Amid fanfare, UN votes to condemn Burma

[Mid]

Amid fanfare, UN votes to condemn Burma
FRANCIS WADE
22 November 2011


UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon address the General Assembly in 2010
(Reuters)

A resolution condemning ongoing human rights violations in Burma was passed by an overwhelming majority of votes in the UN General Assembly yesterday, contrasting somewhat with assertions among some world leaders that the country has shown remarkable signs of progress in recent months.

The 193-member Assembly said that “systematic violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms” continued, including state-sanctioned instances of “arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”.

It noted however the thaw in relations between government and opposition, and the October release of around 230 political prisoners, two benchmarks used by the US and EU countries to signify an improving political environment in Burma.

The resolution however was met with consternation by Burma’s ambassador to the UN, Than Swe. “We do deserve warm, welcome, kind understanding and sincere encouragements of the international community rather than unconstructive approach by adopting such resolutions,” he was quoted by AFP as saying.

UN chief Ban Ki-moon had positive words for Burmese President Thein Sein when they met last week on the sidelines of the ASEAN summit in Bali. He told the former army general, who is seen as a comparative moderate in Burma’s military-aligned government, that the rosy assessments of developments offered by Aung San Suu Kyi in recent weeks signified the extent to which things had changed since elections last year.
The Secretary General also said last week that he is preparing for his first visit to Burma in the near future.

Critics have however sought to douse the fanfare surrounding the new government by pointing to ongoing conflicts in the country’s border regions where Burmese troops are battling multiple ethnic armies. The UN resolution noted concern over the treatment of ethnic minorities by the Burmese army, which has long operated with impunity.

Although passed on an annual basis, General Assembly resolutions are invariably non-binding, although they can indirectly pre-empt more substantial measures in the UN Security Council or International Court of Justice. The recent vote is notable in that it was passed with widespread support, and emphasised continued violations in ethnic regions, at a time when signs of political progress are serving to mask the ongoing and grisly by-products of the country’s civil war.

The EU is currently weighing up the possibility of easing in sanctions following the return to politics of Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy, which is set to contest in the looming by-elections. The Nobel laureate has said she will be among more than 40 candidates competing for seats, with some suggesting she may eventually run for office.

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said in a statement last week that the bloc was already engaged in a “more substantial review of EU policy” to Burma, and that “continuing positive developments in Myanmar [Burma] are a source of great hope and encouragement”.

Britain’s Foreign Secretary William Hague was somewhat more sparing in his praise for the government following the UN vote, saying that the level of support sends a “strong signal” to Burma’s rulers.

He continued that “human rights abuses continue, especially in ethnic areas, and the level of support for this resolution shows once again that the international community has not forgotten the people” of Burma.

dvb.no

[Mid]

A resolution condemning ongoing human rights violations in Burma was passed by an overwhelming majority of votes in the UN General Assembly yesterday

How's them apples ASEAN ?

https://teakdoor.com/thailand-and-asi...officials.html (Asean considering giving Myanmar chair: Officials)

[mobs00]

Excerpts from the meetings summary from the UN website.

DRAFT RESOLUTIONS ON HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS IN IRAN, DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA, MYANMAR

Next, the Committee approved by a vote of 98 in favour to 25 against, with 63 abstentions a draft resolution whereby the General Assembly would express grave concern about ongoing systematic violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms of the people of Myanmar, while recognizing the Government’s commitment to implementing reforms. The representative of Myanmar said the resolution failed to show the entire situation, and he accused its main sponsor, the European Union, of exploiting human rights for political purposes. “At this juncture, we do deserve warm welcome, kind understanding and sincere encouragements of the international community, rather than an unconstructive approach by adopting such a resolution,” he said.

The representative of Thailand said his delegation would abstain from the vote because the advancement of human rights should be made through constructive engagement and dialogue. The universal periodic review mechanism, which Myanmar had recently undergone, was the appropriate way to address such issues. Thailand was also encouraged by recent developments in the country, including the release of political prisoners, and greater international openness. Thailand was also pleased to express support for Myanmar’s bid for chairmanship of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). If Myanmar proceeded on that path, there would be no need for the resolution in the future, he said.

Indonesia’s representative said his country had, for many years, supported the work of the Secretary‑General’s good offices in Myanmar. Highlighting the recent positive changes in Myanmar, he said his Government was encouraged by the establishment of a national human rights commission. The fact that Aung San Suu Kyi had been granted the opportunity for dialogue at the highest levels was a particularly encouraging sign. He regretted the missed opportunity of the text’s main sponsor to recognize those developments and its decisions to take actions that could be counterproductive to the changes in the Myanmar. Moreover, Indonesia was convinced that the Universal Periodic Review provided the best tool for addressing the human rights situation in the country. That was why Indonesia had abstained in the vote.

Malaysia’s representative said his Government believed the international community should look into providing support to Myanmar to allow it to develop its capacity to implement the road map. Human rights should not be exploited for political purposes, as that was contrary to the principles of the Charter. For that reason, his delegation had abstained during the vote. Malaysia favoured constructive dialogue and cooperation with an intention to improve human rights and it looked forward to the planned changes to transform Myanmar.

The representative of Viet Nam said that, as a neighbouring country, her Government had welcomed the recent changes in Myanmar. Her delegation noted the incorporation into the draft text of elements that largely reflected the changes on the ground there. That showed that cooperation and confidence‑building was the only path toward improving the human rights situation in that country. For those reasons, and in conjunction with her Government’s principled position against country‑specific resolutions, Viet Nam had voted against the draft resolution.

Singapore’s delegate said his country did not agree with country‑specific resolutions, which were inherently divisive. His country believed that all human rights considerations should be undertaken in the Human Rights Council through its Universal Periodic Review. For those reasons, his Government had abstained on the draft resolution. At the same time, it was encouraged by recent positive changes in Myanmar

Myanmar’s delegate said this country had requested a vote on the draft resolution in line with the principled approach taken by the Heads of State and Government of the Non‑Aligned Movement regarding country‑specific resolutions, which only led to a politicized approach. The draft resolution had been introduced at a time when his Government was strengthening its cooperation with the international community, including the Human Rights Council. “The country‑specific resolution could only undermine the trust and complicate more the cooperation between Myanmar and potential partners,” he said.

The encouragement and understanding of the international community was truly required as Myanmar sought democratic reform, he said, underscoring that the country’s constitutional Government was striving hard to uplift the social condition of the people and to fulfil their fundamental rights. At the same time, no country, regardless of power or size, could claim to be perfect in terms of their human right record. Member States should, thus, oppose selectivity and double standards regarding the exploitation of human rights for political purposes. Myanmar would continue to oppose any country‑specific resolutions, he said, and disassociated from the draft resolution, stressing that it would not be bound by the text’s provisions. It would, however, continue to cooperate with the United Nations, as well as the good offices of the Secretary‑General and the Human Rights Council.

[Mid]

So ASEAN sat on the fence , no real surprises there

Sadly .

[khmen]

Yeah well, it's all very well sitting in Geneva "condemning" the junta. It's quite another to actually do something about it and protect the people of Burma from atrocities.

All mouth and no trousers.

[Mid]

say what you will the condemnation is positive as opposed to silence .

[khmen]

Fair enough, but what has the international community actually ever done to help Burma in the last 60 odd years?

Oh, aside from hit them with sanctions which only served to further isolate a vulnerable populace leaving them exposed to human rights abuses, while the junta stayed fat through illegal means anyway.

You can condemn them til blue in the face, the junta don't care. All they care about is money and retaining power, and unless some action is taken one way or the other: trade deals/opening up/negotiations on one hand, coup on the other, then nothing will ever change. Until realistic plans for either of these scenarios are put into place nothing will ever change in Burma and until then it is, IMO, all hot air.

[Sailing into trouble]

Pressure is what it is all about. The Arab world has shown that despots can and are being overthrown. The USA is looking for another just war? (kidding). Even using it's real name is a preside point. If you are poor and looking over your shoulder all the time then being in power is not that much fun at the moment. Fewer countries willing to have you as a guest if you have to run away in a hurry.

Bit by bit the world is getting smaller. Which means that with lucky the LOS military will also start to think about what lies in store if they continue to flex their muscle.

[Smug Farang Bore]

The Chinese back it along with big business (oil)

[Pol the Pot]

The Indians back it as well. Can't be letting the Chinese get a head start now, can we?

[Rural Surin]

Which means that with lucky the LOS military will also start to think about what lies in store if they continue to flex their muscle.

The Thai military will certainly need permission and a "go-ahead" from those foreign rulers before any such activity would take place.