BurmaNet News, May 1 - 3, 2010

[Editor]

May 1 – 3, 2010, Issue #3953


INSIDE BURMA
BBC News: Fresh Burma aid appeal two years on from Cyclone Nargis
New York Times: Myanmar junta members go civilian
Irrawaddy: NLD will cease to exist: CEC

ON THE BORDER
Mizzima News: Troops break from DKBA, head for border

BUSINESS / TRADE
Xinhua: Japanese companies sign hydropower deal with Myanmar

OPINION / OTHER
Bangkok Post: A disastrous taste of democracy – David Mattheison
DVB: The courage of clandestine video journalists – Kavi Chongkittavorn
Independent (UK): Suu Kyi's party bids farewell to politics but not to its
hopes – Phoebe Kennedy
Project Syndicate: Breaking Burma’s isolation – Wesley K. Clark, Henrietta
H. Fore and Suzanne DiMaggio
Sydney Morning Herald: Burma's 'elections' should not be recognized –
Nehginpao Kipgen
New Light of Myanmar: Greater number of international level production
businesses and services means more job opportunities – Than Shwe

INTERVIEW
Irrawaddy: We won't abandon our people





____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

May 3, BBC News
Fresh Burma aid appeal two years on from Cyclone Nargis

Two years after a devastating cyclone hit Burma, the aid agency Oxfam has
appealed for more aid, as international funding pledges remain
unfulfilled.

Oxfam said that two years into a three-year appeal, only about a quarter
of the money needed had been promised.

With the monsoon season approaching in Burma, shelter and agriculture were
priorities, it said.

Cyclone Nargis killed about 140,000 people and severely affected the lives
of another 2.5 million.

After an international outcry, Burma's military government eventually
opened up to foreign aid - but now Oxfam says that aid is falling short
and putting its achievements at risk.

Desperate

Sarah Ireland, Oxfam's East Asia director, said: "I think the
international community continues to be divided on whether they should be
supporting a country like Burma at this time."

With the monsoon season approaching, Oxfam says agriculture and shelter
are priorities.

But in some parts of the Irrawaddy delta, the needs are overwhelming.

A monk in Labutta told BBC Burmese: "Some aid has come in since the
cyclone, but now aid agencies have wrapped up their operations.

"Many people are jobless. Several families have to share a home."

The United Nations has echoed Oxfam's plea for more money.

The cyclone that ripped across the fertile delta of the Irrawaddy caused a
humanitarian disaster on a scale comparable to the Asian tsunami.

____________________________________

May 1, Irrawaddy
NLD will cease to exist: CEC – Ko Htwe

The National League for Democracy (NLD) will cease to exist as a political
movement after the deadline for party registration on May 6, according to
NLD Central Executive Committee (CEC) members.

The Burmese opposition party refused to re-register for this year's
general election, saying the election laws were “unfair and unjust.”

The Burmese opposition party's CEC held a meeting on Thursday at its
headquarters in Shwegondaing in Rangoon and discussed passing down
instructions to township level offices on how to proceed.

Win Tin, a leading member of NLD, said that Thursday's would be the last
meeting for the NLD's CEC, but that the party will not remove its placard
and flag from outside its office.

Speaking to The Irrawaddy, Ohn Kyaing, an NLD information committee
member, said, “We will not have any more meetings nor release statements
related to politics. However, we will activate social programs that have a
political purpose.”

At Thursday's meeting, some nongovernmental organizations offered advice
on social programs aimed at collecting plastic bags and burning waste, Win
Tin said.

However, Khin Maung Swe, an NLD spokesperson, said that he will oppose
social activities if carried out under the fighting peacock flag, the
symbol of the NLD.

“I cannot accept our members doing social work with the peacock flag in
the background,” he said. “It would diminish our political dignity.”

Win Tin said that many CEC members have different points of view with soft
and hard liners contesting the plans for the party's future. Therefore, it
was difficult to get round to discussing such grassroots policies.

Sources close to the NLD leadership said some leading members of the NLD
will break away and form a new political party after the deadline.
According to Political Parties Registration Laws, only existing parties
must re-register by May 6. New parties are not subject to such a deadline.

Win Tin said, “If some NLD members want to form a party after May 6 then
that is their right, but it means they accept the 2008 Constitution that
we are opposed to.”

He said he is doubtful that political parties that participate in the
coming election are doing so for the sake of the public, but more likely
to gain political space in parliament.

Win Tin predicted that Suu Kyi would not see any NLD signs or flags when
she is released from house arrest in November, because the NLD will be
disbanded. However, he said she can be part of the “Body politic.”

The Body Politic refers to all citizens of a nation being considered as a
collective political voice.

____________________________________

May 1, New York Times
Myanmar junta members go civilian – Seth Mydans

Bangkok — It is an obvious move when generals in a military junta decide
to step aside in favor of civilian rule: shed military ranks and uniforms
and transform themselves into civilians.

Last week, several cabinet members in Myanmar’s junta did a quick change,
resigning from the armed forces, apparently in preparation for
parliamentary elections expected later this year.

Under a new Constitution adopted in 2008, the military that has ruled
Myanmar, formerly Burma, since 1962 is preparing to replace itself with a
civilian government that includes a 440-member House of Representatives.

The new legislature will set aside 25 percent of its seats for serving
military officers, a number that could be augmented by former officers in
civilian clothes.

Many foreign analysts, as well as Myanmar’s opposition party, the National
League for Democracy, have called the elections a false front intended to
put a civilian face on the military’s continued grip on power.

According to the official press, the prime minister, Gen. Thein Sein, and
22 cabinet ministers gave up their uniforms on Monday, a move that was not
unexpected in advance of the elections. They maintained their cabinet
positions, however, perhaps a foretaste of the civilian governments to
come.

The addition of those and any other newly resigned officers would ensure
an even greater role for the military in the legislature, which in any
case is not expected by foreign analysts to be independent of the
country’s top leadership. Under the new Constitution, that leadership will
also be dominated by serving military officers, with the armed forces
chief remaining the country’s most powerful figure.

The Constitution requires a candidate to be a member of a political party,
and last week the official press reported that after shedding his uniform,
Prime Minister Thein Sein, now a civilian, had applied to form a new
party.

On the opposition side, the National League for Democracy, headed by Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi, has announced that it will not participate in the
elections, which it condemned as unfair and undemocratic.

That party won the last elections, in 1990, by a landslide but was
prevented from assuming office by the ruling junta, which maintained its
grip on power.

Many of the party’s members have been arrested since then, and Mrs. Aung
San Suu Kyi has spent most of the past 20 years under house arrest. The
Constitution bars people with criminal records from running for office.

Analysts say Myanmar’s half-step toward democracy could begin a long, slow
process of greater accountability, at least on a local level. In any case,
the military so thoroughly permeates the government, bureaucracy and
economy of Myanmar that it is likely to retain vast influence in all areas
of life, no matter what shape the government takes.

It has been a long-term project for the military junta to seek the
legitimacy, at least in form, of an electoral mandate. Its goal is what it
calls “discipline flourishing democracy,” which would presumably avoid the
undisciplined clash of interests in more open Western-style democracies.

Its neighbors in Southeast Asia present a range of democratic and
nondemocratic formulas of government, including the disciplined
parliamentary systems of Singapore and Cambodia, with their virtual
one-party rule.

But since the overthrow of President Suharto in Indonesia in 1998, none of
them have been governed by the military, which analysts say is still
likely to be the case in Myanmar despite its civilian format.

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

May 3, Mizzima News
Troops break from DKBA, head for border – Daniel Pedersen

Mae Sot – Hundreds of Democratic Karen Buddhist Army troops are reported
to have broken their alliance with the Burma Army and are heading for the
Thai border, with State Peace and Development Council units in hot
pursuit, Karen National Liberation Army sources have said.

Significant clashes between the two armies came as the DKBA soldiers moved
east.

Karen National Liberation Army sources last night, adding that the DKBA
soldiers were “coming back, but not the commanders, of course”.

Karen National Union vice-president David Takapaw said he had heard that
many DKBA soldiers were unhappy with recent demands made by the SPDC and
that some had begun to defect.

A split within the Karen National Union, between Buddhists and Christians,
created the DKBA in 1994. It rapidly proved a destructive split. In early
1995 the KNU stronghold of Mannerplaw, near the confluence of the Salween
and Moei rivers, had fallen, with Burma Army troops guided into the
natural fortress by KNU defectors flying the new DKBA flag.

At the time the ruling military junta promised the DKBA leaders they could
rule Karen State as they wished. But this year, the DKBA has not so much
managed Karen State as terrorised the countryside and milked urban areas
of cash through intimidation, while its leaders were getting rich on
cross-border taxes.

A photograph in last week’s edition of Mae Sot’s weekly tabloid Pan Din
Maere (Motherland) featured DKBA Batallion 999 leader Colonel Chit Thu
posing with his family in front of his new palatial home. Even the local
Mae Sot paper was invited to his Myawaddy house-warming party. The house
is a monument to new-found riches as only the nouveau-riche can manage. It
is ostentation, and simply lighting the place for his three-day
extravaganza, would have cost a fortune.

Chit Thu has been one of the handful of individuals who have benefited
from the DKBA’s creation. His Brigade 999 has a fearsome reputation and
money to burn.

Until the SPDC started pressing his army for reform as a local militia,
Chit Thu was riding high.

The question is to what extent the DKBA will be damaged by such a mutiny
by its foot soldiers. A few hundred soldiers is many, but not much of an
indent on overall DKBA numbers. But a warlord is nothing without the
loyalty of his men. Chit Thu must now be questioning loyalty among the
remaining men he leads.

With SPDC troops hunting DKBA defectors as they make their way towards
KNLA territory, the prospect of the whole of the DKBA peacefully
transforming into a Border Guard Force (BGF) looks marginal.

The DKBA still insists it supports KNU founder Ba U Gyi’s four guiding
principles of the “Karen revolution”:

    For us surrender is out of the question
    The Karen, we shall retain our arms
    The recognition of Karen State must be complete
    The Karen, we shall decide our own destiny
This, on face value, would have the DKBA opposed vehemently to the SPDC’s
rule.

But the split that festered in 1994 to become one of the most-damaging
blows the KNU has felt is these days all about business.

The DKBA now manages border trade with the SPDC, as the KNU once did with
the Thais. The KNU logged its border strongholds and oversaw tin, zinc and
gold mining.

Now, all manner of goods, both legal and otherwise, cross back and forth
and the KBA takes a cut on virtually every transaction. Its leaders are
becoming very rich.

But its foot soldiers, ever in danger from KNU landmines and ambushes, see
a distinct separation from the lives they lead in the field and those of
their leaders, whom the local media follow like celebrities.

Deadlines for the DKBA to transform into a BGF have come and gone, and as
each one passes the SPDC raises the pressure a notch. The junta’s
programme is essentially a system of creating local militias commanded by
SPDC officers. According to its programme of transformation, the DKBA
would disarm, change uniforms and then be re-armed. Soldiers would receive
a wage equivalent to 1,200 baht a month.

Dropped would be the original DKBA shoulder patch, and most likely the name.

Such a move would take the DKBA further than ever from its roots and its
claims of being driven by Ba U Gyi’s principles.

___________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

May 2, Xinhua
Japanese companies sign hydropower deal with Myanmar

Two Japanese companies have reached respective contract agreements with
Myanmar's power authorities to provide related services to a hydropower
project in the country, an official daily reported yesterday.

One agreement on consulting services of in-house engineering services was
signed between the NEWJEC Inc of Japan and Myanmar's Ministry of Electric
Power-1, while the other on concrete work of the Upper Yeywa hydropower
project was between the High Tech Concrete Technology Co Ltd of Japan and
the Myanmar ministry in Nay Pyi Taw on Friday, said the New Light of
Myanmar.

The Upper Yeywa hydropower project is a follow-up one of the Yeywa
project, which is nearly-completed.

The 790-megawatt (mw) Yeywa hydropower plant is said to mainly distribute
electricity to the commercial city of Yangon.

One of its four turbines with 180 mw started its test-run in February to
generate power and the full run is expected by this month.

The Yeywa hydropower plant, which lies on the Myitnge River, 50 kilometers
southeast of Mandalay, is being implemented by the Ministry of Electric
Power-1.

The hydropower plant, which costs 600 million U.S. dollars, will produce
3.55 billion kilowatt-hours (kwh) annually on total completion and its
generating capacity represents 70 per cent of about 5 billion kwh being
generated by 15 power plants.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

May 3, Bangkok Post
A disastrous taste of democracy – David Mattheison

Cyclone Nargis struck southern Burma two years ago, on the night of May
2-3, 2008. It destroyed much of the Irrawaddy Delta, killed an estimated
140,000 people, and severely affected some 2.4 million others _ making it
one of the worst natural disasters to strike Southeast Asia in
generations.

Burma's ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) delayed a major
international relief effort, stranding aid and humanitarian workers for
weeks in Bangkok, even as Burmese civil society responded admirably by
rushing to the delta with whatever they could gather to assist survivors.

Why didn't the SPDC want too many foreigners in the country? One major
reason was the cyclone threatened to derail a long-planned constitutional
referendum, step four in the SPDC's ``Seven Step Roadmap to Disciplined
Democracy''. Step Five is the holding of ``free and fair elections'', now
scheduled to happen some time in 2010.

At roughly the same time that Cyclone Nargis was making landfall in Burma,
the UN Security Council issued a presidential statement on May 2 calling
on the Burmese government to ensure the referendum scheduled for May 10,
2008, would be free and fair.


: ``The Security Council underlines the need for the Government of Myanmar

[Burma] to establish the conditions and create an atmosphere conducive to
an inclusive and credible process, including the full participation of all
political actors and respect for fundamental political freedoms.''

That was certainly wishful thinking. Since 1990, when the previous
democratic elections delivered a clear win to the opposition National
League for Democracy (NLD), the military junta had methodically set the
stage for an ersatz democratic system. They rejected the 1990 election
results and convened a National Convention in 1993 to write a new
constitution. This convention met episodically, depending on security
exigencies in Burma, prompting many to view it as a marker to buy time for
the military to consolidate their rule.

It was effectively moribund for years, until the Road Map was released in
2003. This set out a process to complete the elections the military
government had promised. During the 18 years from the 1990 elections to
the constitutional referendum in 2009, political parties and their members
were slowly squeezed into illegality, exile, prison or irrelevance.

The NLD was reduced to a defiant shell as its leader Aung San Suu Kyi was
kept under house arrest and other party leaders were imprisoned. Ethnic
opposition groups that reached ceasefire agreements with the government
were frustrated by the SPDC's refusal to discuss political grievances yet
feared armed retaliation by the Tatmadaw (Burma Army) if they breached the
ceasefire pact.

Following demonstrations in Rangoon in August and September 2007, the SPDC
weathered intense international outrage over its violent suppression of
the monks, activists and ordinary citizens who marched for an end to
military rule. By early 2008, Bur ma's prisons were overflowing with more
than 2,100 political prisoners, representing a doubling of the number of
political activists in jail from the previous year.

The text of the draft constitution was only formally released to the
public in limited printings in March 2008, two months before the
referendum. The constitution is replete with repressive provisions _
reserving seats for serving military officers (one-quarter in the lower
house of parliament, one-third for the upper house), providing sweeping
powers for the Tatmadaw, including control over key ministries and
immunity from civilian prosecution, and setting out provisions to limit
basic rights of citizens.
SPDC censorship and limitations on access severely hampered Burmese and
foreign media trying to cover the referendum, compounding the limited
access to information on the process available to the average citizen.

State-controlled media was heavy-handed, carrying incessant propaganda
exhorting citizens to vote for the new constitution. Billboards erected
throughout urban areas proclaimed: ``Let's approve the Constitution to
shape our future by ourselves''; ``To approve the State Constitution is a
national duty of the entire people today''; ``Let's cast `Yes' vote in the
national interest''; ``Democracy cannot be achieved by anarchism or
violence, but by the Constitution''.

In one of the only public opinion polls conducted ahead of the elections,
Burma News International (BNI), a consortium of exiled media
organisations, interviewed more than 2,000 people throughout Burma in
April 2008 to gauge their responses to the referendum. The poll found that
83% of  eligible voters planned to cast votes, with 64% saying they
intended to vote no. A majority, 76%, claimed they would vote based on
their conscience, not just coercion by the authorities. But 69% of
respondents said they did not know what was in the constitution. There was
no domestic or international election monitoring body permitted to observe
the referendum.

One week after Cyclone Nargis hit, the first stage of the referendum was
held throughout the country on May 8, in a total of 278 out of 325
townships in Burma. Polling in the 47 townships (40 in the Rangoon
division and seven in the Irrawaddy division) badly affected by the
cyclone was postponed to May 24. The SPDC's Commission for Holding the
Referendum reported the total population in Burma was 57.5 million and
people over the age of 18 and eligible to vote numbered 27.4 million. Yet
where these figures came from is unclear since Burma has not conducted a
nationwide census since 1983 and the SPDC does not control sizeable areas
of the borderlands where civil war still simmers.

The repressive local government jlmachinery of the Burmese state was
responsible for ensuring a referendum result called for by the SPDC's
generals and they left nothing to chance.  The Village Peace and
Development Council (VPDC), or Ya Ya Ka, and local military units were
instructed to produce the right result by top military officials only
concerned with a result, not a process. Local officials, cadres from the
USDA, the government-backed mass movement, representatives of the
Auxiliary Fire Brigade and Myanmar Red Cross Society, and military and
police personnel either forced people to vote, or collected name lists of
household and  small community members that were all then fraudulently
cast as ``yes'' votes by the referendum officials. It's one of the
fundamentals of the SPDC's repressive rule _ construct a system where
popular fear to defy the military is augmented through overlapping
mobilisation of military, police and government-controlled social
organisations to ensure obedience to the SPDC's dictates.

Burmese citizens from cyclone-affected areas interviewed by Human Rights
Watch in the past several months remembered how the referendum process
further complicated their desperate efforts to recover from the cyclone. 
While few overt cases of intimidation or threats were reported, many
people described how the entire organisation of the referendum was
coercive, and distracted from basic concerns of survival.

Htar Htar Yi, a 36-year-old woman from Laputta township in the delta, said
the referendum process was more restrictive than the 1990 elections in
which she voted as an 18-year-old. ``I experienced voting in 1990. Then I
could vote freely as I liked, but this time was very different. We had no
freedom to vote. I did not give any vote. The village authorities
collected names of all family members for voting. I told a village
official that I wanted to vote as I liked but he said he had already voted
for us. We have no right to speak out because we are living under their
power. They made all votes from the village for them [the SPDC].''

Sein Win, a Ya Ya Ka head in Dedaye township, arranged his village's vote
on May 24, by turning it into a raffle to conceal that the whole process
was rigged _ prizes such as instant noodles and nails were handed out to
people who came forward and voted ``yes''. ``People from our village don't
know what the constitution is. It's good that they don't know. If they
knew, that would be a problem.  If our villagers voted `yes', we might be
favoured by the government while distributing assistance,'' Sein Win
remembers.

Kyin Maung, a 57-year-old man from Dagon, near Rangoon, said that despite
the low turnout at the polling stations in his area on May 24, a high
percentage of residents had their votes tabulated. ``The referendum was
arranged by the Ya Ya Ka and USDA. They set up polling stations in the
schools and monasteries. The USDA members, women's groups [MWAF], firemen
and Red Cross members were there to supervise the referendum. I went to
vote at the polling station. In some areas in my town, local authorities
arranged advance ballots on behalf of voters and later they told people
that there was no need to go to the polling station as they did it all for
them. About 75% of voting in our area was like that. Only about 25% voted
individually,'' Kyin Maung said.

In some cases, the authorities included the dead or missing from the
cyclone in the vote count. May Khin, a 45-year-old woman from an isolated
village in Laputta, whose daughter went missing in the cyclone, said she
allowed authorities to take the names of both her and her daughter as
instructed. ``Soon after Nargis, the authorities came and collected names
from every household. I told them that I don't know whether my daughter is
alive or dead. But they took both of our names. The Ya Ya Ka arranged
polling stations in the village school. Not many people went to vote
because most of us had given the advance ballot. If they asked me to vote,
I have to vote. In order to get food and a place to stay, we had to
vote.'' Ma Mei Mei, a young woman from Dedaye township said the same: ``We
were told just to cast a `yes' vote. At the time, people were struggling
hard to survive. We just did what we were told.''

A Christian pastor from Rangoon who was supporting church members in
Pathien township said that authorities were using displaced survivor
facilities to gather names. ``When the people came into the camps the
authorities registered them, but it was also a `yes' vote for the
referendum. Many people refused to go to the new camps, so they had to
hide in other people's houses.''

In one of the starkest examples of the twisted process, the authorities
forced political prisoners at Insein prison in Rangoon to vote, in direct
contravention of the Referendum Law (Chapter V, Preparing Voting Rolls,
section 11, (d), 3), which states that one category of citizen not to be
included in the voting rolls are ``persons serving prison terms, having
been convicted under order or sentence of a court for any sentence''.

Htet Aung, a dissident imprisoned in Insein at the time said: ``We were
asked to vote three or four days in advance of the referendum. The prison
authorities read the guidelines and explained to us how to vote. They
collected ballots at every room [cell]. We had to mark the ballot in front
of them while they were taking photos and video of us. They could see
clearly what we marked on the ballots.''

At the end of May, the government announced the final national results _ a
92% nationwide ``yes'' vote resulting from a 98% voter turnout. The SPDC
claimed that 99.07% of the voters eligible to vote on May 8 actually cast
ballots. In cyclone affected areas that voted on May 24, the SPDC reported
that 93.44% of the population cast votes _ an unbelievable number given
the challenges to survive that people were facing just two weeks after the
cyclone _ and announced 92.93% in the cyclone jlaffected regions voted in
favour, versus 5.99% who voted ``no''.

The way the SPDC conducted the referendum in the aftermath of Nargis is
instructive of how the elections will likely be conducted later in 2010,
within a nation-wide environment of intimidation constructed to ensure the
right result for the military government. But there are also important
differences. The referendum was a simple yes or no vote on a constitution
most people in Burma had never read. The forthcoming elections will entail
voting for candidates to a national bi-cameral parliament, and to
provincial-level assemblies.

The voting process will be more complex, the choices more varied and
campaigning more widespread.

Yet just as the SPDC ruthlessly and single-mindedly pushed through its
referendum just three weeks after Cyclone Nargis, continuing an electoral
charade while hundreds of thousands of survivors waited desperately for
assistance, the broad results of the 2010 elections are already
pre-determined: Burma will have a civilian front parliament for continued
military rule. A slightly more sophisticated, or less brutally inept,
authoritarian system, but one no less ruthless or sinister.

David Scott Mathieson is Burma researcher for Human Rights Watch. Human
Rights Watch's report, `I Want to Help My Own People: State Control and
Civil Society in Burma After Cyclone Nargis', was published on May 29.
____________________________________

May 3, Democratic Voice of Burma
The courage of clandestine video journalists – Kavi Chongkittavorn

On 27 September 2007, the international community was shocked to see the
video clip of Kenji Nagai, a Japanese video journalist, shot dead by a
Burmese soldier on the streets of Rangoon. For weeks, the brutal death of
this journalist was broadcast repeatedly, reminding us of the danger faced
by journalists reporting the news.

This famous clip was clandestinely filmed from a rooftop by a young
Burmese video journalist (VJ) working for Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB).
He was able to send the clip almost immediately via a portable satellite
to his headquarters in Oslo, norway. Within two hours, the incident went
global, with TV news networks splashing their news bulletins with this
image.

Meanwhile the Burmese junta leaders tried in vain to figure out how the
clip penetrated their solid wall of censorship.

The shooting and attacking of journalists and VJs is not restricted to Burma.

Video clips and photos taken by amateurs who were in the right place at
the right time take us behind the walls of these fortified countries, by
using their camera phones or mini video cameras to record events. However,
to film secretly and report news professionally undercover in a country
controlled by one of the world’s most brutal military juntas is a
different story.

As the video clip of Nagai demonstrated, it required a well-trained
journalist who can capture the news without being captured himself. Video
journalists now fill the important gap, replacing a news vacuum behind the
iron curtain of dictatorship. DVB trains video journalists before they go
into the field undetected and unrecognised, even by their colleagues.

To do their jobs, they are armed with mini video cameras, satellite phones
and other new media technology. In addition, they are also trained to
survive in hostile environments. However, even minor carelessness could
put one’s own life and those of others in jeopardy. A young female DVB
journalist was recently jailed in Burma for 27 years for simply reporting
the news.

Exiled journalist communities from Iran, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka, Gambia,
North Korea, Tibet, Tunisia, Belarus and Uzbekistan are now sharing each
other’s experience. Facing the same restrictions at home – news bans and
no access to information – these exiled communities are following in the
footsteps of their Burmese colleagues, who are well-versed in using new
media technologies, coupled with personal versatility to get fresh news
out.

Iranian journalists have benefited from the experience of Burmese VJs, who
were featured in the 2010 Oscar-nominated documentary, Burma VJ. With the
protests following the disputed Iran elections in 2009, the internet was
flooded with video clips taken by mobile phones and mini video cameras.

VJs are now flourishing in many countries. Underground reporters inside
North Korea have also increased. Using smuggled phones from China, they
report the news to exiled radio stations based in China and South Korea.
Underground journalists from Zimbabwe managed to smuggle video clips and
news reports out of the country after Mugabe’s government censured any
reporting of the news.

International news organisations are far less likely to put their own
journalists in such jeopardy, and over the coming decade, the VJ will
become a vital cog in the 24/7 newsreel, supplying news and images to
publishers, broadcasters and exiled communities alike.

The international community owes a lot to these courageous and faceless
journalists, who constantly risk their lives to report the news.

Kavi Chongkittavorn is a respected journalist and current chair of the
Southeast Asian Press Alliance in Bangkok. With more than twenty years
experience reporting on human rights and press freedom issues in Southeast
Asia, he writes on the everyday struggles of clandestine journalists who
dare to report the news in countries afflicted by censorship. Using new
media technologies such as camera phones, these brave journalists bring
the news to the outside world. On World Press Freedom Day, 2010, Kavi
writes for WAN-IFRA, the World Association of Newspapers and News
Publishers.

____________________________________

May 3, Independent (UK)
Suu Kyi's party bids farewell to politics but not to its hopes – Phoebe
Kennedy

Rangoon – This week, more than 21 years after Burma's National League for
Democracy sprang to life on a wave of opposition to military rule, it will
cease to exist, the dreams of its founders still unrealised, and its
leader Aung San Suu Kyi in long-term detention.
Under laws drawn up by Burma's ruling generals to govern elections this
year, the NLD was forced to choose between expelling its iconic leader on
the grounds that she is a prisoner, or not registering for the vote. It
chose the latter, a decision which means the party cannot legally exist
after the 6 May deadline for registration.

It is a depressing end to the NLD's long and fruitless battle to bring
democracy to Burma. Born out of the failed uprising of 1988, the party won
a landslide victory in the last national elections in 1990, but the
military never allowed it to take power. Senior members of the party, most
of them now elderly, have been harassed, imprisoned and tortured. Yet
through all this, and despite this final, killer blow to their party, NLD
activists have extraordinary belief.

"We do not feel sad," said Tin Oo, the NLD's 83-year-old deputy leader who
has endured several spells in prison and was freed from house arrest in
February. "We have honour. One day we will come back; we will be
reincarnated by the will of the people."

Dignified to the last, party members have chosen not to take down the NLD
sign and red-and-white party flag outside their humble headquarters in
Rangoon. The security forces will do that job for them, said Win Tin,
Burma's longest-serving political prisoner who was released in 2008 after
19 years in jail, most of them spent in solitary confinement in Rangoon's
infamous Insein prison.

"We won't dismantle our party ourselves," said the veteran party activist,
who is a remarkably sparkly 80-year-old, despite suffering years of
torture. "Symbolically, that would be wrong. But remember, this is nothing
new for us. We've seen our offices closed all over the country, our flags
and signboards pulled down. We are used to this repression."


>From their shabby offices, a two-storey terrace squeezed between shops

selling cheap wooden furniture, NLD members plan to continue their social
work, which includes small education and health projects and offering
financial and moral support for the families of Burma's estimated 2,100
political prisoners.

"But we will not do political work here," said Tin Oo, choosing his words
carefully. "We want to avoid any misunderstanding with the authorities."

It is a far cry from the golden days of the late 1980s, said Win Tin, when
the NLD's membership topped six million and the movement seemed
unstoppable. Beaten down by years of repression, intimidation and crushed
uprisings, it is a brave person now who publicly declares allegiance to
the NLD.

"In the old days, our supporters had memberships cards, now they support
us in their hearts and in their minds," Win Tin said. "There are very few
speaking out these days. I am 80 and my health is bad. I have nothing to
lose by speaking out so I have to be daring, on behalf of all the others."

This year's election, expected to be held in October or November, will
offer little for those longing for change in Burma. Western governments
have already dismissed the vote as a sham, saying it will merely put a
civilian face on half a century of military rule.

Last week's resignation from the army of the Prime Minister, General Thein
Sein, and 22 other cabinet ministers appeared to support this view.
According to reports, the general then applied to form a new political
party. Under Burma's new constitution, 25 per cent of seats in parliament
will already be reserved for the military; soldiers who have recently
given up their uniforms will be counted separately as civilians, a way of
bulking up military power in the legislature.

"The only reason this election is being held is to legitimise military
rule, not because the generals want to share their power with anyone
else," said Bertil Lintner, a Burma expert and the author of several books
about the country.

He said the regime's manoeuvres are meaningless to the Burmese people. For
them, the death of the NLD will not diminish their desire for democracy,
or their affection for its leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who is under house
arrest at her lakeside home in Rangoon. "In 1990, the Burmese people voted
for change, and they didn't get it," Mr Lintner said. "With or without the
NLD, that desire for change remains the same."

A history of oppression

1988 Student uprising. Aung San Suu Kyi emerges as political leader

1990 Victory in elections for NLD

1991 Aung San Suu Kyi awarded Nobel Peace Prize for her commitment to
peaceful change

1996 Aung San Suu Kyi attends first NLD congress

1998 300 NLD members released from prison

May 2002 Aung San Suu Kyi released after just under 20 months of house arrest

May 2003 Aung San Suu Kyi taken into "protective custody"

November 2003 Five senior NLD leaders released from house arrest after the
visit of UN human-rights envoy

2007 Public protest movement led by Buddhist monks leads to crackdown and
arrests of NLD activists

2009 Aung San Suu Kyi sentenced to 18 months' house arrest

March 2010 Military formally annuls Aung San Suu Kyi's 1990 poll victory

____________________________________

May 3, Project Syndicate
Breaking Burma’s isolation – Wesley K. Clark, Henrietta H. Fore and
Suzanne DiMaggio

NEW YORK – The Obama administration’s decision to seek a new way forward
in United States-Burma relations recognizes that decades of trying to
isolate Burma (Myanmar) in order to change the behavior of its government
have achieved little. With Burma’s ruling generals preparing to hold
elections later this year – for the first time since 1990 – it is time to
try something different.

Attempting to engage one of the world’s most authoritarian governments
will not be easy. There is no evidence to indicate that Burma’s leaders
will respond positively to the Obama administration’s central message,
which calls for releasing the estimated 2,100 political prisoners
(including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi), engaging in genuine dialogue with the
opposition, and allowing fair and inclusive elections. In fact, the
recently enacted electoral laws, which have been met with international
condemnation, already point to a process that lacks credibility.

This past fall, we convened a task force under the auspices of the Asia
Society to consider how the US can best pursue a path of engagement with
Burma. We concluded that the US must ensure that its policies do not
inadvertently support or encourage authoritarian and corrupt elements in
Burmese society. At the same time, if the US sets the bar too high at the
outset, it will deny itself an effective role in helping to move Burma
away from authoritarian rule and into the world community.

During this period of uncertainty, we recommend framing US policy toward
Burma on the basis of changes taking place in the country, using both
engagement and sanctions to encourage reform. The Obama administration’s
decision to maintain trade and investment sanctions on Burma in the
absence of meaningful change, particularly with regard to the Burmese
government’s intolerance of political opposition, is correct.

Yet there are other measures that should be pursued now. The US should
engage not only with Burma’s leaders, but also with a wide range of groups
inside the country to encourage the dialogue necessary to bring about
national reconciliation of the military, democracy groups, and non-Burmese
nationalities. The removal by the US of some noneconomic sanctions
designed to restrict official bilateral interaction is welcome, and an
even greater relaxation in communications, through both official and
unofficial channels, should be implemented. Expanding such channels,
especially during a period of potential political change, will strengthen
US leverage.

To reach the Burmese people directly, the US should continue to develop
and scale up assistance programs, while preserving cross-border
assistance. Assistance to non-governmental organizations should be
expanded, and US assistance also should be targeted toward small farmers
and small- and medium-sized businesses. Educational exchanges under the
Fulbright and Humphrey Scholar programs and cultural outreach activities
should be increased. These programs produce powerful agents for community
development in Burma, and can significantly improve the prospects for
better governance.

US policy should shift to a more robust phase if Burmese leaders begin to
relax political restrictions, institute economic reforms, and advance
human rights. If there is no movement on these fronts, there will likely
be pressure in the US for tightening sanctions. If there is no recourse
but to pursue stronger sanctions, the US should coordinate with others,
including the European Union and ASEAN, to impose targeted financial and
banking measures to ensure that military leaders and their associates
cannot evade the impact of what otherwise would be less-effective
unilateral sanctions.

If a different scenario emerges, it should open the way for a much more
active US role in assisting with capacity building, governance training,
and international efforts to encourage economic reforms. One priority
should be the development of an appropriate mechanism for ensuring that
revenues from the sale of natural gas are properly accounted for,
repatriated, and allocated to meet urgent national needs.

In adjusting its policy toward Burma, the US must face reality with a
clear vision of what its foreign policy can achieve. US influence in Burma
is unlikely to outweigh that of increasingly powerful Asian neighbors.
Therefore, the US should make collaboration with other key stakeholders,
particularly ASEAN, the United Nations, and Burma’s neighbors – including
China, India and Japan – the centerpiece of its policy.

In every respect, conditions in Burma are among the direst of any country
in the world, and it will take decades, if not generations, to reverse
current downward trends and create a foundation for a sustainable and
viable democratic government and a prosperous society. The US needs to
position itself to respond effectively and flexibly to the twists and
turns that a potential transition in Burma may take over time, with an eye
toward pressing the Burmese leadership to move in positive directions.

____________________________________

May 1, Sydney Morning Herald
Burma's 'elections' should not be recognized – Nehginpao Kipgen

In an annual routine policy review, the European Union extended economic
sanctions against the military-ruled Burma for another year on April 26,
2010. With the continued political imbroglio in this South-East Asian
nation, the decision was not something unexpected.

The sanctions, which include a travel ban and a freeze of assets of
enterprises owned by members of the ruling junta and people associated
with them, is aimed at bringing the military leadership to the path of
dialogue that would eventually lead Burma to democracy.

The European Union wants to see the establishment of a democratically
elected civilian government that engages in socio-economic development,
and respects human rights while rebuilding relations with the
international community.

The European Union renewed its call for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi,
the leader of the opposition and general secretary of the National League
for Democracy, and also offered to hold dialogue with the junta if it
makes a tangible democratic progress.

Given its history of recalcitrance, the military junta is unlikely to give
in to the calls of the European Union. Nevertheless, the junta in its own
way is seeking recognition, if not endorsement, from the international
community.

With years of criticisms and pressures from the international community,
the military leaders plan to legitimise their rule by holding a general
election. The goal is to transform the dictatorial-type of regime to a
civilian form of government, where the ultimate power rests in the hands
of military.

There are two important reasons, among others, that concern the military
leadership in terms of losing its power to a civilian government – safety
and control.

After decades of brutality on its own people, the military leadership is
concerned about their own safety under a democratically elected
government. The trial and execution of former military leaders in Iraq is
something that probably worries the Burmese military leaders.

With the different ethnic nationalities demanding political autonomy, the
junta is wary of any decentralisation of the Burmese society. Under the
present system, the military controls all branches of the government –
legislative, executive and judiciary.

It is symbolically significant, at this juncture, to the Burmese
opposition that the European Union has extended sanctions for another
year. The move can be construed as support for the democratic movement.
However, this initiative will remain unyielding as long as there is
economic engagement by countries such as China, India, and members of the
Association of South-East Asian Nations.

It is not the European Union that is solely responsible for Burma's policy
failure. It is the conflicting approaches of engagement and sanctions that
make the international community's strategy ineffective.

Beyond economic sanctions, what the European Union can possibly do is to
lobby and convince its international partners, at least the Western
countries, not to recognise the result of the election if held under the
existing restrictive laws.

It could also strive to formulate a co-ordinated international strategy to
effectively deal with the military junta.

If the European Union, together with its international partners, decides
not to recognise the election result, the Burmese military junta will lack
the global legitimacy it pursues.

Regardless of the outcome of general election, Burma's decades-old
conflicts will continue as long as suppression of ethnic minorities is
unabated, and their fundamental rights are denied.

Nehginpao Kipgen is a researcher on the rise of political conflicts in
modern Burma (1947-2004) and general secretary of the U.S.-based Kuki
International Forum (www.kukiforum.com). He is a regular contributor to
The National Times.

____________________________________

May 1, New Light of Myanmar
Greater number of international level production businesses and services
means more job opportunities – Than Shwe

Nay Pyi Taw – The following is the translation of the Workers Day message
sent by Chairman of the State Peace and Development Council of the Union
of Myanmar Senior General Than Shwe.

Esteemed workers,

I, in honour of the workers striving with their intellectual and physical
strength and perseverance for development of nation’s productivity, send
this message on the Workers Day which falls on 1st May 2010.

The present age has witnessed every country exerting efforts for own
national economic development and enhancement of power and image. Myanmar
also is in the process of standing tall as a peaceful, modern and
developed state with consolidated force of the entire people. The workers
on their part have their dutiful and effective national role to reach this
end.

Thanks to the united endeavours of the entire people including workers, we
are able to successfully implement the correct national policies and
objectives, while witnessing the rapid national development in parallel
with the prevalence of peace and stability.

The arrangements the State Peace and Development Council is making are to
ensure harmony between the private sector of our national races, the state
sector and the cooperative sector for progress of mechanized farming
followed by national industrialization and development. Necessary
infrastructures and support the SPDC has been providing to promote
advanced services based on rapidly developing information and
communication technology of the world.

The good news for the workers is that greater number of international
level production businesses and services in the country means more job
opportunities for them.

A priority task of the SPDC is the promotion and protection of workers’
rights and opportunities that cover the task of ensuring a pleasant work
environment, occupational safety and living standard improvement, while
acknowledging their magnitude in the national development drive.

The Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar has already been
approved with the overwhelming support of the national races to build a
new modern and developed nation and to place in the fore Our Three Main
National Causes. As Myanmar is going to hold an election according to the
new Constitution this year, the SPDC formed the Union Election Commission
in addition to promulgating necessary laws.

At the same time, we are aware of the conspiracy saboteurs from inside and
outside the country are making to harm the election and to hinder the
seven-step Road Map.

All along the course of history, you the workers proved your worthiness
with your fine traditions. So, I would urge you all to ward off attempts
of saboteurs and aliens to interfere and to sow seeds of mistrust in our
country while further fostering your unyielding spirit, anti-colonialist
spirit, nationalism and Union Spirit. Moreover, you need to join hands
with the entire people for the successful implementation of the Road Map.

In reality, you the workers are the people striving with your intellectual
and physical power for national modernization and development and social
improvement of the entire people. On this auspicious occasion, may you all
enjoy peace of mind while exerting greater efforts in serving the interest
of the nation and the people. – MNA

____________________________________
INTERVIEW

May 3, Irrawaddy
We won't abandon our people

The Irrawaddy recently interviewed the vice-chairman of the National
League for Democracy (NLD), Tin Oo, who was formerly the chief of staff of
Burma's armed forces. He spoke about his personal political experiences,
as well as the NLD's current status and future plans following its
decision not to register for the election in 2010.

Tin Oo, 83, was last arrested in 2003 after Aung San Suu Kyi and her
entourage were attacked by a government-backed mob in what has come to be
known as the “Depayin Massacre.” After being detained for several months,
he was placed under house arrest for six years and was finally released in
February.

Question: The May 7 deadline for political party registration is
approaching. There is concern that following this date the NLD won't be
able to engage in pro-democracy activities since it has decided not to
contest the election and most likely will be dissolved. How do you respond
to these concerns?

Answer: An office and a flag are helpful components for an organization or
a league to be meaningful. However, having no signboard and flag doesn't
mean that the NLD is not involved in politics and the struggle for
democracy. The NLD is not forsaking the people and it will never turn its
back on them. We will continue to work for freedom and democracy in the
country by peaceful means. We are still in the position to do so.

In the past, we managed to work without an office and flag when our
headquarters was raided and shut down for a few months. Also, some people
in the office were given lengthy sentences and thrown into jail.
Nevertheless, those who remained outside continued to work for the people
and the NLD still existed.

We are getting old now but the new generation is very active. I believe in
the NLD youth, and I believe that youth from other organizations,
especially students, will eventually join the democracy movement. Even if
older NLD members can't be part of the future struggle, the current
generation will continue to work for democracy and human rights.

They will join hands and become a powerful force for democracy. We older
members believe that. One thing we keep telling them is not to do anything
aggressively.

We know people are depending on us and have great expectations. But we had
to ask ourselves whether we should contest the election just because of
the fact that people were relying on us. The answer was 'no,' we can't
contest just for that reason.

We can't accept the 2008 constitution and operate under its unjust
provisions. If we do, we will just be an organization that listens to what
authorities say and agrees with them. Look at who has registered for the
election. Most of them are groups with friendly relationships with the
regime.

It doesn't mean that we are going to turn our back on what the people
want. We will never abandon our people. We won't turn blind. We will try
our best to work for them however we can. I want our people to know that
we are old but still very active, so they should not be too concerned.

Q: How can you convince people that refusal to accept the election laws
and the 2008 Constitution was a good reason for the NLD not to register
for the 2010 election?

A: The election laws are very strict. These laws bar the leaders who the
people support, such as pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, from
participating in the election. In the case of political prisoners, I don't
think we can assume a person is convicted when they are in the process of
appeal. It is not fair if these people are not allowed to participate in
the election. We cannot and should not do that in a democracy. No special
explanation is needed for this. No one can move around under these laws as
they tightly control all. In fact, it is even hard to say that they are
laws.

But even though we will not contest the election, the statement we issued
said that the NLD had done as much it could under the circumstances
despite constant repression, that we will continue to work on behalf of
the people and, if possible, we will negotiate to find solutions through
dialogue.

Q: What is your opinion about the political parties that have decided to
contest the election? Do you think people can make the right choice if
they are allowed to cast their own votes?

A: I don't want to speak about that. People are mature enough. They know
the situation and are intelligent. They really want democracy and they
have knowledge related to democratic principles, so they will vote from
their hearts however they prefer. How can I say who should do what? If I
do, they [the regime] will say in newspapers that the NLD did not register
for the election and now is trying to ruin the election by persuading
people to vote, or not vote, against their will.

People are not stupid. They understand what is going on very well. So they
just need to use their intelligence and create the results they want.

Q: Has the democracy struggle just begun? Or did it start a long time ago?
How has the NLD been involved in the struggle?

A: I would say the democracy struggle started following the military coup
in 1962. The military rule of the current regime has lasted for more than
20 years. If you look at the period following the formation of the NLD and
before the 1990 election, many NLD leaders, including Aung San Suu Kyi and
me, were already in detention. The NLD, however, won a landslide victory
in the 1990 election because the rest of the NLD leaders and those who
remained outside detention continued their work peacefully.

Although the regime made many promises, in practice it prevented MP-elects
from performing their jobs and were often arrested. This is part of the
struggle too. And when the regime convened the National Convention,
participants felt pressure not to speak on behalf of the people because
they could be punished if they said something critical of the Convention.
So we decided to walk out of the Convention.

After Aung San Suu Kyi was released from house arrest, however, the NLD
tried to participate in the Convention once again. The NLD requested that
the Election Convening Commission allow the party to discuss its proposals
and pledged that if permitted to do so it would re-join the Convention.
The regime didn't even respond. That means it didn't need to care because
with arms and military might it could do whatever it wanted. Maybe it did
have arms and power but it didn't have people's support. Since the regime
was not serious and sincere, the NLD just couldn't join the Convention.

As you know, most of the NLD MP-elects were later incarcerated or put
under house arrest. The regime frequently pressured our members to resign
from the NLD and took down the party signboards. We were being seriously
repressed, and the party almost reached the point where it couldn't do
anything. Still, we continued.

After Aung San Suu Kyi and I were released from detention we made
organizing trips and tried to reopen our offices in different parts of the
country. Consequently, the regime became suspicious of our activities, and
finally they sent a mob to attack us in Depayin in May 2003.

Even though we were viciously assaulted, the NLD still looked for
opportunities to attend the National Convention. We asked the regime to
free political prisoners and allow us to open our offices. We also
requested dialogue to find solutions. None of our proposals were granted.
On the contrary, Aung San Suu Kyi and other NLD leaders, including myself,
were detained once again and the movements of other NLD members were
continuously restricted. If you think about it, the NLD has never been
able to work freely. It has always worked amid arrests, imprisonments and
repression since its inception. There are many NLD members still behind
bars today.

Q: You and Aung San Suu Kyi have worked together and been through the
Depayin massacre. Could you share your opinion of her?

A: Aung San Suu Kyi joined the democracy movement just to work for the
people and victory over the regime. She does not have any intentions other
than to participate in the movement. She doesn't want power and fame for
herself. She doesn't want that. Her father had worked for the freedom of
his country, and she wants to follow in her father's footsteps by bringing
freedom to her own people. She also wants to work for ethnic
nationalities. She is still engaged in the democracy struggle and will
never step back. She will continue. She has to.

Q: Please tell us about your younger days and how you became involved in
politics.

A: When I was young I wanted to go to college very much, as I wanted to be
a doctor, but my thoughts were driven a different direction when World War
II broke out. I joined the army after I finished high school. I was a
soldier for quite a while and I thought after the revolution I wouldn't
continue being in the army. Luckily, I was selected as an officer. Only
150 soldiers across the country were chosen as officers and I was one of
them.

The uprising in 1988 took place when I was about to begin studying for a
master's degree in law. I joined the democracy movement together with Aung
Shwe and others. Aung San Su Kyi appeared in the movement too. I like her
leadership. She is smart. I am a soldier, so I act like a soldier. But for
her, she is a well-rounded person and has vision. She wants to work for
freedom and democracy. She wants her people free from oppression. We
worked together then and still join hands today.