BurmaNet News, July 27, 2010

[Editor]

July 27, 2010 Issue #4008

INSIDE BURMA
DVB: Burma army torches Karen village
Mizzima News: Censorship rule puts electoral laws, constitution
off-limits, editors say
Mizzima News: USDP offering new roads for votes

ON THE BORDER
Bangkok Post: Burma border talks fail to end stand-off
Times of India: India, Myanmar sign 5 pacts

BUSINESS / TRADE
Irrawaddy: India hopes for benefits from welcoming Than Shwe
Times of India: India, Myanmar sign 5 pacts
DPA: Myanmar junta hands out road contracts to cronies

REGIONAL
AFP: India welcomes Myanmar military ruler with full honours

OPINION / OTHER
Irrawaddy: An open letter to Than Shwe – Bamagyi
DVB: Retaking power in Burma (Pt. 2) – Elliott Prasse-Freeman

____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

July 27, Democratic Voice of Burma
Burma army torches Karen village - Naw Noreen

More than 500 people are reportedly displaced in eastern Karen state’s
Hpapun township after their village came under artillery fire from the
State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) government’s army troops who
also burnt down most of the houses in the village.

Major Saw Kler Doh, spokesperson of the anti-government Karen National
Union’s (KNU) armed-wing Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) brigade-5
said Dutado village in Hpapun township was attacked and burnt down by
troops under SPDC Military Operations Command 10’s Tactical Operations
Command 2 on July 23.

He said the SPDC troops began their attack on the Dutado in the morning of
July 23 by firing artillery rounds into the village for more nearly four
hours.

“[The Burmese army troops] starting from around 10am in the morning began
pounding Dutado with artillery shells for nearly four hours, forcing the
villagers to flee into the jungle,” said Saw Kler Doh.

“The villagers fled their homes and couldn’t take anything with them apart
from the cloths they were wearing. They were about 540 people in the
village.”

“[The troops] entered the village around 3pm in the afternoon and burnt
down everything.”

Saw Kler Doh said the village’s school, a church and about 70 houses were
destroyed in the attack and the villagers were displaced in the jungle.
The Burmese army troops left the village on July 24 but reported to have
laid mines there to prevent the villagers from coming back.

“The army left the village in July 24’s afternoon. Some mines exploded in
the village after they left and everyone assumed it was them who planted
those mines. Now the villagers are afraid to go back to their homes,” he
said.

He added there was no casualties amongst the villagers but one KNLA medic
was killed when trying to assist villagers. Villagers were however facing
difficulties with food, shelter and health assistance as they were
displaced in the jungle. About 100 children in the village will also be
left with no education as their school was burnt down.

It is believed that the attack was an attempt to strike at the KNLA whose
lack of formal bases make it very difficult to strike at their
infrastructure, villages are thus seen as the support structure for the
group.

The internally displaced villagers are being provided with food aid by the
Committee for Internally Displaced Karen People which operates in the
region but in need of more assistance. Meanwhile, other civil society
groups in the region are preparing to donate food, clothing, blankets,
kitchen utensils and materials for shelter.

This attack came just as tensions were said to be on the rise between the
SPDC and the KNU’s rival Karen army the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army
(DKBA) over the Border Guard Force proposal.

Villagers who recently fled to Thai-Burmese border in fear of the clashes
were reported to be going back to their homes yesterday.

On July 25, about 500 people in Myawaddy township’s Wahmehta, Leh Wow,
Sonsemyaing and Thay Baw Bo villages fled their homes to Thai-Burma border
when tensions grew between the DKBA brigade 907 led by Major Na Khan Mwe,
who stayed defiant against Rangoon government’s Border Guard Force (BGF)
proposal, and the SPDC army.

The villagers were taking shelter in Phop Phra township in Thailand’s Tak
province on the advice of their village leaders. On the next day [Monday,
July 26], about 400 of those who fled, apart from some women and children,
began heading back into Burma after being informed by the village leaders
that it was safe to go back home.

According to a source close to the DKBA, the situation in Myawaddy was
calm after some officials from the SPDC army and the DKBA’s special
battalion 999 met with major Na Khan Mwe on Sunday evening when he
reportedly accepted the BGF plan but DVB could not independently confirm
this information.

____________________________________

July 27, Mizzima News
Censorship rule puts electoral laws, constitution off-limits, editors say

Chiang Mai  – The new regulation imposed by the junta’s censor board that
bars domestic journals from misquoting the constitution or electoral laws
has cowed journalists, who say they dare not write anything on the
subjects.

The July 20 directive issued by state censor, the Press Scrutiny and
Registration Board, which is administered by the Ministry of Information,
calls for “correct and complete quoting of the constitution, electoral
laws and its rules”. It also warns domestic journals that stern action
could include loss of publishing licences for breach of the directive.

“Publishers and editorial boards of the journals concerned are obliged to
take serious [care in] editorial works quoting the provisions mentioned in
Constitution of the Republic of Union of Myanmar [Burma], and in articles
and news reports with excerpts related to electoral laws and rules issued
by Union Election Commission,” the directive says.

“Any misquoting will be dealt with stern action up to revocation of
publishing licences,” the directive adds.

“The terms within the laws are incomprehensible to the general public so
we have to elaborate on them in our news reports and articles related to
the constitution and election matters,” a senior journalist from a weekly
journal told Mizzima. “Now it is impossible for us. Though we have to
explain these terms in good faith for our readers, it could now give us a
lot of trouble so we have started to avoid this subject.”

The directive follows the two-week suspension of The Voice journal after
its “Concept and Process” article on constitutional issues written by Aung
Htut appeared in issue 34, volume six.

The state censor had cleared the article after routine vetting but the
Supreme Court intervened over its alleged misquotation of constitutional
provisions, and the suspension followed.

“The laws are complicated in their subject matter, which make them
incomprehensible to the average reader,” a news journal editor said. “We
need to elaborate on the legal terms used 
 for readers’ convenience but
[with the new rule] this has become very difficult.”

Similarly the Supreme Court sent a protest note over the “Legal Issues”
section of the Flower News weekly journal in last week’s issue, forcing
the journal to drop the section and print a “correction”, an editor close
to the journal said.

Journals were also being required to announce their own suspension of
publication when ordered to do so by the censor board, which observers
said was a calculated pretence to say the matter had nothing to do with
the censors.

Journalists in Burma usually refer to the censors as the “Press
Kempeitai”, named after the Japanese secret police in Burma during the
Japanese occupation.

Former censor board director Major Tint Swe has been promoted to the post
of deputy director general and will soon be transferred to another
department under the Ministry of Information.

He was replaced in May by naval Lieutenant Colonel Myo Myint Maung, who
has tightened censorship on articles related to the election and electoral
laws, and on interviews, articles and news reports on some political party
leaders.

Also during his tenure the journals Envoy and Popular were suspended one
week for printing portraits of actresses in dresses allegedly in a manner
“counter to traditional Burmese culture”.

____________________________________

July 27, Mizzima News
USDP offering new roads for votes – Khai Suu

New Delhi – Furthering an ongoing trend, political parties aligned with
Burma’s military regime are continuing to try and secure votes for this
year’s forthcoming general election through the promise public works
projects.

usdp-logoThe junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) in
Dawpon Township of Rangoon Division has been seen trying to recruit party
members and win votes through the promise of newly paved roads, according
to local people.

USDP representatives are telling people the party will build and pave
roads in return for enlistment in the party and securing 15 favorable
votes in the upcoming polls.

“We have no problem to vote for them if they pave roads in our locality.
There are over ten roads in our ward. They told us they would pave at
least one main asphalt road in each area. They said they would build roads
first in the areas from which they have already received votes for their
party,” a local resident from Bo San Tun Ward said.

However, an official with the City Development Committee told Mizzima the
roads are to be built by the municipal committee in the name of the USDP.

According to City Development Committee budget figures received by
Mizzima, over 30 billion kyats (1 USD = 1,000 kyats) was appropriated for
the building and repairing of roads for this year, over 10 billion kyats
more than was allocated last year. The municipal committee built and
repaired over 200 roads during 2009.

usdp-flagMeanwhile, in some villages local authorities and USDP organizers
are forcibly recruiting new party members door-to-door, insisting people
sign the membership application and taking their photographs, a local
resident from Kyauktwinkone Ward in Pegu said.

“They threaten people by saying there will be no more coups if the USDP
wins. Otherwise, there will be more coups in future,” recounted one
individual of their personal experience.

USDP party organizers are also said to have taken advantage of the recent
outbreak of dengue fever in some localities, using the party’s involvement
in fever control and prevention work as a further recruitment ploy.

The USDA, Union Solidarity and Development Association, was the progenitor
of the USDP. It was dissolved on the 6th of this month, paving the way for
the USDP to assume a more politically active profile.

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

July 27, Bangkok Post
Burma border talks fail to end stand-off

Thailand and Burma will continue their talks on the reopening of the
border at Mae Sot on Friday after Burma refused to lift its ban on
cross-border traffic.

Deputy Commerce Minister Alongkorn Ponlaboot yesterday led a Thai
delegation of civil servants and business interests in a meeting with
Deputy Foreign Minister Muang Myint at Myawaddy opposite Mae Sot, Tak, to
try to break the deadlock over the border closure.

Burma closed its border checkpoint on July 18 in protest against the
building by Thailand of an embankment along the Moei River at Ban Tha At.

Burma says the embankment will affect the borderline. It has lodged nine
separate protests against the work.

Thailand initiated the talks yesterday in the hope of convincing Burma to
separate the embankment issue from trade between the two countries.

Burma insisted during the two-hour meeting it would keep the border
closed, Mr Alongkorn said.

The two countries will now table the issue before the Joint Boundary
Committee when it meets on Friday.

____________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

July 27, Irrawaddy
India hopes for benefits from welcoming Than Shwe – William Boot

Bangkok—Some analysts say India’s high profile welcome of Burma’s junta
leader, Snr-Gen Than Shwe, may be an unspoken endorsement of his military
regime’s plans to hold national elections, but New Delhi is also fishing
for benefits from the regime.

The Indian government, feting Than Shwe with top-level political and
commerce meetings this week, faces a number of concerns that put Burma
firmly on its agenda: the search for nearby energy sources, concerns about
Chinese hegemony, transport links eastward and, perhaps most of
importantly according to observers, rising rebel activity in India's
northeast states.

Despite attempts by Western governments to promote isolation of the
Burmese junta, New Delhi has been increasing its contacts. This follows a
period of Indian petulance after New Delhi’s disappointment at being
usurped by China for the chance to purchase the 200 billion cubic meters
of gas in Burma’s still-to-be-developed Shwe offshore field in the Bay of
Bengal.

Two Indian government-owned companies are part of the Shwe development
consortium, led by South Korea’s Daewoo International, and they had hoped
to acquire much of the gas for export to India.

“Bilateral trade with Burma in general is small fry stuff for a burgeoning
economy the size of India’s, but it’s more significant for the junta and
it might benefit India’s efforts to stop China from running away with more
Burmese gas,” said Collin Reynolds, an independent energy industries
consultant in Bangkok.

“Only two blocks of the Shwe field are being developed so far, and it’s
highly likely that much more gas will be found in that field,” Reynolds
said.

In addition, Reynolds said that recent reports that India is rapidly
becoming one of the biggest investors in Burma overlook the fact that most
of India's investment was committed a long time ago to the two-block Shwe
development project, whether or not it acquired the gas China is now
buying.

Through its state-owned energy firm Oil and Natural Gas Corporation and
sister firm GAIL, the Indian government has committed about US $1.3
billion to the Shwe development project, and also to the pipeline which
will carry gas from the coast to China’s Yunnan province.

Thus far, there are no guarantees that India will be able to buy gas from
any future discoveries, and despite Chinese inroads Thailand remains the
biggest buyer of Burma’s gas.

India’s other big project in Burma, a trade route to the coast via a river
flowing from the northeast Indian state of Mizoram, has been stalled for
two years. Efforts by India to develop hydroelectric dam systems in
western Burma to feed electricity to the northeast Indian states have also
largely stalled.

In addition, India’s Ministry of External Affairs admitted in May that
cash shortages and bureaucracy on both sides of the border had delayed an
agreement for Indian companies to dredge the River Kaladan to make it
navigable for bigger commercial vessels, and also to renovate the port of
Sittwe. The delay has pushed up costs by 40 percent to $134 million.

India is Burma’s biggest export market after Thailand, accounting for 17
percent of Burmese exports in the 2008-2009 financial year, but most of
those exports are agricultural produce such as beans and pulses, said
Australian economist Sean Turnell, who produces the Burma Economic Watch
at Macquarie University in Sydney, in a study of Burma’s economy.

Conversely, Burma’s imports from India are insignificant, whereas China is
the biggest single source of Burma's imports at more than 30 percent of
the annual total.

“While commercial interests are doubtless playing an important part in
India’s closer ties with the junta, I would say that growing border
security concerns are at least as important at present,” said an official
with a European Union embassy in Bangkok, speaking on condition of
anonymity.

“India and Burma are close to signing an agreement to cooperate in trying
to cut off the sources of money that funds separatist rebels operating in
India’s northeast states,” the official told The Irrawaddy this week.
“Those sources include drugs and weapons and extortion.”

India’s porous border with Burma is over 1,500 kilometers long and allows
rebels to cross in and out of the Indian states of Manipur, Nagaland and
Mizoram.

Another South Asia analyst, Marie Lall of Chatham House, a London-based
think tank, concurs that the strengthening insurgency movement in India’s
northeast region, which has become more violent in the last 18 months, is
at the heart of New Delhi’s growing engagement with the Burmese junta.

The price of winning the junta’s active support in combating rebels may
not be very expensive economically—Than Shwe is reportedly keen on Indian
know-how in developing Burma’s nascent information technology town of
Yadanabon, near the new capital Naypyidaw. But it could prove costly in
political terms.

____________________________________

July 27, The Times of India
India, Myanmar sign 5 pacts

New Delhi: India on Tuesday signed a clutch of pacts with energy-rich
Myanmar to boost cooperation across wide areas, including
counter-terrorism.

The two countries signed five pacts after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
held talks with visiting Myanmar's military ruler, General Than Shwe, on a
wide range of issues, including counter-terror cooperation, enhanced
energy ties and collaboration in a string of developmental projects.

Among the pacts signed was a treaty on mutual legal assistance in criminal
matters that will be crucial in enabling India get access to insurgents
from India's northeast states who continue to shelter along the sprawling
1,650-km India-Myanmar border.

The treaty aims at deepening bilateral cooperation in combating
transnational organized crime, terrorism, drug trafficking, money
laundering and smuggling of arms and explosives.

Increased collaboration for developing cross-border connectivity and
infrastructure development figured prominently in the discussions.

The two sides also signed pacts in areas of small development projects,
science and technology and information cooperation.

A memorandum of understanding on Indian assistance in restoring the Ananda
temple in Bagan, a renowned Buddhist shrine and a major tourist site in
central Myanmar, was also inked.

Against the backdrop of China's growing clout in Myanmar, India has rolled
out the red carpet to welcome Than Shwe, who began his five-day visit to
the country Sunday by offering prayers at the Mahabodhi temple at Bodh
Gaya in Bihar.

Than Shwe, who heads State Peace and Development Council, as the junta
calls itself, was accorded a ceremonial welcome at the forecourt of the
Rashtrapati Bhavan on Tuesday morning.

He met Vice President Hamid Ansari, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna
and Leader of the Opposition Sushma Sawraj before sitting down for talks
with the prime minister.

____________________________________

July 27, Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Myanmar junta hands out road contracts to cronies

Yangon - Myanmar's junta awarded road construction contracts to six
private business groups with close ties to the military.

Construction Minister Khin Maung Myint presided over a signing ceremony
for contracts with private firms Asia World, Shwe Thanlwin, Firm
Destination Construction, Hilly Regions Construction, Shwetaung and
Myatnoethu, the New Light of Myanmar reported Tuesday.

Asia World, which won a contract to build a 182-kilometre highway between
Yangon and Pathein, is run by Steven Law, son of former drug lord Lo Hieng
Han who is on a 2008 US government list of Myanmar businessmen targeted by
sanctions.

Asia World is Myanmar's biggest, most diversified conglomerate. It has won
contracts to build highways in the Shan State and to renovate and operate
Yangon International Airport.

Myanmar's junta has in recent months been selling public assets and
handing out lucrative infrastructure contracts to private firms in what
observers say is a lead-up to the general election planned some time this
year.

The election is expected to see many military men change their uniforms
for business suits as they contest the polls.

____________________________________
REGIONAL

July 27, Agence France Presse
India welcomes Myanmar military ruler with full honours

Myanmar's reclusive military ruler Than Shwe received a red-carpet welcome
in New Delhi Tuesday as he began the formal leg of a state visit to India
amid protests and criticism from rights groups.

The general was accorded a full ceremonial welcome at the presidential
palace, although the traditional guard of honour was missing as rain
forced the event indoors.

Than Shwe, 77, met Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna and was scheduled
to hold talks later Tuesday with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The junta chief, who oversaw the ruthless suppression of pro-democracy
protests led by Myanmar's monks in 2007, also laid a wreath at the
mausoleum to India's independence hero and global icon of non-violence,
Mahatma Gandhi.

Human rights groups have condemned India's decision to bestow the
legitimacy of a full state visit on Than Shwe, who is regarded as a pariah
by many Western nations which have targeted his regime with sanctions.

Once a staunch supporter of Myanmar's democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi,
India began engaging the junta in the mid-1990s as security, energy and
strategic priorities began to override concerns over democracy and human
rights.

As well as needing the military regime's help to counter ethnic
separatists operating along their common border, India is eyeing oil and
gas fields in Myanmar -- formerly Burma -- and fears losing out to China
in the race for strategic influence in Asia.

China is the junta's key ally and trading partner, and an eager investor
in the isolated state's sizeable natural resources.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited Myanmar last month and signed a raft of
deals on trade, finance, energy, science and technology.

New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) said India had "mortgaged" its
voice on human rights issues to realpolitik, and called on Singh to speak
out against abuses in Myanmar.

"Singh should make a point to publicly voice principled criticism over the
rigging of Burma's electoral laws and continued restrictions on basic
freedoms in Burma," said Elaine Pearson, HRW's Asia director.

Than Shwe's visit prompted protests from pro-democracy Myanmar
demonstrators in New Delhi on Monday, who shouted slogans and carried
posters that labelled the leader "a murderer of innocent people" and a
military dictator.

The junta, which has ruled with an iron fist for nearly 50 years, has
promised to hold Myanmar's first elections since 1990 later this year.

Western nations have dismissed the proposed poll as a sham, and Aung San
Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy is boycotting the ballot.

Keen to obtain international legitimacy for the vote, Shwe is expected to
seek India's endorsement of the poll during his visit.

The International Federation for Human Rights, which represents 164
organisations across the world, has described India's hosting of Than Shwe
as an act "unbecoming of the world's largest democracy".

India is Myanmar's fourth largest trading partner after Thailand, China,
and Singapore, and a major investor in the country's burgeoning energy
sector.

Two state-owned Indian firms are partners in a consortium working to
extract natural gas from major deposits located off the coast of Arakan
state in western Myanmar.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

July 27, Irrawaddy
An open letter to Than Shwe – Bamagyi

Dear Snr-Gen:

I write this letter to highlight the fact that our country needs a break.

The current situation in Burma is very similar to what happened in 1988.
At that time, Gen Ne Win was in charge and controlled everything. If he
had wished, our country could have adopted a democratic form of government
and we could have talked about making progress and rejoining the
international community. And when we heard Ne Win's speech to the party
congress, we genuinely hoped that Burma was heading for a change. But our
hopes were dashed when he half-heartedly resorted to the continuation of
military rule.

Today, you are in total charge of Burma and can change the direction of
the country anytime you like, just like Ne Win could have done in 1988.
But after calling for an election that will result in a new government
formed under an unconvincing Constitution, you are heading for a disaster.

We want you to understand the present situation, dear Snr-Gen, because you
are the only person who can turn our country in the right direction. And
to help you understand, I would like to review what you have done to Burma
during your watch.

Right after the military takeover in 1988, many cabinet ministers, such as
Lt-Gen Tun Kyi and Lt-Gen Kyaw Ba, were openly corrupt. They took bribes
in full public view, never trying to hide what they were doing. We hoped
that when you became junta chief, you would clean up the mess. But rather
than wiping out corruption, people were amazed to see that you and your
family were more corrupt than the former ministers.

What previous generals had done was child's play compared to how your
family used your position to make money. You even organized a grand
wedding ceremony for your daughter and collected contributions from your
subordinates, knowing full well that the money you collected was either
stolen or ill-gotten.

In April 2003, the banks in Burma collapsed under your watch. At that
time, your government was colluding with reported drug warlords like Khun
Sa and Lo Hsing Han, and their dirty money was flowing through government
approved banks. The Burmese currency could not be used outside of Burma
and the exchange rate was unreasonable. Finally, the banks had no money to
issue to their customers—a clear warning to you that things were not
right. You could have taken the advice of experts and fixed the problem,
but you ignored the situation until it was too late.

Also in 2003, you ordered your thugs to attack Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and
her party while they were touring upper Burma. You assigned Gen Soe Win to
supervise the attack and later promoted him to be your Prime Minister.
This state sponsored massacre could not have happened without your direct
orders.

In 2007, When Buddhist monks were attacked by Union Solidarity and
Development Association members in Pakkoku, you should have asked your
religious minister to go and apologize. This might have prevented the
uprising that became the Saffron Revolution, but instead of choosing the
obvious peaceful solution, you ordered your troops to shoot into the
crowd, killing scores of people including a Japanese journalist.

Then in 2008, when Cyclone Nargis hit Burma and tens of thousands of
people died, you were nowhere to be seen. You did not have the ability to
help the victims yourself, but still prevented the outside world from
helping when they were ready and willing to do so. And when you finally
relented to the pressure of the UN Secretary General and allowed foreign
assistance, your army personnel misappropriated funds and merchandise.

People were still mourning their dead from Nargis when you went ahead with
your rigged constitutional referendum designed to prolong military rule.
The whole world could see that you were lying when you said the people
approved the 2008 Constitution by an overwhelming margin.

You then suddenly ordered the capital moved from from Rangoon to
Nyapyidaw. Many people are still puzzled why you did this, and no
explanation has ever been forthcoming, other than you followed the advice
of astrologers. We would understand if you moved the  military
headquarters and your own residence, but moving the civil administration
has caused many people to suffer unnecessary hardships.

When newly elected US President Obama invited your regime to enter into
discussions and become a transparent state, you ignored the invitation
because you believe you have China to protect your hold on power. But
China protects all rogue states in the world— North Korea, Sudan and
Zimbabwe to name a few—and now you are beholden to China. Just the other
day, a friend of mine from Rangoon said some people are now calling our
country the province of Burma under the Union of China. My heart sank when
I heard this.

The latest fiasco is the revelations by one of your former army officers,
Sai Thein Win, who defected and disclosed information about your secret
nuclear bomb program. He charged that you are wasting valuable money on a
hopeless project while the whole country suffers in poverty.

You should be able to use the money from natural gas sales to light up
Burma—you simply need to invite a few companies from abroad to overhaul
the electrical grid to furnish power throughout the country. But instead
of alleviating the hardship of your citizens, you use the money to
strengthen the military.

You knew well why we broke diplomatic relations with North Korea, but
chose to forget the fact that North Korean agents bombed Rangoon in 1983
during South Korean President Chun Doo Hwan’s visit. You think you can
emulate their style and become untouchable in the region, but General Ne
Win would turn over in his grave if he knew you sent Gen Shwe Man to North
Korea and tried to copy their dirty warfare program by building tunnels
and and a nuclear bomb.

You're now aware that your right hand man, Science minister U Thaung, is
cheating you by persuading you that your regime can build a bomb very
soon. But William Kelly, after going through all the data Sai Thein Win
provided, said that you are nowhere near obtaining a nuclear weapon. You
should have instantly fired the cheat from your cabinet.

Under your watch, Burma is in terrible economic shape. The economy is
dominated by the family members of your cabinet, and all lucrative
projects are shared between your army officers. Your minister U Aung
Thaung, for instance, has at least 15 luxury cars in his home. Without
paying bribe money a person can do nothing in Burma, but we do not see any
effort on your part to fight corruption. You turn a blind eye while your
subordinates rob the country’s wealth.

So all things considered, the country is one-hundred times worse off now
than under Gen Ne Win. Even though Ne Win wanted to build a democratic
state, he had no resources in hand in 1988 because he wiped out all
opposition and there was nobody to take over when he left the stage. But
this is where your situation is different. Burma’s political scene is
ready for democracy, we just need a positive signal from you.

You should team up with Vice Snr-Gen Maung Aye and invite Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi, U Tin Oo, U Win Tin and other democracy leaders to sit down and talk.
If you do so, you will realize why our country needs a break from the past
right now, and you will not only solve the problems at hand, but your
future will be safe as well. You could easily negotiate a deal with
democracy leaders, and as a Buddhist you could then devote your time to
religion.

Nobody wants to die a villain. But if you hold onto power with your dirty
techniques, you will be remembered as a shameful soldier. The Burmese
people have beautiful hearts, however, and if you do the right thing now,
whatever your mistakes were in the past, they will forgive and forget and
you will be remembered as their hero.

This is your opportunity to act and give our nation a much needed break.

____________________________________

July 27, Democratic Voice of Burma
Retaking power in Burma (Pt. 2) – Elliott Prasse-Freeman

Part I demonstrated how in Burma peripheral state agents engage in fragile
bargains with local societies, resulting in space at the margins for civil
society activity. Juxtaposed with this somewhat optimistic reading, we
also saw how these bargains only hold because ordinary Burmese have been
trained to be silent – and thus civil society space is not capitalized
upon to impel political changes. This is largely a result of despotic
power deployed by the military-state aggressively dominating the political
realm, foreclosing on political organizing and preventing mass political
consciousness from developing.

But can the upcoming elections alter the existing stasis? They can be a
necessary first step. Social and political evolution may begin in Burma
through a cyclical three-part process, each led by what can be referred to
as ‘political opposition’, ‘grassroots civil society’, and ‘elite civil
society’ leaders. The process involves first structuring an alternative
political discourse that breaks from ‘traditional’ politics and which
centres around socioeconomic idioms, and from which opposition forces will
begin to build a collective political consciousness.

Second, grassroots civil society can also begin to make gentle demands on
the state for better governance. It is critical that these demands come
from multiple sites, and essential that the state sees them. If these
demands emerge from thousands of different places, through multiple
different idioms (Buddhist, human security, moral, pragmatic, and so on),
the state may not see the gentle demands as out of the ordinary, but
rather as symptomatic of systemic problems in Burma. This can undermine
the current equilibrium, and force the state to act on them.

Finally, because the demands are gentle, they are unlikely to precipitate
a crisis, but rather may produce moments of compromise as the regime seeks
a new balance to ensure stability. At this point advocates in civil
society at the elite level (Third Force, the UN, etc) who have been
articulating technical-administrative policy solutions will become
indispensible to the state. New bargains will allow the state to manoeuvre
while maintaining stability, and will improve conditions for the
grassroots. At this point the cycle either begins again, or stops. The
point is that it’s the demands which constitute the mechanism for change,
and the demands can begin through these elections.

For instance, the very existence of the election gives some civil society
organizations an opportunity to broach politics carefully. Take the
example at the top of an NGO holding civic education. When authorities
inquired about the content of the sessions, NGO members replied that it
was their responsibility to educate the people about the upcoming
elections, elections the authorities themselves after all endorse. The NGO
also invited authorities to participate and share their thoughts,
remaining true to their word of including everyone, and further defusing
any suspicion on the part of the state.

We see here how the NGO is not fixated on whether the elections themselves
will change things. Instead it has used the process to evolve the programs
it can run. The elections are providing cover for the building of
political muscles at the grassroots. And while most organizations will
likely not have the skills or the wherewithal to be as active as the NGO
mentioned here, they will still act as conduits for disseminating
information that emerges from specific political campaigns.

Therefore, it is imperative that there is something meaningful to
disseminate – political parties must get their messages to the people. The
recently announced Election Law banning mass rallies need not cause
democrats to abandon the responsibility of campaigning in other ways, of
taking advantage of these civil society networks. For instance, in 1990
mass rallies were also constrained, and yet the people learned enough
about the NLD’s message to reward it with a majority of votes.

Today, the internet, satellite radio, and an explosion of uncaptured media
(see here and here) can be added to the list of information dissemination
opportunities. These are not as essential as the classic ‘word-of-mouth’,
which will enjoy more freedom than usual given that politics are not
officially outlawed during this period around the election. More
importantly, because the complexities of power in Burma are not lost on
the millions who live there, people will continue to navigate them,
knowing when and in what context they can share their opinions about what
is occurring.

Word-of-mouth will allow people to learn what those campaigning cannot
tell them explicitly. While it will not contain the kind of detail
necessary for robust democracy (a citizen will not be able to pore over
the specifics of a proposed platform), nor can it act as an assault on the
regime’s lies and misdeeds (it won’t draw out the connections between
regime policy and the daily miseries, showing where state propaganda stops
and reality begins), word-of-mouth can communicate the general tenor of
what a given party stands for and what it opposes.

The official messages, on the other hand, can work mutually with the
hidden, acting as the concrete description of what opposing parties would
do differently if given the opportunity to govern. As I have argued
elsewhere, the critical questions thus surround the content of the
political information communicated: will opposition parties design
platforms, plans, and policies that will resonate with the average Burmese
person? Will opposition groups not participating use the space around the
election to communicate what they stand for, what they would do
differently if they were given governing responsibilities?

These questions, rather than questions about procedural fairness, should
dominate the discussion. We know the regime will do everything in its
power to tilt the hand towards the status quo. And while energies can be
directed at making these tactics known, these injustices should not become
an obsession that removes focus from the real issues inside: reaching out
to people, evincing their needs and desires, and turning them into
political demands of whatever new regime takes power in 2010. Ultimately,
the elections are just the first step in a larger process of inciting
civil society to get back involved in the political conversation. If the
elections are the destination, then they are a dead end. But if they are
seen as the point of departure, toward getting average people to put
pressure on the state, they may be the first step in a process of change.