BurmaNet News, May 16, 2007

[Editor]

May 16, 2007 Issue # 3205


INSIDE BURMA
Irrawaddy: Burmese junta bans civil organizations
Irrawaddy: Fifteen more pro-democracy activists arrested, released

BUSINESS / TRADE
Mizzima: ONGC to quit Indo-Burma gas pipeline project

INTERNATIONAL
The Moscow Times: Moscow offers to help Myanmar go nuclear
AFP: Russia seen asserting role with Myanmar deal
DVB: Analysis – Bridging Burma’s humanitarian divide
Khonumthung News: More recognition to Chin refugees after US waiver

OPINION / OTHER
The Economist: Do you want to be in my gang? Myanmar and the nuclear club
Asian Tribune: Footloose in Burma with no freedom

____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

May 16, The Irrawaddy
Burmese junta bans civil organizations - Htet Aung

Burma’s Ministry of Home Affairs issued an order Wednesday that denied the
license extension of 24 civil organizations, including the Free Funeral
Services Society and the Chinese Traders Association, founded in 1909.

Rumors of the closing of some civil organizations began to circulate in
Rangoon this week. Tighter controls on non-governmental and civil
organizations have been on-going in recent months.

“Our work can’t be stopped," said a FFSS staff member, noting the
non-profit group provides free funeral services for the poor. "We will
continue offering our services until we get direct instructions from the
authority.”

“We also received the letter," said a member of the Chinese Traders
Association. "We don’t know why the government didn’t extend our
registration. So far, we have no problems with the government.”

Among the groups denied a license were two nonprofit, private hospitals,
the Indian traders association and various Buddhist groups.

The statement, signed by Kyin Lin, secretary for registration in the
ministry’s central control board, instructed the general administrative
department “to take necessary action in accordance with the registration
law on forming associations.”

____________________________________

May 16, The Irrawaddy
Fifteen more pro-democracy activists arrested, released - Htet Aung

Fifteen pro-democracy activists were arrested Wednesday morning in Rangoon
and released after a few hours in detention, according to one of the
group's leaders.

The group was arrested after they prayed for the release of detained
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi at Kyaik Ka Lot pagoda in Rangoon’s
Mingalardon Township, said Khin Myat Thu, a youth member leader of the
National League for Democracy.

“The people who arrested us didn't identify themselves,” Khin Myat Thu
told The Irrawaddy soon after her release. She said the activists were
taken into custody by about 30 people in plain clothes. She said she later
learned that some of the people who took part in the arrests were
forcefully recruited by authorities near the pagoda.

“We were peacefully praying in the pagoda for the release of our leader
Daw Aung San Suu,” Khin Myat Thu said. “We are now encountering more
arrests by the authorities using violent means.”

Authorities deleted pictures of the group's activities from cameras, she
said.

Pro-democracy activists launched a one-month campaign for the release of
Suu Kyi on May 1. She has been under house arrest since May 2003.

About three dozens activists, including Su Su Nway, the winner of the John
Humphrey Freedom Award, are still in custody at an unknown location
following their arrests in Rangoon on Tuesday as they attempted to march
to a pagoda to pray for Suu Kyi's release.

____________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

May 16, Mizzima News
ONGC to quit Indo-Burma gas pipeline project - Syed Ali Mujtaba

The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, ONGC – Videsh Limited or OVL
has walked out of the Indo-Burma gas pipeline project in the footsteps of
the Gas Authority of India Limited, GAIL.

OVL has 20 per cent stake in the offshore Block A-1 of Burma and GAIL has
10 percent. Together they hold 30 per cent share in Burmese A- 1 block gas
reserves. The other consortium partners are Daewoo 60 per cent and KoGas
10 per cent, both from South Korea.

ONGC and GAIL have already invested about 40 per cent of the total project
cost with a profit share at a same ratio.

The ONGC Videsh has cited opposition from Bangladesh on laying the
pipeline and overt Chinese influence on the military junta in Burma as two
main reasons for backing out of the project.

''Since Bangladesh has disagreed to our proposal, the project is now
becoming a costly affair while China is trying hard to procure gas from
Myanmar through a pipeline because the country has been suffering from a
huge energy crisis for long,'' R. S. Butola, Managing Director OVL said in
New Delhi on Monday.

He also indicated that India would not go for any further bid to get back
the pipeline project without a cost-benefit analysis.

India is considered the world's number six energy consumer and desperately
needs energy to fuel its growing economy. Its energy consumption is
expected to grow by 40 percent over the next five years and push it to the
number four slot by 2010 among consuming nations. Government figures show
that the country's domestic gas supply is 65 million standard cubic meters
per day while demand stands at 231 mmscmd. This figure is expected to rise
to 313 mmscmd by 2011-12.

India is planning to meet its energy needs through three gas pipelines --
one from Iran through Pakistan, another from Turkmenistan through
Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the third from Burma

____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

May 16, The Moscow Times
Moscow offers to help Myanmar go nuclear - Miriam Elder

The Federal Atomic Energy Agency said Tuesday that it would build a
nuclear reactor in Myanmar, casting aside widespread Western criticism of
the country's ruling military regime.

The deal, signed between atomic agency chief Sergei Kiriyenko and
Myanmar's visiting science and technology minister, U Thaung, essentially
amounted to a memorandum of understanding, officials said.

The plan is to build a nuclear power research center and light water
reactor, with a heat generation capacity of 10 megawatts, the atomic
agency said in a statement. The reactor will use 20 percent enriched
nuclear fuel, it said.

"So far, a political decision has been taken that says yes, we can do
this," agency spokesman Sergei Novikov said by telephone. "This agreement
simply opens the door so a contract can be concluded."

Agency officials would now carry out negotiations with their counterparts
in Myanmar to hammer out details of the deal, he said.

The announcement came as U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was in
Moscow in a bid to ease rising tensions. Myanmar, formerly known as Burma,
has been under U.S. and international sanctions since 1990, when the
military junta refused to accept the election victory of opposition leader
Aung San Suu Kyi.

Suu Kyi has been held under house arrest for long periods, and governments
and activists alike have rallied to her cause to highlight human rights
abuses in the country.

The deal threatened to add to U.S. criticism of Russia, which is already
helping Iran build a $2 billion nuclear reactor at Bushehr.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov brushed aside potential criticism. "No one
is arguing about the right of every state to have peaceful nuclear
energy," he said. "We can only welcome achievements in this sector of
industry, which is very developed and very safe from the point of view of
nonproliferation."

The atomic agency statement said the nuclear project in Myanmar, which is
a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, would come under
International Atomic Energy Agency control.

An IAEA official who requested anonymity said the organization had "not
been informed by Myanmar about the construction of any nuclear facility."
Were it to be built, it would be "subject to IAEA safeguards inspections,"
the official said.

Construction of the reactor will be handled by state-owned
Atomstroiexport, which is controlled by the atomic agency, the statement
said.

"It's too early to talk about anything concrete, from timeline to location
to expenses," Atomstroiexport spokeswoman Irina Yesipova said. "There's a
huge number of factors to consider."

Yet the deal is a long time coming. The project was first floated in 2000
and talks were nearly concluded before Russia pulled out in 2003, Novikov
said.

Myanmar's reluctance to pay cash up front has been cited as the reason for
that deal falling apart. Today, flush with petrodollars, Russia can afford
to be more patient. "Their advantage is their stuff is cheap and they'll
do business with anybody," said Alexander Kliment, an analyst at Eurasia
Group, referring to the Federal Atomic Energy Agency.

"The commercial benefits of a deal with a country as small as Myanmar are
not immediately evident," he said.

A research reactor, which tends to be smaller inside, could be used to
train local staff or test new technology, analysts said. And Myanmar,
which suffers from partial power outages because of lack of investment,
could use nuclear power to meet a large part of its energy needs.

David Steinberg, an expert on Myanmar and the director of Georgetown
University's Asia Studies program, said the deal was likely prompted by
Myanmar's desire to balance Chinese influence in the country. "Burma has
been entirely dependent on China for military goods," he said from
Washington. "This nuclear deal fits into the pattern of balance [of
Chinese influence]," he said.

Steinberg said he did not believe Myanmar would seek to sell the
technology to a third party. Myanmar and North Korea restored diplomatic
relations last month after nearly 15 years. "There is the fear in the U.S.
that if you have a military junta like Burma ... they're going to go and
sell the stuff on. They may be brutal, but they're not stupid," he said.

The nuclear deal comes as energy ties between the two countries are
growing. Two Russian oil companies based in Kalmykia recently signed a
production sharing agreement with Myanmar to explore for oil and gas in
the country's northwestern Sagaing region. Last week, the two companies,
Silver Wave Sputnik Petroleum and Silver Wave Energy, began drilling their
first test well.

____________________________________

May 16, Agence France Presse
Russia seen asserting role with Myanmar deal - Charlotte McDonald-Gibson

Bangkok: Russia's plan to help build a nuclear research centre in
military-run Myanmar is an effort by both nations to assert themselves
amid deteriorating relations with the United States, analysts say.

Moscow, which on Tuesday announced that it would provide technical
assistance for the centre, is keen to rekindle the influence it had in
Asia during the 1960s and 1970s, diplomatic sources said.

Myanmar meanwhile wants to forge ties with governments that will turn a
blind eye to the human rights abuses and suppression of opposition which
has so enraged the US and Europe, which have economic sanctions against
the regime.

"Russia's relationship with the US is not going well," said Aung Naing Oo,
a Myanmar analyst based in Thailand.

"Burma has tried to establish relations with countries that are at odds
with the US ... (they think) the enemy of my enemy is my friend," he said,
refering to Myanmar by its former name.

The deal with Russia's atomic energy agency Rosatom comes as ties sour
between the Kremlin and the White House, with US Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice recently accusing Russia of rolling back democracy.

The two nations have also clashed over regional security, leaving Russia
keen to assert their relevance on the world stage.

"The Russians are in an opportunistic role ... asserting their great power
role which has diminished until recently," said C Raja Mohan, a professor
at Singapore's S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

Myanmar is currently facing international pressure over the expected
extension of democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi's house arrest later this
month.

The international community has urged the junta to free the 61-year-old,
who has spent most of the last 17 years in detention.

But the junta has reacted with characteristic defiance, arresting at least
40 supporters of the Nobel peace laureate since Tuesday.

Mohan said the nuclear deal was just one more signal that US and European
sanctions, imposed a decade ago, were not working.

"The strategy of isolating Burma is unravelling. (They are) forcing
someone who likes isolation to be more isolated," he told AFP.

US and European sanctions have already been dented by a scramble from
neighbouring countries, particularly India, China and Thailand, to buy up
Myanmar's vast natural wealth to fuel their growing economies.

Russian companies have recently joined the race, signing oil and gas
contracts with Myanmar. The expanding ties are seen as giving the country
vital allies in the international arena.

Russia and China in January vetoed a US-led resolution at the UN Security
Council calling on the junta to free political prisoners and speed up
democratic reform.

As well as flexing its regional muscle, Russia is also acting in its
economic interests, analysts say.

"Russia gains a new market for its nuclear industry," said Charles
Ferguson, science and technology fellow at the Council on Foreign
Relations, a US think tank.

Talk of a joint Russia-Myanmar nuclear deal has been swirling since early
2002, but Myanmar's exact nuclear ambitions remain unclear.

Ferguson said people should be concerned if it looks like the regime plans
to build a power plant, both for safety and security reasons.

"Burma could use the cover of a peaceful nuclear programme to eventually
acquire a nuclear weapons programme," he said.

However, one diplomatic source in Yangon said that Myanmar's likely goal
was to use the planned centre to develop medical technologies.

"There is no credible evidence that it is anything sinister," said the
source, who was speaking on the customary condition of anonymity.

Aung Naing Oo said he was pleased the centre would be under the control of
the International Atomic Energy Agency, but warned that Myanmar's military
leaders could harbour unspoken ambitions to develop their nuclear
presence.

"They look up to North Korea, who have been able to square off with a
country like the US on the nuclear issue," he said.

____________________________________

May 16, Democratic Voice of Burma
Analysis – Bridging Burma’s humanitarian divide - Clive Parker

When the Global Fund pulled nearly US $100 million out of Burma in August
2005, the ideological divide on aid seemed more like a chasm.

But, following a difficult period of recriminations from both sides,
campaign groups, human rights organisations and cross-border relief
agencies seem increasingly able to sit in the same room with aid agencies
working inside Burma to discuss differences of opinion.

At the end of January, the US–based Center for Public Health and Human
Rights at the Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health organised a
ground-breaking meeting on infectious diseases in Burma held in Bangkok
where representatives from across the ideological spectrum discussed key
humanitarian issues.

Last Friday, Charles Petrie, UN chief humanitarian coordinator in Burma,
and Richard Horsey, the International Labour Organization’s representative
in Rangoon, returned from a two-week tour of Europe meeting campaign
groups, politicians and other stakeholders on Burma.

Petrie told DVB on Wednesday, “The purpose of the trip was to try to
generate a better understanding of the situation in the country . . . [or]
at least reduce the needless friction.”

Sitting in the same room together is a start, the question is: Can
differences be resolved so that humanitarian, human rights and political
organisations can work together to tackle Burma’s myriad problems?

The main points of friction remain cross-border versus internal
intervention, the effectiveness of humanitarian aid delivered from inside,
transparency and the relationship between the junta and international
humanitarian agencies based in Burma. The UN insists it has to ‘engage’
with the government to get things done but faces accusations that it fails
to push the envelope and its programs may even benefit the junta
financially.

Many of these issues were discussed when Petrie and Horsey met with
campaign groups including the Norwegian Burma Committee and Burma Campaign
Netherlands over the past few weeks, talks Petrie said he hoped would
“help ease their concerns.”

There remains little love lost between the UN and Burma Campaign UK,
however. Following a meeting at the British House of Commons in London on
May 2 that included the British Department for International Development,
which has recently allowed its funding to be used for cross-border relief,
BCUK representative Mark Farmaner was scathing.

“I don't see how Charles [Petrie] is trying to bridge the divide,” he told
DVB earlier this week. “He talks to people, but selectively, where he
thinks he might bring people round to his point of view.”

BCUK released a report last year entitled “Pro-Aid, Pro-Sanctions,
Pro-Engagement” it said was aimed at dispelling accusations it is against
aid to Burma after it had – along with other organisations – been accused
of welcoming the Global Fund pullout.

Petrie said that both sides were “starting to develop a dialogue,” adding
that there remain “very serious differences of opinion that need to be
addressed.”

The same is true of the UN’s troubled relationship with the Karen Human
Rights Group, which again flared up last month. Although the UN said it
agreed with the main thrust of a recent KHRG report, “Development by
Decree,” an in-depth study at how junta “development” in Karen State has
resulted in the further repression of the population, Petrie said that
information on the UN was “incorrect or dated.” KHRG disagreed as both
sides exchanged public statements.

A KHRG spokesperson told DVB at the end of April after the spat that it
“did not want to declare war on the UN,” but that it took issue with the
“lack of discussion of alternative ways of delivering aid.”

“Agencies that work through the SPDC have to be very careful.” KHRG added,
referring to the effectiveness and transparency of aid operations.

The issue of accountability has plagued the UN in Burma, an issue that
Petrie says his office is currently addressing.

“We haven’t reached what would be the best mechanism [for oversight],” he
said, adding that such a mechanism “should cover everybody . . . everyone
working with Burmese.”

Possible mechanisms include that used in Somalia from the middle of the
1990s, a donor-managed oversight system that is still in place. The new
Three Diseases Fund, a body that essentially replaced The Global Fund, is
currently introducing its own mechanism.

The 3D approach focuses on regular, public updates along with quarterly
meetings of its board, which includes independent experts. The controller
of the fund, the UN Office for Project Services, only opened its premises
in Rangoon in April so the jury is still out on whether it can increase
transparency.

Although many accusations against the UN in Burma on corruption have
generally lacked solid evidence, an official audit of the UN Refugee
Agency’s operations in Burma from 2003 and 2004 paints a worrying picture
of the world body.

The document – which the UN released publicly in November last year but
which has largely gone unnoticed – says that during the audit period, “the
UNHCR representation in [Burma], in following local tradition, procured
gifts for [Burmese] government officials . . . the overall amount expended
in 2004 was almost $5000.”

Local tradition or not, this finding is unlikely to please campaign
groups. The audit awards the UNHCR office in Burma an “average rating,”
adding that “in order not to compromise the overall system of internal
control, timely corrective action by management is required.” Clearly the
UN needs to drastically improve its oversight and appears to finally
realise this.

On the other side of the humanitarian coin, if groups insist that the UN
be subject to strict oversight, they must be also. This should apply to
cross-border aid groups and indeed any group working on Burma.

There also needs to be acknowledgement that internal and cross-border
humanitarian intervention can be complimentary. There are still
cross-border advocators that suggest that no aid should enter Burma
through official channels, arguing that it is possible to reach the same
populations cross-border. Given the current situation, all evidence
suggests that this is absurd.

In Arakan State a small amount of aid reaches one of Burma’s most
vulnerable groups, the Rohingyas, through internal channels. But the
possibility of accessing Arakanese Muslims cross-border is currently
impossible - only one Free Burma Rangers team operates in Arakan and has
never been able to reach a single Rohingya.

Other populations are equally inaccessible from neighboring countries,
namely the roughly six million people in Rangoon and the whole of
Irrawaddy Division as well as much of the rest of Arakan.

With various Burma groups beginning to discuss these issues there does at
least appear to be an opportunity for cooperation that did not exist a
year ago. But as one organiser of January’s Johns Hopkins conference
noted, there is one key ingredient missing from this dialogue, at least in
a group setting.

“The glaring absence [at the Bangkok conference] was an official
representative of the Burmese government despite invitations having been
sent to senior level officials of the Ministry of Health,” the organiser
said.

As Johns Hopkins points out, perhaps the divide is less between the
various groups working on Burma and more with the Burmese government and
its persistently restrictive humanitarian policies.

____________________________________

May 16, Khonumthung News
More recognition to Chin refugees after US waiver

More recognition is being given to Chin people as refugees by the UNHCR in
Malaysia after the US government signed a waiver to exempt Chin refugees
from India, Thailand and Malaysia from the provisions of the US Patriot
Act that had restricted resettlement in US on October 2006.

There are 50,000 to 60,000 Burmese in Malaysia. Among them, 7,000 are
recognized as refugees and of them 5,000 are Chin refugees. It is now
easier to go as refuge to America, according to Salai San from Chin
Refugees Committee in Malaysia.

"Not in groups but singly some are going to America from Malaysia under
the resettlement programme," a Chin refugee in Malaysia said.

While it has not been mentioned how many refugees will be allowed to
resettle in America, but signing a waiver has apparently increased the
number of refugees to be allowed to move to USA than was done earlier.

There are over 1,000 Chin refugees staying in the USA. The population of
Chins in the USA has gone up ever since the military grabbed power in1988.

The Chin National Front (CNF) welcomed the US government's move on the
waiver to Chin refugees from the provisions of the US Patriot Act that
banned the entry of Chin refugees in USA for alleged material support to
the CNF.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

May 16, The Economist
Do you want to be in my gang? Myanmar and the nuclear club


One may take a bet on extraordinary things. Gambling websites, and more
traditional bookies, will give you odds on whether Osama bin Laden will be
captured, Elvis will return, or even on the prospect of the universe
ceasing to expand. A new item might now be added to the list of the
improbable events: that the brutal dictatorship of Myanmar will go
nuclear.

To anyone who has strolled the streets of Yangon, Myanmar’s capital, and
spotted the grim-looking government building devoted to atomic energy,
this seems a most unlikely turn of events. But on Tuesday May 15th Russia
announced that it would help the south-east Asian country’s ruling junta
to set up a nuclear research reactor. Myanmar—once called Burma—had
reportedly tried to strike a similar deal with Russia before, but the plan
stalled over payment. Now Myanmar, flush with an annual trade surplus (the
country is well endowed with natural resources, like oil), says it will
pay cash, and Russia has accepted.

On the cards is only a small-scale research programme, which Myanmar says
will be used to generate power, presumably to keep the flickering lights
on in Yangon. The plan is to build a 10 megawatt nuclear reactor that uses
low enriched uranium. The centre would, reportedly, be under the control
of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear
watchdog. This is a long step from getting the means or the knowledge for
building a bomb, but it is enough to spread jitters.

Myanmar is an international pariah presided over by Than Shwe.
Authoritarian since 1962, it has kept Aung San Suu Kyi, a Nobel peace
laureate, under house arrest, on and off, since 1989. Elections won by her
party in 1990 were annulled. Repeated attempts to censure Myanmar at the
UN, for its grim human-rights record and its crackdown on democracy, have
been stopped only by the intervention of Russia and China.

Now Myanmar may count on a new friend, after a rapprochement with another
small, repressive and peculiar Asian country, North Korea. Diplomatic
relations between the two were cut when North Korean agents murdered a
number of South Koreans with a bomb in Myanmar in 1983. But late in April
the two finally restored ties; Mynamar is also thought to buy weapons from
North Korea.

Although it is not a nuclear threat of any sort, Myanmar’s aspiration to
get nuclear technology is worrying, given proliferation elsewhere. Last
year North Korea tested a crude nuclear weapon, to the dismay of China and
other neighbours, after years of developing a nuclear energy programme.
Efforts since—by America, China, Russia, South Korea and Japan—to persuade
North Korea's Kim Jong Il to give up his nuclear ambitions in exchange for
aid and security guarantees have stalled. As troubling, this week the IAEA
confirmed that Iran has made significant progress in enriching uranium on
a large scale. Iran’s leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, says his country has
the right to develop nuclear technology (with Russian help) for the
purposes of energy generation. Outsiders say that the real goal is to
develop nuclear weaponry.

Perhaps most worrying is Pakistan, which already has nuclear weapons.
General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s American-allied military dictator,
has seen his grip on power challenged recently. The increasing clout of
Islamist extremists there, along with that of secular opponents, promises
continued instability. Next door in India America is not helping matters
much, indeed it appears to be encouraging proliferation by agreeing a deal
on nuclear co-operation with Delhi.

What America or others will do about Myanmar’s putative research programme
is unclear. Putting nuclear materials in the hands of unstable regimes, or
unpredictable dictators, seems far from a good idea. An American decision
to provide the technology, in the 1950s, for a nuclear reactor in
Kinshasa, in Congo, (in gratitude for uranium supplied by Congo to America
for use in the bombing of Hiroshima in 1945), proved to be less than
sensible. Nuclear-fuel rods were stolen in the 1970s and then traded by
Italian smugglers, raising fears that terrorists could get their hands on
such material.

As in Congo, where a dictator was unable to ensure the secure storage of
the nuclear material, or as in North Korea, where a dictator seems keen to
develop nuclear weapons, the lesson for Russia over Myanmar should be
clear: spreading nuclear technology to troubled countries is a bad idea.

____________________________________

May 14, Asian Tribune
Footloose in Burma with no freedom - Zin Linn

“It’s a shame to be a citizen of Burma in this Information Age”,
pronounced a young Burmese journalist who is attending journalism training
in Bangkok. “It’s time to expand enough space for freedom of expression.
The task must be ours, the newer generation”, he remarked as his
professional colleagues elsewhere observed World Press Day.

Between 1948, the year Burma gained independence from Britain and 1962,
the country enjoyed press freedom. The scene changed on March 2, 1962,
when the military seized power. One of the early actions of the junta was
nationalisation of all newspapers. It established a Press Scrutiny Board
(PSB) to enforce strict censorship on all forms of printed matter –
advertisements and obituaries including.

Burma’s most respected journalist U Win is languishing in jail for the
last 18 years. He is 77 years old and suffers from a serious heart
ailment. Yet at the Rangoon General hospital, he is confined to a 15 sq.m
room. A former editor of the Hanthawadi daily, U Win Tin is also held in
jail. He had earned the wrath of the regime with his report “Human Rights
Abuses in the Military Regime’s Various Prisons” to the UN Special
Rapporteur for Burma.
On March 7 this year, 65-years-old U Thein Zan posted on his fence a
satirical article on the Junta rule. “Prices have shot through the roof
and people are hit”, he wrote and immediately landed in jail. “You have
incited public disorder”, the official decree said. Earlier in February,
on 22nd to be precise, protests against price hike met with the same fate.
The only silver lining in their case is that they were released after a
while. They were made to take a pledge that they would not carry out such
protests in future.

On April 22, Htin Kyaw, along with seven others waved placards and chanted
slogans against price rise, power shortages, and rising unemployment at
the San-pya marketplace in Thin-gan-gyun Township in Rangoon Division. It
was a rare show of public discontent. Kyaw staged solo protests earlier on
February 22 and on March 22. Expectedly, these economic dissidents were
quickly rounded up. They are still held in custody.

Martial law in the country forbids public gatherings. Over 3000 people
have lost their lives staging peaceful demonstrations since 1988. Any
effort at creating human rights’ awareness is fraught with danger. Take
the case of Maung Maung Lay (37) and Myint Naing (40). Both work for the
Human Rights Defenders and Promoters Organisation. On April 18 afternoon,
Lay and Naing were attacked by the Junta popped vigilante group as they
left Oatpon village in Ayeyarwaddy Division on their motor cycle after
talking to the locals as a part of their HR awareness campaign. They are
still in the hospital. According to eyewitnesses, senior members of the
village administration, police and the officials of the Union Solidarity
Development Association (USDA), were involved in the attack.

Amnesty International is concerned by reports of violent attacks on social
activists in Burma. It keeps urging the ruling State Peace and Development
Council (SPDC) to bring to book the guilty after a thorough and
independent investigation. The appeal has been falling on deaf ears.

Two UN experts, Paulo Sergio Pinheiro (the Special Rapporteur on human
rights in Myanmar) and Hina Jilani (the Secretary-General’s Special
Representative on Human Rights Defenders), have voiced their deep concern
over the attack on Lay and Naing. Like Amnesty, they also called for a
thorough investigation. That was on April 25. Till date, the call has met
with silence.

Needless to say, the present junta, SPDC, which seized power in September
1988, truthfully follows the footsteps of its predecessor in suppressing
people’s rights and media freedom. Censorship is imposed in the name of
national security. Any one found with pamphlets, books, magazines,
cassettes or videotapes that appear even remotely to the ruling junta, is
arrested and sentenced for anywhere between seven and twenty years.

As Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has once said, Burma is today a prison state. Many
writers and poets, editors and publishers have been thrown into prison
with or without pretext.

There is no independent radio, TV or newspaper. All media is under the
military thumb. Public has no access to the Internet; the regime
scrutinizes all outgoing e-mails.

State-owned Post and Telecommunications (MPT) is the country’s first
Internet Service Provider (ISP); Bagan Cybertech, a semi-government
organization is the second ISP. It is established by Dr. Ye Nai Win, son
of former military intelligent chief Gen.Khin Nyunt.

Bagan Cybertech doubled monthly broadband rates with effect from July
2005. It also suspended the creation of new e-mail accounts ‘until further
notice’. The ban was a sequel to the purge in the military intelligence.
Bagan founder Ye Naing Win was detained and the company was taken over by
the military.

At present, Internet and e-mail service are strictly limited in Burma.
What contributes to such restrictions are high service rates and limited
power connectivity.

Some privately owned journals and magazines are surviving despite strict
censorship norms enforced religiously by the Press Scrutiny and
Registration Division (PSRD).The publishers have to face all types of
odds. Censor clearance is delayed for days. Some times permission is
denied almost at the last moment. Publishing license can be cancelled any
time. Over and above these difficulties, a would-be publisher has to bribe
various authorities to get that elusive licence.

The list of topics that are taboo to the authorities is long and gets
additions almost every day. All publication-related people, such as
writers, journalists, poets, cartoonists, photographers, editors and
publishers must submit their resumes to the Home Ministry and give an
undertaking that they would sincerely follow the PSRD rules and
regulations.

News relating poverty and stories about peoples’ economic hardships are
not ‘fit’ for publication. Articles on socio-economic difficulties,
natural disasters, ship wreck, train crash or plane crash and similar news
pieces are usually not allowed to be reported. Similarly, politics is of
bounds for the media and public talk.

Freedom of Press and Freedom of Assembly are closely interrelated.
Progress of Freedom of Expression depends on the progress of the
Democratic Movement led by Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the National League
for Democracy (NLD) and Burma’s Nobel Peace Prize laureate. She has spent
a large part of last eighteen years under house arrest in Rangoon and has
been cut off with the outside world.

Today military regime is practicing absolutism over all aspects of freedom
in Burma. Academic freedom is completely stifled by various suppressive
laws and decrees. The junta has never tolerated any democratic opinion and
dissent.

The laws most commonly used by the junta are the Emergency Provisions Act
1950, Unlawful Associations Act 1957, Printers and Publishers Registration
Law 1962, and State Protection Law 1975. Each of these draconian laws
provide for long periods of imprisonment. In addition are the systematic
tortures and summary court trials.

Burmese have only one appeal to the international media and HR watch dogs.
Keep up your support to the democratic movement against the military
dictatorship. Also campaign vigorously for the release of over 1000
political prisoners, most of them are students, intellectuals, lawyers,
doctors and journalists.

Minus Freedom of Expression, Burma will never become a free nation.
* Zin Linn - the author is a Burmese freelance journalist living in exile
in Bangkok.