Barbarity in the Bay and the Battered Beast

Abid Bahar

(Reply to Aye Kyaw’s recent article "The Rohingyas and Rakhing")

Arakan, once a beautiful kingdom in the Bay of Bengal, rose to its fame when it looked to West for help from the Sultan of Bengal. Sultan Jalaluddin’s army reestablished the exiled Arakanese king and helped to establish its historic city Mrohaung. Unlike its Burmese rivals of the time, Arakan’s glorious kings had learnt to develop civilization not as a matter of creating terror through destroying human habitat, raping women, using human beings in forced labor but by knowing the art of civilization; how to be kind to it subjects, encouraging tolerance among communities, be just and to encourage the development of art and literature. In Arakan however, with this beauty was also born a beast.

Bengal’s help in need was returned by the later Arakanese kings for terror. After the attack by Shah Sur, when there was a weak Bengal central government, the Moghs turned the lower Bengal and some parts of India into a place of terror; capturing civilian man, women and children and sold into slavery. With Portuguese help in terror centers like Deang Hills in Chittagong, Bengal witnessed its lose of peace for the next two hundred years. Until then this spilled over terror from Arakan was unknown in the Bay. Some of these unfortunate human beings who were taken to Arakan as slaves ( ancestors of some Rohingyas) were employed in agricultural activities. These Moghs almost completely depopulated southern Chittagong. Against this historic barbarity in the Bay, it was not until Shah Suja, the governor of Bengal that took shelter in Arakan, when in the name of giving shelter, at the king's order he was robbed and him and his entire family members were massacred. Shaista Khan, the Moghul Governor finally chased the notorious Mogh pirates out the Bengal territory.

Taking advantage of internal chaos, in 1784 the final blow to the once beautiful Arakan came when it was conquered by the Burmese army through indiscriminate genocidal killings of Buddhist, Muslim and tribal population. While it caused massive depopulation in Arakan, it gave rise to the nonbengali, Mogh, Rohingya and tribal settlements in Chittagong and in Chittagong Hill Tracts. Considering the state of anarchy in Arakan, it seems most of these people decided to stay in the peaceful Chittagong that was by then a British territory. It is from this single invasion that Bangladesh today has people of Arakani origin. Arakan was finally battered after Burma's independence when almost one third of its original territory was added to mainland Burma.

Today Arakan exists only as an ego in the mind of some xenophobic and Western trained historians. Prominent among them are Aye Kyaw and his student Aye Chan, unfortunately both have been teachers. Finding no other outsider enemy they can fight with, they now have turned their attention against their fellow Rohingya citizens called with a negative connotation, the "kula"(the Negro people). Arakan's is a racial problem.

The present Arakani xenophobist' s power base is the Burmese military. Aye Kyaw’s recent article "The Rohingyas and Rakhing" written in response to the "First Conference on the problems of Democratic Development in Burma and the Rohingya Issue" held in Tokyo in 2007 shows his self confessed collaboration with the Burmese army. In this article he notes that he was the architect behind the 1982 constitution Act that officially denied the Rohingya people their Burmese citizenship, triggering genocidal circumstances of unthinkable proportion in Arakan. His student Aye Chan coauthored a book named “Influx Viruses” identifying the Rohingyas as mere viruses now live in "enclaves" implying to be exterminated from Arakan. Both claim that Rohingyas entered Burma after 1826, the year British occupied Arakan and are therefore the “foreigners” in Arakan. Surprisingly, both of them live outside Arakan and enjoy the flavors of Western democracy. They obtained their citizenship in less than 10 years time. Aye Kyaw often uses vulgar expression, with Aye Chan often claim that they have never heard of the word "Rohingya." These circumstances led the Rohingyas into a stateless people. Contrary to this, Rohingyas trace their ancestry in Arakan from the 8th century. These xenophobic writers thus deny Rohingya's birth right in Arakan.

The beasts of today’s Arakan are not the oppressive kings of Arakan anymore but the notorious Aye Kyaw, Aye Chan and their followers whose views promote human suffereing. These are educated people like Julius Streicher of Germany who fanned the flames of the German Holocaust. Today, it is not the example and the inspiration of the founders of Mrauk U dynasty that makes Arakan famous; it is these xenophobic writers’ incitations and collaboration with the undemocratic Burmese government that makes Arakan notoriously famous abroad for its human rights violations and producing refugees.

It appears that Arakan lost its beauty when it replaced the art of civilization of civility for its barbarity in the Bay which was followed by internal chaos and the eventual Burmese occupation in 1784.

Burmese military government is presently trying to acquire powerful bombs, surely not to fight against the democracy movement leaders. Arakan today keeps its beast in its 30% representation in the 500,000 strong Burmese army that supports the whole of Arakan for its racially Mongoloid population. With the military help it has unilaterally renamed the province from its original Arakan into the Rakhine state. These are not the signs of democratic development in Arakan. In the Arakan of chaos, Bangladesh becomes the first victim of refugee problem. Still the xenophobic writers continue to blame the Rohingyas as being Bengalis. The beast of Arakan who feeds on xenophobia to mislead its people seems battered but not dead. Under the circumstances, Bangladesh should continue to seek Arakanese and Burmese people's friendship because xenophobia should not be an obstacle between nations. However, it should watch out especially those internationally identified notorious xenophobic writer's reported visits to Bangladesh and also should keep a watchful eye on the presence of some reportedly pumped up in prejudice so-called Arakani journalists in Bangladesh. If these visitors remain unchecked, it could inspire Arakani fundamentalist Rakkha-Buddhist sentiments spilled over in the otherwise peaceful Chittagong and Chittagong Hill Tracts. After all, the developing and democratic Bangladesh walking on a tightrope can not afford to take things for granted.

(Professor Abid Bahar Ph.D. is the co-founder of Arakan-Burma Research Institute in New York)

Guards demand money from Insein prisoners

Aug 16, 2007 (DVB)—The families of several political prisoners in Insein jail said yesterday that prison officials had stolen money from inmates after they were ordered to pay for the cost of their detention in cash.

The family member of one political prisoner, who asked to remain anonymous, said that officials recently ordered the inmates to pay for prison services with cash and said that 20 percent of all money coming in would have to be donated to the jail. “Then, last month, the authorities ordered the prisoners to hand over all their money, claiming that they were going to spend it on better food for the inmates,” the family member said. “So the prisoners handed them the money. But the officials reportedly used the money for themselves and transferred the inmates to different cells.” A woman who also recently visited a family member detained in Insein on a political charge, said that the officials had clamped down on the amount of food and medicine political prisoners were allowed to receive from outside. “They also punished the inmates who were found to have money by keeping them in solitary confinement,” the woman said. Officials from Insein prison were unavailable for comment today.

Reporting by Maung Too

United Nations Continues to Engage China on Burma
By VOA News 16 August 2007

A top United Nations official has held talks with Chinese foreign ministry officials and once again has discussed the issue of military-ruled Burma.

Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs Lynn Pascoe held two days of talks with Chinese officials in Beijing that ended Wednesday. His meetings were a continuation of an effort that began earlier this year to engage China on Burma.

Pascoe is on his way to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization talks in Central Asia.

Earlier this year, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appointed Ibrahim Gambari as a senior adviser to continue the work of promoting democracy in Burma. Last month, Gambari visited China as well as other Asian nations to discuss concerns about military-ruled Burma.

Burma's opposition party won national elections in 1990, but the country's military leaders refuse to recognize those results. The party's secretary-general, Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, has spent 12 of the past 18 years under house arrest.

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY HELD WA-SO RELIGIOUS FESTIVAL

AND

COMMEMORATED THE 44TH ANNIVERSARY OF 7TH JULY MASSACARE COMMITTED BY THE MILIATRY REGIME IN BURMA IN 1962

In the month of July 2006, members of the Parliamentary Democracy Party (PDP) organised two events, one for the 'War-So Religious Festival', and the other for the 7th July Anniversary occasion, when Rangoon University students were killed by the military regime in 1962. The background history of celebrating War-So Religious Festival started as follows: While Lord Buddha was still living and preaching Dhamma, some farmers from the local areas came to him and complained that their paddy plants were spoiled, caused by some monks who walked through their paddy fields while travelling around their villages. That event took place, while farmers were growing paddy plants during the rainy season. Because of the complaint and to avoid a similar event in the future, Lord Buddha set a law and ordered all his followers-monks that, no one must travel away from the village where they were residing at their monastery, during the four months of the rainy season, starting from the full-moon day of the month of Wa-So (July) till the full-moon day of the month Tha-din-gyut (October). Since then, Buddhist monks acted accordingly, and people offer foods, yellow robes, and medicines for the monks to enable them to stay at the same monastery while abstaining travelling. It is an important occasion and a traditional practice for Buddhist members, to celebrate the Festival offering the above mentioned items to the monks every year in the same month. The PDP members organised such a celebration as they are bound to do so, as most of them are Buddhist followers.

The PDP party members also organised the other important event the 'Commemoration of 44th Anniversary of '7th July massacre' committed by the military regime in Burma in 1962 soon after they had usurped power, from the democratically elected U Nu's government in 1962. It is a memory of a sad occasion for all the people of Burma, as the military regime killed its own people, who were young University students, who were only asking for their student's rights. It is also coincident with the very first massacre of the military regime in the very first year when they usurped power, and since after that gruesome event, they continued to kill innocent civilians, whenever they asked for their Human Rights and freedom.

Since the military usurped power, the whole country became a prison and every day people have to face a miserable life. People from all walks of life tried to topple the military regime from power, but the length of struggle dragged on for so long that, some younger generations are not aware of recent Burmese history. Most younger generations only talk about 8-8-88 uprising and, many of them think that people started to oppose the military regime only from 8-8-88. In this way, the unity, cooperation, understanding between those who were born in later years after the 1962 army coup in Burma and, those who were already born before that period, became difficult to achieve, because of different widening perceptions of major political events.

The problem is this, although people of Burma do not accept military rule and deeply oppose the military rulers, but it is a pity that, we have no unity among the exile opposition groups. This is particularly the result of Dr.Sein Win's activities in the diasporas, where he played one opposition group against another by funding those, which supported him, while denying funds to those, who advocated a different method. The ways of opposing the military regime from different groups do vary. The NLD opposition group applied non-violence method, which resulted in failure after 16 years of its application. They should realise that there is no history that people can expel a regime armed to the teeth, just by applying non-violence method. Because of this, the PDP is applying a two pronged approach,, one political negotiation and the other armed resistance movement.

The PDP party believes that, by applying the two pronged approach, it will be able to deliver the people's aspirations of expelling the military regime from power, restoring democracy and freedom, and bring employment and prosperity in our country in the near future.

So, during the celebration of Wa-So Festival offering materials and foods for the monks and during the gathering for the Anniversary of 7th July massacre, we pray for the welfare of the country and pay homage to those who fell on that 7th July occasion. Especially, we pray for all the people of Burma that they will become free from military rule and stand proudly in the land where they were born.

With all best wishes,

Down with the murderous illegal military regime.

Come and join us in this historic enterprise.

Fight together with us until we can expel the illegal military regime from power.

Information Section,

Parliamentary Democracy Party (Burma)

GHQ (Liberated Area)

E-mail: pdp_office@yahoo.com,

Web page: www.pdpburma.net

Father to a nation, stranger to his son

Mahatma Gandhi is seen as a saintly, almost godlike figure by many Indians. But as a new film and biography reveal, he was far from perfect when it came to parenting. Sarfraz Manzoor reports

Friday August 10, 2007 The Guardian Mahatma Gandhi, leader of campaigns of nonviolence and civil disobedience in the Indian Independence struggle, seen here in India in 1941. Photograph: Corbis

Mahatma Gandhi once confessed that the greatest regret of his life was that there were two people he had not been able to convince. One was Mohammed Ali Jinnah, whose demand for a separate homeland for Muslims led to the partition of India and Pakistan in August 1947 and the end of the dream of a united, independent India. The other person was his own eldest son. Harilal Gandhi's entire life was lived in the shadow of his father and it was spent rebelling against everything his father believed in. Gandhi's stern morality, sexual abstinence and principled stand against Britain were all challenged by his son, who was an alcoholic gambler trading in imported British clothes even as his father was urging a boycott of foreign goods. Harilal even converted to Islam and changed his name to Abdullah before his death in 1948, only months after his father was assassinated by a Hindu extremist.

Article continues

---

Sixty years on from the Indian independence he was so instrumental in securing, Gandhi is a symbol of innocence and peace; a simple man in peasant clothes whose adherence to nonviolence defeated the British and would later inspire both Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela. This was the Gandhi depicted in Richard Attenborough's multi-Oscar-winning film a quarter of a century ago: a dhoti-clad demigod. Attenborough's film told the story of Gandhi as the father of a nation; now a new film, Gandhi, My Father, reveals the extraordinary story of the son and the man he described as "the greatest father you can have but the one father I wish I did not have". The film's release coincides with the publication of a monumental new biography by Rajmohan Gandhi, a historian and grandson of the Mahatma. "I wrote this book because I wanted to make sense of my grandfather," says Rajmohan, 72. "I was 12 years old when my grandfather died and I wanted to be able to tell my children and grandchildren who Gandhi really was. The story of Gandhi is not only the story of India and partition: it is also the story of a father with high expectations and four sons who found it hard to measure up."

There are estimated to be 120 living relatives of Mohandas "Mahatma" Gandhi. They are the descendants of the four sons - Harilal, Manilal, Ramdas and Devdas, Rajmohan's father - that Gandhi had with his wife Kasturba, whom he married when he was 13. Most of the descendants are not in the public eye but, according to great-grandson Tushar Gandhi, they are all aware of the significance of their heritage. "I don't remember a phase in my life when I didn't know who I was," he says, "and while the tragedy of Harilal has had repercussions for my family, it was not until I saw this film that I could see for myself how it must have happened." Of the four sons, it was Harilal who turned most violently against his father. It is a familiar narrative - the son who fails to shine in the face of his father's brilliance - but the particular tensions between Harilal and his father sprang from the inescapable conflict between the demands of being the father of a nation and a father to his children.

Mohandas Gandhi was only 18 when his first son was born, and Harilal was six months old when his father left his family in South Africa in September 1888 to train as a barrister in London. Gandhi came to recognise the importance of spending time with his later sons, but he was absent during Harilal's early years.

This was not the only way in which the eldest son's experiences differed from his brothers'. "When Gandhi returned to South Africa he became a successful barrister," says Rajmohan, "and his son saw the great financial success of his father. He was aware of his father's comfortable life, both socially and financially. When Gandhi became more involved in the political struggle and took a vow of celibacy and poverty, it was a real jolt to young Harilal in a way that it was not for his younger brothers, who did not recall the earlier good life."

Gandhi's political philosophy was based on the belief that there was a larger good for society which demanded that each individual makes sacrifices. The necessity not to appear hypocritical meant that his sons were schooled at home when the family lived in South Africa. He could not have sent the boys to the private European schools without alienating himself from the Indian community, but in remaining true to his principles, he angered his children, who would meet other youngsters demanding to know which school they attended. "The hallmark of any leader," argues Rajmohan, "is that they expand the notion of a family to include the entire nation and so do not do anything special for their children."

When an Indian friend offered Gandhi the opportunity to send one of his sons to England on a scholarship, Gandhi inquired whether the scholarship was truly for one of his boys or for the most deserving young person from the Indian community in South Africa. The man reluctantly agreed that the scholarship could go to the most deserving young person. Gandhi promptly suggested two other boys who he believed were more deserving and these were sent to England in the place of his own children. "You want to make saints out of my boys before they are men," complained his wife but, for Gandhi, his sons were to be the ideal symbols of the new India he was trying to create.

Embittered, Harilal resolved to carve out his own identity. He began drinking and trading in foreign clothes for profit; Gandhi's relationship with his son was further strained by Harilal's decision to remarry after the death of his first wife. "How can I who has always advocated renunciation of sex encourage you to gratify it?" asked Gandhi. "If Harilal wants to marry against my wish, I will have to stop thinking of him as my son." While Gandhi espoused nonviolence, his son's business at one point depended on the continuation of the second world war, and peace led to financial troubles.

"Harilal had the Midas touch in reverse," concludes Feroz Abbas Khan, the director of Gandhi, My Father. "This was a man who was unfortunate in that everything he did just went wrong. He started businesses which all crashed. Time and again he tried and it just didn't work out for him."

Gandhi, My Father opens with Harilal's death after he is picked up from the streets in Mumbai and taken to hospital. The doctors imagine him to be an alcoholic vagrant. They ask him his father's name and he replies: "Bapu" - the term of endearment that Indians used to refer to Gandhi. The doctors agree that Bapu is indeed the father of the nation but demand the name of his biological father. It is a poignant scene. "Gandhi is an inconvenient truth," admits Khan, "and his principles were hard to live by."

Filmed in English and Hindi and shot in India and South Africa, Gandhi, My Father is not typical Bollywood fare. Rather than the usual Bombay mix of melodrama and music, first-time director Khan's film is understated and humane. Khan based his script on his own play, Mahatma vs Gandhi; he supplemented the work with research visits to South Africa and interviews with Gandhi's relatives, all the while collecting letters, articles and any other scraps of information that would help make his film appear authentic.

"I have a responsibility to this subject and the dignity of the subject," he says. "There are no duets sung between Harilal and his father because they didn't have duets - they had arguments." Those arguments stemmed from Gandhi's belief that the needs of the nation were more important than the need of any individual. "One reason that Indians loved him so much," explains Rajmohan, "was that he was not partial to his children - that was his strongest card. He knew that if India wanted to be inspired, they needed the sort of leader who was willing to 'neglect' his children."

In fact, he was a fragile, troubled father. "People assume he was a miracle worker from the start," says Rajmohan, "some impossibly wonderful human being always in control of himself. This was not the case at all." Even before the film's release in India there were protests from those uncomfortable with this portrayal and demands that the film be banned.

Razi Ahmad, secretary of Gandhi Sangrahalaya, a research centre in Patna, said: "We are of the view that any attempt to tarnish the image of national heroes should not be permitted." In truth, the film reveals Gandhi's humanity and that, says Tushar Gandhi, should have been exposed a long time ago. "Gandhi has become a hostage to his mahatmaship. It is easy to say that we cannot emulate someone like him when we put him on a pedestal. What we should be doing is seeing him as a normal, frail human being who strove to achieve something. We should emulate people like him, but not worship them."

· Gandhi, My Father is out now. Gandhi: The Man, His People and the Empire, by Rajmohan Gandhi, is published by Haus Books, price £25.

ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံဆိုင္ရာ ေကာင္စစ္၀န္အသစ္ စစ္တေကာင္းတြင္ ခန္႕အပ္ 8/15/2007

ဘဂၤလာေဒခ်္႕နိုင္ငံ စစ္တေကာင္းျမိဳ႕တြင္ ထားရွိမည့္ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံဆိုင္ရာ ေကာင္စစ္၀န္ တဦးကို ျမန္မာအစိုးရက ယမန္ေန႕ ခန္႕အပ္လိုက္ေၾကာင္း သတင္းရရွိသည္။ ခန္႕အပ္ျခင္းခံရသူမွာ စစ္တေကာင္းျမိဳ႕ အာဂရာဘတ္ ေဟာ္တည္မွ ဒါရိုက္တာ အိပ္ခ်္ အမ္း ဟာကိန္း အာလီ ျဖစ္ျပီး ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံမွ နအဖ အၾကီးအကဲ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးၾကီးသန္းေရႊမွ တိုက္ရုိက္ လက္မွတ္ေရးထိုး ခန္႕အပ္ျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္။ အဆိုခန္႕အပ္မွဳအခန္းအနားအား ယမန္ေန႕က ဒကၠားျမိဳ႕ရွိ ျမန္မာသံရံုးတြင္ က်င္းပခဲ့ျပီး ျမန္မာ့ သံအမတ္ ဦးဥာဏ္လင္းက ေကာင္စစ္၀န္ ခန္႕အပ္လႊာအား မစၥတာ ဟာကိန္းအာလီထံသို႕ ေပးအပ္ခဲ့သည္။ ဘဂၤလာေဒခ်္႕နိုင္ငံမွ စီးပြားေရး သမားမ်ားက ဘဂၤလာေဒခ်္႕နိုင္ငံ၏ ဒုတိယ ျမိဳ႕ေတာ္ စစ္တေကာင္း၌ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံႏွင့္ စီးပြားေရးျမွင့္တင္ရန္အတြက္ ျမန္မာ့ ေကာင္စစ္၀န္ရံုး တခု အထူးလိုအပ္ေနရာ ထိုလိုအပ္ခ်က္ကို ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရက ျဖည့္ဆည္းေပး ျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။ အဆိုပါ ေကာင္စစ္၀န္ခန္႕အပ္ရန္ ျမန္မာႏွင့္ ဘဂၤလာေဒခ်္႕ အၾကား ဒုတိယ နိုင္ငံျခားေရး ၀န္ၾကီး ဦးေက်ာ္သူ လြန္ခဲ့ေသာလက ဘဂၤလာေဒခ်္သို႕ လာေရာက္လည္ပတ္စဥ္ သေဘာတူညီခဲ့ၾကျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္။

Burma needs Strategy not Strategery Is Power Mediation a solution?

By Bo Kyaw Nyein July 23, 2007

When news broke of an American diplomat meeting three ministers representing the Burmese junta, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), in Beijing, some were surprised, some were critical and some met the revelation with suspicion. This author and his colleagues wrote a paper in January 2006

( http://www.mizzima.com/MizzimaNews/MizzimaForum/01-July-2007.html) suggesting American policy makers take a different route, because the route taken by Americans of shouting rhetoric and isolating the Burmese junta just falls into the hands of the military dictators and leads nowhere.

There are two opposing camps or two schools of thought when it comes to dealing with the military junta in Burma. Neither works. One side wants to take a radical stand and oppose blindly anything that concerns the Burmese military dictators. Their view is to declare the junta as evil, and shout rhetoric as loudly as possible, push for more sanctions, isolate the Burmese regime and no, they don't want to hear talk of any dealings or dialogue with the current power holders in Burma. The seeming patron of this group is the powerful Senator from Kentucky who genuinely respects Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the iconic leader who is still suffering in detention and yet still fighting for freedom, liberal democracy, and basic human rights for her people. Her bravery, dedication and conviction should be recognized.

The other side is led by academics, intellectuals and others who feel that the current stalemate and isolation of the SPDC does not serve the interests of the American or Burmese people, and they believe dialogue with the Burmese regime is necessary. They prefer the "Constructive Engagement" policy practiced by ASEAN nations. Thinking that the 2004 U.S. Presidential election might bring regime change in America, leading thinkers of this group wrote and published papers in 2004, hoping an incoming Democratic President might lend a sympathetic ear to their calls for engaging the Burmese military regime. Unfortunately for this camp President Bush was reelected.

After the 2004 election, the isolationists secured the upper hand, and the Burmese junta has been heralded an outpost of tyranny along with North Korea, as defined by U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. As a strong opponent against military dictatorship in Burma and a true believer in liberal democracy, it was music to the ears of this author and his colleagues when the U.S. President and Secretary of State denounced the Burmese military dictators in the strongest terms. It is also a morale boost for the Burmese opposition camp to know that the U.S. President and his administration are standing tall with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in her darkest hours. In this respect, President Bush must be saluted for never wavering in his strong support for the Burmese national leader and Democratic icon, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

But on the other hand, without sounding ungrateful to President Bush, as professionals and as intellectuals, one should also think beyond the rhetoric and ask what is the strategy of American foreign policy, if there is one for Burma, and where is it leading to? To date, as far as one can tell, there is no clearly defined well thought-out American foreign policy for Burma per se and American actions are leading nowhere.

Because of beltway politics, and as the esteemed Senator from Kentucky was one of the most powerful Republican Senators among the Republican leadership during the Republicans majority rule and who also happened to be the senior member of the all-powerful Senate Appropriations Committee and who chaired the Appropriations Sub-committee for Foreign Operations, it seems Bush Administration and State Department officials basically relegated control of Burma policy to the wishes of the powerful Senator.

Behind the Senator, giving advice and formulating American actions is an unofficial group of bi-partisan congressional staff, lobbyists, and NGOs, which is known as the "Burma Group". In typical American culture, this group thinks and acts with some arrogance, thinking they know best for Burma while unconsciously wanting to demonstrate their power.

Burmese people and Burmans in particular are very nationalistic, and because of their long history with colonialism they resent any form of dictation or domination by foreigners. In general, rightly or wrongly, Burmese generals in Pyinmana, Dr Zarni, this author and many of his colleagues, including the current National Council of the Union of Burma (NCUB) General Secretary, and many in the Opposition carry this nationalistic pride.

As a result, this group ends up working mostly with an activist group based in Washington D.C. which does take orders, since their workhorse is an American, fronting a Burmese. Sometimes they lean on a representative of the exile government, which in reality is no more than a 5 member Burmese NGO which has been struggling to survive on political handouts for the past 18 years.

So in the final analysis, "Burma Group" actions are more oriented towards an activists' mentality on an ad hoc basis, rather than deliberate thinking for formulating long term policy with the final goal of long-term political solutions for Burma. There are some in the group who are far-sighted, level-headed and mature professionals, but the radicals seem to dominate the final decisions.

Let's examine what the SPDC generals have been doing for the past 18 years while American and the Burmese activists have been shouting rhetoric. At the start, the generals were unsure of themselves and they were short of foreign reserve in hard currency. At that time, it was a wise move to launch economic sanctions and to demand to meet with the National League for Democracy (NLD), which was not only elected by the people but the biggest and most organized opposition in Burma, led by a true iconic leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

Though most of the ruling generals may lack intellectual thinking along Western norms, they are battle-tested and street smart fighters. While the two senior generals concentrated on building the armed forces, their key power-base, they relegated foreign affairs, the suppression of internal dissidents and exile opposition to the most cunning of the three ruling generals, General Khin Nyunt, the chief of military intelligence. Following their mentor Ne Win's playbook, the generals detained key opposition players and slowly harassed and destroyed the supporters of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD. They slowly and methodically closed the political space for opposition politicians while stretching out the time. Time, it should be noted, is a tool in and of itself as it destroys the morale and hope of the opposition. They are effectively playing TIME & SPACE.

Opposition leaders, both domestic and in exile, fell for their own rhetoric and failed to recognize the strategy being implemented by the military. Building political infrastructure using underground networks is necessary to build and maintain public support as an important political tool to counter ruthless suppression and, if necessary, to prepare for a national uprising.

The National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), the government in exile, has no clue what is needed to help unite the Burmese in exile and to bring them as a united and effective force to help support and/or to build a formidable opposition and political infrastructure inside Burma in support of the struggling leadership. Instead, they are busy writing papers, attending conferences, and traveling the world asking for more donations while jealously guarding access to major donors from other groups.

NLD leaders inside the country who were spared arrest also failed to formulate a winning strategy or to change the strategy to meet the challenges imposed by the ruthless ruling generals. The biggest mistake was that these NLD elders failed to delegate responsibilities to more able, younger leaders to find a political solution. The only rhetoric the exiled members and NLD leaders inside consistently know how to shout is: "Free Daw Aung San Suu Kyi". Instead of building a base, they live on slogans, statements and rhetoric. So it is not a surprise that the movement has been reduced to a "Singularity". It makes life so much easier for the ruling generals to implement their strategy, utilizing the principles of time and space. Remove the "Singularity" and the opposition exists only in name.

While successive American administration policy makers failed to formulate a sound and well defined Burma foreign policy and while NCGUB and NLD elders were shouting "Free Daw Aung San Suu Kyi", General Khin Nyunt formed an Office of Strategic Studies (OSS) and started wooing the Indians while cementing the relationship with China and selling the "Constructive Engagement" policy to ASEAN. In other words they were successfully implementing their form of triangulation theory. To buy time they agreed for talks but set a never ending time table for building confidence and understanding. They then initiated the "Roadmap," upon which they are dragging their feet on their first step: the National Convention. During this long stretch of time they have discovered natural gas resources, allowing them to spend even more on military hardware.

While American policies on Burma were based on emotion and rhetoric, the Chinese set their policies on Burma slowly and deliberately, based on national interest. Their policy makers are experts on Burma and they speak fluent Burmese. Most importantly they know the culture and mindset of the Burmese. They study the players carefully and they know the sensitive nature of Burmese nationalism and make an effort not to invoke any arrogance in dealing either with the government or the opposition. The Chinese are using the intellectual power of think tanks more than ever before, but their think tanks are not independent institutions like in the West, but rather resemble the Burmese OSS, as they are established to advise and serve the government and party.

Nevertheless, Chinese officials are smooth, knowledgeable and impressive. Make no mistake; Chinese policy is to support the present regime in power, at the same time as not antagonizing the opposition. The Chinese have met with many opposition players and have built a working relationship with a certain younger generation NLD leader in exile in particular, who have a temperament to develop good diplomatic skills, is articulate, understand Western thinking and policy making, and once was a trusted and close aides of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi during the critical years of early 1990s. He enjoys the full confidence of newly elected NLD-LA and NCUB leadership and he works well with other individuals who have intellectual capacity and who can contribute.

Chinese officials regularly visit Burma and understand the pulse of the ruling generals. Their main goal is to look after China's interest and to prevent China from being a guilty party if there is another uprising and the military is toppled. After a recent visit to Kunming and Shweli, this author came to the conclusion that the Chinese are methodical in their thinking and thorough in their implementation.

Furthermore, the Chinese are not interested in gas and border trading only, they have a desire to convert Rakhine (Yakine) state to an oil depositary like Texas & Louisiana in America, where they will transport oil from the Middle East to Rakhine and pipe it to Bhamo and then to Yunnan, bypassing the entire trip through the Straits of Malacca to the East China Sea. As most oil business people know, there are certain equity investors who can say no to American sanctions. Negotiations are progressing well and if this plan can be realized and if they can expand upon it to include downstream activities for oil and gas, the building of refineries and other derivatives, Burma can and will become a vital part of China's energy security plan.

Knowing the importance of their gas and geographical location, the Burmese are now trying to play the Russian card, trying to balance the Chinese with the Russians, and in the process buying another UN veto, just in case the Chinese get cozy with the Americans in the UN. The Burmese generals would rather export all the gas they can find and use atomic energy for local consumption, along the way trying to enrich uranium for military use. They have North Korea and Iran to turn to for assistance, and even the bad boy from Latin America, who declared George Bush "evil" in the U.N., will lend them a hand in opposing Uncle Sam.

So is there an alternate route if isolation and sanctions do not work on one hand and "Constructive Engagement" is just a dud? There is definitely a third solution. In this respect, this author and his colleagues think America has an important role to play in Burma policy but must share leadership with the Chinese. Like it or not, it is the reality that the Chinese have the upper hand when it comes to Burma. At this very moment they are the true giant and only they have the necessary influence to convince the ruling generals to find a real long-lasting solution for Burma.

Just like in North Korea talks, the U.S. and China should take the lead but bring in all major global powers such as the EU, Japan, India, ASEAN, Russia and Canada to have their say and to speak in one voice. With a collective and united stand these global powers can conduct power mediation, giving the ssurances needed for the SPDC generals not to be tried at the International Criminal Court, along with giving them incentives to rejoin the family of nations; but they must find a true and durable solution which will include Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the participation of ethnic leaders. If China sides with other global powers, it will be very difficult for the SPDC generals to take a hard, radical stance. However, Russia may be the wild card, since Russia's relationship with the West is fast deteriorating.

Instead of China playing the role of a broker, between the U.S. and SPDC, the U.S and China must discuss and find common ground on how to deal with the SPDC generals and act as honest brokers in a discussion between Burmese stake holders. But there is a trap; why are Burmese generals eager to meet with the U.S.? If they can neutralize the United States, and if they can still resist international pressure to negotiate with the main opposition leaders at the same time, they will have to a degree marginalized Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, since the U.S. is her key supporter. This danger must be understood.

In the meantime the U.S. should revisit its views on the Burmese opposition both in exile and inside the country and carefully study the players just as the Chinese have. The 88 Generation leaders such as Min Ko Naing and Ko Ko Kyi are becoming important and critical players inside Burma. Building political infrastructure and seeking other capable, new and younger generation leaders is needed, since the generation after 1988 has to date been totally ignored and discarded.

Relying mostly on activists in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area is short-sighted and the NCGUB is a total failure. The U.S. should know better. I would hope they learned their lessons in Iraq from Chalabi and Maliki. If the U.S. is serious and genuine in its desire to help the Burmese people, the U.S. should look seriously into finding a durable solution for Burma.

Otherwise, the U.S. will continue cultivating the political welfare culture where many of the so-called exile governments (yes, there are more than one) and activist groups will beg for money in the name of the Burmese people and democracy, while others will keep writing a Burma Constitution in parallel to the never ending National Convention. This will continue until most players, if not all, pass away from the stage. History will then record this Burma episode as another Bush Strategery rather than Bush Strategy.

It must also be clearly understood that the ultimate responsibility to bring democracy back to Burma lies with the Burmese people; it must not rely solely on global powers.

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is no doubt an iconic national leader loved and admired by the majority of the people. She is the hope for many. Yet she is just an agent of change. The solution has to be found in a transition that both the military and the democratic leaders can accept, in short of an all out peoples uprising as in the many "colored" revolutions of the early 21st and late 20th centuries. If all the peaceful attempts fail then Burma may not have any other choice but to join the list of color revolutions. That may ultimately be the final destiny.

Burma does not stand a chance to regain democracy by just shouting "Free Aung San Suu Kyi."

If the Burmese truly love their golden land and their leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, they must learn to rise above petty personal conflicts, work hard and find a common thread or platform to introduce unity and strength from which the much required political infrastructure can be built. Without strength, the SPDC generals will never pay attention to the cries or demands of the opposition.

Only the Burmese can save their leader, who has sacrificed enough for the country and the people. Otherwise, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi will follow another iconic leader, the Dalai Lama, who is a beloved leader of Tibetan Buddhists and an international figure for world peace. But he is still unable to find a solution for Tibet.

The Tibet story will disappear into the sunset and will be forgotten when the Dalai Lama leaves the stage. Similarly, Burma will also become a forgotten country when Daw Aung San Suu Kyi disappears from the stage, by natural means or otherwise (remember Dapayin?). Time is definitely not on our side.

The Burmese too have a choice like George W Bush: Strategy or Strategery?

Bo Kyaw Nyein

bnyein@gmail.com

Bo Kyaw Nyein is the youngest son of U Kyaw Nyein, former Deputy Prime Minister during U Nu's (AFPFL) regime and a close colleague of General Aung San during the Independence struggle. Bo Kyaw Nyein was sentenced to 7 years for his role in the leadership during U Thant's crisis in 1974 and spent nearly 5 years in infamous Insein jail. He is an engineer by profession. He writes political articles for Mizzima and others.

For non-American readers, a note on the meaning of Strategery by Wikipedia: The word "Strategery" gained popularity when it was used in a comedy sketch aired October 7, 2000 , satirizing the erformances of Al Gore and George W. Bush, two candidates for President of the United States, during the first residential debate for election year 2000. Comedian Will Ferrell (SNL) played Bush and used the word "strategery," a mock-Bushism playing on the words "strategy" and "strategic".

H.Res. 610, Resolution to Boycott Chinese Olympics Introduced in the

"Aung Din" aungdin2004@yahoo.com aungdin2004

Wed Aug 8, 2007 11:59 am (PST)

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States Government should take immediate steps to boycott the Summer Olympic Games in Beijing in August 2008 unless... (Introduced in House)

HRES 610 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. RES. 610

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States Government should take immediate steps to boycott the Summer Olympic Games in Beijing in August 2008 unless the Chinese regime stops engaging in serious human rights abuses against its citizens and stops supporting serious human rights abuses by the Governments of Sudan, Burma, and North Korea against their citizens.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

August 3, 2007 Mr. ROHRABACHER (for himself, Mr. PITTS, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. WOLF, and Mr. SMITH of New Jersey) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

------------ --------- --------- ---

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States Government should take immediate steps to boycott the Summer Olympic Games in Beijing in August 2008 unless the Chinese regime stops engaging in serious human rights abuses against its citizens and stops supporting serious human rights abuses by the Governments of Sudan, Burma, and North Korea against their citizens.

Whereas the Games of the XI Olympiad in Berlin in 1936 showed that the integrity of the host country is of the utmost importance so as not to stain the participating athletes or the character of the Games;

Whereas the Chinese regime regularly denies the right to freedom of conscience, expression, religion, and association;

Whereas the Chinese regime also holds thousands of political prisoners without charge or trial, including democracy activists, lawyers, human rights defenders, religious leaders, journalists, trade unionists, Tibetan Buddhists, Uighurs, unregistered church members, Falun Gong practitioners, and political dissidents;

Whereas the Chinese regime has long-standing economic and military ties with Sudan and continues to strengthen these ties, including providing military assistance, in spite of the ongoing human rights abuses amounting to genocide in Darfur, Sudan;

Whereas China reportedly purchases as much as 70 percent of Sudan's oil, currently has at least $3 billion invested in the Sudanese energy sector, for a total of $10 billion since the 1990s; is building infrastructure in Sudan and provided funds for a presidential palace in Sudan at a reported cost of approximately $20 million; and has reportedly cancelled approximately $100 million in debt owed by the Sudanese Government;

Whereas the Chinese regime has long-standing political, economic, and military ties with Burma and continues to strengthen these ties in spite of serious human rights abuses and house arrest of Noble Peace Price winner Daw Aung San Suu Kyi;

Whereas in May 2007, the military junta in Rangoon extended for one year the house arrest order against Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and continues to deny access to her by United States Government officials and others in the international community, including representatives of human rights organizations;

Whereas China is one of the largest importers of Burma's natural resources, extraction of which has led to destruction of villages, increased human rights abuses against civilians, particularly ethnic minorities, and the rampant use of forced labor;

Whereas China has sold Burma's military regime over $2 billion worth of arms and military equipment since 1989, which have been used to commit grave human rights violations and mass atrocities against Burma's ethnic minority civilians resulting in the destruction of over 3,000 villages;

Whereas China's steadfast support for Burma's military regime in the United Nations Security Council, including by vetoing a United Nations Security Council resolution on Burma , and other international fora is emboldening the regime to further perpetrate economic mismanagement, crackdowns, and attacks on civilians that harm the stability of the region;

Whereas according to Amnesty International, China holds more than a quarter of a million people under the `Re-Education through Labor' detention system in labor camps, without benefit of charge or trial;

Whereas local police officers in China are empowered to imprison people under this detention system;

Whereas in the face of a serious food shortage and political repression, thousands of North Koreans have fled across the border to China;

Whereas hundreds, possibly thousands, of North Koreans have been detained by the Chinese authorities and forcibly returned across the border where they face arbitrary detention, torture, and even summary execution;

Whereas in 2004, Mr. Vitit Muntarbhorn, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in North Korea, concluded that because North Korea considers fleeing the country a criminal offense punishable by death, North Koreans who have fled to other countries should be considered `refugees sur place', and therefore China, as a signatory to 1951 United Nations Convention on Refugees and its 1969 Protocol, should not repatriate refugees to North Korea;

Whereas the Chinese regime continues to violate its commitments under the 1951 United Nations Convention on Refugees and its 1969 Protocol by repatriating North Korean refugees against their will to North Korea, where such refugees face imprisonment, torture, and at times execution, for the crime of leaving their country, rather than allowing them safe passage to countries like the Republic of Korea where such refugees would have automatic citizenship, and the United States which has offered them resettlement;

Whereas Chinese security officials, rather than working with the humanitarian community to help these refugees, hunt down and jail humanitarian workers who try to feed and shelter refugees, including United States citizen Steve Kim of Huntington, New York, and South Korean, Japanese, and Chinese citizens;

Whereas the Chinese regime refuses to allow the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the internationally- recognized organization whose sole function is to help refugees, access to the North Korean refugees in China and denies the refugees access to the UNHCR and therefore to much needed assistance;

Whereas China continues to hold the 11th Panchen Lama, who was selected by the Dalai Lama;

Whereas the Panchen Lama was only 6 years old when he was taken away by the Chinese authorities and is held in a secret location;

Whereas according to Amnesty International, China continues to execute political prisoners and nonviolent offenders, and accounts for over 80 percent of all executions documented in the world;

Whereas Chinese authorities have engaged in removing organs from executed prisoners as well as Falun Gong practitioners held in detention, frequently without the consent of the prisoners, the Falun Gong practitioners, or the families of both;

Whereas China continues to allow forced abortion and sterilization to enforce its `One Child' policy, as per family population control measures;

Whereas according to United States Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006, the Chinese regime's birth planning policies retain harshly coercive elements in law and practice;

Whereas the laws restrict the rights of families to choose the number of children they have and the period of time between births;

Whereas the penalties for violating these laws are strict, leaving some women little choice but to abort pregnancies;

Whereas in addition, the implementation of these laws by local officials has resulted in serious violations of human rights;

Whereas reports of forced sterilization and abortions, in violation of the national law, continue to be documented in rural areas;

Whereas in 2007, officials in Chongqing municipality and in Fujian Province reportedly forcibly sterilized women;

Whereas according to the Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006, the Chinese regime consistently blocked access to Internet sites it deemed controversial, such as sites discussing Tibetan independence, underground religious and spiritual organizations, democracy activists, and the 1989 Tiananmen massacre;

Whereas the Chinese regime at times blocked access to selected Internet sites operated by major foreign news outlets, health organizations, and educational institutions;

Whereas China's Internet control system reportedly employs tens of thousands of persons;

Whereas according to the Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006, sexual and physical abuse and extortion were reported in some detention centers;

Whereas Falun Gong activists reported that police raped female practitioners, including an incident in November 2005 at the Dongchengfang police station in Tunzhou City, Hebei Province, in which two women were raped while in detention;

Whereas according to Amnesty International, China executes political prisoners from the Uighur ethnic minority in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region;

Whereas there are concerns that abuses committed against the Uighur ethnic minority could amount to genocide;

Whereas according to the Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006, the Chinese regime has not provided a comprehensive, credible account of all those killed, missing, or detained in connection with the violent suppression of the 1989 Tiananmen demonstrations;

Whereas there are nongovernmental organization reports of hundreds, if not thousands, who died during the crackdown against the Tiananmen demonstrations;

Whereas according the Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006, since the crackdown on Falun Gong began in 1999, estimates of the numbers of Falun Gong adherents who have died in custody because of torture, abuse, and neglect range from several hundred to a few thousand;

Whereas in March 2006, United Nations Special Rapporteur Manfred Nowak reported that Falun Gong practitioners accounted for 66 percent of victims of alleged torture while in custody by the Chinese regime;

Whereas according to the Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2006, regulations for committing a person into the psychiatric facility at Ankang, China, were not clear;

Whereas credible reports indicate that a number of political and trade union activists, underground religious believers, persons who repeatedly petitioned the Chinese regime, members of the banned China Democratic Party, and Falun Gong adherents were incarcerated in such psychiatric facilities during 2006;

Whereas China is preparing to host the Summer Olympic Games in August 2008, the most honorable, venerated, and prestigious international sporting event, and China has selected `One World, One Dream' as a slogan for those games;

Whereas China should act consistently with the Olympic standard of preserving human dignity for its citizens and for the people of the Darfur region of Sudan, Burma , and North Korea;

Whereas the spirit of the Olympics, which is to bring together nations and people from all over the world in peace, is incompatible with Chinese actions; and

Whereas China continues to seriously abuse the rights of its citizens and continues to assist Sudan, Burma, and North Korea in committing human rights abuses against their citizens: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That--

(1) it is the duty and responsibility of the United States to take effective steps to stop serious human rights abuses by the Chinese regime against its citizens and to stop the Chinese regime from supporting serious human rights abuses by Sudan, Burma , and North Korea against their citizens; and

(2) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States Government should take immediate steps to boycott the Summer Olympic Games in Beijing in August 2008 unless the Chinese regime stops engaging in serious human rights abuses against its citizens and stops supporting serious human rights abuses by the Governments of Sudan, Burma, and North Korea against their citizens.

H Con. Res. 200, Resolution Calling for Unconditional Release of Daw

"Aung Din" aungdin2004@yahoo.com aungdin2004

Wed Aug 8, 2007 11:48 am (PST)

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the immediate and unconditional release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi (Introduced in House)

HCON 200 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. CON. RES. 200

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the immediate and unconditional release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

August 2, 2007 Mr. KING of New York (for himself and Mr. LANTOS) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

------------ --------- --------- ---

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the immediate and unconditional release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

Whereas in 1990 the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), a military junta in Burma, nullified the victory of the National League for Democracy (NLD);

Whereas NLD leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was not allowed to assume the office of Prime Minister and was subsequently placed under house arrest;

Whereas Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was released in July 1995, yet once again placed under house arrest in September 2000;

Whereas following a second release, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and several of her followers were attacked by a government-sponsore d mob on May 6, 2002, and she was then imprisoned at Insein Prison in Yangon;

Whereas on May 16, 2007, more than 50 world leaders released a letter demanding the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, a demand repeated by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, 14 United Nations human rights experts, the European Union, the United States, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and the foreign ministers of three ASEAN member states, yet on May 27 her detention was extended;

Whereas for her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991;

Whereas the ruling military junta in Burma continues to violate the human rights of Burmese citizens, including the systematic use of rape as a weapon of war and extrajudicial killings;

Whereas the armed forces in Burma have been accused of large-scale trafficking in heroin and methamphetamines;

Whereas the Burmese Government has destroyed more than 3,000 villages, displaced approximately 2 million Burmese people, and arrested approximately 1,300 individuals for expressing critical opinions;

Whereas Burma's main broadcasters and publications are state controlled and the media does not report opposing views except to criticize them;

Whereas on September 30, 2006, the United Nations Security Council officially included Burma on its agenda for the first time;

Whereas the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) denounced the ruling military regime of Burma on June 22, 2007, citing the use of detainees as porters for the armed forces and the systematic abuse and murder of both detainees and civilians;

Whereas the last time the ICRC publicly denounced egregious, ongoing, and systemic human rights abuses was in 1994 when the ICRC addressed genocide in Rwanda; and

Whereas the ICRC stated that civilians, especially those residing near the Thai-Burma border, have been subjected to abuse such as destruction of their food supply and forced unpaid manual labor: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That--

(1) it is the sense of Congress that United States policy should continue to call upon--

(A) the military regime in Burma --

(i) to immediately and unconditionally release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other detained political prisoners and prisoners of conscience;

(ii) to immediately cease attacks against ethnic minority civilians; and

(iii) to immediately begin a meaningful process of tripartite dialogue with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the NLD, and Burma's ethnic nationalities; and

(B) the People's Republic of China and other countries that provide political and economic support to Burma's military junta to utilize their position and influence to--

(i) urge Burma's military generals to immediately release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners; and

(ii) end their attacks on ethnic minority civilians and begin a meaningful process of genuine national reconciliation with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the NLD, and Burma's ethnic nationalities;

(2) Congress urges the United Nations Security Council to immediately consider and take appropriate action to respond to the growing threat the SPDC poses in Burma ;

(3) Congress expresses support for the restoration of democracy in Burma ; and

(4) Congress expresses the need for freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press to be guaranteed for all Burmese citizens.

Burma asks for ILO recognition

	Burmese government partially blames poverty for the use of forced labour.(Photo by Paula Bronstein/Getty Images)

Burma urges the ILO to review its emergency resolutions adopted more than seven years ago.

Burmese Deupty Minister for Labour, U Aung Kyi, has said Burma is complying with the requests of the ILO with the firm political will and constructively.

As a result, he has requested the ILO to review Emergency Resolutions adopted by the 87th ILC and the 88th ILC concerning Burma.

Burmese government and the ILO signed an agreement in February this year to implement a complaint handling mechanism to deal with forced labour issues.

Listen to BBC's report

ILO is demanding Burmese government to allow for expansion of the Liaison Officer's office with international staff but it has not been approved by the Burmese government.

There have been reports about the use of forced labour in

ဆီဆြတ္အာရီယံမ်ား (ႏွင့္) ကၽြန္သေဘာက္စိတ္ဓါတ္

ရခိုင္သားမ်ားမွာ ရခိုင္ျပည္ပ်က္စီးရသည္ကို ျမန္မာမ်ားကို အျပစ္တင္ေလ့ဟိပါသည္။ ဘိုးေတာ္ေမာင္၀ိုင္းကို အျပစ္တင္ေလ့ဟိပါသည္။ ဘိုးေတာ္ေမာင္၀ိုင္းသည္ သံုးႀကိမ္တိုင္တိုင္ပင့္ဖိတ္ၿပီးမွ ရခိုင္ျပည္ကို သိမ္းယူျခင္းျဖစ္ပါသည္။ ပင့္ဖိတ္ခီသူမွာ ငသံေတြျဖစ္ပါသည္။ ဗိုလ္ခ်င္းျပန္၏ဖခင္ျဖစ္ပါသည္။ ထို႔ေၾကာင့္ ရခိုင္သားမ်ားအတြက္ သမိုင္းသင္ခန္းစာရပါသည္။ (ျပည္တြင္းေရးျပႆနာကို ကိုယ့္အားကိုယ္ကိုး ေျဖယွင္း။ သူမ်ားကို လားအားမကိုးကဲ့) အေျဖရသည္။

အတိတ္အေၾကာင္းကို ထားလိုက္ပါဖိ။ အခု ပစၥဳပၸန္မွာ၀ါ ဇာျဖစ္နီေရလဲ။ ျပည္တြင္းက မဂၢဇိန္းမ်ားကို ခ်န္ထားလိုက္ပါ။ ျပည္တြင္းမွာ စာပီစီးစစ္ေရးဟိနီလို႔ လြတ္လတ္လပ္လပ္ ထုတ္၀ီခြင့္မရလို႔ ဆိုလိုက္ပါဖိ။ အခု လြတ္ေျမာက္နယ္ၿမီကို ေရာက္နီၿပီးျဖစ္သည္။ ရခိုင္သတင္းစာမ်ားကို ဖတ္လိုက္ေသာအခါ ရခိုင္တလံုးတပါဒကိုလည္း ရွာမတြိရပါ။ ေအခ်င့္ကို (ကၽြန္) စိတ္ဓါတ္မေခၚေက (ဂႏၶဴး) စိတ္ဓါတ္ (မယူမ) စိတ္ဓါတ္လို႔ ေခၚရပါဖို႔လား။

သွ်မ္းသတင္းစာမ်ားကို ဖတ္လိုက္ေသာအခါ သွ်မ္းဘာသာ အဂၤလိပ္ဘာသာ ျမန္မာဘာသာ သံုးဘာသာျဖင့္ထုတ္၀ီသည္ကို အားရဖြယ္ တြိျမင္ရပါသည္။ ထို႔ျပင္ ကရင္သတင္းစာ စာအုပ္မ်ားကိုလည္း ကရင္ဘာသာ အဂၤလိပ္ဘာသာ ျမန္မာဘာသာမ်ားျဖင့္ ထုတ္၀ီပါသည္။ မိမိဘာသာကို လံုး၀လွ်စ္လ်ဴမျပဳကတ္ပါ။ အစဥ္အၿမဲ အေလးထားသည္ကို တြိရပါသည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ ရခိုင္သား (အာရီယံမ်ား) မွာ ပဇာအေၾကာင္းေၾကာင့္ မိမိဘာသာကို ေဂ်ာင္ထိုးသိမ္းထားကတ္ပါသနည္း။

ရခိုင့္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးတြင္ အာရီယံ (ဆီဆြတ္) တိ မ်ားနီသိမ့္လို႔ ရခိုင္သားမ်ား လြတ္လပ္ေရးမရႏိုင္ျခင္းျဖစ္ပါသည္။ ခဲ၀ါပိတုန္းျပတ္လွ်င္ သူမ်ားကိုလည္းျပတ္စီခ်င္သည္။ သို႔မွသာ ကိုယ္ပိတုန္းျပတ္နီသည္ကို သူမ်ားျမင္ႏိုင္လိမ့္မည္မဟုတ္ေပ။ ထိုနည္းတူစြာ ခဲ၀ါပိတုန္းျပတ္ကယ္တင္သွ်င္မ်ားက ရခိုင္ျပည္သူမ်ားကို ေဂ်ာက္ထဲတြန္းပို႔နီကတ္ပါသည္။ ရခိုင္လူငယ္မ်ားကို အဆိပ္ခြံ႕ေကၽြး သတ္ျဖတ္နီကတ္ပါသည္။ အိန္တာဗ်ဴးမ်ားတြင္ ရခိုင္သားမ်ား ျမန္မာစကားမပီကလာ ပီကလာေျပာဆိုလွ်က္ (ရခိုင္ပ်ည္က်ီး သီးခ်ားလြတ္ေမ်ာက္ေယး) ဟု အရွက္တရားမဲ့ကင္းစြာ ကၽြီးေအာ္နီကတ္ပါသည္။

လြတ္ေျမာက္နယ္ၿမီေရာက္နီကတ္ပ်ာယ္မဟုတ္ပါလား။ လြတ္ေျမာက္နယ္ၿမီမွာ ျမန္မာဆင္ဆာဘုတ္အဖဲြ႔ဟိေရလို႔ တခါလည္းမၾကားဖူးပါ။ အစြာျဖစ္လို႔ ကိုယ့္ျပည္သူဖတ္ဖို႔ ထုတ္ေတသတင္းစာတိကို ကိုယ့္ျပည္သူသံုးစကားျဖင့္ မထုတ္ကတ္ပါသနည္း။ တခါဖတ္လိုက္တိုင္း ဖတ္လိုက္တိုင္း ျမန္မာက အဘာေခၚေလာက္ေအာင္ က်ိက်ိပက္ပက္ ခၽြဲတတ္ႏဲြ႔တတ္ပါသည္။ ေလ့လာသူတခ်ိဳ႔က (လွ်ာတိအာတြိ) ၿခီလားခကတ္ပ်ာ။ ပ်င္လို႔မရဗ်ာဟု သံုးသပ္ပါသည္။ (ဘိန္းစဲြစြာထက္ စာစဲြစြာ ျဖတ္ရခက္) ဟုဆိုပါသည္။ သြီးထြက္ေအာင္မွန္ပါသည္။

၄င္းသတင္းစာမ်ားကို (ေရာင္ရာ ဆီလူး) ေငြေထာက္ပံ့ပီးနီလူတိကလည္း ဟိပါသည္။ ရခိုင္မွာ စာမဟိလို႔လား။ သို႔မဟုတ္ ယားလို႔လား။ အေျဖမွာ ယွင္းယွင္းေခ်ျဖစ္ပါသည္။ ရခိုင္သား (အာရီယံ) မ်ားမွာ (ကိုယ့္ဆီကိုယ္ဆြတ္) ျခင္းျဖစ္ပါသည္။ သူမ်ားကို လားအျပစ္မတင္သင့္ပါ။ မည္သူမျပဳ မိမိမႈ (ဆီဆြတ္အာရီယံမ်ားကို ဒါဏ္ခတ္ဖို႔ အခ်ိန္တန္ဗ်ာယ္) ျဖစ္ပါေၾကာင္း ရြာလည္ေမာင္းခတ္ ေၾကျငာအပ္သည္။

(ဆီဆြတ္အာရီယံမ်ား ေကာင္းရာသုဂတိလားပါစီ)

Burma: Land of Fear

Introduction

'Inside Burma: Land of Fear' was first broadcast in May 1996. It was written and presented by John Pilger and produced and directed by David Munro. The film detailed the many injustices and human rights abuses that have so badly marked the country's past and present. Amnesty International has described Burma as a 'prison without bars' of a country which has a beauty and resources probably unequalled in Asia.

Yet it is also a secret country. Isolated for the past 34 years since a brutal military dictatorship seized power in Rangoon, this rich country has been relegated to one of the world's poorest with the suffering of its people mostly unseen. The generals who crushed democracy in Burma have ruled with a regime so harsh, bloody and uncompromising that the parallels with Cambodia under Pol Pot and East Timor under Suharto are striking.

According to the United Nations, untold thousands have been forced from their homes, massacred, tortured and subjected to a modern form of slavery. How was this country allowed to descend in such dramatic fashion and, after the pro-democracy uprisings of 1988, are its people any closer to being granted their rights to a vote and an economic system which will reward their labour? Click here to read John Pilger's articles on Burma

UCT to honour Aung San Suu Kyi

The University of Cape Town is to confer an honorary doctorate of law on human rights activist and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, held under house arrest by the Myanmar military junta.

The leader of the main opposition National League of Democracy party, Suu Kyi has been in several spells of detention, and her movements restricted.

In the past 18 years she has been held for a total of 11. She has no telephone and is allowed only two visitors, her maid and doctor.

Vice-chancellor Njabulo Ndebele said UCT wanted to honour Suu Kyi for the personal sacrifices she had made for the freedom of her country's people.

"We acknowledge Suu Kyi as an extraordinary example of sheer strength, her wealth of knowledge, her perseverance and as a symbol of determination of women all over the world.

"Through Suu Kyi's example, there is hope for millions of the down-trodden around the world."

Because the junta has banned Suu Kyi from leaving her native Myanmar, Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu will receive the degree on her behalf at UCT's December graduation ceremony.

A fellow Nobel peace laureate, Tutu is a long-time and outspoken campaigner for her release and the liberation of her people.

Celebrated for her non-violent struggle against oppression, the devout Buddhist was awarded the Rafto Prize and the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought in 1990 and the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991. In national elections in 1990 her party won 82 percent of the seats in parliament, but the victory was rejected by the ruling military junta.

If the results had been accepted, she would have become the country's prime minister.