Thread: Russia and China : What are they Hiding in Burma ??

Labutta/Cologne. "By now, we have treated the first cholera patients," Malteser International staff members report from the hardly affected coastal town in the Irrawaddy Delta. Since the cyclone hit the region, the people here in Labutta could only drink water from wells that have been spoilt and heavily polluted by the flood wave."

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/from...1093784952.htm

The value of these people's lives is almost nothing.

Norton, this is the same attitude of Chavez in Venezuela. These are malevolent evil leaders who are ready to sacrifice their peasant people.

Some leftists think this is the natural order.

I don't agree. I think people need a chance.

Originally Posted by chinthee

I don't agree. I think people need a chance.

As do I, and I certainly know mid and many others here do as well. All these years we've listened to the threats and observed the sanctions which have had absolutely no effect on the bastards. The reality is the world doesn't care enough for the people of Burma to take the risks necessary to put an end to is. This leaves only one alternative to the Burmese people. Continue to live under the tyranny or sacrifice themselves against formidable odds to end it.

Originally Posted by Norton

Originally Posted by chinthee

I don't agree. I think people need a chance.

As do I, and I certainly know mid and many others here do as well. All these years we've listened to the threats and observed the sanctions which have had absolutely no effect on the bastards. The reality is the world doesn't care enough for the people of Burma to take the risks necessary to put an end to is. This leaves only one alternative to the Burmese people. Continue to live under the tyranny or sacrifice themselves against formidable odds to end it.

Yes, and it's not just the people of Burma. It's the people of Venezuela, and of several more countries.

The simple fact that some of these regimes may be against the current US President does not mean that these countries don't share so many things in common with American people.

This leaves only one alternative to the Burmese people. Continue to live under the tyranny or sacrifice themselves against formidable odds to end it.

wonder how the worlds conscience will fair ...........................

I sit in wonder watching the stark contrast between the dual catastrophes on the TV.

China welcomes aid, media, help. The junta bars nearly everybody. China seems to have their shit together despite some very shoddy buildings.

Burma is coming across to the world as a bunch of apes. But at the end of the day, it's their country -- and it's elder cousins of Russia and China say nothing.

Originally Posted by Norton

This leaves only one alternative to the Burmese people. Continue to live under the tyranny or sacrifice themselves against formidable odds to end it.

Or, like many of their brethren, sneak into Thailand and hope not to be caught and chucked in Immigration jail. Then, maybe a refugee camp or work on a construction site. Just hope that the boss is slightly honest and pays the Bt100 a day rather than killing you off in the jungle or on a boat. (Several years back, a friend was on the beach in south Samui and saw a dog run by with an arm in its mouth. Then up ambled a few cops chucking body parts in a big basket.) Nobody cares if a few Burmese go missing.

Funny how genocide in Rawanda didn't elicit this moral stand from the west. Again it's about resources: China and Russia got there before Cheney and his puppet nation is pissed. Yanks say 100,000 plus have died and 1 million threatened with cholera, disease nuclear bombs and maybe even popeye. Wait a while - more people will have died during the hot Europen summer a couple of years back!

Chinese Build Trial Iron Factory
6/11/2008



Rathidaung: A Chinese company is constructing a trial iron industrial unit in southwest Rathidaung Township to produce iron from the regions' beach sand, according to a report coming out of the area.

The report said, "The trial factory for iron has been under construction by the Chinese company in the area for a few years and will be completed very soon."

The factory is located between Angu Maw and Ko Dan Kauk Village, located at the promontory of the Mayu Peninsula in Rathidaung Township, 20 miles north of Arakan's state capital Sittwe.

The report said that sand in the area contains aluminum along with iron ore, and it is possible to produce iron ore from the sand.

A witness said many Chinese and even Western engineers are now working on the factory, and many lands from the local people have been confiscated for it's location.

He also said that everybody can see the factory from the surrounding area, but local people are not allowed to visit the area near the building itself.

The military authorities sent an army column and Nasaka 25 camp to the area to serve as security escorts for the foreigners. Nasaka 25 is now stationed at Angu Maw Village.

The report said that many modern and high power machines that were brought from China have been arriving at the factory compound recently, and it is speculated that the machinery will be used to produce iron.

Many Chinese companies, such as CNOOC, HQCEC, and PetroChina have been getting opportunities from the Burmese military government to invest in oil, gas, and other business sectors in Burma.

These Chinese companies are involved in many business sectors in Arakan State, including gas and oil exploration. #

narinjara.com

Government seeks at all cost to control news coming out of Irrawaddy delta

Zarganar (2e en partant de la gauche)

Reporters Without Borders and the Burma Media Association, an organisation of Burmese journalists in exile, condemn a series of measures taken by military government in the past few days to control news and information coming out of the cyclone-hit Irrawaddy delta

The blogger and comedian known by the stage name of Zarganar was arrested without explanation on 5 June. The police began confiscating satellite dishes on 6 June in order to deny Burmese access to foreign news media. And the official press published articles denigrating the foreign media on 8 June. Furthermore, several journalists have been expelled in recent weeks and it has become impossible to get a press visa.

“We call for the immediate release of Zarganar, whose arrest is typical of the contempt shown by military junta towards those who express themselves freely,” the two organisations said. “Zarganar is very well known in Burma. In his sketches and in the blog he has keep since August 2007 (WinDoor), he defends human rights and condemns the junta’s behaviour. He had become a source of news and information.”

Zarganar, who has been dubbed the “Burmese Charlie Chaplin,” gave an interview to a foreign TV station on the eve of his arrest in which he criticised the government and referred to a group of 400 people who have managed to provide relief assistance to the victims of last month’s cyclone despite a government ban. The group cooperated with another one founded by a Buddhist month.

The authorities told Zarganar’s family that they would hold him for “only two days” in order to question him, but he has not been released.



“Many journalists are being prevented from working freely and the foreign media are being attacked in the official press, which is trying to discredit them,” Reporters Without Borders and the Burma Media Association said. “Activists are playing a vital role in providing news and information through what they are posting online. We condemn the way the authorities are deliberately trying seal the citizens of the Irrawaddy delta behind a wall of silence.”

Several foreign journalists, including CNN and Time reporters have been deported in the past few weeks and others have been refused visas.

The New Light of Myanmar, a government newspaper, referred to “enemy” radio stations on 8 June. "The storm is now no more. However, the enemy that is more destructive than (Cyclone) Nargis has reared its ugly head," the newspaper said. "It is time (that) the foreign broadcasting stations and their accomplices knew that their instigation and propaganda are good for nothing. And they should stop broadcasting such kinds of fabricated news." (See below)

According to Burmese exile media reports , the police are also confiscating the satellite dishes that Burmese citizens use to receive foreign TV stations. Around 50 dishes were reportedly seized from a Rangoon store on 6 June.

The Burmese board of censors has banned news and pictures about the cyclone not only in local newspapers and monthly magazines but also in foreign magazines, such as the 26 May and 2 June issues of Time magazine.

rsf.org

RUSSIA-BURMA NUCLEAR INTELLIGENCE REPORT
By Roland Watson
June 26, 2008

We have new, disturbing, and detailed intelligence about the assistance Russia is providing Burma’s dictatorship, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), on its nuclear program and more generally its military modernization. This new information both confirms earlier intelligence that we have published, and expands what is known about the overall program.

Nuclear reactor and uranium mining

It has been widely reported that Russia is going to provide Burma a nuclear reactor, for so-called “research” purposes. We have received information that the SPDC has now purchased the 10 MW reactor. It is not new, but is reportedly in good condition. It is being dismantled, transported to Burma, and rebuilt. While we cannot confirm that it has arrived, our sources say that installation is due to be completed by December this year. (We have previously reported that North Korean technicians will assist with the construction.)

The reactor will be built at a site some ten kilometers from Kyauk Pa Toe, in Tha Beik Kyin township, approximately one hundred kilometers north of Mandalay near the Irrawaddy River.

In return for the reactor and other services, a Russian government mining company has received concessions to mine gold, titanium and uranium. There are two gold mining sites: in Kyauk Pa Toe; and in the mountains to the right of the Thazi-Shwe Nyaung railway line from Mandalay Division to Southern Shan State in the Pyin Nyaung area.

Titanium is also being mined, or derived from the same ore, at Kyauk Pa Toe.

Uranium is being mined at three locations: in the Pegu-Yoma mountain range in Pauk Kaung Township of Prome District (aka Pyi); in the Paing Ngort area in Mo Meik Township in Shan State; and at Kyauk Pa Toe.

The reactor site has been chosen because of its proximity to the Tha Beik Kyin and Mo Meik uranium mines. It is likely that the gold mining operation at the former will be used as cover, to conceal the nuclear facilities.

We have previously reported, from different sources, that the SPDC has a yellowcake mill somewhere in the Tha Beik Kyin area. Now we know the exact location (or at least enough information to find it with satellite imagery).

The reactor has been publicized as being for research purposes, meaning research on nuclear power generation. We believe that the SPDC has no real interest in generating electricity, or at best that this is a secondary consideration, and that the primary purpose is atomic weapons development. Our sources say that the SPDC expects to have full nuclear capability within ten years.

Russia is presumably supplying the reactor fuel as well. While Burma has uranium ore, and mills to convert it to yellowcake, this must be enriched to create the fuel, typically using cascades of gas centrifuges. We have received one report that the SPDC has begun a centrifuge program, at the South Nawin Dam, but this is unconfirmed. Barring this operation, the source of the fuel therefore must be Russia.

Note: Locating the reactor at Kyauk Pa Toe really only makes sense if there are plans to build an enrichment facility there. This way you would have the full industrial cycle in close proximity: mine, mill, enrichment, and reactor.

What is perhaps most disturbing about Russia’s program with the SPDC is that it is identical to the Soviet Union’s assistance that propelled North Korea to become a nuclear power. Why, with the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War, is Russia still helping rogue regimes proliferate? The surface answer of course is money, in this case in the form of natural resources, but the deeper question remains. Russia is considered to be a democracy. What would the people of the country think of their leaders giving such help to the likes of the SPDC and Than Shwe?

In 1965, the Soviet Union gave North Korea a 2 MW reactor, which was upgraded in 1973 to 8 MW. It also supplied fuel through at least this period. North Korea then went on to construct a much larger reactor, and in the 1980s began weapons development. This included building separation facilities to obtain plutonium, and high explosives detonation tests. (We have received reports that the SPDC has already conducted such tests, in the Setkhya Mountains southeast of Mandalay.) At some point North Korea also began its own uranium enrichment program, to produce weapons grade material, and the U.S. confronted the country about this in 2002. This means that the North has two different sources of fissile material for weapons, reactor plutonium and enriched uranium.

The North detonated a small atomic weapon, with a yield of less than one kiloton, in October 2006, using some of its plutonium. It is now reportedly about to disclose its nuclear assets, and also destroy its plutonium producing reactor, but the sticking point has been the enriched uranium. The North appears unwilling to discuss this (and at this point to disclose its weapons cache), which means that even with the destruction of the reactor and the plutonium stockpile (for the latter the size of which is subject to serious dispute), the North would retain the ability to produce weapons with the uranium. At the moment the U.S. appears willing to accept partial disclosure, i.e., of only the plutonium.

In addition to Russia, North Korean technicians have been helping Burma with its nuclear ambitions (and other weapons programs), and we have received information that the SPDC has given the North refined uranium in return, which may be destined for the enrichment program.

This is all very disturbing, all the more so because of the apparent weakness of the Bush Administration, which has been unwilling to press the North, and which refuses even to mention Burma (its nuclear program). It took North Korea forty years before it detonated a weapon. It will likely take the SPDC only a fraction of this period. Once the Burmese junta has atomic weapons, its rule will be entrenched, and its neighbors, foremost Thailand, will be seriously endangered.

Precision-guided munitions

We have also previously reported that Burma has a wide variety of missile installations, including large quantities of land-based SAMs; ship-launched missiles, both surface to air and surface to surface; weapons for its MIG 29s; and even short range ballistic missiles. We have now received information that while Burma formerly bought anti-aircraft weapons from the Ukraine, in 2007 it purchased four shiploads of such weapons from Russia. We have also learned that the SPDC has multi-tube mechanized rocket launchers from North Korea. (Note: these may be for use with the ballistic missiles, and if so they confirm our earlier intelligence.)

Moreover, Burma is researching the production of guided missiles, and with Russian assistance intends to build a rocket factory in Thazi Township. This will mark the latest step in a well-recognized proliferation of Russian precision-guided munitions in the Asia Pacific region. This class of weapons includes surface to air, to attack jets, and surface to surface to attack land-based targets and also ships. Cruise missiles fall within the category. We do not know which specific PGMs the factory intends to produce, only that they will be medium range guided rockets and that production is scheduled to begin within five years.

It is clear that the SPDC is intent on developing a strong defense against an international intervention, including foreign jets, helicopters and ships. Perhaps one reason why the U.S. and the French balked at dropping relief supplies following Cyclone Nargis was the risk of missile attack on their helicopters and ships.

Military modernization

We have previously noted that the Burma Army is weapons-deficient. It is clear that the extensive procurement program underway with Russia, as well as China, North Korea and others, is intended to rectify this. During the era of Ne Win and the BSPP (Burma Socialist Program Party), the junta established six weapons production facilities. There are now twenty-two, and clearly more are planned.

Coupled with the materiel acquisitions is a major educational program. There are more than 5,000 State Scholars in Russia, all of whom passed their Defense Services Academy class, a nine-month program in the Russian language, and an entrance exam in their specialty. (This is an increase from the 3,000 we previously reported.) They are candidates for either a masters (2 years) or doctorate (4 years – we previously reported 3 years for this degree). They study in Moscow or St. Petersburg, in the former in a suburb at the Moscow Air Institute. There are additional State Scholars from Burma in China, North Korea, Pakistan and India.

One of the more recent groups of scholars, Batch Seven, included 1,100 DSA officers. Their majors are as follows:

250 Nuclear science
100 Tunneling science
200 Rockets
100 Electronics
200 Computer science
100 Aircraft construction
150 Artillery

The students also learn other military subjects, including: tanks; maintenance; anti-aircraft training; ammunition production; fighter pilot training; naval craft construction; naval craft captaincy; and anti-terrorist training.

While it is clear that the overall modernization program will improve the SPDC’s preparedness against attack, the junta still has a significant problem with soldier morale. Many of the state scholars, who are an elite in the Tatmadaw, are not motivated and would seek asylum given the chance. Their stipends barely cover their expenses. The Russian language and their training programs are difficult. They are overworked and separated from the civilian population. Their visas prohibit them from buying air, train or long-distance bus tickets. When they return to Burma, some are used as Russian language teachers or as instructors at the SPDC’s Central Research and Training Unit, but many are sent to the front lines.

As an example, in January this year one scholar fled to the border of Finland, but was arrested by Russian intelligence agents when he used his cell phone to call his contact on the other side. There is widespread dissatisfaction at all levels within the SPDC, except perhaps the very top – although there is reportedly a split there as well, between Than Shwe and Maung Aye. While the new weapons systems improve the junta’s defense against an intervention, they still need operators. The SPDC is poised to fall, through an internal coup, and it is subject to a renewed popular uprising as well.

Acquiring a nuclear weapon would alter this equation somewhat, but really only by creating a new defense against an intervention, and this is as yet some years away, unless the SPDC acquires a warhead directly from North Korea. Still, any such development has to be prevented, which raises the question, yet again: what is the U.S. doing? Under geopolitical realism, the only concerns are national interests. On a superficial level, for the U.S. and Burma, these are limited to Chevron’s investment in Burma’s natural gas production and pipelines. A secondary interest is the concern of U.S. citizens of Burmese origin, but since this group is small it can effectively be ignored. It would seem, therefore, that all the Administration bluster notwithstanding, its only real policy objective for Burma is to protect Chevron, which corporation to bolster its case also makes large campaign donations.

The real direct national interest of the United States is to deny Burma nuclear weapons. It is not only North Korea, Iran and Syria that America (and the world) must contain. Having a nuclear-armed SPDC is an unacceptable risk. This trumps the need to assist a domestic corporation. Further, since Chevron is also a major cash source for the junta, which uses money as well as the direct transfer of natural resources to pay its weapons suppliers, it demands that the company be forced to divest.

dictatorwatch.org

Junta's secret plan: Closer relationship with China
Zarni Saturday, 27 September 2008

Chiang Mai - The secretly distributed minutes of a meeting chaired by the Burmese Ministry of Home Affairs indicate that the Burmese junta, which has ruled the country for over four decades, will seek a closer relationship with China in the face of growing, U.S.-led, international pressure.

The minutes of the meeting, dated July 6, 2008, state that in order to defend the country against U.S. influence, Burma cannot stand alone without any alliances and, therefore, needs the backing of China and other like-minded countries.

The minutes, a copy of which is in Mizzima's possession, say the junta's policy of stepping up relations with China is in both countries' favor and is not to the junta's benefit alone.

With the U.S. vigorously implementing its "China Containment Policy", the minutes say Burma is one of only a few neighboring countries of China that can still fend off U.S. influence.

The minutes list India, Bangladesh, Thailand, South Korea and Mongolia, as well as others, as neighbors of China that are fully or partially influenced by the U.S., leaving Burma and a few other countries such as North Korea free of the Western influence.

"For this purpose, the gas pipeline has been built and Kyaukthu Port has been developed, so that China can get direct access to the sea from Burma," the Home Minister was quoted as saying in the minutes.

China, a veto wielding country in the U.N. Security Council, has openly defended Burma in the U.N. as well as in other international arenas. In January 2007, China along with Russia vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution on Burma that urged the release of detained pro-democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and an improvement in the country's human rights situation.

The minutes also depict the U.S. as failing to influence many nations, including Burma, through its economic, diplomatic, human rights and democracy stance, requiring Washington to turn to the U.N. to further its influence.

The minutes, which apparently accuse the U.S. of masterminding the various resolutions passed by the U.N. against Burma, say the U.S. is seeking to exploit the various councils of the world body, including the Human Rights Council and the International Labor Organization.

Interestingly, the minutes add that with the continuous pressure of the world body and international community, the junta can no longer turn a deaf ear to the outside world but is instead forced to implement at least some changes.

However, the document states that despite growing international community demands, the government will not alter its policy regarding its roadmap to democracy.

But, in the case of renewed anti-government movements and riots, the minutes iterate that such occurrences will be handled by the police and not the army, in an effort to mitigate international criticism.

The minutes determine that while there is no need to worry about growing external pressure, it is important that members of the Ministry work hard and prove themselves excellent in their respective works.

mizzima.com

China’s Grip on Burma ‘Cause for Concern’

By WILLIAM BOOT
Monday, September 29, 2008

BANGKOK — China’s grip on Burma’s natural resources has grown considerably in a short time, says a detailed investigation by a US-based human rights organization, EarthRights International (ERI).

The survey identifies 69 Chinese companies engaged in oil, gas, hydropower development and mining—a 250 percent increase on the number thought to be operating in Burma when a similar study was made one year ago.


A protester covers her mouth with an anti-dam message during a rally outside the Royal Thai Embassy last year in Makati City east of Manila, Philippines.
(Photo: AP)

But the survey says there could be more than 70 Chinese companies operating across Burma because the mining sector is particularly difficult to assess.

“Given what we know about development projects in Burma and the current situation, we’re concerned about this marked increase in the number of these projects,” says ERI in a report published on Monday.

Washington-based ERI says Burma has become “geopolitically significant” to the Chinese as their mushrooming economy demands ever more natural resources, notably energy related.

Having a compliant neighbor rich in gas, oil, minerals and timber is a big plus for China, but Burma’s position on the edge of the Indian Ocean also makes it a “particularly desirable partner in China’s pursuit of energy security,” says ERI.

This is in reference to Chinese plans to develop ports and pipelines in Burma to transship large volumes of oil and gas from the Middle East, Africa and elsewhere.

“We’re concerned about the lack of information about these projects available to the public domain,” said Alek Momi, the report’s principal researcher.

The survey identifies the most firms in hydropower developments—at least 45 companies actively engaged or planning 63 projects, ranging from small dams to the massive scheme on the River Salween at Tasang.

In Burma’s mushrooming oil and gas sectors, at least 16 Chinese companies are named, including all three of China’s biggest transnational enterprises, Sinopec, China National Offshore Oil Corporation, and China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC).

ERI pinpoints the Arakan coast as one of the most significant strategic locations for China’s long-term plans for vacuuming up global oil and gas reserves.

“CNPC has signed a MoU with MOGE [Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise] for a detailed assessment of the potential construction of a crude oil terminal off the coast of Arakan State,” says the report.

A terminal for oil shipped in from the Middle East and Africa, plus pipelines across Burma into southwest China, would “increase the efficiency of China’s oil and gas imports by providing an alternative to the problematic Straits of Malacca.”

ERI names ten Chinese companies involved in mining for minerals—a sector “difficult to assess as many mining projects are small, therefore less visible and attracting less publicity.”

The ERI report comes just a few days after the Burmese junta confirmed that Chinese state-controlled China Non-Ferrous Metal Group will proceed to mine nickel in the Mandalay region.

Few details of the agreement have been disclosed. The Burmese ministry of mines claimed that the project would provide more than 1,000 jobs for local people. The nickel will be exported to China.

ERI says this will become one of the largest mining projects in Burma, with investment of US $600 million, financed by Chinese state banks, to mine and export up 40 million tons of nickel ore.

The lack of clarity on this particular project at Tagung Taung—land acquisition, environmental impact and displacement—underscores ERI’s concerns.

The group has also unearthed evidence of plans by another Chinese company, Jinbao Mining, with a convoluted ownership, to investigate prospects for mining a 10-million ton nickel deposit at Mwetaung in Chin State.

ERI, with Southeast Asia offices in Chiang Mai, Thailand, campaigns for human rights in a number of areas but especially where transnational companies seek to trample on land rights and damage the environment.

ERI brought a successful legal action in the US against oil company Unocal—now part of Chevron—to compensate Burmese villagers for the Yadana gas pipeline through southeast Burma into Thailand.

In China, there is no public consultation on industrial developments and land is often illegally confiscated and people forcibly evicted.

China has one of the worst polluted environments in the world due to uncontrolled development.

irrawaddy.org

The 4th Burmese Empire with Nuclear Weapon
By Prof. Kanbawza Win
Tue, 2008-10-21 01:17

Google Alert Burma duly reported of how Burma is near completion of nuclear weapon on the 18th instant and of how its Defense Minister boasts that by 2020 Burma would be one of the greatest nations in Southeast Asia. Given the economic reality of Burma compounded with its gross mismanagement and human rights violations is it but an empty dream or a reality?

Every body knew that Russia has agreed to build a nuclear research centre in Burma. The centre will comprise a 10MW light-water reactor working on 20%-enriched uranium-235, an activation analysis laboratory, a medical isotope production laboratory, silicon doping system; nuclear waste treatment and burial facilities will be monitored by IAEA as according to Rosatom head, Sergey Kiriyenko and Burma's Science and Technology Minister. Russia has trained Burmese military specialists.


The Background

The story started way back in 1990 when the current Junta christened itself as SLORC (State law and Order Restoration Council); Rangoon University Physics Professor U Po Saw was consulted about developing the technology, and also the selection of candidates to become state scholars. The process of honing cadet officers for training in nuclear technology was begun in 1997, with Defense Services Academy Class 42.

The Junta at first contacted India to obtain nuclear technology. Karla (Indians) agreed to accept state scholars, but India also stipulated that it had to supervise and control the operation of the reactor. The deal did not go through. With the help of China, the Junta succeeded in reaching its agreement with Russia. In addition, the Chinese government has advised the Junta that it should try, by various means, to make nuclear weapons and, if it cannot produce them by its target date of 2020, it should buy them.

The other side of the story is that Burma and North Korea, two of the world's most isolated nations, have agreed to restore diplomatic relations after a break of more than 20 years. At that time having being kicked out of Prime Minister’s Office and interrogated in Insein, I was working with the Korean embassy under ambassador Kae Chu Lee, who was killed instantly when the Pyongyang sent agents to kill President Chun Doo Wan. Self-interest has brought the two countries back together North Korea benefited from Burma's natural resources, such as oil, gas and timber while Burma's rulers need access to military equipment, which has been blocked by US and European sanctions.

In 2003, the regime sent thirty military officers to North Korea to study reactor technology. In 2006, it started buying from the North the machinery necessary for reactor construction. The Junta established its connection with North Korea, so it would not have to stop the program if its relations with Russia turned sour and also want some of Pyongyang's sophisticated tunneling techniques to help further fortify their military complex in the new capital Naypyidaw. The Junta sells natural resources to obtain nuclear technology, including for the costs of educating the state scholars and currently there are over 4,600 in Russia alone.

20,000 tons of iron ore are mined in Ka-thaing Taung, a range in the Hpakan area in Kachin State near the famous jade mines. Even though the program was temporarily suspended in 2005, due to financial reasons the Yadana pipeline provides at least $500,000,000 in annual revenue for the Burmese regime and is now a going process. The Junta also secretly tried to gain assistance from Iran and that is why the two countries relations are so rosy with full diplomatic relations. Further, in 2000, Japan started taking scholars for doctoral level studies, to operate a reactor. With the help of Japan, new departments of nuclear science have been set up at Rangoon University, Mandalay University, and the Defense Services Academy.


Russian Connection

In 2001, the first batch of scholars, 150 military officers, was sent to Russia from Tada U Airport on chartered Aeroflot flights. In Russia, the scholars attend a variety of institutes in Moscow and also St.Petersburg, depending on their subjects of study. The schools includes (MEPHI) Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, (MIET ) Moscow Institute of Electronic Technology, (MATI) Moscow Institute of Aviation Technology, (MAI) Moscow Aviation Institute, (BMSTU) Bauman Moscow State Technical University, (MITT) Moscow Institute of Thermal Technology, (MISI) Moscow Civil Engineering Institute, and (MSMU) Moscow State Mining University

MEPHI teaches nuclear science, MIET rocket guidance, MAI aircraft and space subjects, and MATI the technology for building rockets to carry satellites. There are also course programs in tunneling, uranium mining, and uranium ore refining. Of course many of the scholars are unhappy as their pay is too low and the harsh weather caused them problems with the medical care they receive is inadequate (As an example, in January this year one scholar fled to the border of Finland, but was arrested by Russian intelligence agents when he used his cell phone to call his contact on the other side). In response, the Directorate of Intelligence sent weekly instructions urging them to complete their work and to fulfill the national aim of producing nuclear weapons. At one point former Foreign Minister U Win Aung came in person and told the students to finish their studies. He relayed a message from Vice Chief of Staff Maung Aye that anyone who married a Russian woman scientist and then return home bringing their wives would be rewarded.

Also, in 2002, Quartermaster General Win Myint as well as the Navy Chief, Air Chief and Transport Minister went to Russia and arranged for the training of twenty Air Force pilots, who would then take ten purchased MIG 29s back to Burma. They additionally discussed whether Burma should acquire aircraft carriers and submarines. In July 2002, Science and Technology Minister U Thaung went to Russia and signed the agreement for the acquisition and construction of the nuclear reactor. Now a 10-megawatt reactor was being built in Myaing Township, Magwe Division, and further that it was to use heavy water and, for that reason, that it would be able to produce plutonium (read Bertil Lintner’s Asia Times article of July 2006.)

Uranium ore that is commercially exploitable exists in the Kyauk Pyon, Paungpyin and Kyauk Sin areas. In addition, uranium prospecting has occurred or is underway in southern Tenasserim, Karenni State (the Loikaw area), Moehnyin in Kachin State, and in areas west of Taunggyi. Uranium milling is in progress at Tha Beik Kyin, an enrich milled uranium (yellowcake) to U-235. This yellowcake was sold to North Korea and in return the regime purchased nuclear activation equipment for use in uranium enrichment in July 2006, and also for the production of plutonium and now North Korean nuclear experts are now working in Tha Beik Kyin. The related Military Research Center was built in the Setkhya range (aka Sa Kyin) near Lun Kyaw, which area is a Nuclear Battalion, and that there is a Civilian Research Center in Kyaukse Township. There are also Russian nuclear experts in Pyin U Lwin, who give refresher courses to the state scholars after they return home.

In return for the reactor and other services, a Russian government mining company has received concessions to mine gold, titanium and uranium. There are two gold mining sites: in Kyauk Pa Toe; and in the mountains to the right of the Thazi-Shwe Nyaung railway line. Titanium is also being mined, or derived from the same ore, at Kyauk Pa Toe. Uranium is being mined at three locations: in the Pegu-Yoma Mountain range in Pauk Kaung Township of Prome District (aka Pyi); in the Paing Ngort area in Mo Meik Township in Shan State; and at Kyauk Pa Toe.


Disturbing Factor

What is perhaps most disturbing about Russia’s program with the Burmese Junta is that it is identical to the Soviet Union’s assistance that propelled North Korea to become a nuclear power. Why, with the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War, is Russia still helping rogue regimes proliferate? The surface answer of course is money, in this case in the form of natural resources, but the deeper question remains. Russia is against democracy.

In 1965, the Soviet Union gave North Korea a 2 MW reactor, which was upgraded in 1973 to 8 MW. It also supplied fuel through at least this period. North Korea then went on to construct a much larger reactor, and in the 1980s began weapons development. This included building separation facilities to obtain plutonium, and high explosives detonation tests. The Junta has already conducted such tests, in the Setkhya Mountains, aka Sa Kyin Mountains, southeast of Mandalay.

At some point North Korea also began its own uranium enrichment program, to produce weapons grade material, and the U.S. confronted the country about this in 2002. This means that the North has two different sources of fissile material for weapons, reactor plutonium and enriched uranium. North Korea detonated a small atomic weapon, with a yield of less than one kiloton, in October 2006, using some of its plutonium. It is now reportedly about to disclose its nuclear assets, and also destroy its plutonium producing reactor with the US bowing to the demand that DPRK be taken off from the black list of rogue states. But the sticking point has been the enriched uranium. The North appears unwilling to discuss this because it will disclose its weapons cache, which means that even with the destruction of the reactor and the plutonium stockpile (for the latter the size of which is subject to serious dispute), the North would retain the ability to produce weapons with the uranium. At the moment the U.S. appears willing to accept partial disclosure, i.e., of only the plutonium.

Both Russia, North Korean technicians have been helping Burma with its nuclear ambitions (and other weapons programs), This is all very disturbing, all the more so because of the apparent weakness of the Bush Administration, which has been unwilling to press the North, and which refuses even to mention Burma and its nuclear program. It took North Korea forty years before it detonated a weapon. It will likely take the Burmese dictatorship only a fraction of this period. Once the Burmese Junta has atomic weapons, its rule will be entrenched.


Precision Weapons

Burma now possessed a wide variety of missile installations, including large quantities of land-based SAMs; ship-launched missiles, both surface to air and surface to surface; weapons for its MIG 29s; and even short range ballistic missiles. While the Junta bought anti-aircraft weapons from the Ukraine, in 2007 it has now purchased four shiploads of such weapons from Russia and multi-tube mechanized rocket launchers from North Korea can be used with the ballistic missiles. Moreover, Burma is researching the production of guided missiles, and with Russian assistance intends to build a rocket factory in Thazi Township. This will mark the latest step in a well-recognized proliferation of Russian precision-guided munitions in the Asia Pacific region. The only thing that PGMs factory produce will be medium range guided rockets and that production is scheduled to begin within five years. It is clear that the Generals are intent on developing a strong defense against an international intervention, including foreign jets, helicopters and ships. Perhaps this is the main reason of why the U.S. and the French balked at dropping relief supplies following Cyclone Nargis was the risk of missile attack on their helicopters and ships.

The fact that the Burmese Junta is aggressively seeking nuclear weapons (not to mention all of its other programs) should make the leaders of Thailand, and the world, extremely concerned. The appeasement policy of the successive Thai administrations (including ASEAN) and the International Community towards the Junta should have second thought. The Burmese Military Junta is a threat of the greatest severity. It should be stopped. Since the Security Council, with Russian and Chinese vetoes, is unable to act, there must be an alternative solution. The only real options are for the U.S., either alone or with other concerned nations (including Thailand), to assist the people of the country to free themselves, using whatever means are required. This should be the crux of the Thai policy instead of bullying the refugees and the migrant workers. At the moment, though, there is a conspiracy of silence even to acknowledge this threat. Thailand, the U.S. and other nations are preoccupied with their internal and other problems that there is no desire to recognize publicly another new crisis.

We also understand that there is such a thing as investigative journalism or media outlet as far as Burma’s nuclear program is concerned. This lack of coverage means that political leaders, in Thailand, the U.S., at the U.N., etc., will continue to act as if there is not a problem.


International Community

What is the U.S. doing? Under geopolitical realism, the only concerns are national interests. On a superficial level, for the U.S. and Burma, these are limited to Chevron’s investment in Burma’s natural gas production and pipelines. A secondary interest is the concern of U.S. citizens of Burmese origin as most of the Myanmar tribe will side with the Junta once the 4th Burmese empire is established but not the ethnic tribe, but since this group is small it can effectively be ignored. It would seem, therefore, that all the Administration bluster notwithstanding, its only real policy objective for Burma is to protect Chevron, which corporation to bolster its case also makes large campaign donations.

The real direct national interest of the United States is to deny Burma nuclear weapons. It is not only North Korea, Iran and Syria that America (and the world) must contain. Having a nuclear-armed Burmese Military Junta is an unacceptable risk. This trumps the need to assist a domestic corporation. Further, since Chevron is also a major cash source for the Junta, which uses money as well as the direct transfer of natural resources to pay its weapons suppliers, it demands that the company be forced to divest.

US intelligence believes Burma is seeking to develop nuclear weapons from technology provided by North Korea, according to two former senior US government officials. An article in one of the latest issue of Foreign Affairs, Michael Green, formerly with the National Security Council, and Derek Mitchell, formerly with the Pentagon, write: "Western intelligence officials have suspected for several years that the regime has had an interest in following the model of North Korea and achieving military autarky by developing ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons." The article confirms the thrust of a story in The Australian last year that Burma was seeking to acquire missile and nuclear weapons technology from North Korea.

Green and Mitchell argue that Burma is a much more urgent problem for the international community than is commonly realized. This is because of the humanitarian catastrophe that Burma has become as well as the human and strategic fallout of its activities. Its many illegal immigrants are spreading the HIV-AIDS virus, in part because of the primitive quality of the Burmese health system. It produces the vast majority of Asian heroin and is intimately involved in drug and other smuggling across most of its borders. And its regime is increasingly erratic.

Green and Mitchell evaluate the approaches taken to Burma is that Burma’s neighbors especially in the Association of South-East Asian Nations, of which it is a member, have tried to engage it economically and politically while urging it to embrace political reform. Its closest trade partner and political patron is China which, along with Russia, makes sure the UN takes no effective action. India has also become an important player in Burma and has tried to match China with technology, weapons sales, diplomatic engagement and trade. While the US and the European Union have taken the opposite tack, resolutely condemning Burma's internal oppression and imposing severe trade and investment sanctions but Japan and Australia have taken a middle path.

Neither engagement nor the isolation strategies has had the slightest effect in moderating the Burmese Government's behavior. Engagement by Asian neighbors and isolation by the West have tended to cancel each other out. They propose a new strategy, basically of lining up all the key players - the US, the EU, China, India, ASEAN and Japan - in a new multilateral approach following the model of the six-party talks that have had some success with North Korea. This new multilateral framework would offer Burma security and territorial guarantees, and moderate the US ban on dealing with high-level Burmese officials, but would maintain Western sanctions until Burma made solid progress on minimum benchmarks of behavior that the multilateral process would define. But Burma has rejected this approach. Isolation and sanctions work only when a regime is about to collapse and Burma is not at that point. It's incredibly unsatisfactory and morally very complex also.

But the key to the policy working would be to convince China to exert real pressure on Burma; even then it's not guaranteed. However, China gets too much strategic pay-off from Burma: military listening posts, natural resources, access to the Indian Ocean and much else.

The other aspect that once the Junta became weak it will lead to Balkanization of Burma with disastrous consequences among it neighbors. The imperialist China and the cut throat India will stalk their share, only then the ethnics and the pro democratic groups will realized their folly and it will be too late.

The Burmese generals are not buffoons as the media portrayed. Working at the Prime Minister’s Office I have deal with a lot of them even though at that time they are junior officers. They are crafty, deceptive, and sly and could cleverly trick its people and the international community to swallow their lie as the various UN’s representative including Ban Ki Moon trips demonstrates. Than Shwe himself is a skilled if not a slippery debater and a natural politician gifted in the art of spin and misdirection. If the world, particularly the next American President doesn’t act now we should let the Burmese Junta established their 4th Burmese empire with nuclear weapons and add another giant stature in Naypyidaw for the Burmese has already established three empires, the Pagan Dynasty 1044, the Taungoo dynasty1550 and the Konbaung dynasty 1776.

asiantribune.com

Prostitute dies after sexual escapade with Russian in jade land
Written by KNG
Thursday, 06 November 2008

Three days after she had sex with a Russian male in the last week of October, a Shan prostitute died under bizarre circumstances, in Phakant jade mining area in Kachin State, northern Burma, said local sources.

The Shan woman was called for a night at a Russian mineral exploration camp in Tarmakhan, northwest of Phakant city by a Russian male, according to Tarmakhan jade miners. She was paid 80,000 Kyat (est. US $66).



The next day, the Shan prostitute was admitted to Phakant Hospital where she died, said sources close to the prostitute.

The doctors, who examined the body of the Shan prostitute, said she died from severe injuries to her vagina, cervix and uterus.

No action has been taken against the Russian male by the Phakant military authorities of Burma's ruling junta, local sources added.

According to the junta-run New Light of Myanmar, the regime and the Russian Victorious Glory International Private Ltd signed an agreement for exploring gold and associated minerals along the Uru River (Uru Hka) between Phakant in Kachin State and Homalin in Sagaing Division on February 15 this year.

Two years before this agreement was reached, a team of Russian geologists had set up camp in Tarmakhan and the areas have been restricted to civilians except Russians, said residents of Tarmakhan.

Phakant residents believe that Russians are arriving in Phakant for exploring Uranium in Tarmakhan and Hongpa areas rather than mining gold and jade.

A jade businessman in Phakant told KNG that he has been seeing an increasing number of Russians, Chinese and Thais in Phakant jade mining areas.

kachinnews.com

RECOGNITION OF BURMA’S PROLIFERATION
By Roland Watson
November 13, 2008

Zee News India recently reported that at the request of the United States a North Korean cargo plane was denied permission to fly through Indian airspace to get to Iran. This incident, which occurred on August 7th, was also covered in a Wall Street Journal article in the edition of November 1-2nd. According to the Journal, the U.S. request was “part of the Bush Administration’s Proliferation Security Initiative, which aims to block the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Any action under the initiative would be ordered only if the plane was suspected of carrying nuclear materials, long-range missile components or other potentially lethal cargo.”

The only cargo possibility that was mentioned, by either Zee News or the Journal, was missile components. We believe it is naïve to suggest that cooperation between Iran and North Korea is limited to this extent. More likely, there is nuclear cooperation as well, which the intelligence community has either been unable to document, or which, for whatever reasons, it wants to keep secret.

The last scenario is the most likely, since North Korea was caught helping Syria build a nuclear reactor, which facility Israel destroyed. It would be surprising if the same type of cooperation with Iran – assistance with its program to develop nuclear weapons – were not underway. (Impoverished North Korea is an aggressive arms merchant.) Also, it seems clear that the U.S. has an effective intelligence capability, directed at the North, since it was able to identify this particular flight.

The Journal article was notable for what it didn't mention: the role of Burma in the developing nuclear and ballistic missile proliferation nexus between North Korea and Iran. The flight had proceeded from Pyongyang to Mandalay, from where its departure to Iran was blocked. It would also be naïve to think that this was simply a refueling stop. The flight repeats a pattern of naval shipments from Pyongyang, which were unloaded under top secrecy at Rangoon Thilawa Port at night, and which ships we understand in at least one case then proceeded onward to Iran.

Dictator Watch has previously reported, based on information from our own sources, that Burma is pursuing a nuclear development program with atomic weapons as the ultimate objective. The principal partner in this program is Russia, which has agreed to supply a 10 MW reactor, and which is now being constructed. This is a repeat of the proliferation that the Soviet Union orchestrated with North Korea in the 1970s and 80s, and North Korean technicians are reportedly involved in the Burmese project, if not directing its on-ground activities.

China played an important role in Burma’s proliferation. In May 2001, former Foreign Minister Win Aung together with General Maung Aye spoke to Burmese State Scholars who were to study in Russia. Win Aung said: “China wants us to work with Russia on a nuclear program and to try to develop nuclear weapons in the future.”

Cooperation between Burma and Russia soured in 2006, because the Burmese scholars were not dedicated to their education and the military junta, the SPDC, failed to pay the program’s costs. At that time, and even though cooperation with Russia subsequently was resumed, Burma approached North Korea and Iran for assistance with its nuclear initiative.

Burma further has short-range ballistic missiles, acquired from North Korea. We believe these are Scud variant missiles, not the more sophisticated devices that have been tested by the North within the last year.

Burma also has commercial uranium deposits, which the regime itself has admitted. Our sources inform us that uranium mining and milling is in progress, and that the end product, yellowcake, has been sold to both North Korea and Iran. Regarding the former, the most contentious disarmament issue for the United States has been the extent of the North's uranium enrichment program, and such program's decommissioning. Similarly, there is great concern about Iran's enrichment program. We believe Burma is supplying both programs with the raw material, and further that it has its own enrichment effort (with centrifuge facilities near Kyauk Kyi village in Tha Beik Kyin township, and Naung Hlaing village in Pyin Oo Lwin township).

Section Ten of the Tom Lantos Block Burmese JADE (Junta's Anti-Democratic Efforts) Act of 2008 requires the Secretary of State to prepare a report, not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the Act (July 29) on military and intelligence aid to Burma. This includes “the provision of weapons of mass destruction and related materials, capabilities, and technology, including nuclear, chemical, or dual-use capabilities.”

The report is therefore due by the end of January, and it is to be submitted to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate. It will have unclassified and classified forms, the first of which will be placed on the Department of State's website.

This past summer, the resistance forces in Eastern Burma intercepted Burma Army communications that unmanned drones had been spotted in the Toungoo area of the country (near the junta's capital, Napyidaw), on three separate occasions, and which the Army unsuccessfully tried to shoot down. It seems clear that there is a significant effort to ascertain fully the extent of Burma's proliferation programs, in part to prepare for the Secretary's report. We are fully supportive of this effort, and hope that the Obama Administration will use its results to press for a proper examination of Burma and the risk the SPDC poses to international security and peace.

For the last eight years, the Burma pro-democracy movement has looked to President Bush for assistance. However, other than some comforting words, he did nothing. Congress initiated all the substantive freedom and democracy initiatives for Burma.

Now we have a new administration. President-elect Obama, at his first news conference, said of Iran, its “development of a nuclear weapon, I believe, is unacceptable… We have to mount an international effort to prevent that from happening.”

We believe it is essential that he extend this policy to Burma, in the first instance by personally disclosing the results of U.S. intelligence. The SPDC has an active nuclear program – there have been high level visits with North Korea and China in the last two weeks. The full extent of what is known about this program must be revealed.

The President-elect also said, in his second debate with Senator McCain, that he would provide logistical support for the peacekeeping forces in Darfur, Sudan, including by setting up a no-fly zone. We would ask the new President to take similar action with respect to Burma, by imposing a naval and air blockade of all arms shipments to the SPDC. This would leave only the land border with China as a transit point for military materiel.

The big question for Barack Obama is if he can live up to his words, if he can fulfill the hope that he offers. To do this, he must confront a world that is complex, challenging, and dangerous. He is now in the major leagues, and to be successful, and for the world to improve, he must effectively manage such issues as Iran, North Korea, Burma, and Sudan. To do this, though, he will have to be strong and decisive with the backers of these regimes, and through which backing such problems have proved to be intractable. He will have to stand up to Russia and China, and find some way to get them to relent.

dictatorwatch.org

Russia Urges Burma to Cooperate with UN
By MIN LWIN
Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Russia’s ambassador to Burma has told Burmese Foreign Minister Nyan Win that Moscow will be in a better position to support the Naypyidaw regime if it cooperates with UN special envoy Ibraham Gambari, according to a leaked written account of their meeting.

The secret document, leaked to The Irrawaddy by a Burmese Foreign Ministry source, said the Russian ambassador, Mikhail Mgeladze, reassured Nyan Win of Moscow’s continuing support, while urging cooperation with the UN. The two met on December 6 at Nyan Win’s office in Rangoon.

Gambari has a standing invitation from Burma’s ruling junta to visit the country, but he has shown reluctance to return in view of the regime’s recent crackdown on the pro-democracy leadership, ignoring appeals from the international community.

Last week, the UN said there was no immediate plan for Gambari to visit Burma in the near future.

“He has no plans immediately to go to Myanmar [Burma],” Michele Montas, spokeswoman for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, told reporters at the UN headquarters in New York.

Ban himself was earlier scheduled to visit Burma in December, but cancelled his trip after the Burmese military junta went back on its words and intensified its crackdown on pro-democracy activists.

“He [Ban] is not going to go there just for the sake of going. He has to have some indications that his visit will mean something,” Montas said.

The Russian ambassador’s meeting with Nyan Win was seen as quiet diplomatic pressure on the regime to cooperate with the UN.

Mgeladze restated Moscow’s position, however, that the release of Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners, the opening of a dialogue between Snr Gen Than Shwe and Suu Kyi and the presence of independent monitors at the 2010 election are only internal matters, the leaked document disclosed.

The Russian ambassador also said that he would not support six-party talks on Burma along the lines of this year’s North Korea initiative. A similar Burma initiative has been proposed by some dissidents.

Nyan Win told Mgeladze that the Burmese government would not accept such a proposal. Burma and North Korea were different matters, he said.

Nyan Win told the ambassador that Burma’s two major allies, China and India, also opposed the six-party talks proposal.

The meeting between Nyan Win and Mgeladze also dealt with trade relations between Burma and the West. The two officials shared a view that France and Germany are interested in economic cooperation with the regime, although America and the UK take a tougher policy toward Burma.

The Russian ambassador assured Nyan Win that his government intended to strengthen its economic and diplomatic cooperation with the regime.

Burma and Russia celebrated this year the 60th anniversary of their mutual diplomatic relations, which were established with an exchange of notes in February 1948 at the embassy of the Soviet Union in London.

Burma’s late dictator Gen Ne Win developed a close relationship with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev in the 1960s, sending socialist cadres to the Soviet Union to study socialism. Khrushchev visited Burma in 1960.

About 1500 students, mostly military officers, are currently studying in 11 institutions in Russia. Some 500 Burmese students have so far obtained degrees, including doctorates, in Russia, according to the Russian embassy in Burma.

Burma’s army chief and regime No 2, Vice Snr-Gen Maung Aye, visited Russia in April 2006.

Burma has brought a 10 mega watt nuclear reactor and MiG 29 jet fighters from Russia.

irrawaddy.org

Russia has started to fulfil a US$250-million deal to deliver surface-to-air missiles to seven countries including Libya, Syria and Venezuela, the Vedomosti business daily reported Friday.

Russia will also deliver the S-125 Pechora-2M missile batteries to Egypt, Myanmar, Vietnam and Turkmenistan under the contract, the newspaper said, citing a source in the state-owned Russian Technologies corporation.

The Pechora-2M -- known as the SA-3A Goa in NATO parlance -- is an upgraded version of a surface-to-air missile originally developed in the 1960s that was widely shared with the Soviet Union's allies around the world.

albawaba.com middle east news information::Report: Russia starts to deliver advanced surface-to-air missiles to Syria, Egypt and Libya


Pechora 2M Camion avec missile sol air - Truck with Surface-to-air missile system



armyrecognition.com

Originally Posted by Mid

more along the line of raping the country of natural resources

I'm aghast that they continue to play politics in this manner when the scale of the disaster is so massive and obvious to the world . Thus I question whether that would be enough to make them behave in this manner ?

Can't see why Russia and China should care about the humanitarian needs of the Burmese people if quite clearly their own leaders treat them as they do. Their politicians will want the best for their own national and sticky fingered interests, while the going's good, which is not much different to Thai politicians.

U.N. General Assembly isn't the right forum for dealing with Burma regime
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
By Nehginpao Kipgen, Special to The China Post

In a vote of 80 to 25 with 45 abstentions, the U.N. General Assembly on 24 December 2008 adopted a resolution condemning human rights violations by the Burmese military regime. The resolution called for the release of over 2,100 political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi.

The world's highest body criticized the military regime's political road-map as “not transparent, inclusive, free and fair, and that the procedures established for the drafting of the (country's new) constitution resulted in the de facto exclusion of the opposition from the process.”

The General Assembly also expressed concerns over “continuing practice of enforced disappearances, use of violence against peaceful demonstrators, rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture and cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment.”

The Burmese military, to nobody's surprise, categorically rejected the resolution by accusing the Assembly of making a “blatant interference” in its internal political process. The regime in a direct challenge to the international community said it is not bound by the resolution.

The Burmese government's representative told the Assembly that the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) has made a significant political progress and the country is on its way to having a multi-party general election in 2010, the fifth stage of the seven-step roadmap towards a democratic transition.

The absence of international community's coordinated approach was again witnessed. Of the 10 ASEAN members, in which Burma is also a member, 4 members - Brunei Darussalam, Laos, Malaysia, Vietnam - voted against the resolution. Other 4 members - Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand - abstained from voting; Cambodia was not present for the vote.

While western countries, including the United States, supported the General Assembly's motion, Burma was once again defended by two of U.N. Security Council permanent members, China and Russia. *

India voted against the resolution, while Israel and Japan voted in favor of the resolution. Zimbabwe, a country which is also on the radar screens of the United Nations, unsurprisingly defended Burma by voting against the resolution.

Resolutions in the U.N. General Assembly are largely symbolic and are not legally binding. Successive resolutions have been passed and statements have been released since 1991 by different U.N. agencies with little or no impact on the military regime. The attention caused by this resolution will, as in the past, gradually die down after making some news headlines.

One significant point to note though, is that the Burmese democratic movement is still a concern to the international community.

The U.N. Security Council on 11 October 2007 issued a Presidential Statement calling for the military regime to release all political prisoners and “create the necessary conditions for a genuine dialogue with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all concerned parties and ethnic groups in order to achieve an inclusive national reconciliation with the direct support of the United Nations.” That too was not followed up with any concrete action.

U.N. resolutions and statements have not deterred the military from pursuing its agenda. U.N. special envoys come and go without achieving any substantive results. Effective U.N. intervention could only take place when a legally binding resolution can be passed by the Security Council.

Article 41 under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter states that: “The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures...”

For any Security Council binding resolution to happen, the support of all five permanent members is necessary. This is why the Burmese military leaders have been vigorously wooing China and Russia by strengthening economic and military ties, among others. *

Without the Security Council's endorsement, resolutions and statements by the different U.N. agencies, including the General Assembly, would only remain as paper tigers.

The good offices of the Secretary General also has limited roles, and the Secretary General himself is as frustrated as anyone

If there is no change in the veto power system, unilateral action could be one other option to look into.

If neither of the two options are exercised, the international community should explore other possible pragmatic strategies.

The U.N. General Assembly is not the right forum that can deliver change in Burma.

Nehginpao Kipgen is the General Secretary of U.S.-based Kuki International Forum (www.kukiforum.com) and a researcher on the rise of political conflicts in modern Burma (1947-2004).

chinapost.com.tw

* bold highlight mine.

The U.N. General Assembly is not the right forum that can deliver change in Burma.

the alternative is ?

.

.

What is perhaps most disturbing about Russia’s program with the Burmese Junta is that it is identical to the Soviet Union’s assistance that propelled North Korea to become a nuclear power.

Why is it that the US can have 10 million trillion of the things, but Russia aiding other nations in getting one ten thousandt of what the States has = supreme evil?

Originally Posted by Chairman Mao

Why is it that the US can have 10 million trillion of the things, but Russia aiding other nations in getting one ten thousandt of what the States has = supreme evil?

its all about nuclear proliferation.

Originally Posted by Chairman Mao

What is perhaps most disturbing about Russia’s program with the Burmese Junta is that it is identical to the Soviet Union’s assistance that propelled North Korea to become a nuclear power.

Why is it that the US can have 10 million trillion of the things, but Russia aiding other nations in getting one ten thousandt of what the States has = supreme evil?

Basically:- We are a self preservation society.