http://www.nationmultimedia.com/home/2010/05/31/opinion/ASEANS-NEW-DILEMMA-Burmas-nuclear-ambitions-30130505.html
By Kavi Chongkittavorn
The Nation
Published on May 31, 2010
THE US ACTION was swift following confirmation of a North Korean ship with suspicious arms cargoes docking in Burma last month in violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 1874. A few days later, in the third week of April, the US State Department dispatched an urgent message to the Asean capitals recommending the scheduled Asean-US Economic Ministers' roadshow in Seattle and Washington DC, from May 3-5, proceed without the Burmese representation at "all levels." The drastic move surprised the Asean leaders.
The American ultimatum was not a bluff but a genuine show of frustration. This time Washington wanted to send a strong signal to Burma and the rest of Asean that unless something was done about Burma's compliance with the relevant UN resolutions on North Korean sanctions, there would be dire consequences. Political issues aside, Burma's nuclear ambition can further dampen Asean-US relations in the future. Already, there was the first casualty when the US downgraded the high-powered economic roadshow which was meticulously planned months ahead between the Office of US Trade Representatives and Asean economic ministers through the US-Asean Business Council.
Since nearly all Asean countries, except Singapore, decided to dispatch their trade or industry ministers to join the campaign, they agreed the roadshow should continue without the Burmese delegation as requested by the US. After some bargaining, the US softened its position agreeing to accept a representation at the charge d'affaires level from the Burmese Embassy in Washington DC. But Rangoon chose to opt out as it wanted diplomats directly dispatched from Rangoon. Without a consensus in Asean, a new name - absurd as it seemed - was in place, as the Southeast Asia Economic Community Road Show. It would be a one-time only designation.
When Kurt Campbell, Assistant State Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs returned to Burma for the second time recently, he was blunt telling the junta leaders to abide and fully comply with the UN Security Council Resolution 1874. That has been Washington's serious concern due to the growing link between North Korea and Burma and their existing transfer of nuclear-related technology. Last June, a North Korean ship, Kang Nam, was diverted from going to Burma after being trailed by the US navy.
Since 2000, Western intelligence sources have been gathering evidence of North Korea providing assistance to Burma to build a nuclear reactor that can produce graded plutonium used in assembling future weapons of mass destruction. Last year, reports were released using data collected from two defecting Burmese military officers, intercepted calls and messages as well as human intelligence along Thai-Burmese border, all finger-pointing to Burma's nuclear ambitions.
When they came out last fall, scepticism was high among military experts and strategists on the junta's nuclear intentions. Most said there was insufficient evidence. Some viewed them as attempts to further discredit the regime's international standing. As additional interviews were conducted, especially with a former major in the Burmese Army, Sai Thein Win, who was directly involved with the recent secret nuclear programme, it has become clearer that Burma is investigating nuclear technology. This week, a special report on a huge new body of information, with expert comment from a former official working for the International Atomic Energy Agency, will be released.
As such, it will have far-reaching implications on Asean and its members, who signed the 1995 Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapons Free Zone (SEANWFZ) and Non-proliferation Treaty. Asean is currently working hard to persuade all major nuclear powers to sign the protocol to the SEANWFZ. The grouping has even delayed China's eagerness to accede to the protocol.
Further complicating the issue, Asean has not reached a consensus on how its members would move forward with a common approach on nuclear energy and security. In general, Asean backs nuclear disarmament, which the Philippines has played a leading role as chair of the just concluded Review Conference of State Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation on Nuclear Weapons. Asean also backs the ongoing efforts of US and Russia over non-proliferation.
One sticky problem is that Thailand, Brunei Darussalam, Burma, and Indonesia have yet to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. In the case of Indonesia, it is on the Annex 2 list of the treaty which, to enter into force, must be reatified by all 44 states on this list. At the upcoming Asean summit in Hanoi (October), Asean leaders will study a matrix of common positions that have been or could be taken up by Asean. It remains to be seen how Asean would approach some of the sensitive issues such as the South China Sea, climate change and issues related to nuclear technology.
At the recent Nuclear Summit in Washington DC, leaders from Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand were invited by US President Barack Obama to share their views on non-proliferation and peaceful use of nuclear energy. They supported the summit's plan of action to prevent nuclear terrorism. All these Asean members have long-term plans to build nuclear power plants for peaceful use as energy sources. Vietnam has long decided on building two, while Thailand is planning one in the next ten years. Indonesia has serious parliamentary support to explore a nuclear option. Even the Singapore Economic Strategies Committee has recommended nuclear energy should be considered as a possible long-term solution to the island's energy security. Obama will certainly raise the issue again when he visits Indonesia in the second week of this month.
What is most intriguing has been the lack of serious attention from the Thai security apparatus regarding the nuclearisation of Burma. Apart from the two informal meetings convened by the Defence Council at the end of last year, the topic has been discussed only among a handful of military intelligence officials who have worked closely with their Australian counterparts. The National Security Council still does not believe Burma has that kind of ambition, not to mention the overall nuclear capacity to embark on the controversial programme. Concerned officials argued that domestic problems still have precedence.
Monday, May 31, 2010
ASEAN'S NEW DILEMMA: Burma's nuclear ambitions
Armed ethnic groups put junta's election in doubt
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politics/37986/armed-ethnic-groups-put-junta-election-in-doubt
Armed ethnic groups put junta's election in doubt
Plans by the military to hold elections and take control of border areas have been derailed
Published: 30/05/2010 at 12:00 AM
Newspaper section: Spectrum
The Burmese military's grand plan to hold an election later this year has been thrown into doubt as armed ethnic groups along the Thai border threaten to form an alliance and fight the junta's army, which is trying to take control of their areas.
DETERMINED: Brig Gen Hsar Gay, the KNU’s deputy minister for foreign affairs and a central committee member.
PHOTO: PORNPROM SARTTARBHAYA
If armed conflict breaks out in Burma, the alliance of ethnic groups, both ceasefire and non-ceasefire groups, would pose a significant threat to the Burmese military. The combines strength of the ethnic groups to fight the Burmese army would be about 65,000 soldiers if they joined together.
The Burmese military has been trying to bring the armed ethnic groups along Burma's borders under their control by forcing them to join the Border Guard Force (BGF), a body the junta is desperate to set up so it can gain control of the lucrative trade along the borders.
But the ethnic groups are not keen on the idea and fear losing their independence, along with the all the trade and business they do along the borders.
David Tharckabaw, vice-president and head of the Foreign Affairs Department for the Karen National Union (KNU), and Brig Gen Hsar Gay, the KNU's deputy minister for foreign affairs and a central committee member, recently spoke to Spectrum about the latest developments in Burma and their group, which was formed in 1949.
"If fighting erupts and all the opposition ethnic and ceasefire groups join together, we would control about 25% of the whole country. About 57% of the land in Burma is ethnic areas," said Brig Gen Hsar Gay.
"We could match the Burmese military. Of course, they have artillery - something we don't have - but we could match them by employing mobile warfare tactics. This includes the use of booby traps and claymore mines - we call it above the ground warfare behind the lines."
With the majority of the armed ethnic groups trained for guerrilla warfare, they would be a match for the much better equipped Burmese military, which is estimated to have a maximum of 180,000 men, including the army, navy and air force.
Claims by the Burmese that their armed forces number about 400,000 is an exaggeration designed to scare their enemy, the senior KNU officials say.
When the military regime started trying to form its border guard with the ethnic groups, it sent shock waves through the border areas, and groups that had fought with each other in the past started talking and formed and alliance.
"We get intelligence information about movements of the Burmese soldiers from our sources and also from the non-ceasefire armed groups allied with us. We share information," said Brig Gen Hsar Gay.
"As for ceasefire groups, we also share some intelligence about movements etc, but not with all those groups.
"There were several deadlines set by the military for the ethnic ceasefire groups to join the BGF, with the last one expiring on April 28.
"The Burmese, instead of giving a new deadline, asked the KIO [Kachin Independence Organistaton] and Wa [United Wa State Army] to submit a counter-proposal or suggestions about the BGF plan.
"The Burmese military are desperate to stage an election some time later this year to legitimise a civilian government, but the election, the constitution and the BGF have all been dismissed by many of the ethnic groups."
"Other ethnic groups in opposition think along the same lines as the KNU about the parliamentary elections. They want a nation-wide ceasefire and the release of all political prisoners first.
"They can't accept either the constitution which, first of all, is illegal, and secondly, has not enough provisions for the ethnic nationalities," said the KNU's David Tharckabaw.
"The KNU is completely against the election. We don't participate because firstly, we haven't had any national ceasefire agreement yet. Secondly, we want the right of association and lastly, we cannot accept the election under the present constitution.
"Actually, we are in the line with the National League for Democracy (NLD) which also refused to take part for other reasons. We think that there are not enough provisions for ethnic nationalities to set up a genuine federal union.
"If the Kachin, Wa, Karen and Karenni states don't give support, and with the NLD out, then the elections will be meaningless."
"The SPDC will try to save face and postpone it by making some excuse. However, if the elections are held - maybe in September or October - the opposition will continue its political struggle and there will also be military resistance," said Brig Gen Hsar Gay.
However, he offered an olive branch to the ruling Burmese State Peace and Development Council (SPDC).
"We are always looking for a peaceful resolution to the conflict from the very beginning," he said. "All the Burmese regimes in power always said that the KNU started the fighting. Actually, this is not true. It was started by General Ne Win in 1948 when he was Vice-Chief of Staff of the Burmese armed forces.
"An armed struggle is essentially self defence. But we always look for a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
"To achieve that we met five times with various Burmese governments, but every time they didn't talk about the problems of the Karen or our grievances. They only wanted us to give up our arms and talk later. How can we do that? We would have no more bargaining chips."
If negotiations and talks fail and fighting does break out between the military and the ethnic groups, the biggest armed ethnic group, the KNU, is ready for full scale war.
"Our fighters have been using mobile warfare techniques for many years, making a lot of weapons to be used in ambushes like claymore mines, which is very important, one of our main weapons. Claymore mines and booby traps are weapons that we are using regularly, but the claymore is only one of our resources," said Brig Gen Hsar Gay.
"The mines have also been introduced to all opposition ethnic groups. The mine was extensively used by the Americans during the Vietnam war, but we modify it and we have the technology to produce it. Also, we use some Burmese and American claymore from old times.
"Claymore mines have steel balls inside that will disperse in one designated direction after it explodes. It is similar to a road-side bomb. This ambush weapon can be planted along the road or in places where we think the enemy will come. It is an ambush weapon, designed not to confront the person but ambush them while they are walking or travelling in a vehicle.
"We can use one at a time or three or four or up to 10 or 20, depending on how many enemy will come.
"It can be operated by one or two persons and it causes a lot of damage to the enemy. Three or four men can detonate 10 claymore at one time and wipe out an enemy company of 30-40 men in one second."
The KNU leaders say they don't want a war with the Burmese military, and would prefer talks and a meaningful dialogue.
"The peace talks must be meaningful. They must talk about our suffering, our grievances, why we go on resisting, why we don't want to come under their control, etc.
"They have to talk about that first. They might talk about their problems and their understanding. Maybe they are also suffering. Then it is a meaningful dialogue," said David Tharckabaw.
"We are not saying that everyone in the SPDC is bad. They are changing. Because of the elections there will be more changes. The majority of the SPDC - at least the lower ranking officers - also want democracy.
"They want to see a real democratic government in power. Now is the right time for a change of thinking by the SPDC.
"If we cannot settle the problem before the election, maybe we can do it peacefully after that. This is our hope. We are peaceful. We don't say the SPDC is peaceful, but we want to find a reasonable peaceful solution.
"We have been fighting different regimes for the past 61 years, making us the world's longest resistance movement.
"However, there are three equally important tasks that the KNU must follow: The armed struggle, the internal political front and the international diplomatic offensive. Only a political settlement will bring peace and stability to the region.
"Among the non-ceasefire armies, we are the largest military force outside the ceasefire groups followed by the Shan State Army-South [SSA-S]. We also control the second largest liberated territory after the SSA-S."
Posts
