Myanmar: Towards the Elections

Asia Report N°174
20 August 2009

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The bizarre prosecution and conviction of opposition leader and Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi for violating her house arrest has returned attention to repression in Myanmar, as preparations were underway for the first national elections in twenty years, now scheduled for 2010. This further undermined what little credibility the exercise may have had, especially when based on a constitution that institutionalises the military’s political role. The UN Secretary-General’s July visit, which produced no tangible results, added to the gloom. But while the elections will not be free and fair – a number of prominent regime opponents have been arrested and sentenced to prison terms over the last year – the constitution and elections together will fundamentally change the political landscape in a way the government may not be able to control. Senior Generals Than Shwe and Maung Aye may soon step down or move to ceremonial roles, making way for a younger military generation. All stakeholders should be alert to opportunities that may arise to push the new government toward reform and reconciliation.

At first glance, the obstacles to change seem over­whelming. The 2008 constitution entrenches military power by reserving substantial blocs of seats in the national and local legislatures for the army, creating a strong new national defence and security council and vesting extraordinary powers in the commander-in-chief. It prevents Aung San Suu Kyi from standing for president, even if she were not imprisoned. It is extremely difficult to amend. And while not all regulations relating to the administration of the elections have been an­nounced, they are unlikely to offer much room for manoevre to opposition parties.

But the elections are significant because the controversial constitution on which they are based involves a complete reconfiguration of the political structure – establishing a presidential system of government with a bicameral legislature as well as fourteen regional governments and assemblies – the most wide-ranging shake-up in a generation. The change will not inevitably be for the better, but it offers an opportunity to influence the future direction of the country. Ultimately, even assuming that the intention of the regime is to consolidate military rule rather than begin a transition away from it, such processes often lead in unexpected directions.

This report looks at the elections in the context of Myan­mar’s constitutional history. It examines key provisions of the 2008 constitution and shows how many of the controversial articles were simply taken from its 1947 or 1974 predecessors. Noteworthy new provisions include strict requirements on presidential candidates, the establishment of state/regional legislatures and governments, the reservation of legislative seats for the military, military control of key security ministries, the authority granted to the military to administer its own affairs (in particular military justice) and the creation of a constitutional tribunal.

Criticism of the constitution from groups within Myan­mar has focused on military control, ethnic autonomy, qualifications for political office, and the very difficult amendment procedures. The main reaction of the populace to it and the forthcoming elections is indifference, rooted in a belief that nothing much will change. Some of the so-called ceasefire groups – ethnic minorities that have ended their conflicts with the government – are endorsing ethnic political parties that will take part in the polls. These groups take a negative view of the constitution but feel that there may be some limited opening of political space, particularly at the regional level, and that they should position themselves to take advantage of this. There are increased tensions, however, as the regime is pushing these groups to transform into border guard forces partially under the command of the national army.

The National League for Democracy (NLD), winner of the 1990 elections, has said it will only take part if the constitution is changed, and it is given the freedom to organise. Assuming this will not happen, it is not yet clear if it will call for a complete boycott in an attempt to deny the elections legitimacy or urge its supporters to vote for other candidates. A boycott could play into the hands of the military government, since it would not prevent the election from going ahead and would mainly deprive non-government candidates of votes, potentially narrowing the range of voices in future legislatures.

The Myanmar authorities must make the electoral process more credible. Aung San Suu Kyi and all other political prisoners must be released now and allowed to participate fully in the electoral process; politically-motivated arrests must cease. It also critical that key electoral legislation be promulgated as soon as possible, in a way that allows parties to register without undue restriction, gives space for canvassing activities and ensures transparent counting of votes.

The international community, including Myanmar’s ASEAN neighbours, must continue to press for these measures while looking for opportunities that the elections may bring. This will require a pragmatic and nuanced strategy towards the new government at the very time, following a deeply flawed electoral process, when pressure will be greatest for a tough stance. The new Myanmar government, whatever its policies, will not be capable of reversing overnight a culture of impunity and decades of abuses and political restrictions. But following the elections, the international community must be ready to respond to any incremental positive steps in a calibrated and timely fashion. To have any hope of inducing a reform course, it is critical to find ways to communicate unambiguously that a renormalisation of external relations is possible.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To Members of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN):

1. Make clear to Myanmar authorities that ASEAN member states support the release of political prisoners; enactment of timely and reasonable administrative regulations for registration of political parties; permission for domestic and foreign election monitors to be present throughout the country no less than a month before the scheduled polling date; and a green light for freedom of movement for print and broadcast journalists from ASEAN countries.

2. Consider offering, as and when appropriate, parliamentary exchanges with the newly elected government, assistance in setting up parliamentary committees and other steps that might push the door open a little wider.

3. Outline for Myanmar authorities the steps they would have to take for the elections to be perceived as credible.

4. Build on the positive example set by ASEAN following Cyclone Nargis by acting as a “diplomatic bridge” between Myanmar and the international community – explaining the latter’s concerns to Myan­mar and viceversa.

To Western Governments:

5. Articulate clear expectations for the electoral process and highlight where it fails to meet international standards.

6. State clearly what the West expects of Myanmar in order for relations to improve; send clear messages before the post-election government is in place that a process of normalising relations is possible; and indicate that positive steps will be met with timely, calibrated responses.

7. Suspend restrictions on high-level bilateral contacts with the new government, along with restrictions on its members’ travel, to enable the diplomatic exchanges that will be required in order to communicate the necessary messages.

8. Maintain the targeted financial sanctions against individual leaders, while keeping them under review so that they can be adjusted in light of developments.

To the UN Secretary-General and the relevant agencies of the UN System:

9. Keep an active good offices process, including the personal engagement of the Secretary-General as well as the efforts of his Special Adviser, so as to be in a position to take advantage of any unexpected opportunities that may arise. A multi-level political presence on the ground can be valuable in this respect.

10. Consider providing relevant and appropriate electoral assistance, while abiding by UN standards, including technical discussions with the Myanmar authorities at an early stage on international expectations and experiences from other countries.

11. Begin, through relevant bodies (such as the United Nations Development Programme) and in cooperation with other international institutions (such as the World Bank), activities aimed at strengthening the capacity of civilian institutions of governance. This should be implemented in an incremental manner, based on careful assessments of the space for conducting such activities.

To the Myanmar Government:

12. Release Aung San Suu Kyi and all other political prisoners.

13. Desist from pre-election arrests and prosecution of perceived political opponents or dissidents.

14. Promulgate fair administrative laws and regulations relating to the conduct of the election as soon as possible.

15. Minimise restrictions on the registration of political parties and on canvassing activities and put in place procedures to ensure the transparent counting of votes.

16. Give greater importance to the ethnic dimension of the political situation, including by:

a) implementing a nationwide ceasefire and ensuring and facilitating humanitarian access to former conflict areas;

b) taking steps to reduce tensions with ethnic political and ceasefire organisations and giving them assurances about their political and military status in the lead-up to the elections; and

c) committing to select chief ministers from among the elected representatives of state legislatures.

To Other Stakeholders in Myanmar, including the Political Opposition:

17. Encourage the broadest possible participation in the election process, even if individual parties or organisations choose not to participate.

18. Encourage full participation of the electorate in campaigning and voting.

To Donors, Non-Governmental Organisations and Institutes:

19. Support the provision of in-country civic education to the Myanmar electorate if possible, as well as through exiled media organisations and international Burmese-language radio stations.

20. Support the exposure of new legislators to the workings of other legislatures, particularly those in the region and in other countries that are emerging or have recently emerged from authoritarian rule, in order to build capacity and work towards normalising relations.

21. Be prepared to respond quickly to opportunities to rebuild and/or reform key political and economic institutions, as well as social infrastructure, if or when opportunities arise.

22. Provide humanitarian and development support to ethnic regions, particularly special autonomous areas.

Yangon/Brussels, 20 August 2009

Full Report can be d/l from:

* ICG on a PDF A4 format
or
MS Word format
or
on my Scribd

READ MORE---> Myanmar: Towards the Elections...

UN boss Ban Ki-Moon 'passive, throws fits'

(news.com.au) -A SENIOR Norwegian diplomat has slammed Ban Ki-Moon as lacking leadership, ineffectual and prone to angry outbursts, a daily reported today, just two weeks ahead of the UN chief's visit to Oslo.

Mona Juul, the Norwegian ambassdor to the UN, sent a damning confidential letter to her ministry half-way through Mr Ban's mandate, in which she said he had "hardly shown any leadership,'' Aftenposten reported.

The newspaper, which obtained a copy of the letter, said Ms Juul also described Mr Ban as being "passive,'' especially in hotspots such as Sri Lanka, where a decades-long rebel insurgency was brought to an end by a bloody government offensive.

"At a time when solutions by the UN and multilateral agencies are more necessary than ever to resolve global conflicts, Ban and the UN are notable by their absence,'' she reportedly wrote.

The Norwegian foreign ministry has not commented on the report so far.

Ms Juul, who played a leading role in brokering the Oslo accords which led to a peace agreement being signed in 1993 between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organisation, said Mr Ban had been a "passive observer'' in Sri Lanka.

She said he had also displayed his weakness in the face of the global financial crisis, on environmental issues and the situation in Myanmar where opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi has been in detention for decades.

"Ban regularly throws a fit which even his most cool-headed and experienced collaborators have a problem in dealing with,'' she wrote.

The South Korean-born Mr Ban is due to visit Norway on August 31.

Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere told the newspaper that Ban was a "worker'' and a good listener.

Agence France-Presse

READ MORE---> UN boss Ban Ki-Moon 'passive, throws fits'...

Suu Kyi Verdict: Reaction Divided

By SIMON ROUGHNEEN
The Irrawaddy News

As Aung San Suu Kyi returns to face another 18 months of house arrest, regional and global reactions have followed, highlighting a lack of international unity on her conviction and return to house arrest.

In somewhat of a surprise and perhaps indicating a difference in tone between US President Barack Obama's foreign policy and that of his predecessor, the European Union (EU) reacted with the most vigor.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy specifically mentioned targeting Burma's timber and gemstone exports for increased sanctions, while the European Parliamentary caucus on Burma said there should be a global arms embargo against the junta.

While President Obama and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton both denounced the verdict, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters in Washington that it was “premature” to consider UN sanctions against Burma, perhaps awaiting some consensus at the UN Security Council. However, the US had already renewed its sanctions against the junta some weeks ago, a hardball counter to Secretary Clinton's offer to relax sanctions should Suu Kyi be released, as the UN Security Council originally requested in May.

A UNSC meeting called by the French on the matter ended in uncertainty on Tuesday, as China, Russia and Asean-member Vietnam sought more time to deliberate on a draft proposal circulated by the US.

China, perhaps Burma’s strongest ally, had earlier said that the world should respect the sovereign right of the junta to rule on internal matters, while India, which competes with Beijing for trade and investment links with the junta, has not made any official comment on the verdict at the time of writing.

With Burma being an Asean-member state, it was unclear how strongly the regional bloc would officially react to the verdict.

Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a visiting research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, told The Irrawaddy: “I think Asean should take a lead, but Asean itself is put in a difficult position. It cannot kick Burma out because it would demonstrate that Asean, too, has failed. Asean should come up with a new “regional policy” which should be the right mix between sanction and engagement.”

Beating the UN to the punch, Asean released a statement on Burma on Wednesday, through Thailand, which holds the current chair. It reacted with what some international media summarized as “regrets,” “disappointment” and “condemnation.”

The statement was released after some regional states had announced their own reactions to the verdict. The Malaysian foreign minister said, “I think there is a need for Asean foreign ministers to have an urgent meeting to discuss this issue, which is of grave concern."

Perhaps the most telling aspect of the Asean statement, however, was its affirmation that, “We stand ready to cooperate with the Myanmar [Burma] Government in its efforts to realize the seven steps to democracy and remain constructively engaged with Myanmar in order to build the Asean Community together.”

Earlier Asean had said that Suu Kyi should be released as part of the “free, fair and inclusive general elections [in 2010] that will then pave the way for Myanmar’s full integration into the international community.”

The junta has already ruled that Suu Kyi cannot participate in elections, due to her marriage to a British academic. Her continued detention will mean she cannot appear in public during the electoral period.

Given that many Asean states have close economic links with Burma—with Thailand dependent on the country for gas imports—it remains unlikely that regional consensus on economic sanctions is likely.

As an alternative, "Asean could declare support for a UN arms embargo. It avoids controversial economic sanctions, and as far as we know, they don’t sell arms to Burma anyway," told Mark Farmaner, the head of the Burma UK Campaign group.

Individually, some Asean states have taken a more defined unilateral approach.

“The government of Indonesia is strongly disappointed with the verdict handed down to Aung San Suu Kyi,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Teuku Faizasyah, who added, “The length of the sentence was apparently aimed at preventing Suu Kyi from taking part in next year’s elections. The verdict leads to suspicions that the coming election will not be inclusive and far from credible.”

NGOs and human rights groups in Indonesia reacted strongly to the verdict, and if Indonesia's democracy is functioning as well as many analysts believe, this could translate into a more decisive and forthright Indonesian policy on Burma.

However, other Asean states have been more circumspect, notably Singapore, whose foreign minister was quoted as saying: “What can we do? Can we use force? Can we use trade sanctions? The Europeans and the Americans have done their worst, it has not worked.”

Perhaps Asean states with close links to the junta could do just that. Sunny Tanuwidjaja of Jakarta's Center for Strategic and International Studies criticized Asean’s unflinchingly incremental approach to Burma.

He told The Irrawaddy: “The best thing Asean can do is two things: put Burma's Asean membership and their economic links to Burma at stake.”

Burma specialist Sean Turnell of the Burma Economic Watch in Sydney said Asean states could look more closely at their own economic links to the junta, if they are serious about pushing for change in Burma.

“Asean must be getting sick and tired of the junta, which is tarnishing the regional brand,” he said. “Activists and NGOs would be better-off focusing on Asean and on the other trading partners, notably China and India.”

READ MORE---> Suu Kyi Verdict: Reaction Divided...

Man's 'divine mission' to save Aung San Suu Kyi lands both in jail

By Danny Kemp in Bangkok

* Suu Kyi's visitor on "divine mission"
* Wanted to warn her she was in great danger
* She got extra 18 months, he got seven years
* Times UK: Suu Kyi silenced again

JOHN Yettaw thought he was on a divine mission to save Aung San Suu Kyi when he swam to her lakeside house - but the troubled US military veteran instead left her at the mercy of Burma's (Myanmar's) junta.

The 54-year-old from Missouri was initially branded a "fool" by lawyers for the detained Nobel Peace Prize winner after his bizarre adventure in May gave the military regime a ready-made excuse to keep her locked up.

Yet a picture eventually emerged of a somewhat tragic figure on a spiritual quest, a devout Mormon who sought redemption after his teenaged son was killed riding a motorcycle that Mr Yettaw had bought for him as a present.

Yesterday, a prison court sentenced Mr Yettaw to seven years of hard labour and imprisonment - three years for breaching security laws, three years for immigration violations and one year for a municipal charge of illegal swimming.

Ms Suu Kyi was sentenced to three years but junta chief Than Shwe signed a special order allowing her to serve just half that time, under house arrest.

The 64-year-old Suu Kyi was later driven back to the house under tight security and the road outside the crumbling villa was sealed off. She has already been in detention for 14 of the past 20 years since Burma's ruling generals - who renamed the country Myanmar - refused to recognise her National League for Democracy's landslide victory in 1990 elections.

The rulings were met with instant condemnation around the world: US President Barack Obama called it "unjust" and demanded Ms Suu Kyi and all other Burmese political prisoners be freed; the European Union vowed the reinforce existing sanctions and France called for new sanctions.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd called the charges against Ms Suu Kyi "spurious" and branded the court ruling a "new low" for the junta. The Government will resume broadcasting Radio Australia into Burma, something Ms Suu Kyi had previously called for.

Court drama

The diabetic, epileptic father-of-seven found himself at the centre of Ms Suu Kyi's two-decade struggle with Burma's generals when police arrested him climbing out of the waters of Yangon's Lake Inye on May 6.

He was found with a pair of homemade flippers, along with an amateurish "spy kit" of a black shoulder bag, torch, folding pliers, a camera, two $US100 bills and some Burmese currency.

State media printed photographs that Mr Yettaw had taken of himself before his ill-fated adventure sporting his flippers for his swim, wearing a short-sleeved shirt and looking intensely into the lens. "(Mr Jettaw's) a very sincere and pious person," his lawyer Khin Maung Oo said.

It later transpired that it was not the first time he had been to Ms Suu Kyi's crumbling villa. In November 2008 he walked along a lakeside drain and left a copy of the Book of Mormon at her house before escaping.

His activities spawned conspiracy theories on both sides. During the trial, it emerged that he had been in contact with exile groups in Thailand before crossing over to Burma, prompting the junta to suggest that he was a "secret agent or her (Suu Kyi's) boyfriend".

The exiled activists meanwhile wondered whether he had been paid by Burma's rulers to give a reason for extending her detention, which was due to expire just days after he was arrested.

But it turned out that Mr Yettaw believed he was taking orders from a higher authority still - he had experienced a divine vision that "terrorists" would assassinate Ms Suu Kyi and wanted to warn her.

"Yettaw said he came here because God asked him to," Nyan Win, one of Ms Suu Kyi's lawyers, quoted him as telling the trial in May. "In his vision, the terrorists assassinated Aung San Suu Kyi and then they put the blame for the assassination on the government, so that's why he came here, to warn both of them," he said.

The story behind this vision revealed a lost soul with a difficult past. Military records showed that he had spent a brief spell in the US military in the 1970s, although Mr Yettaw told Burmese authorities that he was a Vietnam veteran with a history of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Married four times and with a history of drink problems and living in trailers, he was described locally as something of a misfit. Then his son Clint died two years ago in a motorcycling accident at the age of 17, and was buried on the family farm in the hamlet of Falcon, according to a US-based website.

The trauma changed everything. He took a backpack tour through Asia with another son, during which he made his first swim to Ms Suu Kyi's house, and then had the latest of the visions which he had experienced for years, according to Newsweek magazine.

Then he left his children with friends and in April this year set off for Thailand and then Rangoon (Yangon).

news.com.au-Agence France-Presse

READ MORE---> Man's 'divine mission' to save Aung San Suu Kyi lands both in jail...

Suu Kyi Sentence Stirs World Outrage

By WAI MOE
The Irrawaddy News

World leaders have expressed outrage over the 18-month sentence in the trial of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, and the European Union plans tougher sanctions against the Burmese regime.

Shortly after the sentence was announced on Tuesday, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicola Sarkozy quickly responded.

“I am both saddened and angry at the verdict today…following the sham trial of Aung San Suu Kyi,” Brown said in a statement, adding that the sentence was further proof that the regime is “determined to act with total disregard for accepted standards of the rule of law and in defiance of international opinion.”

“This is a purely political sentence designed to prevent her from taking part in the regime’s planned elections next year,” Brown said. He said that the 2010 elections will not have credibility or legitimacy unless Suu Kyi and other political prisoners are released, and they are allowed to participant in the poll.

Britain will assume the chair of the UN Security Council in August. Brown said, “I also believe that the UN Security Council—whose will has been flouted—must also now respond resolutely and impose a world wide ban on the sale of arms to the regime.”

The leader of another UNSC veto power, French President Sarkozy, also reacted strongly, calling for the European Union to pass tougher sanctions against the Burmese regime.

Sarkozy said that the verdict was “brutal and unjust,” and he will ask the EU to respond quickly by adopting new sanctions.
He said the EU’s new sanctions “must in particular target the resources that they [the junta] directly profit from, in the wood and ruby sector.” He said the gas industry, which supplies Thailand and other countries, should be spared from sanctions, according to the statement.
The EU, now under the presidency of Sweden, also condemned the sentence. The EU presidency statement said that the proceedings against Suu Kyi which stem from “charges which were brought twenty years after she was first wrongfully arrested, have been in breach of national and international law.”

Threatening tougher sanctions on Burma, the EU presidency said that the EU will further reinforce its restrictive measures targeting the Burmese regime, including its economic interests.

“The EU underlines its readiness to revise, amend or reinforce its measure in light of the developments in Burma/Myanmar,” said the statement.

The European Parliamentary Caucus on Burma called the military regime “the real criminal” and said the international community should wake up and take stronger action against the regime.

Among members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nation (Asean), the Philippine Foreign Minister Alberto G. Romulo said that the verdict is “incomprehensible and deplorable.”

Thailand, the current chairmanship of Asean, has not yet issued a statement. Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya said that Thailand will consult with other Asean members before deciding Asean’s next move on Burma following the sentencing, according to The Nation, an English-language newspaper.

After the sentence, several leading campaign groups, such as US Campaign for Burma and Burma Campaign UK, called for the UNSC to pass an arms embargo on the Burmese regime.

“The dictatorship is directly defying the United Nations Security Council,” said Zoya Phan, the international coordinator for the London-based Burma Campaign UK, in a press release. “It is time the generals faced consequences for their actions; a global arms embargo should be imposed immediately.”

In a statement released soon after the verdict was announced, British Foreign Office minister Ivan Lewis said that the British government would urge the UN to impose further sanctions.

"Specifically we now want to see an arms embargo against the regime. We want to see Burma's neighbors, the Asean countries, China, Japan, Thailand, apply maximum pressure," he said.

READ MORE---> Suu Kyi Sentence Stirs World Outrage...

‘Historic’ meeting of Burmese opposition in Indonesia

(DVB)–Burmese ethnic groups and pro-democracy parties are set to meet in Jakarta this month to draw up a national reconciliation programe for Burma, billed as “history being made”.

The alliance, the Movement for Democracy and Rights for Ethnic Nationalities (MDREN), will meet in the Indonesian capital on 12 and 13 August to formalize the ‘Proposal for National Reconciliation’.

A statement released today by MDREN said that “delegates from all groups aligned in opposition to the military regime” would be present at the meeting.

“The proposal envisages opening a process of dialogue with the junta, effectively offering a sustainable exit-strategy for the military rulers,” it said.

“Civil sector support, electoral and constitutional reforms, military demobilisation, ethnic relations and social infrastructure are among the central areas addressed in the [proposal].”

The Prime Minister of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), Sein Win, said that the convention was “history being made”.

“The last time all major ethnic and pro-democracy organizations have forged a common position was in 1947 when all forces agreed to seek independence from the British,” he said.

“As such, this is the first time an indigenous coalition has agreed to work together against a home-grown power.”

The MDREN is made up of opposition groups both within Burma and in exile, and includes the Ethnic Nationalities Council, the Women’s League of Burma and the Forum for Democracy in Burma.

International diplomats and non-governmental organizations will also attend the meeting.

Indonesia is hailed as a Southeast Asian success story after successful democratic transition from military rule in 1998, and is often cited as a potential model for Burma’s transition.

Reporting by Francis Wade

READ MORE---> ‘Historic’ meeting of Burmese opposition in Indonesia...

Junta faces mounting pressure as Aung San Suu Kyi awaits fate

by Larry Jagan

Bangkok (Mizzima) - The special court in the notorious Insein prison will pronounce the verdict on the trial of Burma’s democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi on Friday as international pressure on the junta mounts to release her.

On Monday night in the Irish capital of Dublin, Bono lead singer of the famous British rock band U2, announced that Aung San Suu Kyi had been awarded Amnesty International's most prestigious honour – she had been made the organization’s “Ambassador of Conscience” for 2009.

“As powerful a voice and as strong a leader in these times, as Dr. King and Nelson Mandela were in theirs... is Aung San Suu Ky,” he told some 80,000 cheering fans, as the band played 'Walk On' -- a track written especially for Aung San Suu Kyi in 2001. Every night during the rest of the group’s current on the 360 tour, U2 plans to highlight her plight during their performances and play 'Walk On'.

U2 has been a long-time campaigner on Aung San Suu Kyi’s behalf. Their lead singer, Bono has been associated with many human rights causes in the past, and the group was previously awarded the title, which was introduced by Amnesty six years ago. Past winners of the award include Vaclav Havel (former Czech president and political prisoner), Nelson Mandela (former South African leader and political prisoner) and the former Irish president and head of the UN’s human rights body, Mary Robinson.

It was inspired by a poem written for Amnesty International by the Nobel Laureate for Literature Seamus Heaney, the award aims to promote the organisation through the life, work and example of its 'Ambassadors'.

Amnesty International’s award and U2’s renewed campaign comes at time when the pro-democracy icon and Nobel Peace Laureate faces a further term in detention. She has been charged with flouting the conditions of her house arrest, when she gave food and shelter to an uninvited and unwanted visitor, an American Vietnam war veteran, John William Yettaw who swam across the lake behind her residence to get entry to her compound.

While the trial has been anything but free, Amnesty insists the real issue is she should never have been arrested in the first place – not have ever been in detention. “It is not a question of whether the proceedings are fair or not, she should never have gone on trial in the first place – it’s a form of political and legal theatre,” Amnesty’s Bangkok-based Burma researcher, Benjamin Zawacki said in an interview with Mizzima. “As a prisoner of conscience she should be released immediately.”

Amnesty International’s campaign for the immediate release of Aung San Suu Kyi has been endorsed by hundreds of the world’s political leaders, human rights advocates, writers and entertainment personalities. One of those who have joined the campaign is the former UN human rights rapporteur for Burma, Professor Paulo Pinheiro. “These current charges are a complete and crude fabrication, a pretext to keep Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in detention for as long as possible,” he recently told Mizzima.

Suu Kyi has spent 14 of the past 20 years under house arrest. Her latest detention began in May 2003, after she and her supporters were attacked by pro-junta thugs while travelling in central Burma. She was first arrested in July 1989 and spent six years under house until she was released in 1995.

For the past five years she has been in virtual solitary confinement, being allowed only very occasional visits by her doctor and lawyer. The UN’s special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari has been able to see her six times in the past few years, but the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was not permitted to see her during his two-day visit to the country earlier this month.

“It is appropriate that she should be given this award [Amnesty’s Ambassador of Conscience] almost 20 years since she began her long fight for human rights in Myanmar,” said Benjamin Zawacki. “Twenty years on and still in detention, she remains a beacon of hope for all Burmese people and the world as a whole,” he added.

As Bono poignantly pointed out as he accepted the award on Aung San Suu Kyi’s behalf earlier this week: “She has been under house arrest in her native Burma for most of the last 20 years.

Her crime is that if she was to participate in elections she would win.”

Within a matter of few days now, Aung San Suu Kyi will know her fate. "We are confident that we will win the case if things go according to the law,” her defence lawyer Nyan Win told reporters outside the court on Tuesday.

But of course in Burma the courts are not free of government interference, and it will certainly be political considerations which determine her future.

However few people – inside Burma and abroad -- believe there will any other verdict than guilty. “The trial has been entirely scripted and the end already decided before-hand,” the British Ambassador in Rangoon, Mark Canning told Mizzima after a rare occasion when he was allowed to attend the court hearing. Public sentiment echoes that of the diplomats.

“No one is in any doubt about the outcome,” said Moe Moe, a taxi driver in the country’s main commercial city. “Those men in green in Naypitdaw [the new capital some 400 kilometres north of Rangoon] know she is the peoples’ hero and the real leader of this country,” he added.

While international pressure is set to mount if she is found guilty, it is unlikely to have any impact on the top generals. “They have completely ignored all international concerns – and gone on with their devastating, shattering repression of all dissent – with extremely heavy sentences being handed down for the crimes of democratic protest,” said Mr Pinheiro.

Nevertheless Aung San Suu Kyi remains Burma’s beacon of hope for the future. And the international campaign supporting her and the democratic cause in Burma will continue to remind the junta, that while they may lock her up, try to silence her and prevent her from seeing visitors, the Burmese people and the world as a whole will not forget her and her heroic efforts on behalf of Burma’s fight for democracy and human rights. We are proud to announce … that Amnesty International has chosen Aung San Suu Kyi as the recipient of their Ambassador of Conscience Award 2009. Thank God for Amnesty International,” said Bono. “May God keep Aung Sang Suu Kyi safe.”

READ MORE---> Junta faces mounting pressure as Aung San Suu Kyi awaits fate...

Suspected North Korean Ship Returns Home

BLOGGER's WARNING:
Must keep an eye on shippings coming from other countries
by land, air, sea and strict control around the borders as well

By ARKAR MOE
The Irrawaddy News

A South Korean official reported on Tuesday that the North Korean vessel, Kang Nam I, which the U.S. Navy had been tracking because it was suspected of carrying illicit cargo, had probably arrived back home, according to a report by the Associated Press on Tuesday.

The U.S. Navy reported on June 19 that it was tracking the cargo vessel after it left port. The ship, which was believed destined for Burma, suddenly turned back on June 28 without delivering its cargo.

The Kang Nam I is believed to have entered the port of Nampo on North Korea's western coast late Monday, said a South Korean Defense Ministry official, who spoke of condition of anonymity, citing department policy. He said South Korea was trying to obtain confirmation of the vessel's return.

The chief of U.S. Naval operations, Adm. Gary Roughead, told reporters in Seoul on Monday that the ship's pending return showed that efforts are working to enforce UN sanctions.

"I think that's an indication of the way the international community came together," Roughead said of the ship's reversal.

He called the monitoring of the Kang Nam I "a very effective way" of stopping proliferation, and said the Navy will continue to conduct operations that support the effort to sanction North Korea.

Meanwhile, the U.N. Security Council issued a condemnation of North Korea's recent missile tests after a closed meeting in New York on Monday.

Accordingly to an Agence France Presse report on Tuesday, Japan's cabinet is expected to send a bill to parliament that allows the coast guard to inspect North Korean ships for nuclear and missile-related materials, in line with a UN resolution.

Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso’s cabinet hopes parliament will pass the bill by the end of this month, officials said, but the bill’s passage is not certain due to opposition to the unpopular prime minister.

The bill would authorize the coast guard to inspect ships both on the high seas and in Japanese waters. Inspectors would first be required to get approval from the captain of any ship targeted and from its country of origin, however.

Japan's Maritime Self-Defence Force, which is banned from offensive military action, could be called on to back up the coast guard if a ship targeted for inspection appears heavily armed, government officials said.

A UN Security Council resolution over North Korea's recent nuclear and missile tests passed last month calls on member states to stop and search vessels suspected of carrying banned weapons for the communist state.

Neither the UN resolution nor the Japanese bill authorizes the use of force.

Along with the United States, Japan pushed hard for tough sanctions after North Korea launched a long-range rocket on April 5, and conducted its second underground atomic test on May 25, followed by a series of missile launches.

READ MORE---> Suspected North Korean Ship Returns Home...

Time to rethink multilateralism?

by Joseph Ball

Mizzima News - Much has been made in recent weeks of Burma's burgeoning relationship with North Korea – illicit arms trafficking, assistance in obtaining "the bomb" and expert direction on the construction of tunnel facilities. Admittedly, these are interesting stories to follow. But by far the greatest, and most contradictory, gift the reclusive regime in Pyongyang has provided the generals in Naypyitaw with is the gift of how to survive in the midst of a hostile international community.

Acquiring nuclear weapons is very much a long-term prospect, and incorporates a process fraught with significant obstacles. The recently exposed tunnel complexes are ultimately of less practical military use and purpose than what is at times inferred. But how to plot a course through an international diplomatic minefield…well, that is a gift that gives and just keeps on giving.

In his talks with United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon over the past weekend, Burma's military leader, Senior General Than Shwe, is reported to have explicitly related to the Secretary-General – regarding the refusal of permission for Ban to meet with detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi – that the junta will not be seen to kowtow to international pressure.

And so, they didn't.

In short, the crux of Pyongyang's curriculum in conducting international relations encapsulates a need to appreciate that the international community must alternately be placated and put in its place, while staunchly adhering to the belief that it is bilateral relations that definitively carry the day. Any welcomed access to international institutions is viewed as a result of a progression in bilateral relations, as opposed to the corollary – which would see bilateral acceptance coming on the heels of adherence to international prerogatives.

The most prominent example of Pyongyang both placating and confronting the international community is the on-again off-again six-party talks. While often held out as a possibility through which to address the crisis in Burma, the six-party talks, covering 2003 to 2007, have arguably resulted in no tangible progress of which to speak, with North Korea at present – sparked by international outrage over an April satellite launch – claiming it "will never again take part in such talks and will not be bound by any agreement reached at the talks." Pyongyang, too, will not be seen to kneel before any international community.

Meanwhile, the North has long held to a foreign policy prioritizing bilateral talks with the United States in order to address the fifty-six year impasse on the peninsula, as the United States is perceived as critical in assisting the country out of its economic malaise and in relieving pressure on the security sector.

However, the United States has not warmed to the idea of bilateral talks – opting instead to try and work through an international framework – leaving a North Korean regime increasingly feeling threatened and fixated on security concerns and, thus, ignoring the development of the state and people, though able in turn to blame sanctions for the state of the economy.

It should not be forgotten that it was a bilateral initiative launched by the United States toward North Korea at the close of the eighties that realized the most success, before souring over the course of the nineties. During the course of the thaw, regular exchanges between the two countries took place in such diverse theaters as academia, sports, journalism and cultural studies.

The Tatmadaw, Burmese military, is a highly nationalistic institution. As such, it attests to represent the state of Burma. And the state of Burma exists within a system of states. States have armies and defined national interests. The international community, practically speaking for the purposes of the junta, has neither.

In the aftermath of Ban's largely perceived failed visit, several voices are calling for ever greater international action to ratchet up the pressure on the junta. This is a pipedream. Burma's generals are acutely aware that the United Nations is not the equivalent of a World Government. For that matter, regional organizations are also of limited importance to the junta in its attempts to balance security and economic interests.

A practical limitation on regional, or international for that matter, organizations clearly played itself out this past week in Honduras. While much was made of the Organization of American States (OAS) determining to expel the Central American country this past Saturday, the fact is Honduras had already unilaterally rejected any authority of the OAS. Significantly, this means – barring some kind of agreement between the competing factions – that it will be up to individual states to decide how to punish the country. Of course, it will also be up to individual states to decide if it is in their greater national interest to pursue a positive relationship with the new government.

The argument that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) needs Burma more than Burma needs ASEAN is not new. It is not difficult to envision a non-ASEAN Burma quickly reaching bilateral trade and economic packages with a number of remaining member states.

Bilateral relations, as with North Korea's leadership, do matter to Burma's generals – and North Korea is but one example of this. Junta representatives were not sent to ASEAN or U.N. headquarters in recent months to seek consultation and exchange information on recent events inside the country and other matters. No, liaisons were instead sent directly to national capitals maintaining a working bilateral relationship with the regime.

Further, the visit earlier this year of former Singaporean Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong to Naypyitaw is likely one of the more significant visits by a foreign leader or delegation in some time. Serving as an ambassador for the interests of the Lion City – as opposed to any wider grouping – in the future of Burma, reported exchanges between Than Shwe and Goh took a decidedly different turn to, say, what the United Nations top diplomat experienced.

As with North Korea, Burma is interested in bilateral relations with North American and European powers in order to gain access to greater financial rewards and, by default, access to and acceptance within the international community. But, with little interest on the part of prospective partners, the regime instead consistently resorts to a disproportionate emphasis on security doctrine – ensuring its own survival to the detriment of the greater good.

It may be that there is no diplomatic, bilateral or otherwise, breakthrough presently waiting to be had concerning Burma's heretofore recalcitrant generals, but pretending that increased pressure from an international consortium is automatically the most effective means of assuaging change is to refuse to question and challenge an historically failed strategy.

If the United States and other national governments currently viewed as hostile to the Burmese junta are to try and wrest change from the generals, it may be time to contemplate more actively joining in the game already in progress – expanded bilateral relations – instead of waiting for the start of a game Burma's generals have no intention of ever seriously playing. Results certainly won't be easy or swift to come by, but the last decades prove this of all strategies thus far employed.

For those obsessed with the primacy of multilateralism and international action…think of it as a strategy of enhanced multilateral bilateralism on the part of the international community.

And, it unfortunately has to be noted, the adoption of additional sanctions by sovereign governments does not count as pursuing a bilateral policy – as it has been remarked upon seemingly ad infinitum of the need for international acceptance of a sanctions policy vis-à-vis Burma if sanctions stand a chance of critically affecting the existing socio-political power matrix.

In the meantime, headlines will continue to be dominated by evolving "diabolical" bilateral workings between Pyongyang and Naypyitaw in concert with a litany of calls for increased international pressure to counter the growing threat. As well as, it should be noted, calls for China to increase bilateral pressure on the junta. But where's the bilateral carrot and stick game from governments of a different political ilk to that of Beijing?

In the absence of an altered strategic approach, Burma's generals will continue to ape, intentionally or not, the North Korean perfected and contradictory response of over emphasis on military security at the expense of socio-economic and political development and a truly national agenda. But, despite its considerable shortcomings, it is a strategy thus far proven to at least do one thing – maintain the political status quo in the face of stiff international consternation.

READ MORE---> Time to rethink multilateralism?...

Ban Ki-Moon's remarks on Burma

by Mizzima News

THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
REMARKS ON MYANMAR TO DIPLOMATIC MISSIONS,
UNITED NATIONS AGENCIES, INTERNATIONAL AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
Yangon, 4 July 2009

Excellencies,

Distinguished guests and colleagues

Ladies and Gentlemen,

This is my second visit to Myanmar in just over a year. Both visits have been at critical times for the country’s future.

My first visit was in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis. This devastating natural disaster, which took so many lives and created so much hardship, touched hearts across the globe. In Myanmar’s moment of need, the world responded generously.

I want to personally thank everyone here today for your remarkable contributions to the relief and recovery effort.

You have saved lives, rejuvenated communities and made it possible for many thousands of people to reclaim their livelihoods. You have helped Myanmar to overcome adversity. It is important that this work continues.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I felt the tragedy of Cyclone Nargis deeply -- as a fellow Asian and as Secretary-General .

I am Asia’s second Secretary-General. The first was Myanmar's U Thant. I revere his memory. I also recall his wise words.

U Thant said: “The worth of the individual human being is the most unique and precious of all our assets and must be the beginning and end of all our efforts. Governments, systems, ideologies and institutions come and go, but humanity remains.”

This is why I have returned.

As Secretary-General, I attach the highest importance to helping the people of this country to achieve their legitimate aspirations.

The United Nations works for people – their rights, their well-being, their dignity. It is not an option. It is our responsibility.

I have come to show the unequivocal shared commitment of the United Nations to the people of Myanmar.

I am here today to say: Myanmar – you are not alone.

We want to work with you for a united, peaceful, prosperous, democratic and modern Myanmar.

We want to help you rise from poverty.

We want to work with you so your country can take its place as a respected and responsible member of the international community.

We want to help you achieve national reconciliation, durable peace and sustainable development.

But, let me emphasize:

neither peace nor development can thrive without democracy and respect for human rights

Kyae zoo tin bar tae.

Myanmar is no exception.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The challenges are many. But they are not insurmountable.

We know from experience that securing Myanmar’s peaceful, democratic and prosperous future is a complex process.

None of Myanmar’s challenges can be solved on their own. Peace, development and human rights are closely inter-related.

Failure to address them with equal attention will risk undermining the prospects for democracy, durable peace and prosperity.

However, we also know that where there is a genuine will for dialogue and reconciliation, all obstacles can be overcome.

The question today is this:

how much longer can Myanmar afford to wait for national reconciliation, democratic transition and full respect for human rights?

The cost of delay will be counted in wasted lives, lost opportunities and prolonged isolation from the international community.

Let me be clear: all the people of Myanmar must work in the national interest.

I said this yesterday when I met with representatives of Myanmar’s registered political parties and with those armed groups that have chosen to observe a cease-fire. I encouraged them respectively to honour their commitments to the democratic process and peace.

Nonetheless, the primary responsibility lies with the Government to move the country towards its stated goals of national reconciliation and democracy.

Failure to do so will prevent the people of Myanmar from realizing their full potential.

Failure to do so will deny the people of Myanmar their right to live in dignity and to pursue better standards of life in larger freedom.

These principles lie at the core of the United Nations Charter, whose opening words are “We the peoples”.

The founding Constitution of independent Myanmar echoes these noble words. We must work together to ensure that Myanmar’s future embodies these principles too.

With this in mind, I bring three messages.

First, respect for human dignity is the precondition for peace and development everywhere.

Myanmar was one of the first United Nations Member States to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

It subscribed early on to the consensus that respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is indispensable to political, economic and social progress.

Unfortunately, that commitment has not been matched in deed. Myanmar’s human rights record remains a matter of grave concern.

The Government has articulated its goals as stability, national reconciliation and democracy.

The upcoming election –the first in twenty years – must be inclusive, participatory and transparent if it is to be credible.

Myanmar’s way forward must be rooted in respect for human rights.

This is why I say that all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, should be released without delay.

When I met General Than Shwe yesterday and today, I asked to visit Ms. Suu Kyi. I am deeply disappointed that he refused.

I believe the government of Myanmar has lost a unique opportunity to show its commitment to a new era of political openness.

Allowing a visit to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi would have been an important symbol of the government’s willingness to embark on the kind of meaningful engagement that will be essential if the elections in 2010 are to be seen as credible.

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi must be allowed to participate in the political process without further delay.

Indeed, all the citizens of Myanmar must be given the opportunity to contribute fully to the future of this country.

National reconciliation cannot be complete without the free and active participation of all who seek to contribute.

The country must embark on a process of genuine dialogue that includes all concerned parties, all ethnic groups and all minorities.

People must be free to debate and to engage in political dialogue, and they must have free access to the information that will help them participate meaningfully in the democratic process.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Any transition is difficult. Myanmar has already undergone transitions from sovereign kingdom, to occupied colony, and now independent State.

This history carries a twin legacy of armed conflict and political deadlock, including recent painful events: the repression of demonstrators in 1988, the cancellation of the 1990 election results, and the clampdown on peaceful dissent that continues to this day.

At the same time, there have been some positive efforts that should be recognized.

Although still fragile, the cease-fire agreements between the Government and armed groups have reduced the level of conflict. The United Nations has wide-ranging experience in making such gains irreversible.

Sovereignty, territorial integrity and national unity are legitimate concerns for any government.

We contend that opening and broadening the political space is the best way to ensure that each group and each individual becomes part of the greater collective project.

The military, all political parties, ethnic minority groups, civil society, and indeed every son and daughter of Myanmar has a role to play in this country’s transition.

Only mutual compromise, respect and understanding can lay the foundations for durable peace, national reconciliation and democracy.

My second message is on addressing the humanitarian needs of Myanmar’s people.

I am glad I have been able to return to see the progress made in the Irrawaddy Delta. The loss of some 130,000 people was tragic, but the rebuilding I saw today was impressive. (JEG's: ??? who for? the new settlers? or the real victims?)

The tragedy showed the resilience of the people of Myanmar. It also demonstrated that people throughout the world care deeply about Myanmar and its people.

Above all, the response to Cyclone Nargis proved the value of engagement over isolation.

The unprecedented cooperation between Myanmar, the United Nations and ASEAN through the Tripartite Core Group, with the support of the donor community, has demonstrated that humanitarian imperatives and the principles of sovereignty do not conflict.

Humanitarian assistance -- in Myanmar as elsewhere -- should never be held hostage to political considerations. We can and must work together to ensure access to humanitarian and development assistance to all those in Myanmar who need it.

This brings me to my third message. It is time for Myanmar to unleash its economic potential.

Myanmar sits in the middle of Asia’s economic miracle. Harnessing Myanmar to the rapid advances taking place around it is the surest way to raise living standards.

I welcome the Government’s policy of opening up to outside trade and investment, and its efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, control HIV, combat human trafficking and curtail opium production.

But the reality is that millions continue to live in poverty. Standards of living in Myanmar remain among the lowest in Asia.

The people of Myanmar need jobs, they need food security and they need access to health care.

We must work to ensure that the people of Myanmar can benefit from and contribute to the regional and global economy.

We must recognize that the region and the world have much to gain from a stable, prosperous and democratic Myanmar. We must work together for that goal.

The Government of Myanmar must seize the moment.

It must take advantage of the opportunities that the international community is prepared to offer to the people of Myanmar.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I came here as a friend.

My duty is to uphold the ideals and principles of the United Nations Charter.

My role is to encourage all of you – the Government, political parties, ethnic groups, civil society – to move forward together as one people and one nation.

Nothing is insurmountable or impossible when the people’s interest is placed above divisions.

The region and the world are changing fast. Myanmar only stands to gain from engagement -- and from embarking on its own change.

The Government of Myanmar has repeatedly stated that cooperation with the United Nations is the cornerstone of the country’s foreign policy.
We ask it to match deeds with words.

The more Myanmar works in partnership with the United Nations to respond to its people’s needs and aspirations, the more it affirms its sovereignty. (JEG's: this is something to think about... sovereignty through partnership... read the hidden message)

Similarly it is incumbent on the international community as whole to work together to help Myanmar meet our shared goals: a united, peaceful, prosperous and democratic future, with full respect for the human rights of all the country’s people.

Kyae zoo tin bar tae.

READ MORE---> Ban Ki-Moon's remarks on Burma...

North Korea fires four short-range missiles

By Lim Chang-Won
News.com.au - Agence France-Presse

* North Korea reportedly fires missiles
* US says they're not worried about attack
* Efforts to reign in rogue state continue

NORTH Korea has reportedly test-fired four short-range missiles, further fuelling tension sparked by its nuclear standoff with the international community, in a move the White House has called the latest in a string of "provocative" acts.

South Korean military officials said the missiles - apparently surface-to-ship ones - were fired into the East Sea (Sea of Japan) between 5.20pm (6.20pm AEST) and 9.20pm (8.20pm AEST) local time. All were launched on Thursday from a base at Sinsang-ri, near the eastern coastal city of Wonsan, a spokesman told the Yonhap news agency.

Other officials told the agency on condition of anonymity they landed about 100km off the coast, where the North has imposed a maritime ban until July 11 for what it calls a military drill.

Spokesmen from the defence ministry confirmed the first three firings but could not be reached for comment on the fourth.

It was the first military action the hardline communist state had taken since the United Nations on June 12 imposed tougher sanctions for its May 25 nuclear test.

South Korea's Joong Ang Ilbo newspaper, quoting an intelligence source, said the North was likely to fire a series of short-range missiles - including Scud-B missiles with a range of 340km - in the coming days. The North may also fire Rodongs, whose 1300km range would likely be shortened to about 400km for the current round of testing.

In the days after its atomic test - the second since 2006 - Pyongyang fired six short-range missiles and renounced the truce brokered on the Korean peninsula after a civil war in 1950 to 1953. In response to the UN resolution tightening curbs on its missile and atomic activities, it vowed to build more nuclear bombs.

World condemnation

US and South Korean officials believe ailing leader Kim Jong-Il, 67, is staging a show of strength to bolster his authority as he tries to put in place a succession plan involving his youngest son.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that broadly-backed international sanctions imposed on North Korea were starting to take effect and raised hopes that Pyongyang will yield to the pressure.

"The North Koreans said they were going to launch these missiles. I don't think that's surprising that they've launched these missiles. I take the North Koreans at their word that they're going to continue their provocative actions."

Washington has said it is not ruling out the possibility of a long-range missile launch toward Hawaii on or around July 4, the US Independence Day, although the Pentagon has expressed doubts about such a scenario.

A spokesman for Australia's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said the Government is "very concerned" about the missile launches and called on North Korea to immediately desist.

Japan's Prime Minister Taro Aso also condemned yesterday's launches, saying: "We have repeatedly warned that such a provocative act is not beneficial for North Korea's national interest."

The commander of US Northern Command, General Victor Renuart, told The Washington Times he did not think Pyongyang's missiles posed any real threat to the US.

"The nation has a very, very credible ballistic-missile defence capability. Our ground-based interceptors in Alaska and California ... give me a capability that if we really are threatened by a long-range ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) that I've got high confidence that I could interdict that flight before it caused huge damage to any US territory," he said.

In Beijing, a US delegation met officials yesterday for talks on giving the UN sanctions more teeth.

The support of China, the North's sole major ally and largest trade partner, is seen as crucial in making the sanctions stick.

Warships tracking suspected weapons

US warships have since mid-June been tracking a North Korean ship suspected of carrying weapons. The Kang Nam 1 was reportedly headed for Burma but US officials said on Tuesday it has now turned back.

China said its top envoy on the North Korean nuclear issue, Wu Dawei, had begun a visit to Russia, the United States, Japan and South Korea.

They are members of a forum which has tried since 2003 to persuade the North to scrap its nuclear programmes in return for energy aid and diplomatic and security benefits.

The North announced it was quitting the talks after the UN censured its long-range rocket launch on April 5.

North and South Korea meanwhile held more talks about the fate of their last major joint business project, the Seoul-funded Kaesong industrial estate just north of the border.

But they failed to narrow differences or set the date for their next meeting, Seoul officials said.

READ MORE---> North Korea fires four short-range missiles...

As Burma Draws Fire, Asean Gets Burned

Burmese Minister of Foreign Affairs MajGen Nyan Win, center (in front of blonde lady), is seen standing among other heads of delegations at the 9th Asia-Europe Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Hanoi in May. (Photo: AFP)

By AUNG ZAW
The Irrawaddy News
JULY, 2009 - VOLUME 17 NO.4

Asean leaders forge a tougher policy aimed at speaking the truth to Burma’s military government, but the generals fire back in words and armed clashes against ethnic Karen along the border

A mistake should not be repeated but in the case of Burma, mistakes are endless.

When leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) admitted Burma into its regional grouping, newspapers and magazines, including this one, expressed strong reservations. Why?

The simple fact is that Burma was not yet ready to join the regional club unless Asean was willing to serve as a shield, in effect giving political cover to one of the world’s most repressive regimes.

It’s sad to say that to this day Burma membership has been a disaster, creating a constant headache for Asean members who have increasingly been concerned with the question of their own credibility.

Ironically, the original goal of taming Burma by admitting the pariah state to the regional club has only further damaged the grouping’s reputation. Burma is not even up to the “Asean standard” of supporting authoritarian rulers by maintaining stability and promoting economic prosperity.

Needless to say, Burma has remained a major source of concern as regime leaders recently detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi inside the notorious Insein Prison, ignoring the outcry of regional leaders and the international community.

If Burmese leaders are finding it difficult to find excuses to confine the Lady of the Lake, Asean leaders also are facing a dilemma: how to nurture the rogue regime into democratic reconciliation.

Asean has no one to blame but itself for making a hasty decision to admit Burma in 1997 before the junta had made any genuine political progress at home.

Why such haste? one excuse Asean leaders cited was that if they delayed admission, Burma would fall into China’s sphere of influence.

Even the Chinese leaders—who quietly criticized Burmese officials at the Asia-Europe Meeting (Asem) held in Hanoi in May—are expressing deep frustration with the generals. The Chinese typically exercised cautious and quiet diplomacy when they conveyed the message to Burma’s leaders—but whenever Burma commits major diplomatic blunders, it always shuts the door, unwilling to listen even to its biggest neighbor.

It is true that Asean has paid a high price by admitting Burma. The once respected Asean has lost influence and become a subject of derision for its continuous support of the junta.

Asean leaders have failed to perform due diligence. Only now, with the latest incarceration of Suu Kyi, do they seem to have learned the importance of delivering a more realistic, tougher message to Burma in unison. Most embarrassed Asean leaders no longer shy away from speaking out on Burma.

Recently, Thailand’s prime minister and foreign minister were joined by Singapore and other original founders of Asean to pour scorn on Burma for staging the bizarre Suu Kyi trial, demanding her release and that of all political prisoners.

In Hanoi, Asean and its European partners issued a statement also calling for the lifting of restrictions placed on Burmese political parties.

Speaking to the Far Eastern Economic Review, Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejajjiva said that if the junta fails to release Suu Kyi, Asean’s credibility will be “affected inevitably,” adding that Burma’s political process must be inclusive to gain the respect of the international community.

“Thailand, as the Asean chair, expresses grave concern about recent developments relating to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, given her fragile health. In this connection, the Government of the Union of Myanmar is reminded that the Asean leaders had called for the immediate release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi,” Abhisit said.

But Asean alone should not be blamed for Burma’s failure, said the prime minister, who himself was facing credibility problems at home after Thailand cancelled a regional Asean summit due to political unrest. Even so, he said, “I think it would be unfair to single out Asean. I think the whole international community puts in an effort and if it’s not succeeding, why single out Asean?”

When pressed about Thailand’s business dealings and energy dependency on Burma, he replied, “We’re neighbors, and there is clearly an energy link, but having said that, there is a lot of Western business presence in Myanmar [Burma]. Again, we share a long common border and there’s a lot of border trade too, and the energy that we buy from Myanmar is the same as we buy from our neighbors. And we have to make sure that we ensure our people have enough energy and security. So I don’t think it’s particularly surprising or special, and it wouldn’t in any way detract us from the goal that we would like to see Myanmar succeeding in her political transition.”

Thailand and two other Asean partners, Singapore and Malaysia, are major trading partners of Burma. Thailand heavily depends on Burma’s gas, cheap migrant labor and natural resources. Singapore is a haven for the regime leaders and family members to visit and receive medical care.

Thailand’s more pragmatic, tougher support for Burma’s Nobel Peace Prize laureate is a direct result of the Democrat-led government now in power in Thailand.

Imagine if former prime ministers Thaksin Shinawatra or Samak Sundaravej were in power. The Suu Kyi trial would have received little attention from Thailand. Instead, the generals would probably have received a tacit blessing from Thai politicians and army leaders, many of whom have a history of cozy business ties with the Than Shwe regime.

With Abhisit, Burma was forced to revert to its neighborhood bully role, engaging in a war of words, telling Thailand in state-run newspapers to mind its own business and not to interfere in Burma’s internal affairs.

“Actually, it is Thailand that needs to forge national reconciliation,” Burma’s Deputy Foreign Minister Maung Myint mused. “Thailand saw year-long demonstrations in which different groups in red, yellow and blue made an attempt to oust the government and jeopardize the Asean Summit.”

But for the generals words alone were not enough, and actions followed.

Troops of the military regime and its ceasefire group, the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army, launched an unusual rainy season offensive with about 9,000 soldiers against the Karen rebel army and civilians in early June.

Armed clashes forced at least 4,000 Karen refugees to flee their villages and many are still arriving in refugee camps on the Thai-Burmese border. The message was clear: don’t mess with Burma.

Then Goh Chok Tong, Singapore’s senior minister, flew to Burma with a message.

In meetings with the top brass, Goh acknowledged that the Suu Kyi trial is a domestic affair, but he pointed out that there is an international dimension to it that should not be ignored.

Goh stressed that the 2010 elections must be inclusive and that the opposition NLD party led by Suu Kyi must be part of the process of national reconciliation.

Goh is the first foreign leader to meet Than Shwe since the trial started, and he used the occasion to deliver a political message to the top leaders in Naypyidaw, saying, “I don’t believe any Singapore investors would come in a big way before the picture is clear, before this move to democracy is seen to produce results.”

Singapore is one of the biggest foreign investors in Burma, with annual bilateral trade of more than US $1 billion.

Burma did not blast Singapore. Instead Goh was given the red carpet treatment during his four-day trip. Is there any meaning behind that? Maybe not, but many Burmese analysts believe Goh’s message carried more weight than those from other Asean nations.

Goh, Abhisit Vejajjiva and Asean leaders performed well on the Suu Kyi trial—making a major departure from the old hands-off, “non-interference” policy.

But it’s still doubtful Than Shwe will listen, knowing full well that Asean has its own weaknesses.

The regime leaders remain defiant and shameless. After killing monks and peaceful demonstrators in September 2007, the Burmese regime signed the new Asean Charter. In 2008, the regime launched a massive crackdown on prominent activists and opposition leaders—the number of political prisoners jailed increased by the hundreds—and Asean was silent.

Thai professor Thitinan Pongsudhirak warned in the Bangkok Post: “Burma is currently in flagrant and fundamental violation of the Asean Charter’s Section 7 of Article 1 on democracy, good governance and the rule of law and the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Failure to redress this violation will render the Charter a travesty of regional community objectives and dilute Asean’s relevance on the broader international stage.”

The Suu Kyi trial and the imprisonment of the political opposition are just the tip of the iceberg.

Than Shwe has his own grandiose dream of setting Burma on a new course. The closer relations between Burma and North Korea are one example and a major cause of concern.

Burma recently hosted an event marking the 45th anniversary of the date when North Korean leader Kim Jong Il joined the central committee of the ruling Workers’ Party of Korea (WPK).

Htay Oo, the secretary-general of the junta’s mass organization, the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA), addressed an assembled audience at the Burmese event, effusing: “One of the feats performed by Kim Jong Il in leading the Party and revolution to a shining victory, shouldering upon himself the destiny of the country and nation is that he has strengthened and developed the WPK into a guiding force of the Songun revolution.”

“Songun” is North Korea’s “Military First” policy that grants the Korean People’s Army a leading role in the affairs of state and allocates national resources to the army before civilians.

Burma’s shady military ties with North Korea and the persistent rumors of Burma’s nuclear ambition, plus the building of tunnels in central Burma and Shan State, could become Asean’s next headache.

READ MORE---> As Burma Draws Fire, Asean Gets Burned...

Burmese women react to brutality with inspiring courage and dignity

By Laura Bush

(SMH) -For two weeks, the world has been transfixed by images of Iranians taking to the streets to demand the most basic human freedoms and rights. Watching these courageous men and women, I am reminded of a similar scene nearly two years ago in Burma, when tens of thousands of Buddhist monks peacefully marched through their nation's streets. They, too, sought to reclaim basic human dignity for all Burmese citizens, but they were beaten back by that nation's harsh regime.

Since those brutal days Burma's suffering has intensified. In the past 21 months, the number of political prisoners incarcerated by the junta has doubled. Within the past 10 days, two Burmese citizens were sentenced to 18 months in prison. Their offence: praying in a Buddhist pagoda for the release of the jailed opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi.

That is only the tip of the regime's brutality. Inside Burma, more than 3000 villages have been "forcibly displaced" - a number exceeding the mass relocations in Darfur. The military junta has forced tens of thousands of child soldiers into its army and routinely uses civilians as minesweepers and slave labourers. It has closed churches and mosques; it has imprisoned comedians for joking about the Government and bloggers for writing about it. Human trafficking, where women and children are snatched and sold, is pervasive. Summary executions pass for justice, while lawyers are arrested for the "crime" of defending the persecuted.

Rape is routinely used as a "weapon of war". In 2006 I convened a roundtable at the United Nations to address the situation in Burma and listened as the Burmese activist Hseng Noung described the rape victims she had aided. The youngest victim was eight; the oldest was 80. Her words silenced the room.

Yet time and again, the women of Burma, often the regime's chief targets, have responded to this brutality with inspiring courage. I will never forget visiting the remote and crowded refugee camps on the mountainous border between Burma and Thailand. There I watched the tireless efforts of Dr Cynthia Maung to provide life-saving medical aid for hundreds of Burmese. I sat with victims of landmines who had lost legs or feet and were waiting quietly, often for hours, for basic care.

Last year it was my great privilege to present a Vital Voices award to 17-year-old Charm Tong, who testified before UN officials and eloquently described the systematic military campaign of rape and abuse waged against women in Burma's Shan state. She spoke unflinchingly, even though her audience included representatives of the very regime she condemned.

More of us in America should make such courage our courage. At this moment, Suu Kyi, 64 and in fragile health, faces sentencing on trumped-up charges. The junta leaders wish to undermine the Nobel Peace laureate's influence before next year's elections. Leaders from around the world have called forcefully for the junta to release Suu Kyi and the 2100 other political prisoners it is holding. But the world must do more than express concern.

A new report from Harvard Law School asks the UN Security Council to establish a commission of inquiry into crimes against humanity and war crimes in Burma. Harvard's panel of international law experts has catalogued the junta's "widespread and systemic" human rights violations. The Security Council has already referred the crisis in Darfur to the International Criminal Court. It should do the same for Burma.

With the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, planning to visit Burma, it is crucial he press the regime to take immediate steps to end human rights abuses, particularly in ethnic minority areas. There have been 38 UN resolutions condemning these abuses, yet the horrors continue unabated.

But Aung San Suu Kyi's continued example of civil courage - like those brave protesters in Iran - reminds all of us that no matter how callous the regime, it cannot lock up what she stands for: the fundamental desire of all people to live in freedom and with dignity. During the brief moments that foreign diplomats were allowed to observe her show trial, Suu Kyi calmly apologised for having to greet them in a prison, saying, "I hope to meet you in better times." We should all share her hope - and add our voices to those who risk so much to protest tyranny and injustice in Burma and beyond.

The Washington Post
Laura Bush is the former first lady of the United States.

READ MORE---> Burmese women react to brutality with inspiring courage and dignity...

Global protests to mark Aung San Suu Kyi on birthday

(The Australian) - THE US and European Union led calls to free Myanmar's detained democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi as her admirers around the world and online celebrated her 64th birthday today.

In Washington, Myanmar exiles toasted the opposition leader at a birthday party on Capitol Hill while in London the wife of Prime Minister Gordon Brown hosted a screening of a film dedicated to her.

But the Nobel laureate herself was spending her birthday at Yangon's notorious Insein prison, where she is being held on charges of violating her house arrest after an American man swam to her lakeside house.

Aung San Suu Kyi has spent 13 of the last 19 years in detention since the ruling junta refused to recognise the landslide victory of her National League for Democracy (NLD) in 1990 elections.

European Union leaders are set to make a 64-word call today for her release at the end of a two-day summit in Brussels. They will say she “tirelessly defended the universal values of freedom and democracy,” according to a draft statement.

The US State Department, in a birthday message, urged the junta to free Aung San Suu Kyi “immediately” and hailed her as a woman who has “dedicated her life to achieving democratic change and promoting progress in Burma”.

“We, along with all of her admirers in Burma and abroad, look forward to the day when she will be able to celebrate her birthday in freedom,” the State Department statement said, using Myanmar's former name.

Campaigners across the world planned to mark the day with events ranging from live music and speeches in Malaysia, evening vigils in Ireland and Australia and debating forums in Thailand.

On the internet, famous names including Britain's Gordon Brown, footballer David Beckham and US actors George Clooney and Julia Roberts offered support on the site “64 for Suu.”

Other women Nobel laureates including Iran's Shirin Ebadi wrote in a joint message on the website that they looked forward to the day their “sister” would be free.

In London, Brown's wife Sarah Brown hosted a private screening of a new film on Myanmar, the first-ever such awareness event at the prime minister's Downing Street offices, officials said.

At least one minister and various charity bosses were to attend the showing of “Burma VJ”, which a Foreign Office spokesman said “exposes the atrocities and injustices that have been taking place under the military regime”.

The birthday was not to go unmarked in Yangon, where NLD members were making preparations at party headquarters for a similar celebration to those in previous years, including giving breakfast to Buddhist monks.

“We have to hold the birthday party without the host again. We would be very happy if she could be released, we are hoping and praying for this,” senior party member Lei Lei told AFP.

Aung San Suu Kyi faces five years in jail if convicted in her trial, which resumes on June 26. The court case has provoked international outrage and has been described as a “show trial” by US President Barack Obama.

A global petition was delivered on Monday to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, signed by more than 670,000 people from 220 countries, calling for the release of all Myanmar's political prisoners, especially Aung San Suu Kyi.

At the US Capitol complex, Myanmar exiles and activists clinked glasses in salute to the opposition leader.

“We are sad that she is not in her house and not free, but we are not giving up our struggle and we will go on until she is released,” Sein Win, Myanmar's “prime minister-in-exile” and a cousin of Aung San Suu Kyi, told the gathering.

US Congressman Joe Pitts said it was “astonishing” that some nations “continue to enable the brutal dictators of Burma to continue their attacks against their people.”

He did not name countries, but China has been the key political, commercial and military backer of Myanmar.

“We must be more than 'concerned' or even 'deeply concerned.' The international community on behalf of the people of Burma must make it clear that the oppressive leaders of Burma will no longer be tolerated,” he said.

Article from: Agence France-Presse

READ MORE---> Global protests to mark Aung San Suu Kyi on birthday...

Suu Kyi’s Detention Affects Asean’s Credibility: Thai PM

By THE IRRAWADDY

If the junta fails to release pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, the Association of Southeast Asian Nation’s (Asean) credibility will be “affected inevitably,” Thai Prime Minster Abhisit Vejajjiva told The Far Eastern Economic Review recently.

During the Far Eastern Economic View’s interview published on Tuesday, 16 June, Abhisit, who is now chairman of Asean, said Burma’s political process will have to be inclusive to gain the acceptability and respectability of the international community.

Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, center, is surrounded by security guards. (Photo: AP)

However, the Thai PM said the Burma issue is the responsibility of the international community and not just Asean.

“I think it would be unfair to single out Asean and I think the whole international community puts in an effort and if its not succeeding, why single out Asean?” he said.

“On the contrary, we think that Asean has helped to facilitate possible channels and processes by which the situation there can be resolved and we’ll continue to do that,” he said, adding that UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon would also play a role in the issue.

Commenting on Burma’s membership with Asean, Abhisit said Asean did not want to isolate or alienate the Burmese military further.

“I doubt that that would make the situation better now,” Abhisit said, stating that it would be wrong to say it was the fault of Asean that things were not going as well as people would like.

“We accept our responsibility and we’re doing what we can,” he said.

Answering a question about how confident Asean’s was of Suu Kyi’s release, Abhisit said: “It’s difficult to say. It’s difficult for anybody to say with certainty.”

Abhisit said that what Asean is looking at more is the direction that Than Shwe and the leadership of Burma will take, which clearly begins with how the trial plays out.

“So we’ll watch that,” Abhisit said.

READ MORE---> Suu Kyi’s Detention Affects Asean’s Credibility: Thai PM...

Powerless against The Lady

by May Ng
Mizzima News

Signs that the government in Burma is losing its power are everywhere. While the latest collapse of a pagoda recently re-anointed with help from the wives of Army generals may provide a sign of diminishing divine right for the military junta, other important clues come from the reason why a military government armed to the teeth is very afraid of the gentle lady who speaks softly from behind bars as well as barefoot monks who pray peacefully.

Some observers justify military rule in Burma with an assumption that without the Army there will be a power vacuum and chaos will ensue. Aside from the obvious question of whether temporary stability provided by a bloody tyrant is to be preferred over the long term struggle toward a meaningful political reconciliation, the urgent question in Burma is:

what if the military has already lost its power and legitimacy.

What if the Burmese government no longer has the power or capacity to rule without the constant use of violence?

Can an Army which clings to power through the barrel of the gun still be considered a legitimate source of power?

The source of legitimacy originates from the people. As the government in Burma has failed to justify its rule in meeting the wishes of the people, the ruling military desperately seeks external sources of legitimacy from sources like the United Nations and ASEAN. The seduction of wealth accrued from Burma too often influences the world to forget lessons learned from the past – for example American support for the Shah of Iran. A belief that through friendly encouragement powerful nations can help the military in Burma liberalize and democratize is not as innocent as it may sound.

Burma is an important reason why ASEAN and the United Nations appear to be weak and irrelevant today. ASEAN often protest that if it dares speak out against the Burmese generals it will push Burma further into the lap of China. At present, ASEAN and the United Nations have not been able to muster enough courage to stand up for principles, preferring to instead cling to the status quo while the Burmese people continue to wait.

Some observers believe that without a decisive military victory against the Burmese generals or intense pressure from international forces, the military will never give up its monopoly on power. But in recent history, few countries have gained democracy from military victories or powerful intervention from abroad despite the many nations that have managed to gain democracy in the last half century.

In addition, few military victors relinquished power after obtaining it in the name of freedom and democracy. And more importantly, historical evidence quashes the myth that only a government with a strong grip on power, even if it relies heavily on violence, is capable of providing stability and development. More recent evidence suggests, on the other hand, that a government formed following a military coup is likely to continually struggle for power and in such an atmosphere peace is only temporary. The use of violence alone to maintain power denotes weakness not strength. A brutal government is a weak government and is dangerous not only to the people in Burma but also to neighboring countries in its potential to cause regional instability.

It is possible that the Burmese military mistakenly believes that the appearance of democracy in the 2010 election is equal to the appearance of legitimacy. But democracy and legitimacy are not the same and should not be confused. True democracy may confer legitimacy but a lack of legitimacy cannot easily be glossed over with a make-believe election.

The use of force is a clear sign of the lack of persuasive power, resulting in ever more coercive measures employed against its own citizens. Ashin U Gambira, the intellectual leader of the Saffron Revolution, is imprisoned under charges of telling the people that the military dictatorship cannot survive without support from the people and outside world. Further, the military is now getting ready to put Aung San Suu Kyi – daughter of the founding father of modern Burma, in notorious Insein Prison following an outrageous accusation that she committed a crime because Army cadres near her home were unable to stop an American man from entering her compound.

Ashin U Gawsita, the frontline Saffron Revolution monk featured with his loudspeaker in the movie ‘Burma VJ’, said that when peaceful people are forced at gunpoint on the street of Rangoon by the government as seen during the 2007 Saffron Revolution, it becomes obvious that the Burmese regime is no longer a legitimate power but a group of terrorists or thugs. Additionally, U Pyinya Zawta, the executive leader of the All Burma Monks Alliance from the Saffron Revolution, said that for every violent force there is an equal force for peace in the universe. He teaches that if all those who believe in peaceful change in Burma -- from inside the country and from other nations -- can act in unison, there will be a strong enough force to end Burma's military oppression.

It is not a question of what China or Russia will do to prolong the military oppression in Burma. It is a question of what the Burmese people and the rest of the world are willing to do to help end the reign of terror in Burma, where the military generals are powerless against The Lady who knows no fear.

(May Ng is a member of Justice for Human Rights in Burma. To view her poems about Burma, please visit: http://www.othervoicespoetry.org/vol33/ng/index.html)

READ MORE---> Powerless against The Lady...