Thread: Don't Sell Burma Short

Don't Sell Burma Short

by Ko Bo Kyi


Posted July 29, 2009
Mae Sot, Thailand – The Obama administration’s attempts to find a new approach to dealing with Burma are laudable, even if the world doesn’t know which direction it will take yet. The U.S. must maintain a tough stance whilst it seeks new avenues for engagement. Although regional cooperation as part of a new U.S. “carrot and stick” strategy has potential, thus far the incentive element lacks depth. The renewal of U.S. trade sanctions against Burma by the U.S. Congress is welcome; there must be no change to these measures until the ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) show at least a modicum of respect for basic rights.
The U.S. has long predicated their policy on the release of democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. “If she were released, that would open up opportunities at least for my country to expand our relationship with Burma, including investments in Burma," U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters at last week’s Association of Southeast Asian Nations security forum. However, Mrs. Clinton made no mention of Burma’s other 2,100 plus political prisoners.

The importance of Aung San Suu Kyi cannot be underestimated. She is still a unifying figure, and one who is universally respected by all of Burma's ethnic nationality groups. But the Obama administration must not retreat from one critical benchmark for democratic progress in Burma: the unconditional release of all political prisoners. After all, what can Aung San Suu Kyi achieve alone, if her supporters and other political actors languish in prison?
Aung San Suu Kyi is not the only political leader in prison who can help bring national reconciliation to Burma. Others include ethnic-Shan leader U Khun Tun Oo and former student leader Min Ko Naing. And there are some 10,000 former political prisoners living in Burma today. All of them represent the voice of peaceful democratic opposition in Burma; all of them have a vital role to play in Burma's democratization process, which must be truly inclusive if it is to be successful.
It is dangerous to optimistically endorse the 2010 elections as the solution to Burma’s stagnant political system, as imperfect as the elections will clearly be. The elections will be based on the regime’s 2008 constitution, designed to entrench military rule. Twenty-five percent of parliamentary seats are reserved for members of the military, and impunity for Burmese army personnel for past and future human rights violations is enshrined in the constitution. The document bars any person married to a foreigner from serving as president of the country, thereby excluding Aung San Suu Kyi as her husband was British.
Extreme caution needs to be exercised when considering the concept of “participation” in the 2010 elections. “The government has said many times that there are no political prisoners in Myanmar. They are, indeed, the ones who are
serving their terms in accordance with the law for their harming stability and peace of the State, and committing other crimes. Daw Suu Kyi, like them, is not a political prisoner, but the person who is on trial for breaching an existing law,” wrote Lu Thit in an editorial titled “Wipe out anti-public desire elements” in the junta’s mouthpiece The New Light of Myanmar last Thursday. In all likelihood, Burma’s military rulers will consider it a huge concession to allow current and former political prisoners simply to vote in any election.
When the Obama administration announces its policy review, it needs to clarify what new incentives they will offer to the SPDC. First of all, any proffered ‘carrot’ should only be in exchange for the unconditional release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all of Burma’s political prisoners. Secondly, the U.S. must press for a guarantee that all current and former political prisoners be allowed to freely participate in the country's democratization process, without restrictions. Specifically, this should include participation in a review of the 2008 constitution; dialogue for national reconciliation; and the right to stand in independently monitored free and fair elections. Any fresh approach to Burma by the U.S. is welcome, as long as these fundamentals are not cast aside.
The international community remains divided on how best to deal with Burma. The regime depends on this. Ultimately, the divisions help maintain the status quo and ensure their continued rule.
And it is Burma’s political prisoners who will continue to pay the price. In November last year, the authorities began to systematically transfer political prisoners to remote jails around Burma. Of the 237 political prisoners transferred since then, 75% have been moved to the country's most remote jails—up to 1,200 miles from Rangoon.
There is no doubt that this is a deliberate, psychological tactic by the regime to cut off political prisoners from their family support system, and crush their resolve. Food and medical supplies in Burma's prisons are so inadequate that political prisoners rely on their families to help them meet their most basic needs. Families have been forced to find additional funds to make the long-distance trips to visit their loved ones in prison. Held in remote facilities, many of which do not have prison doctors, and separated from their family support systems, political prisoners are at increasing risk of chronic and life-threatening health problems.
Of course, Burma’s political prisoners are not the only ones suffering in the country. Human rights groups have documented grave violations against civilians in Eastern Burma, including the rape of women and children, forcible recruitment of child soldiers, and the use of civilians as human “landmine sweepers.” Recent attacks along the Thai-Burma border have forced an estimated 4,000 Karen villagers to flee to Thailand for safety.
If U.S. President Barack Obama really wants to make his mark on Burma, he has the perfect opportunity, particularly if he joins forces with his U.K. counterpart Gordon Brown. The U.K. chairs the U.N. Security Council in August whilst the U.S. has its turn in September. Together they should push the U.N. Security Council to initiate a Commission of Inquiry into crimes against humanity in Burma.
Difficult though it may be, the U.S. and others need to grapple with the complexity of Burma’s issues. Otherwise, the country’s political prisoners—along with thousands of innocent women and children who urgently need protection from the junta’s brutality—will suffer the consequences.
Ko Bo Kyi spent seven years as a political prisoner in Burma. He is co-founder of the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma) and a recipient of the 2008 Human Rights Defender Award from Human Rights Watch.

I wouldn't sell Burma anything...

Am I the only one that finds this approach of "carrot and stick" characterization to be demeaning, patronizing and offensive...
It certainly wouldn't inspire me to want to be cooperative using such a dictatorial tone..

Maybe we should execute a race-specific biological attack and move in...squatter's rights, baby.

“He [Than Shwe] understands very well that if the public is allowed to have a better life it will gain a progressive outlook and become interested in politics.”

Burmese Regime Deliberately Depresses Economy


The Chinese state-owned oil and gas conglomerate China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) is spending at least US $1.5 billion to use Burma as a conduit for oil shipments from the Middle East and Africa. But as a backup in case this scheme has to be abandoned it is now also investing in a multibillion dollar oil project in northern Malaysia.

Is China Playing Safe with its Burma Pipeline Plan?


I'm afraid the verdict will be painfully obvious —Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma’s detained opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate.

The Irrawaddy News Magazine [Covering Burma and Southeast Asia]

I'd like to sell my car in Burma!

One old piece of crap japanese taxi, not road worthy anymore in Thailand, cost over 15'000 Usd over there !

A pickup 6 years of age with lots of Km will be around 25'000 Usd and easy to sale as demand is high availability none.

A new one can fetch 60'000 Usd probably, even more may be...

Someone i know just sold a 4 x4 Mitsubishi for 110'000 Usd and he bougth that one few years ago, new for 50'000 Usd...

Many Thai people having some sort of company over there, sold their cars and made a huge profit with it this last years...


Many are poor over there, but the money to buy cars at those rates is plenty available !

That's nice. Lot of individuals made lots of money out of the situation. Well done to them, they must be very proud.

hmmmm. I should bring my piece-of-shit car over there, might get 40,000

can you drive across the border there?

In 50 years, after the regime has been crushed and the country is 'open and free' it is going to destroy Thailand in terms of tourist numbers.

The mergui archipelago is going to be the next big island destination.

Cars are probably that expensive because of the risk of landmines on the drive there.

Lobster - couldn't agree more. Laos could also get pole position.

Originally Posted by DrivingForce

can you drive across the border there?

no.

there goes that get rich op for u.