Nuclear Research in the Union of Myanmar « ေကတုမတီ
Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Union of Myanmar on cooperation in the construction of the Centre for Nuclear Research in the Union of Myanmar
The Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Union of Myanmar, hereinafter referred to as the Parties,
on the basis of the friendly relations existing between the two States, on the basis of the friendly relations existing between the two States,
Taking into account the Joint Declaration on the foundations of friendly relations between the Russian Federation and the Union of Myanmar from July 3, 2000, Taking into account the Joint Declaration on the foundations of friendly relations between the Russian Federation and the Union of Myanmar from July 3, 2000,
Recognizing the fact that both States are members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of July 1, 1968, Recognizing the fact that both States are members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968,
Seeking to further expand and deepen mutually beneficial economic and scientific-technical relations between the Russian Federation and the Union of Myanmar on the basis of equality, non-interference in internal affairs and full respect for national dignity and sovereignty of both nations, Seeking to further expand and deepen mutually beneficial economic and scientific - technical relations between the Russian Federation and the Union of Myanmar on the basis of equality, non-interference in internal affairs and full respect for national dignity and sovereignty of both nations,
Convinced that the expansion of cooperation between the two nations in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy contributes to the further development of relations of friendship and mutual understanding between them, Convinced that the expansion of cooperation between the two nations in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy contributes to the further development of relations of friendship and mutual understanding between them,
Have agreed as follows: Have agreed as follows:
Article 1 of Article 1
The Parties, through the appropriate Russian and Myanmar organizations cooperate in the design and construction on the territory of the Union of Myanmar Centre for Nuclear Research (hereafter - Center), composed of: The Parties, through the appropriate Russian and Myanmar organizations cooperate in the design and construction on the territory of the Union of Myanmar Centre for Nuclear Research (hereafter - Centre) consisting of:
research nuclear reactor basin type of thermal capacity of 10 MW using light water as coolant and retarder, as well as nuclear fuel enrichment to 20 percent uranium-235; research nuclear reactor basin type of thermal capacity of 10 MW using light water as coolant and retarder, as well as nuclear fuel enrichment to 20 percent uranium-235;
activation analysis laboratory; activation analysis laboratory;
laboratories for the production of medical isotopes; laboratories for the production of medical isotopes;
Installation on nuclear doping silicon, as well as the buildings and facilities engineering support, including the installation of radioactive wastes and their disposal item. Installation on nuclear doping silicon, as well as the buildings and facilities engineering support, including the installation of radioactive wastes and their disposal item.
Article 2 of Article 2
In order to implement the provisions of Article 1 of this Agreement Russian organizations: In order to implement the provisions of Article 1 of this Agreement Russian organizations:
developing a draft Centre; developing a draft Centre;
providing technical assistance in carrying out works on selecting sites for the construction of the Centre and exploration work at the chosen site; providing technical assistance in carrying out works on selecting sites for the construction of the Centre and exploration work at the chosen site;
supply equipment and materials necessary for construction of the Centre and its entry into service; supply equipment and materials necessary for construction of the Centre and its entry into service;
ensure the supply of fuel in the form of ready-complete fuel assemblies and regulators. ensure the supply of fuel in the form of ready-complete fuel assemblies and regulators.
During the entire period of operation of the Centre Russian organizations: During the entire period of operation of the Centre Russian organizations:
perform work on the installation, Commissioning and start up to the main production equipment Centre; perform work on the installation, Commissioning and start up to the main production equipment Centre;
assist in the preparation of specialists for the operation of the Myanmar key technological installations Centre; assist in the preparation of specialists for the operation of the Myanmar key technological installations Centre;
supply spare parts for the operation of the reactor and other installations Centre. supply spare parts for the operation of the reactor and other installations Centre.
Article 3 of Article 3
In order to implement the cooperation provided for by this Agreement, the Myanmar forces and their organizations at their own expense, provide timely: In order to implement the cooperation provided for by this Agreement, the Myanmar forces and their organizations at their own expense, provide a timely manner:
siting for the construction of the Centre and conducting engineering and geological surveys on the selected site; siting for the construction of the Centre and conducting engineering and geological surveys on the selected site;
the transfer of Russian institutions baseline data necessary for carrying out project works; the transfer of Russian institutions baseline data necessary for carrying out project works;
implementation of all construction work using their own materials; implementation of all construction work using their own materials;
Work on installation, Commissioning and putting into operation a set of engineering equipment Centre, except for the installation of radioactive wastes and their disposal item; Work on installation, Commissioning and putting into operation a set of engineering equipment Centre, except for the installation of radioactive wastes and their disposal item;
unloading, storage and delivery of Russian organizations supplied equipment and materials from the ports of the Union of Myanmar to the site of construction of the Centre; unloading, storage and delivery of Russian organizations supplied equipment and materials from the ports of the Union of Myanmar to the site of construction of the Centre;
the supply of electricity and drinking water quality throughout the run-time construction and installation works and for the further exploitation of the Centre as well as the construction of sewerage and sewage treatment facilities; the supply of electricity and drinking water quality throughout the run-time construction and installation works and for the further exploitation of the Centre as well as the construction of sewerage and sewage treatment facilities;
necessary conditions for living and working professionals seconded from the Russian Federation to carry out the works. necessary conditions for living and working professionals seconded from the Russian Federation to carry out the works.
Article 4 of Article 4
Moving expenses Russian organizations related to the activities provided for in Article 2 of this Agreement, shall Myanmanskoy Party in freely convertible currency as the supplies, works and services in the manner determined by treaties between authorized organizations. Moving expenses Russian organizations related to the activities provided for in Article 2 of this Agreement, shall Myanmanskoy Party in freely convertible currency as the supplies, works and services in the manner determined by treaties between authorized organizations.
Article 5 of Article 5
For the implementation of this Agreement, the Parties shall designate an executive bodies: For the implementation of this Agreement, the Parties shall designate an executive bodies:
with the Russian side - the Russian Federation Ministry of Atomic Energy; with the Russian side - the Russian Federation Ministry of Atomic Energy;
with Myanmanskoy Party - The Ministry of Science and Technology of the Union of Myanmar. with Myanmanskoy Party - The Ministry of Science and Technology of the Union of Myanmar.
The executive bodies authorized to drive the organization to carry out cooperation within the framework of this Agreement. The executive bodies authorized to drive the organization to carry out cooperation within the framework of this Agreement.
Article 6 of Article 6
The activities of Russian organizations in Myanmar and under this Agreement shall be in accordance with the concluded agreements, which define the content, volume, time-frame for implementation, cost, payment terms and other necessary facilities. The activities of Russian organizations in Myanmar and under this Agreement shall be in accordance with the concluded agreements, which define the content, volume, time-frame for implementation, cost, payment terms and other necessary facilities.
Article 7 of Article 7
1. In accordance with this Agreement shall not exchange information containing state secrets Russian Federation and the Union of Myanmar. In accordance with this Agreement shall not exchange information containing state secrets Russian Federation and the Union of Myanmar.
2. The information transmitted in accordance with this Agreement or created as a result of its implementation and to review any of the parties as confidential information or proprietary information limited distribution, clearly defined and designated as such. The information transmitted in accordance with this Agreement or created as a result of its implementation and to review any of the parties as confidential information or proprietary information limited distribution, clearly defined and designated as such.
3. The treatment of confidential information is in conformity with the law of the State Party receiving such information, and this information is not disclosed and are not transferred to a third party without the written permission of the Party transmitting such information. The treatment of confidential information is in conformity with the law of the State Party receiving such information, and this information is not disclosed and are not transferred to a third party without the written permission of the Party transmitting such information.
In accordance with Russian legislation with that information be treated as proprietary information with limited distribution. In accordance with Russian legislation with that information be treated as proprietary information with limited distribution. Such information is given adequate protection. Such information is given adequate protection.
In accordance with the laws of the Union of Myanmar to such information be treated as proprietary information with limited distribution. In accordance with the laws of the Union of Myanmar to such information be treated as proprietary information with limited distribution. Such information is given adequate protection. Such information is given adequate protection.
4. Issues of legal protection and distribution of intellectual property rights or scientific and technical products, transferred or created by Russian and Myanmar organizations in the implementation of cooperation under this Agreement, shall be governed in accordance with the laws of the States Parties and treaties concluded by the organizations in accordance with article 6 of this Agreement. Issues of legal protection and distribution of intellectual property rights or scientific and technical products, transferred or created by Russian and Myanmar organizations in the implementation of cooperation under this Agreement, shall be governed in accordance with the laws of the States Parties and treaties concluded by the organizations in accordance with article 6 of this Agreement.
Article 8 of Article 8
In order to implement the cooperation provided for by this Agreement, Myanmanskaya Party accepts the obligations that posed from the Russian Federation nuclear materials, technology, equipment, installation, special non-nuclear materials, as well as made on that basis or as a result of their use of nuclear and special non-nuclear materials , Plant and equipment: In order to implement the cooperation provided for by this Agreement, Myanmanskaya Party accepts the obligations that posed from the Russian Federation nuclear materials, technology, equipment, installation, special non-nuclear materials, as well as made on that basis or as a result of their use of nuclear and special non-nuclear materials, Plant and equipment:
are not used for the production of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, as well as achieving any military purpose; are not used for the production of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, as well as achieving any military objective;
under the control of (guarantees) IAEA for the duration of their stay or actual use of the territory or under the jurisdiction of the Union of Myanmar (IAEA, INFCIRC/477, 20.04.95); under the control of (guarantees) IAEA for the duration of their stay or actual use of the territory or under the jurisdiction of the Union of Myanmar (IAEA, INFCIRC/477, 20.04.95);
provided physical protection measures at a level not below the level recommended by the IAEA; provided physical protection measures at a level not below the level recommended by the IAEA;
are not exported and not transferred from the jurisdiction of the Union of Myanmar, if not between the Parties will be reached another agreement. are not exported and not transferred from the jurisdiction of the Union of Myanmar, if not between the Parties will be reached another agreement.
Its from the Russian Federation equipment and dual-use materials and technologies used in nuclear purposes: Its from the Russian Federation equipment and dual-use materials and technologies used in nuclear purposes:
not used to create nuclear explosive devices; not used to create nuclear explosive devices;
not used in the field of nuclear fuel cycle, not under the control of the (guarantees) IAEA; not used in the field of nuclear fuel cycle, not under the control of the (guarantees) IAEA;
not re-exported to anyone without the written permission of the Russian Party. not re-exported to anyone without the written permission of the Russian Party.
Article 9 of Article 9
Differences and disputes between the Parties relating to the application or interpretation of the provisions of this Agreement shall be settled by the Parties through consultations and negotiations. Differences and disputes between the Parties relating to the application or interpretation of the provisions of this Agreement shall be settled by the Parties through consultations and negotiations.
Article 10 Article 10
This Agreement shall enter into force on the date of signing and is valid until full compliance by the obligations provided under this Agreement. This Agreement shall enter into force on the date of signing and is valid until full compliance by the obligations provided under this Agreement.
The termination of this Agreement, its provisions continue to apply to contracts entered into prior to the termination of his actions. The termination of this Agreement, its provisions continue to apply to contracts entered into prior to the termination of his actions.
In the event of termination of this Agreement provisions of Articles 7 and 8 of this Agreement shall remain in force. In the event of termination of this Agreement provisions of Articles 7 and 8 of this Agreement shall remain in force.
Posted on August 30th, 2008 under Daily New • RSS 2.0 feed • Both comments and pings are currently closed
Comments are closed.
News CalendarAugust 2008 T W T F S S M
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Nuclear Research in the Union of Myanmar « ေကတုမတီ
Myanmar Gets a Russian Nuclear Reactor « ေကတုမတီ
Myanmar Gets a Russian Nuclear Reactor « ေကတုမတီ
BANGKOK, Thailand - Though one of the world’s poorest countries, Myanmar is embarking on a nuclear-research project with the help of Russian and, possibly, Pakistani scientists. Diplomats say the development has upset China, which has heavily courted Myanmar in recent years and resents Moscow for muscling in on its turf.
Believed by Western diplomats to be the brainchild of Science and Technology Minister U Thaung, the project was initiated by Russia’s Atomic Energy Ministry, which in February announced plans to build a 10-megawatt research reactor in central Myanmar, formerly known as Burma. In July, Myanmar Foreign Minister Win Aung, accompanied by the military-ruled country’s ministers of defense, energy, industry and railways, traveled to Moscow to finalize the deal.
Myanmar officials decline to comment on the nuclear project, and there is little noticeable activity around the recently established Department of Atomic Energy in the capital, Yangon, residents say. But Western diplomats in Myanmar say the groundbreaking ceremony is scheduled to take place at a secret location near the town of Magway in January. The equipment and reactor will be delivered in 2003. Russian diplomats say more than 300 Myanmar nationals have received nuclear technical training in Russia during the past year.
Though Myanmar suffers from chronic power shortages, it isn’t clear why it would need a research reactor, which is used mainly for medical purposes. Though there are so far no suspicions that the facility will have a direct military application, it will, like everything else in the country, be under military control.
The program drew scrutiny recently after two Pakistani nuclear scientists, with long experience at two of their country’s most secret nuclear installations, showed up in Myanmar after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the U.S. Asian and European intelligence officials say Suleiman Asad and Muhammed Ali Mukhtar left Pakistan for Myanmar when the U.S. grew interested in interrogating them about their alleged links to suspected terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden, who Washington believes wants to develop a nuclear weapon. There is no clear evidence linking them to the Russia-backed project.
When the nuclear deal was finalized in Moscow in July, Russian news agencies quoted Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov as calling Myanmar a “promising partner in Asia and the Pacific region.” Indeed, Russia also sold 10 MiG-29 fighter aircraft to Myanmar for $130 million.
All this is starting to worry China, which has gone out of its way to cultivate ties with Myanmar, becoming its main military supplier. Beijing long ago identified Myanmar as vital to the well-being of its impoverished southwest. Just this month, Jiang Zemin became the first Chinese president to visit Myanmar since the present, widely reviled junta seized power in 1988. “China is not happy with having to compete with Russia in a country like Myanmar, which the Chinese so clearly consider theirs,” a Bangkok-based Asian diplomat says.
Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan said the two sides had agreed to expand cooperation in “infrastructural constructions” and other areas. Asian intelligence officials say that means China’s desire to link its three southwestern provinces - Yunnan, Sichuan and Guizhou, with 160 million people in total - to vital export markets by way of Myanmar. At this month’s summit, they say, Yangon appeared to accept in principle that Beijing’s proposal for a 30-year accord that would ease Chinese access to Myanmar’s river and road networks.
Meanwhile, China has also built a road linking Yunnan to Myanmar’s riverport of Bhamo on the Irrawaddy, 800 miles north of Yangon, and has given Myanmar three dredgers to clear the river for large barges carrying Chinese goods. Chinese money and technicians are building a port and shipyard near Yangon that people knowledgeable about Asian intelligence say will cater primarily to Chinese vessels.
If Russia is butting in, some in the neighborhood may not mind. India and Vietnam fear China is using Myanmar to expand its influence in Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean. India is itself courting Yangon, but it’s unlikely to dislodge the Chinese, who are firmly behind Myanmar’s military junta. That’s bad news for the international community, which is trying to broker a deal between the junta and the country’s democracy movement. Mr. Jiang said during his visit that Myanmar “must be allowed to choose its own development path suited to its own conditions.”
Posted on August 30th, 2008 under Daily New • RSS 2.0 feed • Both comments and pings are currently closed
Appeal of Singapore-based Burmese Patriots
http://singabloodypore.rsfblog.org/archive/2008/08/30/appeal-of-singapore-based-burmese-patriots.html
http://jg69.blogspot.com/2008/08/solidarity-groups-urge-singapore-to.html
Solidarity groups urge Singapore to renew activists travel and work documents
H.E. Mr George Yong-Boon Yeo
Minister for Foreign Affairs
Singapore
Your Excellency:
We, the undersigned groups supporting human rights and democracy in Burma, urge the Government of Singapore to promptly renew the work and travel permits of six Burmese activists who were studying and working there.
It is our belief that the six individuals were targeted because of their efforts to advocate for human rights and democratic transition in their home country. The Singaporean government’s actions contradict the spirit and content of its own statements made at the United Nations and other international forums on the situation in Burma since September 2007.
The actions and statements of the Burmese nationals in question were fully consistent with public statements made by you and other Singaporean leaders. They have cooperated with the Singapore authorities in working within the constraints of local laws.
The actions taken by the six, in response to the crises caused by the Saffron Revolution in September as well as Cyclone Nargis and the sham referendum in May, were peaceful and constructive. Their desire for democratic transition in Burma is consistent with Singapore’s foreign policy. Fundamental political and economic reforms which constitute the main focus of the Burmese activists, also serves the regional security and economic interests of Singapore and ASEAN.
Singapore was the first country to ratify the ASEAN Charter, and bears a responsibility to promote its spirit and content. It has committed to strengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the rule of law, and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms. These six activists were working to promote and defend these goals. We understand three of them have been forced to leave Singapore but are anxious to return.
We call upon the Singaporean government to treat Burmese citizens working and studying in Singapore equitably and with fairness. Allowing Burmese in Singapore to strengthen their knowledge of human rights and democracy is a vital contribution to Burma’s transition to democracy.
We look forward to Singapore’s timely renewal of the work and travel documents of these six activists. We trust that Singapore’s commitment to progress in transition to democracy will continue, and that Singapore will desist from restricting the opportunities of Burmese working and studying in Singapore.
Thank you for your kind attention,
1. Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma
2. Burma Campaign Australia
3. Burma Partnership
4. Burma Today
5. Burma Workers’ Rights Protection Committee
6. Burmese Women’s Union (Japan Branch)
7. Committee for Asian Women
8. Forum for Democracy in Burma
9. Foundation for Media Alternatives (Philippines)
10. Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women
11. Hong Kong Coalition for a Free Burma
12. Network for Democracy and Development
13. Nonviolence International Southeast Asia
14. Palaung State Liberation Front
15. Shan Women’s Action Network
16. Suara Rakyat Malaysia
cc:
H.E. Lee Hsieng Loong
Prime Minister
Orchard Road, Istana Annexe
Singapore 238823
H.E. Surin Pitsuwan
Secretary General
ASEAN
The ASEAN Secretariat, 70 Jl. Sisingamangaraja
Jakarta, Indonesia 12110
09:35 Posted by soci | Permalink | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0) | Email this | Tags: Appeal, Singapore, Burma
On Myanmar, ASEAN Diplomat Predicts Gambari's Replacement,ミャンマーで、ASEAN外交官はGambariの取り替えを予測する , Road Talk at BIMTEC
Gambari and Ban brain trust, now under Turin's shroud Inner City Press: Investigative Reporting from the United Nations
http://www.innercitypress.com/unsc3myanmar083008.html
Byline: Matthew Russell Lee of Inner City Press at the UN:
News Analysis UNITED NATIONS, August 30 -- Having left Myanmar six days about, after not seeing either Aung San Suu Kyi or General Than Shwe, UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari still had no comment about what if anything his trip had accomplished, despite critical words so far from at least two of the Security Council's five permanent members. Inner City Press asked UN spokesperson Marie Okabe on Friday if there was any response or explanation yet, but Ms. Okabe said "Mister Gambari wants to speak to you directly." Video here.
国際連合、8月30日 -- 左のミャンマーをについての、彼の旅行が達成した何でも安全保障理事会5の永久的なメンバーの少なくとも2からずいぶん遠くの重大な単語にもかかわらず何についてのAung San Suu Kyiに会わなかった後6日持っていてまたはShweより一般的、国連公使イブラヒムGambariにまだコメントがなかった。 都心部の出版物はまだ応答または説明があったらが、Okabe氏は"を言った金曜日の国連スポークスマンに尋ねたMarie Okabe; Gambari氏はあなたにdirectly."を話したいと思う; ここのビデオ。
Meanwhile, as Inner City Press has inquired throughout the diplomatic community about the reasons for Aung San Suu Kyi having declined to meet with Gambari, a Permanent Representative of an ASEAN member state, asking to be identified as such, told Inner City Press that word is Mr. Gambari will be replaced as UN envoy to Myanmar. "I don't blame Aung San Suu Kyi," the ASEAN diplomat said. "If I were her, I also wouldn't meet with an envoy who's about to be replaced."
その間、都心部の出版物がGambariに会うことを断っていたAung San Suu Kyiの理由について外交コミュニティ中尋ねたのでそれ自体識別されることを頼むASEAN加盟州の常任代表は単語がミャンマーへの国連公使として氏取り替えられるであるGambariことを都心部の出版物に告げた。 " 私はAung San Suu Kyiの"の責任にしない; ASEAN外交官は言った。 彼女、私はまた取り替えられることを約ある公使に会わない。
We will be watching Gambari's belated briefing of Ban Ki-moon in Turin, and how the UN finally responds, more than a week late, to the questions that are swirling. The problems are deeper than Gambari, going to the bottom of this UN's commitment to human rights, and the way it let the military government dictate UN currency losses of 20 and even 25.
私達は渦巻いている質問に国連が最終的にいかに答えるかトゥーリンのBan Ki-moonのGambariの遅れて報告を、遅の週以上、見て。 問題は人権にこの国連責任の底に行く20の軍事政権の命令国連通貨の損失および25%を可能にした方法およびGambariより深い。
Meanwhile on August 29 Myanmar's Foreign Minister Nyan Win was in India for the BIMTEC meeting with representatives of Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Thailand and India. Earlier in the year, Myanmar's Vice Senior General Maung Aye was in India and signed several business deals including, for transit, the $100 million Kaladan Multi-project with Indian leaders.
その間8月29日ミャンマーの外相のNyanに勝利はバングラデシュ、ブータン、ネパール、スリランカ、タイおよびインドの代表とのBIMTECの会合のためのインドにあった。 年の初めに、Maung Ayeミャンマーの副年長大将はインドにい、複数の商売上の取引にを含む、運輸のために、インドのリーダーとの$100,000,000 Kaladanの多プロジェクト署名した。
Now, Bangladesh is proposing road connections with Myanmar, while India pushes for roads that pass straight through Bangladesh. Complaints have been filed with the UN, but a former UN presence, Bangladesh's Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury who is also in charge of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, tried to calm things down by saying Bangladesh's sovereignty will always be respected. This is the regional context and dynamic in which Myanamar's military government gets over...
今度は、バングラデシュはインドはバングラデシュをまっすぐに通る道のために押すが、ミャンマーが付いている道の関係を提案している。 不平は国連とファイルされたが、前の国連存在、チッタゴンの丘地域を管理してまたある事を静めるためにバングラデシュの主権の発言によって試みられたバングラデシュIftekharアーメドChowdhuryは常に尊重される。 これはどのMyanamarを軍事政権が…乗り越えるかで地方文脈そして動的である
Earthquake rattles Sichuan, Yunnan provinces - GoKunming: Kunming news, events, travel, business, living
Earthquake rattles Sichuan, Yunnan provinces - GoKunming: Kunming news, events, travel, business, living
An earthquake measuring 6.1 on the Richter
scale shook southwest China this afternoon at 4:30 pm. According to initial reports, the earthquake's epicenter was located 50 kilometers south of Panzhihua (攀枝花), Sichuan province.
As of 6:30 pm Beijing time no reports of damage or injuries have emerged. Panzhihua, a city of slightly more than 1 million, is located near Sichuan's southern border with Yunnan roughly 350 kilometers north of Kunming. The tremor was able to be felt in high buildings throughout Kunming.
Today's earthquake is the second episode of major seismic activity to hit southwest China in the past month - on August 19 and 21, two quakes hit Yunnan's Yingjiang County (盈江县) near the Myanmar border, measuring 5.0 and 5.9 in magnitude, respectively.
The first Yingjiang quake was quickly followed by two aftershocks measuring less than 5.0, while the second quake killed at least three and left 106 injured, 24 of which were considered serious injuries.
Today's quake also hits Sichuan as it was recovering from the devastating earthquake in Wenchuan County on May 12, which killed nearly 70,000 people.
GoKunming will provide more updates as they become available.
UPDATE: At least 22 are confirmed dead - 17 in Sichuan and five in Yunnan - and more than 100 are injured from Saturday's quake, according to Xinhua reports. At least 1,000 homes were destroyed by the tremor.
Related article: Hope during dark times: Witnessing the earthquake's aftermath
The ungiven gift
(Kim Kyung-Hoon/Reuters)
Australian and US personnel transported food aid to a helicopter bound for villages on Aceh's tsunami-hit west coast in January 2005. The US response to the catastrophe cleared the path to renewed cooperation from Indonesia on terrorism.
Three years ago, the world was ready to mount a new attack on poverty - The Boston Globe
JUST THREE YEARS ago, at the G-8 summit of industrialized nations, it looked like the world of foreign aid was about to change. As the 2005 conference ended, British Prime Minister Tony Blair ascended the steps of a resort in the quaint Scottish village of Gleneagles and announced that rich nations would double their aid to Africa by 2010, giving some $50 billion annually. "It is progress - real and achievable progress," he concluded.
Around the rich world, it seemed, millions of people had finally begun to pay attention to global poverty. Time magazine had recently featured on its cover economist Jeffrey Sachs, who offered solutions for "how to end poverty." Celebrities jumped on the aid bandwagon. Angelina Jolie traveled to Africa to receive weighty briefings on the future of the continent. And a consensus appeared to be building among donor nations like Britain and the United States on how to address endemic poverty. Working together, donors would use aid not just as a bandage, but as a lever - rewarding good government in poor countries, and pressing them toward long-term reforms.
Today, however, those hopes have all but evaporated. A collision of factors, from politics to shifting global wealth, has unraveled the consensus among rich countries and allowed poorer nations to ignore their calls for reform. Western nations have failed to deliver the money promised at Gleneagles, casting doubt on the entire experiment - and leaving development veterans deeply pessimistic about the future.
From that high point in Gleneagles, today the aid industry stands on the brink of disaster. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, net aid from most of the wealthiest nations actually dropped, year on year, in 2006 and again in 2007. If the new push for foreign aid collapses completely, it could do just as much damage to the West as it does to the countries that need its benefits. Indeed, the crisis in foreign aid could not only prolong the world's human suffering, but could spark one of the biggest security challenges we face in the coming decades.
. . .
Foreign aid as we know it today is a relatively recent invention, born after World War II with the creation of new global institutions and the emergence of independent but poor states in Africa. By the 1960s, the world's major donors - the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the rich industrialized nations of the West and Japan - had all created aid programs designed to help poorer regions, primarily in Africa and South Asia.
As the donations increased, foreign aid developed into an industry of its own, filled with consultants, contractors, and organizations that arose to channel the huge sums of money moving across borders. Over time, these became as entrenched as the government aid bureaucracies themselves.
Although its goals were laudatory, the aid industry had serious flaws. Donor governments tolerated massive graft by recipient nations, if these countries served strategic purposes - the West poured vast sums into kleptocratic Zaire, for instance, as a bulwark against communism. Leading global advocacy groups criticized aid providers for their stinginess and for directing some of their limited aid budgets to support the overseas operations of rich first-world companies such as agribusinesses. Some conservatives questioned the need for aid at all - the late Senator Jesse Helms memorably compared it with throwing money down a rat hole.
In his 2006 book "The White Man's Burden," former World Bank economist William Easterly issued a sweeping critique of the whole prevailing approach to aid, detailing how, for decades, aid providers had come up with massive plans to help poor nations and then, Soviet-style, attempted to impose them from outside, to little effect. Lacking local input and insensitive to local needs, these megaproposals often failed to make a real dent in the problems they were spending millions of dollars to address.
Earlier this decade, however, the aid industry seemed poised for a meaningful shift, fueled by an infusion of new money and optimism about what it could accomplish. The attacks of 9/11 seemed to convince skeptical conservatives that boosting foreign assistance would make America safer by increasing its global influence. "For at least a year into 2002 and 2003, there was a lot of pressure coming down from the White House to develop new aid programs," says one former top American aid official.
Between 2001 and 2005, the amount of foreign aid given by governments more than doubled. Britain's then-chancellor Gordon Brown proposed a kind of Marshall Plan for developing countries that would combine a doubling of aid to poor nations, a write-off of all their debts, and a vow by all rich countries to spend 0.7 percent of their gross domestic product on aid.
At the same time, the aid industry was developing a new model of assistance, one that emphasized accountability on the part of the governments receiving aid. This also pleased conservatives concerned about waste. The White House launched a new aid program in 2002 called the Millennium Challenge Corporation. The MCC, which received a new stream of aid money, used 16 indicators - on civil liberties, political rights, corruption, and other key factors - to determine whether nations were worthy of assistance. The World Bank and European nations also began to press, in cases, for reforms as a condition for aid money.
Massive global campaigns by celebrities like U2's Bono and Bob Geldof, organizer of the Live 8 concerts, brought poverty and aid greater public awareness. Days before the Gleneagles Summit, some 40 million people in 36 countries participated in an awareness campaign called the Global Call to Action Against Poverty.
But just three years later, that apparent wave of change is looking more and more like a mirage.
Rather than working with proven local programs and existing aid groups, leaders of the rich world simply created entirely new programs. The United States created the MCC and an HIV/AIDS funding bureaucracy called PEPFAR; Britain built a program to transform aid by giving cash directly to poor people in African nations. These new initiatives often duplicated projects that already existed, says Carol Lancaster, an aid expert at Georgetown University. The result adds to the confusion in recipient nations, who already have few trained officials to deal with the proliferation of aid groups. On my own trips to Malawi, one of the poorer nations in Africa, I found that health officials spent a vast percentage of their time simply catering to donors and consultants.
Many conservatives who backed aid now have turned against it, or have reconceived "aid" in ways that serve other interests. The Bush administration now routes nearly one-quarter of its aid money through the Pentagon, up from less than 10 percent in 2002, and much of that "aid" goes to Iraq and Afghanistan. In the 2008 budgeting cycle, Congress slashed funds for the MCC by half, partly because of conservative anger and partly because Democrats view it as a failed Bush administration program.
Despite promises to help the poorest and best-governed countries, rich nations have continued lavishing money on key strategic countries. The White House has continued to send the majority of foreign assistance to allies like Egypt, still run by a corrupt, authoritarian regime. Britain continued funneling aid to Russia - hardly an impoverished state, but one that London wants to build a stronger link with.
Unlike Bush, who made aid a centerpiece of his presidency, John McCain has spent his time in the Senate trying to cap the aid budget. Though McCain, in his presidential campaign, has declared that aid "really needs to eliminate many of the breeding grounds for extremism," he's offered no concrete plans for boosting or reforming assistance. (In comparison, Barack Obama has pledged to double American foreign aid by 2012.)
Public enthusiasm, too, seems to have ebbed. One comprehensive study, by Harris polling, found twice as many Americans think the government spends too much to help prevent disease and improve public health abroad as think it spends the right amount.
Wealthy countries have closed their wallets. In Japan, the government has slashed aid budgets dramatically. In 2006, the United States cut development aid by over 18 percent, and it dropped again the next year. Despite the promises of Gleneagles, net aid handouts from the G-7 group of powerful nations fell by 1 percent in 2007, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a monitoring group. The nongovernmental organization Oxfam projects that by 2010, wealthy nations will fall short of their pledges by some $30 billion - more than the United States' entire annual aid expenditures.
. . .
In the long run, this stinginess will backfire on everyone involved. It will have a disastrous impact on the citizens of poor nations, both because of reduced aid and less pressure on their governments for real political reforms. And aid has benefits for the rest of the world as well. It can prevent the kinds of failed states that harbor terrorism, crime, and other serious dangers.
President Bush in 2002 admitted as much: In his National Security Strategy, he, like McCain, made the link between combating poverty and reducing global extremism. "The events of September 11, 2001, taught us that weak states, like Afghanistan, can pose as great a danger to our national interests as strong states," the strategy declared. Other long-isolated, poor nations, like Yemen, Sudan, and Somalia, also have proven staging grounds for militancy.
Given correctly and designed to produce reforms, aid money can help strengthen weak states before they disintegrate into total failure. In Cambodia, a nation destroyed by decades of civil war, effective aid in the 1990s helped build a real civil society and restore the nation's social fabric to some extent. While hardly an idyll today, the country has strong nongovernmental organizations, an independent media, and some degree of stability, despite continued poor senior leadership.
Failed states can turn into breeding grounds for threats that dwarf even terrorism. In Burma, for example - a country isolated by sanctions and its rulers' own obstinacy - poverty, prostitution, and a brutal human rights climate have created not only a flourishing narcotics trade, but an HIV/AIDS epidemic that has affected all of Southeast Asia. According to Laurie Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations, an expert on pandemic disease, all the HIV strains in Southeast Asia actually originated in Burma. The country "may be the greatest contributor of new types of HIV in the world," she wrote in a report on the crisis.
Some states' problems can spill directly over into Western democracies. Haiti, a country with many of the same longstanding problems as Burma, has become a major conduit for HIV and drug trafficking in the Western Hemisphere. Thousands of Haitians try to flee its chaos by coming to the United States, causing repeated refugee crises.
Eventually, many of these failed states actually wind up requiring more direct Western intervention, which can be yet more expensive and deadly. The United States has intervened in Haitian politics repeatedly over the past two administrations; similarly, both the Clinton and Bush White Houses felt compelled to intervene in Somalia, with disastrous results.
As Western countries' aid falls short, the door opens wider for new donors. In the past four years, middle-income authoritarian nations like China, Russia, and Venezuela, many fattened on higher oil profits or trade surpluses with the United States, have begun increasing their aid programs in a bid for regional or global influence. Venezuela already dwarfs US aid in Latin America, and China has become the largest lender to Africa.
These new donors care little about promoting better governance. In Angola, the government shunned a deal with the International Monetary Fund - which asks for accounting of the money spent and real reform - in favor of a massive financing agreement with China, which holds Angola to no conditions and provides aid with little transparency.
"We used to just listen to what they [the donors] said," said one aid expert I met in Phnom Penh, who also worked in the Cambodian government. "But we don't have to anymore." He pointed to other parts of the capital, where Chinese financing supported new construction. "We have China now. China will help."
Even from the most parochial point of view, the collapse of the new push for foreign aid matters to America. Aid clearly improves images of donor nations, critical at a time when anti-American sentiment is rife worldwide, and the country's military "hard power" remains tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Focus groups in the Muslim world conducted for the Council on Foreign Relations showed that well-advertised, targeted American assistance actually helped swing public opinion toward the United States in Morocco, a Muslim nation where, after 9/11, local images of the United States had soured. Similarly, the US response to the 2004 tsunami in Indonesia helped restore American influence there and opened the door for renewed US-Indonesia counterterrorism cooperation. "That was a dramatic change," Puji Pujiono, an Indonesian relief specialist, told me. "People saw the US military on the ground helping here, and their image of America immediately turned around."
Despite the discouraging news, a bright spot may be emerging in another corner of the aid world. The private sector, increasingly wealthy, is adopting some of the lessons that nations seem determined to ignore, like funding smaller projects that have already enjoyed success on the ground. The Gates Foundation - with an endowment of nearly $40 billion, the largest foundation in the world, and a major private donor in Africa and India - has launched an initiative to focus on microfinance, the providing of small loans to poor borrowers to give them start-up capital. Such private groups may be impressive for their vats of money, but in the long term they may be even more important for their example.
Joshua Kurlantzick is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and author of "Charm Offensive: How China's Soft Power is Transforming the World." He can be reached at jkurlantzick@ceip.org.
© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.
1 2 3 4 5
China eyeing base in Bay of Bengal?-India-The Times of India
China eyeing base in Bay of Bengal?-India-The Times of India
NEW DELHI: Is China marking space for itself in Myanmar's Coco Islands again? India is suddenly up and alert after senior Chinese naval officers recently visited the islands to “upgrade” facilities there.
On June 25, according to reports reaching India, in an unpublicised visit, a Chinese naval delegation led by Col Chi Ziong Feng, accompanied a Myanmarese delegation headed by Brig Gen Win Shein, into the Coco Islands.
According to sources, Brig Gen Shein is commander of Ayeyarwaddy (Irrawaddy) naval headquarters, which controls the island.
According to sources monitoring developments, China decided to help Myanmar upgrade systems in the island.
Myanmar would increase its naval troop strength on the island, while China would help in building two more helipads and storage systems for arms. What was of greater interest to India was that China reportedly agreed to "upgrade" communication facilities on the island.
Interestingly, this was also around the time that Indian minister of state for power Jairam Ramesh was in Myanmar adding to India's development presence there by signing four economic cooperation agreements with the Myanmar government.
The Coco Islands have always been part myth, part Indian and Chinese jostling in the Indian Ocean. But there have never been a stop to reports of China building a listening post in the Great Coco Island, which is close enough to the Andamans and the Straits of Malacca to be of concern to India.
In fact, after much persuasion, India managed to get the Myanmarese to take some officials to Coco Islands in 2006 to see the island for themselves as well as a couple of other islands of concern to India like Hangyii and Kyakpu. Indian representatives were allowed to tour the island. They did not find much.
Even the radar was rudimentary, bought off some ship and not working. The Indian government came to the conclusion that the Myanmarese are either too clever by half or they're not showing everything to India or they had been correct all along. Whatever it was, India stopped its public cribbing about Coco.
The issue was, however, never buried. After the recent visit, India's assessment says the possibility of more helipads on Coco Islands might indicate a Chinese interest in air surveillance of Indian aircraft, ships or facilities.
It took a visit like this to get the Indians to sit up. As of now, Indian officials say they are "concerned, but not alarmed".
After all, despite India ramping up its own presence in Myanmar, China remains its biggest friend, philosopher and guide. For the moment, India remains in a "watch and wait" mode, particularly since its own relations with China are very complex at the present moment.
But it wants to watch out for activity, particularly on the construction of helipads and building more communication posts that will signal danger. India's Far East Command, which operates out of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, is well situated to inderdict vessels passing through Malacca Straits.
Burmese opposition in exile challenge Burma's credentials at UN
Burmese opposition in exile challenge Burma's credentials at UN
Solomon
Saturday, 30 August 2008 20:09
New Delhi - In a campaign that seeks to challenge the legitimacy of the Burmese military junta's membership of the United Nations, opposition political parties in exile said they will send letters urging the UN to reconsider the junta's representation at the General Assembly.
An umbrella Burmese opposition group, the National Council of the Union of Burma (NCUB), said it will send the letter to the UN in early September urging rejection of the Burmese junta's representation as a member state, since it is ruling the country illegally.
"It has already been planned and we will send the letter early next month," Myo Win, Joint General Secretary (2) of the NCUB.
"We have begun this campaign a long time ago and have been discussing with member countries from the UN," Myo Win added.
The group said, it had announced its challenge campaign since last year but wanted to wait for the junta to resolve the question of legitimacy through peaceful dialogue. But since the junta failed to implement effective political dialogue and continued with its seven-step roadmap, the group had begun the challenge campaign.
In May, the junta forced its way ahead with a 'rigged' constitutional referendum, claiming 98 percent approval by voters. The NCUB said this has forced the groups to call on the UN to review the legitimacy of the junta.
"By this campaign we hope to achieve a genuine democracy in Burma that will guarantee the rights of all ethnic groups as well," said Nyo Ohn Myint, Foreign Affairs in-charge of the National League for Democracy – Liberated Area exile, which is a member of NCUB.
The exiled political groups said, through this campaign they will explain to the international communities as well as member states of the UN about the true intentions of the junta, and prevent them from rigging the declared 2010 general elections.
"We hope this campaign will result in regional countries, who defend the junta, and the international community to come for discussions with us," said Nyo Ohn Myint.
Despite repeated calls by Burmese opposition groups to kick start a political dialogue, the junta had declared it is implementing a reform through its seven-step roadmap, which excludes major opposition groups including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's NLD.
As the first step of its roadmap, the junta took 14 years to complete its National Convention to draft a constitution, and in May held a referendum to approve it. The junta then announced that the constitution was approved overwhelmingly. But the opposition and critics said the process of the referendum was not 'free and fair' and accused the junta of rigging it.
The NCUB said it is ready to put on hold its campaign, if the junta considers talking with detained Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and ethnic leaders in a tripartite dialogue and possibly find a solution to Burma's long political impasse.
"We are into this campaign because we want to put our country on the right political track," said Nyo Ohn Myint.
He added that the campaign will be able to put pressure on the junta, as member states of the UN including the five permanent Security Council members, have no power to veto the Credential Challenge Committee.
However, if the junta and other regional countries fail to respond, the NUCB said it will work closely with member states of the UN and challenge the credential of the Burmese junta at the UN General Assembly.
Meanwhile, Burma's opposition parties including the NLD said they are not satisfied with UN's current engagement with the generals as the UN' special envoy Ibrahim Gambari failed to convert his visits into concrete results.
He failed to meet San Suu Kyi so they want the UN to review its policy on Burma.
Nang Yain, General Secretary of Women's League of Burma (WLB), a Thailand based umbrella group of Burmese women, said it also agrees with the campaign that feels the military government does not deserve a place at the UN as it is not popularly elected by the people.
"It will be good if the campaign is successful because that is what should happen," said Nang Yain.
But the WLB was unable to join the NCUB as they are focusing on bringing the Burmese generals to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Subject: [nldlajb] DASSK DEMAD
We can not say exactly whether this is true or not but i guess it is close what Daw ASSK demand to militry regime
tz
David Miliband: Ukraine, Russia and European stability | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
David Miliband
guardian.co.uk, Friday August 29 2008 12:00 BST Article history
It is not an act of hostility towards Russia for Europe to support Ukraine, but a positive move towards lasting peaceAll comments (315)
David Miliband guardian.co.uk, Friday August 29 2008 12:00 BST Article historySince the collapse of the Soviet Union, it has seemed that new rules were being established for the conduct of international relations in central and eastern Europe and central Asia. The watchwords were independence and interdependence; sovereignty and mutual responsibility; cooperation and common interests. They are good words that need to be defended.
The Georgia crisis provided a rude awakening. The sight of Russian tanks in a neighbouring country on the 40th anniversary of the crushing of the Prague Spring has shown that the temptations of power politics remain. The old sores and divisions fester. Russia remains unreconciled to the new map of Europe.
Yesterday's unilateral attempt to redraw the map marks not just the end of the post-cold war period, but is also the moment when countries are required to set out where they stand on the significant issues of nationhood and international law.
The Russian president says he is not afraid of a new cold war. We don't want one. He has a big responsibility not to start one.
Ukraine is a leading example of the benefits that accrue when a country takes charge of its own destiny, and seeks alliances with other countries.
Its choices should not be seen as a threat to Russia or an act of hostility. Equally its independence does demand a new relationship with Russia – a partnership of equals, not the relationship of master and servant.
Russia must not learn the wrong lessons from the Georgia crisis: there can be no going back on fundamental principles of territorial integrity, democratic governance and international law. It has shown in the last two weeks what anyone could have foretold: that it can defeat Georgia's army. But today Russia is more isolated, less trusted and less respected than two weeks ago. It has made military gains in the short term. But over time it will feel the economic and political losses. If Russia truly wants respect and influence, and the benefits that flow from it, Russia needs to change course.
Prime Minister Putin has described the collapse of the Soviet Union as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe" of the 20th century. I don't see it that way. Most people of the former Soviet bloc or Warsaw Pact don't see it that way. It will be a tragedy for Russia if it spends the next 20 years believing it to be the case.
Indeed, since 1991 there has been no "stab in the back" of Russia. In fact, we have offered Russia extensive cooperation with the EU and Nato; membership of the council of Europe and the G8. Summits, mechanisms and meetings have been developed by the EU and Nato not to humiliate or threaten Russia, but to engage with it. The EU and the United States provided critical support for the Russian economy when it was needed, and western companies have invested heavily. And Russia has made substantial gains from its reintegration into the global economy.
These are actions that seek to promote prosperity and respect for Russia. But they have recently been met with scorn. Indeed, the record from suspension of Russian participation in the conventional armed forces to harassment of business people and cyber attacks on neighbours is not a good one. Now we have Georgia.
People often talk and ask about unity in Europe. Russian action has produced unity in Europe. Unity in demanding the withdrawal of Russian troops to their August 7 positions; unity in rejecting the use of force as the basis for redrawing the map of the Caucasus; unity in support of the democratically elected government of Georgia.
Of course Russia can and should have interests in its neighbours, but like everyone else, it must earn that influence. Indeed, they do not make up the "post-Soviet space" to which Prime Minister Putin often refers. The collapse of the Soviet Union created a new reality – sovereign, independent countries with minds of their own and rights to defend.
Russia also needs to clarify its attitude to the use of force to solve disputes. Some argue that Russia has done nothing not previously done by Nato in Kosovo in 1999. But this comparison does not bear serious examination.
Leave to one side that Russia spends a lot of time arguing in the UN and elsewhere against "interference" in internal affairs, whether in Zimbabwe or Burma. Nato's actions in Kosovo followed dramatic and systematic abuse of human rights, culminating in ethnic cleansing on a scale not seen in Europe since the second world war. Nato acted over Kosovo only after intensive negotiations in the UN security council and determined efforts at peace talks. Special envoys were sent to warn Milosevic in person of the consequences of his actions. None of this can be said for Russia's use of force in Georgia.
The decision to recognise Kosovo's independence came only after Russia made clear it would veto the deal proposed by the UN secretary general's special envoy, former Finnish President Ahtisaari. Even then we agreed to a further four months of negotiations by an EU-US-Russia troika in order to ensure that no stone was left unturned in the search for a mutually acceptable compromise.
Over Georgia, Russia moved from support for territorial integrity to breaking up the country in three weeks and relied entirely on military force to do so.
Russia must now ask itself about the relationship between short-term military victories and long-term economic prosperity. At the time of the Soviet Union's invasion of Hungary in 1956 or Czechoslovakia in 1968, no one asked what impact its actions had on the Russian stock market. There was no Russian stock market.
Now, the conflict in Georgia has been associated with a sharp decline in investor confidence. Russia's foreign exchange reserves fell in one week by $16bn. In one day the value of Gazprom fell by the same amount. Risk premia in Russia have sky-rocketed.
Isolation of Russia is not feasible. It would be counter-productive because Russia's economic integration is the best discipline on its politics. It would only strengthen the sense of victimhood that fuels intolerant nationalism. And it would compromise the world's interests in tackling nuclear proliferation, addressing climate change or stabilising Afghanistan.
But the international community is not impotent. Europeans need Russian gas, but Gazprom needs European consumers and investment. The reality of interdependence is that both sides have leverage; both sides can change the terms of trade.
Our approach must be hard-headed-engagement. That means bolstering allies, rebalancing the energy relationship with Russia, defending the rules of international institutions, and renewing efforts to tackle "unresolved conflicts".
Here, Ukraine is key. It has strong links to Russia and this is firmly in both countries' interests. But Ukraine is also a European country. Ukrainian leaders have spoken of their aspiration to see their country become a member of the EU. Article 49 of the EU treaty gives all European countries the right to apply. The prospect and reality of EU membership has been a force for stability, prosperity and democracy across eastern Europe and it should remain so beyond. Once Ukraine fulfils EU criteria, it should be accepted as a full member.
As for Ukraine's relationship with Nato, it does not pose a threat to Russia. It is about strengthening Ukraine's democratic institutions and independence – things that will benefit Russia in the long term.
Europe also must re-balance the energy relationship with Russia. Europe needs to invest in storing gas to deal with interruptions. More interconnections between countries and properly functioning internal markets will increase resilience. It needs diverse, secure and resilient gas supplies.
Europe needs to act as one when dealing with third parties like Russia. And we will be reducing our dependence on gas altogether: increasing energy efficiency, investing in carbon capture and storage technology for coal, and in renewables and nuclear power.
In all international institutions, we will need to review our relations with Russia. I do not apologise for rejecting kneejerk calls for Russia to be expelled from the G8, or for EU-Russia or Nato-Russia relations to be broken. But we do need to examine the nature, depth and breadth of relations with Russia.
In Nato, we will stand by our commitments to existing members, and there will be renewed determination that there should be no Russian veto on the future direction of Nato.
Fourth, the unresolved conflicts that mark the end of empire should not be ignored. The world's attention is currently on South Ossetia and Abkhazia. But the conflicts in Transnistria and Nagorno-Karabakh must not be overlooked. Each has its roots in longstanding ethnic tensions, exacerbated by economic and political underdevelopment.
The choice today is clear. Not to sponsor a new cold war, but to be clear about the foundations of lasting peace.
In cooperation with Project Syndicate, 2008.
UNDP WATCH: UN Whistleblower in Tokyo Raises Questions of Fraud, Cover-Up and Retaliation from Below
Russia, China Alliance Weakening Over Georgia
UNITED NATIONS — An alliance between two of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, Russia and China, that has endured through several recent world crises is faltering as the council clashes over the war in Georgia.
During a contentious public debate yesterday — in which Russia formally raised, for the first time at the council, its decision to recognize the independence of two separatist Georgian regions — China was one of the only seat holders in the 15-member body that did not ask to speak. Chinese diplomats also were mum during earlier closed-door consultations yesterday, as Russia tried, and failed, to convince council members to invite representatives of the two regions, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, to address the world body.
Chinese diplomats increasingly have raised their profile at council deliberations in recent years, and as the body deliberated over international crises this year in Sudan, Zimbabwe, and Burma, they have emerged as representatives of a true world power, using or threatening to use the veto power that they have mostly declined to wield in past decades.
"We will assess what they say, or whether they'll maintain an eloquent silence," the British ambassador to the United Nations, John Sawers, told The New York Sun as he entered the public session on Georgia yesterday, referring to China. Chinese diplomats then made no comment, even as other council members engaged in an increasingly contentious exchange.
"We have no complaint about the position taken by our colleagues," Russia's U.N. ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, said yesterday when asked about China's lack of response at the council. But diplomats noted that China rebuffed President Medvedev's appeal for support, made this week to a regional alliance of Central Asian countries, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, of which China and Russia are members.
Tibetan separatists and Muslims from the western Chinese region of Xinjiang seeking independence present a major concern for Beijing. China also opposes U.N. membership for Taiwan, which it considers part of China. The conflict in South Ossetia also began just as the Olympic Games began in Beijing, reportedly raising the ire of Chinese officials.
Mr. Churkin said yesterday that officials from South Ossetia and Abkhazia, carrying Russian passports, have requested American visas at the American Embassy in Moscow so that they could come to address the Security Council. "They have not been refused," he said, adding that such a denial would violate the host country agreement between America and the United Nations.
But according to several diplomats, Russia did not secure the requisite support of nine council members needed to invite the officials. "South Africa supported the Russians, and so did Vietnam, but China said nothing," a Western diplomat, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said.
New America Media Blogs
people-against-democracy
"I’m here in Thailand right now, far to the north of Bangkok where all the action is. I’m no expert on the politics of this country, but from what I’ve been told, the People’s Alliance for Democracy and these protests are anti-democratic. Thailand is not a Republic but is governed by a monarchy backed by a military junta (as in Burma).
These protests represent another military coup, similar to the one in 2006 that ousted former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra—though this time it’s a military coup without the military.I’m here in Thailand right now, far to the north of Bangkok where all the action is. I’m no expert on the politics of this country, but from what I’ve been told, the People’s Alliance for Democracy and these protests are anti-democratic. Thailand is not a Republic but is governed by a monarchy backed by a military junta (as in Burma).
These protests represent another military coup, similar to the one in 2006 that ousted former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra—though this time it’s a military coup without the military."
OpEdNews » Suu Kyi's message to the world: UN is on the wrong track,世界へのSuu Kyiメッセージ: 国連は間違ったトラックにある
OpEdNews » Suu Kyi's message to the world: UN is on the wrong track
The UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari left Burma without seeing the pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and the regime's high profiles. Suu Kyi did not turn up for the scheduled meeting with Mr. Gambari and there have been claims that she did not accept the junta's food provisions. Suu Kyi's behaviour was criticised by Japan while Thailand Prime Minister tried to marginalise Suu in Burma's politics. However, the world never had a chance to know the progress of the dialogue between the regime and Suu brokered by the UN until the fourth meeting.
国連公使イブラヒムGambariは民主化のリーダーAung San Suu Kyiおよび政体の話題を見ないでビルマを去った。 彼女が会議の食糧準備を受け入れなかったことSuu Kyiは氏とGambari会合のためにそこにであるために要求出て来なかったし。 Suu Kyiの行動は日本によってタイの総理大臣がBurma'のSuuを疎外することを試みる間、批判された; sの政治。 但し、世界に決して第4会合までの国連が仲介した政体とSuu間のダイアログの進歩を知るチャンスがなかった。
A remark from the Japanese diplomat that Suu Kyi's behaviour is 'ill-tempered and uncompromising' was quite negative and ignores that the majority of the people are pro-democracy. As no one has a slight chance of opportunity to voice for their sufferings under military rule and Suu Kyi never had a chance to let the world know that whether UN is on the right track. Her absence at the meeting is simply the 'silent message' to the world that UN's effort in resolving Burma's political stalemate is complete failure.
Suu Kyiの行動がill-temperedおよびuncompromising'であること日本の外交官からの注目; 陰性はかなりあり、人々の大半が民主化であること無視する。 誰も持っていないので国連が正しい軌道にあるかどうか軍事政権およびSuu Kyiの下で苦労のために表明する機会のわずかなチャンスに決して世界にそれを知らせるチャンスがなかった。 会合の彼女の不在は'単にである; 無声message' 世界に完全な失敗であることをビルマの政治行き詰りの解決の国連努力がこと。
Yet, the UN tried to save its work that the last visit of Mr. Gambari could not be judged as an event which is a process. While senior members of 1990 election winning party NLD led by Suu was allowed to talk to Gambari for 20 minutes, the envoy also had to talk to other several pro-junta's individuals and groups such as Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA). The envoy had no idea of 1990 election result when he was asked and rather hoping for the free and fair election of 2010.
しかし、国連は氏のGambari最後の訪問がプロセスであるでき事として判断できなかったこと仕事を救うことを試みた。 Suuが導いた1990年の選挙の勝利党の古参議員がNLD 20分のGambariに話すことは許される間、公使はまた連合団結および開発連合(米国農務省)のような他の何人かのプロ会議の個人そしてグループに話さなければならなかった。 公使は1990年の選挙結果がわかり、彼が尋ねられたときに2010年の自由で、公平な選挙をむしろ望む。
Although the US and other western countries imposed punitive measures against the regime for not honouring the 1990 election result, the UN did not take responsible and serious steps to put pressure on the regime. The junta disgracefully controlled the power on the ground of drafting new constitution and NLD ended boycotting the National Convention for only to listen whatever the regime was saying. Then, who should be blamed? Although the envoy offered UN supervision or independent monitoring for the referendum held in May, the junta did not accept the offer as it is an offer not a binding resolution.
米国および他の西欧諸国が1990年の選挙結果に名誉を与えないための政体に対して罰則処置を課したが、国連は政体に圧力を置く責任があり、深刻なステップを踏まなかった。 会議は不面目に新しい憲法の起草の地面の力を制御し、NLDは政体が言っていたものは何でも聞くためにただのための全国大会のボイコットを終えた。 それから、だれが責任にされるべきであるか。 公使が5月に行われた国民投票のための国連監督か独立した監視を提供したが会議はそれが提供ない結合の決断であるので提供を受け入れなかった。
The junta only looks for the business deals and something which could make profits for them from the international community and institutions. The UN must take serious measures and make the regime to listen to the world body rather than being played by the regime. In Burma's conflict, the regional countries have been pleased with bargains in their counterpart's market, free from western competition and they would love to go on with the junta rather than deal with a democratic government.
会議は国際地域社会および施設からそれらのための利益を作ることができる何かおよび商売上の取引だけを捜す。 国連は深刻な手段を取り、政体を作らなければなり政体によって遊ばれるよりもむしろ国連を聞くために。 ビルマの対立では、地方国は西部の競争から自由な同等の市場の契約と喜び、民主政治の取り引きよりもむしろ会議とでありたいと思う。
It is time for neighbouring countries not to follow the economic interest and stop playing along with Burmese junta. Without a genuine dialogue between the regime and Aung San Suu Kyi who represents the people of Burma, Burma will never reach a peaceful solution. It does not make sense at all to leaving an opposition leader outside the roundtable to resolve the political impasse in a country.
それは経済的利益に続き、ビルマの会議と共に遊ぶことを止めない近隣諸国の時間である。 ビルマの人々を表す政体とAung San Suu Kyi間の本物ダイアログなしで、ビルマは決して平和的解決に達しない。 それは国の政治袋小路を解決するために円卓の外の反対派勢力の指導者を残すことに意味を全然成していない。
The UN should acknowledge the whole process of what the regime has been doing from drafting constitution and holding a rigged referendum to entrench the military until after the 2010 election. The 1990 election result could not be wiped off from the history along with the junta's brutality and bloodshed over the decades. Without releasing political prisoners including Suu Kyi, holding talks will simply extend the time of military rule rather than lead to a solution.
国連は認める政体が憲法草案からして、ずっと2010年の選挙の後までの軍隊を塹壕で防備するために装備された国民投票を保持していることをの全プロセスをべきである。 1990年の選挙結果は会議の残忍と共に歴史および何十年かにわたって惨殺からふき取ることができなかった。 Suu Kyiを含む政治犯の解放なしで、会議を開催することは解決に軍事政権の時をよりもむしろ導く単に拡張する。
The UN must review its mission and make clear that the regime could not go for 2010 election without honouring 1990 election result. The whole process of regime's roadmap to democracy has completely ignored the people's desire and people's representatives who won a majority of the seats in 1990. The UN should realize that its mission is on the wrong track and deluded by the junta.
国連は代表団を見直し、政体が2010年の選挙のために1990年の選挙結果にことを名誉を与えなければ行くことができなかったこと明らかに作らなければならない。 民主主義への政体の道路地図の全プロセスは完全に1990年に座席の大半に勝った人々の代表および人々の欲求を無視した。 国連は代表団が間違ったトラックにあり、会議によって惑わせることを意識するべきである。
Friday, August 29, 2008
IRIN Asia | Asia | Myanmar | MYANMAR: Small-scale livestock farmers feel the pinch | Economy Food Security | News Item(MORE)
", 28 August 2008 (IRIN) - For 42-year-old Than Than and her husband, making ends meet has never been harder.
Their main source of livelihood took a direct hit when Cyclone Nargis struck Myanmar’s Yangon Division in May, sweeping away their 200 ducks and five water buffaloes valued at over US$1,000.
Unable to sell eggs or rent out her buffaloes to plough her neighbour’s rice fields, her plight is indicative of many small-scale livestock farmers.
“I can barely make 1,200 kyat ($1) per day out of my livestock business now… Before the cyclone, I could make over 5,000 kyat ($5) per day,' the mother-of-three said, waving her arms at some ducks swimming nearby."
Scoop: Free trade including Myanmar dictatorship(MORE)
Free trade including Myanmar dictatorship is a slow motion disaster for workers and democracy in both nations
Alliance Party media release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Friday 29 August 2008
The Alliance Party says the news that New Zealand has negotiated a free trade deal with ASEAN nations that include the fascist dictatorship of Myanmar is a disgrace of historical proportions and is a slow motion disaster for workers in New Zealand and in Myanmar."
Joe Biden and Burma(more)
JOE BIDEN
"The Democratic Party senator from Delaware, Joseph R. Biden, has been under the glare of the international media spotlight this week after being nominated as US presidential candidate Barack Obama’s running mate for the US election in November.
Joe Biden is familiar to Burma lobbyists in Washington, DC. As the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he has been prominent in the shaping of US policy on Burma in recent years, say observers in the US capital.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama applauds with his running mate Joe Biden after his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention at Invesco Field at Mile High in Denver Thursday. (Photo: AP)
Alongside senators Mitch McConnell, Dianne Feinstein and congressmen Joseph Crawley, Joseph Pitts and Tom Lantos (who died in February 2008), Biden is often outspoken in his criticism of the Burmese regime."
Soldiers Still Watch Suu Kyi(more)
Soldiers Still Watch Suu Kyi: "Although the Burmese generals don’t want military personnel to show interest in domestic politics, detained pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s surprise snub of the UN special envoy last week has become a popular talking point among soldiers and officers in Burma, according to several military sources."
Fukuda Cabinet E-mail Magazine No.45 (August 28, 2008)
Fukuda Cabinet E-mail Magazine No.45 (August 28, 2008)
================================================================
"A single scale. This is Yasuo Fukuda."
-- Message from the Prime Minister (Provisional Translation)
A single scale. This is Yasuo Fukuda.
There is a saying that I like very much: "Dragons do not have snake
scales."
"A dragon is covered with hundreds of thousands of scales.
But if even one of them is a snake scale, then that is no true
dragon. It is merely a snake that has turned into a false dragon."
My take on this expression is that no matter how excellent
a certain policy may appear to be, if it contains a single lie,
you will not be able to trick the people into buying into it.
I believe that politicians must constantly feel and fear the sharp
gaze of the people on them.
Unless the people are able to be certain that the political realm
is safe, they cannot be reassured. Only when the people feel safe
and reassured will they definitely come to place their trust
in politics.
Safety, a sense of reassurance, and trust. How can these be shared
with the people? I am confident that the many policies that
I promote from the public's viewpoint will meet with
the understanding of the people.
The Diet session will be convened next month. Thorough discussions
will take place on international cooperation and on policies
to safeguard the people's safety and sense of reassurance,
including bills to establish an Agency for Consumer Affairs and
economic measures to ensure a sense of reassurance in the people's
lives as they face issues such as rising prices. We will promptly
implement the necessary measures accordingly.
Safety and a sense of reassurance are truly the foundations for
faith in the future. I am determined to steadily produce results
one by one, as unpretentious as my efforts may seem. I believe that
it is only by steadily plodding forward on that path that we will
be able to restore trust in politics and the administration.
The Japanese national who was kidnapped in Afghanistan,
Mr. Kazuya Ito, has been killed. The authorities worked day and
night following his kidnapping to gather information and it is
deeply regrettable that his life has been taken.
As a member of a non-governmental organization (NGO), Mr. Ito spent
more than four years in Afghanistan teaching agricultural methods.
He was loved by the children there. I am deeply angered
by the inhumane act of taking the life of this young man
who selflessly put himself in danger in his devotion to bettering
the lives of the people of Afghanistan.
I pray for Mr. Ito's repose and express my heartfelt condolences
to his bereaved family.
At this very moment, conflicts continue to rage in various regions
around the world and many people continue to suffer from poverty,
among other difficulties. By helping those people and regions,
we can carry the torch that Mr. Ito has passed to us. Moreover,
doing so is the role that Japan, a Peace Fostering Nation, must
carry out.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Burma: Brutality over Propaganda | The Propaganda Report
http://www.thepropagandareport.com/2008/08/27/burma-brutality-over-propaganda/
By Hughford • August 27, 2008
George Packer writes a fascinating article this week in the New Yorker about the politics of persuasion in Rangoon, and offers an insider’s view of the brutal dictatorship and its opposers. Over the decades, Burma’s military rulers (composed of a cabinet of 10 generals) have systematically destroyed all elements of a functioning society in their country, effectively creating a pre-historic world crippled by superstition, brutality, and poverty.
The sign you see in the picture above was blown down in May by Cyclone Nargis, and hasn’t been put back up - an indication, perhaps, of its ineffectiveness. It seems to be representative of the military junta’s approach to governance: ridiculous, confusing, and contradictory. The messaging certainly doesn’t follow the powerful propaganda tenants established by previous historical dictators: it’s long-winded, poorly constructed, and has no rousing pictures to accompany it. It’s almost pathetic.
So how does the regime maintain control? The Burmese regime has all the characteristics of a totalitarian system, such as secret police, widespread censorship, armed civilian thugs, torture prisons, the atmosphere of distrust, the concentration of wealth in government hands - but there is no overarching ideological message. There is no particular reason provided by the government for the country’s incredible suffering. And the public propaganda machine, as evidenced by the picture, is ineffective.
The following are some reasons provided by Burmese individuals, for the continued rule of the generals:
Christina Fink, author of Living Silence: Burma Under Military Rule: “There are certain cultural practices that help maintain the regime. Burmese society is a hierarchical society, where obedience to authority is taught in the family, in religious institutions, in educational institutions.” Fink points out that education in Burma is based on rote memorization, and she had found that “if you ask Burmese students to paraphrase something they cannot do it.”
Kit Young, an American musician who lived for many years in Rangoon, and who founded a music school there, says that the Burmese word for deference is anade, which involves an unwillingness to make people feel uncomfortable. “You skirt, you go around things,” she says.
A teacher in Rangoon says “We can blame the religion, and we can blame the live-and-let-live attitude of the Burmese. Even people like me, unless we go out of the country from time to time to refresh our minds, we become conditioned to the suppression. We are fearful without knowing we are fearful, and we are submissive without knowing we are submissive.”
A Burmese economist says “Here the government isn’t dependent on the people, and the people aren’t dependent on the government. When there’s no electricity or water, you get it yourself.” In other words, the regime has endured because it is not distracted by an effort to provide good government - crushing the life out of the population is their only task.
Categories: Commentary
Tags:
Democratic Voice of Burma
"NLD dismisses Thai PM痴 call to sideline Daw SuuNLD dismisses Thai PM痴 call to sideline Daw Suu"
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Nigeria: Govt may remove key obstacle to Niger Delta talks
"There were indications Monday that the Nigerian government has finally yielded to pressure to drop former foreign affairs minister and UN official Ibrahim Gambari as Chairman of the planning committee of the planned Niger Delta summit, aimed at ending the spiralling violence in the oil region."
OpEdNews-Myanmar: The war criminal was elevated by the United Nations, to the position of UN special envoy to Burma
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Myanmar-The-war-criminal-by-Ashin-Mettacara-080826-828.html
By Ashin Mettacara
Why couldn't the United Nations do anything for Burma?
I looked into the various sources on Mr. Gambari after failing to meet detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Mr. Ibrahim Agboola Gambari was a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, Georgetown University and Howard University. Later, he became Permanent Representative of Nigeria to the United Nations in 1990.
Mr. Gambari is an intelligent man, but he uses his intelligence to defend a notorious Nigerian military leader, Sani Abacha. Sani Abacha is like Burma military leader, Than Shwe, who has continued suppression of the free press , and has overseen the detention of journalists and peaceful protesters who oppose his regime. In 1995, Sani Abacha's regime executed Ken Saro Wiwa by hanging. Ken Saro Wiwa was an author, environmentalist and Ogoni leader who led a peaceful demonstration.
Although the trial was widely criticized by human rights organizations, UN Representative Mr. Gambari told the CNN Abacha had not committed any offence and labeled Ken Saro Wiwa as "a common criminal." And he defended the military regime and said, "Nigeria doesn't need democracy because democracy is not food. It is not a priority now." Isn't that a remarkable word from the United Nations?
After the demise of Abacha, his soccer teams were charged with murder and corruption. Mr. Gambari was also first of eleven players of Abacha's soccer team, but he was not listed, because UN general secretary Kofi Annan elevated him to the position of Under-Secretary and Special Adviser on Africa at the UN. Gambari should be made to face trial because of his roles in the Ogoni affair and mass murders. Instead he has been elevated to the post of UN special envoy to Burma.
Reference sources:
http://www.onlinenigeria.com/articles/ad.asp?blurb=85
http://www.afriquenligne.fr/news/africa-news/nigeria:-govt-may-remove-key-obstacle-to-niger-delta-talks-200807078386.html
http://www.oyibosonline.com/cgi-bin/newsscript.pl?record=3891
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Saro-Wiwa/span/p
http://ashinmettacara-eng.blogspot.com/
I was born in Wun Tho, Sagaing Division, Burma in 16/04/1982. I was ordained a novice in 1994 and a monk in 2000. I studied Buddhism at Khanti Pariyatti Monastery (Wun Tho, Sagaing Division, Burma), Wayalet Pariyatti Monastery (Rangoon, Burma) and Man Aung Monastery (Rangoon, Burma). I passed Buddhist examinations known as Pathamange, Pathamalatt, Pathamagyi in Burma. I arrived Colombo, Sri Lanka on 9th May, 2004. I studied B.A and M.A programme in Colombo, Sri Lanka and has successfully completed B.A and M.A from the Buddhist and Pali University of Sri Lanka. While I was studying in the Buddhist and Pali University of Sri Lanka, in September 2007, there was a Saffron Revolution in Burma. The military regime cracked down the peaceful protestors who mostly are Buddhist monks. As I could not reconcile myself with the current military regime's brutal crackdown to our Buddhist monks, peaceful protestors and human rights abuses, I became involved in the Burmese politics as an exile. http://ashinmettacara-eng.blogspot.com/
Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author
Inner City Press: Investigative Reporting from the United Nations
Inner City Press: Investigative Reporting from the United Nations: "Gambari's Myanmar Visit 'Disappointing,' UK Mission Says, UN Takes No Questions"
BURMA NEWS: MYANMAR /TIBET NEWS , BURMA DISASTER NEWS, FREE BURMA / TIBET NEWS: Burmese army confiscate more land for self-sustenance
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Center for Refugees to Be Built Next Year-koreatimes
By Park Si-soo
Staff Reporter
The government will build a refugee-only detention center next year to accommodate the soaring number of asylum seekers during their applications are processed. Those who obtain refugee status will be given a six-month education course there designed to help them settle in Korea.
It is the first facility to be constructed exclusively for asylum applicants and refugees.
``We plan to build the center in Paju, Gyeonggi Province,'' a source told The Korea Times. ``The Ministry of Justice is in talks with the Ministry of Strategy and Finance to secure budget.''
Those applying for the status with their visa remaining valid and refugee status achievers will get priority to stay in the center, while asylum seekers who have overstayed their visa will be only allowed to move in if there is room for them, the source said.
The facility will provide inmates with food, medical treatment, and other welfare services for free since Korean law prohibits refugee seekers from working. Many have had no choice but to work illegally at small-scale factories, risking deportation, or seeking financial support from civic groups until the government gives a final decision.
Residents in the new center will be allowed to stay outside the facility after getting approved status.
According to the Ministry of Justice, the number of asylum seekers has reached 1,951 since 1994. Of them, 77 people have been granted refugee status. The Korean government signed the U.N. Convention on the Status of Refugees in 1992.
The number of refugee applicants jumped from 37 in 2001 to 84 in 2003, 410 in 2005 and 717 in 2007.
By nationality, Nepal topped the list of applicants with 374, followed by China with 302, Myanmar with 192, Nigeria with 151 and Uganda with 132.
Of the total applicants, 701 or 35.9 percent applied for political reasons, while 255 or 13.1 percent applied because of possible persecution in their home countries.
pss@koreatimes.co.kr
Angry Reaction to Samak’s 'Suu Kyi is a Tool' Remark
.jpg)
By SAW YAN NAING Tuesday, August 26, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burmese opposition politicians and some political observers and commentators have strongly rejected Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej’s description of Aung San Suu Kyi as a “political tool” of the West.
Samak made the controversial comment to UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari when the two met in Bangkok as the Nigerian diplomat was returning from his latest failed mission to Burma.
“Europe uses Aung San Suu Kyi as a political tool,” Samak told Gambari. “If it's not related to Aung San Suu Kyi, you can have deeper discussions with Myanmar [Burma].”
Samak also told reporters after meeting Gambari: “Efforts to engage the military regime would be more productive if Aung San Suu Kyi was left off the agenda.”
Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) rejected the Thai premier’s comments as inappropriate.
“As the leader of a country, he should not give such comments about the political affairs of other countries,” said NLD Spokesman Nyan Win.
Nyan Win accused Samak of favoring the Burmese regime and ignoring the Burmese people.
Kavi Chongkittavorn, senior editor of the Bangkok English-language daily newspaper The Nation said, “I think Samak’s comment is ridiculous. And he has tarnished Thailand’s reputation as the chairman of the Asean (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations).
“He [Samak] doesn’t even understand the situation in Burma. He has a very sadistic attitude in attacking whoever disagrees with him. Look at the manner he attacks the Thai media everyday.”
A Burmese ethnic leader, Cin Sian Thang, chairman of the Zomi National Congress in Rangoon, accused Samak of “insulting Burmese people.”
Cin Sian Thang charged that Samak “doesn’t support the formation of democracy in Burma.”
A well-known Burmese politician and former ambassador to China in the 1970s, Thakin Chan Htun, said in Rangoon that Samak’s remarks were based on Thailand’s business interests in Burma, which were more important to him than democratic reform.
Although Gambari failed to meet any top Burmese leader or Aung San Suu Kyi on his latest visit, the UN denied the mission was a failure.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s deputy spokeswoman,
Marie Okabe, said in New York on Monday: “One should not make a judgment on the process based on each individual visit.”
During his Bangkok stopover, Gambari urged Samak to continue his support for the UN mission to break the political deadlock in Burma.
Gambari is scheduled to visit Indonesia before returning to New York, where Okabe said he would report to Ban Ki-moon on his latest visit to Burma.
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group | www.irrawaddy.org
Japanese government to accept Myanmar nationals living in third countries as refugees - Mainichi Daily News
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/national/archive/news/2008/08/25/20080825p2a00m0na018000c.html
Gov't to accept Myanmar nationals living in third countries as refugees
The Japanese government has decided to accept refugees who have fled from their own countries and reside in other countries, and will receive about 30 Myanmar nationals living in Thailand as early as fiscal 2010, it has been learned.
The government is also considering increasing the number of Myanmarese refugees it accepts in the future, and expanding its measure to cover refugees from other countries.
Up until now, Japan has refused to accept refugees living outside their own countries other than those accepted under special measures covering Indochinese refugees. Accordingly, the new decision could be regarded as a change in Japan's policy regarding refugees.
Under the current Immigration-Control and Refugee-Recognition Act, screening for refugee recognition is carried out in Japan, and there are no presupposed conditions for accepting refugees living overseas. But with the new measure on refugees living in third countries they can apply in the places where they are living.
In 2007, 816 people applied for recognition as refugees in Japan. Five hundred of them (about 60 percent) were Myanmarese living under the military junta. It appears that the government singled out Myanmarese refugees in its latest decision because there were many wanting to immigrate to Japan. The government is reportedly considering accepting groups of families. If Japan does accept them it will be the first country in Asia to do so.
Click here for the original Japanese story
(Mainichi Japan) August 25, 2008
Posts
