The Daily Beast - The Next Nuclear Nightmare
Philip Shenon – Wed Apr 14, 7:55 am ET
NEW YORK – As Obama calls for reduced nukes, a surprising new rogue state looms. Philip Shenon reports U.S. spy agencies fear Burma is trying to buy nuclear weapons technology from North Korea.
Even as President Obama won agreement from world leaders this week to block the spread of nuclear weapons, the United States is facing a new—and unexpected—nuclear foe: Burma.
National-security officials tell The Daily Beast that U.S. spy agencies and their Asian counterparts have stepped up surveillance of potential nuclear sites in Burma in recent weeks in light of evidence that suggests the country’s brutal junta is trying to buy nuclear-weapons technology from North Korea.
“Burma can become the second hermit kingdom in Asia with nuclear weapons, able to deflect any outside threat,” says one senior American diplomat.
Intelligence officials fear the paranoid, iron-fisted generals who run Burma see a nuclear program—and ultimately, a nuclear bomb—as a way of securing their hold on power forever. There can be little doubting their will to dominate the political stage; the nation’s leading dissident, Nobel Prize- winning pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, has been under house arrest for most of the last 20 years.
“The Burmese have a model in North Korea,” said a senior American diplomat. “Burma can become the second hermit kingdom in Asia with nuclear weapons, able to deflect any outside threat.”
He added: “Unfortunately for us, Burma has the hard currency to buy what Pyongyang is selling—it may be rubies for atoms.”
While most of Burma’s 50 million people live in shocking poverty, the country is rich in natural resources; the junta earns hundreds of millions of dollars a year from the sale of natural gas, hardwood and the fabled Burmese rubies cherished by the global gem dealers.
Although it denies interest in a nuclear weapon, Burma does not hide all of its nuclear ambitions. In 2007, it signed an agreement with Russia for the construction of a small nuclear reactor on Burmese soil.
• Nukes Guru Sam Nunn Backs Obama• Joseph Cirincione: Will Obama End the Nuclear Era?
A new study by the Institute for Science and International Security, a respected Washington think tank, described Burma as a “nuclear wannabe” and said there were “sound reasons to suspect that the military regime in Burma might be pursuing a long-term strategy to make nuclear weapons”—with North Korea’s help.
The study noted that the military government in Burma, one of the most economically and technologically backward nations in Southeast Asia, had recently attempted to purchase sophisticated industrial equipment that could be converted to use in a nuclear program.
Last June, Japanese authorities announced that they had broken up a criminal smuggling ring that was attempting to export a high-tech magnetometer to Burma via Malaysia.
The purchase of the device, which can be used to make gas-centrifuges for processing uranium, was organized through a trading company long affiliated with the North Korean government.
That same month, American warships forced a North Korean cargo ship bound for Burma to return home. U.S. officials suggested that ship was carrying weapons that had been sold to the Burmese military in violation of a United Nations embargo.
David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq who was an author of the recent study, told The Daily Beast that he saw disturbing parallels between North Korea’s cooperation with Burma and Pyongyang’s recent activities in Syria.
In 2007, Israeli warplanes destroyed an underground facility in Syria that, according to American intelligence officials, was being built secretly by North Korea to manufacture and store nuclear weapons.
“What happened in Syria tells us that we have to take the situation in Burma seriously,” Albright said. “We can’t turn a blind eye to this.”
In 2007, Burma and North Korean restored diplomatic and military relations after a 24-year break.
The growing ties between the two countries have alarmed Burma’s neighbors. India, which shares a 1,600-mile border with Burma to its east, already faces nuclear-armed neighbors to its west, in Pakistan, and to its north, in China.
The alliance between the Burmese and North Koreans brings together two of the world’s most isolated, repressive and,—some would say—loony governments.
Like their North Korean counterparts, Burmese leaders operate out of an acute fear of threats from the outside world, especially from the United States. The repressiveness of the Burmese junta is overlaid with mysticism that can often border on the bizarre.
The junta’s top leader, General Than Shwe, is known to make few important decisions without consulting astrologists and numerologists; his mentor, former prime minister Ne Win, liked to dress is royal gowns and is reported to have bathed in dolphins’ blood on the advice of soothsayers who promised it would keep him young.
David Steinberg, a Burma specialist at Georgetown University who is director of Asian studies at the university’s School of Foreign Policy, said he was not surprised by the Burmese junta might want an nuclear program given its paranoia about the United States.
He said that for Burma’s leaders, like their North Korean counterparts, there was a “palpable fear” of an invasion by the United States military. “I think it’s crazy, of course, but they think it’s possible,” he said.
Professor Steinberg suggested the Burmese might seek nuclear warheads that could be mounted on short-range ballistic missiles aimed at American military bases in neighboring Thailand, creating a nuclear umbrella against American attack. “They may feel that it’s the only way to protect themselves,” he said of the Burmese generals.
That Burma would resume any sort of diplomatic and military relations with North Korea may signal the Burmese military’s desperation for an alliance that might offer protection from outside threats.
Burma broke off all relations with Pyongyang in 1983 after North Korean spies were accused of setting off a huge bomb in Rangoon, the Burmese capital, that was intended to kill members of a delegation of South Korean visitors. The bomb killed 17 South Koreans and four Burmese.
Philip Shenon, a former investigative reporter at The New York Times, is the author of The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation.
Philip Shenon – Wed Apr 14, 7:55 am ET
NEW YORK – As Obama calls for reduced nukes, a surprising new rogue state looms. Philip Shenon reports U.S. spy agencies fear Burma is trying to buy nuclear weapons technology from North Korea.
Even as President Obama won agreement from world leaders this week to block the spread of nuclear weapons, the United States is facing a new—and unexpected—nuclear foe: Burma.
National-security officials tell The Daily Beast that U.S. spy agencies and their Asian counterparts have stepped up surveillance of potential nuclear sites in Burma in recent weeks in light of evidence that suggests the country’s brutal junta is trying to buy nuclear-weapons technology from North Korea.
“Burma can become the second hermit kingdom in Asia with nuclear weapons, able to deflect any outside threat,” says one senior American diplomat.
Intelligence officials fear the paranoid, iron-fisted generals who run Burma see a nuclear program—and ultimately, a nuclear bomb—as a way of securing their hold on power forever. There can be little doubting their will to dominate the political stage; the nation’s leading dissident, Nobel Prize- winning pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, has been under house arrest for most of the last 20 years.
“The Burmese have a model in North Korea,” said a senior American diplomat. “Burma can become the second hermit kingdom in Asia with nuclear weapons, able to deflect any outside threat.”
He added: “Unfortunately for us, Burma has the hard currency to buy what Pyongyang is selling—it may be rubies for atoms.”
While most of Burma’s 50 million people live in shocking poverty, the country is rich in natural resources; the junta earns hundreds of millions of dollars a year from the sale of natural gas, hardwood and the fabled Burmese rubies cherished by the global gem dealers.
Although it denies interest in a nuclear weapon, Burma does not hide all of its nuclear ambitions. In 2007, it signed an agreement with Russia for the construction of a small nuclear reactor on Burmese soil.
• Nukes Guru Sam Nunn Backs Obama• Joseph Cirincione: Will Obama End the Nuclear Era?
A new study by the Institute for Science and International Security, a respected Washington think tank, described Burma as a “nuclear wannabe” and said there were “sound reasons to suspect that the military regime in Burma might be pursuing a long-term strategy to make nuclear weapons”—with North Korea’s help.
The study noted that the military government in Burma, one of the most economically and technologically backward nations in Southeast Asia, had recently attempted to purchase sophisticated industrial equipment that could be converted to use in a nuclear program.
Last June, Japanese authorities announced that they had broken up a criminal smuggling ring that was attempting to export a high-tech magnetometer to Burma via Malaysia.
The purchase of the device, which can be used to make gas-centrifuges for processing uranium, was organized through a trading company long affiliated with the North Korean government.
That same month, American warships forced a North Korean cargo ship bound for Burma to return home. U.S. officials suggested that ship was carrying weapons that had been sold to the Burmese military in violation of a United Nations embargo.
David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector in Iraq who was an author of the recent study, told The Daily Beast that he saw disturbing parallels between North Korea’s cooperation with Burma and Pyongyang’s recent activities in Syria.
In 2007, Israeli warplanes destroyed an underground facility in Syria that, according to American intelligence officials, was being built secretly by North Korea to manufacture and store nuclear weapons.
“What happened in Syria tells us that we have to take the situation in Burma seriously,” Albright said. “We can’t turn a blind eye to this.”
In 2007, Burma and North Korean restored diplomatic and military relations after a 24-year break.
The growing ties between the two countries have alarmed Burma’s neighbors. India, which shares a 1,600-mile border with Burma to its east, already faces nuclear-armed neighbors to its west, in Pakistan, and to its north, in China.
The alliance between the Burmese and North Koreans brings together two of the world’s most isolated, repressive and,—some would say—loony governments.
Like their North Korean counterparts, Burmese leaders operate out of an acute fear of threats from the outside world, especially from the United States. The repressiveness of the Burmese junta is overlaid with mysticism that can often border on the bizarre.
The junta’s top leader, General Than Shwe, is known to make few important decisions without consulting astrologists and numerologists; his mentor, former prime minister Ne Win, liked to dress is royal gowns and is reported to have bathed in dolphins’ blood on the advice of soothsayers who promised it would keep him young.
David Steinberg, a Burma specialist at Georgetown University who is director of Asian studies at the university’s School of Foreign Policy, said he was not surprised by the Burmese junta might want an nuclear program given its paranoia about the United States.
He said that for Burma’s leaders, like their North Korean counterparts, there was a “palpable fear” of an invasion by the United States military. “I think it’s crazy, of course, but they think it’s possible,” he said.
Professor Steinberg suggested the Burmese might seek nuclear warheads that could be mounted on short-range ballistic missiles aimed at American military bases in neighboring Thailand, creating a nuclear umbrella against American attack. “They may feel that it’s the only way to protect themselves,” he said of the Burmese generals.
That Burma would resume any sort of diplomatic and military relations with North Korea may signal the Burmese military’s desperation for an alliance that might offer protection from outside threats.
Burma broke off all relations with Pyongyang in 1983 after North Korean spies were accused of setting off a huge bomb in Rangoon, the Burmese capital, that was intended to kill members of a delegation of South Korean visitors. The bomb killed 17 South Koreans and four Burmese.
Philip Shenon, a former investigative reporter at The New York Times, is the author of The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation.
******************************************************
India announces new tracking system to protect tigers
8 mins ago
NEW DELHI (AFP) – India said Wednesday it would use a new tiger tracking system to crack down on "lazy" wildlife guards as it struggles to halt poaching that has drastically reduced the number of big cats.
India's endangered tiger population has plummeted to 1,350 -- just over a third of the 3,700 estimated to be alive in 2002.
"Many field officers are too lazy" to patrol their wildlife sanctuary areas, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh told reporters in New Delhi as he announced the use of the new tracking software system.
"They make up data instead of surveying the field," Ramesh said, adding use of the tracking software should halt malpractice.
The software, known as M-STrIPES, will use a general packet radio service (GPRS) device to follow the movement of the tigers which will be fitted with radio collars.
The system was developed by the state-run Wildlife Institute of India and the Zoological Society of London.
Ramesh said forestry officers patrolling sanctuaries often gave inaccurate reports about the number of tigers to conceal their inefficiency in protecting them from poachers.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, alarmed by the dwindling number of tigers, set up in 2008 a national wildlife crime prevention bureau, drawing experts from the police, environmental agencies and customs in a bid to end poaching.
The government has enlisted ex-soldiers to be part of a "tiger protection force" in state-run sanctuaries.
But despite the new force, poachers killed 32 tigers in 2009 and three this year, according to the Wildlife Protection Society of India.
Experts said the porous border between India and Nepal acts as a smuggling corridor for poachers, who bribe poor forest dwellers to guide them through the dense jungles.
Tiger hunting is illegal worldwide and the trade in tiger parts is banned under a treaty binding 167 countries, including India.
But demand is driven by China, Thailand, Myanmar and other Asian nations where pelts, claws and bones are prized in traditional medicine, environmentalists say.
Ramesh said he will release a new tiger census report in November.
8 mins ago
NEW DELHI (AFP) – India said Wednesday it would use a new tiger tracking system to crack down on "lazy" wildlife guards as it struggles to halt poaching that has drastically reduced the number of big cats.
India's endangered tiger population has plummeted to 1,350 -- just over a third of the 3,700 estimated to be alive in 2002.
"Many field officers are too lazy" to patrol their wildlife sanctuary areas, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh told reporters in New Delhi as he announced the use of the new tracking software system.
"They make up data instead of surveying the field," Ramesh said, adding use of the tracking software should halt malpractice.
The software, known as M-STrIPES, will use a general packet radio service (GPRS) device to follow the movement of the tigers which will be fitted with radio collars.
The system was developed by the state-run Wildlife Institute of India and the Zoological Society of London.
Ramesh said forestry officers patrolling sanctuaries often gave inaccurate reports about the number of tigers to conceal their inefficiency in protecting them from poachers.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, alarmed by the dwindling number of tigers, set up in 2008 a national wildlife crime prevention bureau, drawing experts from the police, environmental agencies and customs in a bid to end poaching.
The government has enlisted ex-soldiers to be part of a "tiger protection force" in state-run sanctuaries.
But despite the new force, poachers killed 32 tigers in 2009 and three this year, according to the Wildlife Protection Society of India.
Experts said the porous border between India and Nepal acts as a smuggling corridor for poachers, who bribe poor forest dwellers to guide them through the dense jungles.
Tiger hunting is illegal worldwide and the trade in tiger parts is banned under a treaty binding 167 countries, including India.
But demand is driven by China, Thailand, Myanmar and other Asian nations where pelts, claws and bones are prized in traditional medicine, environmentalists say.
Ramesh said he will release a new tiger census report in November.
******************************************************
The Salt Lake Tribune - Hearing moved for Burmese man charged with killing girl, 7
Courts » Victim's mother says conclusion near in murder case.
By Stephen Hunt
Updated: 04/13/2010 06:49:22 PM MDT
A Friday hearing that was expected to resolve the case of a Burmese refugee accused of killing 7-year-old Hser Ner Moo has been continued until May 21.
Esar Met, 23, is charged with aggravated murder and child kidnapping for allegedly beating, sexually assaulting and strangling the girl at his South Salt Lake City apartment on March 31, 2008.
The hearing date was moved last week during a conference call between prosecutors, defense attorneys and 3rd District Judge Judith Atherton, according to a docket entry.
The girl's mother, Pearlly Wa, said last month she was told the case would be concluded at the upcoming hearing.
"I was told that because it's been a long, ongoing case, this would probably be the last hearing," the Burmese refugee said through an interpreter.
Mark Biljanic, a spokesman for the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office, said the hearing was continued because the defense had requested additional time. Biljanic has previously declined to comment on whether Met has accepted a plea deal.
Defense attorney Michael Peterson has not returned calls from The Tribune regarding the case.
Met and Hser Ner Moo lived in separate parts of the same refugee camp for Burmese refugees in Thailand before immigrating to the United States, where both lived at the South Parc Townhomes, 2250 S. 500 East.
Met allegedly killed the girl inside his basement apartment, where her body was found a day after her disappearance sparked a massive search of the neighborhood.
An autopsy determined Hser Ner Moo died of blunt force trauma to her head, neck and torso. Some injuries were consistent with strangulation or suffocation, and physicians also found evidence of sexual assault.
The case bogged down in December 2008, when the defense raised questions about Met's mental competency.
That issue was complicated by the need for a psychologist fluent in Burmese, according to a motion filed by Met's defense team.
The defense also raised questions about Met's age, noting there are no birth records for him in either Burma or Thailand. According to what Met has told jailers, he is now 23, however his mother, Ra He Mar, has said her son is older.
Last year, despondent over the lack of progress in the case, Hser Ner Moo's family moved to Marshalltown, Iowa, where her father, Cartoon Wah, works at a pork processing plant.
The parents have said they plan to return to Salt Lake City for Met's upcoming hearing.
Courts » Victim's mother says conclusion near in murder case.
By Stephen Hunt
Updated: 04/13/2010 06:49:22 PM MDT
A Friday hearing that was expected to resolve the case of a Burmese refugee accused of killing 7-year-old Hser Ner Moo has been continued until May 21.
Esar Met, 23, is charged with aggravated murder and child kidnapping for allegedly beating, sexually assaulting and strangling the girl at his South Salt Lake City apartment on March 31, 2008.
The hearing date was moved last week during a conference call between prosecutors, defense attorneys and 3rd District Judge Judith Atherton, according to a docket entry.
The girl's mother, Pearlly Wa, said last month she was told the case would be concluded at the upcoming hearing.
"I was told that because it's been a long, ongoing case, this would probably be the last hearing," the Burmese refugee said through an interpreter.
Mark Biljanic, a spokesman for the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office, said the hearing was continued because the defense had requested additional time. Biljanic has previously declined to comment on whether Met has accepted a plea deal.
Defense attorney Michael Peterson has not returned calls from The Tribune regarding the case.
Met and Hser Ner Moo lived in separate parts of the same refugee camp for Burmese refugees in Thailand before immigrating to the United States, where both lived at the South Parc Townhomes, 2250 S. 500 East.
Met allegedly killed the girl inside his basement apartment, where her body was found a day after her disappearance sparked a massive search of the neighborhood.
An autopsy determined Hser Ner Moo died of blunt force trauma to her head, neck and torso. Some injuries were consistent with strangulation or suffocation, and physicians also found evidence of sexual assault.
The case bogged down in December 2008, when the defense raised questions about Met's mental competency.
That issue was complicated by the need for a psychologist fluent in Burmese, according to a motion filed by Met's defense team.
The defense also raised questions about Met's age, noting there are no birth records for him in either Burma or Thailand. According to what Met has told jailers, he is now 23, however his mother, Ra He Mar, has said her son is older.
Last year, despondent over the lack of progress in the case, Hser Ner Moo's family moved to Marshalltown, Iowa, where her father, Cartoon Wah, works at a pork processing plant.
The parents have said they plan to return to Salt Lake City for Met's upcoming hearing.
******************************************************
Indonesia’s ‘credibility to play role’ in Myanmar transition
Lilian Budianto , The Jakarta Post | Wed, 04/14/2010 10:51 AM | World
A number of observers have suggested that initiatives to encourage Myanmar’s military junta to hand over power to civilians include guaranteeing that they will not be prosecuted after stepping down. The Jakarta Post’s Lilian Budianto talks about the issue with the president of Washington-based National Endowment for Democracy, Carl Gershman, currently in Jakarta for the 6th symposium of the “World Movement for Democracy”. Gershman also said Indonesia could play a significant role in Myanmar’s transition to democracy. Below are excerpts of the interview:
Question: Does providing guarantee that Myanmar’s generals will be free from prosecution after they are not in power help lead to transition to democracy?
Answer: Yes, the generals in Myanmar want to know that they have a future after they are no longer in power.
They want some compromise. Just like in Indonesia; the military was moved out of politics but they retain some influence here.
In South Africa, (in the aftermath of apartheid system), not everybody was punished. Some peopleneed to be punished, such as those who committed crimes against humanity.
There are different levels of crimes but it is important to limit vengeance and retribution because if you go too far, you will destabilize the democratic transition.
Former rulers will fight and so you must find the middle ground. It is hard. Human rights activists sometimes are more interested in retribution than finding the middle ground because it involves compromise. You have to find a balance.
Is it acceptable for the international community to allow perpetrators of human rights crimes to walk free?
It will need compromise and constitutional reforms factoring in how to include the minority and how much power to give to the military (after the end of dictatorship). In Chile in 1989, you had (president Augusto) Pinochet out of office but the military had some influence afterward. In Poland in 1989, some radical activists were against some guarantees that were given to communists. But compromises are sometimes necessary.
You must deal with the past, which can arise in different ways.
What role can Indonesia play in Myanmar?
Indonesia has the authority and credibility to play a role in the transition of Burma considering that it is the largest country in Southeast Asia. It is a democracy ruled by the former military general. Indonesia has the authority to enter Burma more than we do. Indonesia believes in quiet diplomacy.
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is a sophisticated man. He doesn’t believe in imposing the will of Indonesia on Burma. Indonesia believes in a quiet diplomacy. He can use that to encourage a change in Burma, Indochina as well. Indonesia has a role to play beyond his border. We are engaging with Indonesia to spread democracy.
The relation between Indonesia and the US is one of the most important relations we have in the world in terms of democracy development. We have difficult relations with authoritarian countries. We must look together for a change to work together in Burma. It is important for the US to work with Indonesia on Burma.
What can push change in Myanmar?
Domestic drive. International push can only provide some aid but the drive has to come from within.
But the domestic factor is too weak?
It is not that the domestic factor is too weak but the military regime is too severe.
You have thousands of people who took to the streets in 2007 for revolutions, but they were repressed. One thing that was different in Burma: In the 1988 uprising, 3,000 people were killed while in the 2007 uprising, 100 were killed. There is space for a democratic voice in Burma.
What options does it have to lead to change?
It is possible that the people, like in the Philippines, have a non-violent revolution. However, that is not possible in Burma.
Indonesia has to play a role. The Indonesian President is from the military. He can show the Burmese that it is possible to make a transition to democracy and you have to pressure them but also enable them see that there is a future. Dictators tend to be very nervous because they committed crimes and are afraid the people will seek revenge.
Lilian Budianto , The Jakarta Post | Wed, 04/14/2010 10:51 AM | World
A number of observers have suggested that initiatives to encourage Myanmar’s military junta to hand over power to civilians include guaranteeing that they will not be prosecuted after stepping down. The Jakarta Post’s Lilian Budianto talks about the issue with the president of Washington-based National Endowment for Democracy, Carl Gershman, currently in Jakarta for the 6th symposium of the “World Movement for Democracy”. Gershman also said Indonesia could play a significant role in Myanmar’s transition to democracy. Below are excerpts of the interview:
Question: Does providing guarantee that Myanmar’s generals will be free from prosecution after they are not in power help lead to transition to democracy?
Answer: Yes, the generals in Myanmar want to know that they have a future after they are no longer in power.
They want some compromise. Just like in Indonesia; the military was moved out of politics but they retain some influence here.
In South Africa, (in the aftermath of apartheid system), not everybody was punished. Some peopleneed to be punished, such as those who committed crimes against humanity.
There are different levels of crimes but it is important to limit vengeance and retribution because if you go too far, you will destabilize the democratic transition.
Former rulers will fight and so you must find the middle ground. It is hard. Human rights activists sometimes are more interested in retribution than finding the middle ground because it involves compromise. You have to find a balance.
Is it acceptable for the international community to allow perpetrators of human rights crimes to walk free?
It will need compromise and constitutional reforms factoring in how to include the minority and how much power to give to the military (after the end of dictatorship). In Chile in 1989, you had (president Augusto) Pinochet out of office but the military had some influence afterward. In Poland in 1989, some radical activists were against some guarantees that were given to communists. But compromises are sometimes necessary.
You must deal with the past, which can arise in different ways.
What role can Indonesia play in Myanmar?
Indonesia has the authority and credibility to play a role in the transition of Burma considering that it is the largest country in Southeast Asia. It is a democracy ruled by the former military general. Indonesia has the authority to enter Burma more than we do. Indonesia believes in quiet diplomacy.
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is a sophisticated man. He doesn’t believe in imposing the will of Indonesia on Burma. Indonesia believes in a quiet diplomacy. He can use that to encourage a change in Burma, Indochina as well. Indonesia has a role to play beyond his border. We are engaging with Indonesia to spread democracy.
The relation between Indonesia and the US is one of the most important relations we have in the world in terms of democracy development. We have difficult relations with authoritarian countries. We must look together for a change to work together in Burma. It is important for the US to work with Indonesia on Burma.
What can push change in Myanmar?
Domestic drive. International push can only provide some aid but the drive has to come from within.
But the domestic factor is too weak?
It is not that the domestic factor is too weak but the military regime is too severe.
You have thousands of people who took to the streets in 2007 for revolutions, but they were repressed. One thing that was different in Burma: In the 1988 uprising, 3,000 people were killed while in the 2007 uprising, 100 were killed. There is space for a democratic voice in Burma.
What options does it have to lead to change?
It is possible that the people, like in the Philippines, have a non-violent revolution. However, that is not possible in Burma.
Indonesia has to play a role. The Indonesian President is from the military. He can show the Burmese that it is possible to make a transition to democracy and you have to pressure them but also enable them see that there is a future. Dictators tend to be very nervous because they committed crimes and are afraid the people will seek revenge.
******************************************************
Youth uprisings reflect ‘desperate’ need for reform
Lilian Budianto , The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Wed, 04/14/2010 9:24 AM
Decades after democracy made its first inroads in Southeast Asia, youth movements have increasingly led reforms in a region where repressive regimes have ruled with little tolerance of civil society groups.
From the uprising in the Philippines, to Indonesia, Myanmar and the recent protests in Thailand, youth and students as well as religious groups have taken the lead for political reform, although many faced violent repression.
Regardless of their success rate, the bottom-up approach, with youth in the frontline to push government reforms, has becomes a mainstream activity. Activists say this allows everybody a chance to participate in making new governments.
“The idea of democracy is to give everybody a space for their voice and a role in the building of a nation,” said Ryota Jonen, of the Washington-based National Endowment for Democracy, at the 6th symposium of the World Movement for Democracy in Jakarta, on Tuesday.
He said if a democracy was installed with a top down approach, as in Malaysia and Singapore, then people had little chance to voice their aspirations and influence government policies.
Indonesia saw a major turning point leading to democracy with the 1998 student revolt, ending 32-years of Soeharto’s authoritarian rule.
Now the world’s third largest democracy, Indonesia is an example of successful transition from dictatorship to democracy, speakers said.
In contrast, democracy in the Philippines has seen a decline following the initial success of the people movement in 1986. The Philippines is now reported to be one of the most dangerous places for journalists worldwide, following a massacre of journalists last year.
“Social revolts have been seen as an effective way to lead to democracy because they put the largest pressure on government compared to other ways,” said Hans Tippenhauer, an activist from Haiti, during the same event.
“But whether this is followed by success or repression is another matter. At least, youth uprisings are effective in attracting attention, telling people that something must be done to make a change,” he said.
Khin Maung Win, a deputy director of the Democratic Voice of Burma, said youth movements could only work to push for democracy when combined with external pressure.
“If you are facing a harsh military regime, that does not hesitate to use violence to stamp out protests, there is little chance a people’s revolt will successfully bring about change.” he said. None of Myanmar’s people’s revolts have been successful in toppling the military regime, which cracked down on the opposition party after it won the 1990 elections. Some 3,000 people were reported killed in Myanmar during the 1988 uprising, and more than 100 in another revolt led by monks in 2007.
Jonen said there was not a single model where people’s mobilization could be proven to have worked to bring about reform, but at least it was necessary to signal to the world that people wanted reform.
“When youth engagement culminates in an uprising, it is a sign of how desperate they are for a reform. But such social uprisings do not always guarantee a success in bringing democracy. But it is still worth trying,” he said.
Lilian Budianto , The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Wed, 04/14/2010 9:24 AM
Decades after democracy made its first inroads in Southeast Asia, youth movements have increasingly led reforms in a region where repressive regimes have ruled with little tolerance of civil society groups.
From the uprising in the Philippines, to Indonesia, Myanmar and the recent protests in Thailand, youth and students as well as religious groups have taken the lead for political reform, although many faced violent repression.
Regardless of their success rate, the bottom-up approach, with youth in the frontline to push government reforms, has becomes a mainstream activity. Activists say this allows everybody a chance to participate in making new governments.
“The idea of democracy is to give everybody a space for their voice and a role in the building of a nation,” said Ryota Jonen, of the Washington-based National Endowment for Democracy, at the 6th symposium of the World Movement for Democracy in Jakarta, on Tuesday.
He said if a democracy was installed with a top down approach, as in Malaysia and Singapore, then people had little chance to voice their aspirations and influence government policies.
Indonesia saw a major turning point leading to democracy with the 1998 student revolt, ending 32-years of Soeharto’s authoritarian rule.
Now the world’s third largest democracy, Indonesia is an example of successful transition from dictatorship to democracy, speakers said.
In contrast, democracy in the Philippines has seen a decline following the initial success of the people movement in 1986. The Philippines is now reported to be one of the most dangerous places for journalists worldwide, following a massacre of journalists last year.
“Social revolts have been seen as an effective way to lead to democracy because they put the largest pressure on government compared to other ways,” said Hans Tippenhauer, an activist from Haiti, during the same event.
“But whether this is followed by success or repression is another matter. At least, youth uprisings are effective in attracting attention, telling people that something must be done to make a change,” he said.
Khin Maung Win, a deputy director of the Democratic Voice of Burma, said youth movements could only work to push for democracy when combined with external pressure.
“If you are facing a harsh military regime, that does not hesitate to use violence to stamp out protests, there is little chance a people’s revolt will successfully bring about change.” he said. None of Myanmar’s people’s revolts have been successful in toppling the military regime, which cracked down on the opposition party after it won the 1990 elections. Some 3,000 people were reported killed in Myanmar during the 1988 uprising, and more than 100 in another revolt led by monks in 2007.
Jonen said there was not a single model where people’s mobilization could be proven to have worked to bring about reform, but at least it was necessary to signal to the world that people wanted reform.
“When youth engagement culminates in an uprising, it is a sign of how desperate they are for a reform. But such social uprisings do not always guarantee a success in bringing democracy. But it is still worth trying,” he said.
******************************************************
Business Mirror - Editorial: Their time will come
Opinion
Thursday, 15 April 2010 21:01
IT’S unfortunate that the Asean summit ended recently in Hanoi without a clear signal from the nine Southeast Asian neighbors of Burma/Myanmar that the steps it has taken to ensure the credibility of this year’s elections are far from satisfactory.
The 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), long criticized for its policy of constructive engagement with the junta that has held in its tight grip a hapless nation for decades, had given out some signal that it might be prepared to drum the human-rights and democracy issue into such a controversial regime when it adopted its charter last year and then moved to set up its own human-rights body. Since then, however, little progress seems to have been made as far as Burma is concerned.
At the end of last week’s summit in Hanoi, the chairman’s statement simply said: “We underscored the importance of national reconciliation in Myanmar and the holding of a general election in a free, fair and inclusive manner, thus contributing to Myanmar’s stability and development.”
Inter Press Service (IPS) quoted Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung, summit chairman, as telling reporters at the meeting’s end: “The elections should be free and democratic, with the participation of all parties involved, and lead to real national reconciliation.” This, he added, would “help stabilize the country, creating a base for economic development.”
That’s it? No mention, IPS noted, of the National League for Democracy or its most famous leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who is boycotting the election after the regime found new reason to extend her detention with the charges related to harboring an American man who swam in a lake to access her house and stayed there overnight, “to warn her,” supposedly, of risks to her life.
At the Hanoi summit’s end, Asean Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan, was quoted as saying that “on the Myanmar issue, we just have to have patience.”
Well, patience is running out among a people who were deprived of the chance to be ruled by the party and leaders they voted for in a free election in 1990. In fact, even among Asean leaders, there has been an edge of irritation of late. Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand, according to IPS, seem bent on nudging the junta, “at least privately,” to ensure that the elections aren’t a joke—in short, an embarrassment to Asean. Manila’s Foreign Minister Alberto Romulo was even more blunt. He was widely quoted as saying a few weeks back that at the rate things are going, the upcoming Burma elections seemed to be a mockery of democracy. He mentioned the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Suu Kyi by name as a crucial factor to proving that the elections are fair and free. But then, that’s just one member lamenting the state of things in Burma.
The junta was lucky that focus on it was overshadowed by Thailand’s turmoil while the summit was going on. Sooner or later, however, there will be a time of reckoning, and for the sake of our Burmese brothers, it is hoped that real change would come peacefully. As the now-ailing Suu Kyi once told a feisty Australian journalist who did a secret documentary of the Burmese saga, “Our time will come.”
Opinion
Thursday, 15 April 2010 21:01
IT’S unfortunate that the Asean summit ended recently in Hanoi without a clear signal from the nine Southeast Asian neighbors of Burma/Myanmar that the steps it has taken to ensure the credibility of this year’s elections are far from satisfactory.
The 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), long criticized for its policy of constructive engagement with the junta that has held in its tight grip a hapless nation for decades, had given out some signal that it might be prepared to drum the human-rights and democracy issue into such a controversial regime when it adopted its charter last year and then moved to set up its own human-rights body. Since then, however, little progress seems to have been made as far as Burma is concerned.
At the end of last week’s summit in Hanoi, the chairman’s statement simply said: “We underscored the importance of national reconciliation in Myanmar and the holding of a general election in a free, fair and inclusive manner, thus contributing to Myanmar’s stability and development.”
Inter Press Service (IPS) quoted Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung, summit chairman, as telling reporters at the meeting’s end: “The elections should be free and democratic, with the participation of all parties involved, and lead to real national reconciliation.” This, he added, would “help stabilize the country, creating a base for economic development.”
That’s it? No mention, IPS noted, of the National League for Democracy or its most famous leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who is boycotting the election after the regime found new reason to extend her detention with the charges related to harboring an American man who swam in a lake to access her house and stayed there overnight, “to warn her,” supposedly, of risks to her life.
At the Hanoi summit’s end, Asean Secretary-General Surin Pitsuwan, was quoted as saying that “on the Myanmar issue, we just have to have patience.”
Well, patience is running out among a people who were deprived of the chance to be ruled by the party and leaders they voted for in a free election in 1990. In fact, even among Asean leaders, there has been an edge of irritation of late. Singapore, Indonesia and Thailand, according to IPS, seem bent on nudging the junta, “at least privately,” to ensure that the elections aren’t a joke—in short, an embarrassment to Asean. Manila’s Foreign Minister Alberto Romulo was even more blunt. He was widely quoted as saying a few weeks back that at the rate things are going, the upcoming Burma elections seemed to be a mockery of democracy. He mentioned the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Suu Kyi by name as a crucial factor to proving that the elections are fair and free. But then, that’s just one member lamenting the state of things in Burma.
The junta was lucky that focus on it was overshadowed by Thailand’s turmoil while the summit was going on. Sooner or later, however, there will be a time of reckoning, and for the sake of our Burmese brothers, it is hoped that real change would come peacefully. As the now-ailing Suu Kyi once told a feisty Australian journalist who did a secret documentary of the Burmese saga, “Our time will come.”
******************************************************
ReliefWeb - Thailand: Revitalizing the local economy and helping to end refugee warehousing
Source: United States Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCR)
Date: 13 Apr 2010
"From a distance, the camps look amazing. You just see hills covered in lush greenery and bamboo roof huts peeking through the trees," said American nonprofit worker Jessica Hansen, recalling her first impression of the cluster of refugee camps along the Thailand-Burma border. "I was awestruck by the natural beauty of the scenery."
But come closer and you see a different picture. You see deforestation, which causes flash floods. You see people dressed in dirty, torn clothes. You see kids covered in mud.
And, as Hansen put it, you see a lot of grown, capable people just lying around because they have no other choice.
"There was a lethargic feeling," said Hansen. "After the refugees have been at the camp for a while without being allowed to work, they become disillusioned. They don't think that the government is going to help them."
Some 140,000 refugees live in camps along Thailand's border with Burma. About one fourth of those refugees, most of whom have fled on-going violence and human rights abuses in Burma, have languished in these camps for over two decades. They are not allowed to leave the camp, seek employment, or otherwise pursue a normal life.
"Warehousing refugees wastes human resources and can have an impact on security," said Veerawit Tianchainan, director of the Thailand field office of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI). It leaves refugees with little hope and puts them at risk of exploitation, abuse, and human trafficking, he explained.
The infrastructure and housing inside the camps in Thailand are meant to be temporary, despite the fact that most of the refugees have lived there for years. The Royal Thai Government (RTG) prohibits construction of cement houses with roofs, limiting building materials to mostly bamboo and cashew wood. Not only are these homes poorly insulated, they are too fragile to withstand the torrential downpours during the rainy season. As a result, most of the refugees have to rebuild their houses every year.
Sanitation is another major problem—especially during the rainy season. "It's hard to tell the children not to play in the dirty water," said Tianchainan. And when disease strikes, the available healthcare services are minimal and too often inadequate.
The overall quality of education—the only hope for a brighter future for most refugees—is subpar. There is a shortage of teachers and the classrooms tend to be overpopulated. According to a 2005 Education Survey Report by ZOA Refugee Care Thailand, an overwhelming majority of primary- and secondary-level students complained that the classrooms are too crowded and noisy. Opportunities for pursuing higher education are also limited. An initiative to allow young Burmese refugees to attend Thai universities proved unsuccessful because most of the schools in the camps are not accredited, explained Tianchainan. Discouraged by the uncertainty for their future, many students begin to lose motivation and cease their studies.
Not allowed to work or even leave the camp, refugees in Thailand subsist on food rations, which are provided by an alliance of NGOs and include rice, soy beans, fish paste, cooking oil, and a combination of vitamin supplements in powder form known as AsiaMix. A few vendors near the camps sell fruits, vegetables, and meat—luxuries that are rarely available through internationally-supported food assistance. But in order to be able to purchase these items, refugees have to sell their food rations or illegally leave the camp to earn money, risking arrest and deportation.
"The refugees are not in a position to do anything meaningful. The camp situation doesn't allow them to work or develop themselves. They have to sustain on what's given to them," explained Tianchainan. "By not knowing what's in their future, they don't have any hope for tomorrow or next year." And yet, this mostly hopeless existence for refugees costs millions to maintain.
USCRI is at a forefront of a movement to transition from aid to development in Thailand's refugee camps and the Thailand-Burma border communities. "We're looking at a few alternatives to warehousing," said Tianchainan. USCRI Thailand is geared toward helping refugees integrate into local communities, get jobs, and gain access to Thai education and healthcare.
However, most Thais do not even know that there are refugees in their country. And those who do tend to focus on the negative side effects the refugee camps create, including pollution, soil erosion, and deforestation. Thai communities along the border with Burma consider their living conditions to be just as poor as those in the camps and are unhappy that international assistance only helps refugees. "The local Thai community feels that they are not much better off than refugees. That creates tension and conflict," said Tianchainan. "We have to neutralize the situation before we can have the refugees interact with the Thai community."
Addressing the concerns of the local communities would require integrating services provided to people in the camps with those available to local Thai communities. This would ensure that both the refugees and the communities that host them would benefit from incoming international aid and improve educational and health services in the border area. It would also foster day-to-day interaction between the refugees and local communities, which would help dissipate the negative attitude many Thais have toward refugees.
Recently, USCRI Thailand hosted a competition for graduate and undergraduate university students to create a business plan for economic and social development along Thailand's border with Burma. The Inspector General of the Ministry of Labor of Thailand, Pairat Lumyong, commended this joint effort by the government, academic, and business sectors to revitalize the border community: "Hopefully, the business plans from this competition can be adjusted and implemented in the real world later."
Source: United States Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCR)
Date: 13 Apr 2010
"From a distance, the camps look amazing. You just see hills covered in lush greenery and bamboo roof huts peeking through the trees," said American nonprofit worker Jessica Hansen, recalling her first impression of the cluster of refugee camps along the Thailand-Burma border. "I was awestruck by the natural beauty of the scenery."
But come closer and you see a different picture. You see deforestation, which causes flash floods. You see people dressed in dirty, torn clothes. You see kids covered in mud.
And, as Hansen put it, you see a lot of grown, capable people just lying around because they have no other choice.
"There was a lethargic feeling," said Hansen. "After the refugees have been at the camp for a while without being allowed to work, they become disillusioned. They don't think that the government is going to help them."
Some 140,000 refugees live in camps along Thailand's border with Burma. About one fourth of those refugees, most of whom have fled on-going violence and human rights abuses in Burma, have languished in these camps for over two decades. They are not allowed to leave the camp, seek employment, or otherwise pursue a normal life.
"Warehousing refugees wastes human resources and can have an impact on security," said Veerawit Tianchainan, director of the Thailand field office of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI). It leaves refugees with little hope and puts them at risk of exploitation, abuse, and human trafficking, he explained.
The infrastructure and housing inside the camps in Thailand are meant to be temporary, despite the fact that most of the refugees have lived there for years. The Royal Thai Government (RTG) prohibits construction of cement houses with roofs, limiting building materials to mostly bamboo and cashew wood. Not only are these homes poorly insulated, they are too fragile to withstand the torrential downpours during the rainy season. As a result, most of the refugees have to rebuild their houses every year.
Sanitation is another major problem—especially during the rainy season. "It's hard to tell the children not to play in the dirty water," said Tianchainan. And when disease strikes, the available healthcare services are minimal and too often inadequate.
The overall quality of education—the only hope for a brighter future for most refugees—is subpar. There is a shortage of teachers and the classrooms tend to be overpopulated. According to a 2005 Education Survey Report by ZOA Refugee Care Thailand, an overwhelming majority of primary- and secondary-level students complained that the classrooms are too crowded and noisy. Opportunities for pursuing higher education are also limited. An initiative to allow young Burmese refugees to attend Thai universities proved unsuccessful because most of the schools in the camps are not accredited, explained Tianchainan. Discouraged by the uncertainty for their future, many students begin to lose motivation and cease their studies.
Not allowed to work or even leave the camp, refugees in Thailand subsist on food rations, which are provided by an alliance of NGOs and include rice, soy beans, fish paste, cooking oil, and a combination of vitamin supplements in powder form known as AsiaMix. A few vendors near the camps sell fruits, vegetables, and meat—luxuries that are rarely available through internationally-supported food assistance. But in order to be able to purchase these items, refugees have to sell their food rations or illegally leave the camp to earn money, risking arrest and deportation.
"The refugees are not in a position to do anything meaningful. The camp situation doesn't allow them to work or develop themselves. They have to sustain on what's given to them," explained Tianchainan. "By not knowing what's in their future, they don't have any hope for tomorrow or next year." And yet, this mostly hopeless existence for refugees costs millions to maintain.
USCRI is at a forefront of a movement to transition from aid to development in Thailand's refugee camps and the Thailand-Burma border communities. "We're looking at a few alternatives to warehousing," said Tianchainan. USCRI Thailand is geared toward helping refugees integrate into local communities, get jobs, and gain access to Thai education and healthcare.
However, most Thais do not even know that there are refugees in their country. And those who do tend to focus on the negative side effects the refugee camps create, including pollution, soil erosion, and deforestation. Thai communities along the border with Burma consider their living conditions to be just as poor as those in the camps and are unhappy that international assistance only helps refugees. "The local Thai community feels that they are not much better off than refugees. That creates tension and conflict," said Tianchainan. "We have to neutralize the situation before we can have the refugees interact with the Thai community."
Addressing the concerns of the local communities would require integrating services provided to people in the camps with those available to local Thai communities. This would ensure that both the refugees and the communities that host them would benefit from incoming international aid and improve educational and health services in the border area. It would also foster day-to-day interaction between the refugees and local communities, which would help dissipate the negative attitude many Thais have toward refugees.
Recently, USCRI Thailand hosted a competition for graduate and undergraduate university students to create a business plan for economic and social development along Thailand's border with Burma. The Inspector General of the Ministry of Labor of Thailand, Pairat Lumyong, commended this joint effort by the government, academic, and business sectors to revitalize the border community: "Hopefully, the business plans from this competition can be adjusted and implemented in the real world later."
******************************************************
EUROPOLITICS / Culture
Europolitics - Three films on human rights screened at EP
Wednesday 14 April 2010
The fourth One World International Documentary Film Festival is screening a selection of films for the first time at the European Parliament as part of One World Brussels, namely 'Ana, seven years after', 'Kimjonglia' and 'Orphans of Burma's Cyclone', on 14 and 15 April. A total of around ten films participating in the One World 2010 Festival in Prague will be screened in different cinemas in Brussels from 12 to 19 April. Each screening will be followed by a question and answer session with the directors or discussions with political leaders and members of international non-governmental organisations. One World Brussels is organised under the auspices of European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek, former Czech President Václav Havel and Czech Permanent Representative to the European Union Milena Vicenová. The festival's best film will be selected by a jury, whose members include Catherine Absalom of the International Human Rights Federation and Bernard Verschueren of Protection International.
Europolitics - Three films on human rights screened at EP
Wednesday 14 April 2010
The fourth One World International Documentary Film Festival is screening a selection of films for the first time at the European Parliament as part of One World Brussels, namely 'Ana, seven years after', 'Kimjonglia' and 'Orphans of Burma's Cyclone', on 14 and 15 April. A total of around ten films participating in the One World 2010 Festival in Prague will be screened in different cinemas in Brussels from 12 to 19 April. Each screening will be followed by a question and answer session with the directors or discussions with political leaders and members of international non-governmental organisations. One World Brussels is organised under the auspices of European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek, former Czech President Václav Havel and Czech Permanent Representative to the European Union Milena Vicenová. The festival's best film will be selected by a jury, whose members include Catherine Absalom of the International Human Rights Federation and Bernard Verschueren of Protection International.
No comments:
Post a Comment