Sunday, September 7, 2008
The sands of peace
The sands of peace
Posted: September 06, 2008, 3:23 AM by Jeff White
Lawrence Solomon, Oil, Russia, oilsands, Alberta, environment, carbon dioxide, EU, European Union, fossil fuels, tar sands, oil sands, Georgia
Russia’s energy supplies enabled their aggression, Canada’s supply could be the placating alternative
By Lawrence Solomon
"When it comes to action over Georgia, Russia has the European Union over a barrel. In fact, 1.2 million barrels. That’s how much Russian crude is pumped westward every day down the Druzhba pipeline to fuel Europe’s economies.”
So began an article in The International Herald Tribune, one of many last week explaining why Europe — and the west — has little choice but to sacrifice parts of Georgia, and maybe a lot more, to Russia’s ambitions.
“Russia knows that when it comes to conducting a serious foreign and security policy, Europe is all mouth,” says Lord Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong and a former EU external relations commissioner. This impotence emboldens Russia and revives its centuries-long drive to control neighbouring states.
A new Cold War looms, many are concluding, financed by Russia’s new found energy wealth and fueled by appeasement. Is the free world doomed to decades of hostility due to Europe’s energy vulnerability?
1.2 million barrels of oil a day is a lot. Or not. Alberta’s might as an energy power is now based largely on the ongoing development of just seven oil sands projects, most of them on the ultimate scale of 300,000 to 400,000 barrels of oil a day. Add three or four projects from Alberta on that scale to produce another 1.2 million barrels of oil per day and Europe’s entire oil dependence on Russia can be eradicated. A democratic peace-promoting country would have come to Europe’s rescue, providing not just oil but the steel needed in Europe’s spine.
The oil would do more than loosen Europe from the grips of an untrustworthy supplier who has shown no hesitation in using its energy exports to bully its customers — the Ukraine, Georgia, and Estonia have all felt Russia’s wrath. With an immense addition to the world oil markets from Alberta, oil prices will plummet along with the need for appeasement, in the process weakening despotic and militaristic regimes. High oil prices arm despots against their own people, as with Burma’s military regime; they finance terrorism abroad, as with Iran; and they make dreams of empire thinkable, as with Russia.
Canada’s oil sands are rightly known for the immense environmental problems that they pose. They should also be known for their role in promoting peace and security around the globe. Canada already exports some 2.5 million barrels of oil a day to U.S., more than half of it from oil sands, providing the Americans with a secure supplier that reduces its need to intervene militarily in far-flung oil-producing regions.
Energy security remains a top political issues in the U.S. One of Barack Obama’s central pledges in his acceptance speech last week was getting off Mideast oil in a decade. The United States imports some two million barrels of Mideast oil per day. In a decade, if the Alberta government’s plans come through, that entire two million barrels could come from increases in Alberta oil sands production alone. In another decade, Alberta hopes to expand its production by another three million barrels per day. Advancing just 1.2 million of that three million for the sake of Europe, and for the cause of peace, should become an imperative.
In the 1980s, when oil from oil sands cost about $30 a barrel, and oil prices were often in the $20 to $30 range, oil sands required economic subsidies to be viable business propositions, even ignoring their environmental harm. With oil now at $100 per barrel and production costs about $10 a barrel and expected to fall further, the profitability of oil sands is immense. No subsidies can be justified, economic or environmental.
Oil sands have a host of problems. These include known harms — they consume and pollute too much water, they despoil too much land — and they include one potential harm — greenhouse gases, which many scientists believe can cause the planet to warm dangerously. But problems have a way of getting solved, as we’ve seen with coal. Once the dirtiest of fuels, coal can now be burned cleanly, thanks to improvements in technology. Clean coal has the same emissions profile as natural gas, and it is getting cleaner still.
Oil sands are following the same route to rehabilitation. They still consumes too much water, but less than half as much as before. Although some 500 square kilometres of land has been despoiled to date, land is also beginning to be rehabilitated, as it must under the terms of the agreements that the producers signed with the government — Syncrude has reclaimed some 4,500 hectares at its site north of Fort McMurray, with impressive results. Greenhouse gas emissions are being halved.
Alberta’s oil sands represent one of the planet’s largest reservoirs of energy — some 2.5 trillion barrels of crude bitumen from which 300 billion barrels are estimated to be available, an amount that rivals the reserves of Saudi Arabia. They need to be developed properly: cleanly, to protect the environment, and quickly, to promote peace and stability.
Financial Post
— Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Energy Probe and author of The Deniers: The world-renowned scientists who stood up against global warming hysteria, political persecution, and fraud.
LawrenceSolomon@nextcity.com
The 2010 Election Challenges
The 2010 Election Challenges
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By MIN ZIN Saturday, July 12, 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burma's conflict is moving into a new phase of intractability. In other words, the conflict will become institutionalized in 2010.
The military has unilaterally set the rules of the new game with the ratification of its constitution and is preparing to hold elections in 2010 as part of its seven-step “roadmap.” But the new constitution will not bring about much-needed state-building, a process in which all parties rally together and make their voices heard.
Instead of entering into the state-building process, Burma ranked 12th out of 177 states in order of their vulnerability to violent internal conflict and societal deterioration in the 2008 “failed state” index, presented by Foreign Policy magazine and the Fund for Peace. In the 2007 index Burma was designated 14th in failed state rankings. The country is crumbling.
"I can't really see anything happening that will be positive for the country's better future at this stage," said David Steinberg, a Burma expert from Georgetown University in Washington, DC.
The incompatible goals of the military elites and the opposition, including ethnic minorities, will not be transformed by the new constitution and the 2010 election.
The opposition will continue to fight for the goal of national reconciliation but is likely to find itself ineffective within the new institutional procedures that favor the military's exclusive domination. As result, the opposition will have to pursue alternative course of actions—such as public mobilization and international advocacy.
On the other hand, since the military continues to impose its one-sided goal of exclusive domination with the new constitution and elections it cannot expect to minimize the cost of conflict. The most visible costs of this approach will be the continuation of international isolation and further damage to the country's economy.
"We do not accept the junta's unilateral solution," said Aung Din, a former political prisoner and executive director of the US Campaign for Burma. "Until and unless there is a negotiated political settlement, made by the military, the National League for Democracy led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and ethnic representatives together, the US-led western sanctions against the junta will not be lifted."
Sein Htay, a Burmese economist in exile, goes further, saying: "No matter whether there are western economic sanctions or not, the regime's policy failure and mismanagement will damage the prospect of development and public welfare. The country's economy will continue to worsen after 2010."
The threat of renewed public uprisings will still be present, since the military's intentions do not facilitate a reconciliation of interests. More repression will result, increasing existing grievances and public hostility towards the military.
"As the generals will use the same method of coercion against the people even after 2010, the existing public anger that reached an unprecedented high level during the crackdown against monk-led protests last year and the regime's negligence of cyclone relief in May will then be compounded," said Win Min, a researcher in civil-military relations in Burma. "Antagonistic civil-military relations will continue."
Apart from being unable to transform incompatible goals and relations, the new, post-2010 regime will not change any salience of the issues that the country has been facing and which have earned it pariah status.
According to the military's new constitution, a military chief will independently administer military affairs, including recruitment and expansion of troops, promotions, troop deployment, budget, military-owned businesses, purchase and manufacture of weapons, etc.
Consequently, the issues of child soldiers, forced relocations, forced labor, landmines, internal displaced person, the flow of refugees to neighboring countries, rape and other rights violations—all of which are associated with the military's unchecked interests and behavior— will continue unresolved, especially in ethnic areas such as the eastern areas of Burma.
Since the elected parliament’s legislative power will be restricted and because it will not be able to oversee the military, no civilian mechanisms will be available to redress the military’s excesses. Military personnel accused of crimes will be tried by a court-martial appointed by the head of the armed forces, the Tatmadaw—effectively allowing the military to continue its violations with impunity.
The 2010 elections could, however, contribute to leadership changes, at least on a nominal level during the initial stage. Two power centers will be created—military and government. Aside from the 25 percent of parliamentary seats reserved for the military and its power to appoint the three most important cabinet ministers (Defense, Home and Border Area Affairs) in the Cabinet, the generals are determined to fill the remaining government portfolios and parliamentary seats with members of its own civilian thuggish movement, the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA).
The election is sure to be marked by vote rigging, intimidation and bullying attacks orchestrated by the USDA and its affiliates against opposing candidates. Given the record of USDA violence against Suu Kyi's entourage in 2003 and opposition activists in subsequent years, the world will witness an election model of goon-squad democracy—comparable to the travesty of recent elections in Zimbabwe.
The new post-election power arrangement will nonetheless create conflict between two power centers over the command structure and personal interests. Even now, various reports confirm that there is serious animosity and tension between military personnel and USDA members regarding the latter's interference with the military's administrative mandate and other issues of self-interest.
Given the military's lack of experience of sharing power, it will be harder for the generals to accept being outshone by the USDA.
"Many officers in the military hate the USDA and believe it will go down when Than Shwe goes," said a source close to the military establishment.
The government's operation with two centers of power—no matter who pull the strings—could lead to either a serious internal split or miserable inefficiency of the ruling body.
Some advocates expect it will take an evolutionary shift toward liberalization. They believe the military's constitution, although flawed, can give reform options to a new generation of military officers. They suggest "using the generals’ flawed model of democracy as a starting point from which to pursue a more acceptable long-term solution."
However, the nature of the power rivalry within a post-2010 regime will not necessarily lead to a new opening and democratization in the long run. Even if it does so, the question is: how long is the long run? It may be too long to have any strategic relevancy for the opposition movement, within the country as well as abroad.
In fact, political transition is not likely to take place within the framework of a military-imposed constitution. Even amendments made to the constitution in the hope of gradual reform will not be possible within military-dominated parliamentary debate and a new power arrangement. It could happen only if the status-quo is challenged by public pressure and a negotiated settlement is reached with the military. Otherwise, the post-2010 prospect remains bleak.
The UN-led international community, therefore, must double its efforts to push for an inclusive political resolution in Burma before 2010, mediating for meaningful political dialogue among all key stake holders by using coercive diplomacy, rather than pleading to the regime to conduct elections that are just "credible and inclusive".
The international community must be fully aware that the result of the election will be in accordance with the military's constitution. Otherwise, it will make the same major mistake committed by EU leaders at their July 19 summit in Brussels when they called on the military junta "to ensure that the elections announced for 2010 will be prepared and conducted in a way that contributes to a credible and fully participative transition to democracy." Without considering contextual and consequential dangers, the EU leaders just pushed for the 2010 election and perhaps felt they were serving the cause of Burmese democracy. Moral misery and strategic blunder!
UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari, who is planning to return to Burma soon, should be especially cautioned not to lend legitimacy to the regime's constitution and elections in 2010. The UN, which once supported the junta's seven-step “roadmap” as a potential for an inclusive transition, must now say clearly that the map is no longer relevant since it has failed to incorporate key stakeholders.
In brief, the UN-led international community should not give up its attempt to enforce an inclusive political resolution in Burma before 2010.
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group | www.irrawaddy.org
Country could face critical rice shortage
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Country-could-face-critical-rice.4465071.jp
Published Date: 06 September 2008
By BEN BAILEY
BUSINESSMAN Paul Strachan warned that a lack of rice supplies could put the biggest strain on Burma's military rulers since the 1988 uprising.
"If farmers aren't able to plant a full crop of rice in the next few weeks, there could be a shortage within six months," he said.
It all depends on how much the junta has stored for an emergency, and whether the ordinary Burmese people will rise up in protest if supplies run short. About 80 to 90 per cent of the country's supply comes from the Irrawaddy Delta, and there has been a world rice shortage as well. If there is hunger in six months, the whole country will be affected, not just the delta."
He added: "The government depends on rice exports for foreign currency. I don't think ordinary Burmese have seen the potential problem. The leadership should be thinking about this. If there is this crisis, it could spread."
Burmese jail over 700 monks
Burmese jail over 700 monks
Friday, 5th September 2008. 4:24pm
By: George Conger.
Over 700 monks have been jailed by the Burmese military junta since the introduction of martial law in 1988, the Burma Lawyers’ Council (BLC) reported on Sept 2, with at least 19 having died while in custody.
The statistics on the government’s jailing of Buddhist monks for pro-democracy activities comes at the start of the trial of the Ven U Gambira, leader of Burma’s “Saffron Revolution.”
An increase in fuel prices in August 2007 by the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) -- the formal name of the military junta that seized power in 1988 — prompted protests. On Sept 21, 2007 U Gambira, the 29-year-old leader of the All-Burma Union of Monks, organized a demonstration against the price hikes. The demands soon grew to include the release of political prisoners and for talks between democracy activists and the regime.
Within days the monks’ protest drew support from the people of Yangon [Rangoon], and a week of demonstrations that brought 100,000 people into the streets in support of the Saffron Revolution ensued. The police responded with force, and an estimated 3,000 demonstrators were killed. Gambira escaped the crackdown and went into hiding. However, he turned himself in to the authorities after members of his family were allegedly threatened by the regime. The Buddhist abbot has been held at Rangoon’s Insein prison awaiting trial on treason and sedition charges.
His lawyers from the BLC have protested the regime’s treatment of their client, and have called for the abolition of laws that call for the shackling of political prisoners and forbid monks from wearing their robes in court. U Myo of the BLC said their client would not attend the first day of trial on Sept 3 while shackled and in prison garb “because the trial of a disrobed monk damages the dignity of the monks and the Sasana [Buddhist congregation],” he said, according to a report from the Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB). The DVB also reports that police have begun a detailed census of all Buddhist monks in Rangoon, requiring them to give the names and addresses of their families, as well as their own personal information --- an action seen as a veiled threat to the monks should they come out in protest this month on the anniversary of the failed uprising.
Christian leaders in Burma have also come under government scrutiny in recent days. Clergy in the northern town of Chibwe were interrogated by police last month following an illegal poster campaign protesting the construction of a dam.
Kachin Development Network chairman U Aung Wah said clergy were summoned for interrogation by local authorities on July 13 and 24. "The male and female pastors were called to the police station one at a time and pressured to find out who was behind the posters – the officials insisted that they knew there was a link between the pastors and the poster campaign," said Aung Wah.
“They were forced to sign an agreement saying that they would find out who the culprits were,” he said.
The dam project is a joint venture between a Chinese company and a military controlled Burmese concern, Myanmar-Asia World Company. Kachin farmers have been driven off their land by the army to build the dam. “They have seized gardens and farmland from the locals and the project has destroyed all the roads in the area,” Aung Wa said.
BURMA:BUILDING UPON SUCCESS
BURMA:
BUILDING UPON SUCCESS
Three months after Cyclone Nargis, the world has an outdated image of the situation inside Burma. Although aid agencies delivered assistance within days after the storm and continue to do so, the story of a recalcitrant government that rejects aid from the generous nations of the world has not been updated. Aid agencies today report an unprecedented level of access and mobility in the Ayeyarwady Delta, which is a tribute to the successful fight by the United Nations, the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) and the United States for humanitarian access. But the gains in delivering relief supplies, gathering information about needs and supporting local communities are at risk without continued commitment to food security, livelihood and early recovery activities.
The U.S. government and the European Commission should immediately commit funds to continue humanitarian cyclone relief past the emergency stage and into 2009 for food security, early recovery and livelihoods programs. They should allocate these funds based on revised assessments of need and the ability to effectively implement such programs.
The U.S., Europe and ASEAN should publicly acknowledge the progress that has been made in access to cyclone-ravaged parts of Burma since the end of May.
International donors should ensure vigorous support for livelihood recovery operations, and particularly for capacity building initiatives that strengthen local Burmese organizations.
Policy Recommendations
September 5, 2008
Contacts: Dawn Calabia and Megan Fowler
The Ground Truth
For two weeks, Refugees International interviewed the staff of over forty humanitarian organizations inside Burma. All report access to any requested part of the delta, including ethnic minority areas, and the ability to send international staff to train, implement and monitor programs without obstruction. Since June, over 1,000 visas have been granted to international aid workers. Similarly, agencies report the ability to resolve problems with the government, and praise the Tripartite Core Group (TCG) – the cyclone response structure comprised of working levels of the Burmese government, ASEAN and the United Nations – as an effective mechanism for resolving disputes. The TCG has ably removed obstacles related to visas, Foreign Exchange Certificates and the importation of food, among others.
Agencies also praised the Post-Nargis Joint Assessment (PONJA), the first comprehensive, independent assessment of humanitarian need. For a country that has not conducted a national census in over 20 years, the information that it contains represents a major leap forward. PONJA is to be updated regularly to report on aid operations and their effectiveness, and ASEAN will establish six offices in the delta to better monitor and evaluate aid activities.
Burmese community based organizations were first responders that are now working to increase their capacity to provide effective aid. Local organizations with international support are providing training and funding to ensure that Burmese humanitarian groups can better assess and organize community assistance, improve their organizational structures and coordinate activities with each other and with international agencies. The work of local organizations is vital for the success of humanitarian operations in Burma as these groups
phone: [202] 828–0110 n facsimile: [202] 828–0819 n e-mail: ri@refintl.org n www.refugeesinternational.org n 2001 S Street, NW, Suite 700 n Washington, DC 20009
promote self-reliance and reduce vulnerabilities. Support for groups that provide capacity building and training services to these organizations is as important as the provision of direct relief.
Improved information sharing and coordination between the UN and international and local NGOs, coupled with easier international access to the delta and donor support, have reduced suffering, saved lives and improved the overall humanitarian response to the affected population. While a large majority of cyclone victims have received some sort of assistance, and most are receiving regular food aid, the process of transitioning from relief to self-sufficiency will require international help well through 2009 and perhaps beyond. The international community must continue funding humanitarian assistance and begin livelihood and other early recovery activities that will allow the gradual phasing-out of emergency aid. (See Key Facts on Post-Cyclone Nargis Humanitarian Needs.)
The Political Struggle over International Aid
The demands of the relief effort have emboldened some Ministers within the Government of Burma to facilitate international cooperation, a story ignored by international reports that focus on the government’s obstructionism. Their success has created a new set of operational rules that are unique to the delta, including increased mobility for international staff; operations approved quickly through “letters of agreement;” the use of community organizing strategies; and improved communication between the international community and the government through the TCG. This new standard for humanitarian operations inside the cyclone affected areas should be commended by international organizations and donor governments and its application to the rest of the country should be advocated for by all actors.
Nonetheless, hardline isolationists are still determined to prevent further international involvement in Burmese affairs. This obstructionism has raised hurdles for relief operations, such as the failed attempt to impose strict guidelines on international agencies in June. More seriously, this conservative faction is attempting to exert its influence over on-going operations outside the delta, and is meddling with the annual memoranda of understanding (MOUs) of a number of long-standing operational agencies. With little clear direction being given from the senior leadership, multiple government officials appear to be implementing competing pro- and anti-engagement policies simultaneously in hopes that their actions will curry favor with top officials.
The sooner that the U.S. and other donor countries reaffirm their commitment to early recovery operations at least through 2009, the better the chance that the new openness in the delta will take hold. Ministers who have risked their political capital to support international involvement must be encouraged by donor commitments to more than a short-term infusion of humanitarian assistance. Without these commitments, isolationists may argue that humanitarian operations were more about scoring political points against the regime rather than aiding Burma.
Funding is Key
Gaps and delays in funding will hamper relief activities and could cause ruptures in the supply of essential goods. The U.S. Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) has led an exemplary operation to provide cyclone relief, granting almost $50 million to international NGOs and UN agencies. OFDA programs are scheduled to transition to the U.S. Agency for International Development in January 2009. Refugees International is concerned that to date no funding has been requested or identified by the Bush Administration or authorized by Congress to continue the needed relief programs in FY 2009.
Similarly in April 2009, the European Commission’s Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO) will hand over responsibility for future aid to the European Commission (EC). Currently the EC plans €6 million for cyclone operations, substantially below current ECHO funding levels. The British government has provided £45 million through March 2009, but has not determined funding past that date. Australia has announced $55 million for its 2008/2009 cyclone programs.
Ripple Effect?
Humanitarian agencies have largely maintained their operations throughout the country while responding to the cyclone. Though many agencies temporarily pulled staff from regional offices throughout the country to work in the delta, few programs halted their nationwide operations to respond to Nargis.
Many humanitarian activists in Burma hope that the assessment, monitoring and access breakthroughs that characterize the delta operations will eventually lead to a revision of overall Burmese policy on humanitarian activities. Currently, the restrictions placed on agencies in other parts of the country remain unchanged (see “Key Facts on the Operating Environment for International Agencies,” March 2008). Many actors also hope for benefits from increased contact with Burmese officials, and one agency has indeed reported expanded access in another part of the country as a direct result of relationships built during cyclone operations.
It is too soon to tell if there will be a national transformation on humanitarian access. To encourage this transition, international agencies and donor governments must continue to demonstrate their willingness to engage in the delta and lend support to those Burmese officials who are pushing for a greater international role. Without this vital support – both financial and political – the international community may risk squandering the largest humanitarian opening inside Burma in the past twenty years.
Dawn Calabia and Megan Fowler assessed the cyclone response effort in Burma in August 2008.
phone: [202] 828–0110 * facsimile: [202] 828–0819 * e-mail: ri@refintl.org n www.refugeesinternational.org n 2001 S Street, NW n Suite 700 n Washington, DC 20009
BURMA:
KEY FACTS ON POST-CYCLONE NARGIS HUMANITARIAN NEEDS
Cyclone Nargis hit Burma’s Ayeyarwady Division on May 2 and 3, and has affected over 2.4 million people, roughly one-third of the population of the delta region. While as many as 800,000 people may have been displaced because of the cyclone, the vast majority have since returned to their home villages, both voluntarily and under governmental forced return policies. On return, they are finding the widespread destruction of their homes and infrastructure, salinized water supplies, destroyed food stocks, and the loss of livestock, fishing boats, and other necessities. Rebuilding communities affected by Cyclone Nargis will take years, and will require a solid commitment from the international community.
September 3, 2008
Contacts: Dawn Calabia and Megan Fowler
More than half of all households in the affected region reported the loss of all food stocks during the cyclone, indicating that they will likely be dependent on humanitarian food deliveries until local farmers produce a complete harvest. It is estimated that 924,000 people will require food aid.
Half of the summer rice crop was destroyed by Cyclone Nargis. Though efforts to replant in time for the fall harvest have been vigorous, it is estimated that only 25% of villages had enough existing seed stock to plant. Production losses due to the cyclone range from 40-70% of pre-Nargis levels. Assistance with agricultural inputs is expected to be needed for at least the next two harvests.
Fifty percent of water buffalo and 25% of cattle died in the worst-affected regions of the delta. Small livestock such as chickens, pigs, ducks, and sheep had much higher mortality rates. The lack of livestock not only affects food security, but also deprives farmers of the animals necessary to plow their fields.
The cyclone destroyed over 130,000 boats, depriving communities not only of the means to fish, but also of their transportation and communication systems.
The storm destroyed 450,000 houses, while a further 350,000 sustained some type of damage. Though 80% of delta residents have temporarily rebuilt homes, the availability of construction materials such as thatch and bamboo will necessitate the use of temporary housing for many through 2009.
Sixty-three percent of residents in the affected parts of the delta have inadequate access to clean water, due largely to the salinization of ponds and other water sources. This has led to a shift towards rainwater collection as the primary water source for most families.
Cyclone Nargis destroyed close to 75% of all health facilities in the delta. The biggest impact was on primary health facilities in rural areas.
Only 60% of the affected population now has access to latrines or other sanitary facilities.
The storm destroyed 50-60% of schools, both monastic and public. This has a disproportionate impact on poor children, whose enrollment rate in primary school is only 80%, and whose enrollment in middle school is only 10%.
Source: Post-Nargis Joint Assesment.
National League for Democracy: Special Statement No. 16/09/08 (Unofficial Translation)
National League for Democracy: Special Statement No. 16/09/08 (Unofficial Translation)
Fri 5 Sep 2008
Filed under: News, Statement
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, general secretary of the National League for Democracy, is the daughter of General Aung San, the founding father of Burma’s armed forces, a selfless architect of independence that enabled Burma to become a sovereign nation, and a martyr of the nation who gave his life for the country and the people.
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is the leader of the National League for Democracy, a party which won an overwhelming support of the constituents in an election conducted in a fair and free manner, and she is also a political leader who is trusted by all the ethnic and democratic forces.
Since 1989, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has persistently called for and endeavored for the emergence of a genuinely meaningful political dialog so that a political compromise can be reached and national reconciliation achieved in the interests of the nation and the people. For this reason, the National League for Democracy profoundly believes that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi must inevitably be involved in all political and development programs of Burma.
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is presently under house arrest, unlawfully being detained under the “Law to Safeguard the State against the Dangers of Those Desiring to Cause Subversive Acts”. Additionally, the authorities introduced measures which are not part of the original restrictions. It is, therefore, vital to rescind these measures immediately because Article 9 of that law states that “In restricting fundamental rights of citizens, the following principles shall be strictly adhered to:
Section 9(b): “Only necessary restriction of fundamental rights shall be decided”.
Section 9(c): “The duration of such restriction shall be kept to a minimum”, and
Section 9(f): “The person against whom action is taken shall enjoy the fundamental rights as provided in the Constitution, in so far as these rights have not been restricted”
We have now come to learn that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi no longer accepts the food basket which is delivered to her home daily. The majority of the people and the National League for Democracy are concerned that this practice has been going on for about three weeks now.
We have learned that she stopped accepting the food basket because of the following reasons:
-To protest her unlawful detention under Section 10 (b)* of the aforesaid law,
-Daw Khin Khin Win and her daughter, who are helping her at home, are being persecuted and unlawfully being treated as if they are also being detained under Section 10 (b)
-The authorities had promised to let the family doctor visit her every month at the time of her detention but they did not let the doctor visit her between January and August this year.
Hence, we hereby declare that we hold the authorities who are unlawfully detaining Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to be responsible for her “life security and longevity”.
As per decision made by the Central Executive Committee meeting on 4 September 2008,
Rangoon
Central Executive Committee
National League for Democracy
No. 97B West Shwegondine Street
Bahan Township, Rangoon
The sixth waxing moon of Tawthalin 1370
[*The following footnote is an input by the translator]
Article 10
The Central Board, in the protection of the State against dangers, has the right to implement the following measures through restrictive order:
(b) If necessary, the movements of a person against whom action is taken can be restricted for a period of up to one year.
Small Islands to World: S.O.S.
Dear all,
Please sign this urgent petition for the Earth's climate change. We all need to support the island nations' fight because the sea level rise will eventually affect Japan, and Burma's coast as well.
Thank you,
Laura Yanoma
Dear friends,
Next week, desperate due to accelerating sea level rise, a group of small islands' leaders plan to take the unprecedented step of putting a resolution before the United Nations calling upon the Security Council itself to address climate change. Stand with these threatened people:
Sign the petition now!
Imagine the sea rising around you as your country literally disappears beneath your feet, where the food you grow and the water you drink is being destroyed by salt, and your last chance is to seek refuge in other lands where climate refugees have no official status. This is not a dream, it's the fearful reality for millions of people who live on islands around the world, from the Maldives to Papua New Guinea.
That is why these small islands are planning the unprecedented step next week, ahead of the UN General Assembly meeting, of calling on the Security Council itself to address climate change as a pressing threat to international peace and security.
This is a creative move born of desperation, a challenge to global powers to end their complacency and tackle this lethal crisis with the urgency of wars. This effort could help shift the tenor of the world's debate -- from a far-off storm cloud to a life-threatening crisis here and how. But the island states' campaign will meet fierce opposition from the world’s biggest polluters, so they need our help. Sign the petition now to raise a worldwide chorus of support for this call -- our signatures will be presented to the UN by the islands' ambassadors as they introduce their resolution next week:
http://www.avaaz. org/en/sos_ small_islands
For the first time in human history, the North Pole can be circumnavigated -- the Arctic ice is melting more quickly than almost anyone anticipated. Now, small island nations -- where homes are, at most, mere meters above sea level -- are preparing evacuation plans to guarantee the survival of their populations. They are on the frontline, experiencing the first wave of devastating impacts from climate change which soon will threaten us all.
President Remengesau of Palau, a small island in the Pacific, recently said:
Palau has lost at least one third of its coral reefs due to climate change related weather patterns. We also lost most of our agricultural production due to drought and extreme high tides. These are not theoretical, scientific losses -- they are the losses of our resources and our livelihoods. ... For island states, time is not running out. It has run out. And our path may very well be the window to your own future and the future of our planet".
Beyond the islands, countries like Bangladesh -- population, 150 million -- face losing large parts of their landmass. The experience of our planet's most vulnerable communities serves as a warning sign of the future world we can all expect: extreme weather growing in intensity, conflict over water and food supplies, coasts disappearing and hundreds of millions made refugees.
The more signatures we raise to be delivered to the UN next week, the more urgently this call will ring out to protect our common future. Sign now:
http://www.avaaz. org/en/sos_ small_islands
The small islands' brave campaign for survival is our campaign as well. Just as sea levels rise or fall everywhere at the same time, the choices of every person everywhere affect the future of our common home. By standing with the people at the front line of the climate crisis, we show them, and ourselves, that we recognize our fundamental shared humanity -- and the responsibilities that come with it.
With hope, Ben, Iain, Alice, Paul, Graziela, Pascal, Ricken, Brett, Milena -- the Avaaz team
PS: For a report on Avaaz's campaigning so far, see:
https://secure. avaaz.org/ en/report_ back_2
PPS: These are the States who are sponsoring the resolution: Fiji, Maldives, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Samoa, Seychelles, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, joined by Canada and Turkey.
For a draft of the Small Islands States Resolution, please see:
http://islandsfirst .org/draftres. pdf
For more information about those presenting the petition please visit:
http://islandsfirst .org
For information on Tuvalu's evacuation plan and climate refugees, see:
http://www.wwf. org.au/articles/ climate-refugees -in-a-drowning- pacific/
For information about how rising sea levels will affect us all:
http://www.earth- policy.org/ Updates/Update2. htm
For more information on the rapidly-melting Arctic ice:
http://www.independ ent.co.uk/ environment/ climate-change/ for-the-first- time-in-human- history-the- north-pole- can-be-circumnav igated-913924. html
For more information about all of the island states:
http://www.sidsnet. org/aosis/
----------
ABOUT AVAAZ
Avaaz.org is an independent, not-for-profit global campaigning organization that works to ensure that the views and values of the world's people inform global decision-making. (Avaaz means "voice" in many languages.) Avaaz receives no money from governments or corporations, and is staffed by a global team based in London, Rio de Janeiro, New York, Paris, Washington DC, and Geneva.
Click here to learn more about our largest campaigns.
Don't forget to check out our Facebook and Myspace and Bebo pages!
You are getting this message because you signed "" on 2007-10-15 using the email address anicca_z@hotmail. com.
To ensure that Avaaz messages reach your inbox, please add avaaz@avaaz. org to your address book. To change your email address, language settings, or other personal information, https://secure. avaaz.org/ act/index. php?r=profile&user=e56875de35859b 42085e3a847fef30 c0&lang=en, or simply go here to unsubscribe.
To contact Avaaz, please do not reply to this email. Instead, write to info@avaaz.org. You can also send postal mail to our New York office: 857 Broadway, 3rd floor, New York, NY 10003 U.S.A.
If you have technical problems, please go to http://www.avaaz. org.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
