BurmaNet News, June 30, 2005

[Editor]

June 30, 2005 Issue # 2751


INSIDE BURMA
AP: Myanmar war veterans urge military government to quit International
Labor Organization
AFP: Myanmar's generals deaf to the world: analysts
DVB: Burma reportedly reorganizes military intelligence structure
Irrawaddy: Te Za accused of bribe to secure logging deal

BUSINESS / FINANCE
RTBF Radio 1: Belgium dismisses lawsuit by four Burmese against oil giant

REGIONAL
Hindu: Myanmar refugees rally against NHPC plant

INTERNATIONAL
Irrawaddy: Burmese women nominated for Peace Prize

OPINION / OTHER
Bangkok Post: Back to chauvinism, xenophobia
Irrawaddy: The Bonfire of the Vanities

____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

June 30, Associated Press
Myanmar war veterans urge military government to quit International Labor
Organization

Yangon: Myanmar's war veteran's group urged the country to quit the U.N.
International Labor Organization, which has repeatedly criticized the
ruling junta for allowing the use of forced labor, a state-run newspaper
reported Thursday.

"Despite the government's sincere cooperation with the ILO, it had
unjustly passed a resolution to impose sanctions against Myanmar," Lt.
Col. Hla Swe, chairman of Magwe Division War Veterans Organization
Supervisory committee, was quoted as saying by the Myanma Ahlin daily.

"The ILO is applying political pressure which has nothing to do with labor
affairs ... therefore, Myanmar should resign from the ILO," said Hla Swe.

The ILO has long been an ardent critic of Myanmar, also known as Burma,
for allowing forced labor, which it says is used especially by the
military.

Articles published in the state-controlled press reflect the government
line, and often are the only source of official information.

In 2000, the ILO took the unprecedented step of calling on its members to
impose sanctions against Myanmar because of the military government's
failure to curb forced labor.

In response, the junta allowed the Geneva-based organization to open an
office in Yangon in 2002. A year later, ILO withdrew its sanctions call.

In 2004, however, ILO said unless Myanmar made more progress and took
swift action the call for sanctions would be revived. The ILO recently
condemned Myanmar again, indicating that sanction calls would likely be
renewed.

____________________________________

June 30, Agence France Presse
Myanmar's generals deaf to the world: analysts - Pascale Trouillaud

Yangon: By blocking their ears to repeated calls for the release of
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and that they give up the chairmanship
of ASEAN in 2006, Myanmar's generals have shown they will listen to no
one, analysts say.

The clamor on the Nobel laureate's 60th birthday this month to demand an
end to her house arrest made little impact in Yangon, which has ignored
calls by heads of state, ministers, other Nobel prize winners and human
rights activists across the world that she be released.

Analysts say it is likely the regime has already decided she will not be
freed before next year.

The generals would first want to re-convene the National Convention
drafting a new constitution and have it approved in a referendum, the
result of which is a foregone conclusion.

Only then would they feel comfortable to free the popular opposition leader.

Another thorny issue illustrates that the generals listen to no one: the
junta's frustrating delay in finalizing whether it will assume the
rotating chairmanship of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN).

The United States and the European Union have threatened to boycott their
annual security meetings and other forums with ASEAN if Myanmar heads the
regional bloc in 2006, after Malaysia in an alphabetical rotation.

ASEAN itself is divided over the issue. Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos support
Myanmar, while countries like Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand have made
it understood to Yangon they would prefer it relinquished the role.

Within ASEAN, "There is a sense of exasperation," a Yangon-based analyst
said.

But Myanmar does not want to let go and has already begun preparations,
extending the city's airport, resuming downtown construction and
beautifying several parks.

"They are under serious pressure. They desperately want it, it is
important for their credibility," he told AFP.

The decision, he said, rests solely with Senior General Than Shwe, the
country's 72-year-old supreme leader.

"He has no inclination to give this up, and it would be a big slap in the
face" if Myanmar were pressured out of the role, he said.

"The general listens to no one, no one has any influence over him," noted
another observer. "He is totally insensitive to whatever people suggest to
him, and he has a very limited vision of the world and international
matters."

Than Shwe, who has a reputation for reclusiveness and inflexibility, is
rankling his neighbors by keeping ASEAN waiting.

Former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad tried for four years after 1997,
the year ASEAN accepted Myanmar with strong support from Malaysia, to
engage him in the art of diplomacy, the observer said.

"He has never stopped giving them advice, but to (Than Shwe) it went in
one ear and out the other," he said.

Some heavyweights members within ASEAN, which historically has steered
clear of internal meddling, would like to see Myanmar forego the
chairmanship, if only to "get rid of the Myanmar problem at least for a
certain time," he added.

Yet Myanmar "has always won out, and has always been able to impose her
opinion."

Yangon's refusal to budge, the first analyst said, has the military regime
seemingly headed towards even greater isolation after the sacking last
October of prime minister Khin Nyunt, who was the only top-level leader in
favor of some degree of opening to the outside world.

Myanmar, which has been under military rule since 1962, remains unfazed by
tightened US and EU sanctions over its dismal human rights record, as well
as the regular condemnation by the UN Human Rights Commission or the
International Labor Organization.

"Internationally I don't know who could influence them, except maybe the
Chinese, but they have a policy of non-interference in internal affairs,"
said the analyst.

The military regime is consequently living in a virtual vacuum, content to
engage in perfunctory relations with its neighbors while enjoying warm
ties with regional powers China and India, each of which court Yangon for
geo-political advantage.

"They feel they have nothing to fear because they have friends protecting
them at the (UN) Security Council," said one Western diplomat, referring
to permanent member China.

"The rest doesn't interest them much."

____________________________________

June 24, Democratic Voice of Burma
Burma reportedly reorganizes military intelligence structure

[Newsreader] It has been learned that the Department of Security on
Military Affairs [DSMA], formed after the arrest and purge of Gen Khin
Nyunt, former prime minister and chief of military intelligence, has been
reorganized with new personnel at the 12 military commands.

Burma-Thailand border based military observers said a special meeting was
held during the second week of June at Lashio-based Northeast Military
Command that is directly facing some problems with the peace groups
[ethnic cease-fire groups] and four battalion commanders were given duties
in charge of DSMA and other departments. They are General Staff Officer
[GSO] Grade-1 DSMA, Staff Office Grade-1 [SO-1] Inspection Department,
SO-1 People's Militia Department, and SO-1 Military Department.

Observers say it is rather strange to see other officers assigned separate
duties for different departments formerly managed alone by Northeast
Military Command Commander Maj-Gen Myint Hlaing.

When DVB [Democratic Voice of Burma] contacted military observer U Htay
Aung about the matter, he explained as follows:

[U Htay Aung] After the arrest of personnel from the Military Intelligence
led by Gen Khin Nyunt on 19 October 2004, the junta reorganized the
military intelligence apparatus and formed the DSMA. According to the new
setup the chain of command is not under the DSMA but the regional
commanders and 12 new departments have been formed in the 12 regional
military commands. The department is formed with GSO-1, GSO-2, and others
depending on their duties and responsibilities. Sa Ya Hpa or Security on
Military Affairs Battalions have been formed at prominent cities under the
military commands.

[DVB correspondent] Yes. We have learned that the DSMA at Northeast
Military Command is headed by a GSO-1. Since it is under the control of
the regional military commander and Maj-Gen Myint Swe, who is the chief of
DSMA and also Rangoon commander, how will the chain of command work?

[U Htay Aung] I think another person needs to be appointed as chief of
DSMA who will be stationed at the War Office. It is possible Rangoon
Commander Maj-Gen Myint Swe is currently jointly in charge of Rangoon
command and DSMA because the Rangoon command shares the same premises with
the War Office. Moreover, the army commander in chief and deputy army
commander in chief rank higher than the regional commanders. It seems they
are forming the DSMA as a separate support unit under the army's control,
which means the DSMA could not control the regional military commanders
like the Military Intelligence Department under Gen Khin Nyunt did, and
the DSMA chief could not directly control the DSMA battalions in the
military commands. The regional military commanders will have direct
control over the DSMA battalions. I think the commanders will report
directly to the army commander in chief concerning the DSMA matters and
send courtesy copies to the DSMA chief. The current procedure is just the
opposite of the old one.

[DVB correspondent] You mean there is no way the new DSMA chief could
become a powerful intelligence chief like Gen Khin Nyunt?

[U Htay Aung] That is correct. They have formed the DSMA Office by taking
lessons from previous experiences. You can arbitrarily say the SPDC [State
Peace and Development Council] has reorganized the military to have a
firmer grip on power. But in our view, the junta military is still facing
internal problems concerning appointments and transfers. We believe the
internal strife will remain in another form within the military.

____________________________________

June 30, Irrawaddy
Te Za accused of bribe to secure logging deal - Clive Parker

Te Za, the head of Rangoon-based Htoo Trading Company, has been directly
implicated in bribing a local community representative in Karenni State to
secure logging rights in the area, according to an informed source in
Rangoon.

Two payments of US $10,000 were allegedly paid by check to the Karenni
village representative by Te Za, who was then asked “for a favor” in
return, the source said. Te Za then allegedly requested the representative
sign a blank piece of paper thought to have subsequently been applied to a
logging agreement. The incident has been brought to the attention of the
relevant authorities in Rangoon who have said they will not investigate,
despite the admission of the payment by Htoo Trading.

In reply to the accusations the company admitted paying US $20,000 “to a
village representative to upgrade their schools and local clinics.” It
denied the payment was made by check and that Te Za made the payment in
person.

Htoo Trading has not yet begun logging in the area but has been given
permission to do so by the Myanmar Timber Enterprise, the logging
license-issuing authority responsible for contracting private logging
firms in Burma. As a result, Htoo Trading said it has done nothing
illegal.

“It is erroneous to assume that local entities can grant the necessary
legal licenses by bribing them for the permission for logging,” Thiha, the
brother of Te Za, said in a statement to The Irrawaddy.

However an environmental group operating in Karen State says such
allegations have been made previously against Htoo Trading, which it says
has a lot to gain from paying off local authorities who can give access to
rebel-controlled areas in some cases.

“In Karen areas they find influential people and give money for
investment. That way they have access to the areas,” an environmental
worker in Karen State said. “Htoo will find delegates to negotiate with
local leaders or township leaders to get permission [for logging].” Many
armed groups are “pro-Htoo,” he added.

For its part, the Ministry of Forestry has refused to investigate the
matter further. In response to the allegations, Aye Min, general manager
of the Department of Forestry, said: “It is impossible. We’ve never heard
of this kind of problem.”

According to Global Witness, which has extensively documented illegal
logging in Burma, the authorities routinely ignore acts of impropriety in
the logging industry, often because government officials are directly
involved.

In its 2003 report, A Conflict of Interests, Global Witness documents the
case of a Taiwanese businessman, working with senior forest department
officials, who bought more than 300 tons of illegal teak, worth up to
$600,000 on the international market. The report alleges that the deal was
uncovered but that the investigation “was quashed from above.”

____________________________________
BUSINESS / FINANCE

June 29, RTBF Radio 1
Belgium dismisses lawsuit by four Burmese against oil giant

Brussels: The highest Belgian court of appeal has dismissed a lawsuit
against TotalFinaElf brought by Burmese nationals, Belgian RTBF radio has
reported.

"The Court of Cassation... has decided, in a way, to follow the lawyers of
TotalFinaElf and to pronounce a nonsuit", the radio said.

It recalled that, in 2002, four Burmese nationals, one of whom had refugee
status in Belgium, filed a lawsuit against the oil company for "complicity
with the Burmese junta in crimes against humanity in Burma".

One month ago the arbitration court ruled that the Burmese plaintiffs were
able to proceed with their case under Belgium's universal jurisdiction
law, the radio added.

"Today the Court of Cassation overturned this decision," it said.

____________________________________
REGIONAL

June 29, The Hindu
Myanmar refugees rally against NHPC plant

Hundreds of Myanmarese refugees, under the banner of the Anti-Tamanthi Dam
Campaign Committee (ATDCC), held a demonstration here on Tuesday to
protest against the construction of a 1,200 MW power plant, coming up in
the Kuki-dominated tribal area of Myanmar. The power plant is being
constructed with the help of the National Hydro-electric Power Corporation
(NHPC).

In a memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister, the Home Minister, and
the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of NHPC, the protesters said the dam
would displace 3,600 ethnic Kuki people from 35 villages and submerge
17,000 acres of agricultural land. "All the manual works, will be for sure
done by the local Kukis by use of force, thus leading to human rights
abuses against the local population,'' the memorandum said. The committee
also alleged that 80 per cent of the power generated from the plant, was
likely to be exported to India to strengthen ties between the two
countries.

Stop investments'

Appealing to the Indian Government to stop the Tamanthi project which
would "in no way benefit the local Kuki people," the memorandum said all
forms of investments in Myanmar should also be stopped until genuine
democracy was restored, as the investment was strengthening the military
dictatorship and supporting its strategy to subjugate the indigenous
people.

Threat to wildlife

The proposed dam site being part of Myanmar's largest national park, the
flooding would threaten the habitats of many endangered wild species
including tigers, leopards, rhinos, Asian golden cats, gorillas and
hornbills.

_____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

June 30, Irrawaddy
Burmese women nominated for Peace Prize - Shah Paung

Four Burmese ethnic minority women living in exile are among 1,000
nominees worldwide for the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize. The women include
Cynthia Maung, a Karen medical doctor who since 1989 has run a clinic
treating Burmese refugees, migrants and orphans in Mae Sot, on the
Thai-Burma border, and Charm Tong, a leader of the Shan Women's Action
Network.

In 2002, Dr Cynthia, as she is widely known, won Southeast Asia’s Ramon
Magsaysay Award for community leadership, considered by many as Asia’s
equivalent of the Nobel Peace Prize, and last April she was listed as one
of Time Magazine’s Asian Heroes. Altogether she has received six
international awards for her work. In 1999, she was the first recipient of
the Jonathan Mann Award, sponsored by US and Swiss health organizations.

Charm Tong is also well known for her struggle on behalf of women from her
native Shan State, on Burma’s eastern border. In 2004 she was one of 10
women chosen as Women of the World, by popular women’s magazine Marie
Claire.

The other two Burmese women nominated for the Nobel prize are Naw
Zipporrah Sein, secretary of the Karen Women’s Organization, and Naw Paw
Lu Lu, who runs a home for Burmese refugees in the Sangkhlaburi district
of Thailand’s Kanchanaburi province.

_____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

June 29, Bangkok Post
Back to chauvinism, xenophobia

Burma's military rulers are opting for isolation amid increasing division
- Larry Jagan

Burma's military rulers are desperately trying to restore morale within
the army as increasing divisions and disillusionment with the country are
causing concern.

A struggle for control between the top two generals, growing tension
between Rangoon and the ceasefire groups, and the regime's failure to
catch the culprits behind the bomb blast in Rangoon have cast a long
shadow over the  military's future.

Since the arrest of former prime minister Khin Nyunt last October, the
regime has tightened control and centralised the command structure within
the army.

The defence ministry controls everything now. The United Nations and
international aid organisations in Rangoon are increasingly worried that
the regime may even be considering throwing them out.

Senior General Than Shwe has also been working on a major shake-up of the
army for months now, in preparation towards the establishment of a new
military headquarters at Pyinmana, some 600 kilometres north of Rangoon in
central Burma.

The supreme command is also likely to be divided into north and south.

The power and authority of the regional commanders has been significantly
increased since the last quarterly meeting of the ruling State Peace and
Development Council in late April. The number of senior officers under
their command has been doubled.

Three new colonels have been appointed to each regional headquarters in
charge of military intelligence, inspection, public relations and the
militia.

The power of the regional commanders has been restored to the pre-2001
days when the intelligence chief, General Khin Nyunt, streamlined the army
and  tried to rein in the regional commanders.

But it is unlikely that the regional commanders will be elevated again and
sit on the ruling council.

The restructuring is also largely the result of the struggle between the
top two generals - Than Shwe and Maung Aye - for power over the army
command.

Six of the regional commanders were recently moved around. Usually the
regional commanders are replaced and brought back to Rangoon when their
term  comes to an end. Normally they are effectively kicked upstairs.

But the current reshuffle largely leaves the structure and power relations
between the two top generals unchanged. This reflects the fragility at the
top and the difficulty the two generals have in agreeing to change.

The key position yet to be resolved between the two is the crucial Rangoon
command, currently controlled by a Than Shwe loyalist, Major-General Myint
 Swe, who is also in charge of the new Military Intelligence branch.

He is expected to retain his intelligence command and be appointed to the
SPDC.

He is expected to be replaced within the next few weeks by a Maung Aye
supporter, the northern commander Maung Maung Swe, according to Kachin
sources.

There are major changes to the SPDC and a further cabinet reshuffle in the
pipeline, according to diplomats in Rangoon. Promotions that were made six
months ago have been ratified and become official. It is usual practice
for officers to spend a six months' probation period before their new rank
is confirmed.

Already Prime Minister Soe Win has been made a full general and Rangoon
commander Myint Swe has become lieutenant-general.

These promotions immediately followed the arrest of Khin Nyunt last
October and involve Than Shwe's supporters.

But the delicate balance between the two top generals has swung back
towards Maung Aye since then - not that he is trying to overthrow the man
at the  top. “It's a struggle for supremacy,” said an Asian diplomat based
in Rangoon.

”Maung Aye does not want Than Shwe to feel openly threatened, he does not
want to confront him outright, but he does want to clip his powerbase,”
said  a senior Asian diplomat with strong ties to the Burmese junta.

The senior general has tried to use the third most powerful general, the
military chief-of-staff, General Thura Shwe Mann, to balance Maung Aye's
influence, much in the same way as he previously used Khin Nyunt.

The difference this time is that Thura Shwe Mann has none of the prestige,
vision or credibility that the former intelligence chief did.

Thura Shwe Mann has little credibility within the army junior officers and
the rank and file despise him, according to Burmese military sources.

”He is a very, very stupid man,” a senior Burmese military officer
recently said privately. But it is the rapacious corruption of his sons
that has particularly angered other senior military figures, especially
Maung Aye.

In the next few weeks the promotions and reshuffle of commanders may
reveal  the outcome of the struggle for power within the military.

But one thing is certain: it is unlikely to affect the overall strategy,
especially towards the international community.

There are growing signs within the junta that they are returning to the
isolationism of the past. Already the regime has snubbed the United
Nations.  The UN's special envoy for Burma, Razali Ismail, who reports
directly back  to Secretary-General Kofi Annan, has been refused
permission to visit Burma  since the first week of March last year. There
is no likelihood of him returning any time soon. The senior general
reportedly told Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra last December that
Mr Razali would not be  allowed back.

The UN special rapporteur for human rights in Burma, Paulo Sergio
Pinheiro, has also been effectively shut out as well. The last time he was
allowed back was in November 2003.

For a while the regime, especially Khin Nyunt, favoured him because of his
preparedness to say openly that he opposed isolation and favoured
conversation. But he has been repeatedly denied access to Burma over the
past 18 months.

This is largely because the current regime does not favour talking with
anyone: the UN, the ethnic groups or the pro-democracy political parties.

More crucially, it reflects their chauvinistic and xenophobic approach.
They have no interest in dealing with difficult foreigners or the
international community.

The latest International Labour Organisation's move, effectively a call
from the recent meeting in Geneva for members to impose sanctions against
the  regime because of its failure to deal with forced labour, has
hardened the  top generals' resolve to ignore international pressure.

It may also convince the regime to break links with the international
community altogether.

Some top military leaders are seriously considering throwing out the ILO,
according to Burmese government sources. But ILO insiders in Geneva hope
cooler heads may yet prevail.

What is more likely is that the regime will simply make it increasingly
difficult for the ILO office in Rangoon to carry out its work. This would
put pressure on the organisation to pull out on its own accord.

All the UN agencies and international aid organisations in Rangoon are
finding it hard to operate. Their staff have difficulties getting
permission to travel to their projects, especially in areas where there
are ceasefire groups.

A planned trip last month by the UN drugs chief in Rangoon and several top
Burmese police chiefs to Shan state was cancelled at the last moment.
Requests to the various ministries are lost in the bureaucracy.

”The situation is bad and can only get worse,” a Western aid expert said
recently.

While the top two generals continue to jockey for power, the political
situation in Burma will also only get worse.

Even if the International Labour Organisation and the United Nations
manage to continue to work in the country, malnutrition and HIV/Aids will
increase  as the military regime puts it emphasis on control rather than
development.

_____________________________________

June 2005, Irrawaddy
The Bonfire of the Vanities - David Scott Mathieson

What do opposing academic views on Burma achieve?

Academics are so capable of thinking and writing oddly on occasion that
it’s a wonder people take them seriously. They just research people or
events, develop ideas, write them down or talk about them. That’s all. Why
then are their views so prominent over contemporary Burma? Who are
academics and who pays them? Why should anyone care what they say?

Academic debates on Burma should be put in perspective. They have a role
to play in both “traditional” and “engaged” ways. Traditionally,
researchers produce detailed work for a predominantly scholarly audience:
theoretically grounded, empirically rigorous, impartial, and defined
within a discipline such as anthropology, history, economics or geography.
In “engaging” with social movements, academics can contribute through
advice, training or teaching, and in writing reports, articles or books
that have a normative relevance. In short, anything a scholar writes
should be read by anyone interested.

On both levels, academics should work with organizations, journalists, aid
workers, activists, and grass-roots groups in exchanging ideas, sharing
information and suggesting strategy to contribute to debates. Many toil
away without involving themselves in public debate, they just provide
another perspective. So why then are some so prominent? Because they
choose to be.

Take the European Commission’s recent “Burma Day.” Robert Taylor and
Morten Pedersen were commissioned to write a report based on their
credibility as academics: Taylor as a semi-retired professor from London
University and Pedersen as an analyst with the International Crisis Group
and PhD student. The report was designed to avert further EU sanctions and
increase aid to Burma. What resulted was a crescendo of disapproval by
many observers who accused both authors of being pro-engagement apologists
for military rule.

Let’s be blunt about this. Debates on Burma can be nasty, personal and
unconstructive. Current debates on engagement are marked by a bitter
polarization. Pride, arrogance, envy and other personality sins emerge
because some people think their answers are better than others. Academics
are a part of this. Other pro-engagement scholars have been criticized for
expressing views, including American professors David Steinberg and John
H. Badgley, Burmese scholar Kyaw Yin Hlaing, of Singapore University, and
Australian Helen James. These scholars, among others, have appeared in
print or in public together at various times arguing for different
approaches to engaging Burma.

Should they be subject to personal attacks merely for expressing this? No,
but then both sides in the debate rarely do each other justice in
representing opposing views. Most conferences these days are stacked with
either pro- or anti-engagement activists, scholars and funders. The
results are not edifying. Look at the 2004 Burma/Myanmar Update at the
Australian National University, organized by retired ambassador Trevor
Wilson and roundly dismissed as an apologists’ ball. Many of the
presenters had attended similarly themed conferences, and most of the
papers presented were familiar, if not re-heated.

Take the collection of essays in the 2004 National Bureau of Asian
Research report  “Reconciling Burma/Myanmar” as one example of activist
“scholarship” that lobbied for greater engagement. Helen James wrote that
tertiary education has been a success: before 1988 there were only 38
universities in Burma, and now there are 154. We can be certain she
doesn’t spend a lot of quality time in them. Taylor suggested that Burma’s
ruling State Peace and Development Council would be a good partner for the
US in its war against terror. Weird views, certainly, but should we be
bandying around the charged term “apologist” for stuff like this?

On occasion yes, when ideas transcend decency. Take the argument by
several scholars of what we will call “authoritarian acculturation.” This
contends that Burmese people prefer strong central rule, that they are
innately resistant to Western democratic values, and the SPDC, while
ineffectual, is still legitimate because its members are like old Burmese
kings. The historian Michael Aung-Thwin wrote a contentious article in
2002 where he referred to “Democracy Jihad” and “Parochial Universalism”
to argue against the Western imposition of democratic values on Burma,
contending they were inimical to Burmese ease with military rule. Another
prevalent argument by scholars is that forced labor is really voluntary
labor, and has historical and cultural credibility. Several pro-engagement
academics use varying shades of these two arguments to qualify military
rule and undermine those they view as unrealistic human rights or
democracy advocates.

For those academics who choose to adopt a certain stance in public
debates, they must be prepared for contending views, and those responses
should be more forthcoming on the merits of information and arguments
themselves. Scoring points against the other side is petty, regardless of
which side it is. Above all, academics should be aware that ideas resonate
in the real world, and Burma is more important than their reputations.

David Scott Mathieson is a PhD student at the Australian National University.