http://www.mizzima.com/book-reviews/1941-indias-betrayal-of-burmas-democratic-aspirations.html
by Nandita Haksar
Monday, 06 April 2009 14:21
Publisher: Penguin Books India, 2009
Price: Rs. 299
Reviewed by: Joseph Ball
Traveling east, crossing the internal border demarcating the Indian states of West Bengal and Sikkim, there is the distinct feel of entering a frontier area outside the unchallenged purview of the central state – special travel documents, an immediate upsurge in national propaganda and, on the return trip, a dash by virtually all travelers, businessmen and drivers alike for the 'duty free' shops on the Sikkim side of the divide. India's northeast can indeed feel very far from the halls of power in New Delhi.
It may seem improbable that India's northeastern border with Burma, significantly closer geographically to Bangkok than the Indian capital, and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, located nearly 800 miles offshore from Kolkata, would be linked in a complex nexus of international politics and intrigue. Yet, this is precisely the story that Rogue Agent sets out to tell – a saga that has left 34 Arakanese and Karen Burmese freedom fighters wallowing in Indian detention for over a decade, wrongfully accused by a corrupt Indian intelligence officer of gunrunning for insurgents operating in northeast India, and anonymous victims of a shift in Indian foreign policy away from Burma's democratic opposition and in favor of closer ties with Burma's ruling generals.
Along these lines, Rogue Agent asks searching questions of why India's bureaucracy has betrayed the Arakanese and Karen resistance movements, Burma's struggle for democracy and, in a wider context, what the evolution of Indian foreign policy says of India's own struggle to adhere to the democratic ideals upon which the state was founded.
Nandita Haksar is well positioned to tell the story of the ethnic Burmese freedom fighters. A trained human rights lawyer, she is also a long standing friend of Burmese pro-democracy elements, having formed tight bonds not only with the freedom fighters chronicled in the book, but also with communities of Burmese refugees living in India.
The strength of the book lies in the close relationship between the author and the detained freedom fighters, whose testimonies vividly portray not only the harrowing trials of their betrayal by India's intelligence system, but also the often neglected sagas of the fights of the Arakanese and Karen for their rights as citizens of Burma – struggles that have waged for generations, spanning the entire history of modern Burma.
Haksar, an ardent proponent of the argument that India's national interests are best served by supporting Burma's opposition elements, goes to great lengths to chronicle the changing face of Indian foreign policy vis-à-vis Burma as emblematic of why Indians should be much concerned over the future of democracy in their own country.
Even some of those detained are described as having adopted a similar mantra during their time under detention in the world's largest democracy. Haksar says of one Burmese inmate, "[His] obsession throughout the period of his ten-year detention has been to understand why India has refused to support the Burmese resistance movement."
Haksar at least partially answers this by contending that "India does not have a cohesive policy towards Burma because it never had a policy for its North-East." Indian nationalists, it is said, see Karen and Arakanese movements in similar light to separatist movements in northeast India. And as an Indian Admiral is quoted in the text as saying, "Surely even Ms Aung San Suu Kyi would oppose the balkanization of her country."
Such reasoning, at the forefront of India's change in orientation with respect to Burma, in addition to combating Chinese influence, fighting for its own economic interests and allotting greater importance to its eastern neighbors, highlights a crucial question at the center of the debate: are Indian interests best met by focusing on a staunchly nationalist agenda or, instead, through a discourse led by a trans-state agenda of interwoven rights?
However, as the Burmese freedom fighters embarked on their fateful journey to Landfall Island in 1998, such a question was likely far from their minds – preoccupied as they were with matters of daily struggle and survival.
Isolated, with few friends to whom to turn, the National Union Party of Arakan (NUPA), from which several of those detained are members, was forced to turn to anyone willing to help – and an overture from a ranking Indian military intelligence agent could not be discarded.
Lured to the Andaman and Nicobar Islands by the promise of a sanctuary from which to direct activities against Burma's military rulers, in exchange for espionage services against Chinese interests in the region and assistance in combating piracy, the tale of the ethnic Burmese freedom fighters also comes across as one of dwindling available options forcing misplaced trust in an individual whose sincerity should well have been questioned.
Epitomizing the desperation of the NUPA camp, Haksar writes, "The Arakans had no choice but to fulfill his demands since he was their only contact with the Indian authorities." She goes on to explain how he demanded such exorbitant gifts from the rebels as gold for his wife and a new house in Punjab. For a cash-strapped resistance movement, the tens of thousands of dollars poured into the private coffers of a wayward Indian intelligence agent provides a somber appraisal of their dire position.
In contrast to Grewal, Haksar points to George Fernandes as reflective of what Indian approaches to Burma used to encapsulate and representative of the direction the country again needs to take. Fernandes, a long-standing personal friend of Burma's democratic forces, is a former Defense Minister and outspoken political voice for the rights of estranged communities, including the cause of Tibetans as well as that of Burma’s democratic opposition.
However, the policies espoused by Fernandes and others like him were far from in the ascendancy during the mid-1990's. In combination with Grewal’s agenda of greed, the ethnic Burmese rebels were doomed by the near 180 degree shift in India's Burma policy, which – encapsulated by the 'Look East Policy' – was just starting to come into its own at the time of their arrests. In short, Burma's rebels had become expendable, the purported reasons for the rebels' activities in Indian waters and territories coming in direct conflict with New Delhi's newfound interpretation of what best served India's national interests.
The shortfall of the book comes in the form of the factual errors and questionable inferences sprinkled throughout the text.
From spelling errors associated with Burmese names, the country's Foreign Minister is identified as Nay Win as opposed to Nyan Win, to oversights regarding general associations and figures, Muslims are sited as comprising 20 percent the Burmese population – approximately five times the common estimate, the informed reader is unfortunately distracted from the text.
More thought provoking, however, are a number of 'interpretative liberties' taken with respect to historical timelines, geopolitics and geography.
Speaking to the strategic importance of The Straits of Malacca, Haksar writes, "The Pentagon has been trying to militarize the region since 11 September 2001." Increasingly militarize, possibly. But the insinuation that 9/11 ushered in the U.S. military's interest in the region ignores a longstanding commitment of the U.S. government to the need to secure The Straits – the Dulles brothers of the 1950s serving as but one prime example of America's long-standing strategic thinking regarding Straits security.
Additionally, it is somewhat surprising that the critical role India played in supporting Burmese Prime Minister U Nu's fledgling government in the immediate post-independence years is somewhat glossed over. To this end, the question must be asked if this has anything to do with the fact that the Karen National Defense Organization was very much at the head of the opposing camp, threatening the very outskirts of Rangoon and the government of U Nu – Indian democratic posturing, and support for the central state, at this early stage squarely conflicting with the self-determination agendas of Burma's ethnic communities.
And what is the reader to make of the assertion that if allowed to benefit from a base in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands "they [the rebels] would have been able to carry out an effective resistance against the military junta in Rangoon." The critical stronghold of the Karen resistance, Manerplaw, had already been overrun some three years previously, and the organization was facing daunting internal divisions. As for the Arakanese resistance, by the mid-80s scholarly reports were already speaking pessimistically of the chances for success by Arakanese forces – citing war weariness, disunity and the global situation among other factors for the bleak outlook.
Throughout the book, the fight to free the detained freedom fighters is put forth as a mission to right both moral and political wrongs – the two aspects of the cause rarely divorced. Even Dynyalin, one of those detained, concludes from his study of early Indian support for Burma's opposition elements: "While other East Asian countries engaged Burma 'constructively', India pursued a moralistic policy."
The morality of politics has in turn been a central tenet of Burma's struggle for democracy, with opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi occupying a not undeserved position of dominance atop the moral dais. But does morality necessarily lend itself to effective politics either domestically or with respect to the formulation of foreign policy? Is the pursuit of changing the policies of governments best served by headlining arguments of international rights, or national interest?
While paying heed to the larger political context, Rogue Agent succeeds in telling the story of an often neglected subplot to independent Burma’s woes, the subterfuge of Indian Ocean politics and the pursuit of Arakanese and Karen resistance forces for their basic rights – fights which predate the trendy historical focal point of Burmese resistance, 8-8-88, by several decades.
But Rogue Agent was never just about the depravity of rights enjoyed by Burma's fringe populations and the incarceration of 34 ethnic rebels from Burma, it is very much also a impassioned plea for what the author sees as an Indian democratic tradition threatened by misplaced calculations of national interest. As Haksar concludes, "In the final analysis my solidarity for the Burmese peoples' struggle for democracy was dictated by my concern for protecting the democratic space in my own country" – fates forever intertwined.
And what has come of those whose wrongful detention inspired the book? They remain right where Rogue Agent left them, with the reconvening of their trial scheduled to commence in June of this year after India's military establishment continued to impede the pursuit of justice and access of information to key witnesses during the most recent hearings concluded this past March.
However, even if released, what then for the freedom fighters? Sadly, freedom could yet prove but a poisoned chalice.
Though already agreed to be accepted as refugees in either the Czech Republic or East Timor, without approval of refugee status forthcoming from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) such offers hold no protection against the possible persecution the 34 may face if repatriated to Burma.
To date, the UNHCR’s acknowledged reluctance to act on behalf of the appeal for refugee status stems from statutes contained within Article 1F of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
The importance of procuring refugee status for the ex-combatants lies in the prohibitions of forced return related to Article 1F. An exclusionary principle related to the Article in question states: "No Contracting State shall expel or return a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political persuasion."
Ultimately, then, the case of return or exile would hinge on weighing the seriousness of the threat of reprisal upon return to Burma – the threat of which is manifestly undeniable.
Further, as spelled out in a UNHCR position paper, when dealing with ex-combatants of non-international conflicts, the right against torture should reign supreme.
According to the study, “refugee law should not lag behind human rights law,” the two, it is argued, need to be brought closer together in recognition of the vision of the Preamble to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
And, as UNHCR research concludes: "[W]here substantial grounds have been shown for believing that the person in question, if expelled, would face a real risk of being subjected to treatment contrary to Article 3 [of the Convention Against Torture] in the receiving country. In these circumstances, Article 3 implies the obligation not to expel the person in question to that country."
But without action on the part of UNHCR in recognizing the 34 as refugees and the imminent threat against their well-being if repatriated to Burma, their future freedom remains seriously jeopardized – even if their days in Indian custody are finally brought to a close.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Rogue Agent: How India's Military Intelligence Betrayed the Burmese Resistance
Monday, April 6, 2009
第56回PFB例会のご案内 政治囚の早期釈放を！元政治囚ボーチー氏を招いて（4月11日（土） 18時～/ 東京・池袋）
転送・転載 大歓迎
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
■第56回ビルマ市民フォーラム例会のご案内
<4月11日（土） 18時～/ 東京・池袋>
￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣
『政治囚の早期釈放を！元政治囚ボーチー氏を招いて』
ボーチー 氏 政治囚支援協会(AAPP)
デービッド・マティソン氏 ヒューマン・ライツ・ウォッチ ビルマ調査員
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
◆日時＝2009年4月11日（土）午後6時～午後8時30分
＊午後5時45分開場
◆会場＝ 池袋・ECOとしま（豊島区立生活産業プラザ）
８階 多目的ホール
*所在： 豊島区東池袋1-20-15、Tel 03-5992-7011
*交通： 池袋駅東口徒歩5分
地図：http://www.city.toshima.lg.jp/shisetsu/shisetsu_community/005133.html
◆資料代＝ 200円（会員）・500円（非会員）
◆定 員＝ 80名 （事前申込み不要／先着順）
￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣
ビルマ軍事政権は昨年5月、巨大サイクロンがビルマ史上最悪となる
被害をもたらした直後に、一方的に起案した新憲法の是非を問う国民
投票を強行しました。軍政はこの新憲法に基づく総選挙の実施を2010年
に計画しています。
選挙を前に、軍政はさらに民主化を求める勢力への封じ込めを強めており、
政治囚の数はこれまでで最高の2,100名にも上っています。
民主化の進展には、まず第一に、一刻も早く全ての政治囚を釈放し、
民主化勢力と少数民族との対話が必要だとして、現在、世界24カ国で
政治囚の釈放を求める署名キャンペーンが行われています。
次回、ＰＦＢ例会では、この署名キャンペーンの中心団体である「ビルマ
政治囚支援協会（AAPP、本部タイ）」から、自身も7年3ヶ月政治囚として
刑務所で過ごした元政治囚 ボーチー氏を招き、ビルマ国内の実情と
政治囚の状況についてお話いただき、私たち日本の市民や政府の
役割について共に考えてみたいと思います。
また、国際人権NGOヒューマン・ライツ・ウォッチより、ビルマ調査員の
デービット・マティソン氏もお招きし、最新のビルマ情勢について、ご報告
いただきます。
ぜひご参加ください。
【スピーカー プロフィール】
●ボーチー (Bo Kyi)
政治囚支援協会(AAPP)を創設（本部タイ）。ビルマ（ミャンマー）で、政治的
意見や活動ゆえに囚われている人びとの釈放に尽力してきた。ボーチー氏
自身も、政治犯として7年3ヶ月、刑務所に拘束されていた。身の危険を冒し
ながらも、20年にわたり、自らの体験をもとに、ビルマで苦しむ多数の
政治囚の実情を世に知らせるとともに、ビルマ軍事政権がひた隠す残虐
行為の真実を世界に知らせ続けてきた。
2008年、ヒューマン・ライツ・ウォッチは、弾圧にもくじけないボーチー氏の
勇気、そして、声をあげられない多くの人々にかわって声をあげてきた
英雄的な努力を讃え、「人権賞（Human Rights Defender Award）」を送った。
●デービッド・マティソン（David Mathieson）
ヒューマン・ライツ・ウォッチ（本部 ニューヨーク） のビルマ調査員。
フリンダース大学、オーストラリア国立大学、Alternative ASEAN Network on
Burma(ALTSEAN)でのビルマ調査員を経て、2006年から現職。
主な研究分野は、ビルマの現代政治学、経済的・社会的・地理的観点に
おけるビルマ内戦、人間の安全保障と麻薬取引など。
Asia Times Online, The New Statesman, The Nation, 毎日新聞（「ビルマを
巡る危険な楽観主義」、2007年）等に取り上げられたマティソン氏の記事・
論説は多数にのぼる。
2000年にフリンダース大学修士課程修了（政治学）。2009年にオーストラリア
国立大学博士課程修了予定（政治学・国際関係論）。
◆ビルマ政治囚支援協会
http://www.aappb.org/
ビルマの政治囚や彼らの家族への支援を目的に設立された。政治囚へ食料や物品を
届けるほか、国際社会と協力してビルマの政治囚の早期釈放を訴える活動を行ってい
る。
◆ヒューマン・ライツ・ウォッチ
http://www.hrw.org/
---------------------------------------------
★PFBでは、日本人と在日ビルマ人を対象に、時々のビルマ情勢や
在日ビルマ難民の抱える問題などをテーマに、隔月で例会を実施して
おります。会員・非会員を問わず、どなたでもご参加いただけます。
初めての方でもぜひお気軽にご参加ください。
以上
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
◇ ビルマ市民フォーラム事務局 ◇
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
〒160-0004
東京都新宿区四谷一丁目18番地6 四谷1丁目ウエストビル4階
いずみ橋法律事務所内
電話03-5312-4817（直）／ FAX 03-5312-4543
E-mail： pfb@izumibashi-law.net
ホームページ： http://www1.jca.apc.org/pfb/index.htm
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Son of late insurgency leader defects to Myanmar's government
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/263009,son-of-late-insurgency-leader-defects-to-myanmars-government.html
Yangon- A son of late Karen rebellion leader general Bo Mya has defected to the Myanmar's military junta, an official statement said Saturday. Nay Soe Mya, with a group of soldiers and their families totaling 159 people, crossed over on March 30 to enjoy the "fruits of regional development" after "witnessing the nation-building endeavours being carried out by the state," the statement said.
The ethnic Karen's 60-year fight for autonomy, is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain as Myanmar's military chips away at its remaining hold on the mountainous border region with Thailand, analysts say.
Nay Soe Mya, one of three surviving sons of Bo Mya - who died a legendary warrior in 2006 aged 81 - has joined Htain Maung, a former brigade leader, who was sacked from the Karen army in January 2007 after making an independent peace deal with the government, a Karen guerrilla on the Thai-Myanmar border said.
Htain Maung is believed to have been allocated land for settlement and permitted to carry on a logging trade.
"We consider them traitors who have become defeatist, and corrupt too. They want money and they have been given (trade) concessions," the rebel fighter said. Nay Soe Mya is related by marriage to Htain Maung, he added.
The State Peace and Development Council, as the ruling junta styles itself, is keen to suppress all potential problems ahead of elections designed to produce a "civilian government" controlled by the military, early next year.
Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, gained independence in 1949. It has a myriad of minority groups at odds with the central authority, which has historically not been in complete control of the border regions. Several groups yet fight for autonomy, the Karen being the biggest.
Copyright, respective author or news agency
Suu Kyi's US backers plead to keep sanctions
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/5477015
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Congress supporters of Myanmar's democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi pleaded to keep sanctions on the military regime as a key senator said efforts to isolate the junta had failed.
President Barack Obama's administration is reviewing strategy on Myanmar , also known as Burma , whose ruling junta has crushed dissent and kept Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest for 19 years.
In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , 17 members of Congress said they were "greatly concerned" by indications that the United States was considering lifting sanctions on Myanmar .
The lawmakers, led by longtime Aung San Suu Kyi champion Joseph Crowley, said that Myanmar's leader Than Shwe had shown no desire to engage with the world's only detained Nobel laureate.
"Than Shwe's regime continues to perpetuate crimes against humanity and war crimes so severe that Burma has been called 'Southeast Asia's Darfur,'" they wrote.
They noted that Congress approved a law last year subjecting the Myanmar junta to sanctions until it releases all political prisoners and starts dialogue on bringing in democracy.
"We urge you to join us in standing firmly alongside Aung San Suu Kyi and Burma's democracy movement," they said.
But Jim Webb, who heads the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Asia, said the United States needed a more "constructive" policy on Myanmar .
"Certainly the way that we approach it now I don't believe has had the results that people want it to have," Webb, a member of Obama's Democratic Party, told a luncheon at the Council on Foreign Relations.
"What I think we should be doing in Burma is trying to open up diplomatic avenues where you can have confidence builders... and through that process work toward some way where you can remove sanctions," he said.
State Department official Stephen Blake last week paid the first visit by a senior US envoy to Myanmar in more than seven years, quietly holding talks both with the junta and the opposition.
The State Department played down the significance of the meeting, stressing that the Obama team was still reviewing policy on Myanmar .
Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg said Wednesday the United States was seeking a common approach with Asia on Myanmar and said the six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program could serve as a model.
Nearly all Asian nations maintain full relations and trade with Myanmar , distancing themselves from the sanctions policy of the United States and the European Union.
China is the key commercial and military partner of the junta, which crushed 2007 protests led by Buddhist monks.
The previous US administration of George W. Bush strengthened decade-old sanctions against Myanmar -- imposed under his predecessor Bill Clinton -- while his wife Laura was an outspoken critic of the military regime.
Senator Webb -- a Vietnam veteran who has also been a journalist -- said the United States should take a lesson from how it opened relations with China and Vietnam despite human rights and other concerns in the two communist states.
Webb said that when he returned to Vietnam in 1991 -- four years before Washington and Hanoi established relations -- the situation was worse than when he visited Myanmar in 2001.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Daewoo Int'l extends Myanmar field exploration
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSSEO3885220090403
SEOUL, April 3 (Reuters) -
South Korea's Daewoo International Corp said on Friday it had extended exploration rights to Myanmar's AD-7 oil and gas field despite other members of the project dropping out after the original exploration period ended in February.
Daewoo International (047050.KS) will have a 100 percent stake in the field under the new deal, from its previous 60 percent stake.
India's ONGC Videsh Limited had owned a 20 percent stake in the field, while another Indian firm, Gail (GAIL.BO), and state-run Korea Gas Corp (KOGAS) (036460.KS) each had 10 percent, it said.
(Reporting by Angela Moon; Editing by Jonathan Hopfner)
US should aim to lift Myanmar sanctions: senator
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h1-7_FE-Kox45ivWahFKJxSBhk7Q
WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States should take a new approach of engagement with military-run Myanmar with an aim of lifting sanctions, a key senator said Friday.
President Barack Obama's administration is reviewing strategy on Myanmar, also known as Burma, whose ruling junta has crushed dissent and kept pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest for 19 years.
Jim Webb, who heads the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Asia, said the United States needed an "aggressive diplomatic posture" on Myanmar but one that was more "constructive."
"Certainly the way that we approach it now I don't believe has had the results that people want it to have," Webb, a member of Obama's Democratic Party, told a luncheon at the Council on Foreign Relations.
"What I think we should be doing in Burma is trying to open up diplomatic avenues where you can have confidence builders ... and through that process work toward some way where you can remove sanctions," he said.
Webb said any diplomacy between the United States and Myanmar should closely involve other countries, particularly members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) which includes Myanmar.
ASEAN nations, along with Japan and China, have maintained cordial relations and trade with Myanmar, distancing themselves from the sanctions policy of the United States and the European Union.
Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg said Wednesday the United States was seeking a common approach with Asia on Myanmar and said the six-nation talks on North Korea's nuclear program could serve as a model.
Webb -- a Vietnam veteran who has also been a journalist -- said the United States should look at how it opened relations with China and Vietnam despite human rights and other concerns in the two communist states.
Webb said that when he returned to Vietnam in 1991 -- four years before Washington and Hanoi established relations -- the situation was "worse than the conditions I saw in Burma in '01."
Copyright © 2009 AFP. All rights reserved. More »
BURMA: China’s Thirst for Oil Ignores Environment, Rights
http://democracyforburma.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/burma-chinas-thirst-for-oil-ignores-environment-rights/
2009 April 3
tags: Human Rights, Junta, Burma, Gas, Thugs and Thieves, oilby peacerunningBURMA: China’s Thirst for Oil Ignores Environment, Rights
By Marwaan Macan-Markar
BANGKOK, Oct 31 (IPS) - The largest island off Burma’s west coast is emerging as another frontier for China’s expanding plans to extract the rich oil and gas reserves of military-ruled Burma.
Initial explorations by a consortium, led by China National Offshore Oil Company (CNOOC), has left a deep scar on Ramree Island, which is twice the size of Singapore and home to about 400,000 people. ‘’They have destroyed rice fields and plantations when conducting the seismic surveys and mining the island in search of oil,’’ says Jockai Khaing, director of Arakan Oil Watch (AOW), an environmental group made up of Burmese living in exile.
‘’The local communities have been directly and indirectly affected,’’ he Said during an IPS interview. ‘’Hundreds of people have been forced to relocate as a result of the drilling conducted near their communities. The locals hate the Chinese; their world has become crazy after the Chinese arrived.’’
CNOOC has been pushing ahead with its work since early 2005, with no attempt to consult the local residents and showing little regard to such notions as corporate social responsibility, adds Jockai. The Chinese company, which is listed on the New York and the Hong Kong stock exchanges, has ‘’not conducted the required environmental impact assessments and social impact assessments that are recognised internationally as a must before exploration work begins.’’
To dispose the waste from its drilling sites, ‘’CNOOC workers dug shallow canals designed to carry the (toxic) ‘drilling mud,’ or wastewater containing oil, away from the drilling sites and into Chaing Wa Creek, which curves past several local farms before flowing into the Bay of Bengal,’’ states a report by AOW, released in mid-October. ‘’This arbitrary disposal can make soil in surrounding areas unsuitable for plant growth by reducing the availability of nutrients or by increasing toxic contents in the soil.’’
Concerns about the cost of letting China tighten its grip on the natural resources in Burma (or Myanmar) has also been expressed by other groups, like EarthRights International (EI), a U.S.-based group championing human rights. There are 69 Chinese companies involved in 90 ‘’completed, current and planned projects’’ in the oil, gas and hydropower sectors in Burma, EI revealed in groundbreaking report released in late September.
That number marks an over 200 percent increase in the number of Chinese energy developers thought to have had existed a year before. ‘’Given what we know about development projects in Burma and the current situation, we’re concerned about this marked increase in the number of the projects,’’ the rights lobby stated in the report, ‘China in Burma: The Increasing Involvement of Chinese Multinational Corporations in Burma’s Hydropower, Oil and Natural Gas, and Mining Sectors.
‘’China is using Burma’s military dictatorship to its advantage as it goes in search of oil and gas. There are no rules and regulations for Chinese companies to follow in Burma,’’ Ka Hsaw Wa, executive director of EI, said in an IPS interview. ‘’This will hurt the future of Burma.’’
Such criticisms come at a time when China has begun to show signs that the environment cost of its projects abroad cannot be ignored. ‘’The country lacked comprehensive environmental protection policies in its overseas projects, although investment had been expanding,’’ states a report released in mid-September by the Chinese Academy for Environmental Planning (CAEP), according to the ‘China Daily’ newspaper.
‘’China’s overseas investment and aid mainly focuses on exploring oil and other resources, processing and manufacturing, and construction in African and Southeast Asian countries,’’ the English-language daily added. ‘’Without proper management, such projects are likely to cause environmental problems, the (CAEP) report said.’’
Burma, in fact, will prove to be an ideal testing ground, given that China emerged as the military-ruled country’s biggest investor in the country’s power sector. The money flowing in from such foreign direct investments and the sale of gas has helped to prop up a junta notorious for suppressing its people through many forms of abuse.
In 2006, the junta earned an estimated 2.16 billion U.S. dollars from sales of natural gas to Thailand, which accounts for close to half of Burma’s export earnings and is the single largest source of foreign earnings. In 2008, Burma is expected to earn 3.5 billion US dollars from export of gas, according to one estimate.
But little of these benefits trickled down to the country’s beleaguered people. Consequently, Burma ranks as one of the world’s least developed countries. And having an abundance of natural resources has not improved the power supply in the country for the people either. Regular blackouts are frequent in Rangoon, the former capital, and elsewhere.
The junta has profited in other ways, too, from China’s energy interest in Burma. ‘’Beijing has come to the junta’s rescue and protects it from criticism at international forums like the U.N. Security Council,’’ says Win Min, a Burmese national security expert teaching at a university in northern Thailand. ‘’A strong relationship of mutual benefit has developed since 1988.’’
In exchange for letting Chinese companies exploit its natural resources, the Burmese dictatorship has got military hardware from Beijing. They range from fighter jets and armoured carriers to small weapons, Win Min told IPS. ‘’The junta will open the country to China because the military regime needs Beijing more than the other way around.’’
(END/2008)
Russian firm after Uranium not gold in Kachin State
http://bnn-worldnews.blogspot.com/2009/04/russian-firm-after-uranium-not-gold-in.html
Friday, April 3, 2009
Uranium is being explored on the pretext of searching for gold and associated minerals by a Russian company, which arrived in Burma's northern Kachin State, last year, said local sources.
Russian mineral experts working for the company Victorious Glory International Private Ltd. based in Hpakant (Phakant) jade mining areas are exploring mainly Uranium, according to ethnic Kachin residents of Hpakant jade mining city.
Local eyewitnesses told KNG recently, they have seen strange-faced Russian people in Hpakant jade mining city since last year.
The Russian company is stationed in areas around Tarmakhan and Hongpa mountains where Uranium was explored during Burma's first elected Prime Minister U Nu's tenure from1948 to 1962, said a Kachin geologist in Hpakant.
On February 15, last year, Burmese ruling junta's Director-General U Win Ti of the Geological Survey and Mineral Exploration Department and Chairman Krivoshey Pavel of Victorious Glory International Private Ltd signed an agreement in the new jungle capital Naypyitaw for the exploration of such minerals along Uru River or Uru Hka between Hpakant in Kachin State and Homalin in Sagaing Division, according to the state-run "New Light of Myanmar".
The Russian geologists arrived in Hpakant one year before the agreement and a Russian geologist died of Malaria in Hpakant public hospital in early 2007, said sources in the hospital.
Jade miners in Hpakant said Chinese jade companies have been permitted to mine jade along Uru River for a long time. Here precious water-jade is produced.
The fact that the Russian company agreed to explore for gold and associated minerals in Uru River with the junta is a load of nonsense because all the companies in Hpakant jade mining areas are only mining jade, according to local jade miners.
At the moment, no one except workers of the Russian company is allowed to visit the Russian base in the mountains and disturb Russian mineral explorers by Burmese army soldiers who stand guard, residents of Hpakant said.
kachinnews
ビルマのお正月「ダジャン水かけ祭」開催のお知らせ＜2009年4月12日・井の頭恩賜公園＞
【転送歓迎】
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
ビルマ市民フォーラム メールマガジン 2009/4/3
People's Forum on Burma
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
いよいよ今年も４月１２日（日）、ビルマのお正月「ダジャン水かけ祭」が行われます。
今年は例年の場所を変更し、吉祥寺の井の頭恩賜公園 で行われます。
（お間違いないよう、ご注意ください。）
みなさまお誘い合わせの上、ぜひお出かけください。
◆ダジャン「水かけ祭」とは？♪♪♪◆
ビルマのお正月はビルマ暦をもとにしているために4月に新年を迎えます。
お正月の最大行事がダジャン「水かけ祭」です。新年を迎えるとき、一年の
悪いことや汚れを水で洗い落とし、きれいに迎えるという意味で、互いに水を
かけあいます（ちなみに、東京では水はかけあいません）。
ダジャンは一年で最もにぎやかなお祭りです。東京でも在日ビルマ難民が
ふるさとを思い、毎年開催しております。
当日はビルマの歌や伝統舞踊が披露され、とっても美味しいビルマ料理の
屋台もたくさん並びます。
ビルマ市民フォーラム事務局
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
ビルマのお正月 ダジャン水かけ祭 開催のお知らせ
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
■日 時： ２００９年 ４月 １２日（日) 午前１０時３０分～午後５時
■場 所：井の頭恩賜公園
住所 東京都武蔵野市御殿山１－１８－３１
アクセス
ＪＲ中央線吉祥寺下車徒歩５分
京王井の頭線井の頭公園下車徒歩１分
■主 催： ＬＤＢ ビルマ民主化同盟
(問合先：TEL:03-3916-4996)
今年も、東京でビルマのお正月を祝う“ダジャン水かけ祭り”を開催することに
なりました。今年で18回目になります。
ビルマでも一番にぎやかなお祭りであることから、在日ビルマ人が多く集まります。
当日は、ステージ上で一日中ビルマの歌や踊りが披露されます。お祭り会場では
ビルマの食べ物の屋台が並び、お正月に食べる特別なお菓子などもあります。
またビルマの織物や民芸品などの店もあり、ビルマの文化を堪能するひと時と
なるでしょう。
私たち在日ビルマ人のみならず、日本の皆さまにも参加していただけることで
今年も続ける事ができます。これもひとえに皆さまからの多大なるご理解とご支援の
おかげです。この場をかりて心よりお礼を申し上げます。
今年も会場周辺の桜が満開になる時とかさなると予想されています。
皆さま、どうぞお誘い合わせの上、是非ご来場ください。
ビルマ民主化同盟（ＬＤＢ）
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
◇ ビルマ市民フォーラム事務局 ◇
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
〒160-0004
東京都新宿区四谷一丁目18番地6 四谷1丁目ウエストビル4階
いずみ橋法律事務所内
電話０３－５３１２－４８１７（直）／ FAX:０３―５３１２－４５４３
E-mail： pfb@izumibashi-law.net
http://www1.jca.apc.org/pfb/index.htm
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Myanmar: Web Slowdown Hurting Myanmar Businesses
http://www.mysinchew.com/node/22845?tid=37
Foreign 2009-04-03 13:38
YANGON, MYANMAR: Disruptions to Myanmar's Internet service will continue indefinitely, a state-owned service provider warned Friday (3 April), saying it does not know when it will complete repairs to an undersea cable.
The slowdown has hit local businesses hard, causing some Internet cafes to close their doors and prompting travelers to cancel trips to the impoverished nation.
State-owned Myanmar Teleport blamed the problems on maintenance it has been doing since 21 March on a cable in the Bay of Bengal. Teleport initially said work would be finished on 25 March but now says it does not know when the repairs will be completed.
"Currently we do not know the schedule for repair completion," Teleport said in a statement.
The junta in Myanmar aggressively censors the Internet and routinely blocks politically sensitive Web sites such as those promoting human rights. During a crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Sept 2007, it cut all access to the Internet and shuttered many cybercafes.
But this time around, there is no indication that government meddling is behind the slowdown. While hard to confirm, business owners said they believed the problem was technical. (AP)
MySinchew 2009.04.03
World leaders pledge US$1-trillon in aid
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1456114
Simon Kennedy and Kitty Donaldson in London, Bloomberg
Published: Thursday, April 02, 2009
Dominique Faget/AFP/Getty ImagesBritish Prime Minister outlines the outcome of the G20 summit in London on Thursday. Leaders signed off on plans to commission blacklists of tax havens and tighten financial rules to bring hedge ...
World leaders agreed on a regulatory blueprint for reining in the excesses that fed the worst financial crisis in six decades and pledged more than US$1-trillion in emergency aid to cushion the economic fallout.
The Group of 20 policymakers, meeting in London, called for stricter limits on hedge funds, executive pay, credit-rating firms and risk-taking by banks. They tripled the firepower of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and offered cash to revive trade to help governments weather the turmoil resulting from the surge in unemployment. They avoided the divisive question of whether to deliver more fiscal stimulus to their own economies.
The statement amounts to an effort to rewrite the rules of capitalism to address an integrated world economy that has outgrown the ability of nations to keep it in check. The assembly echoed -- on an international stage -- the introduction in the U.S. of securities regulation after the 1929 crash.
"By any measure the London summit was historic," President Barack Obama said after the talks. U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said, "we have reached a new consensus that we take global actions together to deal with the problems we face."
The measures to fight the recession and reform finance helped push U.S. stocks up, extending a global advance, and Treasuries down. The Dow Jones Industrial Average exceeded 8,000 for the first time since Feb. 10, before settling up 216.48 points, or 2.79%, at 7,978.08, while the S&P 500 rose 23.30 points, or 2.87%, to 834.38. In Toronto, the S&P/TSX composite index rose 131.32 points, or 1.47%, to close at 9,073.14, marking its highest closing level since Jan. 9.
Even as the G-20 leaders said they will maintain power over their own markets and companies rather than cede it to a cross-border regulator, they closed ranks behind "greater consistency and systematic co-operation" to flesh out a new regulatory order first outlined at a November meeting in Washington.
The crackdown is "a major step forward," Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, a professor at Columbia University, said in an interview. "It's a historic moment when the world came together and said we were wrong to push deregulation."
Blaming "major failures" in regulation as "fundamental causes" of the credit crunch, the G-20 said national regulators will be revamped to better monitor threats to the international system.
A new Financial Stability Board will be established to unite regulators and join the IMF in providing early warnings of potential threats. Once recovery is underway, work will begin on new rules aimed at avoiding excessive leverage and forcing banks to put more money aside during good times.
Hedge funds that are "systemically important" will be subjected to greater oversight, as will all key financial instruments, markets and instruments, the G20 said. That signals a setback for German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who wanted all of the investment funds brought under the spotlight.
That didn't stop the funds' lobby from complaining the US$1.4-trillion industry had been made a "scapegoat" for the market meltdown. "Although we agree that any entity that provides banking services should be regulated as a bank, the vast majority of hedge funds do not fall into this category," Andrew Baker, chief executive of the London-based Alternative Investment Management Association, said in an interview.
Principles will also be introduced on pay and bonuses to create "sustainable compensation schemes" after concern that executive remuneration rewarded short-term risk-taking over the long-run interests of companies. Accounting-standard setters were urged to improve valuation methods and credit-rating companies will be forced to meet a code of good practice.
Having proved a sticking point at the talks, the G20 said it will impose sanctions on tax havens that do not provide enough information. Officials split over the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development publishing a list of such nations, agreeing in the end not to block it after Mr. Obama and Mr. Sarkozy hashed out a deal with Chinese President Hu Jintao.
After bilateral meetings around London on Wednesday, Thursday's summit was held at East London's barn-like Excel Center, within sight of the Canary Wharf, which houses Citigroup Inc.'s Citibank, Barclays PLC, HSBC Holdings Plc and Bank of America Corp. After a one and a half hour breakfast meeting, the group spent most of its time in a circular room, taking breaks for one-on-one chats in a separate lounge, a U.K. official said.
During the plenary sessions, the leaders wore microphones and got simultaneous translations for any of the 13 languages spoken. When one wanted to speak, he or she pressed a button, set off a light and waited for his or her turn.
After a lunch of filet of beef and talks that went 30 minutes beyond schedule, the room erupted in applause when the final text was agreed upon.
The G20's pact to impose tougher regulation marks a narrowing of differences after Ms. Merkel and Mr. Sarkozy entered the summit demanding Mr. Brown and Mr. Obama endorse a more detailed response to the crisis than that initially planned.
"We never thought we would find an agreement this large," Mr. Sarkozy said. Ms. Merkel called it a "victory for common sense."
Having committed US$2-trillion in fiscal packages to save their economies, the leaders said Thursday they would "deliver the scale of sustained fiscal effort necessary to restore growth," while ensuring sustainable budgets and price stability in the long term. With banks still bogged down by toxic assets, the G20 promised "to take all necessary actions" to restore the availability of credit and protect major institutions.
Mr. Obama and Mr. Brown have pushed for more spending, only to run into resistance from Ms. Merkel and Mr. Sarkozy, who argue they've done enough, have bigger social-safety nets and don't want to bust budgets. The IMF will gauge the policies taken, which should accelerate the recovery of the global economy to its long-term trend, the G20 said.
Inundated with record requests for loans from troubled economies, including Pakistan and Hungary, the IMF was told its war chest will be boosted by US$500-billion and it will receive another US$250-billion in special drawing rights, the agency's synthetic currency. Multilateral development banks, including the World Bank, will be enabled to lend at least US$100-billion more.
"It's historic, there's no question about it," said Colin Bradford, an economist at the Brookings Institution in Washington.In return for their contributions, emerging markets such as China and Brazil will receive more of a say in the fund, the G20 said. The IMF will also use revenue from sales of its gold reserves to aid the world's poorest countries, and its next leader will no longer automatically be a European.
The G20 members are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United States, the U.K. and the European Union. Officials from Spain and the Netherlands were also present. The leaders will meet again in New York in September, Mr. Sarkozy said.
Bloomberg News
Close
Presented by
US wants Myanmar out of isolation
http://burmadigest.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/us-wants-myanmar-out-of-isolation/
Posted by burmadigest under News
No Comments
According to AFP news:
The United States wants to forge a common strategy with Asia to coax military-run Myanmar out of isolation, a senior official said yesterday, suggesting six-way talks with North Korea could be a model. President Barack Obama’s administration has launched a review of policy on Myanmar, also known as Burma, where a US official last week paid the first visit by a senior envoy in more than seven years.
Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg said the United States wanted a “collaborative and constructive” approach on Myanmar, saying nations with sway over the junta should avoid “recreating a mini version of the Great Game.” “Viewing relations with a notorious authoritarian regime like Burma as a zero-sum game is in no nation’s interest,” Steinberg told the National Bureau of Asian Research, a think-tank.
“We want to discuss a common approach with ASEAN, with China, with India and with Japan to find a policy that will improve the lives of the people of Burma and promote stability in this key region,” he said.
Asian nations including those in ASEAN, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, have mostly tried to engage with Myanmar.
Myanmar to punish performances against traditional culture in water festival
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-04/02/content_11120144.htm
www.chinaview.cn 2009-04-02 15:29:33
YANGON, April 2 (Xinhua) -- The Myanmar authorities have warned of severe action to be taken against performances and singing deemed as not conforming to Myanmar culture in the upcoming Myanmar traditional water festival, the leading local weekly Yangon Times reported Thursday.
The authorities have issued rules for artists to abide by when launching the water festival, calling for staying away from dressing in a decadent way, dressing with political sign and singing in an uncultured manner.
Video tape records covering the event will serve as evidences to charge those who broke the rules, the state-organized Myanmar Music Association said, warning that rule breakers will be revoked with their business license and vocalists be banned from singing if so found.
This year's Myanmar traditional Thingyan Water festival will start from April 13 and will run for four days until April 16 before the new year day ushers in on April 17 according to the Myanmar lunar calendar.
The Myanmar water festival represents a unique and entertaining event, and people of all ages, especially the young ones, have started making plan to spend the long holidays.
Editor: Fang Yang
U.S. donates rice for Myanmar cyclone survivors
http://www.reuters.com/article/homepageCrisis/idUSBKK209031._CH_.2400
LABUTTA, Myanmar, April 2 (Reuters) - The United States has donated more than 16,000 tonnes of rice to help survivors of last year's devastating cyclone in military-ruled Myanmar, officials said.
The rice is part of a $28 million American food aid package distributed through the U.N. World Food Programme (WFP) to survivors of Cyclone Nargis, which left 140,000 people dead or missing and 2.4 million people severely affected last May.
"The United States government is the WFP's single largest donor for the cyclone victims," said Chris Kaye, the U.N. agency's country director, speaking to Reuters on Wednesday at a WFP distribution camp near Labutta in the hardest-hit Irrawaddy Delta. Nearly a year after the cyclone struck, many people are still living in temporary shelters and access to food and clean water remains a challenge.
The U.S.-donated rice is expected to benefit 350,000 people. Some of it is being distributed under food-for-work projects managed by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to support the rebuilding of roads and dykes.
Larry Dinger, U.S. charge d'affaires in Myanmar, said Washington had provided a total of $74 million in humanitarian assistance to Nargis survivors "as part of America's commitment to the welfare of the Burmese people". Over the years Washington has tightened sanctions on the military, which has ruled the former Burma for more than four decades, to try to push the regime toward political reform and improving human rights.
But sanctions have not worked, and neither has a policy of engagement by Myanmar's regional neighbours.
The Obama administration announced in February that it was conducting a review of its policy towards Myanmar to find new ways to sway one of the world's most reclusive regimes. (Reporting by Aung Hla Tun; Editing by Darren Schuettler)
Six-party Talks on Burma Proposal Gets US Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By WAI MOE
Thursday, April 2, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The US is prepared to tackle the Burma issue by joining six-party talks along the lines of those held to discuss North Korea ’s nuclear program, according to a senior State Department official. Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg told the National Bureau of Asian Research think tank on Wednesday that the US wanted a “collaborative and constructive” approach on Burma , saying nations with sway over the junta should avoid “recreating a mini version of the Great Game.” Steinberg said: “Viewing relations with a notorious authoritarian regime like Burma as a zero-sum game is in no nation’s interest. We want to discuss a common approach with Asean [the Association of Southeast Asian Nations], with China , with India and with Japan to find a policy that will improve the lives of the people of Burma and promote stability in this key region.” The US was open to setting up new “flexible” frameworks similar to the six party talks on Pyongyang ’s nuclear program, Steinberg said. Some analysts are skeptical, however, pointing out that the six-party talks on North Korea had not halted Pyongyang ’s nuclear program. The talks brought together the US , China , Japan , Russia and the two Koreas . “I do not think it [six party talks on Burma] is a promising idea to resolve the issues, but it could be very useful in making sure that this is an issue that gets the global attention it deserves,” said Jeff Kingston, professor of Asian Studies at Temple University, Japan. Kingston said he was not optimistic that the US could forge a common strategy with Asia, given that its concerns about human rights and democracy are not shared by India , China and Asean. President Barrack Obama’s administration is conducting a review of US policy towards Burma .
Migrants' journey of hope ends in tragedy
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/611581
Africans seeking new life in Europe feared dead as overloaded boat sinks
Apr 01, 2009 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (1)
Olivia Ward
FOREIGN AFFAIRS REPORTER
Hope has been abandoned for about 300 missing African men, women and children, who are feared to have drowned on a perilous voyage from Libya to Italy seeking economic survival at a time of growing global desperation.
"The search has stopped, and we have no more information on their fate," said Michele Bombassei, head of technical co-operation for the International Organization for Migration in Tripoli, Libya.
A boat said to be carrying 356 people – but designed to hold just 75 – capsized Sunday near an oil platform 50 kilometres off the Libyan coast in the Mediterranean Sea.
Libyan coast guard officials retrieved at least 23 bodies and rescued 23 survivors before halting the search.
Two other vessels lost radio contact in turbulent weather; the Geneva-based group said it was unclear whether they were local fishing boats or other shipments of migrants.
An Italian-Libyan pact to patrol the Libyan coast will be launched May 15. But it is unlikely to stem the flow of thousands of illegal migrants trying to escape starvation, war and political persecution in Africa.
A recent report by the British government says the impoverished continent faces economic decline because of the global financial downturn, driving many to seek riskier escape routes.
"Smugglers often use unseaworthy and overcrowded boats to carry migrants who have had to pay large sums for their journey," the migration group said, adding that last year nearly 36,000 people arrived on the Italian island of Lampedusa, a beachhead for migrants seeking work in Europe. The numbers more than doubled since 2007.
In Geneva, migration group spokesperson Jean-Philippe Chauzy told reporters that migrants heading for Italy often face appalling conditions.
"There's no safety equipment on those boats – no buoys, dinghies or anything – because the purpose is to cram (in) as many people as possible ..."
Those who make it to Lampedusa – the closest Italian point from Libya – get a hostile reception. It is home to swelling numbers of migrants who once were removed to the mainland for detention, but are placed in a full-to-bursting camp.
Italy, hard hit by the economic shock, is hoping the sea patrols will prevent a catastrophic migration crisis. More than 600 new arrivals were found along Italy's southern coast this week alone.
In a phone interview from Tripoli, Bombassei said many of the migrants who arrive in Libya stay there if they find jobs in the oil-rich country. With a small population of 6.2 million, it has labour shortages at a time when other countries are grappling with unemployment.
"Notwithstanding the (low) price of oil, Libya is in an economic boom," Bombassei said. "The government has started an important program of refurbishing cities, and news of jobs travels quickly."
Some migrants find construction work or more skilled employment. But the majority have a day-to-day struggle for survival, and the discouraged try to move on to Europe.
Early spring marks the beginning of the smuggling season in the Mediterranean Sea, said Ron Redmond, spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. The sea is generally warmer and calmer during this time of year, though strong storms still occur.
With files from the Star's news services
Thursday, April 2, 2009
When Burma Policy is Really China Policy
http://washingtonindependent.com/36807/when-burma-policy-is-really-china-policy
By Mike Lillis 4/1/09 12:20 PM
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made headlines in February when, during a spin through Asia, she revealed that the Obama administration is reviewing its Burma policy, in search of more effective ways to sway the tyrannical military regime.
“Clearly, the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn’t influenced the Burmese junta,” she told students at Tokyo University.
Today, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) weighs in with a message for the White House: “Stay the course” on Burma policy, particularly as it pertains to support for Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel-Prize winning head of the National League for Democracy who’s been under house arrest on and off (mostly on) since 1990. From an op-ed in The Boston Globe today:
While it may be expedient for some diplomats and aid workers to marginalize the National League for Democracy, Clinton must recognize that no political reconciliation in Burma is possible without that party’s full participation along with ethnic representatives who remain imprisoned.
Further down, Gregg reveals what this issue, in his mind, is really about: Stemming the spread of Chinese influence in Southeast Asia.
Burma is more than just a human-rights problem. Illicit drugs, diseases, and refugees migrate to neighboring countries, creating major social — and financial — burdens on local and national governments. Geostrategic interests, including natural resources and access to deep water ports for a growing Chinese navy, should be of increasing concern to the region, as well as the United States and Europe. [...]
It is far from certain that engagement with the military junta will produce any significant reward (tigers don’t change their stripes), and the United States is not in a position to effectively counter China’s growing presence in Burma, whether through high-risk investments or security assistance. The best antidote to a growing Chinese footprint is transparent and accountable governance, long championed by the NLD and one of America’s best exports to the region.
Can’t wait for the next Cold War.
–
TWI is on Twitter. Please follow us here.
U.S. Plans to Join U.N. Human Rights Council
http://www.christianpost.com/Intl/Human_rights/2009/04/u-s-plans-to-join-u-n-human-rights-council-01/
By Ethan Cole
Christian Post Reporter
Wed, Apr. 01 2009 03:46 PM EDT
The United States will run for an elected seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council this year, the State Department announced Tuesday, reversing the Bush administration's approach to the often discredited Council.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has recently been criticized for downplaying China’s human rights problem, said human rights is “an essential element of American global foreign policy,” according to The Associated Press.
“With others, we will engage in the work of improving the U.N. human rights system to advance the vision of the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights.”
Clinton, along with U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, said the United States wants to join the Council to help advance President Barack Obama’s vision for a “new era of engagement” with the global community.
Rice said the administration desires to make the Council more effective by “working from within.”
Under former President George W. Bush, the United States had boycotted the Council for repeated criticism of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians while hardly mentioning or investigating the human rights violations of flagrant abusers such as Sudan, Zimbabwe, China, and Burma.
U.S. House Human Rights Commission co-chairman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) applauded the Obama administration for the “bold decision” to seek a seat on the U.N. Human rights Council. He promises to work for congressional support for the decision.
“I am very pleased that President Obama has made the bold decision for the U.S. to run for a seat on the United Nations Human Rights Council,” McGovern said in a statement. “I am committed to working closely with other human rights leaders in the Congress to provide the Administration with any support it may need to successfully implement this important decision.”
The State Department’s announcement comes less than a week after the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a highly-criticized “defamation of religions” resolution. The resolution, spearheaded by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), could be manipulated to legitimize anti-blasphemy laws and repress religious and speech freedom, critics warn.
“It is high time the United States rejoins the rest of the family of nations in making the Council the strongest international human rights entity yet,” McGovern said. “I am certain that under Secretary Clinton's and Ambassador Rice's leadership, the United States will not only mount a successful bid for the seat, but will once again be a leader in the defense of human rights, and will work successfully for the structural changes needed to improve the Council.”
The next election for the Council will take place on May 15 at the U.N. General Assembly in New York.
Dying, and Alone, in Myanmar
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/world/asia/01iht-myanmar.html
BANGKOK — The most heartbreaking moment for doctors and nurses treating people with H.I.V./AIDS in Myanmar is the arrival of a new patient. Running short of funds and medications, clinics have started turning dying people away.
“They continue to knock on our doors, even though we can’t take in most of them,” said Joe Belliveau, operations manager of the international aid group Médecins Sans Frontières.
The 23 clinics run by the group, also known as Doctors Without Borders, are the primary dispensers in Myanmar of the antiretroviral drugs that can prolong the lives of those infected with H.I.V., the virus that leads to AIDS. So most of the people it cannot treat are likely to die.
The people of Myanmar, a country that seems to have been marked for suffering, receive little foreign assistance — the country ranks among the lowest per capita for such aid in the world. The same is true for assistance for people with H.I.V./AIDS.
Médecins Sans Frontières estimates that 240,000 people are currently infected with H.I.V. in Myanmar and that 76,000 are in urgent need of antiretroviral drugs. Every year, about 25,000 people with the virus die.
The group’s clinics have been providing 11,000 people with the antiretroviral drugs that keep them alive. The longer they live, the more treatment they need. The group says it is unable to increase its budget there without taking money away from people in need elsewhere.
Last year it made the difficult decision to stop accepting any new patients in order to continue treating the old ones. It has opened its doors a little bit this year, accepting 3,000 new patients, still a fraction of those in need.
“When we stopped last July it was devastating for the staff,“ Belliveau said. “They couldn’t even treat the ones dying on their doorsteps.”
This year, the United Nations-backed Global Fund To Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has applied for government permits to bring antiretroviral drugs into Myanmar, and the number of people receiving treatment is likely to rise.
But that will only be one step. Fewer than 20 percent of those who need the drugs receive them, either from international groups or, in very small amounts, from the government, Médecins Sans Frontières said in a report released in November.
When a photographer visited a clinic a few months ago, he found anguish and fatalism among the people who had not received the drugs.
“I can only live longer if I have ART,” said one 28-year-old woman, referring to the antiretroviral treatment she needs. “Most of the money and possessions I had are already gone. My family sends me food from the village, but they cannot support my treatment. If I get ART I will be able to live, if not, I will die.”
In one room the photographer found a 49-year-old man, gaunt and weak, sitting on the side of a bed. He had no family, and because of the stigma of the disease he was ashamed to tell his friends or co-workers about it.
“The worst thing for me is the loneliness,” he said.
Two weeks after his picture was taken, he was dead.
US wants common Myanmar strategy with Asia
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hNFsFTOzY4WNkOA3rcRkDIHJVN3Q
WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States wants to forge a common strategy with Asia to coax military-run Myanmar out of isolation, a senior official said Wednesday, suggesting six-way talks with North Korea could be a model.
President Barack Obama's administration has launched a review of policy on Myanmar, also known as Burma, where a US official last week paid the first visit by a senior envoy in more than seven years.
Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg said the United States wanted a "collaborative and constructive" approach on Myanmar, saying nations with sway over the junta should avoid "recreating a mini version of the Great Game."
"Viewing relations with a notorious authoritarian regime like Burma as a zero-sum game is in no nation's interest," Steinberg told the National Bureau of Asian Research, a think-tank.
"We want to discuss a common approach with ASEAN, with China, with India and with Japan to find a policy that will improve the lives of the people of Burma and promote stability in this key region," he said.
Asian nations including those in ASEAN, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, have mostly tried to engage with Myanmar. China is the key trade and military partner of the junta, which crushed 2007 protests led by Buddhist monks.
The Asian approach contrasts with that of the United States and the European Union, which have slapped sanctions on the regime to pressure it to improve human rights and free pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
Steinberg said the US "core objectives" would remain the same after the review -- to seek a "more open" Myanmar that respects the rights of its people and integrates into the global economy.
"We all have a common interest in working together to get a constructive solution that convinces the junta that the path they are pursuing is not in their interest," he said.
He said Myanmar was an issue on which the United States was open to setting up new "flexible" frameworks similar to the six-nation talks on ending North Korea's nuclear program.
"The solution to many global problems will not always be in creating new formal institutions or new bureaucracies," he said.
Copyright © 2009 AFP. All rights reserved. More »
Banking on Beijing
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/apr/06/00006/
There are two ways to interpret the fact that China is America’s largest creditor at a moment of stupendous American borrowing. The first is as an economist. And we’ll get to that. But the second is as a thriller writer—or paranoid economic and political nationalist—and it is much, much juicier.
The thriller scenario begins in the blood-red corridors of the Zhongnanhai leadership compound in Beijing, next door to the Forbidden City. Here China’s political elite has been plotting their usurpation of American power for decades. Bent over their Lenovo Thinkpads, the brilliant sons of Communism have engineered nothing less than a global revolution.
Dissolute, wasteful, crass America has been rotting, borrowing and spending, licking lead toys and watching “The Girls Next Door.” Meanwhile, diligent, thrifty, clever China has been preparing to take its place, squirreling away money and buying American debt.
Poor America thinks only in four-year election cycles, cackle the Beijing bureaucrats, whereas China thinks in hundred- and thousand-year spans, in vast historical revolutions that must inevitably turn in their favor.
Does any issue sum it up better than patent infringement? “We can’t do business with a country which pirates ‘The Dark Knight’ and Microsoft Office,” screams America. “Fine,” say the Chinese, “But did we ever see a penny from our invention of paper?”
And so, in the spring of 2009, the time came for China to spring its trap.
As with the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in 1914, no one believed so trivial an incident as the hassling of a U.S. naval ship in the waters of the South China Sea could precipitate the events that followed.
Sunday, March 8, 75 miles south of Hainan Island. The USNS Impeccable was cruising in international waters, dragging behind it a Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System (SURTASS), a listening device used to pick up underwater acoustical data, notably submarine movements.
Suddenly, five Chinese boats appeared and surrounded it, one coming within 25 feet. A Chinese sailor produced a grappling hook and tried to snag the Impeccable’s SURTASS. The Impeccable’s crew sprayed him and his ship with a fire hose. The Chinese sailors undressed down to their underwear and kept coming. One boat tossed wood into the water ahead of the Impeccable, forcing it to stop. Two hours later, Chinese fighter planes flew low over the American ship.
The Impeccable’s captain said Chinese harassment had increased markedly during the previous week, but he had no idea why. The Pentagon maintained that the Chinese have vastly under-reported their military spending and cloaked their intentions for years. Was the truth now starting to emerge? Was China’s pesky aggression a sign of worse to come?
The following Friday, March 13, China’s premier, Wen Jiabao, followed the military attack with an assault on America’s credit-worthiness. “We have lent a huge amount of money to the U.S.,” he said. “Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I am definitely a little worried.”
With the U.S. Treasury rolling out ever more plans to borrow and spend, this was no time for one of the biggest acquirers of its debt to be making violent choking sounds.
Or was it the perfect time? With America on its knees, was this not the ideal moment to trigger the shift of power from Washington to Beijing? Would China now dump its U.S. assets, render the dollar worthless, and emerge triumphant from the wreckage of the global economy?
Get me Harrison Ford.
The truth may be more mundane—unless, of course, you are a keen follower of the patterns of global credit, in which case these are riveting times.
China’s massive acquisition of American assets in recent years, from Treasury bills to corporate bonds and equities, seems to have many people spooked. The way they talk about it, you would think some tattooed goon, seconded from a Macao casino, had cornered Lady Liberty and was demanding she pay the vigorish.
China, according to this thinking, is not someone to whom you want to owe money, especially if like America you are already in a deep financial hole and asking to dig further. China’s motives are not aligned with America’s interests. Owe them too much and one day you’ll pay a far heavier price than you imagined.
In fact, Chinese lending and U.S. borrowing have become so fundamental to the success of their respective social and economic models, and the stability of the global economy, that a quick unraveling would be a form of mutually assured destruction. There is no easy way out of the relationship for either country unless they wish to tumble like Holmes and Moriarty into the roaring Reichenbach Falls.
China’s huge dollar reserves are merely a symptom of an economic fix of its own making. Ever since Deng Xiaoping introduced his economic reforms to China 30 years ago, the country’s growth has been driven by exports—mostly to the United States and Europe.
The export focus led to the creation of millions of manufacturing jobs, which in turn served the primary goal of China’s leaders, to ensure social stability through employment and prosperity. China’s factories duly became the last stop on the global assembly line, taking in imports from more advanced Asian economies such as South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan, repackaging them, and sending them off by container ship.
Crucial to this strategy was a weak currency. If the renminbi climbed, as it should have given China’s growing economic power, the value of Chinese exports would rise and their competitiveness fall. So Beijing acted aggressively to keep the renminbi at a consistent level against the dollar. Until 2005, there was a fixed peg. Since then, the renminbi has been allowed to float and has drifted up by around 20 percent, though it still trades well below where most economists believe it should.
How the Chinese achieved this explains much of the present situation. First, the Chinese central bank simply printed renminbi to dilute the existing pool and buy foreign currencies. Then, fearing inflation, they bought back their own currency by issuing bonds and raising capital requirements on Chinese banks, which must now turn over some 20 percent of their cash deposits to the government.
In addition, China lent to its biggest export market by investing in dollar-denominated securities, notably those issued by the United States Treasury and government agencies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This kept the dollar healthy and Chinese exports relatively cheap.
For years, this policy of keeping the renminbi low against the dollar and using the dollar trade surplus to lend back to the United States to buy more Chinese goods worked. But it was a policy, like a Ponzi scheme, that became all but impossible to reverse and was merely putting off the cost China would one day have to pay for its explosive growth.
As Brad Setser, a global economic analyst at the Council on Foreign Relations, has written, “The benefits—rapid export growth, lots of investment in the export sector—associated with China’s exchange rate policy were front-loaded while the costs—export dependence, losses on China’s reserves—were back-loaded. The bill for subsidizing China’s exports during the boom is just now coming due.”
One consequence of this is that China’s leaders now view America’s economic challenges from two different, often conflicting, perspectives. On the one hand, China is America’s largest foreign creditor. U.S. Treasury and government agency securities are now estimated to comprise $1.25 trillion of China’s American portfolio. Another $250 billion or so is believed to be split between U.S. corporate bonds, money-market funds, and equities. American assets are believed to comprise 70 percent of China’s foreign reserves, with most of the rest held in euros. The numbers are murky as China’s foreign investments are handled by a number of entities, some in Hong Kong, whose holdings are not disclosed.
If America runs up more debt than it can reasonably repay, the value of China’s U.S. holdings will fall. Thinking as a lender, China would rather America tightened its belt, cut its expenses, and focused on paying back its existing debts. It wants America to keep the dollar strong and interest rates low to preserve the value of its bonds.
But if the U.S. economy does not recover quickly, whether through government stimulus or other means, China’s entire growth and export-driven economy risks unwinding. If one accepts that the size of China’s reserves is a sign of its devotion to the goal of social stability, of which the export economy is simply the means, then Beijing must be willing President Obama’s borrowing plans to succeed. Dollar be damned, China needs the American consumer to buy Chinese goods and sustain Chinese jobs.
In this context, Wen Jiabao’s fretting over a fall in the value of China’s foreign reserves, its rainy day fund, is like complaining about a dripping tap when water is pouring in from the ceiling. Even if the value of China’s U.S. portfolio were to fall by 30 percent, it would cost the Chinese around the same as their recent $586 billion stimulus plan. If the whole lot, a sum equivalent to one seventh of America’s GDP, were to go up in smoke, China would remain solvent. Except that would also mean that the United States’ economy had ceased to exist, which would be a considerably larger problem.
From America’s perspective, China’s fussing is a mild concern. If China were to stop lending money to the United States, there are other sources of capital in the world. There are plenty of investors, including American investors, who still see the full faith and credit of the United States government as a decent bet.
And realistically, where else is China going to go? It has already tried to use its economic muscle to patch together a network of oil suppliers around the world to immunize itself from price movements and supply disruptions by cutting deals with Iran, Sudan, and Angola. But it still depends on global supply for 95 percent of its energy needs. This policy of going where squeamish rivals fear to tread has also led it to become the largest trading partner of Iran, North Korea, and Sudan and the second largest of Burma and Zimbabwe. You scarcely need to be the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights to understand this is not the Peoria Chamber of Commerce.
The China Investment Corporation, a sovereign wealth fund, and the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE), a shadowy body with responsibility for managing China’s foreign reserves, have made a number of investments in Western financial firms in recent years. Two years ago, the Chinese paid $3 billion for a stake in the Blackstone Private Equity Group. The value of that has fallen by around 75 percent. In December 2007, the CIC paid $5 billion for a 10 percent stake in Morgan Stanley. That has since fallen by more than half.
The Chinese were reportedly stunned by their losses in Lehman Brothers and by the lack of support they received from the U.S. government. When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were close to collapse, only intervention by the Bush administration saved the Chinese from dramatic losses on hundreds of billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities. Since then, the Chinese have sold their government agency securities and bought short-term Treasury bills, which carry less risk.
In fact, when you decompose the risks and returns on China’s portfolio, U.S. Treasuries may well be its soundest investment. Singapore’s vaunted Temasek sovereign wealth fund, for example, lost 31 percent of its value last year. Had China followed Temasek’s investment strategy, or indeed Blackstone’s, instead of buying boring old Treasuries, Wen Jiabao would have thrown himself into the Yangtze.
Over the next few months, the extent of China’s buying of U.S. assets will be closely watched. The World Bank forecasts that China ran up a $425 billion current account surplus in 2008. It has to put the money somewhere, and there is already a surfeit of domestic credit. That cash, perhaps the last of the great savings glut piled up in emerging markets over the past decade, has to go overseas.
The appetite of foreign central banks for U.S. Treasury securities is already falling as the global economy contracts. But for the next few months at least, long enough for President Obama to get his stimulus funding in place, the money, with China’s help, should be there.
And then what? Then the really hard work begins for China. Wen Jiabao has conceded that the government target of 8 percent growth this year, necessary to contain unemployment, is unrealistic. He has called on China’s businesses to “focus on adjusting product structure, improving quality and upgrading technologies in the face of economic woes.” It is high time, he was saying, for China to move up the economic value chain, to go from sweatshop to design shop, to develop its domestic markets and create investment opportunities for its own citizens.
The reason the Chinese save so much is not because they are better than us or because they all read Suze Orman. They save because they have nothing to buy or to invest in and because they are terrified that when they get sick or grow old or have to educate their children, the state will not help them.
China’s priorities are territorial integrity and economic growth, not bankrupting the United States. Growth can only continue with greater economic liberalization and a move away from the government’s mercantilist policies, notably its insistence on using an artificially low currency as its main competitive weapon. For all of its success, China’s GDP per capita still ranks only 100th in the world. It is a woefully inefficient consumer of energy, a rank polluter, and a poor provider of educational and health services to its people. If you think the United States has problems, try living in Guangzhou Province, the heart of China’s manufacturing industry, where millions of migrant workers are struggling to find work.
The stark facts of China’s relative position to the United States are these: China has four times the people and one quarter the GDP.
Wen Jiabao is within his rights to express concern about his investment in the United States. But he must also acknowledge that China’s ability to convert its surplus into loans to Americans has been crucial to China’s economic growth.
Had China pursued a different strategy over the years, letting its currency float, liberalizing its markets, and stimulating domestic consumption, its progress may have been more uneven and less predictable. It would have had a different set of problems to face today—problems that might have looked more like America’s.
__________________________________________
Philip Delves Broughton is the author of Ahead of the Curve: Two Years at Harvard Business School and a former New York and Paris correspondent for The Daily Telegraph.
The American Conservative welcomes letters to the editor.
Send letters to: letters@amconmag.com
Huge Population of Rare Dolphins Discovered
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/550615/
Newswise — The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) announced today the discovery of a huge population of rare dolphins in South Asia—but warns that the population is threatened by climate change and fishing nets.
Using rigorous scientific techniques, WCS researchers estimate that nearly 6,000 Irrawaddy dolphins, which are related to orcas or killer whales, were found living in freshwater regions of Bangladesh’s Sundarbans mangrove forest and adjacent waters of the Bay of Bengal—an area where little marine mammal research has taken place up to this point. Prior to this study, the largest known populations of Irrawaddy dolphins numbered in the low hundreds or less.
Each discovery of Irrawaddy dolphins is important because scientists do not know how many remain on the planet. In 2008, they were listed as vulnerable in the IUCN Red List based on population declines in known populations.
The results of the study were announced today at the First International Conference on Marine Mammal Protected Areas in Maui, Hawaii and published in the Winter issue of the Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. Authors of the study include Brian D. Smith, Rubaiyat Mansur Mowgli, and Samantha Strindberg of the Wildlife Conservation Society, along with Benazir Ahmed of Chittagong University in Bangladesh.
“With all the news about freshwater environments and state of the Oceans, WCS’s discovery that a thriving population of Irrawaddy dolphins exists in Bangladesh gives us hope for protecting this and other endangered species and their important habitats,” said Dr. Steven E. Sanderson, President and CEO of the Wildlife Conservation Society. “WCS is committed to conservation of these iconic marine species from dolphins, sea turtles, sharks to the largest whales.”
“This discovery gives us great hope that there is a future for Irrawaddy dolphins,” said Brian D. Smith, the study’s lead author. “Bangladesh clearly serves as an important sanctuary for Irrawaddy dolphins, and conservation in this region should be a top priority.”
Despite finding this extraordinarily large population, the study’s authors warn that the dolphins are becoming increasingly threatened by accidental entanglement in fishing nets. During the study, researchers encountered two dolphins that had become entangled and subsequently drowned in fishing nets—a common occurrence according to local fishermen.
In a second paper, published in the March/April issue of Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystem, Smith and his coauthors report the additional long-term threat to the dolphin population of declining freshwater supplies, caused by upstream water diversion in India, coupled with sea-level rise due to climate change. These circumstances also threaten Ganges River dolphins, an endangered species with a range that overlaps with that of the Irrawaddy dolphins’ in the Sundarbans mangrove forest. The recent likely extinction of the Yangtze River dolphin, or baiji, is a potent reminder of how vulnerable freshwater dolphins are to extinction via the impacts of humans.
The Irrawaddy dolphin grows to some 2 to 2.5 meters in length (6.5 to 8 feet) and frequents large rivers, estuaries, and freshwater lagoons in South and Southeast Asia. In Myanmar’s Ayeyarwady River, these dolphins are known for “cooperative fishing” with humans, where the animals voluntarily herd schools of fish toward fishing boats and awaiting nets. With the aid of dolphins, fishermen can increase the size of their catches up to threefold. The dolphins appear to benefit from this relationship by easily preying on the cornered fish and those that fall out of the net as the fishermen pull it from the water. In 2006, WCS helped establish a protected area along the Ayeyarwady River to conserve this critically endangered mammal population.
WCS is currently working closely with the Ministry of Environment and Forests in Bangladesh on plans for establishing a protected area network for both Irrawaddy and Ganges River dolphins in the Sundarbans mangrove forest. Funding is critical to sustaining these activities along with WCS’s long-term efforts to study the effects of climate change on this habitat, support sustainable fishing practices, and develop local ecotourism projects.
Support for this study has been provided in part by the Kerzner Marine Foundation and Ocean Park Conservation Foundation, Hong Kong (OPCFHK). This study was also funded in part by the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission. The Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) has also supported WCS efforts as part of a regional program for cetacean conservation in the Bay of Bengal.
The Wildlife Conservation Society saves wildlife and wild places worldwide. We do so through science, global conservation, education and the management of the world's largest system of urban wildlife parks, led by the flagship Bronx Zoo.
Together these activities change attitudes towards nature and help people imagine wildlife and humans living in harmony. WCS is committed to this mission because it is essential to the integrity of life on Earth. Visit: www.wcs.org
Special Note to the Media: If you would like to guide your readers or viewers to a web link where they can make donations in support of helping to save wildlife and wild places, please direct them to: www.wcs.org/donation
Standing firm on Burma
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/04/01/standing_firm_on_burma/
By Judd Gregg | April 1, 2009
SECRETARY OF STATE Hillary Clinton recently announced that the administration will undertake a Burma policy review.
Over the years, Congress and various administrations have imposed economic sanctions and aid restrictions against the State Peace and Development Council, as the misfit military junta in Burma calls itself. Some question whether US actions have had any result in lessening the junta's death grip over that country.
Clinton should seek to answer that question by soliciting the opinions of those who matter most: the people of Burma and their elected representatives from the National League for Democracy. In 1990, the League won parliamentary elections that were ignored by the junta, and its key leaders, including Aung San Suu Kyi, were jailed - or worse. Despite the military junta's campaign of brutality, democrats in Burma have refused to give up.
Clinton will hear predictable answers from diplomats who will insist that a policy shift toward greater economic engagement with the SPDC is in order, regardless of the fact that Transparency International lists Burma as the second-most corrupt country in the world.
She will hear some aid workers insist that America causes the Burmese people's suffering through its sanctions, never mind the SPDC's well-documented record of economic mismanagement, failed governance, and gross human-rights abuses.
And the secretary will hear a repeated refrain in foreign capitals that "China and India won't" or "the Association of Southeast Asian Nations can't" when it comes to holding the junta accountable for its contemptible misrule, at a time when President Obama has much of the world eager to reinvigorate diplomacy with America.
However, the voice Clinton must listen hardest to is the one she is likely to hear least. Suu Kyi remains under house arrest in Rangoon. While it may be expedient for some diplomats and aid workers to marginalize the National League for Democracy, Clinton must recognize that no political reconciliation in Burma is possible without that party's full participation along with ethnic representatives who remain imprisoned.
Burma is more than just a human-rights problem. Illicit drugs, diseases, and refugees migrate to neighboring countries, creating major social - and financial - burdens on local and national governments. Geostrategic interests, including natural resources and access to deep water ports for a growing Chinese navy, should be of increasing concern to the region, as well as the United States and Europe.
During the review, the administration should stay the course on current US policy toward Burma. Assistance provided in the wake of Cyclone Nargis should be monitored closely to ensure that none is siphoned off by the regime, and ongoing programs that seek to address the most basic of needs to the people of Burma - inside and along the border with Thailand - should continue at increased funding levels to address currency and commodity price fluctuations. Finally, no one should believe that elections scheduled for next year will be transformational so long as Suu Kyi, the National League for Democracy, and ethnic nationalities remain shackled, and barred from political participation by the junta's Draconian constitution. The call for the immediate and unconditional release of Suu Kyi and all prisoners of conscience must continue.
America has stood by Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy for over two decades. Any policy change that calls for a deviation from this support must be weighed carefully. It is far from certain that engagement with the military junta will produce any significant reward (tigers don't change their stripes), and the United States is not in a position to effectively counter China's growing presence in Burma, whether through high-risk investments or security assistance. The best antidote to a growing Chinese footprint is transparent and accountable governance, long championed by the NLD and one of America's best exports to the region. Further, history demonstrates that the people of Burma have no misguided affections for their northern neighbor.
To paraphrase former British prime minister Winston Churchill, the price of America's greatness is a responsibility to stand by courageous democrats in Burma. Congress has done so in the past, and should continue to do so as long as they struggle for justice and freedom in their country.
Republican Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire is a ranking member of the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Subcommittee.
© Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
The G-20's Funny Money
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123854148528775677.html
The IMF has a plan to create cash and pass it all over the world.Article
more in Opinion »Email Printer Friendly Share:
Yahoo Buzz facebook MySpace LinkedIn Digg del.icio.us NewsVine StumbleUpon Mixx Text Size
If the G-20 leaders meeting in London this week have one goal, it is to find a way to reflate the global economy with the least political cost. As bad luck would have it, the International Monetary Fund is standing by to help.
A hint of what's in store came from Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso earlier this week when he said that he will propose an increase in "special drawing rights," or SDRs, at the IMF. If the term "SDR" sounds vaguely familiar, perhaps that's because it was the subject of a short-lived proposal last week from the head of the People's Bank of China to create a new global reserve currency that could replace the U.S. dollar. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner may have been caught off guard when he said that he would entertain the idea. When his comment sent the dollar plummeting, Mr. Geithner quickly backtracked.
But Mr. Aso's reference to SDRs is something altogether different. He is proposing a massive expansion in foreign aid, which we will explain below. What is important to understand is that the plan means hundreds of billions of dollars in handouts going to emerging market countries with no strings attached: All governments qualify, including those that lock political dissidents in dungeons and steal from their own people. Treasury is widely believed to support the SDR expansion, despite the fact that it will increase, yet again, costs for American taxpayers and the debt burden of future generations and will reward dictators the world over.
SDRs are nothing more than a fancy term for allocated credits divvied out by the IMF to member countries. The SDR pool at the fund traces its roots back to the gold standard when it was used as a liquidity tool for balance-of-payments shortfalls. These "international reserves" would continually circulate from deficit to surplus countries.
Today, under fiat currencies, SDRs are like bits of paper printed by IMF officials in the basement. They have no value but can be exchanged for subsidized loans to nonreserve currency countries. As the fund explains, "The SDR is neither a currency, nor a claim on the IMF. Rather, it is a potential claim on the freely usable currencies of IMF members." The current exchange rate per SDR is about $1.50.
When a country decides it wants to spend an SDR, it alerts the fund, which then takes the bits of paper it created to the country that has the real money and exchanges them. For example, if Bananalandia wants dollars, its SDR account is debited, and America's SDR account is credited. The U.S. then issues debt to raise the dollars to give to Bananalandia. The rate at which countries borrow is a weighted average of the lowest rates in the dollar, euro, yen and pound sterling. In practice, the "loans" are almost never retired.
Since 1970, the Fund has allocated 21.4 billion SDRs (almost $32 billion at the current dollar rate). But in 1997 the IMF board passed a resolution to double the number of SDRs. In 12 years it has failed to get the 85% of total votes at the Fund to approve that resolution.
The reason was easy to understand: The U.S. has 16.8% of the votes and the cost to U.S. taxpayers of SDRs is already substantial. In a 2004 paper for Congress's Joint Economic Committee, Carnegie Mellon economist Adam Lerrick explained that SDRs cost U.S. taxpayers $330 million per year. With the U.S. "contribution" to the 1997 resolution total U.S. exposure would be about $12 billion. Mr. Lerrick estimated that the total cost of this proposed expansion to U.S. taxpayers could reach $750 million annually. With this in mind and given the lack of conditionality for what amounts to foreign aid, Congress refused to approve the IMF proposal.
Mr. Aso of Japan didn't specify amounts he will endorse in London. But Ted Truman, a former assistant secretary of the Treasury under Bill Clinton who is now advising Mr. Geithner, is calling for "an immediate, one-time allocation of $250 billion" in SDRs. He says his goal is to put into action the "many well-intentioned pledges to adopt expansionary policies, avoid protectionism, stabilize and reform the financial system, mobilize the IMF and multilateral development banks to help the weakest countries, and combat poverty" that will come out of the London meeting. Wow, free money can certainly do magical things.
As for getting this through Congress, Mr. Truman adds that the Treasury Secretary "can vote for an SDR allocation of up to $250 billion, or somewhat larger, as long as he consults with key members of the U.S. Congress 90 days before he casts his vote. Thus, the actual allocation could occur by mid-summer, much sooner than most other crisis-mitigation measures would begin to take effect." We're told by others that this is, at best, an "unusual interpretation" of U.S. law.
Since IMF financing is "off-budget," meaning that it doesn't show up as an annual U.S. expenditure, all this is an off-the-books future liability. But no one should mistake this as charity for the deserving poor. As we wrote in an editorial in 2004, a doubling of SDR credits would make Iran eligible for a total of $465 million, Syria $90 million, Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe $115 million, Sudan $100 million, Venezuela $840 million and Burma $80 million.
If Americans decide they want to give more to the neediest, there are honest ways to do it. But to simply blanket the world with conjured dollars and ask already-stretched American taxpayers to pay for it is bad economic policy and even worse governance.
Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum.
Posts
