Refugees too distrustful of government to go home

Refugees too distrustful of government to go home

Thursday, 23 May 2013 17:39 KP

Following a series of attack on Shan State Army (SSA) Task Force 701 base on Sino-Burma border by the Burma Army two weeks ago, which sent thousands of refugees to China, although the fight was over, people are still fearful to return home as they distrust the army, said local news sources from Namkham.

Refugees stranding at a Sino-Burma border

“People return to their homes in day time, but dare not spend the night, so in the evening they cross back to China for rest. Let alone the people who live on the other side of the Mao (Shwe) River, even for people in the town of Namkham, it is a nightmare at night. Bomb blasts and gun fires would occur here and there. Moreover, Burma Army is also reinforcing its troops in the area with troops from Mandalay. This impact on the people’s life and they are suffering mentally,” said Sai Ai Mon, a member of Shan Nationalities Democratic Party (SNDP) Namkham branch.

It has been reported that the commander of Burma Army’s area command met with the refugees and unsuccessfully persuaded them to return home.

Meanwhile, the Burma Army is also reinforcing its troops in the Loi Hohso area bordering between Namkham Township and Kachin State, which has sent people from Wan Sawn, Kunkeng, Kawng Nawng, Samtan, Wanmai, Hinlong further 6 villages to Xiao Yun Pan village in China, added local sources.

Related to the above news sources, SHAN has reached out to the SSA Task Force 701 commander Lt-Col Zawm Mong who said, “As we are relocated between east and west of Kachin Independence Army, if the Burma Army decides to use force, they [Burma Army] will first encounter the KIA troops either from east or west. It is not yet clear if the Burma Army will attack any time soon. On the other hand, KIO and Burma Army are preparing for a peace talk. The army may not want to put the peace talk at risk.”

Receiving bags of rice donated by supporters

Meanwhile Sai Ai Mon said 2 Shan political parties from Namkham are actively joining hands to get support and relief aid to the refugees for their daily survival.

“Shan Nationalities Democratic Party (SNDP) and Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD) are collecting rice, cooking oil, salt, medicine, clothing and other utensils in the town. Those supplies will be delivered to the refugees on 24 May. Burma Army is also said to have distributed rice 5 pey (16 liters) per family to some villages, which were seized from SSA Task Force base. And 1 bag (60 liters) of rice per household are also being distributed through the Border and Rural Development Program. The government even has promised to repair the houses which were destroyed during the fighting. People say, many of the houses were destroyed after the attacks. However, whatever the government is trying to amend and heal the wounds by this kind of support, people will not believe them”.

Similarly, young people from Muse also have been collecting donations from the town, said a young man from Muse.

“Since 13 May, we have been visiting door-to-door toke-su (fundraising) for the refugees in Muse. People are generously offering donations. Within 5 days, we have raised 2 million Kyat ($2,200). We have already delivered 12 bags of rice to the refugees. Now we are collecting the funds. Although the army has told the refugees that now they can return home, people will do so only if there is a certain organization that can give them a guarantee for their safety. Some houses have been looted in which they lost between $ 2,000–$ 3,000. Some also said to have lost national identification (ID) cards. Some people complain the loss of ID cards in tears,” said a Muse native Ai Sai.

Due to the attack on SSA Task Force base 701 in Namkham Township on Sino-Burma border by a 400-strong force under the control of Military Operations Command #16, people from Nawng Ma and other villages in the region have fled to China for their safety at the time of reporting.

Credited to SHAN

Testing Time for Myanmar

Testing Time for Myanmar

Monday, 01 April 2013 17:25 Soe Myint (Editor-in-Chief, Mizzima)

Recent riots in Meiktila and other parts of central Myanmar once again show that the country is passing through a testing time. The stakeholders—be it the armed forces, the opposition democracy activists or government officials—are each facing challenges in handling the recent communal and/or religious conflict.

Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and President Thein Sein are shown in an earlier meeting, in a file photo. Photo: MRTV

If one wants to understand why such communal and religious riots broke out in Myanmar so soon after the country opened up, there are certain underlying factors that need to be looked at.

Firstly is the fact that the majority of people in Myanmar are Buddhists and very religious (in a good sense) and they want to practice their faith publicly. However, there are, as in every society, both national extremists and religious extremists who want to exploit the transition of the country to their advantage and create space for themselves in this transitional period. This is equally true for opposition parties, businesspeople, armed ethnic groups, the military, and even the private media.

After decades of repressive military rule and living in a closed society, cut off from the rest of the world, people want to exercise their new-found freedom. This is the first time that they can target the establishment after harboring grievances for so long. The public has high expectations from the democratic changes underway in Myanmar.

In many ways, the anti-Muslim sentiment being exploited and led by certain factions of Buddhist monks is a way of expressing anti-establishment feelings. Many monks are still angry from the way the military brutally cracked down on their peaceful protests in 2007 and the recent mis-handling (another violent crackdown) of the Latpadaung copper mine protest by the police.

Another factor is a lack of education among some people, combined with the economic challenges, means people are more easily provoked.

The government is not sure (or at least it was not sure) of how to handle this kind of riot in a civilian way. The government is learning and it needs the support from its political alliances and its own citizens.

Yes, there are certain rogue elements within the establishment who are extreme nationalists or want to use it for their own benefit or specific political purposes, but the government in general and security forces are wary of how to handle such riots. In the past, riots like this were met with violent crackdowns and armed responses. The reaction was the same in Rakhine State last year. But the government realized that this was not the right way to deal with that kind of situation.

They are also aware that the international community and media are watching events in Myanmar closely. But it is not the role of the media to create what they call “fundamentalists”.

Condemnation of certain factions is not the answer or solution. One should not lose sight of the fact that the country is in transition under the framework of national reconciliation. Whatever we do, we should try to focus on not derailing the country and its stakeholders from the path of national reconciliation.

It is easy to condemn an event or a particular section of society, but it is difficult to bring everyone together on a path that moves forward. If we lose sight of the path of national reconciliation, it will likely take many years for Myanmar to reach the current level of changes or reforms.

In every transition, there are challenges and risks as well as opportunities. We should try to minimize the risks and challenges while taking maximum possible opportunities for the betterment of the society and country. This is easier said than done.

Of course, we should say outright that Myanmar should not provide a space for religious and racial fundamentalists. We should say that security forces should not be biased and should be professional in handling any riots in the country. We should say that there should not be a space for any sort of discrimination in Myanmar. The people of Myanmar accept that the country is not monolithic but it is a multi-linguistic, multi-ethnic and multi-religious society. The majority have to respect the minority.

But it is incomplete if we do not try to understand the root of the problems. It will not be complete if we are not consistent and focused to move along the path the stakeholders have agreed to follow: national reconciliation. These problems have existed in the country for a long time and will likely continue to do so for some time. They should be addressed over time and consistently with continuity.

Contrary to many people’s criticism for her “inaction”, I believe Daw Aung San Suu Kyi knows clearly that the country should be moving forward within the frame of this national reconciliation. This is what she is doing and this is the example that she is attempting to set for the people of Myanmar.

One should also recognize certain realities in the country. The present government is a quasi-civilian government that came to power not by a free and fair election but by keeping a strong opposition in jail with a one-sided election. Many of the leaders of the present government were former soldiers. The present constitution, that was adopted forcibly by the previous military regime just a few days after the country was hit by Cyclone Nargis in 2008, empowers the military with certain privileged rights such as a reserved quota of 25 percent of seats in parliament, appointments in certain important ministries, such as Home and Defense, as well as a right to return to military rule in certain situations.

The present constitution bars Daw Aung San Suu Kyi (having been married to a British man and having sons who are foreign citizens) to become Myanmar's President even if her party wins the majority of seats in any given election. The opposition political parties including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy are still very much in need of building as political institutions after years of clamp-down by the previous military regimes. Issues like capacity building and professionalism are in urgent need across almost every sector and on every level.

There are definitely many individuals within and outside the government who are trying hard to deal with such challenges and making efforts so that the country’s democratic reforms continue steadfastly and steadily. We should encourage such efforts. We should not forget that Myanmar was under a very tightly-controlled system and under repressive military regimes for decades. It takes time to evolve from that for everyone, every stakeholder—the administrators, the armed forces, the political parties, civil society groups, the media, etc.

But there are clear signs and visible actions that many stakeholders are making efforts to come out of those Dark Ages.

Here, we should be very careful of how the international community reacts or intervenes in the internal affairs of Myanmar, especially during this trying transitional period. They should offer a helping hand to deal with such challenges rather than setting “universal standards” for Myanmar and asking the country and its people to follow such “standards”.

It is also a testing time for the international community to understand and learn how to support Myanmar and its people in this transition to democracy. Myanmar should be given space to manage the transition with the assistance and support from well-wishers.

Myanmar has seen many positive changes in a very short period. It is important to ensure that they are sustainable and successful in the long term. 

 

Credited to Mizzima

The Burmese Army targets the Shan troops

The Burmese Army targets the Shan troops

Jai Lert Tai

09 May 2013

The Burmese troops launched an fierce attack on the Shan troops on the Shan-China border since this morning. The fights are still going on at the time of reporting.

According to the local source in Nam Kham, northern Shan  State, "Local villagers from Nawng Ma and Nawng Kham fled to China border. Some fled to Nam Kham for shelters."

Reportedly, there were around 800 villagers fled from the fighting and taking refuge in China. The Chinese authorities also were seen on the border after the shooting broke out. According to the local source, the Burmese Army used artillery to pound the SSA bases. 

The incident took place after four Burman civilians who believed to disappear into the village. After the disappearance of the Burman civilians, the Burmese Army asked the SSA to return them which SSA-S claimed to have no knowledge of their whereabouts. 

After that, the Burmese made a checking on SSA's bases and SSA allowed the Burmese Army to clarify their allegations. However, after the checking, the Burmese Army burned down the camps which angered the armed Shan fighters. 

According to the local source, "It is a shame to SSA for seeing their camps burning down which they could not do anything." The incident sparked anger for the SSA. Again, they were told to calm down by their commanders." 

However, the Burmese deployed around 300 troops to raid the whole base of SSA in Nawng Ma today (09 May). Both sides opened fire. As a result, 9 were killed and 8 were wounded on the Burmese Army side whilst SSA lost one fighter and 2 were wounded.

According to a Burmese political analyst, "The Burmese Army does not want peace. The military campaigns against the ethnic armed groups damaged the reputation of the reformed Thein Sein government. The government promotes peace but its commanders are war-hungers. They are too concerned to lose power to the reformed government. The only thing they would survive is waging war or creating wars. Wars would only keep them survive."

However, a border observer disagreed, "If the government can't control its troops and they are powerless. It is another block that the government must control its own troops. If not, how could the ethnic armed groups trust the so-called trust building process of the government?"

He added, "The Burmese government's main objective behind the ceasefire was ensure that EU and US lift sanction on their military personals and business partners. The signals of ceasefire, participation of Daw Su in the parliament were the keys for the EU and US to lift sanction. Of course, the release of some political prisoners a big bonus for Thein Sein to walk proudly in the international community." 

Credited to ShanExpress

Do you want me to trust you?

Do you want me to trust you?

Jai Lert Tai
28 Nov 2012 (Republish)

In 1947, a Barmar stranger came to my native town, Pang Long. He asked me to marry him. He seemed to be sincere. Yes, I agreed to do so even I really did not understand his culture and language. He convinced me to trust him by giving promises which I have never dreamed of before. He said, I would gain more freedom than I used to live under the British rule. Moreover, he promised that I would be the president.

I was amused and happy with his sincere intention. To ensure that I would not be abused, bullied or deceive by him, I proposed for a conditional wedding agreement. Our conditions are; no violence, be a good father and mother, regular incomes for the family wellbeing and run our houses with mutual respect, equal share and equal responsibility (one kyat for Barmar and one kyat for Shan). If the agreement is broken, we would go separately. He even told me, to trust him and live with him for ten years, if I am not happy, I can divorce.

I remember well that we married in 1947 almost over 60 years ago.

It was just a few years after we married. He came home and beat me. At first, I thought he was stressed from his work. And I forgave him even he gave me a blood running nose and a black eye on that day. The next two days, he came to my compound with his bulldogs and chased after my children. He beat my children. Some of my kids were fallen down and killed. Worse than that, he ordered me to do his work. He dig gold, rubies in my farm, cut my teakwood and sold it. And he even rent some of my farm to his foreign friend without asking for my permission. When I ask for some money, he said, it was his money.

I had no time to send my children to school because I have to work for him days and nights. He ran into my farm whenever he wanted, he beat me whenever he liked. It was 10 years. I said “Enough is enough”. I proposed for a new rule of running house. I asked for federal equal power. He accused me of trying to make a divorce and he sent many more of his bulldogs to bark, bite at my family members in my own compound.

For my children, for my land, I had to fight him because I am not his slave! I hate him for breaking promises. I hate myself for trusting him. Our neighbors are watching him. They know he is irresponsible and a bad father. So they criticize him by sending protest letters and some stop trading with him. His family members do not like his doings and how he runs the family business.

More than 60 years, we fought over our differences. He realized, he can’t beat me because I would defend and fight back in whatever I have in hands (Even I know he is a devil and too strong to beat). Now he wants to talk. He is changed! He surprised me and our neighbors. They started to praise him. They even forget how badly he has treated me. They forget that he gave me a running nose, ruin my house and beautiful garden and let his bulldogs chased over my children.

Now, he asks me to trust him again. My stranger husband, please tell me, are you serious of building a new house? What kind of house are you offering me? In our new house, can I send my children for a Shan school? Can I build a Shan university? Can my family have the right to run the business? Will you promise to take your dogs back to your home? Can I use my language as one of the official languages in my own house? Moreover, you even forget to apologize for what you did to me. If you are sincere to ask me to trust again, I believe I deserve a proper apology from you at least.

Credited to ShanExpress