BurmaNet News, August 14, 2008

[Editor]

August 14, 2008 Issue #3534

INSIDE BURMA
DVB: U Gambira raises monks’ issues with UN rights envoy
Irrawaddy: USDA expected to form proxy parties for 2010 election
Mizzima News: Suu Suu Nwe and Hanny Oo appear before court
Mizzima News: UNICEF/WHO step up rehabilitation assistance

ON THE BORDER
Irrawaddy: Landslide disrupts Thai-Burmese border trade

BUSINESS / TRADE
Myanmar Times: Beans and pulses exports driven by Indian demand
DVB: Htoo trading leaves Bogalay workers unpaid

INTERNATIONAL
Mizzima News: UN admits loss of about 1.56 million dollars of cyclone aid
in Burma

OPINION / OTHER
Irrawaddy: Effectiveness over Excellence - Kyaw Zwa Moe
Irrawaddy: Bush as Human Rights Champion? - Pokpong Lawansiri
The Economist: Myanmar's sad anniversary

____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

August 14, Democratic Voice of Burma
U Gambira raises monks’ issues with UN rights envoy

All-Burmese Monks’ Alliance leader U Gambira raised the issue of the
imprisonment and disrobing of monks by the Burmese regime in a meeting
with United Nations human rights rapporteur Tomas Ojea Quintana.

U Gambira’s sister Ma Khin Thu Htay said her brother had spent 20 minutes
with the special rapporteur during his visit to Burma last week.

"He said the meeting took place at night time and they had a lot of
privacy, but U Gambira didn't get to tell him about all the important
things, only general things – such as about 200 monks being thrown into
prison and then disrobed," Khin Thu Htay said.

"He told Mr Quintana that he was being detained in prison without a court
hearing or remand. He wanted to tell him a lot but there wasn't much
time," she said.

"Mr Quintana promised him he would do his best."

U Gambira has been in detention in Insein prison since he was arrested by
government authorities in Magwe division's Sintgaing township on 4
November 2007 for his role in instigating public protests in September.

____________________________________

August 14, Irrawaddy
USDA expected to form proxy parties for 2010 election - Wai Moe

Burma’s military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Association
(USDA) is reportedly planning to form proxy parties to contest the
proposed general election in 2010.

“I heard that the USDA is ready to form proxy parties to run in the
election,” a Burmese researcher in Rangoon told The Irrawaddy. “One of the
proxy parties may be named the National Prosperity Party.”

The researcher, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said some well-known
writers and economists would be invited to be “think tanks” for the new
parties.

An Arakanese leader, Aye Thar Aung, said businessmen and other prominent
people in Arakan State were being asked to stand as pro-military
candidates. “It seems as if the authorities want respectable people to be
involved,” he said.

A Rangoon businessman associated with the USDA said the organization
wanted to form three or four proxy parties and was drawing up names of
businessmen and respectable people who could be candidates.

Thakin Chan Tun, a veteran Rangoon politician in Rangoon, claimed the
businessmen invited to stand in the election would be rewarded by the USDA
with special benefits.

He said the USDA had lost its credibility following its involvement in the
brutal crackdown on last September’s demonstrations. USDA thugs were also
held responsible for the attack on pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi
and her supporters in Depayin, Sagaing Division, northern Burma, in late
May, 2003.

Senior members of the USDA include junta head Snr-Gen Than Shwe and
government ministers.

“A USDA role in the 2010 election is questionable,” said Thakin Chan Tun.
“But they can use proxy parties.”

The regime would make sure the 2010 election would not be a repeat of the
one in 1990, he maintained. “The junta will make sure the pro-military
parties will get a majority.”
Aye Thar Aung said pro-military groups such as the 88 Generation Students
group of the Union of Burma, led by Aye Lwin, a former student activist
and anti-sanctions politician, and the Wun Tha Nu National League for
Democracy, which split from the NLD, were ready to register themselves for
the 2012 election.

The NLD and other victorious parties in the 1990 election have yet to make
their intentions known. Opposition sources say most will boycott the 2010
election.

Several pro-military parties met with the UN special rapporteur on human
rights in Burma, Tomas Ojea Quintana, during his recent visit to Burma.

A report in the official daily The New Light of Myanmar listed the parties
and groups that met the UN envoy:

The NLD, the National Unity Party, the Union Pa-O National League,
Independent Representatives-elect, the Wun Tha Nu (patriotic) National
League for Democracy, the 88 Generation Student Youths (Union of Myanmar),
the Modern Political Scientific Economy Study Group, the Political Economy
Study Group (New Generation), and the National Convention and Constitution
Supporting Force.

Pro-military parties and groups were in the overwhelming majority on the
list because the authorities wanted to show the international community
that there were pro-military voices in Burma, said Thein Nyunt, a lawyer
who was a successful candidate in the 1990 election.

Aye Thar Aye agreed: “The military junta wants to send their voice to the
UN envoys, through the mouths of pro-military groups.”

Political observers say the junta is expected to announce the electoral
law for the 2010 election in the near future. “We heard this unconfirmed
news and we’ll know more when the official announcement comes,” said Thein
Nyunt.

____________________________________

August 14, Mizzima News
Suu Suu Nwe and Hanny Oo appear before court

A human rights activist under detention was produced before court
yesterday, but family members are worried as they were not allowed to meet
with her.

Suu Suu Nwe is in Insein prison and facing trial at Rangoon's West
District Court. It has been two weeks since family members were last
permitted to meet with her.

"She appeared before the court yesterday and was again remanded. Only the
lawyers were allowed to enter the courtroom. We've not met with her for
two weeks. Why didn't the authorities allow us to meet with her? There was
no official announcement of such a ban. However, she is reportedly no
longer being held in solitary confinement," her elder sister Htay Htay Kyi
said.

"We are worried about her health as she is suffering from a heart ailment.
She will have anxiety when she is not allowed to meet with us. The
authorities are giving trouble not only to prisoners but also to their
family members," she added.

Suu Suu Nwe, a member of the opposition party National League for
Democracy, was banned from meeting with family members and receiving food
parcels from the 2nd to 15th of last month for allegedly violating prison
rules.

She was arrested on the 14th of November 2007 while hanging an
anti-government banner in front of Mya Yeik Nyo Hotel in Rangoon. She was
later charged under sections 143 and 147 (unlawful assembly), 505 (b)
(inducing crime against public tranquility) and 124(a) (disaffection
towards State) of the Criminal Code.

Yesterday the court also examined prosecution witnesses in another
political case, that of Hanny Oo

The government has accused final year law student Hanny Oo (21) of being
the mastermind behind a protest against a fuel price hike and subsequent
rising commodity prices which was staged in front of Yuzana Plaza in
Rangoon in September 2007.

She has been charged under sections 124 (a) (disaffection towards State),
505 (b) (inducing crime against public tranquility) and 143 and 145
(unlawful assembly) of the Criminal Code. Additionally she is confronted
with a charge related to section 6 of the Registration of Organizations
Act.

Family members of Hanny Oo said they felt very sorry when they heard a
prison inmate was assaulted by prison authorities for her failure to tell
Hanny Oo not to wear a black dress to court.

"Hanny Oo was not allowed to wear the black dress and ordered to change
clothes. They again ordered her to change when her next dress included a
bit of black yarn. Prison staff Tin Tin Maw then slapped an inmate who was
guarding the door while Hanny Oo was changing dress for not telling her
not to dress in black. She felt very sorry to see that. They impose
restrictions even on dress. She feels this is an attempt by prison
authorities to sow dissension among prison inmates," commented one of her
family members.

Hanny Oo was arrested by Military Affairs Security personnel and civilian
security contingents while talking with four friends on the 9th of October
2007 at her home in South Okkalapa Township. She was accused of having met
with All Burma Federation of Student Union (ABFSU) members.

Her case is scheduled to hold its next hearing on the 20th of August,
while Suu Suu Nwe's case has been remanded until a week later, on the
27th.

____________________________________

August 14, Mizzima News
UNICEF/WHO step up rehabilitation assistance

Burma's citizens will soon be the beneficiaries of a new $440,000
investment into vaccination facilities inside the country.

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and the World Health
Organization (WHO) have confirmed that a cold chain facility capable of
storing an eight month supply of six vaccinations will soon arrive in
Burma.

The international organizations argue that the enhanced vaccination
capabilities in Burma are especially valuable at this time, as the country
continues to recover from the devastating effects of Cyclone Nargis this
past May.

"Immunization is vital in the survival of Myanmar's children," according
to UNICEF's Osamu Kunii, "especially in areas affected by disaster, where
diseases easily spread."

Included in the vaccinations is one to prevent polio, which saw 15
reported cases in the country in 2007 following what had been believed to
be the eradication of the affliction in the Southeast Asian country.

Fears expressed by several rights and advocacy groups in the days and
weeks immediately following the cyclone that the country hovered on the
verge of an enormous health crisis have so far failed to materialize.

UNICEF officials, speaking earlier this week, were also insistent that the
recovery operation – which according to local NGOs could last as long as
four years – is proceeding apace and opening up new opportunities for
international organizations inside the country.

However, in late June Burma Campaign UK offered one of several indictments
of the humanitarian delivery of aid inside Burma, accusing Save the
Children UK of deviating from organizational procedures in the delivery of
aid through Burma's military and in the involvement of a known business
associate of the junta's with the program.

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

August 14, Irrawaddy
Landslide disrupts Thai-Burmese border trade - Violet Cho and Sai Silp

A landslide caused by heavy rain has cut the road from Myawaddy to Pa-an
in Burma’s Karen State, disrupting Thai-Burmese transport and trade in the
Mae Sot border area.

The landslide occurred about 35 miles from the Thai-Burmese border,
cutting the main trading route from Mae Sot into Burma, which had also
been used to carry relief supplies to the cyclone-devastated Irrawaddy
delta. Thai trucks and other vehicles can only get as far as Myawaddy,
residents report.

One local resident said three people had died in flooding in Shwe Ko Ko,
in Karen State. Flooding also disrupted illegal trade across the Moei
River.

Banpot Korkiatkajorn, chairman of Tak’s Chamber of Commerce, told The
Irrawaddy that the landslide occurred one week ago. Work on clearing the
road was being held up by the lack of heavy earth-moving equipment.

Further north, Thai-Burmese border trade was disrupted last week when the
Sai river between Burma’s Shan State and Thailand’s Chiang Rai province
flooded the towns of Tachilek and Mae Sai, which stand at either end of
the Friendship Bridge between the two countries.

In the Golden Triangle area, where the borders of Thailand, Burma and Laos
meet, the Mekong River reached its highest level for 30 years, flooding
homes and farmland.

Thailand’s Water Resources Department director-general Siripong Hungspreuk
warned that heavy rain in Northern Thailand, China and Laos could swell
the river to its highest level ever by mid-August.

____________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

August 11-17, Myanmar Times
Beans and pulses exports driven by Indian demand - Aung Kyi

IT’S a sellers market at the moment for beans and pulse exports said
sellers at the Bayintnaung Commodities Wholesale Centre in Yangon last
week.
One exporter said demand from India is pushing prices skyward.

“Owing to continuous demand from the Indian since early June, the prices
of some beans and pulses have increased by between 35 and 60 percent
compared with what they were in May, when demand was cool,” he said.

Dr Myan Linn, a beans and pulses exporter in Yangon, said the demand from
India this season was far higher than last year because unfavourable
weather had limited that nation’s February harvests. He added that similar
problems might also hinder the upcoming September harvest.

Pigeon peas, or toor, were K700,000 a tonne in early August, an increase
of about 35pc over the K520,000 price in May. Matpe, or black gram, was
even more expensive at K740,000 a tonne, which was a 60pc increase over
the K445,000 it cost in May, Dr Myan Linn said.

“Now raw matpe is about K73,000 for 60 viss [96 kilograms or 216 pounds]
in the Yangon market and the special quality ready cargo [SQRC] variety
have reached K810,000 a tonne because demand far exceeds the supply,” said
U Kyaw Win, the managing director of an export and import company that
operates in Yangon.

Myanmar’s supply shortfall was likely hampered by a number of farmers
nationwide planting other crops after seeing beans and pulses stay low
last year, another trader said.

The price of white chickpeas also soared to K640,000 a tonne, while green
gram reached K610,000 a tonne in the first week of August, said Dr Myan
Linn.
Several exporters said that the Indian buyers were outbidding their
Chinese rivals and the majority of exports were heading west rather than
northeast.
India annually imports about 3 million tonnes of assorted beans and pulses
from the United States, Canada, Australia and Myanmar.

And exports of beans and pulses from Myanmar traditionally find their way
to India – to the tune of about 70pc. The remainder is shipped to
Pakistan, Sri Lanka, China, Japan, South Korea and Singapore.

These exports earned about US$680 million from about 1.271 million tonnes
during the 2006-07 fiscal year.

In October 2006, Myanmar’s matpe exports reached a record high of K1.1
million a tonne after about 40pc of India’s September harvest was
destroyed by torrential rain and associated flooding.

____________________________________

August 14, Democratic Voice of Burma
Htoo trading leaves Bogalay workers unpaid

Bogalay residents have complained that the Htoo trading company, which was
engaged in redevelopment projects in the area, has pulled out after two
months without paying local workers for their labour.

Htoo trading is owned by Tay Za, a Burmese tycoon with close links to the
ruling junta.

Residents said the company had stopped the project because it was not
profitable.

"The Htoo trading used labour from daily paid workers in Bogalay to
rebuild houses destroyed by the cyclone," a resident said.

"But after two months, they decided the project was not going to make
profit and they abandoned it without settling payments for the labour."

The Bogalay resident said the workers had agreed a price for their labour
at the outset of the project.

"They owed some people up to about 4-500,000 kyat – it's not a small
amount of money,” he said.

“Carpenters in our town worked for Htoo trading after agreeing a payment
of around 5000 kyat a day and now they are waiting for them to come back."

Htoo trading used Bogalay workers to build houses in the Kyein Chaung Gyi
village area, which were sold to locals for 1.5 million kyat to be paid in
installments.

____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

August 14, Mizzima News
UN admits loss of about 1.56 million dollars of cyclone aid in Burma - Mungpi

The United Nations on Thursday admitted that over the past three months
about USD 1.56 million of aid money for victims of Cyclone Nargis has been
lost to Burma's distorted foreign exchange mechanism.

Daniel Baker, the UN humanitarian Coordinator in Burma in press statement
said, "The loss in value due to foreign exchange for the Cyclone Nargis
international humanitarian aid during the last three months has been about
USD 1.56 million."

"We are not getting the full value of dollars donated for emergency
relief, and donors are extremely worried and keen to see that this issue
is resolved," Baker added.

Baker's remarks in the statement came weeks after the UN Humanitarian
Chief John Holmes, after his second visit to Burma in late July, said
there is a 'significant problem' in the exchange mechanism and that the UN
has lost an estimated USD 10 million of aid money.

Holmes told reporters that he had raised the concern of the international
community with the Burmese government on the foreign exchange regulations
and urged it to resolve it.

Sources said the Burmese military regime has been lining their pockets
with aid money through a twisted foreign exchange mechanism.

While aid money transferred to Burma are received in hard currency, the
Banks, run by the government remits the money in Foreign Exchange
Certificate (FECs), which it treats as equivalent to the US dollar.

But in the market, FEC is valued at Kyat 870, while US dollar is valued at
1170 Kyat.

On Friday, according to the statement, the Burmese Minister for National
Planning and Economic Development Soe Tha met members of the TCG to
resolve the problem of the exchange mechanism.

During the meeting, which included the UN Resident Coordinator and the
Humanitarian Coordinator, the Burmese Deputy Foreign Minister and TCG
Chairman Kyaw Thu and an ASEAN representative, Dr. Puji Pujiono, Soe Tha
said the Burmese government has an alternative to solve the problem.

"We do have alternative ways for the international humanitarian community,
including international NGOs, to bring in dollars and to get the full
dollar value of their assistance" Soe Tha told the meeting.

Soe Tha said the UN agencies could avoid loss from the FEC by employing
dollar-to-dollar direct bank transfers to the vendors when purchasing
humanitarian goods and services.

"It will then be up to the vendors to manage their dollar accounts," he
added.

The Burmese minister also confirmed that the vendors will have no
obligation to convert the dollars into FECs or local currency neither will
there be an obligation for the international humanitarian community to
commission particular vendors.

But the Myanmar Foreign Trade Bank, the principal bank in Burma that is
used by several aid agencies to transfer aid money, on Thursday told
Mizzima that they are continuing to give customers in FEC while
withdrawing their money which are transferred abroad.

"We treat the FEC as equivalent to the US dollar and give customers the
same amount. But we deduct 10 per cent from the amount as tax," the
official, who did not wished to be named told Mizzima.

Bishow Parajuli, the UN Resident Coordinator and TCG member, welcoming the
Burmese government's effort, said, "This mechanism would hopefully help us
to address the bulk of the problem very quickly, and we appreciate that
the government has been willing to work with us on a solution."

However, critics said the UN has long known of the discrepancy in the
Burmese foreign exchange mechanism even before the international community
rushed in to the country to help victims of Cyclone Nargis.

An observer in Rangoon said the UN fully knows of the twisted foreign
exchange system that the Burmese government has been using but it chooses
to remain silent.

The source at the MFTB said, there is no reason for the UN not to know
about the loss of at least 10 to 15 per cent on every dollar transferred
to Burma.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

August 14, Irrawaddy
Effectiveness over Excellence - Kyaw Zwa Moe

After 20 years, it’s still alive but just barely—Burma’s 20-year democracy
movement. Its goal is democracy, but the country is still under the
military boot. And there’s little possibility of achieving the goal in the
near future unless a miracle happens.

On August 8, some young people wore black clothing to mark the 20th
anniversary of the Burma’s most significant uprising, known as 8.8.88 or
the four eights.

Some Burmese university students in Rangoon are still wearing black to
mark the bloody anniversary of the military coup, which occurred on
September 18 when an estimated 3,000 demonstrators were killed by the
current regime’s troops. But nothing beyond wearing black clothing will
happen on the 18th.

No one can deny that the ’88 uprising was powerful, managing within two
months, from July to September, to topple three successive authoritarian
governments, led by late dictator Ne Win and followed by his loyal
successors, former Brig-Gen Sein Lwin and the academic Dr Maung Maung.

The uprising produced exciting political theater: new political parties
made up of both young and seasoned political leaders, and the 1990 “free
and fair” election, the first in 26 years. Of course, it all failed, but
at least democracy became the country’s goal.

The question is: What substantive gains has the democracy movement
achieved in the past 20 years?

The leadership of the democracy movement has shown courage in confronting
the oppressive regime, but it has yet to mature enough to achieve the
political goals it seeks.

Some politicians, strategists and businessmen still see The Prince by
Niccolo Machiavelli, written in the early 16th century, as an
authoritative guide to political movements, although it’s considered
extreme by some.

One its major rules: A policy shouldn’t be defined by its excellence or
purity, but by its outcome. The policy must be effective.

Obviously, Burma has had no democratic policy changes. Instead, it has
political prisoners, public turmoil, fear and political and economic
refugees.

Actually, it’s something of a miracle to see the movement still struggling
along under such overwhelming odds. The military regime has never given
any breathing space to the democratic opposition, preferring to smother it
to death.

All pro-active, capable political activists are destined for prison—like
the prominent former student leader Min Ko Naing—or house arrest—like
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

In fact, Suu Kyi once described Burma itself as a larger prison. Its
people are virtually prisoners who live under harsh conditions.

Unfortunately, no one has figured out how to break out of the prison,
including Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy, the main opposition
party and the winner of the 1990 elections.

The NLD and other democracy groups have had some great policy ideas: hold
an assembly of elected representatives in 1990; open up a dialogue between
the opposition groups and the military; hold tripartite talks with the
military, including opposition groups, ethnic parties and so on.

Each, at the time, may have been an excellent or pure policy, but each
lacked effectiveness.

The NLD headquarters in Rangoon today is little more than an office with a
sign in front announcing its presence. Officials release statements
marking anniversaries, call for the release of Suu Kyi and the party’s
deputy leader Tin Oo and come up with other routine announcements and
statements. However, the authorities constantly monitor the office and
just visiting it can be dangerous.

The NLD’s failure is just one of the many failures of all Burmese
opposition groups, inside and outside the country, that are trying to
achieve democratic reform.

On the other hand, the military regime has always exercised a clear,
effective policy designed to retain military power now and into the
future. It unwaveringly adheres to its “seven-step road map” to
“disciplined-democracy,” code words for more military repression and
control.

Burmese opposition groups must rethink the past to come up with
pro-active, effective policies that can move the country closer to a
democratic system. It doesn’t have to be 100 percent overnight. But the
opposition must have a strategy that produces effective gains, even if
only one small step at a time.

The past 20 years would make a poor political science textbook for Burma’s
future generations of activists and political leaders. However, out of the
rubble of these failed policies the movement must learn to create new
policies not based on excellence or purity but on effectiveness.

____________________________________

August 14, Irrawaddy
Bush as Human Rights Champion? - Pokpong Lawansiri

The visit of George W Bush to Bangkok early this month to mark the 175th
anniversary of relations between Thailand and the United States drew great
attention to the Burmese pro-democracy communities in Thailand.

Bush visited Thailand in October 2003 during his first term to attend an
Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting, where he was met with
demonstrations by thousands of Thai and international peace activists who
opposed his administration’s human rights record.

It remains difficult for many human rights activists around the world to
understand why Burmese activists see the US government as a staunch
supporter of human rights.

Globally, Bush is seen not as a strong supporter of democracy and human
rights, but as a staunch supporter of the use of force, so-called
“pre-emptive attacks” as illustrated by his famous phase, “You are with us
or against us.”

Bush used those words in 2003 to rally public support by linking Al-Qaeda
with the then Iraqi government, claiming Saddam Hussein had weapons of
mass destruction (WMD). In a 2006 report by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg
School of Public Health, it was estimated that 650,000 Iraqis have died in
the US-led war in Iraq.

The action by the US government in Iraq is totally contradictory to the
international concept of humanitarian intervention, which justifies
military intervention with multilateral agreement through
inter-governmental organisations like the UN only if the action alleviates
the suffering of a country’s citizens.

Regarding the UN Human Rights Council, the US is a proponent of reforms.
The US was among four countries that voted against the reform of the UN
Commission on Human Rights to become the Human Rights Council in March
2005.
In June, the US announced that it will disengage from the UN Human Rights
Council after it failed to cooperate with human rights experts the council
dispatched to conduct an investigation of prison conditions at Guantanamo
Bay.

The US government under Bush has also been a strong opponent against the
Rome Statute of International Criminal Court (ICC). Human Rights Watch
reported in 2002, his administration negotiated with the Security Council
to provide immunity for US troops when they committed violations. His
administration also has requested states around the world to approve
bilateral agreements, known as the “impunity agreement,” not to surrender
American nationals to the ICC.

While China and Russia continue to be the key vetoes at the UN Security
Council (UNSC) against binding resolutions on the Burmese military regime,
the US has vetoed UNSC resolutions calling for Israel to respect human
rights in Gaza and the West Bank and against the deployment of monitoring
team to those areas.

How do Burmese activists see such policies? Critical questions should be
raised on why the US government supports the pro-democracy movement in
Burma. Burmese activists should not turn their eyes away from human rights
violations committed in the countries of US allies such as Saudi Arabia,
Israel, Egypt and others.

Bush calls the recent attacks by Russia in Georgia unlawful, but
unilateral attacks by the US were carried out in Iraq and Afghanistan. In
China, Bush talked about prisoners of conscience being detained without
trial, while at the same time prisoners are held at the secret Guantanamo
Prison without trial as well.

The Burmese democracy movement should ask more questions about the global
human rights movement of the US government.

Strategy is necessary when dealing with governments, but the Burmese
movement should fully understand the policies of the US as a defender of
human rights. Looking at a situation with two eyes is better than with one
eye.

In citing reasons for US backing, many Burmese point to the benefits of
Burma having a democratic government, as a means of lessening China’s
influence in the region.

But can our Burmese friends really call the US a staunch supporter of
human rights while it overlooks human rights violations in other places
such as Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, Abu-Graib Prison and countries that are
strong allies of the US?

____________________________________

August 13, The Economist
Myanmar's sad anniversary

The limits to people power

The auspicious date of the eighth day of the eighth month may now forever
be associated with the opening of the Beijing Olympics in 2008. But for a
generation of Burmese it will always recall the mass uprising of 1988, and
its brutal quashing.

The twentieth anniversary this month, like its predecessors, was marked by
protests in capitals around the world, and heavy security in Myanmar
itself. Some attempted demonstrations were reported from within the
country. But most people seemed too scared, or simply too busy trying to
make ends meet, to risk their freedom and perhaps their lives on the
streets.

Myanmar’s people-power revolution was well and truly put down, and,
despite occasional flashes of resistance, such as last September’s
monk-led movement, the chances of a repeat seem slim. Yet elsewhere in the
world, people power has proved irresistible.

Myanmar’s rebellion followed successful popular campaigns in the
Philippines in 1986 and South Korea in 1987. It was followed by the
downfall of the Soviet Union and its clients in Eastern Europe in the late
1980s and early 1990s, and by the toppling of dictatorships in Thailand in
1992 and Indonesia in 1998.

So why did Myanmar’s revolutionaries fail?

It was not for lack of courage or determination. Nobody knows how many
died—3,000 is a widely cited estimate that may well be understated—but
long after it was clear the army would use lethal force, protesters braved
the danger.

It was not for lack of popular support. Millions took to the streets in
1988—more people than protested in Russia and its satellites. When
Myanmar’s regime held an election less than two years later, the
beleaguered opposition still won more than 60% of the votes.

Nor was it for lack of a charismatic, popular leader. Aung San Suu Kyi,
daughter of Myanmar’s independence hero, emerged as just such a
figurehead. In that role she was far more impressive than was, say,
Corazon Aquino, the widow of a Philippine opposition leader, who emerged
as the president who succeeded Ferdinand Marcos, the deposed dictator.

Nor was it for lack of international goodwill. For those few weeks in
1988, most of the world cheered the protesters on. The junta had friends,
of course, as its successor does now, but none provided help that amounted
to a lifeline.

No, the reason the revolution failed was simple: the army was prepared to
kill as many people as it took to thwart it.

This seems obvious. But in fact it is often forgotten. China’s Tiananmen
protests in 1989—Asia’s other great failed people-power rebellion—were
similarly fruitless for the same reason: that in the end troops were
willing to shoot their fellow citizens. Yet it is quite commonly argued
that they failed because the Chinese Communist Party, unlike its Soviet
and East European counterparts, had got the economy right. It may have
done. But guns, not butter, saved it.

Similarly, the Burmese junta’s survival is often ascribed to the weakness
or bad policies of its opponents, or the lack of a concerted international
approach, or even sometimes to the argument that poor Asian countries need
dictatorship to thrive (a ludicrous claim in this case, given the junta’s
role in impoverishing one of the best-endowed countries in the region).

The sad truth is that the junta will survive as long as it and Myanmar’s
people are confident that the army will do whatever it takes to protect
its rule. Change is therefore more likely to stem from a split in the
ranks of the army and junta than from the futile heroism of the huddled
masses yearning to be free.