| Suu Kyi Praises 88 Generation Leaders Posted: 08 Aug 2013 05:51 AM PDT  The audience listens to Aung Suu Kyi's speech at the Myanmar Convention Center in Rangoon. (Photo: JPaing / The Irrawaddy) RANGOON — A thronged Myanmar Convention Center saw Burma's opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi praise the leaders of the 1988 student uprising against military rule, at the closing of an event on Thursday marking the 25th anniversary of the demonstrations. "We have to be grateful to the people for their involvement in the uprising," she told the packed auditorium in the north of Burma's commercial capital, Rangoon. "We shouldn't forget about it. We thank anyone involved, especially those who sacrificed their lives for our cause." Suu Kyi, now a parliamentarian with ambitions to be Burma's next president, saw her political career launched in 1988 with a public speech in Rangoon two weeks after the Aug. 8 demonstrations against the Ne Win dictatorship, which had been ruling for a quarter-century. Her speech this year on Thursday was the culmination of three days of debate and ceremony organized in part by the 88 Generation leaders—prominent former political prisoners who are now in their 40s, including Min Ko Naing, Mya Aye, Ko Ko Gyi, Pyone Cho and Min Zeya. "Our cause will have success someday, given the number of people gathering here today," Min Ko Naing told the crowd, an estimated 4,000 to 5000 people wedged into the convention center and an area outside, where some watched the proceedings on a video screen. Among the delegates were Htay Oo from the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), the party set up by the same Burmese military that brutally crushed the 1988 student-led uprising, killing an estimated 3,000 people. Others present included Shan leader Khun Htun Oo and US Ambassador Derek Mitchell. Speaking to The Irrawaddy about the commemoration and its relevance to Burma today, Mitchell recalled a famous aphorism by philosopher Carlos Santayana. "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, so it is important to honor the sacrifice of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice for the freedoms we hope are beginning here," he said. After crushing the 1988 uprising, Burma's military ruled the country until early 2011, before transferring power to a civilian government—albeit one under President Thein Sein, a former general, and with a Constitution that reserves 25 percent of seats for the powerful military. After those 1988 student protests, the Burmese military refused to acknowledge a landslide win for Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) party in a 1990 election. The ruling generals kept her and other activists from the 88 Generation in jail for many of the subsequent years, and in 2007 they ordered the military to crush another uprising, this time led by Buddhist monks. The post-2011 government has undertaken political and economic reforms, including the release of most 88 Generation leaders from jail early last year. The 88 Generation leaders, who have worked with the government on various peace processes between the military and ethnic militias, have formed a prominent group in Burmese civil society, prompting speculation that they might establish a political party ahead of the 2015 national elections. Tin Oo, a senior member of the NLD and a former head of the Burma Army, told The Irrawaddy that the 88 Generation would make suitable political allies for the NLD, should the activists decide to enter formal politics. "I don't know whether they will go into politics or not," Tin Oo said. "If they do, they will not join the NLD—they will have their own party, I think. But in Parliament we will be the same, on the one principle we will be united." Both the NLD and the 88 Generation are calling for a revision to Burma's 2008 Constitution, which vests significant powers with the military and bars Suu Kyi from becoming president. Refraining recent criticisms of the slowing pace of Burma's reforms at the 1988 commemoration event on Thursday, Suu Kyi said, "There's no rule of law in this country so far," and reiterated her view that the Constitution must be amended. Human rights groups have said that Burma's reforms have stalled recently, as farmers and others protesting land-grabs are arrested and jailed. A range of old, repressive laws also remain in place, as Burma's legislature works through a litany of new and proposed laws. Nonetheless, Mitchell, the US ambassador, sees the Silver Jubilee commemorations as indicative of change in Burma, remarking that such an event would have been impossible prior to 2011. "It's the beginning of a process, but the fact that you can have such an event here, with such a large crowd and wide participation, is remarkable," he told The Irrawaddy. Former BBC correspondent Christopher Gunness, who reported on the 1988 demonstrations in Burma, echoed Mitchell's comments, saying, "It is extremely significant that government ministers and military people came to an event like this, because in all societies that are transitioning from dictatorship to democracy, the first step along the way is truth, is discovering the truth, is telling the truth and acknowledging the truth." |
| Despite Denials, UWSA Owns Helicopters: Military, Business Sources Posted: 08 Aug 2013 05:33 AM PDT  A Z-9G helicopter mounting the TY-90 lightweight air-to-air missile. (Photo: http://china-defense.blogspot.com) CHIANG MAI, Thailand – Jane's Intelligence Review earlier disclosed that Burma's largest ethnic rebel group, the United Wa State Army (UWSA), received five helicopters from China. Both Beijing and the Wa rebels have dismissed this claim in recent months. However, according to several informed sources and leaked documents, it seems that the UWSA owns at least two helicopters. An ethnic Kachin military leader in the north Thai city of Chiang Mai told The Irrawaddy that he had seen two helicopters—but not helicopter gunships—at a UWSA base near UWSA headquarters in the Shan State town of Panghsang. "They are simple helicopters," said the military official. "They [the UWSA] will likely use them for transportation, as their southern unit [in south Shan State] is far away from their headquarters." He said the helicopters would likely be operated by China-trained Wa pilots who were sponsored by the UWSA to study at Chinese universities. Some media reports say the helicopters will be operated with help from individual Chinese operators from China's People's Liberation Army. Aung Myint, a spokesman for the UWSA in Rangoon, earlier told media that the claim by Jane's was groundless. He said no one in the UWSA could operate the helicopters. Quoting ethnic sources and government officials, the Jane's report said China "delivered several Mil Mi-17 'Hip' medium- transport helicopters armed with TY-90 air-to-air missiles to the Wa in late February and early March." Another well-informed source who runs a business in China—and is close to the Chinese business circle—told The Irrawaddy that the UWSA was capable of operating the helicopters because it had young officers who studied in China. He said the UWSA would never admit to owning the helicopters but wanted to be prepared for any potential attack by the Burmese government, which he said disproved of the rebel group's calls for an autonomous state. The UWSA reportedly has an estimated 20,000 well-equipped fighters and recruits modern weapons, including air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles as well as armored vehicles and tanks. Bertil Lintner, a Thailand-based Swedish veteran journalist who is familiar with UWSA affairs, said, "Two helicopters are supposed to be at a base near Pangwai [near Panghsang], and two are believed to be in Mong Pauk. Light tanks or armored vehicles are stored in Mong Pauk." The UWSA, which has some support from China, was shocked when the Burmese government launched air strikes near the Sino-Burma border against the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), an ethnic Kachin rebel group with which the UWSA has an informal alliance. Diplomatic sources said the offensive displeased Beijing because it pushed Kachin refugees into Chinese territory and disturbed border trade. As the Kyaukpyu pipeline from west Burma's Arakan State transports gas into China, concern has grown among Chinese authorities over instability between the Burmese government and ethnic armed groups. A Kachin rebel leader said Chinese authorities told him that they wanted to deploy troops to Kachin and Shan states to secure the gas pipeline as well as multi-million dollar hydropower plant projects. Due to instability on the Sino-Burma border, China has taken the unprecedented step of getting involved in several peace deals between the Burmese government and KIO leaders. Observers say China has acted like a double agent, dealing with the government and ethnic groups on the Sino-Burma border—and providing military hardware to both parties. The UWSA, which mainly relies on funding from the illicit drug trade, formerly sought military resources from Thailand. Due to financial connections with UWSA commander Wei Hsueh-kang, a drug kingpin, 11 individuals and 16 companies in Thailand were labeled as "specially designated nationals" and "blocked persons" by the US Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) in November 2005. Some observers say the UWSA likely continues to receive military hardware from Thailand but that the group's main partner is China, which is less likely to be influenced by the United States. Another foreign journalist who made his latest trip to the UWSA region in Shan State in 2010 said the Wa rebels were influenced by China. He referred to a "business faction" of Chinese-speaking Wa leaders who were interested in making money. The expatriate said that another faction, which he termed the "patriotic faction," wanted to open the Wa region and invite journalists for a media briefing, but that the business faction opposed this idea. Several representatives from the UWSA joined a recent conference of ethnic minority leaders in Chiang Mai, where they urged an ethnic alliance group known as the United Nationalities Federal Council (UNFC) to support their call for an autonomous state. The UWSA signed a ceasefire agreement with the former military regime in 1989 and renewed the agreement in late 2011. |
| In 1988, Talkin’ Bout a Revolution Posted: 08 Aug 2013 05:18 AM PDT  The student-led uprising of 1988—and the military crackdown that followed—left many questions unanswered, but that didn't stop activists, generals and prognosticators in Burma and abroad from adding their two cents about the country's future in the aftermath. Political jockeying and justifications for the brutal suppression were orders of the day, and a generation of student leaders, whether they knew it or not, were staring down the barrel of a 25-year struggle for democracy. The Irrawaddy has assembled a collection of quotes from 1988-89, when the fate of the Golden Land was anybody's guess.
 "The recent uprisings were good for the people, but we cannot yet say it will be directly beneficial to the revolutionaries."
—Gen Bo Mya, then president of the Karen National Union in Manerplaw on Aug. 12, 1988 [Asiaweek, Sept. 2, 1988]  "The only question is whether the new era will emerge peacefully in accordance with the will and wishes of the Burmese people, or whether it will be the product of anarchy and violence."
—US Congressman Stephen Solarz in early September 1988 [Asiaweek, Sept. 16, 1988]  "[Gen Ne Win] cannot oppose the consensus, what the whole country is demanding. I believe he is controlling the reins from the back, but that he has given in."
—Leading opposition figure Gen Tin Oo, Sept. 11, 1988 [Asiaweek, Sept. 23, 1988]  "A lifetime in politics does not appeal to me, but how long is a lifetime? Obviously, once you start a movement like this, you don't stop halfway and say, 'That's it, I've had enough.' You just stay there until it reaches a logical conclusion of some kind."
—Daw Aung San Suu Kyi on Sept. 25, 1988 [Asiaweek, Oct. 7, 1988]  "If I want to do a certain thing I do it at once, sometimes without consulting my comrades. But I always give them this chance: if they don't like what I do, I resign from the leadership. It they accept what I have done, they support me. In democracy that should be the way."
—Former Premier U Nu in early October 1988 [Asiaweek, Oct. 14, 1988]  "Burma as a whole is very peculiar. You know, nobody outside Burma can believe how such a tolerant people all of a sudden burst like atomic bombs. Burma is such a place. Especially Gen Ne Win's character. We don't know actually what is in his mind."
—Brig-Gen Aung Gyi in early October 1988 [Asiaweek, Oct. 21, 1988]  "Since the government announced a multiparty system [on Sept. 10], some 20 parties have popped up. Every leader has different ideas. This we regret very much."
—Student leader Min Ko Naing in Yangon in early October 1988 [Asiaweek, Oct. 28, 1988] "I'll always be with the people. I'll never die. Physically I might be dead, but many more Min Ko Naings would appear to take my place. As you know, Min Ko Naing can only conquer a bad king. If the ruler is good, we carry him on our shoulders." —Student leader Min Ko Naing in Yangon in early October 1988 [Asiaweek, Oct. 28, 1988] "Our armed struggle cannot get going quickly. We haven't enough money, food, medicine, and other requirements. Many students in the jungle have malaria." —Student leader Maung Maung Kyaw in Bangkok on Oct. 26, 1988 [Asiaweek, Nov. 11, 1989]  "I believe that I saved the country from an abyss. The country has come back from an abyss, and I saved the country, for the good of the people, according to the law."
—Snr-Gen Saw Maung on Jan. 18, 1989 [Asiaweek, Jan. 27, 1989] Following the Asiaweek interview with Snr-Gen Saw Maung: Pakhanthar: "Once the Asiaweek wrote only what was not true and so it may be said that on the whole it has made considerable progress." Chipathar: "I agree with you. Once this magazine acted as a mouthpiece of the insurgents and destructive elements and wrote news and articles in their favor and some called it 'Asia Weak' instead of Asiaweek and some even named it 'Asia Wicked'." —"Pakhanthar" and "Chipathar" engaging in a contrived "nation-building" dialogue in the main state organ, The Working People's Daily, on Feb. 15, 1989. |
| Timorese Pushback of Burmese Refugees Prompts Unease, Confusion Posted: 08 Aug 2013 03:39 AM PDT  More than 90 refugees are being held at the Makassar Immigration Detention Center on Indonesia's Sulawesi island after being pushed back from East Timor shores. (Photographer's name withheld) RANGOON — Confusion remains over the recent refusal by the East Timor government to allow a group of 95 refugees, many of whom are Burmese Rohingya, to stay in the country. The group, 99 in total including four crew members, landed in East Timor, also known as Timor-Leste, on June 30, before being escorted several days later to a nearby Indonesian island by Timorese officials. The refugees are now being held at the Makassar Immigration Detention Center on Indonesia's Sulawesi island. Vivian Tan, regional spokeswoman for the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR), said the East Timor government has not yet replied to its enquiries about the case, but clarified that not all of the 95 are Rohingya or Burmese. "The group seems to be a mix of people from Myanmar, Bangladesh and Indonesia," Tan told The Irrawaddy. "We are 73 Rohingya refugees, 47 men, 10 women and 16 children. Most of us fled directly from Burma and some from Malaysia," said Rafi Zaw Win, in an e-mail to an NGO working on Rohingya issues that was seen by The Irrawaddy. The man is part of the group currently being held in Makassar, some of whom appear to have Internet access and cellphone connections. An Australian international NGO worker who has visited the group at the Makassar IDC, but asked not to be named, told The Irrawaddy that "the conditions of the center are very difficult and it is overcrowded. I did not go inside, but was able to talk to women, children and men through the wired gates outside. The people that I spoke to were scared, confused and didn't understand their situation." Also raising concerns about the Dili government's handling of the case are Timorese NGOs, a group of which signed off on a July 26 letter to Timorese lawmakers—including Prime Minister Xanana Gusmao, a former political prisoner in Indonesia. The NGOs say they have not received a reply from the Timorese government and, to highlight the case, subsequently published an English translation of the original letter, which was written in Tetum, the main language in East Timor. Questions sent by The Irrawaddy to the prime minister's spokesman had not been replied to at time of writing. In the letter, the NGOs accuse the government—a signatory to the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees—of reneging on its obligations to the boat people. "Upon achieving independence for ourselves, we also acquired an obligation to provide solidarity to the people of other lands, who need our help as human beings," reads the letter to the government, which includes ministers who in the past were themselves refugees. The letter reminds the government of the terms of the country's constitution, referring to a section that reads: "The Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste shall grant political asylum, in accordance with the law, to foreigners persecuted as a result of their struggle for national and social liberation, defense of human rights, democracy and peace." The pushback has caught the attention of civil society groups outside of East Timor. "Please note that Timor-Leste is a party to the Refugee Convention and, despite this, they expelled asylum seekers," Chris Lewa, director of the Arakan Project, told The Irrawaddy The HAK Association, a Timorese human rights organization and one of the NGO signatories, said it tried to speak to the group while they were in East Timor, but were prevented from doing so by Timorese police. "Members of PNTL [Timorese police] informed the team that they had received orders from the Prime Minister, which prohibited all people from carrying out interviews or taking photos," the letter to the government read. Celestino Gusmao, researcher at La'o Hamutuk, a Dili-based development and economics research organization and one of the letter's signatories, told The Irrawaddy that the NGOs believe part of the reason for the government's actions was a lack of understanding of relevant laws and ensuing obligations. "We are using private channels to encourage the government to address this situation so that in the future such violations are not repeated," he said. And while the Timorese government has not replied to the UNHCR or to local civil society groups, Timorese Foreign Minister Jose Luis Guterres said the refugees did not apply for asylum in East Timor, according to Timorese newspaper reports. "On humanitarian grounds, we helped in the repair of the boat but none of them requested asylum to Timor-Leste. Then we escorted them to international waters and requested them to return to the place where they came from," said Guterres, who added that "if they had requested so, the governor would have done all the necessary action according to international conventions that we've ratified. The government and the people of East Timor have solidarity with those who are persecuted for political or religious reasons." But according to Rafi Zaw Win, the group requested asylum on July 1 after landing on Timorese shores, after an attempt to reach Darwin in Australia, 400 kilometers south of East Timor, was scuppered due to engine trouble. "On July 1, 2013, our boat came ashore in Island Bata village of East Timor and the villagers rescued and helped us and took us to their village's hall where we met Timorese police and I requested asylum to the police officers on behalf of 73 Burmese Rohingya refugees, but they told me that they could not consider our request for asylum in East Timor," he said. The Rohingya are a Muslim people living mostly in western Burma's Arakan State. They are widely described by human rights groups as one of the world's most persecuted minorities. Two bouts of sectarian violence in Arakan State between Muslims, including Rohingya, and Buddhist Arakanese in 2012 has left about 100,000 Rohingya in squalid temporary camps, with thousands more seeking to flee the region to Thailand, Malaysia and beyond. "We do believe that the government of Timor-Leste violated the rights of those Rohingya who came here, we didn't treat them as people, and sent them into international waters," Manuel Monteiro Fernandes, acting director at the HAK Association, told The Irrawaddy. |
| Can the Forces of ’88 Come to the Fore? Posted: 08 Aug 2013 01:11 AM PDT Twenty-five years on, are we now on the road to democracy that we hoped to attain through peaceful demonstrations on the streets in 1988? The answer, I think, is still not clear. It depends on all of us, the Burmese people. Of course, we have reached a political phase today that never seemed possible until a couple years ago, when the former military regime handed power to a quasi-civilian government. The country's nationwide uprising, known as the "Four Eights" democracy movement, is being commemorated this week, with the Silver Jubilee on Thursday. For three days, starting on Tuesday, activists from the 88 Generation Peace and Open Society have held a commemorative event, with leading members of ethnic armed groups, former political prisoners, social workers, scholars and many more people coming together to openly discuss once-taboo issues inside the country for the first time. We cannot deny that this marks an unprecedented step in the reform process. "For this anniversary of the 88 movement, it is quite significant that we can all reunite here again," said Ko Ko Gyi, a prominent leader of the 88 Uprising and a leading member of the 88 Generation Peace and Open Society. It's true. Before the reforms, I would have never been able to participate in an outspoken and thought-provoking discussion with Ko Ko Gyi, one of my inmates back in the 1990s at the notorious Insein Prison, and another close activist friend, Min Zin, as we did this week for an episode of the "Dateline Irrawaddy" program at my office in downtown Rangoon.  Kyaw Zwa Moe is editor (English Edition) of the Irrawaddy magazine. He can be reached at kyawzwa@irrawaddy.org. Ko Ko Gyi and I were both arrested in December 1991 after taking part in a student demonstration in Rangoon. I spent eight years in prison before my release, and he was freed 10 years after that. Min Zin and I, as high school students, organized political activities together in 1989. The last time we met in Rangoon was that year on July 19, the Martyrs' Day holiday, when the military forcibly dispersed our peaceful demonstration. "The 88 Uprising was a wide, colorful picture," Ko Ko Gyi said, visualizing the pro-democracy movement 25 years ago. Those who took part have since entered a diverse range of fields, as politicians, journalists, businesspeople, ethnic rebel leaders and even soldiers. "I'm in the political field and you're in the media sector, while Min Zin is pursuing a PhD," Ko Ko Gyi said during our roundtable discussion. Min Zin is a PhD student in political science at the University of California, Berkeley, where I also studied journalism years ago. We certainly feel fortunate to join this jubilee together with our former inmates and colleagues. But we also realize that we cannot achieve justice for many other friends who perished over the past two and a half decades in prison or at war in the jungle, fighting for their political beliefs. Justice must be an important part of this reform process, but it will depend on the willingness of former military generals and our own efforts. Ko Ko Gyi said that to truly promote reform, those who took part in the 1988 movement should collaborate and contribute to the rebuilding of the nation from each of their respective fields. "We have to admit that the country is going through the motions of reform. But we need to try harder to achieve the essence of reform," he said. "The 2008 Constitution and the 2010 elections were one sided, controlled by the former military regime. Certainly the current political situation is not what we expected. On those grounds, we are trying to make this process inclusive." Min Zin who is a contributor to The Irrawaddy and other international publications, including the Foreign Policy blog, thinks the playing field in Burma has never been fair. "Because wealth, power, institutions and so on in the nation have always been monopolized by the rulers and their close associates, the underdogs have faced a disadvantage," he said. "During the 88 demonstration, we 88 generation students received lunch boxes from people who donated with the expectation of achieving democracy. I don't think we have paid back the debt of those lunch boxes. "Twenty-five years later, I think our generation should pay back this debt and the next generation should reap the rewards. … As long as the military is involved in politics, there will be students and monks who get involved in politics. I think this should end, and we should try to achieve reconciliation in a genuine way." Min Zin urged people from all institutions, including the military, to practice their respective professions. In Burma, the military has been involved in politics since 1962, when Gen Ne Win took power, and its key role in politics has been guaranteed by the current 2008 Constitution. This is a major problem—and the reason why Burma has derailed. On the other hand, nobody can deny that the military is the main institution in this reform process. To bring about real democracy, Burma needs strong leadership. Our country has lacked capable leaders at critical junctures in the past, including when we gained independence from the British in 1948, after the national hero Gen Aung San was assassinated. Burma was missing a strong leader then, and we are in the same situation now. To attain national reconciliation, we need capable men and women who can narrow the gap between the military and civil society and also reduce ethnic conflicts. Twenty-five years have passed. Nothing concrete has been achieved. We find ourselves in a reform process, but one important question still lingers: Who will benefit? Burma is changing, but is it changing for all of us, Burma's people, or just for a select handful of the elite? |
| Hundreds Commemorate ’88 Uprising on Streets of Rangoon Posted: 08 Aug 2013 12:44 AM PDT  Students carry wreaths after marching near City Hall and Sule Pagoda in Rangoon, where many people were killed or injured during pro-democracy protests in 1988. (Photo: Steve Tickner / The Irrawaddy) RANGOON — Standing in front of the building where thousands were forced to run for their lives amid a hail of bullets 25 years ago, pro-democracy activists gathered again on Thursday to remember their fallen comrades. Under overcast skies on Thursday morning, nearly 100 people bearing wreaths descended upon an open space opposite Rangoon's City Hall to mark the silver jubilee of a nationwide pro-democracy movement that would ultimately cost more than 3,000 demonstrators their lives. "We are here today to honor our comrades who sacrificed their lives on this day, August 8, in 1988," said San Tint Kyaw, an organizer of the memorial event. Twenty-five years ago, normal life for most Burmese ground to a halt when people from all walks of life took to the streets in a protest known as the '88 Uprising, with participants demanding an end to the 26-year, single-party rule of dictator Ne Win. But a military crackdown on the thousands of protesters at Rangoon City Hall would turn the day's demonstrations into a night of historic infamy. "There was sea of people here on that day," recounted another organizer who survived the crackdown. "When the Army opened fire at night, there was total chaos as people ran for their lives." At 8am on Thursday, a crowd that included children in their school uniforms marched around Maha Bandoola Park in front of City Hall. Participants observed one minute's silence and laid four wreaths, each depicting the number 8, at the corner of the park in honor of those killed during the crackdown. "Our fallen heroes, we are proud of your sacrifice for our democratic cause," an organizer read out a message to their fallen comrades at the memorial event. "We vow here today that we will keep on fighting for the peace, democracy and human rights that we all long for." The nearly 30-minute memorial event concluded with prayers from leaders of the country's four major religions: Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam. Later on Thursday, an illegal demonstration saw hundreds of protestors march through the streets of Rangoon, under the stern gaze of law enforcement officials. Myint Kyi, a police officer in Lanmadaw Township, confronted demonstration leader and rights activist Ma Phyu, asking whether participants had permission to hold the march. In response, Ma Phyu said the marchers' peaceful protest was to honor comrades killed during the 1988 uprising. "Even U Aung Min [the government's chief peace negotiator] has recognized the uprising in 1988," Ma Phyu said. "It is the anniversary of the 1988 uprising and we did not feel the need to gain permission as it is just to commemorate by walking in the street." She said the protests in 1988 began on the streets and Thursday's demonstration by her group, made up of former political prisoners and other rights activists, was homage to those origins. Authorities have in the past charged rights activists who failed to receive permission for protest marches. The latest high-profile case was in March, involving a protest against fighting between government troops and ethnic rebels in Kachin State. Some peaceful activists were charged for holding the unpermitted demonstration. Ma Phyu said she did fear any repercussions that might arise from Thursday's march. The rights activists carried banners as they marched, drawing curious onlookers out of shops and onto balconies to observe the demonstration. Some bystanders offered applause in support of the protesters. The activists passed through the townships of Dagon, Lanmadaw, Ladar, Pabaetan and Kyaukthadar, with more and more people joining the march until the crowd reached Sule Pagoda downtown, where activists laid flowers for 1988's victims outside the grounds of Maha Bandoola Park. Some wore black T-shirts to reflect the somber nature of the commemoration, while others spoke of hopes that one day the military generals responsible for more than 3,000 deaths in 1988 might be brought to justice. "For me, it depends on if I have the power," said Win Cho, another leader of Thursday's march. "If I have it, I want to bring this case to justice when the country has a fair justice system." One woman clad in a black T-shirt said in front of City Hall that the military generals should publicly apologize for the brutality unleashed 25 years ago. "They still keep quiet about what they have done and they have not made any apology to the people. And they are still holding power in government. We do not want to see them [in power]," the woman said. |
| US Extends Ban on Gems Imports From Burma Posted: 07 Aug 2013 11:00 PM PDT  A mine site in Mogok, Kachin State, the center of Burma's gems industry. (Photo: The Irrawaddy) WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Wednesday extended a ban on imports of rubies and jade from Burma, reflecting worries about the powerful military's continuing involvement in the murky industry based in conflict-wracked border regions. Washington remains concerned about human rights abuses against ethnic minorities and the role of the army in Burma despite democratic reforms that have seen a shift from decades of authoritarian rule. The reforms have led to a dramatic improvement in US relations with the Southeast Asian nation, and the overall trend remains a positive one for the government of President Thein Sein. President Barack Obama issued Wednesday's executive order to extend the gems ban because wide-ranging sanctions legislation lapsed when it was up for renewal in late July. The original sponsor, senior Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, announced in May he would not seek to extend the 2003 legislation because of Burma's democratic progress. McConnell was for years one of the harshest critics in Congress of Burma's military rulers and a fervent supporter of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. The Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act he sponsored had imposed a broad ban on all imports from Burma. Obama waived its provisions in November other than on gems. Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said in a statement Wednesday that's part of the administration's efforts "to promote responsible trade and investment in support of Burma's reform process." Engaging Burma has been a rare area of agreement between Obama and McConnell, largely because of Suu Kyi's support for building relations with Thein Sein's reformist government. The Republican senator is also supportive of the administration's intent to gradually build ties between the US and Burma militaries. But other US lawmakers have pushed back against that, and had cautioned that allowing the 2003 sanctions legislation to lapse could allow "conflict gems" into America. Rhodes said it was maintaining the ban "due to continuing concerns, including with respect to labor and human rights." Kachin activists last month wrote to Obama and congressional leaders complaining that the Burma's central government retains control of ruby and jade mining concessions in Kachin and northern Shan State. Some 10,000 Kachin people have been displaced by fighting in the gem-rich area of Hpakant as Burma troops sought to secure control of gem mining interests, the activists said. Despite the US sanctions—that are backed by the threat of stiff fines and even jail terms for violators—gems remain an important source of revenue for the impoverished nation. Burma is one of the world's biggest producers of jade and by some estimates, source of up to 90 percent of its rubies. Gems auctions held under government auspices yield hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Burma sellers say the sanctions have little impact on their business because they rely on Chinese and Thai gem merchants, who are the major buyers. The US restrictions also prohibit the import of Burma gems that have been processed in other countries. US officials say Burma's gems industry lacks transparency, and activists say working conditions in its remote mines are notoriously harsh. For the US ban to be lifted, Washington would likely be seeking more openness on ownership structures, revenues and how workers are treated. While the Obama administration moved swiftly in the past year to allow new U.S. trade and investment in Burma, the United States still forbids its nationals from investing in military-owned companies. Several dozen Burma entities are also blacklisted because of ties to the former military junta, the drug trade and arms dealing with North Korea. |
| A Rocky Road as India Migrates to the Cities Posted: 07 Aug 2013 10:52 PM PDT  Farmers and members of India's rural communities participate in a march on the national highway in the central Indian state of Madhya Pradesh on Oct. 5, 2012, demanding the central government to announce a national land reforms policy. (Photo: Reuters / Mansi Thapliyal) Dharigaon, a tiny village in the northern state of Uttaranchal, stretches no more than a kilometer from start to finish. Though hauntingly beautiful—surrounded by misty meadows and the contiguous Garhwal hills—it is equipped with only rudimentary infrastructure: a ramshackle water pump, a dirty public toilet and a primary school teaching up to standard five. The main occupation of the men folk is agriculture and cutting forest wood which barely sustains families. Unsurprisingly, Dharigaon's population (about 1,000 people) has been dwindling steadily over the last decade. Fed up with the village's lack of development, its residents have been migrating to nearby cities like Dehradun, Muzaffarnagar, Saharanpur, Moradabad and Srinagar. Kisan Ram has been contemplating migration too. "Most people in Dharigaon pray for an opportunity to leave the village and live in the city," the poverty-stricken farmer said in an interview. "A city is considered a gateway to innumerable facilities, benefits and opportunities that open up new career avenues and prospects for a bigger and better lifestyle. Alas, our village offers no such promise." Dharigaon isn't alone. Village after Indian village this correspondent traveled to was characterized by a toxic cocktail of official apathy, lack of development and governmental neglect. Mahatma Gandhi once said: "the soul of India lies in her villages." However, that "soul" now seems haunted by non-existent roads, lack of sanitation, schools without teachers, hospitals sans doctors and beds and a lack of community welfare centers. India's cities are increasingly chaotic as these millions of rural migrants seek out a better life, with seemingly little planning on the part of government leaders, unlike China. According to a 2010 report by the McKinsey consulting company, "While India has barely paid attention to its urban transformation, China has developed a set of internally consistent practices across every element of the urbanization operating model: funding, governance, planning, sectoral policies, and the shape, or pattern, of urbanization, both across the nation as a whole and within cities themselves. At the same time, the villages continue to get short shrift. There is a dangerous chasm between "inland" India—the urban, largely stable and increasingly prosperous part—and much of its rural outland, a neglected, poorer, lawless place. "This is what divides the country into two halves; the primitive, agrarian Bharat [the Hindi name for India] and the modern, progressive 'India,'" said Dr Swati Prabhakar, an urban historian who is currently working on a book "India Vs Bharat." Is it any wonder then that from 1951, when India's urban population was 62 million, comprising 17 percent of the country's total, it had shot up to 377 million, or 31 percent by 2011? By 2025, demographers reckon 42.5 percent of the country's population will be urban dwellers. Faced with the erosion of their traditional way of life, caused by economic and social distress in the village, rural folk are fleeing to the cities. Migration Mess Dr Ashish Bose of the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi University, who has written more than 20 books on India's population and development, theorizes that the policy of the government to "simply discourage migration to the city without taking care of the rural population will not work." In an interview, Bose argues that this movement will have another fallout—slackening in farming as a livelihood due to shrinking land. "As land is sold off for non-agricultural purposes to build housing colonies and more importantly for industries which acquire large tracts of land from villagers to setup new industries, poor villages are deprived of land they own so that big industrialists can benefit. The compensation paid is never adequate. In the process, the poor villages become poorer." Analysts say that like India, China too has a huge population, a dependence on agriculture and a trend toward urban migration. But while China has far better mechanisms in place to attempt to ensure a seamless transition, India has continued to falter. For instance, while Beijing follows a registration system and strict control over migration, India sticks to the antiquated tradition of conducting census. In China, there is a systematic and continuous study and redress of urban problems in their manifestations unlike India. The rural migration to cities in India has other pitfalls—uneven economic growth which has birthed a new phenomenon—what economists call "in-betweener" towns. These census towns are characterized by their "in-betweenness"—part city, part village, posing fresh challenges for policy makers due to their skewed development pattern. The urban challenge in India, planners say, is usually addressed in policy circles by focusing on cities alone. In the process, the rural backdrop against which urbanization is taking place is largely ignored. The Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), a mammoth city-modernization scheme launched in 2005, envisages investment of over US$20 billion over the next decade to bring phased improvement in their civic service levels. But despite this colossal investment, urban India continues to grow in a haphazard fashion contributing to the increase of slums and degradation of cities. Narendar Pani, an urban affairs specialist, writes in an essay that though a sharp focus on cities alone may be acceptable in the developed world where the process of urbanization stabilized long ago, and the rural areas account for a small share of the population, in India the process of urbanization is still far from complete and therefore requires out-of-the-box thinking. Rural Exodus One of the greatest challenges for urban planning in the cities of developing countries, Pani says, is that local governments do not have the ability to track population growth together with basic infrastructure for the community. On the other hand, the growing exodus of rural population to cities ends up creating a great congestion making city life even more difficult. "We need to create a minimum of basic conditions for coexistence in small urban centers to prevent people from migrating to all major urban centers," adds Prabhakar. Is this really possible? Can India effectively stop the migration of people from rural areas to towns and cities, especially in a democratic setup where one is free to live and work anywhere in the country? This migration, planners fear, may never cease, considering the sorry state of affairs in Indian villages where the benefits of social welfare measures aren't percolating down to the grassroots. MGNREGA, a $73-billion rural employment guarantee scheme that provides a legal guarantee for at least 100 days of employment in every financial year to adult members of any household willing to do public work-related unskilled manual work at the statutory minimum wage of US$2.20 per day at 2009 prices, has come in for a lot of criticism. The Comptroller and Auditor General's 2012 report on MNREGA reveals that the scheme has failed to ensure the primary objective of livelihood security to the rural population by providing 100 days of guaranteed employment. This, concludes the report, is due to improper and ineffective planning without any strategy to create long-term employment generation opportunities. The China Example China's urbanization ratio went from 20 percent in 1980 to 52 percent last year. However, unlike India, the country is seeking to prepare for this shift. Beijing's new urbanization plan is sharply focused on removing institutional barriers to rural migrant workers living permanently in cities. Beijing is also working on a pilot program of land reform to make the shift as seamless as possible. Encouraging migrant workers to settle in cities, Chinese planners believe, will help turn them into urban spenders which would in turn drive private consumption. Meanwhile, access to better welfare would lure more surplus farmers to urban sectors, especially considering the large rural-urban income gap. About 100 million people, it is estimated, will leave China's villages for cities in the next decade, hopefully providing a new source of sustained growth in labor productivity and, therefore, the economy. Deb Mukherjee, an urbanization expert at a Delhi-based think-tank, compares the intellectual discourse on cities between India and China. "We need to think through our problems and find our own solutions," says the analyst. "There are a lot of people in India trying to change cities but very few who are trying to understand them unlike China where they change cities to fit their understanding." |
| Church Says Sri Lankan Military Killed Protesters Posted: 07 Aug 2013 10:46 PM PDT  Sri Lankan army snipers in ghillie suits march during the War Victory parade in Colombo May 18, 2013. (Photo: Reuters) WELIWERIYA, Sri Lanka — Sri Lanka's Roman Catholic church accused the military on Wednesday of shooting unarmed protesters and desecrating a church by entering it with weapons and attacking people who sought refuge during a violent crackdown on a demonstration last week. Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith made the accusations in a message read at the funeral service of an 18-year-old high school student who was among three people who were fatally shot by the military last Thursday. "We were shaken by this tragic loss of three innocent young lives … as a result of acts of provocation and excessive use of force—assaulting unarmed people and shooting at them," Ranjith said. He said it was "unacceptable and unjustifiable" to have attacked civilians who sought refuge inside St. Anthony's Church during the military crackdown. "Entering a holy church of the Catholics with arms and behaving in an inhuman manner has distressed the people and we would like to stress that we were shocked and saddened at the desecration of the venerated church," he said. Residents of Weliweriya town, northeast of Colombo, and surrounding villages were protesting a factory's discharges of chemical waste that were polluting drinking water. Witnesses and television reports said the military shot at the protesters and attacked them with poles, killing two teenagers and a 29-year-old man. They said at least 15 others were injured. Journalists said the military attacked them and damaged cameras before turning on the protesters. Government ministers said the military was acting in self-defense because protesters threw gasoline bombs and shot at them at the instigation of a third party bent on discrediting the government. Government officials often accuse unnamed third parties or foreign governments of trying to instigate people to unseat the government. President Mahinda Rajapaksa has announced compensation for the victims. But Ranjith said only an independent investigation, prosecution of those responsible, and "democratic behavior" by the authorities during future public protests would be an appropriate tribute to the victims. Including last week's deaths, five people have died in the past two years after police or soldiers fired at protesters. |
| Thai Lawmakers Start Debate on Amnesty Bill Posted: 07 Aug 2013 10:40 PM PDT  An anti-government protester wearing a mask painted in the colors of the Thai national flag looks on as riot police officers stand guard outside the parliament in Bangkok on Aug. 7, 2013. (Photo: Reuters / Athit Perawongmetha) BANGKOK — Thai lawmakers on Wednesday began debating a highly contentious bill to give amnesty for political offenders, which threatens to revive the often violent social unrest that plagued Thailand for years. The government-sponsored bill proposes a blanket amnesty to all those charged with crimes related to Thailand's various upheavals since Sept. 19, 2006, the day a military coup ousted then Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra while he was on an overseas trip. Even though the bill excludes Thaksin—Thailand's most divisive figure in recent history—it is bitterly opposed by the opposition, who see it as an underhanded attempt to bring him back home without fear of being jailed for a 2008 conviction. Activists also oppose the bill, saying it would let human rights abusers off the hook for their actions while suppressing past public protests. Thaksin's sister Yingluck Shinawatra is now the prime minister and the government is packed with his loyalists. The opposition fears that the bill, if passed, would give Yingluck an opportunity to look for loopholes in the law to facilitate her brother's return. About 2,000 opposition Democrat Party supporters gathered outside Parliament before the debate began Wednesday, but didn't carry out their threat to break through a police cordon around the building, easing fears of violence. Frenzied headlines in the local press for the past week had been touting "rising tension" and the possibility of a "major clash." To many, Thaksin was a savior of the poor who challenged Bangkok's traditional ruling elite by consistently winning elections handsomely, thanks to his populist policies. But his opponents see him as a corrupt businessman who enriched himself, and was not respectful enough of the country's revered monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej. His troubles began in 2006 when the military ousted him after increasingly large demonstrations called for his ouster. In 2008, even though his allies had temporarily taken back control of government, he was sentenced in absentia to two years in jail on a conflict of interest charge, which he would have to serve if he returns. Also in 2008, Thaksin's opponents, who called themselves the "yellow shirts," occupied the prime minister's offices for about three months and Bangkok's two airports for a week. In 2010, about 90 people were killed when Thaksin's supporters, the "red shirts," occupied part of downtown Bangkok for around two months before being swept away by the army. Although the government has a majority in the lower house, it is sensitive to the potential of social unrest if Thaksin gets an amnesty. An earlier parliamentary effort that could have led to a pardon for Thaksin was derailed by courts. Human rights advocates also say an amnesty would provide impunity for wrongdoers as it covers the 2010 period when the bloody military crackdown ended the "red shirt" protests. The prime minister at the time, Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, is facing charges of murder in connection with the crackdown, though his case has not yet reached the court. Cecile Pouilly, spokeswoman for the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, said Tuesday in Geneva that the bill could pardon people involved in abuses during the 2010 crackdown on anti-government protesters. She told reporters the Thai government must ensure any amnesty measure "excludes those who are responsible for human rights violations and to take steps to prosecute perpetrators of such violations." |
