“Five pages of blather”, or is it a “major victory” for rights crusaders in Asia?
It took 4 days for the New Light of Myanmar to respond to the decision of the United Nations Security Council to place Burma on the agenda.  The headlines indicate an almost panic-stricken junta trying to reassure the people of Burma that the UNSC will only be able to discuss Burma, and that Russia and China, as permanent members, will be able to use their veto on any proposed resolutions.  No doubt the people of Burma will be rather disappointed to hear that any countries voted against the resolution that might bring them relief from the tyranny.  There is of course quite a long way to go at the UNSC before any direct action can be taken.   But the fact that Burma is on the agenda means that Burma can be raised by the UNSC members at any time.  At last, those countries who are concerned for the future well-being of the people of Burma can voice their opinions in the world’s highest responsible body.  Many people realise that the UN is in need of restructuring; most despotic governments would give the UN less power; most democracies would give it more and stronger powers.  The time for ‘parochial’ isolationist government is coming to an end, as the peoples of the world seek to come together in harmony for freedom, dignity and human rights – irrespective of local politics and squabbles.

As we might expect in a state that tells the people what they are allowed to say and do, the article in NLM starts by claiming that the views expressed are those of both the government and the people.  I am sure that nothing could be further from the minds of the people of Burma at this time, whose views will be diametrically opposed on this matter.  An opportunity has arisen for the people’s suffering to be disclosed and investigated, for the crimes and incompetence of the SPDC to be exposed and reviled – at least by anyone with an ounce of humanity.  With the oppressive regime of press scrutiny and censorship, the real views of the people of Burma are not allowed to be aired, or printed – offenders liable to 10 years imprisonment for ‘defamation of the state’ (i.e. telling the truth), or 20 years for ‘secretly publishing anti-government propaganda’ articles (75 year old Win Tin has been held on a number of charges since July 1989) – although as one is a relation of a detained Shan political leader and the other a member of the NLD, we cannot but assume that the sentences reflect the junta’s hatred of the people of Burma and anyone who voices an opinion for democracy.  Harsh sentencing for breaking almost arbitrarily oppressive censorship laws may not be a reason to call for Burma to be added to the UNSC agenda; but when we add everything else to the list of atrocities, minor and major issues and threats to regional peace and security that the junta pose, there is no doubt that the matter of Burma is where it should be – with the UNSC.

The NLM spares no punches when criticizing Japan for voting with the ‘USA and their cohorts’.  Reminding Japan about the mistreatment of Burma’s people in WWII and the subsequent forgiveness of the people of Burma, Japan’s action now is deemed ‘regrettable’.  I’m sure the people of Japan and Burma will live to be proud of the fact that Japan supported the motion.  It is the junta who are still living in WWII and are still fighting their old enemies – the UK and USA - and they are still trying to install the fascist ‘national socialist’ politics that so impressed Ne Win when he was training with the Imperial Japanese army, and which he took with him into the national Burma army after WWII, after fighting alongside Japan and acting just as cruelly to those he considered sympathetic to the British colonialists.  Aung San rightly had his doubts about Ne Win’s politics, and he should have kicked him out when he had the chance.

The NLM congratulates its friends – Russia and China for their genuine attitude.  As these two countries are actively aiding and abetting the SPDC in their human rights abuses by supplying arms and ammunition – worth US$ billions – it is hardly surprising in the way they voted.  Both countries are also benefiting from the wholesale plunder of Burma’s riches - the generals get fatter while China and Russia get gas.   Perhaps too, both countries see the writing on the wall for their own human rights abuses in Chechnya and Tibet coming in for scrutiny – but that will have to wait till another day at the Security Council.  China for one has recently been attacking the US for the US’s criticisms of lack of religious freedom in China as interference in China’s internal affairs – this at a time when the People’s Daily Online prints a state-sponsored attack on the Dalai Lama as an ‘unworthy religious leader’.  The Dalai Lama is a Nobel Peace Prize winner, awarded for his work throughout the world in the cause of peace and reconciliation.  China criticizes the Dalai Lama because they are still trying to justify their illegal occupation of Tibet since the invasion of an independent nation between the initial incursions of 1950 and the bloody massacres of 1959.  China, using the same press censorship that Burma uses, tells its people the state version of history and not the truth.  They omit the fact that since 1949, China has brutally suppressed Buddhism in China, killed millions of Chinese and Tibetans because of their religious faith, tortured and imprisoned many hundreds of thousands because they refuse to give in to communist party bullying.  They now tolerate a degree of religious freedom – as long as it doesn’t interfere with state policy.  China may have changed over the years, but one thing hasn’t changed – they still lie and deny their past misdeeds.  And as for human rights abuse, we just need to ask Falon Gong about torture and religious freedoms.

The NLM points out that human rights are not necessarily an issue that constitute a threat to international peace and security, and that the UN charter states that nations should not use human rights issues with a view to intervening in the internal affairs of other countries – so does it makes it alright to commit genocide against ethnic groups in Burma as that is an ‘internal affair’?!  The SPDC’s brutal suppression of its people has gone on for too long after any major civil war or insurgent conflicts have finished.  The SPDC are using their military force to enslave the people of Burma and perpetuate their grasp on controlling the country, and this has repercussions for the regional and international community.  Maybe the UN charter needs to be revised so that the UN can intervene in ‘internal affairs’.  Would the people of Rwanda have wanted UN intervention to prevent genocide?  Did Kosovo’s or Sierra Leone’s conflicts resolve more peaceably after UN intervention?  Do the people of Darfur want UN intervention?  All of these would be claimed as ‘internal affairs’ by the perpetrators of genocide and appalling human rights abuse.  The people of Burma have been crying out for international intervention since 1988, and some ethnic groups have been seeking external intervention to resolve what are really political disputes since 1948.

Qatar’s representative intimated that other UN and human rights organisations may now find it difficult to work in Burma with Burma on the UNSC agenda – as if working there in the past has been easy.  The SPDC has consistently hampered the actual work of international NGOs, despite stupid statements in their press about working with this or that UN organisation.  They despise the international community for clearly identifying the root cause of all of Burma’s problems – the SPDC and the Tatmadaw.  They have prevented the ICRC from undertaking independent prison visits; they have threatened to decapitate the ILO representative; and any aid that does go into Burma is taxed through the SPDC’s foreign exchange mechanisms in the SPDC Bank to fund their own arms purchases and private luxury lifestyles.   Only when the UN’s highest councils agree on increasing the pressure on the regime and directly intervening in the internal affairs of Burma will this scandalous corruption and state-bullying cease.

Now we turn to the NLM rebuttal of the USA’s claims of matters that ‘constitute a threat to international peace and security’.  The NLM claims that there are no political prisoners in Burma, and that all those imprisoned have committed crimes.  It now seems that being an NLD member or a Shan is a crime; for of those imprisoned, the charges have been made up and evidence fabricated to suit the regime’s continuance of a climate of fear.  Can writing anti-government poetry bring about the downfall of the regime? – oh, if only it could, it would make poets of us all.  The over-whelming testimonies of ex-prisoners of Burma’s prisons identify the appalling conditions of detention, and the cruelty and torture that is used to punish, torment and persecute political prisoners.  Far from being ‘criminals’, many of these courageous men and women are the future of Burma, people who had been working under extremely difficult conditions to bring about a peaceful political solution to Burma’s impasse – the transfer of power to the people.  The NLM also picks on DASSK who has apparently defied orders – orders placed by an illegal regime on the person elected to head the civilian government, and still the person that many people in Burma hold as an icon for democracy; and who many people outside Burma see as a symbol of freedom and non-violent defiance to a brutal regime.  The charges against all of those cited by AAPPB have been fabricated by the regime, courts presided over by lackeys of the junta, judgement a foregone conclusion, and sentences passed reflecting the hatred that the junta have for any opposition to their oppressive fascist state.

The NLM then claims that there are no true refugees, but only insurgents and their relatives, and illegal workers – the SPDC’s Ministry of Labour have apparently reached agreement with foreign countries to solve the problem.  The truth is that there are people living on the border refugee camps who are terrified of returning to Burma, because they know that they will not be ‘resettled at native villages’; but imprisoned, tortured and killed, they took refuge from the war that has ravaged the border states when the Tatmadaw burned down their villages, mined their fields, beheaded civilians, raped women and children, and worked those left alive as slave porters and ‘comfort women’ until they could work no more.  The Tatmadaw have targeted ethnic groups for annihilation, and to assimilate the lands into those who obey commands and bow their head in fear to the Tatmadaw.  Refugees and those who have fled brutality to other countries often find themselves with little in the way of support and turn to working for a pittance for unscrupulous employers – illegal maybe, but profitable for some certainly.  With approaching a million persons internally displaced or in refugee camps on the borders of Burma, thus is a humanitarian crisis that needs a caring response from the international community – not more pseudo-political slogans and nonsense from the NLM about national races and border areas development.  The solution will not dissolve until the SPDC have stopped killing the people of Burma and carrying out a program of genocide on ethnic people in the border areas.

Next the NLM turns to the drugs issue, claiming that the SPDC have been working with the UN, USA and the international community to control this issue.  What they don’t say is that the SPDC are still so closely involved with the illicit drugs trade that SHAN called their recent report ‘Hand in Glove’, uncovering the involvement of all levels of the Tatmadaw in the extremely profitable illicit drugs trade.  Whilst there are claims of reduced poppy fields, the latest reports show that there are still plenty of poppy fields and that the methamphetamine operations are still in business.  The Tatmadaw regularly come into conflict with the SSA-S’s anti-drugs operations, while the Tatmadaw are protecting the drugs traffic runs into Thailand.  The US has also recently identified two countries worldwide – Venezuela and Burma – for having “failed demonstrably” over the past year to meet their obligations under international counter-narcotics agreements.

The NLM also questions the claims that HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria is a threat to neighbouring countries.  They cite WHO data regarding the spread of HIV/AIDS and add their own view that it spreads from areas where it is high to areas where it is low – without any evidence or relevance.  I’m not sure about this, but I understand that any figures gathered in Burma are subject to where and what WHO can go and do.  A report by John Hopkins University stated “a longstanding and severe under funding of health and education programs in Burma.  Health expenditures in Burma are among the lowest globally, including an annual budget of less than $22,000 for the prevention and treatment of HIV among a total population of 43 million people… There is a growing humanitarian crisis in Burma. In our report, we document how the ruling government’s policies have restricted nearly all aid and allowed serious infectious diseases to spread unchecked.”  With the reluctance of the SPDC to do anything for HIV/AIDS sufferers, they attack anyone who does wish to help, whether they are NLD members organising events or the Global Fund who left Burma because of restrictions imposed by the Junta.  If the SPDC are serious about healthcare, then they certainly don’t show it by their actions.  They hate anyone who wants to provide humanitarian aid, and instead expect HIV/AIDS sufferers to place reliance on indigenous weeds.  With unreliable data, it may be that there is a growing threat to neighbouring countries that needs to be studied and remedies sought as quickly as possible.  This is a key area for the UN to take action, and put pressure on the junta for full co-operation.

The next section covers the ‘peace and tranquillity’ and ‘the rule of law’ that exist in Burma since 1992 as a result of the actions of the SPDC.  This is perhaps missing a reference to the major offensives in 2006 against the Karen people and the KNU resulting in thousands of more refugees fleeing the terror tactics of the Tatmadaw.  Or as we are learning the rule of law that applies to the Tatmadaw is not the same rule of law that applies to civilians – a group of loutish drunken soldiers can batter a village elder to death on the village roads, and the local SPDC commander offers monetary compensation, not a court martial for the criminals.  The NLM claims that 35 armed groups have returned to the ‘legal fold’ – either to become emasculated in the ‘National Convention’ or to join the SPDC in illicit drugs operations, money laundering and various corrupt practices.  The predicted upcoming confrontation with the SSA-S at Loi Kawwan has attracted an additional 14 infantry battalions to bolster the existing 47 infantry battalions and 10 artillery battalions based around Kengtung.  Does this sound like ‘stable, peaceful and tranquil’?

The NLM also hark back to the covert US operations affecting Burma from the 1950s, and claim that the US influenced Shan State to attempt to secede and join SEATO.  Back in 1958, Shan State did raise the issue of secession – as it was their right under the 1947 constitution.  The US was supporting the Kuomintang (KMT) in anti-communist China operations from Shan State, causing the Tatmadaw, the KMT and the Communist Party of Burma (CPB) to use Shan State as a battleground.  With the constitution of Burma and its democratic government still eluding stability, the Shan State elders wanted to consider the future of Shan State in the chaos that existed in Burma.  It was the machinations of Ne Win and his caretaker government of 1958 and military coup of 1962 that stopped the political leaders even holding discussions about federalism.  The SPDC have continued their dogmatic approach to the constitution of Burma and still can’t get it into their heads that their vision is wrong – they just don’t have a clue about (or they don’t even want to consider) the aspirations of the ethnic peoples and their wishes for autonomy and self-determination in a federal states of Burma.  Any political solution for the political crisis that is Burma will need the tri-partite dialogues – the existing illegal government (SPDC), the democratically elected government – the NLD - and the ethnic nationalities.

The NLM can’t resist the opportunity of laying into the NLD and reserving considerable space to naming those NLD representatives who have been removed from office for one reason or another; and all the usual reasons for attacking the NLD.  These detailed figures covering election results and subsequent votes made by townships bullied by SPDC and USDA thugs into recanting their freely given opinions are a travesty of justice and a shame on Burma.  They do not represent the views of the people – they represent the authoritarian views and repressive nature of the SPDC.  This reflects the fear of the SPDC – they fear DASSK and the NLD as they know that once a democratically elected government is in place and supported by independent forces, the SPDC generals and their stooges will be thrown in jail and tried for crimes against humanity, crimes against the people of Burma, they will learn the fear that is everyday life for the people of Burma living under the jack boot of the SPDC.

The NLM also refer in glowing terms to the seven point road map and the National Convention.  With point one not yet completed, we wonder which century it will be completed?  Certainly, it will see out Than Shwe, unless he believes that his necromancy will keep him alive beyond the lifespan of even the oldest human being.  As for the National Convention itself, every political organisation not under the thumb of the SPDC wants to throw it away as a waste of time – it is certainly not a constitution for any country that values its freedom and wants a true democracy.  There are several good constitutional models developed by Burma’s expatriate community - I have only started to read the draft Shan State Constitution and have been impressed by its brevity (39 pages) and common sense approach to a federal state constitution.  The constitution recommends a system of proportional representation to ensure that all minorities have a say in issues that affect their lives.  “We want to illuminate the principle that the people are sovereign” explained Sao Seng Suk, chair of the drafting commission, “the right to reject national legislation, if it deemed unjust, for the protection of their livelihood, existence and their immediate environment, through local level referendum.”

The NLM of course says that the State and the people will ‘crush internal and external destructive elements’.  The SPDC are successfully crushing the people of Burma in every way they can – by fear and force.  It is up to those of us who are not being crushed to speak up for those who are – even if that means we are labelled as ‘destructive elements’ – personally I want to crush the SPDC’s government, to crush it as a form of government – it isn’t government, it is incompetence magnified by bullying thugs.  The Tatmadaw has been hijacked by vicious fascist thugs and their evil ways permeate the army so perniciously, that only total re-construction of a national army will change the culture of terror; in a country that calls on soldiers to swear an oath of loyalty to the constitution; and a constitution that forbids any serving military personnel from serving in government.

The UNSC can now debate Burma – they haven’t made any decisions yet, so we all need to keep going in applying pressure to every country in the UNSC and those that will take up the non-permanent roles in 2007.  The secretary general role is also up for replacement, and we will all be keeping an interested eye on who replaces Kofi Annan.  Before the end of 2006, it is likely that Ibrahim Gambari will get his return visit to Burma and report back to the UNSC.  If the US wants to bring a resolution to the UNSC, it is going to have to work hard to get China and Russia to agree to any wording.  This may hold up further developments for now, but Burma is definitely on the agenda.

Endnote

The title for this article came from my initial reaction to the NLM article (Five pages of blather) - rather than my 5 pages - and a comment in a news report about the UNSC announcement last weekend in the Philippines Inquirer (a “major victory” for rights crusaders in Asia).

For simplicity’s sake I have omitted the references, but if you want to know where anything came from then please contact me at taisamyone@yahoo.co.uk.