BurmaNet News, December 16, 2010

[Editor]

December 16, 2010 Issue #4105


INSIDE BURMA
Irrawaddy: Min Ko Naing in poor health as temperatures drop
Mizzima: Prepare for battle, with better weapons, junta tells militias
DVB: Victim of land confiscation facing jail

BUSINESS / TRADE
Bangkok Post: More than 3,000 teak logs seized in sting operation
Irrawaddy: Burma's eight-month international trade value hits $8.8 billion

INTERNATIONAL
Japan Times: Myanmar families take first steps
Japan Times: Critics slam settlement program's lack of vision

OPINION / OTHER
Foreign Policy: Out of house arrest, into the fire – Steve Finch
Guardian (UK): Technology lets us peer inside the Burmese cage, but not
unlock its door – Timothy Garton Ash
Huffington Post (US): Bloggers under fire! – William Fisher





____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

December 16, Irrawaddy
Min Ko Naing in poor health as temperatures drop – Saw Yan Naing

Min Ko Naing, a well-known activist and leader of the 88 Generation
Student group, is in greater pain due to cold temperatures in Kengtung,
where he is serving a 65-year prison sentence in a remote township in
eastern Shan State that is one of the coldest places in the country at
this time of year.

Suffering from osteoporosis, a disease weakening the bones that is
exacerbated by poor diet and lack of exercise, he is experiencing pains in
his arms, hands and legs.

Political and other prisoners in Burma commonly suffer from health
problems due to poor diet and the lack of  proper medical care and staff
in Burma's prisons. Min Ko Naing has previously suffered from eye disease
and hypertension (high blood pressure) while in jail.

Speaking with The Irrawaddy on Thursday, Min Ko Naing's sister Kyi Kyi
Nyunt said, “It is like living in a freezer there and he can't do much
physical exercise to warm himself up, so his legs and hands are painful.”

Min Ko Naing is only allowed to meet with family members one time every
three months. His sister's last visit was in October and the next visit
will not be until January.

“We worry about his health as the Kengtung area is now very cold and he
isn't given enough time for walking or physical activities,” said Tate
Naing, secretary of the Thailand-based Assistance Association for
Political Prisoners (AAPP).

Min Ko Naing is only allowed one hour a day for walking. However, he is
allowed to read some journals and religious books in the prison.

Min Ko Naing was arrested in August 2007, along with more than a dozen
other members of the 88 Generation Students group, after leading
demonstrations against steeply rising prices. The demonstrations preceded
massive protests the following month, which were brutally suppressed by
the regime.

Min Ko Naing and his colleagues Ant Bwe Kyaw, Hla Myo Naung, Htay Kywe, Ko
Ko Gyi, Kyaw Min Yu and Phyoe Cho of the 88 Generation Students group were
sentenced to 65-year jail terms for their participation in the non-violent
protests in 2007.

Tate Naing also said female activist Nilar Thein, a mother and member of
the 88 Generation Student group who is being detained in Thayet prison in
Magwe Division, is also in poor health due to a peptic ulcer.
____________________________________

December 16, Mizzima News
Prepare for battle, with better weapons, junta tells militias – Jai Wan Mai

Chiang Mai – Burmese Army officers promised better weapons including heavy
arms to around 200 junta-led militia leaders in Tangyan Township in Shan
State’s north after calling them to a meeting early this week, a militia
source said.

People’s militias and Border Forces Directorate chief Major General Maung
Maung Ohn, told them to increase their combat readiness, the militia
source said.

Maung Maung Ohn praised the co-operation and loyalty of the militias and
promised to supply more weapons to, he said, maintain stability and peace
in the area. Heavy weapons would also be provided he said.

He urged participants to closely monitor troop movements of the Shan State
Army-North (SSA-N) and the United Wa State Army (UWSA), a pair of the
armed ethnic groups that have rejected the Burmese generals plan that they
transform into Border Guard Forces (BGF) or state militia under junta
command.

Around 1,500 militia soldiers have lined up in Tangyan along the frontiers
of territories held by SSA-N Brigade 1 and the UWSA.

Among the meeting participants, Bo Moon and Ja Htaw, who were believed to
head the two strongest militia, were also present, the source said.

Bo Moon is an adopted son of notorious Golden Triangle drugs kingpin Khun
Sa, who surrendered to Burmese authorities in 1996. The son gained the
full support of the Burmese Army after he joined Burmese troops in halting
the advance of SSA-S troops towards the north of Shan State between 1999
and 2000.

He is allegedly involved in the drug trade, under the protection of a
reputed force of 800 armed men. The group is sometimes known as the Wan
Pang militia.

Meanwhile, Ja Htaw, of Lahu ethnicity, had about 250 men but only 150 were
armed, a Shan State source said.

One military analyst said: “The Burmese regime has been successful in
using the ‘divide and rule’ strategy to [thwart] the opposition groups.
The break-up of the Karen struggle by using the DKBA against KNU, the
collapse of the Mong Tai Army, the Kachin, Mon and Pa-O were obvious
examples. The Burmese Army will not hesitate to use other groups to attack
its main rivals.”

He was referring to the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army and its rivals
since 1994, the Karen National Union. He predicted: “Militia groups would
be used on front lines in case a bigger confrontation between the opposing
groups and the Burmese Army takes place.”

A Lahu man in Chiang Mai said: “The Lahu people were both recruited into
the UWSA or the Burmese Army 
 we don’t want our people to be used as
pawns.”

He confirmed that some of the Lahu militia leaders had gained business
concessions for co-operating with the Burmese Army but that many Lahu
people were still poor.

A trader in Mae Sai gave his thoughts on why local merchants had moved
their  allegiance to the junta-led militias.

“Many businessmen have changed their business partners from within
ceasefire groups to those of militia groups because they have more power
than the ceasefire groups,” the trader said. “Some of the businesses are
illegal”.

He added that the Burmese Army had applied increasing pressure in various
forms on the National Democratic Alliance Army (NDAA), aka the Mongla
group, and the UWSA, to transform into BGFs. Currently, Burmese officials
had also stopped goods entering the NDAA-controlled area through the
Taping border checkpoint.

____________________________________

December 16, Democratic Voice of Burma
Victim of land confiscation facing jail – Naw Noreen

A farmer whose land and property was confiscated and destroyed by Rangoon
authorities faces a possible jail term after being charged with
trespassing.

Zaw Weik had initially refused to leave his Tagondai village land when
approached in 2008 by two fish farmers, Aung Shein and Khin Myint, who
were accompanied by local authorities. He claims they then destroyed his
two houses and farmland in two separate incidents, in 2009 and January
2010.

He added that his bean crops were razed whilst he was attending a court
hearing in March this year.

Rangoon division authorities are attempting to sue Zaw Weik on charges of
trespassing that stem from his refusal to leave the land. He claims also
that the death of his son earlier this year was linked to the case.

“My younger son took photos of the people destroying our house and the
crops and he was assassinated on 10 June [2010] under the guise of an
accident when a motorbike crushed into a shop stall,” Zaw Weik said.

“They are hiding the truth of the assassination. Our reports on the two
incidents were barely read and absolutely no action was taken.” He added
that both sides in the trial have finished presenting arguments and a
verdict is due to be heard next week.

Land confiscation by authorities in Burma is rife. The majority of cases
involve land been taken for infrastructure projects, although numerous
cases of farmland being forcibly converted to grow specific crops abound.

Only the UN’s International Labour Organisation (ILO) is officially
mandated to deal with cases of land confiscation, although groups such as
Guiding Star, run by lawyer Aye Myint, handle complaints.

____________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

December 16, Bangkok Post
More than 3,000 teak logs seized in sting operation

Chiang Mai: Authorities have confiscated more than 3,000 teak logs
estimated to be worth more than 200 million baht and believed to have been
smuggled into Thailand from Burma.

A joint operation between the Department of Special Investigation, Customs
Department and Royal Forestry Department raided two sawmills owned by
Suksawat Group Co yesterday and seized the logs.

The operation was carried out following a complaint from Justice Minister
Pirapan Salirathavibhaga that a company had imported teak wood illegally
from Burma through Mae Hong Son.

DSI deputy chief Narat Savetnant alleged Anton Co had falsely declared the
confiscated logs to the Customs Office in Mae Hong Son as sawn timber
using 57 documents that claimed the imports had been approved by Burmese
officials.

The import documents were later found to be counterfeit, Mr Narat said.

The crackdown has raised questions over whether local officials
responsible for approving the import of the confiscated wood were aware of
the company's activities.

No charges have been made against officials but they will face an inquiry
to determine if they had anything to do with the illegal wood imports and
whether they should take responsibility, Mr Narat said.

The DSI unit which investigates special criminal cases in the North has
been looking into the case since February. It had learned by September
that Anton Co had imported sawn teak from Burma under suspicious
circumstances.

The company owner was charged by the DSI with violating regulations on the
import of sawn timber.

Anton Co said last month it was considering suing the Forestry Department
for refusing to renew its licence to transport teak logs from Burma
through Salawin National Park in Mae Hong Son.

Phichet Lertlum-umphaiwong, the company's deputy managing director, said
its permission to transport teak expired a month ago and the department
had refused to renew it, even though it had previously been renewed on a
yearly basis.

Natural Resources and Environment Minister Suwit Khunkitti claimed at the
time that the company did not have an export licence from Burma and no
source-of-origin documents to prove where the logs came from. Anton Co
insisted legal documents were issued by Myanmar Timber Enterprise, the
government-owned corporation and sole extractor of timber in Burma.
____________________________________

December 16, Irrawaddy
Burma's eight-month international trade value hits $8.8 billion – Wai Moe

Driven by a sell-off of natural resources, the value of Burma’s exports
hit US $5.5 billion for the past eight months, while the total value of
its international trade was $8.8 billion, according to the junta’s
Ministry of Commerce. Burmese economic observers predicted, however, that
the import-export revenues would not directly benefit most Burmese people.

Citing Ministry of Commerce statistics, 7 Day News Journal, a Rangoon
weekly journal, reported on Thursday that during the period from April 1
to December 7 of Burma's 2010-11 fiscal year, Burma exported goods valued
at $ 5.5 billion and imported goods valued at $3.3 billion.

A ministry official told 7 Day News Journal that most of Burma's export
revenue came from selling natural gas, followed by jade, to Asian
countries. These goods were delivered by sea and road.

Burma’s export earnings from natural gas during the eight-month period
were estimated to be $4 billion and Jade exports delivered by sea during
the eight-month period hit US $1.1 billion, excluding jade sold at the
Naypyidaw gems fair in November.

Burmese beans were the third most significant export, valued at over $520
million, while teak wood exports reached $180 million.

Burma's biggest trading partners for the eight-month period were Thailand,
Singapore and China-Hong Kong.

Trade with Thailand was valued at over $2 billion, with Singapore $1.1
billion and with China-Hong Kong $ 900 million.

The Ministry of Commerce statistics also showed that Burma’s trading value
in each of the 2009-10 and 2008-09 fiscal years exceeded $11 billion.

Although the Burmese military regime has earned billions of dollars from
exporting natural gas to Thailand, economic observers said they are
skeptical that the Burmese people's incomes and quality of life would
improve as a result.

“It is easy to get money from selling the country’s natural resources,”
said a Burmese economist in Rangoon who spoke on condition of anonymity.
“But those natural resources will not come back, and so the question is
how to use the money for the country’s development such as in the health
and education sectors—how to bring resources from underground to
development above ground.”

He added that for the past 22 years, no independent researcher has had
access Burmese government expenditures, which are not publicly disclosed.

While junta officials often claim they are “looking beyond 2010” and there
will be more economic opportunities following the election held on Nov. 7,
Burmese experts said the country's rate of development is still behind
where it stood prior to the 1962 military coup.

A Thailand-based Burmese economist, who also spoke on condition of
anonymity, said the billions of dollar Burma receives from its
import-export trade will not find its way into the hands of the nearly 50
million ordinary Burmese citizens, since there is no transparency and
accountability for how and where the money is spent and multiple billions
of dollars are likely spent on the junta’s military ambitions.

In addition, intelligence sources said that although Burma earns billions
US dollars by exporting natural gas, the money received is reportedly
transferred directly from foreign oil companies to the junta’s undercover
accounts at two Singaporean banks.

These accounts are reportedly controlled by ex Lt-Gen Tin Aye, who is
junta chief Snr-Gen Than Shwe’s most trusted revenue guardian.
Intelligence sources said Tin Aye is also in-charge of the junta’s missile
programs.

According to Burmese experts, the majority of Burmese are still living in
poverty and spending more than 70 percent of their income to purchase
food.

____________________________________
INTERNATIONAL

December 16, The Japan Times
Myanmar families take first steps – Masami Ito

The air was filled with hope and warmth as the five families from Myanmar
who are in Japan on the third-country resettlement program met with
visiting United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees chief Antonio
Guterres last month in Tokyo.

"This is the first group that resettles in Japan . . . and we all want
your integration in Japanese society to be a success," Guterres told the
families. "And when I look at your children, I hope that they will become
doctors or engineers, that they can really have a wonderful future in this
country."

Guterres, who had been a strong advocate for Japan to start the
resettlement program, was in Tokyo last month for the first time since the
families arrived from Thailand in September and October.

A total of 27 family members of ethnic Karen ranging from young children
to adults were selected by the Japanese government from the Mera refugee
camp at the Thailand-Myanmar border.

The Mera camp is the temporary home to 50,000 refugees, most of whom fled
Myanmar because of the armed conflict between the military junta and Karen
National Union rebels.

"You have suffered a lot . . . and I know how difficult it has been for
all of you. The conditions of the camp were also not so good and I hope
that finally you will find a new home," Guterres said.

Since their arrival, the families — including the children — have been
undergoing intensive training to learn the Japanese language and
daily-life skills like using electronic goods and flush toilets. The
training, which ends next spring, has kept the families extremely busy
getting ready for their new lives in Japan.

One of the fathers spoke on behalf of the five families, expressing their
gratitude to the government.

"We are truly grateful for being welcomed to Japan and we would like to
express our appreciation to the Japanese government for its various
support, including the resettlement training program," he said.

____________________________________

December 16, The Japan Times
Critics slam settlement program's lack of vision – Setsuko Kamiya

Lawyers, asylum-seekers say government project must be opened to local aid
groups.

Lawyers and supporters of asylum-seekers in Japan have cast a critical eye
on the start of the government's third-country refugee resettlement
program.

They claim that while the government is seemingly opening the country for
more refugees through the pilot program, the situation for individuals who
fled their countries directly seeking political asylum here continues to
be very harsh. Critics point to the lack of consistency in the
government's approach to the overall issue of allowing people to resettle
here.

Some say the government has put a wall around the program to keep out
other parties willing to help.

They have urged the government to allow them to participate in helping the
resettlers adjust to Japanese society. If the country really wants the
internationally watched project to succeed, they argue, this is necessary.

"It's very unclear what the government plans to do after the first three
years (of the trial resettlement)," said Shogo Watanabe, head of a lawyer
group working on behalf of asylum seekers. "We can't see a long-term,
comprehensive immigration policy coming."

Indeed, the differences between someone coming directly to Japan seeking
refugee status and those coming via a third country and various
negotiations, are obvious from the start.

The five ethnic Karen families who arrived this fall from a refugee camp
in Thailand near the Myanmar boarder are designated as refugees by the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees under the U.N. convention on
refugees. Under Japan's pilot program, 90 people from the camp will
resettle here over the three years.

An official at the Justice Ministry's Immigration Bureau said the families
have been allowed into the country because of their urgent need for
protection. But they have not been accorded refugee status by the justice
minister. Thus they will not be counted among recognized refugees or those
protected by the government through the conventional application process.
Instead, the families have been registered as long-term residents, the
official said.

Watanabe, who supports foreign nationals seeking political asylum in
Japan, said having the families from Myanmar here has had no positive
impact on the conventional process for individual asylum-seekers.

"Getting refugee status continues to be very tough," he said. "There is no
criteria, objectivity, or transparency in the screening process."

Only a handful are granted political asylum by the government. 2009 saw
1,388 foreigners come directly to Japan and apply for refugee status, but
only 30 were successful, including those who had filed applications at
earlier dates.

According to the Japan Association for Refugees, about 950 people have
already applied for asylum in the country this year as of the end of
November.

Typically, the screening process takes about two years, but during that
period, most applicants cannot receive financial support from the
government because of the limited budget. They are also not allowed to
work during that time.

The Justice Ministry announced in July it will speed up the screening
process to around six months, but some people are still left without any
means of support, according to JAR.

Asylum-seekers often have no choice but to rely on support from
compatriots or nonprofit aid groups, but because their numbers are
increasing, aid is becoming harder to come by, said JAR's Mihoko Kashima.

Even if one is granted refugee status here, the support to learn the
Japanese language, find jobs or places to live is a challenge for most,
Kashima said.

"Even after they are granted refugee status, there doesn't seem to be a
way for them to get on the upward spiral (to improve their life)," she
said. "If the government is serious about accepting more refugees, it
needs to create an environment where they feel they have opportunities."

The ethnic Karen families on the resettlement program are currently under
the responsibility of the Foreign Ministry and receiving six-month
Japanese language training and other tools necessary to help them settle
and begin working.

Kashima noted that in other countries where third-country resettlements
take place, it is common for governments to work with NPOs in the early
stages to create a consistent support system.

"We have yet to be approached," she said.

Because of the lack of transparency, Kashima said, it is unclear if the
programs provided to the refugees are sufficient, or what sort of followup
is being planned when the six months of preparation for life in the
country is over.

Apparently, it's not just the nonprofit aid organizations, but fellow
refugees themselves who have not been invited to help promote the new
program.

"The most important thing is the empowerment of the refugees," said Tin
Win, a refugee from Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, who was granted
political asylum in 1999 by the government. "But our fortune has been
decided without our participation. . . . many policymakers don't even know
what problems we have."

Tin Win, who heads the Federation of Workers' Union of the Burmese
Citizens in Japan, said he welcomes the Karen people from the camp in
Thailand. He said that while there are differences between them and
conventional refugees, it is more constructive for both groups to
cooperate and work toward their assimilation into Japanese society.

"In that way I think we can solidify the communities and work together and
promote our rights and our integration into Japanese society," he said.

To do so, it is also necessary for the government to provide equal
treatment to the two groups, he added.


>From experience, Tin Win said that acquiring language skills is important

for refugees, but just a few months of Japanese lessons are not enough —
there is a huge need for comprehensive followup.

Teaching the basics of life in Japan to newcomers — including societal
rules, the educational system, social insurance policy and workplace
behavior — is also necessary, said Tin Win, who now works at an auto parts
factory in Gunma Prefecture.

"We jump from a Third World country without the rule of law to a First
World country where there is a sophisticated system. Please understand
that it is new for us and difficult for us to understand," he said.

At the same time, Japanese society should also open up and appreciate
diversity and accept refugees as a part of society, he said. The fact that
refugees and other resettlers are marginalized is a problem because it
prevents the groups from communicating with Japanese people, Tin Win said.

"(Myanmar democracy icon) Aung San Suu Kyi always said diversity is not
weakness. It's power," he said.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

December 16, Foreign Policy
Out of house arrest, into the fire – Steve Finch

Aung San Suu Kyi's release is great news for the dissident and her
supporters -- but it's not going to mean anything for democracy in Burma.

Speaking after her release from more than seven years of house arrest in
Rangoon, Burmese dissident Aung San Suu Kyi said of her freedom, "We want
to use this as an opportunity [for democracy]." But she didn't explain how
that opportunity might best be exploited. Indeed, Aung San Suu Kyi has
been consistently vague about how Burma, the Southeast Asian pariah state
that first imprisoned her just before she won a free election in 1990, can
plausibly experience genuine political reform in the near future. Worse,
the West has seemed equally at a loss, especially since the Burmese
leadership engineered a sham election in which it returned to power in a
landslide. Aung San Suu Kyi seems intent on remaining hopeful, but
unfortunately, the international community seems little inclined to help
correct the injustices of Burma's political system.

The main problem remains stubbornly in place: lack of unity in the
international community. While the West talks of sanctions and punishment
to coerce the generals, China, Russia, and, to a lesser extent, India and
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) continue to prefer a
less confrontational approach. The result has been persistent failure both
to develop a strategy to secure the release of the regime's 2,200
political prisoners and to facilitate reconciliation between the regime
and Aung San Suu Kyi.

Mark Farmaner, director of Burma Campaign UK, warns that in the past, when
the regime has shown Aung San Suu Kyi a cold shoulder, the international
community has usually abandoned her as well. "There is a cycle that
happens in Burma, and it is in danger of happening again," he said, in
referring to the ruling junta's repeated refusal to respond to offers of
dialogue and compromise by Aung San Suu Kyi.

Despite the excitement over Aung San Suu Kyi's release, so far the cycle
seems ready to once again run its course. According to a Burma legal
source in Washington, the U.S. assistant secretary of state for East Asia
and Pacific affairs, Kurt Campbell, told Burmese groups in November that
the United States is taking a "wait-and-see" approach. President Barack
Obama's administration has for the moment decided not to further pursue a
U.N. commission of inquiry first recommended in March by Tomás Ojea
Quintana, the U.N. special rapporteur for human rights in Burma, that
would look into war crimes Burma's junta might have committed against its
own people, an approach shot down by China in particular ahead of the
election. The administration otherwise has no other plans to adjust
economic sanctions, said the source.

When asked directly, the State Department gave few specifics about its
plans. "U.S. Burma policy will continue to combine pressure and principled
engagement to promote a free and democratic Burma that respects human
rights, adheres to the rule of law, and fully complies with its
international obligations," said an official last month following the
release of Aung San Suu Kyi.

It's clear that the Obama administration has Burma in mind, even if its
official pronouncements are less reassuring. Among the first 200 or so
WikiLeaks diplomatic cable releases last week was one message from the
secretary of state's office dated July 31, 2009, classifying Burma as one
of eight "key continuing issues" for the United States together with Iraq
and the Middle East. Addressed to 36 U.S. missions, including those in the
capitals of the other four permanent members of the U.N. Security Council
-- Britain, China, France, and Russia -- the cable asked staff to collect
intelligence on U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's intentions regarding
Burma, how the world body planned to address the recent elections and
engage with the regime, and attitudes toward Burma among Security Council
members.

The memo suggests that Washington sees the United Nations as the most
viable arena in which to address Burma's democracy and human rights
problems. The Obama administration seems to have concluded that unilateral
actions, whether economic or military, stand little chance of success. But
the United Nations' track record in Burma is not good. All attempts to
discipline the junta, such as the recent efforts by Western countries to
pursue a U.N. commission of inquiry, have been held up by China and
Russia. Their unwillingness to chastise Burma has drained momentum from
the issue entirely, at least in the Security Council, which has not held a
session on Burma since July 2009 because of Chinese opposition. The
September 2006 decision to place the country on the Security Council's
formal agenda has largely been for naught.

China's government has held up progress in Burma outside the United
Nations as well. While the West, India, and even Singapore welcomed Aung
San Suu Kyi's Nov. 13 release as a positive step, China's Foreign Ministry
was ducking all questions regarding Beijing's stance on negotiations to
end her detention. Beijing has instead backed the junta line, welcoming
last month's much-criticized elections as a major step toward
democratization. Of the many diplomats who met with Aung San Suu Kyi the
morning after her release, Chinese Ambassador Ye Dabo was the most notable
absentee.

Indeed, China's priorities regarding Burma lie elsewhere. The Chinese
government has stated publicly that it sees Burma as a necessary
alternative transit route for energy that could bypass the congested
Strait of Malacca. China National Petroleum Corp. started building an
800-kilometer oil and gas pipeline from Burma's western coast up to Yunnan
province earlier this year.

Meanwhile, Burma's other major neighbor, India -- which also owns gas
interests in the country -- has shown hardly any more willingness to
antagonize the junta. Just a week before last month's elections, India
called the proposed U.N. commission of inquiry on Burma
"counterproductive," which prompted a sharp rebuke from Aung San Suu Kyi
herself shortly after her release. When Obama visited New Delhi shortly
after Burma's flawed vote, he accused India of shying away from
criticizing regimes like Burma, but that kind of pressure has had little
impact on Indian elites.

ASEAN, which includes Burma, remains divided on how to tackle the regime.
The Philippines, Indonesia, and Singapore have occasionally shown a
willingness to fall into line with the West, but Vietnam, Laos, and
Cambodia have generally sided with Beijing on this issue.

The sum total of all this is that the West has almost no allies when it
comes to Burma. Although Aung San Suu Kyi told journalists the day after
her release that "my message is not for the Western nations in
particular," her inability to engage other major players has weakened her
efforts.

But no matter how tough the situation diplomatically, it still behooves
the Obama administration to try to resolve it -- and it's unclear whether
Washington is willing to step into the breach. Although Congress mandated
for a special representative and policy coordinator on Burma two years
ago, this role has never been filled, and there has been no official
explanation for the holdup.

So where do Aung San Suu Kyi and the West go from here? Possibly, nowhere.

"We have to understand that the recent election and Aung San Suu Kyi's
release were not the beginning of the end of repression, or the first,
tangible step toward national reconciliation," says Burma specialist
Bertil Lintner. "There is no hope for 'reconciliation' or 'dialogue' in
Burma. Those popular catchphrases are based on wishful thinking." And, of
course, wishful thinking won't do much to bring real democracy to Burma
____________________________________

December 16, The Guardian (UK)
Technology lets us peer inside the Burmese cage, but not unlock its door –
Timothy Garton Ash

To talk via video link to Aung San Suu Kyi was inspiring. Yet liberation
is unlikely for Burma if its neighbours will not act

Guardian Comment Tim Garton Ash/Matt Kenyon 16/12/2010 Of the situation in
Burma, Aung San Suu Kyi says: "We have years of practice at talking and
getting no response." Illustration: Matt Kenyon for the Guardian

There is nothing to compare with being there. Failing that, get a
video-link. And suddenly here's Aung San Suu Kyi on a screen in front of
us, live from 54 University Avenue, Rangoon. She sits upright, composed,
elegant in a white blouse, and quietly amused, after more than seven years
of isolation, by the unfamiliar new technologies of long-distance
communication. "I'm very glad to be able to communicate with you," she
says, "that for me is great progress" - and the satellite link goes down.

Later, she is reconnected to the LSE lecture theatre, packed with students
and specialists, through a terrible phone connection. Half the time she
can't make out what we are asking, the other half we can't make out what
she is answering as her distorted voice booms from a loudspeaker. After a
student has tried several times with a slightly complicated question, Aung
San Suu Kyi says: "Just give me one keyword." "Multinational companies!"
we shout. "Investing in Burma!" She laughs, we laugh, at the almost
slapstick quality of the long-distance exchanges. "We have years of
practice at talking and getting no response," she comments at one point,
after thinking she had been cut off. Talking to the generals who are
ruining her country, that is.

I don't think any of those students will forget the day they were able to
put a question directly to Aung San Suu Kyi. For all the technical
difficulties, both her personality and her message shine through. The
message is resolute, but also conciliatory. She reiterates how she hopes
to work with, not against, the military authorities. So far as we can
acoustically decipher her answer, she gives a cautious welcome to the idea
of an international commission of inquiry into conditions inside Burma,
but emphasises that it must not be seen as "a trial of the generals".

After seven and a half years under house arrest, getting news of her own
country only from intensive listening to international radio broadcasts,
she clearly wants to take some time to get her bearings. Can she revive
her own emasculated National League for Democracy? Can she rejoin forces
with those who have fallen away from it or formed a new party in the
(vain) hope of gaining a significant number of seats in the recent
election? How about the Buddhist monks, who imparted such disciplined
energy to the peaceful protest movement in 2007? Not least: can she forge
ties with representatives of the ethnic minorities that comprise about a
third of the country's population? That is what her father, Aung San, did
in 1947, in the Panglong conference that helped pave the way for an
independent Burma. Now she tells us that she is hoping for a "second
Panglong".

Asked to identify her sources of inspiration, she says "in the first
place, my parents". Then she mentions Archbishop Desmond Tutu. Later, when
the conversation comes back to the idea of a truth and reconciliation
commission, like the one chaired by Tutu in South Africa, she reflects
that things are more complicated in Burma. "If only we were all black,"
she sometimes thinks to herself, then the ordinary Burmese and the ethnic
minorities would recognise that they are all, together, an oppressed
majority. As the Burma specialist Maung Zarni points out, in Burma's
version of apartheid it's the military who are the whites.

This is an inspiring conversation, across all the barriers placed in our
way. All my instincts are to frame it in a narrative of liberation –
gradual, often frustrated, but eventually triumphant. "For Freedom's
battle once begun 
 though baffled oft is ever won" – these great words of
the 19th century English poet Byron were pinned to a wooden cross outside
the Lenin Shipyard in Gdansk, at the birth of Poland's Solidarity movement
30 years ago. Now freedom's battle is being fought, and baffled, with the
weapons of the internet, the satellite and the mobile phone. Sometimes
these are described as "liberation technologies".

Tutu himself has an upbeat reflection on his own "wonderful" phone
conversation with Aung San Suu Kyi ("She constantly seemed to be on the
verge of bursting into laughter") earlier this month: "When I think back
to the situation in South Africa, I remember that there were many times
when it felt like we would never see freedom in our country, when those
who oppressed us seemed invincible. As I always say though: this is a
moral universe, injustice and oppression will lose out in the end."

A sober analysis, however, shows a constellation of forces in and around
Burma less favourable than those in South Africa, or Poland, or the
Philippines, or Chile, or the many other stories of eventually triumphant
self-liberation over the last three decades. This is not just because of
the weakness and divisions of the internal opposition movement, after
decades of brutal oppression and the regime's "divide and rule". That can
change, with time, hard work on the ground and inspired leadership.

Above all, it's because of the external context. Some readers will recall
that a month ago I asked on these pages whether the world's largest
democracy, India, could be more true to its own values when it came to its
small, suffering eastern neighbour. President Barack Obama, no less, posed
a similar question on his official visit to India. I gather that so far
the answer has been a resounding silence. India is barely prepared to talk
about the issue with the world's other leading democracies, let alone to
act differently. So long as Burma's Asian neighbours, including Thailand
and, of course, China, continue to behave in this way, putting their own
commercial and strategic interests before the lives of the long-suffering
peoples of Burma – and before their own long-term enlightened
self-interest in having a stable and prosperous neighbour – the Burmese
generals will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Burma is not the only example of such an unfavourable external setting.
Welcome to the post-western world. If this continues to be the case, the
internet, satellites and mobile phones will enable us to peer inside the
cage, but not to unlock its door. We may see the embattled friends of
freedom more clearly but will not necessarily be able to help them more
effectively. When Liu Xiaobo, this year's Nobel peace prize winner, is
finally released, we may have a chance to talk to him on a video link,
though at the moment even his wife's mobile phone is blocked. We can watch
the unjustly imprisoned Russian billionaire Mikhail Khodorkovsky behind
his bars. He remains locked up.

What we have here is a political version of the drama of the Chilean
miners. We saw them on video camera when still trapped underground, but if
their own self-help, and the physical drilling through the rock, had not
been successful, then that video link would merely have allowed us to
watch them die.

This is not a counsel of despair, just of realism. In Burma, as everywhere
else, communication technologies do not, of themselves, set anyone free.
People set people free.

____________________________________

December 16, Huffington Post (US)
Bloggers under fire! – William Fisher

Last April, writer and historian Barbara Goldsmith announced that Nay
Phone Latt was the winner of the 2010 PEN/Barbara Goldsmith "Freedom to
Write" award, which honors international literary figures who have been
persecuted or imprisoned for exercising or defending the right to freedom
of expression.

But Nay Phone Latt wasn't there to receive his award. Like Liu Xiaobo, the
Chinese dissident who last week received the Nobel Prize in absentia, the
prominent Burmese poet and human rights advocate was back home in his
native Mynamar, serving a 12-year sentence for distributing news and views
via his blog.

Nay Phone Latt was arrested on January 29, 2008, following the monks'
protests in Rangoon and elsewhere in the country

"He represents a younger generation of Burmese who are longing for freedom
and willing to pay the cost of speaking out in its defense," said Kwame
Anthony Appiah, president of PEN American Center.

"That he is a blogger reflects the global truth that Internet censorship
is one of the great threats to free expression today."

Nay Phone Latt's treatment is emblematic of a deadly virus sweeping across
the world and spreading its pathogens any place where an authoritarian,
totalitarian government holds power. These despots have quickly learned
the contemporary Internet social networking techniques used by their
subjects - and have moved in with a heavy hand to suppress these free
expressions.

Despite its faux non-military trappings, Mynamar certainly qualifies, but
then so do scores of other countries - most of them America's "allies" and
recipients of large sums of money and aid to help us wage "the global war
on terror."

The war on bloggers and other social networkers is probably fiercest in
the Middle East, but a host of other countries participate with similar
sinister gusto.

For example, in Iran, the world's youngest detained blogger, 18-year-old
Navid Mohebbi, is currently being tried behind closed doors before a
revolutionary court in the northern city of Amol.
His lawyer is not being allowed to attend the trial, which began on 14
November.

Mohebbi is facing the possibility of a long prison sentence, accused of
"activities contrary to national security" and "insulting the Islamic
Republic's founder and current leader...by means of foreign media." He has
also been accused of being member of the "One Million Signatures"
movement, a campaign to collect signatures to a petition for changes to
laws that discriminate against women.

Mohebbi is but one of many bloggers being persecuted in Iran. For example,
one Blogger was sentenced to 14 years in prison for membership in the
banned "One Million Signatures" campaign, which advocates for freedom and
equality for women.

He was also charged with acting against national security, propaganda
against the state through connection with foreign media, and insulting
Ayatollahs Ruhollah Khomeini and Ali Khamenei.

The list of writers, journalists, and bloggers currently in prison in Iran
includes some of Iran's most distinguished journalists, some of the
country's leading bloggers, and Kian Tajbakhsh, an Iranian-American
scholar and social planner who was sentenced in August 2009 to 15 years in
prison following a mass trial of 140 activists, intellectuals, and writers
accused of fomenting a "velvet revolution."

The Committee to Protect Journalists this month announced that the 47
journalists now in prison in Iran are more than any other country on earth
has imprisoned at any one time since 1996.

For more, visit:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-fisher/bloggers-under-fire_b_797799.html