http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=14929
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By SAW YAN NAING Thursday, January 15, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Burmese schoolteacher in Ranong in southern Thailand was arrested by Burmese police in Kawthaung after he and his family were repatriated by Thai officials on January 11, according to sources at the Thai-Burmese border.
Ko Gyi, who had been living in Ranong since 1995, was reportedly sent back to Burma with his wife, daughter and son-in-law, and is currently being detained in a police station in the Burmese border town of Kawthaung.
Sources said Ko Gyi had become a target for Burma’s military authorities because of his supposed links with Burmese opposition groups, as well as allegedly providing information to exiled Burmese news organizations.
Ko Gyi has previously been interviewed by BBC Burmese Service and The Irrawaddy.
Thai authorities also raided his home and school in Ranong and seized some computers and his car.
Ko Gyi founded a primary school in Ranong with the help of Jesuit Refugee Service, an international Catholic organization that provides assistance to refugees, forcibly displaced persons and Burmese migrant workers.
Ko Gyi and his wife worked at the school, which has provided free education to the children of Burmese migrant workers since 2003.
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group | www.irrawaddy.org
Friday, January 16, 2009
Burmese Schoolteacher and Family Repatriated
Human Rights in Burma Deteriorating: Report
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=14930
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By LALIT K JHA Thursday, January 15, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON — The human rights situation has worsened in Burma in the months since a large-scale international relief operation began in the wake of Cyclone Nargis, according to a report released on Wednesday by Washington-based Human Rights Watch (HRW).
In its annual report, HRW highlighted both the Burmese regime’s poor handling of the relief and rescue mission in the cyclone-stricken Irrawaddy delta and its continuing crackdown on political dissidents.
The report alleged that the ruling military junta in Burma has systematically denied its citizens basic freedoms, including freedom of expression, association and assembly.
Referring to the series of long-term prison sentences imposed on pro-democracy activists late last year, the report said that the number of political prisoners in the country now stands at more than 2,150.
“In October and November, more than 70 political activists, monks, nuns, labor activists, and journalists were tried in secret proceedings in prison or closed sessions in court,” the report said.
Many of the harshest sentences were handed down to people who participated in the 2007 demonstrations; 14 of them were sentenced to 65 years each. Members of the 88 Generation Students group faced 22 charges, including contact with exiled political groups and unlawfully publishing documents, and faced sentences of 150 years.
Four lawyers representing activists were also jailed for contempt of court after they attempted to withdraw from legal representation to protest the unfair proceedings.
The Burmese military continues to violate the rights of civilians in ethnic conflict areas, the report said. Extrajudicial killings, forced labor, land confiscation without due process and other rights violations continued in these areas in 2008, according to HRW’s annual World Report 2009, which documents human rights abuses and violations across the globe.
The international community in general and the US and European countries in particular continued to oppose the junta in Burma, but its big neighbors, including India, China and Thailand, remained the military’s key supporters.
China, Russia, India and Thailand continue to provide diplomatic support for the Burmese junta and are major trade and investment partners, the report said.
Foreign investment in Burma’s oil and natural gas sector increased in 2008, particularly in connection with a major offshore gas project led by a Korean consortium and a planned overland pipeline to the Burma-China border.
HRW alleged the junta continued widespread and systematic forced recruitment of child soldiers. The non-state armed groups also recruited and deployed children in conflict-prone areas.
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group | www.irrawaddy.org
Burma Situation Affects Region: Thai PM
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=14932
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By WAI MOE Thursday, January 15, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thailand’s Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said on Wednesday that because the situation in Burma could affect other countries in the region, it is time for change.
Abhisit spoke to journalists at a dinner at the Foreign Correspondent Club of Thailand in Bangkok.
Thailand shares more than 1,800 km with military-ruled Burma. Nongovernment organizations that work with Burmese migrant workers estimate there are 4 million Burmese, legal and illegal, currently living in Thailand.
Abhisit said that the regional bloc, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), should be more proactive on Burma issues, although the situation is difficult.
The Thai government will use a “flexible engagement” policy in relation to Burma under the Democrat administration, he said. The “flexible engagement” policy was outlined by Surin Pitsuwan, the former Thai foreign minister and current secretary-general of Asean in 1999. He proposed the regional bloc use a “constructive engagement” policy.
“Flexible engagement” was about open and frank discussion on issues such as human rights, leading to cooperative solutions—a pooling of sovereignty rather than its dilution, so as to make Southeast Asia a secure and prosperous region, according to analysts.
Abhisit said the sanction policy of Western nations on Burma was counterproductive.
Commenting on Abhisit’s Burma policy, Kavi Chongkittavorn, an assistant group editor of Thailand’s The Nation, told The Irrawaddy on Thursday that whether using “constructive engagement” or “flexible engagement,” Asean has to continue pressure on Burma.
He said the current Democrat administration can do a lot on Burma policy, and Abhisit’s approach will be different from the previous government of Thai Primer Thaksin Shinawatra.
“This government will be more transparent in its Burma policy,” he said.
Analysts say the Thaksin administration Burma policy was based on business interests and the government provided a 4 billion baht loan to Burma’s telecommunication sector—some of which was used to buy satellite services from a company owned by Thaksin.
Meanwhile, in a separate event, Abhisit told members of the diplomatic corps at Government House on Wednesday that Thailand will continue to play a constructive role in the sub-regional, regional and international community.
“We also continue to honor our international obligations and commitments at all levels and across all sectors,” he said. “Strengthening relations with neighboring countries remains at the heart of our foreign policy.”
Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya held a meeting with Burmese Deputy Foreign Minister Kyaw Thu in Bangkok on Monday to discuss bilateral relations.
After the meeting, Abhisit told reporters the goals of Western countries and the countries of this region are on common ground on Burma issues.
“But our methods may differ because of two main reasons: cultural differences and the distance of the countries,” he said, indicating that neighboring countries have a more delicate situation when there are policy differences.
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group | www.irrawaddy.org
Chuo professor dies in campus stabbing-(JAPAN)
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/mail/nn20090115a1.html
Thursday, Jan. 15, 2009
University shuts gates, cancels day's classes
Kyodo News
A Chuo University electronics professor died of stab wounds Wednesday after he was attacked by a man in a building on the Korakuen campus in Bunkyo Ward, Tokyo, police and other sources said.
The culprit, dressed in black clothing and a black knit cap, fled the scene, according to the student who found the professor. The man appeared to be in his 30s, the police said.
Hajime Takakubo, 45, of the Faculty of Science and Engineering, was found bleeding from multiple wounds in a bathroom on the fourth floor of the university's No. 1 building. He was stabbed at least 10 times in the chest, back and hands.
A security guard called authorities at around 10:30 a.m., but Takakubo died an hour later, the police said.
The attacker was seen fleeing the building. No weapon has been found so far, the police said.
Takakubo, whose office is on the same floor as the attack, was scheduled to give a lecture at 10:40 a.m. He was an expert on electronic circuits for TVs and mobile phones.
"He was a gentle person and not the kind who has arguments with others," an acquaintance said.
A sophomore in one of Takakubo's classes said the slaying was a complete shock.
"He was always smiling and I have never heard that he was involved in trouble," the student said.
The university closed all three of its gates after the stabbing, and students appeared worried. A school official later announced to a crowd of more than 200 students that afternoon classes were canceled and the campus would temporarily close.
The Metropolitan Police Department set up an investigation headquarters at Tomisaka Police Station.
Takakubo was a member of the Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers, and the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan. He leaves behind a wife, who is also a university professor, and a son and two daughters. His late father, Toshikazu, was a legal scholar, according to a source close to the family.
In July 1991, Hitoshi Igarashi, an associate professor at Tsukuba University in Ibaraki Prefecture who translated "The Satanic Verses," the controversial book by Salman Rushdie, was murdered on campus.
In November 2000, an economics professor at Meiji University was attacked by four men on a street. He suffered a broken bone but survived.
Myanmar activist gets 104 years in jail
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i8lQ5IvvKZaO86E_vFfi83VRYauwD95MUI9G5
YANGON, Myanmar (AP) — Military-ruled Myanmar has freed six people who recently called for the release of detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, but sentenced another activist to 104 years in prison, relatives and an activist group said Wednesday.
Six members of Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy party who marched for her release on Dec. 30 in the country's biggest city, Yangon, were freed without charge Wednesday, said the detainees' relatives. They spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of harassment by the authorities.
Three others activists remained in detention, according to the relatives.
Nobel peace laureate Suu Kyi, the face of Myanmar's beleaguered opposition, has been detained without trial for about 13 of the past 19 years, despite a worldwide campaign calling on the country's military rulers to release her.
Meanwhile, a member of a student protest group who was arrested last September was sentenced on Jan. 3 to 104 years in jail on a variety of charges, including six violations of immigration law, said the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners, a Thailand-based group of Myanmar activists.
It said Bo Min Yu Ko of the All Burma Federation of Students Unions was not allowed a defense lawyer at his trial. It did not give details of his offenses.
"The courts are not independent and simply follow orders from the regime," said the group's statement. "Criminals sentenced on drug charges are often given relatively light sentences, but political activists are given very long terms of imprisonment."
It said that at least 280 political activists have been sentenced in a flurry of hurried and often closed court cases since October last year.
Myanmar has been under military rule since 1962. The current junta came to power in 1988 after crushing a nationwide pro-democracy uprising. It held elections in 1990 but refused to honor the results after Suu Kyi's party won a landslide victory.
Hosted by Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
The role of the UN and Asean in Burma
British ambassador to Burma, Mark Canning, talks to The Irrawaddy about the role of the UN and Asean in Burma, the Cyclone Nargis relief effort and his expectations for the election in 2010
Mark My Words
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
British ambassador to Burma, Mark Canning, talks to The Irrawaddy about the role of the UN and Asean in Burma, the Cyclone Nargis relief effort and his expectations for the election in 2010
Mark Canning
Question: How do you assess events in Burma in 2008?
Answer: It was a bad year on almost all fronts. It was especially cruel that on top of all their other problems, the people of this country had to cope with the devastation caused by Cyclone Nargis—but at least there we’ve seen some good progress. After a difficult start, relief reached those who needed it, a creative mechanism was established for overseeing the operation and a number of tricky problems were overcome.
Elsewhere, there was no movement, in fact quite the opposite. The UN secretary-general himself said very recently that the degree of cooperation between Myanmar and the UN had been unsatisfactory. There was no move towards any sort of dialogue between the government and the opposition. There was continued repression.
The number of political prisoners doubled, and more than 200 activists, who’ve done nothing but espouse peaceful protests, were given massive prison sentences. Aung San Suu Kyi remains locked away and prevented from playing the conciliatory role she could fulfil if allowed. The various concessions made at the turn of the year, like the series of meetings between her and the labour minister came to nothing. The population has been told to expect the introduction of “disciplined democracy” in 2010—they’ve seen plenty of the former but not much of the latter.
Q: Many critics, including Burmese both inside and outside the country, believe that Gambari’s mission has been a failure. What can he do to win greater credibility for his mission and to achieve political reconciliation in Burma?
A: The UN is playing a key role and we support it 100 percent. Dr Gambari has been working the problem extremely hard, but, as he and the secretary-general have made clear, the level of cooperation from the government has simply not been good enough.
There’s always been a tendency to criticise the envoy—you saw the same with Razali Ismail, you see it now with Dr Gambari, but that’s a mistake. It’s quite clear where responsibility lies for the lack of forward movement. The priority for 2009 therefore is to rebuild more solid international backing for what the UN is trying to do. The secretary-general’s personal engagement is a great asset and should help achieve that, and we hope very much to see him back here once conditions allow. We have now a clear assessment of where things have got to on which to build. It’s crystal clear there’s not been the kind of progress over the past 12 months which a number of countries claim to have seen. In fact, the situation has gone backwards and will continue to do so until there is clear and unambiguous backing for the UN. Issues like the release of political prisoners, rather than being internal matters, are central to what the UN is trying to achieve—political reconciliation.
Q: The UK played a major role in the cyclone relief operation—where do you see things going now?
A: The operation is going far better than we feared at the outset. The Tripartite Core Group mechanism has proved a great success, and there has been excellent collaboration between the government, Asean and the UN. Most of the affected population is getting some form of support, a wave of secondary deaths has been avoided, and the operation has been instrumental in saving hundreds of thousands of lives. As you say, the UK has been the largest contributor, and we’re proud of that. Most of all though it’s been a fantastic co-operative effort which has involved a range of donors, agencies, and local and international NGOs, all of which has rested on the hard and innovative work of the three TCG partners.
Our ministers are now in the process of assessing what more we might do. Looking ahead, we—and I think most donors—hope to see the TCG mandate extended beyond July so that it can build on what’s been achieved. We hope also that in partnership with government, some of the underlying policy issues in the area of agriculture and livelihoods, that affect the ability of those in the delta and elsewhere to make a sustainable living, can be considered. There’s good work going on there too, but there’s probably more that could be done. The key point is that there’s no point bandaging the patient if you then send him back into the environment that helped cause the problem in the first place.
Q: Do you think that the “humanitarian space” in the delta can be expanded to other areas of the country? What makes you believe that this will be possible, and what obstacles do you foresee?
A: That’s certainly the hope of all of us who are involved in the operation. The Nargis operation has helped build confidence and trust between the government and the donor community. We’ve seen good co-operative working, and both local and international NGOs play a fantastic role. All this has been excellent, but, as you say, the rest of the country is out there and it’s important in coming months that collectively we start to raise our eyes from the delta to address some of the serious situations elsewhere. Whether we’ll succeed, and the environment will almost certainly be difficult and unpredictable in the period up to 2010, remains to be seen, but it’s essential we try to build on the gains and keep up the momentum.
Q: The UK has tended to take a hard political line on Burma. Why in this case were you willing to donate so generously? And how would you respond to sceptics who say that aid organisations cannot operate effectively in Burma because of government restrictions? You recently asked the Burmese military government to increase its assistance to the Burmese people. Do you think that they have increased their aid to people who are in need?
A: We’ve always believed that, while the search for a political solution goes on, the people of this country should not be made to suffer further. We’ve steadily extended our humanitarian work in-country, particularly in health, but in other areas too, like livelihoods and primary education. Our role in the relief operation was consistent with this, and we hope that the success it’s enjoyed will encourage other donors to work in this country, which remains one of the most under-aided in the world.
To the sceptics you mention, I’d say that while this is not always the easiest of environments, good work can and is being done. The Three Diseases Fund is a good example. It’s delivering real health benefits to vulnerable populations, has benefited from excellent cooperation from the Ministry of Health and has at all times operated within the guidelines donors set at the outset. We very much hope to see more donors come in and are more than happy to share our experience with them. We hope to see the government’s contribution increase—that not only makes more funds available for the delivery of health, education, etc, but it also sends a signal of commitment that helps draw in new donors and encourages those already here to provide more assistance.
Q: Turning back to politics, what about Burma’s neighbours? Apart from the members of Asean, what do you think other countries, such as India, China and Russia, can do to bring about positive change in Burma?
A: There’s a key role for the countries of the region. Everyone understands the intractable nature of this problem. There are no easy solutions, and it must be tempting at times, when the issue is on your doorstep, to give up on it. Regional integration is hard enough at the best of times, yet alone when one of the members is moving in the opposite direction in political and economic terms. For the members of Asean, the situation poses an obvious reputational challenge—at the very time they are launching the human rights charter, we have a member flouting the standards it is designed to promote and as the situation declines—and it will—the practical effects on the neighbours, are likely to become more pronounced.
The fundamental question for the region therefore is whether the course on which the government is embarked is going to deliver the sort of stability and prosperity they have achieved in their own countries? There’s very little evidence in my view that it is. Nobody is under any illusions about the scale of the challenge, and a number of countries in the region have been working to address it, but the key in coming months is to build a more unified backing for what the UN is trying to achieve. It’s essential that the government should constantly be reminded, by those that have influence, of the need for change and meaningful cooperation with the UN.
Q: There has been a great deal of speculation that Aung San Suu Kyi could be released this year. If so, what do you think she will be able to achieve?
A: Whether she’ll be freed we obviously don’t know, but she should be. She has made clear repeatedly her willingness to work with the government and other political and ethnic nationality forces to address the challenges this country faces. She has made clear her wish to work for gradual, stable, evolutionary change, and change which takes account of the interests of the many different parties involved, including the military.
The fact that she’s under house arrest suggests she’s regarded as a threat. But she’s actually an opportunity in the sense that she could be instrumental in helping to forge the sort of broad-based dialogue with government that is the only way that progress is going to be made. If she’s not allowed to play that role, then it’s difficult to see how this will be done.
Q: The regime has accused the British and other Western embassies of meeting with NLD members. How do you respond to this charge?
A: We keep in touch with as wide a range of opinion as we are able. That includes government, as well as a range of other actors, and that’s very much the role of an embassy.
Q: How do you see Burma’s political landscape in 2010 and beyond? What is the UK government’s stance on the 2010 election?
A: The coming year will obviously be dominated by preparations for the elections in 2010, and we’ll presumably soon get some more detail of what the SPDC will allow in terms of participation. This can all represent a healing process, and a step on the way to resolving longstanding political difficulties—or it can be the opposite—as has been the case till now.
There’s clearly time to make the process more inclusive. We hope to see that happen. The European Union has always made clear that it is willing to respond to movement in a positive direction. Clearly, you can not have a credible electoral process without certain things happening—the release of political prisoners, engagement between government, opposition and the ethnic nationalities—and those are the criteria against which it should be judged.
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group | www.irrawaddy.org
A Tribute to Burma and Beyond
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011300759_pf.html
By Tom Sietsema
Wednesday, January 14, 2009; F03
Tired of screaming at your dining companions and bumping against the people sitting next to you at restaurants?
Oceans of space encircle the tables at Burma Road (617 S. Frederick Ave., Gaithersburg; 301-963-1429), where mint-green walls and tinkling music also put diners at ease. "I feel good in here," says the 80-year-old in my party, echoing the sentiments of all of us on a recent visit to this young restaurant. No sooner is everyone seated than a pot of tea appears.
Behind the tranquillity is Win Myint, who introduces himself to customers as simply "Charlie." Burma Road is a tribute to the place of his birth and the path by which his mother and grandmother fled the invading Japanese in World War II. Of the trio of friends who helped open the 110-seat restaurant in October, Myint, 54, is the only one with experience in the field, having run Hunan Cafe in King George, Va., for a decade.
The menu weaves Burmese with Chinese dishes. Thus pickled tea leaf salad and pork with pickled mango share space with General Tso's chicken and kung pao shrimp. Given the relative scarcity of the former cuisine around here, friends and I fill up on that salad, crunchy with peanuts and fueled with garlic, and that spicy meat and fruit combination, which is a tad oily but also hearty. Not to be missed: roti, the flaky Indian pancake, served with a "dip" of chicken curry.
Executing the long menu are four cooks, two Burmese and two Chinese, whose work can be delivered free to anyone ordering within a three-mile radius of Burma Road.
Something tells us Myint makes a mean cup of coffee. Before Burma Road, he worked as an assistant manager at a Starbucks in Washington.
Entrees, $6.50-$14.95.
Post a Comment
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Report item as: (required) X Obscenity/vulgarity Hate speech Personal attack Advertising/Spam Copyright/Plagiarism Other Comment: (optional)
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
© 2009 The Washington Post Company
Ads by Google
Rent a car Gaithersburg
Compare rental cars in Gaithersburg Compare car rent Maryland
CompareCarRent.com
Flowers Washington Dc
Flowers Delivered by Local Florists Same Day Flower Delivery Available.
FlowerDelivery.com/Local_Delivery
Send Flowers
Same Day Delivery by Local Florist Save $10 Online using Coupon JF2007
JustFlowers.com/Send_Flowers
Burmese Expatriates Bid Farewell to the First Lady
http://asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1666&Itemid=159
Written by Nehginpao Kipgen
Wednesday, 14 January 2009
It is less than 10 days before America's 44th president takes office on January 20. It has come the day for the Bush's family to bid adieu to the White House and begin a new journey of life. The significant role played by the First Lady, Laura Bush, is also coming to an end, yet her legacy will remain a living history in an administration that has precious few high spots.
Laura Bush took several historic and unprecedented initiatives to highlight the plight of some of the most oppressed people of the world. Among others, her advocacy for human rights abuses in the Union of Burma has brought the attention of the international community.
Some might have criticized or lambasted her for too much involvement in some of the crises of the world. Regardless of what the critics say, Laura Bush deserves appreciation and recognition for her goodwill and dedication for the cause of millions of hapless people.
At the opening session of the 61st UN General Assembly, on September 19, 2006, Mrs Bush convened a roundtable discussion to draw the international community's attention on human rights abuses in Burma. Participants included senior UN and US government officials, academics, and non-governmental organizations working to address humanitarian and human rights concerns in Burma.
In a historic meeting, Mrs. Bush welcomed a group of Burmese dissidents at the White House on June 12, 2007.
In the aftermath of the Cyclone Nargis, it was Laura Bush who made a moving statement from the White House James S. Brady Press Briefing Room on May 5, 2008. When asked: "Mrs. Bush, why such an historic interest? This is a first, for a First Lady to come to this podium and talk about a cyclone. Why such a historic interest?"
Her response was: "Well, you know I've been interested in Burma for a long time. It started really with an interest in Aung San Suu Kyi and reading her works and just the story of a Nobel Prize winner who's been under house arrest for so long, whose party was overwhelmingly elected in an election and then was never able to take office. And so it started with an interest in her, and then just the more I've seen, the more critical I see the need is for the people in Burma to be – for the world to pay attention to the people of Burma, and for the world to put pressure on the military regime."
It was an eye opener for many in the international community when the First Lady and her daughter Barbara made their way through the muddy ground in a rainy day, on August 7, 2008, to meet with thousands of Burmese refugees at Mae La refugee camp and Mae Tao Clinic at the Thai-Burma border.
When her husband was calling for "an end to the tyranny in Burma" at a speech in Bangkok, Laura Bush emphasized human rights abuses and said, "The best solution would be if General Than Shwe's regime would start real dialogue" with ethnic minorities and pro-democracy groups.
In one year anniversary statement of the 2007 demonstration, Mrs Bush said, "The United States reiterates our long-standing call for the Burmese regime to engage in a genuine dialogue with all democratic and ethnic minority leaders, with the goal of making a credible transition to civilian, democratic government. We call on the regime to release Aung San Suu Kyi and all other political prisoners."
These are some of the instances where Mrs. Bush personally got involved in the Burmese democratic movement. In the process, she had indeed fired up the international community. But sadly, it does not bring an end to the military rule.
As you are packing up to vacate the White House, Laura, please tell Michelle Obama, the incoming First Lady, to continue what you have started. This very important mission needs to continue till we see a genuine democratic society in Burma where the rights of every ethnic group are equally respected.
Nehginpao Kipgen is the General Secretary of US-based Kuki International Forum (www.kukiforum.com) and a researcher on the rise of political conflicts in modern Burma (1947-2004).
China provides more military trucks to Burma
http://www.mizzima.com/news/inside-burma/1542-china-provides-more-military-trucks-to-burma.html?tmpl=component&print=1&layout=default&page=
by Myo Gyi
Wednesday, 14 January 2009 16:04
Ruili, China (Mizzima) - Five military trucks, believed to be capable of carrying up to 100 tons in weight, were driven to the Burmese side of the border from China through the Sino-Burmese border gate, eyewitnesses said.
The trucks, which were driven through the Jiegao-Mahnwingyi border gate, were seen being guided by several Burmese military officers.
"The trucks had a label reading 'Sino Truk'. They were driven from the Mahnwingyi gate to the Burmese side at about 9:30 a.m. (Burmese Time). There were some Burmese military officers in the trucks," an eyewitness told Mizzima.
The eyewitness said the trucks were empty but there were people in civilian dresses, who are believed to be Burmese army men.
A source, who claimed to have spoken to some of the Burmese officials, said the trucks will be transported to a military base in central Burma's Meikhtila town.
He also said, the trucks were nearly double the size of military trucks – FAW and Dong Feng – which the Chinese in earlier years had given to Burma and are believed to be capable of carrying up to 100 tons in weight.
He said these trucks are different from the earlier Dong Feng trucks, which the Chinese had given in hundreds to Burma, as they are nearly double the size and length of the earlier trucks.
"They are ten-wheelers and according to one of the soldiers, these trucks will be used for carrying canons," the eyewitness said.
Sources said, China has been supplying military trucks to Burma at nearly half the market rate and allowing them to pay in installments. However, it is still not known how much Burma pays China for the trucks.
China has long been the major supplier of military hardware including arms, ammunitions and military trucks to Burma. In the past, sources in the border said China had supplied hundreds of military trucks to Burma through the Jiegong-Muse border gate.
< Prev Next >
Abhisit Needs to Set a New Course on Burma -TIME PM-IRRAWADDY
http://www.irrawaddy.org/print_article.php?art_id=14925
COMMENTARY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By AUNG ZAW Wednesday, January 14, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here’s some good news: Thailand’s new prime minister, Abhisit Vejjajiva, says he shares the West’s desire for change in Burma.
Of course, that doesn’t mean that the Kingdom is about to impose sanctions on its recalcitrant neighbor. Because of its culture and geographic proximity to Burma, Thailand could not embrace such an approach, he explained.
The young prime minister was disappointingly short on details about what his country could do to bring about change in Burma, but at least he made a clear break from the policies of former PM Samak Sundaravej, who visited Burma a year ago and returned full of fulsome praise for his hosts.
Samak, who was widely regarded as a proxy for ousted PM Thaksin Shinawatra, infamously came to the defense of Burma’s brutal generals, describing them as pious Buddhists who pray and meditate every morning.
More importantly, Samak was intent on restoring Thaksin’s policy of highly personalized, business-based relations with Burma. Under Thaksin, Thailand’s Burma policy was driven by purely commercial considerations. The lack of transparency that characterized some of his deals with the Burmese junta was widely criticized.
Most Burmese now hope that Abhisit will be able to restore transparency and accountability to Thailand’s dealings with its troubled neighbor. But even if he succeeds in staying in office long enough to undo some of the more damaging aspects of Thaksin’s legacy, he will have his work cut out for him setting relations with Burma on a straighter course.
Almost from the moment the Burmese regime seized power in a bloody coup in 1988, Thailand has been deeply conflicted over how to respond to its neighbor’s problems.
In the immediate aftermath of the army’s crackdown on protests, Burma’s nascent pro-democracy movement enjoyed strong popular support in Thailand, which soon became an important base for thousands of anti-junta dissidents; even now, hundreds of exiles remain in the country, to the perennial irritation of Burma’s rulers.
At the same time, however, many in Thailand’s ruling class saw the bloodshed as an act of desperation by a military clique despised by the majority of Burmese and with few friends abroad. The government of late PM Chatchai Choonhavan wasted no time in exploiting this rare opportunity to win access to Burma’s resources in exchange for Thailand’s economic and diplomatic support of the regime.
For most of the past 20 years, Bangkok has pursued a policy of “constructive engagement” with Burma. Only during the two terms of former PM Chuan Leekpai has Thailand’s Burma policy been guided by principles other than economic self-interest.
In 1993, the Chuan government allowed Nobel Peace Prize laureates, including Tibet’s spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, to visit Thailand to lobby for the release of detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and to highlight the need for democracy in Burma. The regime in Rangoon was furious and the relationship was strained.
During his second term, from 1997 to 2001, Chuan took an even tougher stance toward the generals in Burma. He declined to pay an official visit to Burma and he put Thailand’s defense in the hands of then-Army Chief Gen Surayud Chulanont and then-Third Army Commander Lt-Gen Watanachai Chaimuenwong—two hawks who looked askance at their neighbors to the west. Gen Surayud was also known to be sympathetic to Burma’s ethnic minorities.
As a result, troops from both sides massed along the border, leading to serious skirmishes and repeated border closures. Relations were then at their lowest ebb.
All this changed when Thaksin became the prime minister in 2001. He quickly restored a business-based approach to relations with Rangoon. But after Thaksin was deposed by a military coup in October 2006, relations with Burma were put on the back burner.
Surayud returned to a position of influence, this time as Thailand’s interim leader, and Bangkok kept its distance from Burma.
Surayud condemned the regime’s bloody crackdown on Buddhist monks and activists in September 2007 and called for a concerted international process to deal with Burma, modeled on the six-party talks which successfully persuaded North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program.
So what can we expect from new Thai government?
Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya has indicated that the new Democrat-led coalition government in Bangkok would depart from Thaksin’s business-oriented Burma policies, saying that Thailand would now run “an ethical foreign policy.”
“We shall have no [personal] business deals with the [Burmese] junta; we shall observe human rights and environmental concerns; we shall treat Burmese as we do Thais,” he said at an academic conference on December 19.
Burmese who listened to Kasit via shortwave radio stations hailed the remark. But we all know that Thailand cannot afford to allow ties with Burma to sour too much.
In reality, Thailand is Burma’s leading investor and trading partner. Thai state-owned energy firms are the largest buyers of natural gas from Burma and Thailand has won a concession to energy from the 7,110-megawatt Tasang dam on the Salween River in Burma’s Shan State. The Thai-financed project has seen no progress to date.
Under Samak, the two sides also discussed a plan to build a deep-sea port in Tavoy in Burma’s southeast, for which the regime leaders reportedly asked assistance from Thailand.
Thailand and Burma can do more business in the future, but Abhisit’s government must also take the lead in pushing for political change in Burma.
There are several ways it can do this.
As a chairman of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), Bangkok can help to formulate a comprehensive policy to bring about positive change in Burma. If Thailand, in coordination with Asean, begins to make a move, China and India, the regime’s two major allies, will listen.
Abhisit has already indicated that his Burma policy is likely to involve a more proactive stance on human rights issues in the military-ruled country. In an interview with the Qatar-based Al Jazeera news network, Abhisit said that he would try to convince fellow members of the Asean of the importance of human rights to the international community.
Unless Asean’s efforts to enshrine human rights are credible in the eyes of the international community, “the grouping will not be able to achieve its objectives,” he said.
Abhisit, an Oxford-educated economist, can also help Asean and the West to find some common ground in their approach to Burma.
Thailand could, for instance, take a more active role in humanitarian relief efforts in Burma’s cyclone-stricken Irrawaddy delta, which have brought together a wide range of international participants focused on addressing some of Burma’s immediate needs.
Perhaps with this in mind, the Thai foreign minister has offered to help Burma coordinate fundraising for the reconstruction of temples damaged by Cyclone Nargis.
But Abhisit must also take care to ensure that Thailand’s efforts to rebuild Burma do not end with its temples. He should remind his Asean counterparts that Burma’s political system also needs to be fixed, and that the sooner that can be achieved, the better it will be for the whole region.
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group | www.irrawaddy.org
City group to help Myanmar refugees
http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Alberta/2009/01/14/pf-8016281.html
January 14, 2009
By TARINA WHITE
Volunteers leave today for a Calgary-based humanitarian mission to aid Myanmar refugees who have fled their homeland's strict military dictatorship.
The group of 14 with Calgary-based Medical Mercy Canada Society (MMC) is taking medicine, equipment, clothes and baby supplies for Myanmar refugees in India, Thailand and Burma.
Each year since 1992, MMC founders Dr. Myron Semkuley and his wife Elaine have led volunteers to assist the malnourished refugees.
"They're all extremely poor and they just come into Thailand or India with nothing except for what they can carry in their hands," said Myron, 69, a Calgary family physician.
"There's zero or very little support for 98% of the people.
"They need a lot of help and really don't get a lot of help."
Volunteers on the six-week trip, ranging in age from 20 to 65, include doctors, journalists, beekeepers and engineers.
Each participant has paid $5,000 to join the humanitarian mission.
The society operates a blood clinic and also offers medical training, said Myron.
At Confirmation Hearing, Clinton Talks of Engagement With Iran
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011301145.html?wpisrc=newsletter
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 14, 2009; Page A01
Secretary of State-designate Hillary Rodham Clinton said yesterday that the incoming Obama administration will seek to engage directly with Iran in an effort to persuade it to abandon its nuclear program and become "a constructive regional actor," underscoring a dramatic shift in U.S. foreign policy from the Bush administration.
This Story
At Confirmation Hearing, Clinton Talks of Engagement With Iran
In Foreign Policy, a New Trio at the Top
Afghan Conflict Will Be Reviewed
Clinton Talks Strategy in Confirmation Hearing
Live Blogging From the Clinton Confirmation Hearing
TALK: A Disaster in the Making?
View All Items in This Story
View Only Top Items in This Story
In prepared testimony and remarks during her confirmation hearing -- which were supplemented by 79 pages of formal answers to questions posed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- Clinton was careful not to tip her hand on specific plans or policies that the new administration might pursue. But she struck a consistent theme of active engagement and unyielding diplomacy, a sharp contrast to President Bush's policy of refusing to deal with countries that did not first meet conditions set by the United States.
"I don't get up every morning thinking only about the threats and dangers we face," Clinton said. "With every challenge comes an opportunity to find promise and possibility in the face of adversity and complexity."
Clinton also pledged greater involvement in the quest for Middle East peace but was not drawn into specific questions about how the incoming administration might handle Israel's invasion of the Gaza Strip.
She drew the line, however, at the idea of the United States engaging in immediate talks with Hamas, the militant group battling Israel. Clinton said it is appropriate to set conditions in dealing with what she called "non-state actors," which in the case of Hamas would be renouncing violence, recognizing Israel and respecting previous agreements between Israelis and Palestinians.
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 14, 2009; Page A01
Secretary of State-designate Hillary Rodham Clinton said yesterday that the incoming Obama administration will seek to engage directly with Iran in an effort to persuade it to abandon its nuclear program and become "a constructive regional actor," underscoring a dramatic shift in U.S. foreign policy from the Bush administration.
This Story
At Confirmation Hearing, Clinton Talks of Engagement With Iran
In Foreign Policy, a New Trio at the Top
Afghan Conflict Will Be Reviewed
Clinton Talks Strategy in Confirmation Hearing
Live Blogging From the Clinton Confirmation Hearing
TALK: A Disaster in the Making?
View All Items in This Story
View Only Top Items in This Story
In prepared testimony and remarks during her confirmation hearing -- which were supplemented by 79 pages of formal answers to questions posed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- Clinton was careful not to tip her hand on specific plans or policies that the new administration might pursue. But she struck a consistent theme of active engagement and unyielding diplomacy, a sharp contrast to President Bush's policy of refusing to deal with countries that did not first meet conditions set by the United States.
"I don't get up every morning thinking only about the threats and dangers we face," Clinton said. "With every challenge comes an opportunity to find promise and possibility in the face of adversity and complexity."
Clinton also pledged greater involvement in the quest for Middle East peace but was not drawn into specific questions about how the incoming administration might handle Israel's invasion of the Gaza Strip.
She drew the line, however, at the idea of the United States engaging in immediate talks with Hamas, the militant group battling Israel. Clinton said it is appropriate to set conditions in dealing with what she called "non-state actors," which in the case of Hamas would be renouncing violence, recognizing Israel and respecting previous agreements between Israelis and Palestinians.
The 61-year-old former first lady and current senator from New York was warmly embraced by senators on both sides of the aisle who praised her intellect and her policymaking skills. She fielded nearly six hours of mostly polite queries, the only exceptions being a handful of questions about potential conflicts posed by former president Bill Clinton's charitable foundation.
The committee plans to vote on her nomination tomorrow morning, and she is expected to be confirmed easily.
Clinton's daughter, Chelsea, sat behind her during the hearing, but the former president watched the hearings on television with his wife's 89-year-old mother, Dorothy Rodham, a spokesman said.
During his second term, Bush began a shift in policy, opening up dialogue with North Korea and bending on his initial demands for conditions on talks with Iran, but the idea that Bush had little interest in diplomatic engagement persisted in most foreign capitals.
On Iran, the Bush administration has pursued a carefully calibrated effort that held out the prospect of economic and political incentives if Iran agreed to suspend its efforts to enrich uranium, a key component of nuclear weapons. Bush permitted ambassador-level diplomats to meet with Iranian counterparts but insisted that more substantive discussions not occur unless Iran first changed its behavior.
Clinton said flatly yesterday that Bush's effort has "not worked" and that President-elect Barack Obama's team is "very open to looking to a positive, effective way of engaging with Iran." She acknowledged that the effort represents a gamble and insisted that a nuclear-armed Iran is unacceptable to Obama, but she added: "We won't know what we're capable of achieving until we're actually there working on it."
In her written responses to the committee's questions, Clinton said that it is even possible that Obama could meet directly with Iranian leaders, a prospect she had ridiculed when she was Obama's rival in the bruising Democratic primaries.
Page 2 of 2 < Back
At Confirmation Hearing, Clinton Talks of Engagement With Iran
Video
Clinton Talks Strategy in Confirmation Hearing
Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton is calling for a strategy for achieving peace in the Middle East that goes beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a wider list of pressing issues.
» LAUNCH VIDEO PLAYER
» Top 35 Politics Articles
» Most Popular on washingtonpost.com
TOOLBOX
Resize Print E-mail Yahoo! BuzzSave/Share + DiggNewsvinedel.icio.usStumble It!RedditFacebookmyspaceNewsTrust
COMMENT
washingtonpost.com readers have posted 351 comments about this item.
View All Comments »
POST A COMMENT
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
Why Do I Have to Log In Again?
Log In Again? CLOSEWe've made some updates to washingtonpost.com's Groups, MyPost and comment pages. We need you to verify your MyPost ID by logging in before you can post to the new pages. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Discussion PolicyYour browser's settings may be preventing you from commenting on and viewing comments about this item. See instructions for fixing the problem.
Discussion Policy CLOSEComments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging» Links to this article
"We will not sit down for the sake of talking," Clinton wrote. "But we are willing to lead tough and principled diplomacy with the appropriate Iranian leader at the time and place of our choosing -- if and only if -- it can advance the interest of the United States."
This Story
At Confirmation Hearing, Clinton Talks of Engagement With Iran
In Foreign Policy, a New Trio at the Top
Afghan Conflict Will Be Reviewed
Clinton Talks Strategy in Confirmation Hearing
Live Blogging From the Clinton Confirmation Hearing
TALK: A Disaster in the Making?
View All Items in This Story
View Only Top Items in This Story
Condoleezza Rice, the outgoing secretary of state, defended the administration's approach to Iran in an interview with The Washington Post on Monday, arguing that it had put Iran on the defensive in the region.
"This isn't an issue of talk to Iranians, don't talk to Iranians," Rice said. "It is a question of what price the Iranians are trying to extract for engagement. Are they trying to extract a grand bargain in which Iran is acknowledged as a regional power without having given up the very policies that are destabilizing the region?"
Clinton reiterated that Obama is "committed to responsibly ending the war in Iraq and employing a broad strategy in Afghanistan that reduces threats to our safety and enhances the prospect of stability and peace." Her statement was nuanced and cautious, and it was perhaps most notable for what it did not say, including no mention of the need to win either war, a constant refrain of the current administration.
Clinton appeared most passionate when she spoke on a subject normally absent from the list of priorities for the nation's top diplomat -- the plight of the 2 billion people who earn less than $2 a day, especially women and girls, who she said "comprise the majority of the world's unhealthy, unschooled, unfed and unpaid."
Obama is equally concerned about the world's poor, Clinton said, noting that his mother, Ann Dunham, was a pioneer in microfinance in Indonesia, and observing that "the care and concern she showed for women and for poor people around the world mattered greatly to her son, our president-elect. And I believe that it has certainly informed his views and his vision."
Clinton gave little ground on questions about potential conflicts between Bill Clinton's charitable activities worldwide and the job of secretary of state. An agreement was reached under which the former president released the names of donors to his foundation, which has raised about $500 million, some of it from foreign governments. He also promised to provide annual updates of the donor list.
Sen. Richard G. Lugar (Ind.), the senior Republican on the committee, gently suggested in his opening statement that the agreement be amended to provide even more information, including the immediate disclosure of all donations of $50,000 or more. "The bottom line is that even well-intentioned foreign donations carry risk for United States foreign policy," he said.
The Associated Press reported yesterday that Sen. Clinton intervened at least six times in government issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband's foundation. A Clinton spokesman and the companies involved dismissed the incidents as coincidental.
"I am hopeful that as we go through the history of this, that people will not say, 'Well, Senator Lugar . . . and others were prescient; they saw the problems,' " Lugar warned Clinton.
Posts
