. Bykere said that Asia would remain economically dependent on the US for at least five to 10 years. "In 2008, US and EU consumption amounted to US$19 trillion, while Asian consumption was less than US$5 trillion."
The first US-ASEAN summit will take place in Singapore in November, the same week that Obama meets his Chinese counterpart, President Hu Jintao. While economic issues will doubtless dominate the agenda, both meetings should give a good indication of international policy towards military-run Myanmar going forward.
Rights abuses
As ever, Myanmar was a key ASEAN summit issue - at least to those watching from the outside. Aside from the Japanese Foreign Ministry, whose spokesperson gave a fairly detailed account of what Myanmar Prime Minister General Thein Sein told the ASEAN/Japan summit, there was scant official comment on Myanmar. The country, known also as Burma, received a mere two-line mention in the final ASEAN chair's statement.
This despite pro-democracy Aung San Suu Kyi being sentenced to an extra 18 months house arrest on August 11 for breaking the terms of her previous incarceration for hosting an unregistered American guest who swam, apparently unannounced and undetected by junta security, across the lake to Suu Kyi's Yangon home.
The sentencing at the time prompted a relatively strong statement from the Thai premier, in his role as ASEAN chair, when he asked that the sentence be revoked. Only two months has passed, Suu Kyi is still in detention, and many at the meeting questioned the official reticence on the issue.
Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya told the media at the summit that "there has been some progress recently, with Suu Kyi's letter to Myanmar President General Than Shwe followed by two meetings with a junta representative, and another meeting between Suu Kyi and foreign diplomats".
Yet she is still under house arrest and more than 2,000 political prisoners remain in jail. Myanmar's flawed 2008 constitution will be the bedrock for elections slated for 2010, leaving the military in command, irrespective of what result the elections throw up. Meanwhile, the eastern borderlands are tense, as the junta and ethnic militias gear up for a potentially-devastating new round of civil conflict, all in the name of the Myanmar regime centralizing control ahead of the elections.
This has the potential to send new legions of refugees into Thailand, China and perhaps elsewhere in the region, and could perhaps undermine current and future investment plans by Southeast Asian and other states in Myanmar, which remains under Western investment sanctions.
Despite the obvious threat to regional security posed by Myanmar, and the rhetorical assent promoting democracy and human rights in the ASEAN charter, old-school "non-interference" in the internal affairs of other countries is clearly still standard operating procedure in the grouping.
Thai premier Abhisit, for one, seemed resigned to the prospect of renewed fighting in Myanmar. When questioned on this topic by reporters after his meeting with Thein Sein, he said, "Thailand stands ready to do its humanitarian duty, as always," when the inevitable flight of refugees from Myanmar enters Thai territory.
It thus appears that ASEAN has regressed to its old habits on Myanmar, perhaps in part due to the new US policy which will combine engagement through talks with continued sanctions. Abhisit told the media at the summit that "we always felt that engagement is the right approach" - even though the US and the EU retain sanctions on the Myanmar junta over its abysmal rights record.
ASEAN let Thein Sein off the hook at the meeting, and appears to be coasting on the back of a misinterpreted US policy shift. "How can the new US approach vindicate ASEAN when ASEAN's engagement, whatever you call it - constructive, flexible or forward - has proven to be ineffective?" asked Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a visiting fellow at the Institute for Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore.
Despite the reality that the US has not changed its policy on Myanmar, the message is getting blurred. There may be an impact on Southeast Asia, beyond Myanmar, where despite summit pledges to connect ASEAN peoples and promote human rights, the reality remains disconnected. That's seen in authorities in Vietnam jailing reporters and clamping down on religious minorities.
Cambodia is implementing restrictive new press laws, and Malaysia continues to use a draconian colonial-era Internal Security Act when it wishes to restrict political protest and freedom of expression. A spokesman for the US Embassy in Bangkok told Asia Times Online that the US "supports the establishment of the AICHR, and welcomes the new focus on human rights in ASEAN" - despite the new commission's circumscribed mandate.
With US regional influence in the balance, if not on the wane, it is unclear how the Obama administration can or will leverage its Asia policy. The November Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation and ASEAN meetings should reveal whether the US will base its Asia policy on getting its own economic house in order.
This could mean putting political issues on the back burner, as per Obama's recent refusal to meet the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, for fear of offending a China that is becoming increasingly intertwined with the US economy and its future sustainability. But Obama's inchoate approach to foreign policy in the region is starting to stoke criticism.
"The Obama administration has failed to effectively signal that it genuinely cares about human rights in Asia," said academic Welsh.
Note
1. ASEAN comprises Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia. Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.
Simon Roughneen is a roving freelance journalist. He has reported from over 20 countries and is currently based in Southeast Asia.
In any case, his about-turn might be a more realistic assessment of the numbers - despite the debt-laden US economy. Arpitha Bykere is senior Asia analyst at Roubini Global Economics - which is run by Nouriel Roubini, the "Dr Doom" who predicted the 2008 economic crisis. Bykere said that Asia would remain economically dependent on the US for at least five to 10 years. "In 2008, US and EU consumption amounted to US$19 trillion, while Asian consumption was less than US$5 trillion."
The first US-ASEAN summit will take place in Singapore in November, the same week that Obama meets his Chinese counterpart, President Hu Jintao. While economic issues will doubtless dominate the agenda, both meetings should give a good indication of international policy towards military-run Myanmar going forward.
Rights abuses
As ever, Myanmar was a key ASEAN summit issue - at least to those watching from the outside. Aside from the Japanese Foreign Ministry, whose spokesperson gave a fairly detailed account of what Myanmar Prime Minister General Thein Sein told the ASEAN/Japan summit, there was scant official comment on Myanmar. The country, known also as Burma, received a mere two-line mention in the final ASEAN chair's statement.
This despite pro-democracy Aung San Suu Kyi being sentenced to an extra 18 months house arrest on August 11 for breaking the terms of her previous incarceration for hosting an unregistered American guest who swam, apparently unannounced and undetected by junta security, across the lake to Suu Kyi's Yangon home.
The sentencing at the time prompted a relatively strong statement from the Thai premier, in his role as ASEAN chair, when he asked that the sentence be revoked. Only two months has passed, Suu Kyi is still in detention, and many at the meeting questioned the official reticence on the issue.
Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya told the media at the summit that "there has been some progress recently, with Suu Kyi's letter to Myanmar President General Than Shwe followed by two meetings with a junta representative, and another meeting between Suu Kyi and foreign diplomats".
Yet she is still under house arrest and more than 2,000 political prisoners remain in jail. Myanmar's flawed 2008 constitution will be the bedrock for elections slated for 2010, leaving the military in command, irrespective of what result the elections throw up. Meanwhile, the eastern borderlands are tense, as the junta and ethnic militias gear up for a potentially-devastating new round of civil conflict, all in the name of the Myanmar regime centralizing control ahead of the elections.
This has the potential to send new legions of refugees into Thailand, China and perhaps elsewhere in the region, and could perhaps undermine current and future investment plans by Southeast Asian and other states in Myanmar, which remains under Western investment sanctions.
Despite the obvious threat to regional security posed by Myanmar, and the rhetorical assent promoting democracy and human rights in the ASEAN charter, old-school "non-interference" in the internal affairs of other countries is clearly still standard operating procedure in the grouping.
Thai premier Abhisit, for one, seemed resigned to the prospect of renewed fighting in Myanmar. When questioned on this topic by reporters after his meeting with Thein Sein, he said, "Thailand stands ready to do its humanitarian duty, as always," when the inevitable flight of refugees from Myanmar enters Thai territory.
It thus appears that ASEAN has regressed to its old habits on Myanmar, perhaps in part due to the new US policy which will combine engagement through talks with continued sanctions. Abhisit told the media at the summit that "we always felt that engagement is the right approach" - even though the US and the EU retain sanctions on the Myanmar junta over its abysmal rights record.
ASEAN let Thein Sein off the hook at the meeting, and appears to be coasting on the back of a misinterpreted US policy shift. "How can the new US approach vindicate ASEAN when ASEAN's engagement, whatever you call it - constructive, flexible or forward - has proven to be ineffective?" asked Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a visiting fellow at the Institute for Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore.
Despite the reality that the US has not changed its policy on Myanmar, the message is getting blurred. There may be an impact on Southeast Asia, beyond Myanmar, where despite summit pledges to connect ASEAN peoples and promote human rights, the reality remains disconnected. That's seen in authorities in Vietnam jailing reporters and clamping down on religious minorities.
Cambodia is implementing restrictive new press laws, and Malaysia continues to use a draconian colonial-era Internal Security Act when it wishes to restrict political protest and freedom of expression. A spokesman for the US Embassy in Bangkok told Asia Times Online that the US "supports the establishment of the AICHR, and welcomes the new focus on human rights in ASEAN" - despite the new commission's circumscribed mandate.
With US regional influence in the balance, if not on the wane, it is unclear how the Obama administration can or will leverage its Asia policy. The November Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation and ASEAN meetings should reveal whether the US will base its Asia policy on getting its own economic house in order.
This could mean putting political issues on the back burner, as per Obama's recent refusal to meet the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, for fear of offending a China that is becoming increasingly intertwined with the US economy and its future sustainability. But Obama's inchoate approach to foreign policy in the region is starting to stoke criticism.
"The Obama administration has failed to effectively signal that it genuinely cares about human rights in Asia," said academic Welsh.
Note
1. ASEAN comprises Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia. Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.
Simon Roughneen is a roving freelance journalist. He has reported from over 20 countries and is currently based in Southeast Asia.
***********************************************************
Over 3,000 students sit for IELTS exam in Myanmar this year
www.chinaview.cn 2009-10-27 11:22:05
YANGON, Oct. 27 (Xinhua) -- Over 3,000 students sat for the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) examination held in Myanmar for the 2009-10 exam year, sources with the Yangon-based British Council said on Tuesday.
As the IELTS exam marks are recognized by universities in the United States, the number of candidates increased year by year from 1,097 in 2005-06, 1,380 in 2006-07, 1,400 in 2007-08 and 2,600 in 2008-09, the sources said, adding that nowadays the number of candidates sitting for exam for pursuing further study in Australia with the majors of medical doctor and nurse stood the majority.
Among the candidates, over 1,200 were qualified for studying in Singapore, over 960 for Australia, 360 for England and 60 for America during this year, it said.
IELTS, sponsored by the Cambridge University, International Education and Development Program and British Council, charged 145U.S. dollars for the exam fees.
The IELTS exam is used to be held at the British Council in Yangon every year but now the new exam center went to the second largest city of Mandalay this month, it added.
Over the past decade, most Myanmar students sought further study abroad for advanced education and the move has become widespread among youths in the country.
Among the Myanmar students who study abroad, over 50 percent are from Yangon, 30 percent from Mandalay and 15 percent from other parts of the country, education officials said.
The students pursuing education in foreign countries range from20 to 30 years of age, taking up 50 percent of the youths in the country, followed by those between 16 and 20, under 16 and 30 above. Of them, ordinary graduates stand the majority.
www.chinaview.cn 2009-10-27 11:22:05
YANGON, Oct. 27 (Xinhua) -- Over 3,000 students sat for the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) examination held in Myanmar for the 2009-10 exam year, sources with the Yangon-based British Council said on Tuesday.
As the IELTS exam marks are recognized by universities in the United States, the number of candidates increased year by year from 1,097 in 2005-06, 1,380 in 2006-07, 1,400 in 2007-08 and 2,600 in 2008-09, the sources said, adding that nowadays the number of candidates sitting for exam for pursuing further study in Australia with the majors of medical doctor and nurse stood the majority.
Among the candidates, over 1,200 were qualified for studying in Singapore, over 960 for Australia, 360 for England and 60 for America during this year, it said.
IELTS, sponsored by the Cambridge University, International Education and Development Program and British Council, charged 145U.S. dollars for the exam fees.
The IELTS exam is used to be held at the British Council in Yangon every year but now the new exam center went to the second largest city of Mandalay this month, it added.
Over the past decade, most Myanmar students sought further study abroad for advanced education and the move has become widespread among youths in the country.
Among the Myanmar students who study abroad, over 50 percent are from Yangon, 30 percent from Mandalay and 15 percent from other parts of the country, education officials said.
The students pursuing education in foreign countries range from20 to 30 years of age, taking up 50 percent of the youths in the country, followed by those between 16 and 20, under 16 and 30 above. Of them, ordinary graduates stand the majority.
***********************************************************
Myanmar, China to jointly shoot film featuring human trafficking
www.chinaview.cn 2009-10-27 10:44:53
YANGON, Oct. 27 (Xinhua) -- Film directors of Myanmar and China will cooperate in shooting an educative film featuring a story of human trafficking across border, sources with the Myanmar Motion Picture Enterprise (MMPE) said on Tuesday.
The film, "The Road to Hell", is based on a story in which the mother rescued her son and daughter from human traffickers to whom they were sold by her second husband.
Their roles will be played by Myanmar and Chinese actors and actresses, the sources said, adding that the movie will be shot in the border areas of the two countries as well as Thailand.
Myanmar is making efforts to promote the standard of the country's video features and movie production for penetrating foreign markets in cooperation with foreign countries and through attending foreign film festivals.
Earlier this month, a Myanmar film delegation comprising director, actors and actresses took part in the 18th China Golden Rooster and Hundred Flowers Film Festival held in Nanchang, Jiangxi province, in which two Myanmar movies -- "Piece of String" and "Myaw Lint Chin Myar Swar" (Much Expectation) were screened.
In 2007, Myanmar also took part in another Chinese film festival in Suzhou with the film "Hexagon ".
For the development of TV and movie sector, Myanmar sent delegations in the past few years to international radio, movie and TV shows, Beijing Film Festival and 16th Chinese Golden Rooster Film Festival as well as to China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and Singapore to learn the digital camera technology and to India to study the TV broadcasting.
www.chinaview.cn 2009-10-27 10:44:53
YANGON, Oct. 27 (Xinhua) -- Film directors of Myanmar and China will cooperate in shooting an educative film featuring a story of human trafficking across border, sources with the Myanmar Motion Picture Enterprise (MMPE) said on Tuesday.
The film, "The Road to Hell", is based on a story in which the mother rescued her son and daughter from human traffickers to whom they were sold by her second husband.
Their roles will be played by Myanmar and Chinese actors and actresses, the sources said, adding that the movie will be shot in the border areas of the two countries as well as Thailand.
Myanmar is making efforts to promote the standard of the country's video features and movie production for penetrating foreign markets in cooperation with foreign countries and through attending foreign film festivals.
Earlier this month, a Myanmar film delegation comprising director, actors and actresses took part in the 18th China Golden Rooster and Hundred Flowers Film Festival held in Nanchang, Jiangxi province, in which two Myanmar movies -- "Piece of String" and "Myaw Lint Chin Myar Swar" (Much Expectation) were screened.
In 2007, Myanmar also took part in another Chinese film festival in Suzhou with the film "Hexagon ".
For the development of TV and movie sector, Myanmar sent delegations in the past few years to international radio, movie and TV shows, Beijing Film Festival and 16th Chinese Golden Rooster Film Festival as well as to China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and Singapore to learn the digital camera technology and to India to study the TV broadcasting.
***********************************************************
MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
Press Releases:TROIKA OF THE COMMUNITY OF DEMOCRACIES APPEALS TO BURMA/MYANMAR TO END HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES
2009-10-27
On 26 October in Washington, the Troika (Portugal, Lithuania and Mongolia) of the Community of Democracies, which is currently chaired by Lithuania, issued a statement expressing grave concern about the development of the trial of the opposition leader of Burma/Myanmar Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and appealed to the ruling regime of Burma/Myanmar to end gross human rights abuses in the country.
In the statement, the Troika of the Community of Democracies urges the regime of Burma/Myanmar to immediately release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners, to initiate a political dialogue with the democratic opposition of Burma/Myanmar and representatives of ethnic minorities leading to national reconciliation, democratic reforms and free and transparent general election.
In 1990 in Burma/Myanmar, the general election was organised for the first time in 30 years. The election was won by the National League for Democracy, the leader of which is Aung San Suu Kyi. She was arrested and has spent 14 years out of the past 20 under house arrest.
On 11 August 2009, the Burma/Myanmar court sentenced the leader of the opposition Aung San Suu Kyi to additional 18 months of house arrest for allegedly violating the terms of her house arrest, when in May 2009 the military of Burma/Myanmar arrested a U.S. citizen near the home of Aung San Suu Kyi. It is believed that the junta has used the incident before the election that is scheduled in 2010 to once again prolong the term of the house arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi. The term had to end this year.
In 1991, Aung San Suu Kyi won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Since 1962, Burma/Myanmar has been ruled by the military regime. The country suffers from big corruption, poverty and human rights abuses. Since 1996, the European Union has applied sanctions against the military regime in Burma/Myanmar.
Established in 1999, the Community of Democracies is an intergovernmental structure. Democracies and developing democracies take part in its activities. The goal of this organisation is to strengthen and deepen democracy worldwide. The Community of Democracies is based on the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Convening Group of the Community of Democracies is comprised of 17 members: Cape Verde, Chile, the Czech Republic, India, Italy, Lithuania, Mali, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Salvador, South Africa, South Korea and the U.S.A.
Press Releases:TROIKA OF THE COMMUNITY OF DEMOCRACIES APPEALS TO BURMA/MYANMAR TO END HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES
2009-10-27
On 26 October in Washington, the Troika (Portugal, Lithuania and Mongolia) of the Community of Democracies, which is currently chaired by Lithuania, issued a statement expressing grave concern about the development of the trial of the opposition leader of Burma/Myanmar Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and appealed to the ruling regime of Burma/Myanmar to end gross human rights abuses in the country.
In the statement, the Troika of the Community of Democracies urges the regime of Burma/Myanmar to immediately release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners, to initiate a political dialogue with the democratic opposition of Burma/Myanmar and representatives of ethnic minorities leading to national reconciliation, democratic reforms and free and transparent general election.
In 1990 in Burma/Myanmar, the general election was organised for the first time in 30 years. The election was won by the National League for Democracy, the leader of which is Aung San Suu Kyi. She was arrested and has spent 14 years out of the past 20 under house arrest.
On 11 August 2009, the Burma/Myanmar court sentenced the leader of the opposition Aung San Suu Kyi to additional 18 months of house arrest for allegedly violating the terms of her house arrest, when in May 2009 the military of Burma/Myanmar arrested a U.S. citizen near the home of Aung San Suu Kyi. It is believed that the junta has used the incident before the election that is scheduled in 2010 to once again prolong the term of the house arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi. The term had to end this year.
In 1991, Aung San Suu Kyi won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Since 1962, Burma/Myanmar has been ruled by the military regime. The country suffers from big corruption, poverty and human rights abuses. Since 1996, the European Union has applied sanctions against the military regime in Burma/Myanmar.
Established in 1999, the Community of Democracies is an intergovernmental structure. Democracies and developing democracies take part in its activities. The goal of this organisation is to strengthen and deepen democracy worldwide. The Community of Democracies is based on the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Convening Group of the Community of Democracies is comprised of 17 members: Cape Verde, Chile, the Czech Republic, India, Italy, Lithuania, Mali, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Salvador, South Africa, South Korea and the U.S.A.
***********************************************************
The Age - Wives ignore party divide to support Suu Kyi
BRENDAN NICHOLSON AND PETER HAWKINS
October 28, 2009
TWO of Australia's most influential women have made a powerful protest against the Burmese junta's treatment of detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Therese Rein, wife of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, and Lucy Turnbull, wife of Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull, were among hundreds who turned out on the Sydney Opera House steps at the ''Stand for Freedom'' protest yesterday.
The presence of Ms Rein marks her most significant foray into a highly contentious international issue, and is a marked contrast to the low profile role adopted by her predecessor, Janette Howard.
It is certain to annoy Burmese officials.
Ms Rein said Ms Suu Kyi was a truly courageous woman and an inspiration to all women in Australia and around the world.
''The Australian people, and the women of Australia in particular, want to send a message today to Aung San Suu Kyi and to the people of Burma on whose behalf she continues to sacrifice her own freedom.
''We wish to convey our great admiration for you and our strong support for your struggle,'' she said. ''You provide an inspiration to young women in Australia and around the world.''
Six years ago, Lucy Turnbull, then lord mayor of Sydney, awarded the keys of the city to Ms Suu Kyi.
Members of Australia's Burmese community accepted the keys on her behalf.
''I don't think anyone at the key ceremony six years ago could have imagined that Aung San would be still under house arrest today,'' Ms Turnbull said.
The rally was organised by human rights activist, Labor MP and friend of Ms Suu Kyi, Janelle Saffin, who said she was inspired by the turnout.
Ms Saffin said she was encouraged to see such a strong response to Ms Suu Kyi's call to the world's democracies to ''please use your liberty to help ours''.
''Our message to Suu Kyi and the Burmese is simple,'' she said. ''We stand behind you, beside you, in front of you, and in times of trouble we will keep you in our hearts and minds.''
On the Opera House steps, and holding a large portrait of Ms Suu Kyi, was Daw Khinpyone, from Baulkham Hills in Sydney's north-west.
Ms Khinpyone spent nearly four years in jail in Burma during the 1960s. She remembers the time spent in prison while she was pregnant and then as a young mother still breast-feeding her child. ''That's not strange - everybody suffers there,'' she said.
''We are fighting for democracy and need to support our people in Burma who suffer a lot. But, our community is so happy after today and wants to say thank you.''
Australian, British and American diplomats met Ms Suu Kyi in Burma on October 9, their first substantive contact since 2003. Ms Suu Kyi sought the meeting to obtain information about the three countries' sanctions policies.
A spokeswoman for Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said the meeting was a significant step by both Ms Suu Kyi and the Burmese authorities.
BRENDAN NICHOLSON AND PETER HAWKINS
October 28, 2009
TWO of Australia's most influential women have made a powerful protest against the Burmese junta's treatment of detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Therese Rein, wife of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, and Lucy Turnbull, wife of Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull, were among hundreds who turned out on the Sydney Opera House steps at the ''Stand for Freedom'' protest yesterday.
The presence of Ms Rein marks her most significant foray into a highly contentious international issue, and is a marked contrast to the low profile role adopted by her predecessor, Janette Howard.
It is certain to annoy Burmese officials.
Ms Rein said Ms Suu Kyi was a truly courageous woman and an inspiration to all women in Australia and around the world.
''The Australian people, and the women of Australia in particular, want to send a message today to Aung San Suu Kyi and to the people of Burma on whose behalf she continues to sacrifice her own freedom.
''We wish to convey our great admiration for you and our strong support for your struggle,'' she said. ''You provide an inspiration to young women in Australia and around the world.''
Six years ago, Lucy Turnbull, then lord mayor of Sydney, awarded the keys of the city to Ms Suu Kyi.
Members of Australia's Burmese community accepted the keys on her behalf.
''I don't think anyone at the key ceremony six years ago could have imagined that Aung San would be still under house arrest today,'' Ms Turnbull said.
The rally was organised by human rights activist, Labor MP and friend of Ms Suu Kyi, Janelle Saffin, who said she was inspired by the turnout.
Ms Saffin said she was encouraged to see such a strong response to Ms Suu Kyi's call to the world's democracies to ''please use your liberty to help ours''.
''Our message to Suu Kyi and the Burmese is simple,'' she said. ''We stand behind you, beside you, in front of you, and in times of trouble we will keep you in our hearts and minds.''
On the Opera House steps, and holding a large portrait of Ms Suu Kyi, was Daw Khinpyone, from Baulkham Hills in Sydney's north-west.
Ms Khinpyone spent nearly four years in jail in Burma during the 1960s. She remembers the time spent in prison while she was pregnant and then as a young mother still breast-feeding her child. ''That's not strange - everybody suffers there,'' she said.
''We are fighting for democracy and need to support our people in Burma who suffer a lot. But, our community is so happy after today and wants to say thank you.''
Australian, British and American diplomats met Ms Suu Kyi in Burma on October 9, their first substantive contact since 2003. Ms Suu Kyi sought the meeting to obtain information about the three countries' sanctions policies.
A spokeswoman for Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said the meeting was a significant step by both Ms Suu Kyi and the Burmese authorities.
***********************************************************
TMCnet - Myanmar to upgrade state-run TV-4
YANGON, Oct 27, 2009 (Xinhua via COMTEX) -- Myanmar will upgrade the broadcasting frequency system of the state-run Myanmar Radio and Television (MRTV)-4 channel from Ultra High Frequency (UHF) to Very High Frequency (VHF) starting March next year, sources with the Myanmar Online Co.Ltd said on Tuesday.
According to the company's statistics, a total of 12 million audiences view the channel.
MRTV-4, which includes paid channels and free-to-air one, have been aired from over 30 relay stations with the use of digital and analog systems to cover Yangon, Mandalay, Nay Pyi Taw and its nearby areas.
The MRTV-4, which was originally a paid channel and jointly implemented by the state-run MRTV in Yangon and the private-run Forever Group, started partly free-to-air telecast in Dec. 2006 and later extended to other regions in the country.
The free-of-charge programs of the MRTV channel mainly comprise entertainment, documentaries, Sunday talks and so on, and the eight-hour programs was aired three times to meet 24-hour run, according to the Forever Group.
The MRTV, established 60 years ago, is carrying out heavy functions and is striving to air quality radio and TV programs across the country, extending functions to link countrywide network by converting analogue system into digital one, and expanding coverage to other countries.
The MRTV has launched four channels including Myanmar and English languages to telecast news, education and entertainment programs since color television was introduced in the country in 1980.
Meanwhile, the military-run Myawaddy TV, which is next to MRTV, started telecasting in March 1995 and has morning and evening services at present. It plans to introduce a 24-hour service in the country to cater to the demand of domestic watchers.
In cooperation with China Central Television (CCTV), Cable Networks News (CNN) and the Japan Broadcasting Corporation (NHK), there is satellite news available with the MRTV.
YANGON, Oct 27, 2009 (Xinhua via COMTEX) -- Myanmar will upgrade the broadcasting frequency system of the state-run Myanmar Radio and Television (MRTV)-4 channel from Ultra High Frequency (UHF) to Very High Frequency (VHF) starting March next year, sources with the Myanmar Online Co.Ltd said on Tuesday.
According to the company's statistics, a total of 12 million audiences view the channel.
MRTV-4, which includes paid channels and free-to-air one, have been aired from over 30 relay stations with the use of digital and analog systems to cover Yangon, Mandalay, Nay Pyi Taw and its nearby areas.
The MRTV-4, which was originally a paid channel and jointly implemented by the state-run MRTV in Yangon and the private-run Forever Group, started partly free-to-air telecast in Dec. 2006 and later extended to other regions in the country.
The free-of-charge programs of the MRTV channel mainly comprise entertainment, documentaries, Sunday talks and so on, and the eight-hour programs was aired three times to meet 24-hour run, according to the Forever Group.
The MRTV, established 60 years ago, is carrying out heavy functions and is striving to air quality radio and TV programs across the country, extending functions to link countrywide network by converting analogue system into digital one, and expanding coverage to other countries.
The MRTV has launched four channels including Myanmar and English languages to telecast news, education and entertainment programs since color television was introduced in the country in 1980.
Meanwhile, the military-run Myawaddy TV, which is next to MRTV, started telecasting in March 1995 and has morning and evening services at present. It plans to introduce a 24-hour service in the country to cater to the demand of domestic watchers.
In cooperation with China Central Television (CCTV), Cable Networks News (CNN) and the Japan Broadcasting Corporation (NHK), there is satellite news available with the MRTV.
***********************************************************
Scoop - Activists Urge Halt of Shwe Pipeline Project
Tuesday, 27 October 2009, 9:51 am
Article: Nava Thakuria
The Shwe Gas Movement, an oil and gas watchdog, along with a number of well wisher and supporters are officially going to urge the Chinese government to suspend the Shwe Gas and Oil Pipeline Project in Burma (Myanmar).
The Burmese organization has already initiated for gathering endorsements for an open letter to the President of People’s Republic of China to be submitted on October 28 through their embassies in different countries. The proposed natural gas and oil pipeline project is understood to start in the western Burmese province Arakan and to run through the country for nearly thousand kms and finally to reach the Yunnan Province of China.
The exile Burmese have initiated for the Global Day of Action on the particular date and will send the letter to the President Hu Jintao through the Chinese embassies in different countries like India, Bangladesh, Thailand, South Korea, Japan etc. Mentionable that the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) holds a 50.9% stake in partnership with the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) in dual oil and gas pipelines planned from the Arakan State to Yunnan Province. M. Kim of the Shwe Gas Movement, while speaking to this writer from New Delhi, argued that the project would invite serious threats to the people of Burma. It would also pose risks for the regional security, diplomacy and financial aspects to both Burma and China.
Therefore we demand to suspend the project to prevent a human and environmental disaster from taking place, he added. “We are gravely concerned for the thousands communities living along the planned 980 km pipeline corridor. Based on experiences in Burma, partnerships with the MOGE on infra-structure development projects invariably leads to forced displacement, forced labour and loss of livelihoods.
The escalation of abuses around a project when Burma army soldiers provide security is well documented by UN agencies and NGOs,” said in the letter addressing the Chinese president.
It may be mentioned that a number of international corporations are engaged in the petroleum production activities in Burma including Daewoo International (South Korea, 51% of shares in Shwe Gas Consortium), Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC Videsh, India, 17% of shares in Shwe Gas Consortium), Gas Authority of India Limited (GAIL India, 8.5% of shares in Shwe Gas Consortium), The China National Petroleum Corporation (purchaser of the gas and builder of pipelines), PetroChina Company Ltd etc.
“In the 1990s, the Yadana gas project was developed by TOTAL of France and UNOCAL Corporation of the United States of America. The project directly resulted in forced labour, land confiscation, displacement, rape, and killings. TOTAL and UNOCAL were subsequently sued in French and US courts, respectively, for what amounted to their involvement in the human rights abuses, and each case was settled out of court.
These same questions of complicity, aiding and abetting, and otherwise exacerbating the human rights situation in Burma are raised again by the Trans-Burma pipeline project and directed at CNPC under your government’s policy and administration,” added in the letter. “Conflicts have already surfaced in Burma, in response to oil and gas exploration by a Chinese corporation in partnership with Burma’s MOGE.
The China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) Ltd conducted explorations in western Burma’s onshore block M between 2005-2007, which led to land confiscation, environmental degradation and loss of livelihoods. The local community were neither consulted nor informed of the project,” claimed in the letter. It has also cautioned that this oil and gas pipeline project would, if it goes ahead, create a conjuncture in which on one hand Chinese corporations and the partnering Burma army operating on the ground will be responsible for rights abuses and uprooting livelihoods and on the other hand exporting vast amounts of oil and gas to China while the electricity consumption per capita in Burma is less than 5% of the Chinese people. This is a dangerous combination which could further fuel serious conflicts and anti-Chinese sentiment in Burma.
The letter of course admitted, “We understand and support the fact that China has increasing energy needs in order to support the development of your country and its people.
However, we believe that in order to nurture a relationship based on regional stability and development, that would benefit the people of both the countries, an urgent measure is definitely required.”
Tuesday, 27 October 2009, 9:51 am
Article: Nava Thakuria
The Shwe Gas Movement, an oil and gas watchdog, along with a number of well wisher and supporters are officially going to urge the Chinese government to suspend the Shwe Gas and Oil Pipeline Project in Burma (Myanmar).
The Burmese organization has already initiated for gathering endorsements for an open letter to the President of People’s Republic of China to be submitted on October 28 through their embassies in different countries. The proposed natural gas and oil pipeline project is understood to start in the western Burmese province Arakan and to run through the country for nearly thousand kms and finally to reach the Yunnan Province of China.
The exile Burmese have initiated for the Global Day of Action on the particular date and will send the letter to the President Hu Jintao through the Chinese embassies in different countries like India, Bangladesh, Thailand, South Korea, Japan etc. Mentionable that the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) holds a 50.9% stake in partnership with the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) in dual oil and gas pipelines planned from the Arakan State to Yunnan Province. M. Kim of the Shwe Gas Movement, while speaking to this writer from New Delhi, argued that the project would invite serious threats to the people of Burma. It would also pose risks for the regional security, diplomacy and financial aspects to both Burma and China.
Therefore we demand to suspend the project to prevent a human and environmental disaster from taking place, he added. “We are gravely concerned for the thousands communities living along the planned 980 km pipeline corridor. Based on experiences in Burma, partnerships with the MOGE on infra-structure development projects invariably leads to forced displacement, forced labour and loss of livelihoods.
The escalation of abuses around a project when Burma army soldiers provide security is well documented by UN agencies and NGOs,” said in the letter addressing the Chinese president.
It may be mentioned that a number of international corporations are engaged in the petroleum production activities in Burma including Daewoo International (South Korea, 51% of shares in Shwe Gas Consortium), Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC Videsh, India, 17% of shares in Shwe Gas Consortium), Gas Authority of India Limited (GAIL India, 8.5% of shares in Shwe Gas Consortium), The China National Petroleum Corporation (purchaser of the gas and builder of pipelines), PetroChina Company Ltd etc.
“In the 1990s, the Yadana gas project was developed by TOTAL of France and UNOCAL Corporation of the United States of America. The project directly resulted in forced labour, land confiscation, displacement, rape, and killings. TOTAL and UNOCAL were subsequently sued in French and US courts, respectively, for what amounted to their involvement in the human rights abuses, and each case was settled out of court.
These same questions of complicity, aiding and abetting, and otherwise exacerbating the human rights situation in Burma are raised again by the Trans-Burma pipeline project and directed at CNPC under your government’s policy and administration,” added in the letter. “Conflicts have already surfaced in Burma, in response to oil and gas exploration by a Chinese corporation in partnership with Burma’s MOGE.
The China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) Ltd conducted explorations in western Burma’s onshore block M between 2005-2007, which led to land confiscation, environmental degradation and loss of livelihoods. The local community were neither consulted nor informed of the project,” claimed in the letter. It has also cautioned that this oil and gas pipeline project would, if it goes ahead, create a conjuncture in which on one hand Chinese corporations and the partnering Burma army operating on the ground will be responsible for rights abuses and uprooting livelihoods and on the other hand exporting vast amounts of oil and gas to China while the electricity consumption per capita in Burma is less than 5% of the Chinese people. This is a dangerous combination which could further fuel serious conflicts and anti-Chinese sentiment in Burma.
The letter of course admitted, “We understand and support the fact that China has increasing energy needs in order to support the development of your country and its people.
However, we believe that in order to nurture a relationship based on regional stability and development, that would benefit the people of both the countries, an urgent measure is definitely required.”
***********************************************************
Bangkok Post - Opinion: POST BAG Asean, the hypocrite
Published: 27/10/2009 at 12:00 AM
Newspaper section: News
Agence France Presse (AFP) has issued a news report entitled ''Asean makes mockery of rights body'' which criticised the hypocrisy and cowardice of the leaders of the region when it comes to substantive and procedural human rights issues involving its member states, especially Burma.
The other day the Asean leaders, in a summit meeting, bragged before the world mass media that Asean would someday be like the European Union in content, structure, vision, and aspirations.
That dream is a big joke and is more like a press-release beautification effort to sanitise the poor human rights image of the region and its top leaders.
I still have to wait and see how the Asean Human Rights Commission will turn out in terms of structure, composition, operations, transparency, accountability, moral courage and commitment to the enforcement of the universal precepts of human rights in the region.
I will need at least five years to do that. The commission must be strictly monitored by the world, especially the human rights advocates and lawyers in the Southeast Asian region.
At any rate, the AFP report stated Asean leaders barely mentioned Burma's democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi at its weekend summit, making a mockery of the region's grand claims for its new rights body.
Leaders of the 10 states comprising Asean, including Burma, devoted just three lines to the military-ruled nation's political situation in the nine pages of their final declaration.
While the statement called for elections promised by the junta in 2010 to be fair, free, inclusive and transparent, it made no mention of the opposition leader, who has been detained under house arrest for 14 of the past 20 years.
The summit at Cha-am and Hua Hin opened with the inauguration of Asean's first human rights body, hailed by members as historic but derided by activists, given the lack of action on Burma.
The problem with Asean is that it is prevented from applying any real pressure on the military regime in Burma because of the association's long-standing policy of non-interference in member's internal affairs, which Burma's ruling generals led by Gen Than Shwe have abused for a long time now.
The United States seems to have caved in, too, because it now wants to re-engage the isolated regime after decades of hostility, thus, reducing the pressure on Asean to push for reform in Burma.
We the people of Asean must be frank and stop fooling each other.
Asean states, especially the Philippines, have been reluctant to admonish Burma because they themselves face their own human rights issues.
These include extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture during custodial investigations, prolonged preventive detentions without judicial interventions, localised genocide and failure to prosecute abusive and corrupt military and police officers and the political, drug, and gambling lords who fund them.
That is the long and short of the story.
MANUEL J LASERNA JR
Las Pinas City, Philippines
Published: 27/10/2009 at 12:00 AM
Newspaper section: News
Agence France Presse (AFP) has issued a news report entitled ''Asean makes mockery of rights body'' which criticised the hypocrisy and cowardice of the leaders of the region when it comes to substantive and procedural human rights issues involving its member states, especially Burma.
The other day the Asean leaders, in a summit meeting, bragged before the world mass media that Asean would someday be like the European Union in content, structure, vision, and aspirations.
That dream is a big joke and is more like a press-release beautification effort to sanitise the poor human rights image of the region and its top leaders.
I still have to wait and see how the Asean Human Rights Commission will turn out in terms of structure, composition, operations, transparency, accountability, moral courage and commitment to the enforcement of the universal precepts of human rights in the region.
I will need at least five years to do that. The commission must be strictly monitored by the world, especially the human rights advocates and lawyers in the Southeast Asian region.
At any rate, the AFP report stated Asean leaders barely mentioned Burma's democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi at its weekend summit, making a mockery of the region's grand claims for its new rights body.
Leaders of the 10 states comprising Asean, including Burma, devoted just three lines to the military-ruled nation's political situation in the nine pages of their final declaration.
While the statement called for elections promised by the junta in 2010 to be fair, free, inclusive and transparent, it made no mention of the opposition leader, who has been detained under house arrest for 14 of the past 20 years.
The summit at Cha-am and Hua Hin opened with the inauguration of Asean's first human rights body, hailed by members as historic but derided by activists, given the lack of action on Burma.
The problem with Asean is that it is prevented from applying any real pressure on the military regime in Burma because of the association's long-standing policy of non-interference in member's internal affairs, which Burma's ruling generals led by Gen Than Shwe have abused for a long time now.
The United States seems to have caved in, too, because it now wants to re-engage the isolated regime after decades of hostility, thus, reducing the pressure on Asean to push for reform in Burma.
We the people of Asean must be frank and stop fooling each other.
Asean states, especially the Philippines, have been reluctant to admonish Burma because they themselves face their own human rights issues.
These include extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances, torture during custodial investigations, prolonged preventive detentions without judicial interventions, localised genocide and failure to prosecute abusive and corrupt military and police officers and the political, drug, and gambling lords who fund them.
That is the long and short of the story.
MANUEL J LASERNA JR
Las Pinas City, Philippines
***********************************************************
The Irrawaddy - Playing the Suu Kyi Card
By WAI MOE - Tuesday, October 27, 2009
At last week’s meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) at the resort town of Cha-am in Thailand, Burmese Prime Minister Gen Thein Sein told heads of state that Burma’s pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi has a role to play in the country’s reconciliation process. He did not, however, provide details or clarify exactly what role he was referring to.
However, Win Tin, a prominent leader within Suu Kyi’s opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) party, has claimed that Thein Sein’s comment could be intended to defuse tensions with the United States ahead of the Asean- US summit in Singapore next month.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy on Tuesday, he said, “I think this is a kind of political game that the Burmese premier is playing with regard to Suu Kyi. At the moment, I do not see any genuine political will toward the reconciliation process in Burma.
“Reconciliation is more than just a word or a concept. It must be practiced at the dialogue table,” he added.
The Asean-US summit will be held in Singapore on Nov. 15, coinciding with the annual leaders' meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC). US President Barack Obama will meet with Thein Sein during the summit, the first meeting between the two.
US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia Kurt Campbell is also scheduled to visit Burma in the coming weeks. He may meet with Suu Kyi and some ethnic leaders, as well as government officials such as U Thaung, the minister of Science and Technology and former Burmese ambassador to Washington, who Campbell met in New York in September.
Whether Campbell will meet with junta strongman Snr-Gen Than Shwe is unclear, according to diplomatic sources.
Commenting on Campbell’s trip, Win Tin said he hoped Campbell would be more proactive toward democracy in Burma than UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, whose trip to Burma in July was widely labeled a failure.
“Mr Campbell will be different from Mr Ban Ki-moon,” Win Tin said. “During his visit, Mr Ban Ki-moon met representatives of 10 political parties and gave us just two minutes each to explain the political situation in the country—it was very disappointing.”
Suu Kyi has repeatedly requested the junta for an audience with members of her party’s central executive committee, including Win Tin, but to date her requests have gone answered.
After the conclusion of its Burma policy review, the Obama administration said that it will follow a policy of direct engagement with Burma while it retained sanctions against the junta.
The chairman at the 15th Asean summit in Cha-am on Sunday said the regional leaders welcomed the US’s engagement policy.
“The US’ engagement with Burma is very different from Asean’s,” said Larry Jagan, a British journalist who specializes in Burma issues. “The US’ Burma policy goes with engagement and sanctions.
“The US’ engagement is very sensible. We can call it ‘sensible engagement,’” he said, adding that Asean has lost momentum in dealing with Burma since it allowed the military regime membership in 1997.
During the summit, Thein Sein and his foreign minister, ex Maj-Gen Nyan Win, briefed Asean representatives on the political situation in Burma, including the 2010 election and Suu Kyi’s meetings with the junta’s liaison officer, ex Maj-Gen Aung Kyi, and Western diplomats.
Burmese officials even hinted during a meeting with Japanese delegates that Suu Kyi could be released before her current 18-month term of house arrest expires if she “maintains a good attitude.”
Unlike previous meetings in Thailand throughout 2009, at the 15th Asean Summit, Abhisit and Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya responded briefly to a few questions concerning Suu Kyi at press conferences.
However, the Asean chairman dropped a previous call for the release of political prisoners, including Suu Kyi, in his statements during the summit and related meetings.
“This is disappointing,” said Win Tin. “It showed Asean cannot do anything for the Burmese people. It seems Asean’s engagement with Burma is just for business interests.”
By WAI MOE - Tuesday, October 27, 2009
At last week’s meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) at the resort town of Cha-am in Thailand, Burmese Prime Minister Gen Thein Sein told heads of state that Burma’s pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi has a role to play in the country’s reconciliation process. He did not, however, provide details or clarify exactly what role he was referring to.
However, Win Tin, a prominent leader within Suu Kyi’s opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) party, has claimed that Thein Sein’s comment could be intended to defuse tensions with the United States ahead of the Asean- US summit in Singapore next month.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy on Tuesday, he said, “I think this is a kind of political game that the Burmese premier is playing with regard to Suu Kyi. At the moment, I do not see any genuine political will toward the reconciliation process in Burma.
“Reconciliation is more than just a word or a concept. It must be practiced at the dialogue table,” he added.
The Asean-US summit will be held in Singapore on Nov. 15, coinciding with the annual leaders' meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC). US President Barack Obama will meet with Thein Sein during the summit, the first meeting between the two.
US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia Kurt Campbell is also scheduled to visit Burma in the coming weeks. He may meet with Suu Kyi and some ethnic leaders, as well as government officials such as U Thaung, the minister of Science and Technology and former Burmese ambassador to Washington, who Campbell met in New York in September.
Whether Campbell will meet with junta strongman Snr-Gen Than Shwe is unclear, according to diplomatic sources.
Commenting on Campbell’s trip, Win Tin said he hoped Campbell would be more proactive toward democracy in Burma than UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, whose trip to Burma in July was widely labeled a failure.
“Mr Campbell will be different from Mr Ban Ki-moon,” Win Tin said. “During his visit, Mr Ban Ki-moon met representatives of 10 political parties and gave us just two minutes each to explain the political situation in the country—it was very disappointing.”
Suu Kyi has repeatedly requested the junta for an audience with members of her party’s central executive committee, including Win Tin, but to date her requests have gone answered.
After the conclusion of its Burma policy review, the Obama administration said that it will follow a policy of direct engagement with Burma while it retained sanctions against the junta.
The chairman at the 15th Asean summit in Cha-am on Sunday said the regional leaders welcomed the US’s engagement policy.
“The US’ engagement with Burma is very different from Asean’s,” said Larry Jagan, a British journalist who specializes in Burma issues. “The US’ Burma policy goes with engagement and sanctions.
“The US’ engagement is very sensible. We can call it ‘sensible engagement,’” he said, adding that Asean has lost momentum in dealing with Burma since it allowed the military regime membership in 1997.
During the summit, Thein Sein and his foreign minister, ex Maj-Gen Nyan Win, briefed Asean representatives on the political situation in Burma, including the 2010 election and Suu Kyi’s meetings with the junta’s liaison officer, ex Maj-Gen Aung Kyi, and Western diplomats.
Burmese officials even hinted during a meeting with Japanese delegates that Suu Kyi could be released before her current 18-month term of house arrest expires if she “maintains a good attitude.”
Unlike previous meetings in Thailand throughout 2009, at the 15th Asean Summit, Abhisit and Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya responded briefly to a few questions concerning Suu Kyi at press conferences.
However, the Asean chairman dropped a previous call for the release of political prisoners, including Suu Kyi, in his statements during the summit and related meetings.
“This is disappointing,” said Win Tin. “It showed Asean cannot do anything for the Burmese people. It seems Asean’s engagement with Burma is just for business interests.”
***********************************************************
The Irrawaddy - The 'Burmese Way' to a 'Disciplined Flourishing Democracy'
By KAY LATT - Monday, October 26, 2009
Many people assume that the Constitution approved in Burma in 2008 adopted a standard presidential system. But the type of presidential system used in the Constitution is unique to Burma and differs from other presidential systems used around the world.
According to the Constitution, there will be one president and two vice presidents, all of whom will be elected by three groups that make up the Electoral College. The president is not directly elected by popular vote as in many presidential systems.
There are, generally, three governmental systems in the world: the parliamentary system, the presidential system and the semi-presidential system, or hybrid system. The form of cabinet and system for separation of powers among executive and legislative bodies varies among countries.
In a parliamentary system, the executive body is created in the parliament. If a party wins a majority in the parliament, it is allowed to form a government. If no party wins a majority, the various parties must bargain to form a government. So long as a government can maintain the confidence of the majority in the parliament, it may rule.
In this system, the head of state does not have broad executive powers. According to the 1947 Burmese Constitution, the president was the head of state but only a ceremonial figurehead, whereas the prime minister as the head of government and had full executive powers. In some instances, the president may have limited executive powers.
Countries that use the parliamentary system include the United Kingdom (UK), many countries in Europe, as well as many former British colonies in Africa. Israel, Japan and former British colonies in Asia, such as Malaysia and India, also use this system.
In the presidential system, executive and legislative powers are separate. Presidents serve as the head of government and are directly elected by popular votes. Presidents usually choose the members of a cabinet (or ministers) at their pleasure and cabinet members do not necessarily need to be members of parliament. Normally, the parliament cannot dismiss the president by a vote of no confidence. The president assumes the role of head of state as well.
Countries which use the presidential system include the United States and some countries in Latin America. The Philippines, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Iran, South Korea and Sri Lanka also use this system.
There is also a hybrid system called the “semi-presidential system” or “presidential-parliamentary system.” If the constitution favors the powers of the president, it is termed a “semi-presidential system.” If the legislative branch is given more power, it is called a “semi-parliamentary system.” In that system, both the president and a prime minister share executive powers. In most cases, presidents appoint the prime minister although prime ministers may or may not be a member of the president's political party.
The French government uses a semi-presidential system. In France, the president nominates the prime minister and selects the members of the cabinet. The president usually takes care of foreign affairs, leaving the power to run the country’s internal affairs to the prime minister. Other countries that use this model are former French colonies in West Africa such as Cote D’Ivoire, Gabon, Mali and Senegal and some eastern European countries such as Poland and Bulgaria.
In most presidential or semi-presidential systems, the president is directly elected by popular vote, but in some countries, the legislature elects the president and the prime minister.
In South Africa, the National Assembly elects the president who becomes both head of state and head of government. The parliament of South Africa consists of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces. Four hundred seats are elected by a popular vote for the National Assembly and 90 seats, 10 from each province, are elected to the National Council of Provinces.
The leader of the political party or coalition of parties that wins a majority of seats in the National Assembly becomes president. The president and the members of government who are also members of parliament are responsible to the parliament.
The system adopted in the 2008 Constitution of Burma is not a genuine presidential system as it does not match the characteristics of the presidential system like that of the United States or the semi-presidential system like that of France.
According to the 2008 Constitution, the president will be elected by three groups that make up the Presidential Electoral College.
The first group consists of elected members of the Pyithu Hluttaw (People's House), excluding representatives from the military; the second group is made up of elected members of the Amyotha Hluttaw (House of Nationalities); the third group is formed by representatives nominated by the commander-in-chief of the military from the two Hluttaws (houses).
Each group will elect a vice president from among the Hluttaw members or among persons who are not Hluttaw members. Then the Presidential Electoral College made up of all members of the two Hluttaws, including the military representatives, will elect the president from one of the three vice presidents.
The president serves as both head of state and head of government and will name the members of government (ministers). The president has broad powers although he or she is not elected by popular vote. This type of system uses a new way of choosing the president and is unique to Burma.
Under this system, a political party which wins a majority in the Pyithu Hluttaw may not be able to form a government. Although there are 440 seats in the Pyithu Hluttaw, 110 are reserved for representatives to be selected by the commander-in-chief.
A party must have its vice presidential candidate elected in the Presidential Electoral College. Only if a party’s vice president candidate is elected president in the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (the two combined houses), will it be able to form a government.
Once the president and vice presidents are elected, if they are members of parliament, they must resign from the Hluttaw. Also, they must relinquish their political parties' activities. They cannot be dismissed by a no-confidence vote. Presidents or vice presidents can be replaced only according to the impeachment proceedings in the Constitution.
Many observers see the new Constitution as installing a “Burmese way” to the junta’s idea of a “disciplined flourishing democracy.” After the 2010 elections, the elected representatives will form the first parliament and a new government will take shape.
Then the question will be how effectively can it govern and serve the interests of the people?
By KAY LATT - Monday, October 26, 2009
Many people assume that the Constitution approved in Burma in 2008 adopted a standard presidential system. But the type of presidential system used in the Constitution is unique to Burma and differs from other presidential systems used around the world.
According to the Constitution, there will be one president and two vice presidents, all of whom will be elected by three groups that make up the Electoral College. The president is not directly elected by popular vote as in many presidential systems.
There are, generally, three governmental systems in the world: the parliamentary system, the presidential system and the semi-presidential system, or hybrid system. The form of cabinet and system for separation of powers among executive and legislative bodies varies among countries.
In a parliamentary system, the executive body is created in the parliament. If a party wins a majority in the parliament, it is allowed to form a government. If no party wins a majority, the various parties must bargain to form a government. So long as a government can maintain the confidence of the majority in the parliament, it may rule.
In this system, the head of state does not have broad executive powers. According to the 1947 Burmese Constitution, the president was the head of state but only a ceremonial figurehead, whereas the prime minister as the head of government and had full executive powers. In some instances, the president may have limited executive powers.
Countries that use the parliamentary system include the United Kingdom (UK), many countries in Europe, as well as many former British colonies in Africa. Israel, Japan and former British colonies in Asia, such as Malaysia and India, also use this system.
In the presidential system, executive and legislative powers are separate. Presidents serve as the head of government and are directly elected by popular votes. Presidents usually choose the members of a cabinet (or ministers) at their pleasure and cabinet members do not necessarily need to be members of parliament. Normally, the parliament cannot dismiss the president by a vote of no confidence. The president assumes the role of head of state as well.
Countries which use the presidential system include the United States and some countries in Latin America. The Philippines, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Iran, South Korea and Sri Lanka also use this system.
There is also a hybrid system called the “semi-presidential system” or “presidential-parliamentary system.” If the constitution favors the powers of the president, it is termed a “semi-presidential system.” If the legislative branch is given more power, it is called a “semi-parliamentary system.” In that system, both the president and a prime minister share executive powers. In most cases, presidents appoint the prime minister although prime ministers may or may not be a member of the president's political party.
The French government uses a semi-presidential system. In France, the president nominates the prime minister and selects the members of the cabinet. The president usually takes care of foreign affairs, leaving the power to run the country’s internal affairs to the prime minister. Other countries that use this model are former French colonies in West Africa such as Cote D’Ivoire, Gabon, Mali and Senegal and some eastern European countries such as Poland and Bulgaria.
In most presidential or semi-presidential systems, the president is directly elected by popular vote, but in some countries, the legislature elects the president and the prime minister.
In South Africa, the National Assembly elects the president who becomes both head of state and head of government. The parliament of South Africa consists of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces. Four hundred seats are elected by a popular vote for the National Assembly and 90 seats, 10 from each province, are elected to the National Council of Provinces.
The leader of the political party or coalition of parties that wins a majority of seats in the National Assembly becomes president. The president and the members of government who are also members of parliament are responsible to the parliament.
The system adopted in the 2008 Constitution of Burma is not a genuine presidential system as it does not match the characteristics of the presidential system like that of the United States or the semi-presidential system like that of France.
According to the 2008 Constitution, the president will be elected by three groups that make up the Presidential Electoral College.
The first group consists of elected members of the Pyithu Hluttaw (People's House), excluding representatives from the military; the second group is made up of elected members of the Amyotha Hluttaw (House of Nationalities); the third group is formed by representatives nominated by the commander-in-chief of the military from the two Hluttaws (houses).
Each group will elect a vice president from among the Hluttaw members or among persons who are not Hluttaw members. Then the Presidential Electoral College made up of all members of the two Hluttaws, including the military representatives, will elect the president from one of the three vice presidents.
The president serves as both head of state and head of government and will name the members of government (ministers). The president has broad powers although he or she is not elected by popular vote. This type of system uses a new way of choosing the president and is unique to Burma.
Under this system, a political party which wins a majority in the Pyithu Hluttaw may not be able to form a government. Although there are 440 seats in the Pyithu Hluttaw, 110 are reserved for representatives to be selected by the commander-in-chief.
A party must have its vice presidential candidate elected in the Presidential Electoral College. Only if a party’s vice president candidate is elected president in the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (the two combined houses), will it be able to form a government.
Once the president and vice presidents are elected, if they are members of parliament, they must resign from the Hluttaw. Also, they must relinquish their political parties' activities. They cannot be dismissed by a no-confidence vote. Presidents or vice presidents can be replaced only according to the impeachment proceedings in the Constitution.
Many observers see the new Constitution as installing a “Burmese way” to the junta’s idea of a “disciplined flourishing democracy.” After the 2010 elections, the elected representatives will form the first parliament and a new government will take shape.
Then the question will be how effectively can it govern and serve the interests of the people?
***********************************************************
The Irrawaddy - Burmese Dissidents, Activists Unhappy with Hun Sen
By SAW YAN NAING - Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Many Burmese are unhappy with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen’s recent comment comparing ousted Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra to detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Hun Sen made the remark during a meeting of the 15th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) Summit in Cha-am, Thailand, suggesting that the billionaire businessman who became one of Thailand’s most popular politicians before his ouster in a 2006 coup was—like Suu Kyi—a victim of political persecution.
At the summit meeting, Hun Sen said that Thaksin, who is in self-imposed exile, was welcome to live in Cambodia, and he would not be extradited, if requested by Thailand.
Win Tin, a senior member of the Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, said he was upset over Hun Sen’s comparison.
“There is no reason to compare Thaksin and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi,” he said.
“As a prime minister, Hun Sen must know that these two persons are different.”
Debbie Stothard, the coordinator of the Alternative Asean Network on Burma, said, “It’s a terrible joke to compare Thaksin Shinawatra to Suu Kyi.”
A Burmese university student at Ramkhamhaeng University in Bangkok, Kyaw Linn Oo, said Hun Sen may have meant that both Thaksin and Suu Kyi were very popular and received widespread political support.
However, he said Suu Kyi has sacrificed for democracy, and she was not comparable to Thaksin, who went into exile after he was convicted of corruption following the coup.
Suu Kyi has spent 14 of the past 20 years in detention. While in office, Thaksin was widely criticized for his “War against Drugs,” in which thousands of people died in extra-judicial killings.
Kaung Kin, a Burmese poet and a student in Bangkok, said Hun Sen’s remark was a big mistake.
“Daw Suu [Suu Kyi] is a freedom fighter,” he said. “Thaksin was charged with corruption. Daw Suu is nonviolent. Supporters of Thaksin are violent.”
By SAW YAN NAING - Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Many Burmese are unhappy with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen’s recent comment comparing ousted Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra to detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Hun Sen made the remark during a meeting of the 15th Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) Summit in Cha-am, Thailand, suggesting that the billionaire businessman who became one of Thailand’s most popular politicians before his ouster in a 2006 coup was—like Suu Kyi—a victim of political persecution.
At the summit meeting, Hun Sen said that Thaksin, who is in self-imposed exile, was welcome to live in Cambodia, and he would not be extradited, if requested by Thailand.
Win Tin, a senior member of the Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, said he was upset over Hun Sen’s comparison.
“There is no reason to compare Thaksin and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi,” he said.
“As a prime minister, Hun Sen must know that these two persons are different.”
Debbie Stothard, the coordinator of the Alternative Asean Network on Burma, said, “It’s a terrible joke to compare Thaksin Shinawatra to Suu Kyi.”
A Burmese university student at Ramkhamhaeng University in Bangkok, Kyaw Linn Oo, said Hun Sen may have meant that both Thaksin and Suu Kyi were very popular and received widespread political support.
However, he said Suu Kyi has sacrificed for democracy, and she was not comparable to Thaksin, who went into exile after he was convicted of corruption following the coup.
Suu Kyi has spent 14 of the past 20 years in detention. While in office, Thaksin was widely criticized for his “War against Drugs,” in which thousands of people died in extra-judicial killings.
Kaung Kin, a Burmese poet and a student in Bangkok, said Hun Sen’s remark was a big mistake.
“Daw Suu [Suu Kyi] is a freedom fighter,” he said. “Thaksin was charged with corruption. Daw Suu is nonviolent. Supporters of Thaksin are violent.”
***********************************************************
Thai security forces raid KNU leaders’ homes in Mae Sot
by Salai Pi Pi
Tuesday, 27 October 2009 21:11
New Delhi (Mizzima) – Surprise raids were carried out by Thai security forces on Tuesday on the homes of several top ranking leaders of the Karen National Union (KNU), an ethnic armed rebel group, in Thailand’s Mae Sot, opposite Burma’s Myawaddy town.
At around 6 a.m. on Tuesday, members of the Thai police and the army raided the residence of KNU leaders including Chairman Saw Tamala Baw and Vice-chairman David Thackerbaw in Mae Sot, according to Naw Zipporah Sein, General Secretary of the KNU.
However, she said she was unaware of the details as she was not at home during the raid.
Nan Phaw Gay, editor of the Mae Sot-based Karen Information Centre, meanwhile, said, “Relatives of KNU members told us that Thai authorities came to their homes and conducted the raid.”
“It was possibly to search for weapons suspected to be in the possession of the KNU members,” she said, adding that she was unaware of any arrest.
But David Thaw KNU committee member told Mizzima that the raid might be connected with the recent regional summit in the Thai beach resort town of Hua Hin during the weekend.
“Thein Sein [Burmese Prime Minister] seemed to have pressed the Thai government during the recent ASEAN summit not to allow any opposition to take shelter on Thai soil,” said David Taw.
During the 15th Association of Southeast Asian Nations Summit, Thein Sein told his Thai counterpart that Burma will not allow any Thai dissidents to use Burmese territory as bases to attack the kingdom.
by Salai Pi Pi
Tuesday, 27 October 2009 21:11
New Delhi (Mizzima) – Surprise raids were carried out by Thai security forces on Tuesday on the homes of several top ranking leaders of the Karen National Union (KNU), an ethnic armed rebel group, in Thailand’s Mae Sot, opposite Burma’s Myawaddy town.
At around 6 a.m. on Tuesday, members of the Thai police and the army raided the residence of KNU leaders including Chairman Saw Tamala Baw and Vice-chairman David Thackerbaw in Mae Sot, according to Naw Zipporah Sein, General Secretary of the KNU.
However, she said she was unaware of the details as she was not at home during the raid.
Nan Phaw Gay, editor of the Mae Sot-based Karen Information Centre, meanwhile, said, “Relatives of KNU members told us that Thai authorities came to their homes and conducted the raid.”
“It was possibly to search for weapons suspected to be in the possession of the KNU members,” she said, adding that she was unaware of any arrest.
But David Thaw KNU committee member told Mizzima that the raid might be connected with the recent regional summit in the Thai beach resort town of Hua Hin during the weekend.
“Thein Sein [Burmese Prime Minister] seemed to have pressed the Thai government during the recent ASEAN summit not to allow any opposition to take shelter on Thai soil,” said David Taw.
During the 15th Association of Southeast Asian Nations Summit, Thein Sein told his Thai counterpart that Burma will not allow any Thai dissidents to use Burmese territory as bases to attack the kingdom.
***********************************************************
Photos released of murdered Japanese journalist
Oct 27, 2009 (DVB)–Images of the post-mortem examination on the body of a Japanese journalist shot dead by Burmese police during the September 2007 protests have been released for the first time.
Accompanied by the images obtained by DVB of the body of Kenji Nagai, who worked for Tokyo’s APF news agency, are photographs of the possessions he carried when he died. Separate footage captured by DVB reporters filming the demonstrations appears to show Nagai carrying a camera that has not been included in the exhibit of his possessions.
A letter sent in November 2007 by Japanese activists to Burma’s ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) protesting the shooting had demanded that the camera and videotape be returned to Nagai’s family “without any modifications to the recorded material”. The family has since received all of his belongings apart from the camera and videotape.
Subsequent footage released on Japanese television showed a government soldier taking the camera. A wristwatch that Nagai was wearing when he died is also missing from the exhibit photograph.
Nagai was killed by a single bullet-wound to the chest as he filmed monks and civilians protesting on the streets of Rangoon, in what has now come to be known as the Saffron Revolution.
The Japanese prime minister at the time described the killing as “extremely unfortunate”, while the government’s chief cabinet secretary demanded an investigation into the incident.
Relations between the two countries temporarily soured after the shooting, with Japan halting aid to Burma. This was resumed however following cyclone Nargis in May 2008.
Nagai was the only foreigner to have been killed during protests which lasted for eight days before the government launched a brutal crackdown, killing scores of monks and students in the process.
Up to 50,000 people are thought to have been involved in the demonstrations which erupted after the government hiked up fuel prices overnight, in some cases to five times their original price.
Since his death, an award has been created in Nagai’s name to honour reporters documenting human rights abuses in Burma.
The first recipient of the award was Eint Khaing Oo, a female journalist who was imprisoned after reporting on cyclone Nargis. She has since been released.
The Times quoted an associate of Nagai’s who said the 50-year-old was “relentless” in his pursuit of stories. He had previously documented conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Cambodia and Palestine.
Reporting by Francis Wade
Oct 27, 2009 (DVB)–Images of the post-mortem examination on the body of a Japanese journalist shot dead by Burmese police during the September 2007 protests have been released for the first time.
Accompanied by the images obtained by DVB of the body of Kenji Nagai, who worked for Tokyo’s APF news agency, are photographs of the possessions he carried when he died. Separate footage captured by DVB reporters filming the demonstrations appears to show Nagai carrying a camera that has not been included in the exhibit of his possessions.
A letter sent in November 2007 by Japanese activists to Burma’s ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) protesting the shooting had demanded that the camera and videotape be returned to Nagai’s family “without any modifications to the recorded material”. The family has since received all of his belongings apart from the camera and videotape.
Subsequent footage released on Japanese television showed a government soldier taking the camera. A wristwatch that Nagai was wearing when he died is also missing from the exhibit photograph.
Nagai was killed by a single bullet-wound to the chest as he filmed monks and civilians protesting on the streets of Rangoon, in what has now come to be known as the Saffron Revolution.
The Japanese prime minister at the time described the killing as “extremely unfortunate”, while the government’s chief cabinet secretary demanded an investigation into the incident.
Relations between the two countries temporarily soured after the shooting, with Japan halting aid to Burma. This was resumed however following cyclone Nargis in May 2008.
Nagai was the only foreigner to have been killed during protests which lasted for eight days before the government launched a brutal crackdown, killing scores of monks and students in the process.
Up to 50,000 people are thought to have been involved in the demonstrations which erupted after the government hiked up fuel prices overnight, in some cases to five times their original price.
Since his death, an award has been created in Nagai’s name to honour reporters documenting human rights abuses in Burma.
The first recipient of the award was Eint Khaing Oo, a female journalist who was imprisoned after reporting on cyclone Nargis. She has since been released.
The Times quoted an associate of Nagai’s who said the 50-year-old was “relentless” in his pursuit of stories. He had previously documented conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Cambodia and Palestine.
Reporting by Francis Wade
***********************************************************
Sweden scrutinizes US policy to BurmaOct 27, 2009 (DVB)–Burmese activists and aid workers took center stage at the Swedish parliament yesterday for a discussion forum aimed scrutinising US policy to Burma.
Sweden holds the current presidency of the European Union, which last week pledged €35 million ($US52m) in aid to Burma.
The pledge coincided with a visit to Burma by Sweden’s ambassador to Thailand, Lennart Linner, billed as a “fact-finding mission”.
Former Burmese UNICEF worker, Dr Khin Zaw Win, told DVB that the US was following in the footsteps of the EU in promoting engagement with Burma’s military rulers.
“The general opinion is that the isolation method isn’t working,” he said. “The majority looks forward to participating in the upcoming elections one way or another.”
He added that with the shift in US policy, “questions loom as to what the UN is going to do” regarding Burma.
Although the EU expanded its sanctions on Burma following the sentencing of Aung San Suu Kyi in August, it is said to be exploring various avenues for greater dialogue with the junta prior to elections scheduled for next year.
Dr Salai Lian Hmung, from the Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC), said that “rather than seeing a continuation of the military dictatorship, we would like to see a change”.
“We regard the 2010 election as a way to reach out for change and have already issued a statement saying we will not disagree with or denounce any democracy or ethnic groups entering the elections,” he said.
“We can’t expect the United States to remove sanctions at once; it can only be done through step by step negotiations.
“The more important thing is that we need to point out the lies told by the [Burmese government] who said that sanctions are only hurting the people.”
The EU aid will go via the new Livelihoods and Food Security Trust (LIFT) fund, which is then set to channel the money through various non-governmental organizations. EU policy dictates that aid cannot go straight to the Burmese government.
No comments:
Post a Comment