By WILLIAM BOOT
Thursday, November 25, 2010
BANGKOK — American and European business organizations are reconsidering their position on Burma following the freeing of Aung San Suu Kyi, as concern grows among them that economic sanctions have benefited Asian countries prepared to turn a blind eye to junta human rights abuses.
The United States Chamber of Commerce says it is waiting for a “signal” from Suu Kyi on the issue, and the European Union Business Council called for dialogue.
The EU Foreign Affairs Council this week met to discuss policy on Burma following the elections and Suu Kyi’s release.
The council is now “assessing the possibilities for engagement” with Burma’s leadership, but also calls for “all the remaining political detainees to be released without delay,” said Council President Catherine Ashton in a November 22 statement.
Tami Overby, vice president for Asia at the US Chamber of Commerce, said, “It’s fairly clear that the sanctions haven’t brought political change, but instead have outsourced jobs from US firms to their competitors in other countries that trade freely with Myanmar [Burma].”
Overby told the Wall Street Journal: “American firms would urge Congress and the [Obama] administration to consider easing the sanctions if Ms. Suu Kyi and the opposition signal an openness to revisions in the sanctions regime,”
While Western firms have stood on the sidelines, China, Thailand, India and Singapore and other Southeast Asian countries have not only engaged with the Burma military regime but also invested heavily, especially in primary industries and natural resources such a gas.
Proven gas reserves in Burma have climbed to 570 billion cubic meters over the last 10 years, according to a BP Statistical Review. Thailand and, more recently, China, have been the chief beneficiaries.
Chinese companies alone invested US $8 billion in Burma in the first six months of this year, mostly in gas, oil and hydroelectric development projects, according to a Reuters report based on official Burmese statistics.
“Some Western companies certainly are keen to move into Burma’s energy sector, I think the more so since the announcement last week that a Chinese business [Sinopec] has just discovered what appears to be another sizable gas reservoir,” a commercial diplomat with a Western embassy in Bangkok told The Irrawaddy on Wednesday.
“I think, however, that non-Asian governments will continue to hold back for the time being on any revision of sanctions policies, until they get some endorsement from Aung San Suu Kyi on the issue,” said the diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the delicate subject.
French energy giant Total and the US concern Chevron are still operating in Burma’s lucrative offshore gas fields, excused from sanctions penalties by their respective governments under a so-called “grandfathered” deal which precluded firms already in Burma when economic sanctions were first imposed.
Chevron declined to comment on the latest political developments in Burma and its future business plans there.
“It is in the interest of the EU to re-engage Myanmar [Burma] as it is increasingly evident that the vacuum created by the withdrawal of Western investment is being filled by China, India and Thailand,” said Thaung Tun, writing for the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore.
“If the EU does not change course, it will not only miss the opportunity to pursue commercial interests but have no leverage to affect positive change in Myanmar. The EU should take advantage of its trade review to offer to reinstate the Generalized System of Preferences privileges to Myanmar. The initiative would be regarded as a signal that Europe stands ready to resume mutually beneficial relations,” said Thaung Tun.
Suu Kyi has already hinted that she would be in favor of some improvement in European tourism to Burma. In an interview with the German news magazine Der Spiegel this week, she noted that the EU is examining its policy on tourism.
“I haven’t had an opportunity to speak with the European Union about this, but it is essential that people see what is actually happening in this country,” the magazine quoted her as saying.
In the big commercial picture, Asian countries continue to lead the way. China, Japan and South Korea have expressed interest in participating in the Thai-led multibillion dollar plan to build a port and petrochemical industrial zone at Tavoy (Dawei) on Burma’s southeast Andaman Sea coast.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/highlight.php?art_id=20176
Friday, 26 November 2010
Aung San Suu Kyi and Burmese Sanctions
November 13, 2010, 9:18 am
By NICHOLAS KRISTOF
Congratulations to Aung San Suu Kyi on her release from house arrest. She should be president, but at least she’s finally free. And her release is also a reminder that even the odious Burmese regime, one of the most oppressive in the world today, cares a little bit about its international image.
Pressure would also be much more effective if China weren’t protecting and supporting the Burmese junta, partly so that it can gain an outlet to the Indian Ocean and access to listening posts and quasi-bases there to squeeze India. China’s role in Burma has been disgraceful, and one lesson is the need to put pressure not only on the Burmese regime but also on Beijing.
But it’s also time to rethink strategy. Suu Kyi is a brilliant mind and great leader, and I hope she’ll rethink her support for sanctions on Burma. Within the Burmese exile community (nobody except the regime uses the word Myanmar), there’s a split on this issue, although most line up with Suu Kyi in favor of sanctions.
I think that’s a mistake. Maybe sanctions were a worthwhile experiment at the beginning, but they have failed. They haven’t caused the collapse of the regime, which seems as strong as ever. But the sanctions have increased the suffering of the Burmese people. Tens of thousands of young Burmese women have lost their jobs in the garment industry, and some of them probably ended up being trafficked to brothels in Thailand and Malaysia.
More broadly, one of the lessons of history is that broad sanctions rarely work. They make regimes more isolated and give them excuses for their economic failings, when in fact it’s usually international contact that brings about change. Our sanctions on Cuba, for example, have probably helped keep Castro in power, and sanctions have done nothing to hurt North Korea.
I’d be in favor of narrowly targeted sanctions on officials, but broad sanctions have failed. Suu Kyi is her people’s real leader, and I hope she leads the Burmese democracy community to a reconsideration of sanctions.
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/13/aung-san-suu-kyi-and-burmese-sanctions/?scp=2&sq=aung%20san%20suu%20kyi&st=cse
By NICHOLAS KRISTOF
Congratulations to Aung San Suu Kyi on her release from house arrest. She should be president, but at least she’s finally free. And her release is also a reminder that even the odious Burmese regime, one of the most oppressive in the world today, cares a little bit about its international image.
Pressure would also be much more effective if China weren’t protecting and supporting the Burmese junta, partly so that it can gain an outlet to the Indian Ocean and access to listening posts and quasi-bases there to squeeze India. China’s role in Burma has been disgraceful, and one lesson is the need to put pressure not only on the Burmese regime but also on Beijing.
But it’s also time to rethink strategy. Suu Kyi is a brilliant mind and great leader, and I hope she’ll rethink her support for sanctions on Burma. Within the Burmese exile community (nobody except the regime uses the word Myanmar), there’s a split on this issue, although most line up with Suu Kyi in favor of sanctions.
I think that’s a mistake. Maybe sanctions were a worthwhile experiment at the beginning, but they have failed. They haven’t caused the collapse of the regime, which seems as strong as ever. But the sanctions have increased the suffering of the Burmese people. Tens of thousands of young Burmese women have lost their jobs in the garment industry, and some of them probably ended up being trafficked to brothels in Thailand and Malaysia.
More broadly, one of the lessons of history is that broad sanctions rarely work. They make regimes more isolated and give them excuses for their economic failings, when in fact it’s usually international contact that brings about change. Our sanctions on Cuba, for example, have probably helped keep Castro in power, and sanctions have done nothing to hurt North Korea.
I’d be in favor of narrowly targeted sanctions on officials, but broad sanctions have failed. Suu Kyi is her people’s real leader, and I hope she leads the Burmese democracy community to a reconsideration of sanctions.
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/13/aung-san-suu-kyi-and-burmese-sanctions/?scp=2&sq=aung%20san%20suu%20kyi&st=cse
Difficult Issues Clamor for Advocate’s Attention
Soe Than Win/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesDaw Aung San Suu Kyi left the headquarters of her political party, the National League for Democracy, on Tuesday.
By SETH MYDANS
Published: November 16, 2010
BANGKOK — The jubilant throngs that greeted Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the pro-democracy leader, this past weekend in Myanmar confirmed that her huge popularity remains intact. But as she steps gingerly back into the swirl of political combat, she confronts difficult realities that will limit her ability to translate that popularity into fundamental change.
Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi is taking a conciliatory tone, at least for now, saying she bears no grudge toward her former jailers and suggesting that she might support the relaxation of international sanctions against the military government in Myanmar, formerly Burma. “If people really want sanctions to be lifted, I will consider this,” she said in an interview on Sunday. “This is the time Burma needs help.”
After seven years of isolation in her lakeside villa, she is now overwhelmed with supplicants and supporters seeking her ear. “I know I said I wanted to hear what the public is thinking,” she said during her rally on Sunday, perhaps only half joking. “But now that there are so many voices and so much noise, I don’t know what is being said anymore.”
In the coming weeks, she faces difficult decisions on uniting the opposition, the demands of armed ethnic minority groups, the sort of movement she hopes to shape and the degree to which she chooses to challenge the government.
She must also assimilate new realities that include the rising influence of China, the dispersal of wealth among well-connected businesses, and the emergence of new institutions and new political players as a result of parliamentary elections held just six days before her release. And looming above all these concerns are the ruling generals who, whatever their gestures or promises, remain determined not to cede power or to allow any real democratic opening.
A new Constitution, passed last year, sets up a bicameral national Parliament, 14 regional parliaments, a president, a cabinet and new government institutions that will give military rule a much more complex form.
All but the very senior members of the military junta were required to resign to run for office as civilians and were replaced by a younger generation of officers in their 50s whose personal agendas could conflict with those of the senior officers.
“It’s not the same environment that existed when she was taken into detention seven years ago,” said Priscilla Clapp, the former chief of mission in the American Embassy in Myanmar and a principal adviser to the Asia Society task force on United States policy toward Burma/Myanmar.
“She has come out into a different world, and I think she is trying to feel her way into it,” Ms. Clapp said.
Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi’s mandate is precarious, built purely on the gauge of an applause meter, without an organized base or formal platform to ground her. Her party, the National League for Democracy, was forced to disband when it declined to contest the elections.
On Tuesday, she made her first trip into downtown Yangon, formerly Rangoon, to file papers with the country’s High Court asking to have her party reinstated, but analysts said the court was unlikely to rule in her favor.
While Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi has moved cautiously so far, some analysts said they did not expect this spirit of compromise to last. “She’s always been confrontational, every time she has gotten out,” said David I. Steinberg, a professor of Asian studies at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University in Washington, in an interview. “She has always tested the limits of how far she can go. I feel sure she’ll try to quietly test the limits of what she can do.”
She had been released twice before, in 1995 and in 2002, and both times she reached that limit. The outpouring of support for her was too much for the generals, and she was arrested and returned to detention.
Now 65, she has been under house arrest for 15 of the past 21 years.
Some people are asking not only what she might be able to accomplish now that she is free, but also how long she might remain free. She was returned to house arrest in 2003 after an attack by organized thugs on her motorcade that some people say was an assassination attempt.
“This is not an ordinary military dictatorship we are talking about,” said Bertil Lintner, the author of seven books on Myanmar. “This is a military that has become expert at staying in power.”
The liberation of Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi says nothing about the broader motives of the military junta, Mr. Lintner said. “It’s a public relations exercise for foreign opinion after a totally fraudulent election, rather than part of political reform, which it’s not.”
The generals may see this as a moment of national redefinition, within the boundaries they set.
Along with establishing the new Parliament, they have moved into a new capital and decreed a new flag, a new national anthem and a new name for their nation: the Republic of the Union of Myanmar (formerly the Union of Myanmar).
“I don’t think there’s a place for Aung San Suu Kyi in that new state that the military has created,” Mr. Lintner said.
Although the bottom line of military control remains unchanged, this is a nation in some flux as it sets up its first civilian government since a 1962 coup and as the military enters a period of generational change.
“She has to maneuver among all of these difficult transitional questions,” Ms. Clapp said. “The country is in the middle of a transition the likes of which it has not seen for a long time. There are many different outcomes, so I think she’s going to be very careful.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/world/asia/17myanmar.html?scp=5&sq=aung%20san%20suu%20kyi&st=cse
'The Lady' Hasn't Changed, But Neither Has the Junta
By HTET AUNG
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
After a seven-year public absence from Burma's political scene, Aung San Suu Kyi reappeared to the cheering jubilation of a huge crowd of supporters. The adulation she received, coupled with her first public comments, demonstrated that nothing about Suu Kyi has changed except the wrinkles on her face.
Unfortunately, however, the rigged and fraudulent manner in which the junta conducted the recent election shows that nothing about the Burmese military regime has changed either, except maybe moving the capital to Naypyidaw during her house arrest.
Despite being under house arrest for 15 of the last 21 years, Suu Kyi has clearly been able to maintain her influential role in politics and remains a symbol of hope for the Burmese people, whose support for her has not diminished during her two-decade struggle to achieve democracy in a country ruled by a ruthless regime.
The 65-year-old pro-democracy leader's political charisma still captivates her followers, who are ready and willing to heed her commands. Once again, however, this will surely be interpreted by the junta as a threat to its power.
Her first political speech, delivered on Sunday, briefly laid out a political road map that picked up exactly where she left off when placed under house arrest in 2003.
Suu Kyi reaffirmed that without the people's involvement, change is impossible. She also revealed her strategy for getting the people involved: the formation of a network of people to pursue her unfinished non-violent democratic struggle.
The grass-roots strategy of mobilizing her supporters to get personally involved in the cause is the same approach Suu Kyi used during her countrywide tour in 2003, when she traveled from the northern part of Kachin State down to the central Burma before her convoy was attacked by thugs near Depayin, where she was rearrested and about one hundred of her followers were reportedly killed.
In an interview with the BBC on Tuesday, Suu Kyi pushed the political envelope further when she said she wants to bring about a “nonviolent revolution.” She said that such a nonviolent revolution would consist of “a radical change” in Burma brought about in a peaceful manner, which she went on to describe as a “noticeable change” and a “great change for the better.”
That is a far cry from the junta's vision of building “a modern developed nation” under the leadership of the military in politics. And the question that must now be asked is: How will Suu Kyi mobilize a “people's network” to bring about a “nonviolent revolution” while avoiding another Depayin?
Despite the fact that the generals released Suu Kyi, the methods they used to rig the election show that the junta leaders are still of the same oppressive mindset as they have been for two decades and are not willing to risk any loss of their iron grip on power.
The regime still considers Suu Kyi their primary nemesis, and although Suu Kyi reiterated that the goal of her political discourse has always been dialogue with the generals rather than confrontation, her first public comments following release may have set the stage for another showdown.
In the near future, the junta will carry out the last two steps of its seven-step political road map when the first session of the new parliament is convened within 90 days after the election and a president is subsequently elected and forms the executive and judiciary branches of government.
As Suu Kyi was excluded from the election and her party, the National League for Democracy, chose not to participate because they believed the process was undemocratic, both will be absent from Burma's institutional political scene for the foreseeable future.
In this context, it is difficult to see how positive future change in the relationship between Suu Kyi and the generals will occur. So just as before, the junta and Suu Kyi's opposition will likely remain two parallel lines going in opposite directions.
The more things change in the junta's Burma, it seems, the more they remain the same.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=20096
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
After a seven-year public absence from Burma's political scene, Aung San Suu Kyi reappeared to the cheering jubilation of a huge crowd of supporters. The adulation she received, coupled with her first public comments, demonstrated that nothing about Suu Kyi has changed except the wrinkles on her face.
Unfortunately, however, the rigged and fraudulent manner in which the junta conducted the recent election shows that nothing about the Burmese military regime has changed either, except maybe moving the capital to Naypyidaw during her house arrest.
Despite being under house arrest for 15 of the last 21 years, Suu Kyi has clearly been able to maintain her influential role in politics and remains a symbol of hope for the Burmese people, whose support for her has not diminished during her two-decade struggle to achieve democracy in a country ruled by a ruthless regime.
The 65-year-old pro-democracy leader's political charisma still captivates her followers, who are ready and willing to heed her commands. Once again, however, this will surely be interpreted by the junta as a threat to its power.
Her first political speech, delivered on Sunday, briefly laid out a political road map that picked up exactly where she left off when placed under house arrest in 2003.
Suu Kyi reaffirmed that without the people's involvement, change is impossible. She also revealed her strategy for getting the people involved: the formation of a network of people to pursue her unfinished non-violent democratic struggle.
The grass-roots strategy of mobilizing her supporters to get personally involved in the cause is the same approach Suu Kyi used during her countrywide tour in 2003, when she traveled from the northern part of Kachin State down to the central Burma before her convoy was attacked by thugs near Depayin, where she was rearrested and about one hundred of her followers were reportedly killed.
In an interview with the BBC on Tuesday, Suu Kyi pushed the political envelope further when she said she wants to bring about a “nonviolent revolution.” She said that such a nonviolent revolution would consist of “a radical change” in Burma brought about in a peaceful manner, which she went on to describe as a “noticeable change” and a “great change for the better.”
That is a far cry from the junta's vision of building “a modern developed nation” under the leadership of the military in politics. And the question that must now be asked is: How will Suu Kyi mobilize a “people's network” to bring about a “nonviolent revolution” while avoiding another Depayin?
Despite the fact that the generals released Suu Kyi, the methods they used to rig the election show that the junta leaders are still of the same oppressive mindset as they have been for two decades and are not willing to risk any loss of their iron grip on power.
The regime still considers Suu Kyi their primary nemesis, and although Suu Kyi reiterated that the goal of her political discourse has always been dialogue with the generals rather than confrontation, her first public comments following release may have set the stage for another showdown.
In the near future, the junta will carry out the last two steps of its seven-step political road map when the first session of the new parliament is convened within 90 days after the election and a president is subsequently elected and forms the executive and judiciary branches of government.
As Suu Kyi was excluded from the election and her party, the National League for Democracy, chose not to participate because they believed the process was undemocratic, both will be absent from Burma's institutional political scene for the foreseeable future.
In this context, it is difficult to see how positive future change in the relationship between Suu Kyi and the generals will occur. So just as before, the junta and Suu Kyi's opposition will likely remain two parallel lines going in opposite directions.
The more things change in the junta's Burma, it seems, the more they remain the same.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=20096
Suu Kyi and Asean Need to Mend Fences
By KAVI CHONGKITTAVORN
Monday, November 22, 2010
Since her release from house arrest on November 13, the opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, has occupied new headlines worldwide with media interviews. She has mentioned almost everything she wants to do for her country and people in coming months and years, providing that the junta does not arrest her one more time.
However, one topic has escaped her: Asean. Amazingly, she has not mentioned at all the grouping even once in those interviews that refused to communicate with her some 15 years ago. Her letter to the Asean foreign ministers in July 1995 remained unanswered. Of course, it was a bad start on both sides. At the time, it was simply a contestation of recognition between her and the junta. She wanted to communicate directly with the Asean leaders barely two weeks after her first freedom. Burma was also about to sign the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Brunei paving the way for a full membership. Doubtless, Asean chose the side of junta.
At the time, she was overly enthusiastic about the role of Asean thinking unrealistically that it would be able to help and steer Burma in the right direction. Prior to the founding of Asean in 1967, Burma was approached to become a founding member of Asean by Thailand. Citing the principle of permanent neutrality, the then prime minister Ne Win refused to join the scheme arguing that the planned grouping was an imperial tool of the US. Exactly three decades later, Asean granted a membership to Burma in a hurry for fear of China's growing influence. On top of it, politics of admission served as a manifestation of the grouping's diplomatic independence against the Western harsh criticism on Burma.
Since then, Asean and Suu Kyi have transformed in their own ways reflecting the region's new dynamism and her own political maturity. After over a decade of admitting Burma and Laos, the grouping was confident enough to become a rules-based organisation that aspired to respect democracy and human rights. In the past two years, Burma has yet to display its willingness to compliance with the new Asean spirit of collective responsibility albeit the Asean-led humanitarian operation in the post Nargis.
So far, she has already met with some of the Western ambassadors. In the near future, arrangements must be made between her and the Asean ambassadors. The first known attempt, organised by Thailand, to do so in July 1995 in Rangoon was aborted due to Burma's strong protest. Poksak Nilubol, the Thai envoy to Burma at the time said that Asean lost the opportunity to bargain with Burma with the membership without any condition. He said Suu Kyi could be a moderating force.
Individually, Asean envoys can meet and sound her out. There is no provision under the Asean Charter that prohibits such a meeting. In this case, Thailand should not shy away for such an undertaking. On such matter, Cambodia has in fact pushed the envelope further by engaging with domestic players in a neighboring country. In April at the side line of an international meeting on democracy in Jakarta, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono met briefly informally with Anwar Ibrahim.
For Suu Kyi, as a prominent citizen of Asean and the only Nobel laureate, a senior stateswoman (only one too), her status and stake is even higher. All that is said and written in the Asean charter and all sacred documents of Asean would become futile and useless with the way the case of the Suu Kyi is being handled by Asean and its mechanism. It would certainly make a mockery of the Asean promises.
More than the Asean leaders would like to admit, she has a moral authority far beyond any of them. She is the best known Asean citizen living. She can challenge them to look at her case and handle it the way they have pledged their honor and commitment to do for "the People of Asean." There is no need to remind them that the Asean Charter begins with "We the People" like the American Declaration of Independence. During the drafting process of term of reference in 2007, this preference was approved quickly without dissension.
If she wishes, she can claim and capture that high moral ground by writing an open letter addressed either to current Asean chair Viet Nam through the end of this year or next chair, Indonesia, stating her principles and vision making a clean brake from the past. Unlike the restrictive situation in Asean back in 1995, currently more Asean citizens are living under democratic environment than ever before. Indonesia, which used to serve a model of the current Burmese military junta, has transformed itself into a vibrant democracy. The Philippines also has a new president that commits to democratic values. All Asean members have also pledged to make the grouping a people-oriented community.
That way, she would be able to communicate broadly to the Asean leaders and ordinary people.
Suu Kyi can indeed play a positive dual rule on behalf of Burma in Asean as well as for Asean in the global stage. She can improve the standing and image of both Burma and Asean. Judging from her statements since her release, she would certainly maintain rather active public life and is not going anywhere or stay idle. Her political future might some days follow the same path of other dissident leaders around the world who later took up leadership roles. In the Asean, many foes have turned friends after the collapse of Berlin Wall. Leaders of Laos, Viet Nam and Cambodia could easily recall their first meeting with their former enemies after joining Asean. Such leadership rapports might take years to establish. It would be wise for Suu Kyi and Asean to do it now.
Kavi Chongkittavorn is senior editor and a columnist at the Bangkok-based English-language daily newspaper, The Nation. This article appeared in The Nation on Monday.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/opinion_story.php?art_id=20141
Monday, November 22, 2010
Since her release from house arrest on November 13, the opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, has occupied new headlines worldwide with media interviews. She has mentioned almost everything she wants to do for her country and people in coming months and years, providing that the junta does not arrest her one more time.
However, one topic has escaped her: Asean. Amazingly, she has not mentioned at all the grouping even once in those interviews that refused to communicate with her some 15 years ago. Her letter to the Asean foreign ministers in July 1995 remained unanswered. Of course, it was a bad start on both sides. At the time, it was simply a contestation of recognition between her and the junta. She wanted to communicate directly with the Asean leaders barely two weeks after her first freedom. Burma was also about to sign the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Brunei paving the way for a full membership. Doubtless, Asean chose the side of junta.
At the time, she was overly enthusiastic about the role of Asean thinking unrealistically that it would be able to help and steer Burma in the right direction. Prior to the founding of Asean in 1967, Burma was approached to become a founding member of Asean by Thailand. Citing the principle of permanent neutrality, the then prime minister Ne Win refused to join the scheme arguing that the planned grouping was an imperial tool of the US. Exactly three decades later, Asean granted a membership to Burma in a hurry for fear of China's growing influence. On top of it, politics of admission served as a manifestation of the grouping's diplomatic independence against the Western harsh criticism on Burma.
Since then, Asean and Suu Kyi have transformed in their own ways reflecting the region's new dynamism and her own political maturity. After over a decade of admitting Burma and Laos, the grouping was confident enough to become a rules-based organisation that aspired to respect democracy and human rights. In the past two years, Burma has yet to display its willingness to compliance with the new Asean spirit of collective responsibility albeit the Asean-led humanitarian operation in the post Nargis.
So far, she has already met with some of the Western ambassadors. In the near future, arrangements must be made between her and the Asean ambassadors. The first known attempt, organised by Thailand, to do so in July 1995 in Rangoon was aborted due to Burma's strong protest. Poksak Nilubol, the Thai envoy to Burma at the time said that Asean lost the opportunity to bargain with Burma with the membership without any condition. He said Suu Kyi could be a moderating force.
Individually, Asean envoys can meet and sound her out. There is no provision under the Asean Charter that prohibits such a meeting. In this case, Thailand should not shy away for such an undertaking. On such matter, Cambodia has in fact pushed the envelope further by engaging with domestic players in a neighboring country. In April at the side line of an international meeting on democracy in Jakarta, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono met briefly informally with Anwar Ibrahim.
For Suu Kyi, as a prominent citizen of Asean and the only Nobel laureate, a senior stateswoman (only one too), her status and stake is even higher. All that is said and written in the Asean charter and all sacred documents of Asean would become futile and useless with the way the case of the Suu Kyi is being handled by Asean and its mechanism. It would certainly make a mockery of the Asean promises.
More than the Asean leaders would like to admit, she has a moral authority far beyond any of them. She is the best known Asean citizen living. She can challenge them to look at her case and handle it the way they have pledged their honor and commitment to do for "the People of Asean." There is no need to remind them that the Asean Charter begins with "We the People" like the American Declaration of Independence. During the drafting process of term of reference in 2007, this preference was approved quickly without dissension.
If she wishes, she can claim and capture that high moral ground by writing an open letter addressed either to current Asean chair Viet Nam through the end of this year or next chair, Indonesia, stating her principles and vision making a clean brake from the past. Unlike the restrictive situation in Asean back in 1995, currently more Asean citizens are living under democratic environment than ever before. Indonesia, which used to serve a model of the current Burmese military junta, has transformed itself into a vibrant democracy. The Philippines also has a new president that commits to democratic values. All Asean members have also pledged to make the grouping a people-oriented community.
That way, she would be able to communicate broadly to the Asean leaders and ordinary people.
Suu Kyi can indeed play a positive dual rule on behalf of Burma in Asean as well as for Asean in the global stage. She can improve the standing and image of both Burma and Asean. Judging from her statements since her release, she would certainly maintain rather active public life and is not going anywhere or stay idle. Her political future might some days follow the same path of other dissident leaders around the world who later took up leadership roles. In the Asean, many foes have turned friends after the collapse of Berlin Wall. Leaders of Laos, Viet Nam and Cambodia could easily recall their first meeting with their former enemies after joining Asean. Such leadership rapports might take years to establish. It would be wise for Suu Kyi and Asean to do it now.
Kavi Chongkittavorn is senior editor and a columnist at the Bangkok-based English-language daily newspaper, The Nation. This article appeared in The Nation on Monday.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/opinion_story.php?art_id=20141
Myanmar’s Leading Dissident Reunites With Youngest Son
Soe Than Win/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesDaw Aung San Suu Kyi with her son Kim Aris after his arrival at Yangon airport on Tuesday.
By SETH MYDANS
Published: November 23, 2010
PHNOM PENH, Cambodia — Myanmar’s leading dissident, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, was reunited with her youngest son on Tuesday after a decade-long separation during which she said she never felt that they had been apart.
Soe Than Win/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesDaw Aung San Suu Kyi, center, left the Yangon airport with her son Kim Aris on Tuesday. They met after a 10-year separation.
“I am very happy,” she said in a telephone interview after meeting her son, Kim Aris, 33, at the airport, and she thanked the military junta for giving him a visa after repeated refusals.
But she said, “I don’t feel that I’ve been apart from him for so many years. I never felt apart from him.”
Nevertheless, only a few days after the exuberance of her release, she sounded weary, perfunctory and even curt during the interview, saying, “I don’t want to talk about it,” when pressed about her feelings about her reunion with her son.
The decision to grant him a visa was a symbolic gesture of leniency by the junta, which released Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi after her term of house arrest ended 10 days ago. She has been allowed to meet with supporters and give interviews.
The reunion on Tuesday underlined the personal toll of the political campaign Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi has waged during the past two decades.
During that period she was detained for 15 years and only rarely allowed visitors or communication with the outside world.
She has always been free to leave Myanmar, according to her lawyers, but chose to stay for fear of being denied re-entry.
“I don’t believe in looking at it as a sacrifice,” she said of her decision to embrace her fate as a political martyr. “It’s a choice. It’s a choice I made.”
Now that she is free, she said, she intends to lead what she calls a nonviolent revolution, rather than an incremental evolution.
She said her use of the term “revolution” was justified because, “I think of evolution as imperceptible change, very, very slowly, and I think of revolution as significant change. I say this because we are in need of significant change.”
The change she had in mind, she said, was “a change for the better from the point of view of human rights and democratic institutions.”
But she said that unlike some of her supporters in the West, she did not see regime change as a goal. “What we want is value change,” she said. “Regime change can be temporary, but value change is a long-term business. We want the values in our country to be changed. We want a sound foundation for change.
“Even if there’s regime change, if these basic values have not changed, then one regime change can lead to another regime change and so on and so on.”
She said she did not endorse moves among her supporters overseas to try to bring the junta leaders into international court for crimes against humanity.
“I’ve never said I want them to be brought into the international court,” she said. “I don’t think there is any solid reason for the generals to fear for their safety. We are not after them personally. I certainly do not wish them ill.”
As for her own ambitions, she said, “I’m not very much concerned whether I personally come to power, but I am concerned about the power of the people.” The people of Myanmar, whose aspirations and whose popular uprisings have been crushed over the years, must understand that real power is in their hands, she said.
To this end, she said she would continue to work through her party, the National League for Democracy, although the government banned it as a political party when it declined to take part in a parliamentary election this month.
For the moment, she said, she is busy in Yangon, the main city of Myanmar, but she did not rule out a resumption of the trips she made around the country during her last one-year period of freedom, in 2003.
“One should be free to travel around one’s country as one chooses,” she said.
Her last period of freedom ended when a government-backed mob attacked her convoy, killing dozens of people and forcing her to flee for safety.
Asked if she might again be putting her supporters at risk in public gatherings, she said, “They don’t have any reason to feel nervous just because they come out to greet me.”
But she said, “In any society where the rule of law is not firmly established and basic human rights are not respected, there’s always a risk.”
Asked about the personal animus the junta’s leader, Senior Gen. Than Shwe, is said to feel for her, and what she thinks of him, she said, “I don’t think we know each other well enough to care or not care for each other.”
Television footage on Tuesday morning from the airport in Yangon showed Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi and her son in a brief embrace before walking out of the terminal together.
One of the first things he did after greeting his mother was to show her a red tattoo bearing the symbol of her party, which won an election in 1990 but was not allowed by the military to take power.
This month, the junta held its first election since then, carefully engineered to produce a victory for its favored party, creating a new Parliament that analysts say will provide a civilian face to continued military rule.
In 1991, a year after the previous election, Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, which was accepted for her in Oslo by her older son, Alexander Aris. Her late husband, Michael Aris, raised their two children in Britain. He was unable to visit with his wife before his death a decade ago at the age of 53, and she refused to leave the country to see him for fear that she would not be allowed to return to resume her house arrest.
Asked in the interview about the culture shock of emerging from the sensory deprivation of house arrest to the tumult that surrounds her now, she said, “It’s a bit hectic, but it will calm down in a few weeks.”
Thomas Fuller contributed reporting from Bangkok.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/world/asia/24myanmar.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=aung%20san%20suu%20kyi&st=cse
Dodging Myanmar’s ‘new’ democracy, police
John Simpson
The Daily Telegraph
First Published : 25 Nov 2010 11:08:00 PM IST
Last Updated : 25 Nov 2010 12:17:26 AM IST
Aung San Suu Kyi may have been released from her long years of house arrest, but she is still not free. The Burmese military government restricts her almost as much as ever.
Her political party, the National League for Democracy, no longer exists officially. And she is under the observation of the security police 24 hours.
Suu Kyi’s officials assume that both her house and her headquarters are thoroughly bugged, in order to find out what her plans are and perhaps dig up further excuses to put her back under house arrest. Characteristically, her response is to take no notice. She certainly has not watered down her political line.
The government watches her obviously and aggressively, trying to cramp her style as she returns to daily life. Across the road from her headquarters, in a couple of shacks which are now an ad hoc police station, a group of plain-clothes security policemen is always gathered.
They are equipped with expensive stills and video cameras, and anyone who goes in or out of the headquarters is filmed and photographed. This is obviously a useful way of keeping tabs on any visitors, but it is also intended to intimidate Suu Kyi’s supporters.
When I asked her about the activities of the security police last week, she maintained she had scarcely noticed them. This may not be literally true, but it is a statement of her state of mind. She insists on behaving as though she is completely free, and she seems to take no account of the police or the government’s sensitivities. Suu Kyi is not a lady to mince her words.
Western journalists are not allowed into Myanmar, but a couple of dozen had managed to get tourist visas to enable them to cover her release. For us, the intimidation was pretty mild. The security police wanted to find out where we were staying and working, and taking our pictures was part of that process. Our mug-shots would be matched against the pictures on our visas, and at some stage we would be tracked down and asked, no doubt politely, to leave the country. Myanmar may be a police state, and an unpleasant one at that; but it usually sticks to the civilised norms with foreigners.
With Suu Kyi’s supporters, the security police do not use kid gloves. This is why she stressed after she was freed that her own treatment under house arrest had been mild: she was anxious not to diminish the genuine sufferings of her party members who had been beaten and held under bad conditions in gaol for year after year.
Like secret policemen almost everywhere, the Burmese security are at one and the same time clever and grossly obvious. Like the Chinese security police, who seem to be in charge of training the Burmese, they are often good and often incompetent at following you. Good, because they are assiduous and there are large numbers of them; incompetent, because they know they have the power to do anything they want and this makes them stand out in any crowd. Most obvious of all, many of them are equipped with garish little orange mopeds, made in China, which only the police can use in Myanmar. This means they can thread their way effectively through Rangoon’s heavy traffic in pursuit of their quarry.
It wasn’t hard to lose them. Rangoon is full of ancient, rusted taxis, and they are quick to respond if you wave at them. Fortunately, many of the main avenues are divided down the middle by railings. We learned to take a taxi in one direction, with our faithful orange moped behind us, then tell the driver to stop somewhere suddenly so the moped was forced to overtake us. Then we would jump over the railings and catch a taxi going in the other direction.
When we interviewed Suu Kyi on November 15, our main concern was obviously to hold onto our tapes. The four of us — two cameramen, a producer and me — divided into two groups. We left her headquarters at the same time; two headed left while the others turned right. One of the cameramen and I jumped into a taxi and headed off, an orange moped close behind. At a big intersection we paid, jumped out, ran through the traffic, and jumped into another cab in the street at right angles to the avenue. As we crossed the avenue I spotted the orange mopedist at the lights.
Our other team, who were carrying the main interview tape, had a harder time. Several policemen were following them, so they split up. The cameraman, who kept the tape, texted us to say he was having problems getting rid of his tail. At one stage he made his taxi-driver, who was extremely nervous, drive round a roundabout three times. Finally they stopped at a market and the cameraman vanished through it and out on the other side in a different street.
Compared with some places, Myanmar is relatively mild. The worst that would have happened to us was that we would have lost our tapes and been put on a plane out and blacklisted for ever more. That, I suppose will happen to us anyway. But having been banned from a range of countries in the past, including the Soviet Union to
Czechoslovakia, Poland, China, Iran and Iraq, I know that times change and governments change with them. I expect I’ll be back in Myanmar eventually.
It’s even possible that Aung San Suu Kyi will be president by then.
(The writer is the BBC’s world affairs editor)
http://expressbuzz.com/opinion/op-ed/dodging-myanmar%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%98new%E2%80%99-democracy-police/225737.html
The Daily Telegraph
First Published : 25 Nov 2010 11:08:00 PM IST
Last Updated : 25 Nov 2010 12:17:26 AM IST
Aung San Suu Kyi may have been released from her long years of house arrest, but she is still not free. The Burmese military government restricts her almost as much as ever.
Her political party, the National League for Democracy, no longer exists officially. And she is under the observation of the security police 24 hours.
Suu Kyi’s officials assume that both her house and her headquarters are thoroughly bugged, in order to find out what her plans are and perhaps dig up further excuses to put her back under house arrest. Characteristically, her response is to take no notice. She certainly has not watered down her political line.
The government watches her obviously and aggressively, trying to cramp her style as she returns to daily life. Across the road from her headquarters, in a couple of shacks which are now an ad hoc police station, a group of plain-clothes security policemen is always gathered.
They are equipped with expensive stills and video cameras, and anyone who goes in or out of the headquarters is filmed and photographed. This is obviously a useful way of keeping tabs on any visitors, but it is also intended to intimidate Suu Kyi’s supporters.
When I asked her about the activities of the security police last week, she maintained she had scarcely noticed them. This may not be literally true, but it is a statement of her state of mind. She insists on behaving as though she is completely free, and she seems to take no account of the police or the government’s sensitivities. Suu Kyi is not a lady to mince her words.
Western journalists are not allowed into Myanmar, but a couple of dozen had managed to get tourist visas to enable them to cover her release. For us, the intimidation was pretty mild. The security police wanted to find out where we were staying and working, and taking our pictures was part of that process. Our mug-shots would be matched against the pictures on our visas, and at some stage we would be tracked down and asked, no doubt politely, to leave the country. Myanmar may be a police state, and an unpleasant one at that; but it usually sticks to the civilised norms with foreigners.
With Suu Kyi’s supporters, the security police do not use kid gloves. This is why she stressed after she was freed that her own treatment under house arrest had been mild: she was anxious not to diminish the genuine sufferings of her party members who had been beaten and held under bad conditions in gaol for year after year.
Like secret policemen almost everywhere, the Burmese security are at one and the same time clever and grossly obvious. Like the Chinese security police, who seem to be in charge of training the Burmese, they are often good and often incompetent at following you. Good, because they are assiduous and there are large numbers of them; incompetent, because they know they have the power to do anything they want and this makes them stand out in any crowd. Most obvious of all, many of them are equipped with garish little orange mopeds, made in China, which only the police can use in Myanmar. This means they can thread their way effectively through Rangoon’s heavy traffic in pursuit of their quarry.
It wasn’t hard to lose them. Rangoon is full of ancient, rusted taxis, and they are quick to respond if you wave at them. Fortunately, many of the main avenues are divided down the middle by railings. We learned to take a taxi in one direction, with our faithful orange moped behind us, then tell the driver to stop somewhere suddenly so the moped was forced to overtake us. Then we would jump over the railings and catch a taxi going in the other direction.
When we interviewed Suu Kyi on November 15, our main concern was obviously to hold onto our tapes. The four of us — two cameramen, a producer and me — divided into two groups. We left her headquarters at the same time; two headed left while the others turned right. One of the cameramen and I jumped into a taxi and headed off, an orange moped close behind. At a big intersection we paid, jumped out, ran through the traffic, and jumped into another cab in the street at right angles to the avenue. As we crossed the avenue I spotted the orange mopedist at the lights.
Our other team, who were carrying the main interview tape, had a harder time. Several policemen were following them, so they split up. The cameraman, who kept the tape, texted us to say he was having problems getting rid of his tail. At one stage he made his taxi-driver, who was extremely nervous, drive round a roundabout three times. Finally they stopped at a market and the cameraman vanished through it and out on the other side in a different street.
Compared with some places, Myanmar is relatively mild. The worst that would have happened to us was that we would have lost our tapes and been put on a plane out and blacklisted for ever more. That, I suppose will happen to us anyway. But having been banned from a range of countries in the past, including the Soviet Union to
Czechoslovakia, Poland, China, Iran and Iraq, I know that times change and governments change with them. I expect I’ll be back in Myanmar eventually.
It’s even possible that Aung San Suu Kyi will be president by then.
(The writer is the BBC’s world affairs editor)
http://expressbuzz.com/opinion/op-ed/dodging-myanmar%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%98new%E2%80%99-democracy-police/225737.html
India saddened me... let’s talk now: Suu Kyi
Wed Nov 24 2010, 05:52 hrs
Expressing her “sadness” with the way New Delhi engaged with the military regime in Yangon while she was in detention, Myanmarese leader Aung San Suu Kyi today called for “talks with (India) as soon as possible.”
She was speaking to The Indian Express over the telephone in her first interview to an Indian news organisation since her release on November 13.
“I am saddened with India. I would like to have thought that India would be standing behind us. That it would have followed in the tradition of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru,” said Suu Kyi.
A prisoner in her own land, locked in her lakeside home in Rangoon, Aung San Suu Kyi, 65, had spent 15 of the past 21 years under house arrest.
She now sees the time opportune for a fresh political initiative between her party and the Indian government. “We would like India to work closely with us, that is work with my party, the National League for Democracy (NLD),” she said.
The NLD has been sidelined by the junta since it claimed an astounding victory in the 1990 elections.
The junta never recognised the results of the elections that granted the NLD a 80 per cent mandate to govern.
The junta has ruled over Burma since 1962. “I do not oppose relations with the Generals but I hope that the Indian government would talk to us as well. I would like to see talks begin immediately. I would like to see close and friendly relations, like those that have not been seen recently.”
“I would like India to remember that the two countries have been through thick and thin together. We have fought together against colonialism. It is now time to maintain steady in that direction and encourage a valuable friendship,” she said.
Suu Kyi, a graduate of Delhi’s Lady Shri Ram College, and her husband, the late Michael Aris, a scholar in Tibet and Bhutan studies, lived in Shimla prior to her return to Myanmar in 1988.
“I would love to return to India. My fondest memories are in India. As a family we lived in Shimla. That has been the happiest time of my life,” she said.
Myanmar has been the recipient of a stringent sanctions regime due to the politics of the military men. Suu Kyi has, in the past, called upon sanctions to keep the generals in tow.
Since her release she has spoken of an easing of those sanctions. “Sanctions need to be reviewed from time to time. They need to be viewed not simply from the economic angle but the social implications as well. There are many people with many different views on sanctions. It is time we had a look at the sanction regime again. I will need to speak to the countries that have imposed sanctions and need to hear their qualms. They did so — after all, do so — to usher in democratic change.”
On China, Suu Kyi said: “China is a neighbour we have a longstanding friendship with. But currently China is not on the side of those who side with democracy and human rights. But I maintain that we have to be on good terms with neighbours.”
Suu Kyi, under the laws of the new Constitution is prevented from participating in politics.
Her NLD boycotted the November 2010 elections, Myanmar’s first in 20 years, saying the rules prevented a free and fair process but a breakaway group (National Democratic Force) did participate.
This fractured her party and the NLD is not a legal entity today, as per the new election laws.
Said Suu Kyi: “The NLD and I believe that there are great flaws in the constitution...(But) we have to first sort out our differences (within).”
Suu Kyi, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, was reunited with her son yesterday after 10 years of separation.
“The best moment for me has been the arrival of my son, but that’s a personal moment. But the moment I hold closest is when I saw the faces of my supporters.”
Suu Kyi had previously expressed her interest in using Twitter to reach out to her supporters but she’s keener on Facebook now.
“A lot of young Burmese have told me that Facebook, rather than Twitter is more useful to them. But I do not have an internet connection. I did go to apply for an internet permit but I don’t know how easy it will be but I have made the application.”
Suu Kyi underlined her commitment to a non-violent struggle. “My calm comes from my people, from my colleagues. Many of who have been in much worse situations in Burma’s jails. My people have always managed to remain calm and cheerful.”
She now has her eyes set on the long-run as a free citizen active in politics. But there is the matter of a book. “I do have ideas and have jotted down many notes but the time for the book must be right.”
India for its part has prodded along trading with the Myanmarese junta.
Though the MEA called for the release of Suu Kyi, it ensured bilateral relations in trade continue. This policy is a departure from the 1990s when India was more vocal and active in persuading the junta to follow on the route to democracy.
But with increased Chinese investment and interests, India felt it necessary to deal with the junta.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india-saddened-me...-lets-talk-now-suu-kyi/715179/1
Expressing her “sadness” with the way New Delhi engaged with the military regime in Yangon while she was in detention, Myanmarese leader Aung San Suu Kyi today called for “talks with (India) as soon as possible.”
She was speaking to The Indian Express over the telephone in her first interview to an Indian news organisation since her release on November 13.
“I am saddened with India. I would like to have thought that India would be standing behind us. That it would have followed in the tradition of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru,” said Suu Kyi.
A prisoner in her own land, locked in her lakeside home in Rangoon, Aung San Suu Kyi, 65, had spent 15 of the past 21 years under house arrest.
She now sees the time opportune for a fresh political initiative between her party and the Indian government. “We would like India to work closely with us, that is work with my party, the National League for Democracy (NLD),” she said.
The NLD has been sidelined by the junta since it claimed an astounding victory in the 1990 elections.
The junta never recognised the results of the elections that granted the NLD a 80 per cent mandate to govern.
The junta has ruled over Burma since 1962. “I do not oppose relations with the Generals but I hope that the Indian government would talk to us as well. I would like to see talks begin immediately. I would like to see close and friendly relations, like those that have not been seen recently.”
“I would like India to remember that the two countries have been through thick and thin together. We have fought together against colonialism. It is now time to maintain steady in that direction and encourage a valuable friendship,” she said.
Suu Kyi, a graduate of Delhi’s Lady Shri Ram College, and her husband, the late Michael Aris, a scholar in Tibet and Bhutan studies, lived in Shimla prior to her return to Myanmar in 1988.
“I would love to return to India. My fondest memories are in India. As a family we lived in Shimla. That has been the happiest time of my life,” she said.
Myanmar has been the recipient of a stringent sanctions regime due to the politics of the military men. Suu Kyi has, in the past, called upon sanctions to keep the generals in tow.
Since her release she has spoken of an easing of those sanctions. “Sanctions need to be reviewed from time to time. They need to be viewed not simply from the economic angle but the social implications as well. There are many people with many different views on sanctions. It is time we had a look at the sanction regime again. I will need to speak to the countries that have imposed sanctions and need to hear their qualms. They did so — after all, do so — to usher in democratic change.”
On China, Suu Kyi said: “China is a neighbour we have a longstanding friendship with. But currently China is not on the side of those who side with democracy and human rights. But I maintain that we have to be on good terms with neighbours.”
Suu Kyi, under the laws of the new Constitution is prevented from participating in politics.
Her NLD boycotted the November 2010 elections, Myanmar’s first in 20 years, saying the rules prevented a free and fair process but a breakaway group (National Democratic Force) did participate.
This fractured her party and the NLD is not a legal entity today, as per the new election laws.
Said Suu Kyi: “The NLD and I believe that there are great flaws in the constitution...(But) we have to first sort out our differences (within).”
Suu Kyi, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, was reunited with her son yesterday after 10 years of separation.
“The best moment for me has been the arrival of my son, but that’s a personal moment. But the moment I hold closest is when I saw the faces of my supporters.”
Suu Kyi had previously expressed her interest in using Twitter to reach out to her supporters but she’s keener on Facebook now.
“A lot of young Burmese have told me that Facebook, rather than Twitter is more useful to them. But I do not have an internet connection. I did go to apply for an internet permit but I don’t know how easy it will be but I have made the application.”
Suu Kyi underlined her commitment to a non-violent struggle. “My calm comes from my people, from my colleagues. Many of who have been in much worse situations in Burma’s jails. My people have always managed to remain calm and cheerful.”
She now has her eyes set on the long-run as a free citizen active in politics. But there is the matter of a book. “I do have ideas and have jotted down many notes but the time for the book must be right.”
India for its part has prodded along trading with the Myanmarese junta.
Though the MEA called for the release of Suu Kyi, it ensured bilateral relations in trade continue. This policy is a departure from the 1990s when India was more vocal and active in persuading the junta to follow on the route to democracy.
But with increased Chinese investment and interests, India felt it necessary to deal with the junta.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india-saddened-me...-lets-talk-now-suu-kyi/715179/1
Fight human trafficking, Suu Kyi urges
Thursday, 25 November 2010 02:35 Mizzima News
New Delhi (Mizzima) – National League for Democracy general secretary Aung San Suu Kyi yesterday urged NLD women’s wing members to combat human trafficking.
The message came as Suu Kyi and about 200 from the women’s wing of her party from all states and divisions except Kachin and Karenni met for about three hours at NLD headquarters in Rangoon.
“Although victims reported their cases to the women rights non-governmental organisations, the results were fruitless. So the NLD has to take up this responsibility,” Rangoon Division NLD women’s wing chief May Win Myint told Mizzima.
“Thet Wai, aka Pauk Sa, used to help combat against human trafficking with complete reporting to the International Labour Organisation (ILO).”
“Aung San Suu Kyi urged us to help in combating against human trafficking,” May Win Myint said.
The junta formed the Myanmar Women’s Affairs Federation (MWAF) in 2004. Also, Burma, along with Laos, Cambodia, China, Thailand and Vietnam, signed the “Commit MoU” in Bangkok on October 29, 2004. It stands for Co-ordinated Mekong Ministerial Initiative against Trafficking Memorandum of Understanding.
Despite being party to these efforts, Burmese rights organisations in exile said the junta had failed to effectively protect women, meaning many were trafficked to China, Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries.
NLD women’s wing leaders including May Hnin Kyi, Hnin Hnin Yu, Khin San Hlaing, Khin Htay Kywe, Lei Lei, Khin Mar Kyi, Aye Aye Mar and Phyu Phyu Thin attended the meeting,
They sought Suu Kyi’s lead in educational development for the new generation to which the Nobel Peace laureate said she would help as much as she could.
The women’s leaders also expressed fears for Suu Kyi’s safety, and told her to take care amid assassination threats. Her father National hero Aung San was assassinated in 1947 by his political rivals just before Burma largely through his work attained independence from Britain.
http://www.mizzima.com/news/inside-burma/4609-suu-kyi-urges-nld-women-to-fight-human-trafficking-.html
New Delhi (Mizzima) – National League for Democracy general secretary Aung San Suu Kyi yesterday urged NLD women’s wing members to combat human trafficking.
The message came as Suu Kyi and about 200 from the women’s wing of her party from all states and divisions except Kachin and Karenni met for about three hours at NLD headquarters in Rangoon.
“Although victims reported their cases to the women rights non-governmental organisations, the results were fruitless. So the NLD has to take up this responsibility,” Rangoon Division NLD women’s wing chief May Win Myint told Mizzima.
“Thet Wai, aka Pauk Sa, used to help combat against human trafficking with complete reporting to the International Labour Organisation (ILO).”
“Aung San Suu Kyi urged us to help in combating against human trafficking,” May Win Myint said.
The junta formed the Myanmar Women’s Affairs Federation (MWAF) in 2004. Also, Burma, along with Laos, Cambodia, China, Thailand and Vietnam, signed the “Commit MoU” in Bangkok on October 29, 2004. It stands for Co-ordinated Mekong Ministerial Initiative against Trafficking Memorandum of Understanding.
Despite being party to these efforts, Burmese rights organisations in exile said the junta had failed to effectively protect women, meaning many were trafficked to China, Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries.
NLD women’s wing leaders including May Hnin Kyi, Hnin Hnin Yu, Khin San Hlaing, Khin Htay Kywe, Lei Lei, Khin Mar Kyi, Aye Aye Mar and Phyu Phyu Thin attended the meeting,
They sought Suu Kyi’s lead in educational development for the new generation to which the Nobel Peace laureate said she would help as much as she could.
The women’s leaders also expressed fears for Suu Kyi’s safety, and told her to take care amid assassination threats. Her father National hero Aung San was assassinated in 1947 by his political rivals just before Burma largely through his work attained independence from Britain.
http://www.mizzima.com/news/inside-burma/4609-suu-kyi-urges-nld-women-to-fight-human-trafficking-.html
Two Separate Paths
By KYAW ZWA MOE Thursday, November 25, 2010
Aung San Suu Kyi has wasted no time in raising important issues—national reconciliation, dialogue with the military leaders, a nationwide conference with ethnic groups, non-violent revolution—and so on in less than two weeks since her release.
All she got from the ruling generals was sheer silence, which must be interpreted as denial aimed directly at her.
But that's not news. Burma's pro-democracy icon has called for dialogue with the junta since 1988 when she entered Burma's political arena. She's actually met with senior leaders three times.
“We met, but I can't say we had a true dialogue,” Suu Kyi told The Irrawaddy in an interview a few days after her release, when asked about her meetings with leaders, including Snr-Gen Than Shwe, in 1994, 1995 and 2000.
Her 15-year spent in detention under house arrest during the past 21 years hasn't caused her to change her ideas about the role dialogue could play in bringing about national reconciliation. But she doesn't think it will happen in the near future.
Asked if she thought she would have a chance to go to Naypyidaw to meet with the junta head in the future, Suu Kyi said, “I don't think that way. I think of how I am going to make it happen.” She said that Gandhi was very fond of the Christian hymn “Lead, Kindly Light” though he was a follower of Hinduism. The hymn says, “I do not ask to see the distant scene; one step enough for me.”
“Gandhi believed that, and so do I,” said the 65-year-old Nobel Peace laureate the interview over the phone. “I will do my best to walk, step by step. If I am on the right track, I will reach the right place.”
However, so far the idea of dialogue doesn't seem to be realistic. In the past two decades, Burmese political groups and the international community have urged the junta to hold talks with political and ethnic organizations, to be led by Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy, whose landslide victory in the 1990 election was ignored by the military regime.
All domestic and international forces and their efforts—economic sanctions, pro-engagement policies, armed struggles—have failed to get the generals to a table to hold talks with the opposition groups.
“Dialogue must be a win-win situation for both parties,” Suu Kyi said in the interview. “I have said to them [the generals] before, but they don't seem to understand it. I am not sure if they don't understand it or if they don't believe it. Perhaps it is because in the military, there no such thing as a negotiated settlement. This is something I really need to give a lot of thought to.”
If we look back at the country's political history of the past 20 years and the political approaches of the military regime, talks look to be out of the question. Realistically, the dialogue idea doesn't work, at least for now, but in politics even the seemingly impossible sometimes happens.
Real events have happened in the 10 days since Suu Kyi's release that give us a better picture of reality.
Nine private journals in Rangoon were banned for publishing big pictures of Suu Kyi and stories than were permitted; 82 HIV/AIDS patients were ordered to leave their current shelter only a few days after Suu Kyi visited the shelter, which is run by members and supporters of the NLD party.
The generals have carefully scrutinized Suu Kyi's every move since her release. They don't want to see informative coverage of her in the media or the crowds who gather to great her and hear her speak.
To deter them, government departments have taken specific actions. On Nov. 21, a few days after the journals published pictures and stories of Suu Kyi, the Press Scrutiny and Registration Board, a tool of the junta, banned 9 journals temporarily. On Nov. 24, the Health Ministry ordered the eviction of the HIV/AIDS patients under the pretext the shelter was not hygienic, according to state-run newspaper.
Suu Kyi herself has yet to become a target of the junta. Apolitical acts like her reunion with her youngest son and their visit to Shwedagon Pagoda are unlikely to draw their wrath.
However, the generals will not tolerate her politically sensitive moves, and sooner or later, if she keeps them up, she will be targeted for harassment or arrest.
Since Suu Kyi's release, the hope for change has been high among the public. However, the generals see her as a “destructive element,” the language they use to describe some opposition groups in their newspapers.
Moreover, look at two paths that Suu Kyi and the generals are now walking down. On one hand, the generals are convening a new parliament with elected candidates and forming a new government. On the other, Suu Kyi says the election complaints should be investigated, and that she will work for national reconciliation through dialogue and nonviolent ways.
At this rate, the paths of Suu Kyi and the regime will never cross. Instead, a clash between Suu Kyi and the generals may be unavoidable.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/opinion_story.php?art_id=20184&page=1
Aung San Suu Kyi has wasted no time in raising important issues—national reconciliation, dialogue with the military leaders, a nationwide conference with ethnic groups, non-violent revolution—and so on in less than two weeks since her release.
All she got from the ruling generals was sheer silence, which must be interpreted as denial aimed directly at her.
But that's not news. Burma's pro-democracy icon has called for dialogue with the junta since 1988 when she entered Burma's political arena. She's actually met with senior leaders three times.
“We met, but I can't say we had a true dialogue,” Suu Kyi told The Irrawaddy in an interview a few days after her release, when asked about her meetings with leaders, including Snr-Gen Than Shwe, in 1994, 1995 and 2000.
Her 15-year spent in detention under house arrest during the past 21 years hasn't caused her to change her ideas about the role dialogue could play in bringing about national reconciliation. But she doesn't think it will happen in the near future.
Asked if she thought she would have a chance to go to Naypyidaw to meet with the junta head in the future, Suu Kyi said, “I don't think that way. I think of how I am going to make it happen.” She said that Gandhi was very fond of the Christian hymn “Lead, Kindly Light” though he was a follower of Hinduism. The hymn says, “I do not ask to see the distant scene; one step enough for me.”
“Gandhi believed that, and so do I,” said the 65-year-old Nobel Peace laureate the interview over the phone. “I will do my best to walk, step by step. If I am on the right track, I will reach the right place.”
However, so far the idea of dialogue doesn't seem to be realistic. In the past two decades, Burmese political groups and the international community have urged the junta to hold talks with political and ethnic organizations, to be led by Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy, whose landslide victory in the 1990 election was ignored by the military regime.
All domestic and international forces and their efforts—economic sanctions, pro-engagement policies, armed struggles—have failed to get the generals to a table to hold talks with the opposition groups.
“Dialogue must be a win-win situation for both parties,” Suu Kyi said in the interview. “I have said to them [the generals] before, but they don't seem to understand it. I am not sure if they don't understand it or if they don't believe it. Perhaps it is because in the military, there no such thing as a negotiated settlement. This is something I really need to give a lot of thought to.”
If we look back at the country's political history of the past 20 years and the political approaches of the military regime, talks look to be out of the question. Realistically, the dialogue idea doesn't work, at least for now, but in politics even the seemingly impossible sometimes happens.
Real events have happened in the 10 days since Suu Kyi's release that give us a better picture of reality.
Nine private journals in Rangoon were banned for publishing big pictures of Suu Kyi and stories than were permitted; 82 HIV/AIDS patients were ordered to leave their current shelter only a few days after Suu Kyi visited the shelter, which is run by members and supporters of the NLD party.
The generals have carefully scrutinized Suu Kyi's every move since her release. They don't want to see informative coverage of her in the media or the crowds who gather to great her and hear her speak.
To deter them, government departments have taken specific actions. On Nov. 21, a few days after the journals published pictures and stories of Suu Kyi, the Press Scrutiny and Registration Board, a tool of the junta, banned 9 journals temporarily. On Nov. 24, the Health Ministry ordered the eviction of the HIV/AIDS patients under the pretext the shelter was not hygienic, according to state-run newspaper.
Suu Kyi herself has yet to become a target of the junta. Apolitical acts like her reunion with her youngest son and their visit to Shwedagon Pagoda are unlikely to draw their wrath.
However, the generals will not tolerate her politically sensitive moves, and sooner or later, if she keeps them up, she will be targeted for harassment or arrest.
Since Suu Kyi's release, the hope for change has been high among the public. However, the generals see her as a “destructive element,” the language they use to describe some opposition groups in their newspapers.
Moreover, look at two paths that Suu Kyi and the generals are now walking down. On one hand, the generals are convening a new parliament with elected candidates and forming a new government. On the other, Suu Kyi says the election complaints should be investigated, and that she will work for national reconciliation through dialogue and nonviolent ways.
At this rate, the paths of Suu Kyi and the regime will never cross. Instead, a clash between Suu Kyi and the generals may be unavoidable.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/opinion_story.php?art_id=20184&page=1
Suu Kyi criticises India's ties with Myanmar junta
(AFP) – 1 day ago
NEW DELHI — Myanmar's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi criticised India in a newspaper interview on Wednesday for doing business with the military dictators who held her under house arrest until 11 days ago.
Suu Kyi, who lived in India in the 1980s, was released in Yangon on November 13 after spending more than seven consecutive years in detention.
India was once a staunch supporter of her cause, but began engaging with Myanmar's junta in the mid-1990s over security and energy issues.
The government in New Delhi has been eyeing oil and gas fields in Myanmar, and is also eager to counter China's growing influence in south-east Asia.
"I am saddened with India. I would like to have thought that India would be standing behind us. That it would have followed in the tradition of Mahatma Gandhi and (India's first prime minister) Jawaharlal Nehru," Suu Kyi told the Indian Express.
"I do not oppose relations with the Generals but I hope that the Indian government would talk to us as well," she said.
India, which shares a border with Myanmar, welcomed the country's reclusive military leader Than Shwe for a state visit in July.
The invitation outraged human rights groups who said India was reneging on its democratic principles in order to improve trade links and to compete with China.
US President Barack Obama, during his trip to India earlier this month, criticised India for failing to condemn human rights abuses in Myanmar.
"When peaceful democratic movements are suppressed, as they have been in Burma (Myanmar), then the democracies of the world cannot remain silent," Obama told the Indian parliament.
Suu Kyi also told the newspaper that she had applied for an Internet connection since her release and hoped to communicate with her supporters through social networking websites Facebook and Twitter.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j-9tzuGDdFRlVfYMdUmKHXDWZwqw?docId=CNG.b9563120a4c64fddca80a6a945060645.a41
NEW DELHI — Myanmar's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi criticised India in a newspaper interview on Wednesday for doing business with the military dictators who held her under house arrest until 11 days ago.
Suu Kyi, who lived in India in the 1980s, was released in Yangon on November 13 after spending more than seven consecutive years in detention.
India was once a staunch supporter of her cause, but began engaging with Myanmar's junta in the mid-1990s over security and energy issues.
The government in New Delhi has been eyeing oil and gas fields in Myanmar, and is also eager to counter China's growing influence in south-east Asia.
"I am saddened with India. I would like to have thought that India would be standing behind us. That it would have followed in the tradition of Mahatma Gandhi and (India's first prime minister) Jawaharlal Nehru," Suu Kyi told the Indian Express.
"I do not oppose relations with the Generals but I hope that the Indian government would talk to us as well," she said.
India, which shares a border with Myanmar, welcomed the country's reclusive military leader Than Shwe for a state visit in July.
The invitation outraged human rights groups who said India was reneging on its democratic principles in order to improve trade links and to compete with China.
US President Barack Obama, during his trip to India earlier this month, criticised India for failing to condemn human rights abuses in Myanmar.
"When peaceful democratic movements are suppressed, as they have been in Burma (Myanmar), then the democracies of the world cannot remain silent," Obama told the Indian parliament.
Suu Kyi also told the newspaper that she had applied for an Internet connection since her release and hoped to communicate with her supporters through social networking websites Facebook and Twitter.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j-9tzuGDdFRlVfYMdUmKHXDWZwqw?docId=CNG.b9563120a4c64fddca80a6a945060645.a41
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi calls for united EU stance on Myanmar
Bangkok, Nov 24 (DPA) Democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi Wednesday called for a coordinated approach within the European Union in its policy towards Myanmar, warning it would be a 'disgrace' if the group fell victim to the junta's divide and rule tactics.
'In terms of the EU, and other allies of ours, I think we would like to see a more coordinated approach,' Suu Kyi told DPA in a telephone interview.
Suu Kyi, 65, was released from seven years of house detention Nov 13, a week after Myanmar's junta staged the first general election in two decades.
Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) party boycotted the polls in protest against election regulations that would have forced it to drop the Nobel laureate as a party member in order to run.
Other regulations prohibited registered parties from including people currently serving prison terms. Suu Kyi had been under house detention since May 2003.
Suu Kyi was unimpressed by an EU statement on the election outcome which she described as weak.
'Unless theirs is a coordinated approach, I think their statements cannot be as strong as we would like them to be,' Suu Kyi said.
Members of the EU are known to be split over questions such as sanctions imposed on Myanmar, also called Burma, and the revival of development aid to the country, one of the world's poorest.
Suu Kyi expressed concerns over Myanmar's approach to the EU.
'If they are going to let the regime divide and rule them, I think that would be a disgrace for the EU,' she said.
The NLD formerly supported economic sanctions against Myanmar, although it has promised to look at the question.
'We will review the matter on sanctions and only on the grounds of whether or not the sanctions are hurting the people, and whether the people have sound reasons to think they have been hurt by the sanctions,' Suu Kyi said.
The NLD won the 1990 general election by a landslide, but the party was blocked from assuming power for the past 20 years, and many of its members were jailed.
Suu Kyi, the daughter of Myanmar independence hero Aung San, has spent 16 of the past 21 years under house arrest.
http://sify.com/news/aung-san-suu-kyi-calls-for-united-eu-stance-on-myanmar-news-international-klytE9aaadd.html
'In terms of the EU, and other allies of ours, I think we would like to see a more coordinated approach,' Suu Kyi told DPA in a telephone interview.
Suu Kyi, 65, was released from seven years of house detention Nov 13, a week after Myanmar's junta staged the first general election in two decades.
Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) party boycotted the polls in protest against election regulations that would have forced it to drop the Nobel laureate as a party member in order to run.
Other regulations prohibited registered parties from including people currently serving prison terms. Suu Kyi had been under house detention since May 2003.
Suu Kyi was unimpressed by an EU statement on the election outcome which she described as weak.
'Unless theirs is a coordinated approach, I think their statements cannot be as strong as we would like them to be,' Suu Kyi said.
Members of the EU are known to be split over questions such as sanctions imposed on Myanmar, also called Burma, and the revival of development aid to the country, one of the world's poorest.
Suu Kyi expressed concerns over Myanmar's approach to the EU.
'If they are going to let the regime divide and rule them, I think that would be a disgrace for the EU,' she said.
The NLD formerly supported economic sanctions against Myanmar, although it has promised to look at the question.
'We will review the matter on sanctions and only on the grounds of whether or not the sanctions are hurting the people, and whether the people have sound reasons to think they have been hurt by the sanctions,' Suu Kyi said.
The NLD won the 1990 general election by a landslide, but the party was blocked from assuming power for the past 20 years, and many of its members were jailed.
Suu Kyi, the daughter of Myanmar independence hero Aung San, has spent 16 of the past 21 years under house arrest.
http://sify.com/news/aung-san-suu-kyi-calls-for-united-eu-stance-on-myanmar-news-international-klytE9aaadd.html
Aung San Suu Kyi would make better progress than the ruling junta on issues of concern to China's leaders.
The Nov. 13 release of Aung San Suu Kyi has set off a predictable deluge of commentary about the significance of her return to the fore of Burma's pro-democracy movement. But there has been little commentary on how China factors into Ms. Suu Kyi's future. Beijing's reaction to this event, and how Ms. Suu Kyi fits into China's strategic calculus in Burma, may be one of the most important yet poorly understood aspects of this unfolding morality play.
The conventional wisdom is that the Chinese government's overriding concern with cross-border stability and access to Burma's abundant energy and other resources, ...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704638304575635902017620916.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Darticle
The conventional wisdom is that the Chinese government's overriding concern with cross-border stability and access to Burma's abundant energy and other resources, ...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704638304575635902017620916.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Darticle
Suu Kyi says NLD will continue as political party
Junichi Fukasawa / Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writer
BANGKOK--Myanmar pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi wants her political organization to expand its democratic reform efforts to all parts of society, including ethnic minorities, she said in a telephone interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun.
The 65-year-old Suu Kyi, released from 7-1/2 years of house arrest on Nov. 13, said, "We keep the door open for [any political group or individual] to contact us."
Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) was officially disbanded in May for boycotting the Nov. 7 elections conducted by the military government. On Monday, Myanmar's Supreme Court refused to hear Suu Kyi's suit demanding nullification of the party's dissolution.
She said the group will formally protest the ruling. "We're going to appeal that decision because we did nothing that isn't right under the law," she said.
She also said the NLD would continue to function as a political party, suggesting the party will play a pivotal role in Myanmar's road to democracy.
Although Suu Kyi offered to meet with the military government in a speech after she was freed, she said she had not made a formal request to meet with junta leaders.
When asked what Japan and the West should do to help Myanmar achieve democracy, she said, "I think they should be more aware of the problems within this country, and I think for the help, [what we need] most of all is their coordinated effort."
Suu Kyi also said Myanmar's ethnic groups had drawn up a proposal for the second Panglong Conference. The first Panglong Conference was a deal reached in February 1947 between the central government under Suu Kyi's father, Aung San, and the Shan, Kachin and Chin peoples.
Showing an intention to promote cooperation with ethnic minorities, Suu Kyi said, "I'll contact them. They were the ones who drew up the proposal."
When asked about former NLD members who left the party to form the National Democratic Force so they could participate in the election, she said, "That's their decision. We certainly think that it's their right to decide what they want to do, and it's not our decision."
(Nov. 26, 2010)
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/world/T101125005342.htm
BANGKOK--Myanmar pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi wants her political organization to expand its democratic reform efforts to all parts of society, including ethnic minorities, she said in a telephone interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun.
The 65-year-old Suu Kyi, released from 7-1/2 years of house arrest on Nov. 13, said, "We keep the door open for [any political group or individual] to contact us."
Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) was officially disbanded in May for boycotting the Nov. 7 elections conducted by the military government. On Monday, Myanmar's Supreme Court refused to hear Suu Kyi's suit demanding nullification of the party's dissolution.
She said the group will formally protest the ruling. "We're going to appeal that decision because we did nothing that isn't right under the law," she said.
She also said the NLD would continue to function as a political party, suggesting the party will play a pivotal role in Myanmar's road to democracy.
Although Suu Kyi offered to meet with the military government in a speech after she was freed, she said she had not made a formal request to meet with junta leaders.
When asked what Japan and the West should do to help Myanmar achieve democracy, she said, "I think they should be more aware of the problems within this country, and I think for the help, [what we need] most of all is their coordinated effort."
Suu Kyi also said Myanmar's ethnic groups had drawn up a proposal for the second Panglong Conference. The first Panglong Conference was a deal reached in February 1947 between the central government under Suu Kyi's father, Aung San, and the Shan, Kachin and Chin peoples.
Showing an intention to promote cooperation with ethnic minorities, Suu Kyi said, "I'll contact them. They were the ones who drew up the proposal."
When asked about former NLD members who left the party to form the National Democratic Force so they could participate in the election, she said, "That's their decision. We certainly think that it's their right to decide what they want to do, and it's not our decision."
(Nov. 26, 2010)
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/world/T101125005342.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
