BurmaNet News, January 4, 2011

[Editor]

January 4, 2011 Issue #4112


INSIDE BURMA
DPA: Junta warns of "covetous" countries, Suu Kyi thanks foreigners
Irrawaddy: NLD raises 20 Million kyat for social projects
Irrawaddy: Big Brother is listening: Junta to target 3,000 cell phones
DVB: Burma army expands in Kachin, Shan states

ON THE BORDER
VOA: Children of migrants in Thailand get caught without a country
VOA: Stateless minorities struggle for recognition, services in Thailand
Nation (Thailand): DKBA soldier holds a Thai hostage

BUSINESS / TRADE
Narinjara: Burma objects to Bangladesh deal with ConocoPhilips

REGIONAL
AFP: India builds naval research centre

OPINION / OTHER
Asia Times: Anti-sanctions chorus out of tune – Maung Zarni
Korea Times: Predictions about future – Gwynne Dyer

INTERVIEW
RFA: Prodding generals to negotiating table





____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

January 4, Deustche Presse Agentur
Junta warns of "covetous" countries, Suu Kyi thanks foreigners

Yangon – Myanmar's junta on Tuesday used the independence day anniversary
to warn of 'covetous' countries bent on controlling the nation while
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi took the occasion to thank her foreign
supporters.

'It is not strange (that) certain covetous, aggressive countries are
anxious to gain political control over a geographically strategic country
like Myanmar,' military supremo Senior General Than Shwe said in a speech
marking the 63rd anniversary of independence from Britain.

Meanwhile, recently freed democracy icon Suu Kyi used the same occasion to
thank her supporters, including 'national leaders, political leaders,
Nobel peace laureates, United Nations, European Union, international
amnesty organizations, people from America and Europe and our nationals
from home and abroad.'

Suu Kyi, the winner of the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize, was released from a
seven and a half years of house detention on November 13, six days after
the country held it first general election in two decades.

'Successful victory for democracy is a must,' Suu Kyi said in a New Year's
message. 'Political freedom, economy freedom and social freedom are linked
together,' she said. 'We need to unite together to achieve those
freedoms.'

Than Shwe, junta chief since 1992, made no mention of political freedoms
in his independence anniversary day speech.

Instead he argued that Myanmar, also called Burma, fell to Britain in
three wars between 1824 to 1885 'due to a lack of a strong army.'

Now Myanmar has a strong army but a weak everything else.

Ranked as South-East Asia's biggest economy in the pre-World-War II era,
Myanmar is now on the list of the United Nations' least developed
countries.

The country has been under military rule since 1962, when former strongman
General Ne Win launched his disastrous 'Burmese Way to Socialism.'

Mass anti-military protests in 1988 put an end to the socialist system,
but failed to install democracy.

The military cracked down on the demonstrators, killing an estimated 3,000
protestors.

It allowed an election in 1990, but then refused to pass over power to the
victor - the National League for Democracy party, headed by Suu Kyi.

Although the junta staged a new general election on November 7,
international observers criticized it for being unfree, unfair and
non-inclusive.

The polls were won by the pro-junta Union Solitary and Development Party,
which is packed with ex-military men and current government ministers.

Than Shwe said the successful election was 'the pride of the nation and
the people.'

____________________________________

January 4, Irrawaddy
NLD raises 20 Million kyat for social projects – Sai Zom Hseng

With the support of thousands of people, Burma's main democratic
opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), raised about 20
million kyat (US $23,256) at a three-day fund-raising event for political
prisoners and others in need, according to party sources.

The event, which took place at the NLD's Rangoon headquarters from Jan. 2
to 4, was the biggest the party has held in more than 20 years.

“We got about 10 million kyat ($11,628) in the first two days, and today,
we sold another 10 million kyat or so worth of goods,” Yar Zar, a youth
member of the NLD, told The Irrawaddy on Tuesday. “The party leaders will
coordinate how best to use this money for social programs.”

The main items for sale at the event, which was billed as a trade fair,
were postcards of pictures drawn by NLD leader Aung San Suu Kyi, calendars
and pictures of Suu Kyi and her father, independence hero Gen Aung San,
ethnic costumes and key chains made by NLD members.

“It was more like a donation event for political prisoners and the NLD's 
social programs than a trade fair,” said Yar Zar.

Aye Thar Aung, the secretary of the Committee Representing the People’s
Parliament (CRPP), said the NLD held the same sort of fund-raising event
before the 1990 election and used the proceeds to assist the needy.

“This time, Daw Suu and other senior NLD leaders like U Win Tin sold the
presents they got from the people to help raise funds,” he said.

The event involved members from different NLD branches and groups, each of
which set up separate stalls to sell different items.

“There was an NLD youth stall, NLD women's stall and the No. 54 stall led
by Daw Suu,” said Yar Zar, referring to the number of Suu Kyi's home on
University Avenue, where she recently ended seven years under house
arrest.

A local resident who went to the event said, “There were thousands of
people there, and almost all of them bought something. The most popular
items were those with Aung San Suu Kyi’s pictures on them.”

“They sold everything for a fair price, so everybody could afford to buy
something,” said a Rangoon-based journalist. “Pictures or photos of Aung
San Suu Kyi and Gen Aung San are hard to find these days, so they sold
very well.”

The proceeds from the event will be used to assist the families of
political prisoners, people affected by natural disasters and HIV/AIDS
patients.

The NLD is currently running three shelters for HIV/AIDS patients in Rangoon.

____________________________________

January 4, Irrawaddy
Big Brother is listening: Junta to target 3,000 cell phones – Hset Linn

Rangoon — Burma's military regime is preparing to intercept more than
3,000 GSM and CDMA phones belonging to politicians, businessmen, social
activists, artists and media personnel, according to an official from the
state-run Myanmar Posts and Telecommunications (MPT).

The official, who is involved in the implementation process, told The
Irrawaddy that Military Affairs Security (MAS), the regime's intelligence
agency, arranged the phone interception plan and will implement it with
technical assistance from MPT. A team consisting of more than 20 MAS
members and an MPT engineer will be responsible for maintaining constant
surveillance of the designated cell phones, but an operation base has not
yet been chosen, the official said on condition of anonymity.

Apart from executive members of Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for
Democracy (NLD), the list of those whose calls will be listened in on
reportedly includes some independent candidates and leaders from political
parties that were newly formed to contest last year's election in
November.

Others on the list include some of the junta's leading business cronies,
such as Tay Za, Zaw Zaw, Htun Myint Naing, Chit Khaing and Nay Aung, along
with more than 60 other businessmen, including MPs-elect Khin Shwe, Htay
Myit, Win Myint and Ko Ko Gyi, all of whom contested the election as
members of the regime's proxy party, the Union Solidarity and Development
Party (USDP).

Social activists and artists are also targeted, according to the official.
HIV/AIDS activist Phyu Phyu Thin, writer Than Myint Aung and actor Kyaw
Thu and his wife are reportedly on the list under the category of “social
activists,” while movie directors Maung Myo Min, Min Htin Ko Ko Gyi and
Cho Too Zaw and singers Anaga, Yan Yan Chan and Kyar Pauk, along with some
other hip hop performers, are placed under the “artists” category.

High-profile media personnel are also on the MAS list, including Dr Than
Htut Aung, the CEO of the Eleven Media Group; Dr. Nay Win Maung, the CEO
of the Voice Weekly journal; Thaung Su Nyein, the editor-in-chief of the 7
Days news journal; Ko Ko, the editor-in-chief of the Yangon Times news
journal; and foreign correspondents Aye Aye Win and Aung Hla Htun.

The MPT official said he thinks junta chief Snr-Gen Than Shwe directly
ordered the MAS to carry out this plan, because a number of USDP MPs-elect
are included on the list.

He said a similar program existed when Gen Khin Nyunt was the junta's
military intelligence chief, but it was shut down after Khin Nyunt was
purged in 2004 and his intelligence unit was dismantled.

“There were not many cell phones in Burma when the former intelligence
unit was active, so they were easy to intercept. These days, however,
there are so many phones in use, and people keep changing them all the
time, so I doubt the interception plan will be successful,” said the MPT
official.

The regime, which always keeps a close eye on the country's political
opposition, often traces the telephone records of politicians and
activists to find evidence to try and imprison them.

Soon after the monk-led protests in Burma in September 2007, also known as
the Saffron Revolution, about 200 mobile phones belonging to politicians,
journalists and students were blocked without explanation.

____________________________________

January 4, Democratic Voice of Burma
Burma army expands in Kachin, Shan states – Htet Aung Kyaw

Two additional military command zones are being created for the Burmese
army in regions bordering China as tensions with ethnic armies grow.

Several major rebel groups have refused demands by the Burmese junta to
transform into Border Guard Forces, a move that would see their
lower-ranking troops assimilated into the Burmese army.

Aung Kyaw Zaw, a military analyst on the China-Burma border, said that two
more Regional Military Commands (RMCs) may be added later in the year, on
top of the two already set in place.

One has been designated for Tanaing in Kachin state, which is home to the
Kachin Independence Army (KIA). Another will be formed in Wanhseng in the
south of Shan state, close to territory controlled by the Shan State Army.

“Traditionally [the Burmese Army] never kept any troops in Wanhseng,” said
Aung Kyaw Zaw. “I think the intention might be to keep full control over
both Shan State Armies [South and North] as well as for security for the
gas pipeline running between Mandalay and Lashio.”

The Burmese government will be keen to bolster its military presence along
the planned Shwe oil and gas pipeline route, which begins in Kyaukphyu on
the western coast and ends in southern China. The project will prove
lucrative to the junta, and is likely to tighten relations with its
northern neighbour.

China has warned the junta that it must maintain stability along the
shared border following fears that fighting could erupt over the refusal
by ethnic armies to transform into Border Guard Forces.

Sporadic bursts of fighting have occurred in both Kachin and Shan state in
recent months, although it remains unclear whether or not this will
intensify.

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

January 4, Voice of America
Children of migrants in Thailand get caught without a country – Daniel
Schearf

Bangkok – In Thailand, children of migrant workers, most of them from
Burma, can get caught in a legal limbo that leaves them stateless,
unrecognized as citizens of any country.  There are thousands of stateless
children with limited access to education and health care, and with
limited freedom of movement.


Thailand denies Burmese boy a passport

The problem of stateless children was highlighted when 12-year-old Mong
Thongdee Thailand's national paper airplane champion, was invited last
year to an international competition in Japan.

Although he was born in Thailand, the ethnic Shan boy was refused a
passport because his parents are migrant workers who fled conflict in
Burma.

Scenes of him crying on national television stole the hearts of ordinary
Thai people.


Temporary travel documents granted

Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva intervened to get Mong a temporary travel
document. In Japan he won a bronze medal and his team won gold for the
country that, despite his status, he calls home.

More than a year later, Mong remains a minor celebrity.  Invited to a
university to demonstrate his paper airplane folding skills, he is swarmed
by young girls wanting his autograph.

He says he wants to study really well.  If he has a chance, he says, he
wants to do something for Thailand.  He says perhaps he can help improve
Thailand's reputation.

Mong wants to be a pilot and his fame has allowed him and his classmates
the opportunity to compete in a radio controlled airplane contest.


Thailand migrants a 'national security concern'

But he still needs official permission to leave his home town because Thai
authorities consider stateless migrants, even children, to be a national
security concern.

Duangrit Ketima is director of Bann Hway Sai, Mong's school, in Chiang Mai.

He says more than half of his 80 students are stateless but they should
not be labeled a burden.

He says the children are probably no threat to Thailand and even make
contributions to the country.  So, he says, the government should consider
giving them citizenship.

Many children migrate with their families illegally to escape conflict and
poverty, making it hard for them to claim citizenship in Burma.

They work on construction sites and farms in but they can not register
with authorities. Their status leaves them vulnerable to exploitation and
unable to access social welfare programs.

Although Thailand mandates education for all children, regardless of their
status, many do not speak enough Thai to keep up in class or their parents
do not send them to school for fear they could be deported.

Hsai Leng directs the Migrant Learning Center in Chiang Mai, a charity
funded by an American businessman, where migrants can get free education
and community support.

"They cannot go to Thai school; they cannot go to (get) the, maybe, health
care," Hsai said. "And, sometime, if you have no document you can have no
job, you cannot work."


Thailand citizenship, then and now

Before 1972 Thailand granted citizenship to everyone born in the country.

But an influx of refugees and migrants because of conflicts in the region
led to a change in law, requiring that the children of non-Thai nationals
apply for citizenship.

Senator Tuang Untachai says Thailand should not be expected to pay for the
welfare of migrant children.

He says if they give citizenship to a lot of people then more will migrate
from neighboring countries into Thailand.  He says they are one of the
target countries for migrants so, if the policy is not clear, a lot of
people will migrate here because when they come to Thailand they can get
fundamental rights to education, medical treatment, and other services
just like Thai people.

At a beauty parlor in Chiang Mai an ethnic Shan woman is scrubbing a
customer's foot for a pedicure.  She lives with her daughter and mother in
a one-bedroom apartment and does not wish to be identified because not all
of them are here legally.

She says she came to Thailand to work and send money back home.  Burma was
expensive and they wanted to be together so she brought her family to
Thailand.  But, she says she does not dare enroll her daughter in a Thai
school because she does not think she could follow the classes.  Also, she
does not think she could afford the school fees.

For now the mother sends her daughter to the migrant learning center.

She wants her daughter to study hard and eventually become a Thai citizen
so she will have more opportunities and not have to go back to Burma where
fighting and poverty are all too common.

____________________________________

January 4, Voice of America
Stateless minorities struggle for recognition, services in Thailand –
Daniel Schearf

Bangkok – In this 2005 file photo, some 480 hill tribe ethnic minority men
temporarily entered the Buddhist monkhood for five days at a ceremony in
Chiang Mai, Thailand, after the Thai government granted them citizenship,
and they became monks to celebrate

Thailand is home to hundreds of thousands of people who were born there,
but are not recognized as citizens because they lack documentation. Some
are ethnic Thais, though many more are ethnic minorities living in remote
hill tribes.

As many as one third of them lack citizenship. Without citizenship they
cannot own land or vote, often are excluded from state-funded health care
and must get permission to leave their villages.


Gaining citizenship

A group of people receive proof of citizenship in a ceremony at the Thai
parliament. DNA tests proved their parents were Thai citizens, so they can
now become citizens.



It is bittersweet for the mother of Bangkok native Adisak Lertchum, an
ethnic Thai who has waited 45 years to get access to social services, such
as subsidized health care. It came too late to save her son's leg.

He said he had cancer for more than 10 years in his leg but, since he did
not have any money, he could not afford to go to the hospital. Since he
did not have any treatment, he said, they had to cut his leg off.

Adisak Lertchum was stateless because his parents failed to register his
birth.



Gauging ethnic minorities

Rights groups say an estimated 300,000 ethnic minorities in Thailand are
in the same situation.

However, Senator Tuang Untachai heads a committee supporting DNA testing
and argues there are only about 100,000 stateless who should be given Thai
citizenship. The rest, he said, are migrants from other Southeast Asian
nations who want access to Thailand's social welfare.

Tuang said those people are migrating to avoid war. He also said some
illegal migrants come to Thailand to work, while others come, but do not
work.

Indeed, many hill tribe people came illegally to escape conflict and
poverty in neighboring Burma. Often they are unable to prove citizenship
in Burma.

Others have families that have lived in Thailand for generations, but
their births were not registered.

Ma Sa, an ethnic Karen, is one of the only people in her village who was
born in Thailand. She is applying for citizenship, and said it will be
good for her to become a Thai citizen in case she needs to go to the
hospital. She can get a card to get free health care.


Huge disadvantage

Without proof of citizenship, she cannot own land, hold certain jobs, or
even leave her village without permission.

At a government office in Mae Hong Son Province, about 20 villagers sit in
plastic chairs while their documents and requests are examined and
processed. Many stateless minorities are not even aware they lack
citizenship until they apply for government services or try to leave their
villages.

On the wall are posters explaining the different types of identity cards
issued to ethnic minorities. It is a tiered system that grants benefits
such as health care to those with certain types of identity papers, but
not to others.

Rights groups say the system breeds corruption and that prejudice is a
common obstacle. Jaroon Jinakan, a registration official, denies such
problems but acknowledges the power to grant citizenship is held by local
authorities.


U.N. survey of tribes

Jaroon said the chief will be the one to make the decision to approve
citizenship or not. He said it depends on his opinion, knowledge of the
law, witnesses provided, and the person applying.

To get a more accurate picture of their plight, the United Nations is
working with Thai authorities on the largest survey ever of the tribes.

The last one in 2007 revealed that more than half of those surveyed lacked
birth certificates and that stateless children were less than half as
likely to get a basic education as other children.

____________________________________

January 4, The Nation (Thailand)
DKBA soldier holds a Thai hostage

A soldier of Burma's breakaway faction, armed with hand grenades, held a
Thai hostage in Tak's Mae Sot district on Monday morning, demanding that
Burma returned to Democracy.

The soldier was identified as Sorta Mini, of Democratic Karen Buddhist
Army (DKBA and based in Poppra district of Tak province.

He seized Rote Laowan, a motorcycle taxi driver on Mae Sot-Mae Tao road in
front of a UN High Commission for Refugees branch. He held two hand
grenades whose pins were already removed.

He told police who rushed to the scene that he wanted to meet foreign
journalists and UNHCR officials.

The Burmese demanded that Burmese military junta allow the country to
return to democracy.

After a brief negotiation with police, he surrendered. He then wrote a
note in English and gave it to reporters. It claimed that he was forced to
be border protection soldier and that he did not recognise the result of
the national election in 2010. The note also called for the United Nations
to help Burma resume democratic system.

After the surrender, Sor Ta reportedly asked the UNHCR to give him refugee
status.

____________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

January 4, Narinjara News
Burma objects to Bangladesh deal with ConocoPhilips

Dhaka: Burma has objected to Bangladesh's plan to sign a
production-sharing deal between Petrobangla and US oil giant ConocPhilips,
according to a media report of Bangladesh.

The report said that Burma recently sent a letter to the foreign ministry
requesting the Bangladesh government refrain from signing the
production-sharing contract, or PSC, with the US firm until the maritime
boundary dispute between the two neighboring countries was resolved. The
report quoted senior foreign ministry officials in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh-Deal-with-ConocoPhillips
Burma claimed that both the deep-water offshore gas blocks, DS-08-10 and
DS-08-11, that ConocoPhilips selected for exploration, lay within the
boundary of Burma's territorial waters.

The objection from Burma came about after the government completed all
necessary formalities with ConocoPhilips before signing the PSC for oil
and gas exploration in the deep-water offshore gas blocks in the Bay of
Bengal.

Petrobangla already inked an initial agreement with ConocoPhilips in
October last year, prior to signing of the PSC on completion of over two
years' negotiations with the US firm.

Under the agreement, ConocoPhiilips has agreed to start exploration work
in the two offshore gas blocks immediately after signing of the PSC. The
company also agreed to avoid exploration in areas of the offshore blocks
that are disputed by India and Burma.

ConocoPhilips has already been kept waiting over two years to sign the
PSC, since it the launch of the first round of bidding in 2008.

The latest objection from Burma over signing of the PSC might further
delay the agreement with the US firm, the report quoted officials as
saying.

In its initial 2008 bid, ConocoPhilips pledged to invest $110.66 million
in total and offered a bank guarantee of the same amount for the two
blocks it was approved for.

ConocoPhilips has also committed to conducting 2D seismic survey covering
1200 line kilometers during its initial five years of exploration, with an
investment commitment of $2.496 million and a bank guarantee of the same
amount. The company has also committed to conduct 3D seismic survey in 500
square kilometers and drill a well during the first extension period of
two years, investing $58.1665 million with a bank guarantee of the same
amount.

The company has pledged to drill one well in its second extension period
of two years with an investment commitment of $50 million.

According to sources, Burma also had raised objections during Bangladesh's
offshore bidding round in 2008 and wrote letters to different
international oil and gas firms asking them to not take part in the
offshore bidding round.

Burma is not alone in its objections, with India also claiming part
ownership of the offshore blocks targeted by Petrobangla for development.

Protest from the neighboring countries resulted in lukewarm response
during the country's 2008 offshore bidding round, with only seven foreign
firms submitting bids for 15 out of the 28 offered gas blocks.

The Bangladesh government is now in talks with its neighbors to settle the
maritime boundary disputes and to kick off exploration in the prospective
offshore blocks and shrug off the country's perennial energy crisis. It
has also lodged a suit with the United Nations tribunal to settle the
maritime boundary disputes.

____________________________________
REGIONAL

January 4, Agence France Presse
India builds naval research centre – Pratap Chakravarty

New Delhi – India launched a new naval research centre for warships on
Tuesday, part of efforts by the South Asian giant to build its sea
defences and counter the perceived threat of China in the Indian Ocean.

Defence Minister A.K. Antony laid the foundation stone for the National
Institute for Research and Development in Shipbuilding (NIRDESH) in the
southern state of Kerala, which will be built at a cost of six billion
rupees (133 million dollars).

The facility, which will be up and running in two years, will help develop
technology for "drawing board to delivery" of warships for India, a naval
official said.

The Kerala unit will work independently of the national Defence Research
and Development Organisation, with the aim of reducing India's dependence
on military imports, which mostly come from Russia.

The 136-vessel navy said in a statement that NIRDESH would ensure India's
maritime security.

"This would empower Indian navy, coastguard and other maritime security
agencies in a manner befitting the country?s stature and influence in the
region," it said.

The facility would "ensure that the country would be self-reliant in this
crucial area of defence technology," Antony added.

New Delhi is wary of growing Chinese influence around the Indian Ocean,
where Beijing has funded or plans to invest in major infrastructure
projects, including ports in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and military-ruled
Myanmar.

In August, two Chinese warships raised eyebrows in Delhi when they sailed
to adjoining Myanmar for a rare visit to promote ties between the two
allied countries.

Retired admiral Arun Prakash, a former Indian naval chief, recently warned
that the Chinese navy will have more warships than the United States
within a decade and urged India to speed up naval procurement.

Analysts say India falls behind China in naval firepower, but the country
should strive for supremacy in the strategic Indian Ocean, a vital
shipping lane connecting Asia to Europe and the Middle East.

"Just because we cannot compete with China does not mean we do not defend
our interests in the Indian Ocean where we want naval supremacy," retired
Indian navy rear admiral Raja Menon told AFP.

India has already begun strengthening its military presence in the Andaman
archipelago, which lies south of Myanmar, as part of plans to protect its
interests in the ocean.

Delhi, which wants to boost its 14-strong submarine fleet, launched its
first nuclear-powered submarine in 2009 and has invested in its military
shipyards to start building an aircraft carrier and stealth frigates.

It also plans to buy eight long-range maritime spy planes by 2015 besides
six Franco-Spanish Scorpene submarines for which orders were placed in
2006.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, China's
military spending was the second-largest in the world, after the United
States, in 2009.

KPMG consultancy firm estimates India plans to spend 112 billion dollars
on defence hardware between now and 2016.

India hiked its 2010-2011 military spending by four percent to 32 billion
dollars but analysts like Menon warn that the navy's share of 16 percent
of the defence allocation is insufficient for funding its expansion plans.

India and China fought a brief border war in 1962 and still have
unresolved territorial disputes.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

January 4, Asia Times
Anti-sanctions chorus out of tune – Maung Zarni

Bangkok – A chorus of international calls is on the rise to end the
economic and financial sanctions Western countries led by the United
States have maintained against Myanmar's military regime. Business lobbies
and the global aid industry have jumped at November's rigged elections and
the release of pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest as a
public relations opportunity to push their narrow objectives in Myanmar,
also known as Burma.

I was once among the Burmese dissidents who in the 1990s helped to build
an international campaign for sanctions against Myanmar's rights-abusing
regime. A decade later, I publicly challenged what was then known as the
pro-sanctions orthodoxy, particularly when it became apparent that
Washington's blanket sanctions were about to kill off the country's
fledging garment industry that employed a large number of ordinary
workers.

Seven years on, I am speaking out against the new anti-sanctions lobby.
The called-for policy shift overlooks the elephant in the room, namely the
predatory and callous ruling military elite and the state organs they use
as instruments for rent-seeking and repression. Western punitive measures,
including economic sanctions and the denial of loans and development aid,
are often held responsible for the economic misery and woe that envelop
communities throughout Myanmar.

But the economic promise of the growing anti-sanctions lobby doesn't match
the empirical realities on the ground. Like the sanctions regime of the
previous decade, the lobby is waxing about morality and long-term
strategy. Anti-sanctions advocates are promoting, either naively or
self-servingly, foreign aid, trade and investment as a panacea for the
country's ills while pinning hope on the emergence of a Burmese middle
class who with economic clout will demand more political rights.

Arising mainly from autocratic or feudal political systems, Southeast
Asia's middle classes lack the progressive potential for democratization
and meaningful development, unlike the original bourgeois of the old
Europe which brought down the feudal ruling elites and helped to
democratize institutions of power and wealth. Bangkok's Thai middle class
that greeted the "red shirt" grassroots movement with scorn and disdain
and autocratic Singapore's well-fed and apolitical middle class spring to
mind as apathetic examples.

The new anti-sanctions orthodoxy is pervasive among players with ties to
foreign and local business interests and the global aid industry. This
policy departure is also gaining resonance among free-market ideologues
dressed up as Myanmar experts, Western media, diplomats and certain
academics. They are joined by a growing contingent of experts in
international affairs and strategic studies, especially in countries which
have much to gain economically and strategically from normalizing
relations with Myanmar's dictatorship.

However there is one major problem with the new anti-sanctions orthodoxy:
its logic of gradual change through engagement, development aid and trade
has no empirical basis in the history of meaningful social change from
dictatorships in either the East or West. In fact, the emerging
anti-sanctions consensus is dangerously ill-informed about the hard
realities on the ground in today's Myanmar.

Specifically, the abstract idea of evolutionary change in Myanmar ignores
the particular characteristics of the country's dictatorship that prevent
investment from benefiting the masses. These traits include the feudal
mindsets of the ruling senior and junior generals, the deeply structural
nature of political and ethnic conflicts, an utter deficit of technocratic
competence and concern for public welfare, and the lack of any real - as
opposed to anticipated - potential for change through the emerging move
towards "civilianized" military rule after November's rigged elections.
(The new parliament is expected to be functioning by February.)

Some have argued that November's elections, which were won overwhelmingly
by military-backed candidates, carry the seeds of evolutionary political
change. These same advocates have also held up the military's unmistakably
regressive constitution as something better than outright dictatorship,
even though it brought about no change in the balance of institutional
power in the post-election set up.

While the military has allowed for the trappings of a functioning
democracy, including the creation of political parties, a parliamentary
system with different houses and a nominal division of power,
realistically there will be no room for serious reform initiatives or
policies to be tabled, much less debated, within the new
military-controlled parliament. Instead it will likely act as a pliant
rubber stamp, as seen in Asia's other military-influenced "democracies".

Wishful thinking
The regime has permitted the country's largest pro-democracy political
party, namely the National Democratic Front, made up of former National
League for Democracy renegades, only token inclusion in its democratic
politics through a mere 1.5% of seats in parliament. Its own Union
Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), a landslide winner with almost
80% of the contested seats, on the other hand will have near total control
of regional and national parliamentary houses.

It is important to understand that most of the regime's "civilianized"
parliamentarians have spent decades as soldiers learning the art of
climbing the military and bureaucratic ladders solely through their
unquestioning loyalty and obedience to their superior officers by
executing their orders, right or wrong. It is highly unlikely that these
MP-elects (including ex-military officers, their cronies and other regime
supporters) will think and act in a democratic and independent manner.

Some analysts have stated hopes that more junior generals, including those
in their late 50s and early 60s, will be more open-minded and
reform-oriented with the transition towards civilian rule. Yet it seems
just as unlikely that senior ruling generals would willingly hand the
reins of power to junior officers who think, feel and act significantly
different from themselves.

To be sure, Myanmar's regime is not monolithic and individual generals
have differences in ideas, approaches, and interests. But historic and
empirical evidence shows that Myanmar's military officers have tended to
act as a corporate entity in promoting its own interests, particularly in
matters related to wealth distribution and political liberalization.

Anti-sanctions advocates also place too much responsibility on Western
sanctions, specifically the denial of development aid and low levels of
humanitarian assistance, for the sorry state of Myanmar's beleaguered and
impoverished population. They often point to now upwardly mobile Cambodia
and Laos, which both receive as much as 10 times more in foreign aid per
capita than Myanmar, as a case for the benefits of bolstered aid flows.

And yet the same aid and trade advocates conveniently overlook the fact
that Myanmar's ruling generals recently purchased from Russia a second
squadron of state-of-the-art MiG-29 fighter-jets at the cost of nearly
US$600 million. The purchase came just days after economist Joseph
Stiglitz delivered his world-class economic advice to a group of junior
generals in the regime's capital Naypyidaw, or the Abode of Kings, that
their country's agricultural sector requires massive state investment. As
the Burmese economist U Myint has observed, Myanmar's agri-based economic
structure remains virtually unchanged since the 1930s - despite the fact
the regime now earns billions of dollars annually in energy sales.

Others have pointed to China and Vietnam, where political freedoms and
economic development are delinked, as possible development models for
Myanmar to emulate. "Noble obligation" is a notion that has come to be
associated with paternalistic ruling classes. The one-party autocracies in
Beijing and Hanoi have made serious efforts to improve the material lot of
their populations, even when they deprive them of any meaningful voice in
the country's political and policy matters.

No such public obligation has yet been detected among Myanmar's military
rulers, neither in normal times nor in times of crisis as witnessed in the
regime's callous and incompetent response to the Cyclone Nargis disaster
in 2008. The fact that less than 2% of the country's national budget is
allocated to the combined fields of public health and education speaks to
this lack of concern.

The latest Economist Intelligence Unit report on Myanmar observes, "In
terms of fiscal policy, the government is likely to continue to focus on
spending heavily on the military, and it will do little in the way of
implementing policies to support households and businesses." The regime -
and its predatory and increasingly feudalist state institutions - will
thus remain the insurmountable obstacle to the trickle-down economic logic
of the anti-sanctions lobby.

The anti-sanctions lobby does get one thing right, however. The unwavering
backing of Myanmar's dictatorship by its Asian neighbors, including China,
India and economically advanced members of the Association of South East
Asian Nations, has rendered Western sanctions and boycotts ineffectual.
That's prevented the punitive measures from having the impact they had in
the successful fight against apartheid in South Africa.

As Timothy Garton Ash, professor of European Studies at Oxford University,
pointed out in a recent live dialogue with pro-democracy icon Suu Kyi at
the London School of Economics, the post-Cold War efforts at
democratization across Eastern Europe succeeded partly because the
external geopolitical and ideological environment was at the time
conducive to internal struggles for democratization. Suu Kyi has until now
backed the West's sanctions. But the unfolding tragedy in Myanmar is that
the favorable external environment for organic democratization no longer
exists.

To the contrary, Myanmar's opportunistic neighbors continue to treat the
country as a brothel of cheap labor and source of natural resources.
Indeed, several of these countries would find it against their interests
for the military regime to be replaced with a truly democratic government,
one that was responsive to its citizens' basic needs and livelihoods.

The emerging anti-sanctions lobby should be understood for what it is -
the bald promotion of Western strategic and corporate interests. Ending
sanctions now will only further entrench military rule, giving it a veneer
of normalcy and acceptability, at the expense of Myanmar's long-suffering
people and the country's equitable economic development.

Maung Zarni is a visiting senior fellow at Chulalongkorn University's
Institute of Security and International Studies and a research fellow on
Myanmar/Burma at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He
may be reached at m.zarni at lse.ac.uk.

____________________________________

January 4, The Korea Times
Predictions about future – Gwynne Dyer

Fake elections in Egypt, Myanmar (Burma) and Belarus. A massive earthquake
in Haiti, devastating floods in Pakistan, and a volcano in Iceland that
killed nobody but inconvenienced millions.

Something verging on civil war in Thailand, a reviving civil war in Ivory
Coast, and a real civil war in Afghanistan (with lots of foreign help). As
these things go, not a bad year at all.

There are 192 countries in the world ― or 202 countries, whatever
the number is this week. There are almost seven billion people. All those
countries and all those people will unfailingly supply enough bad news to
hold the ads apart all year, every year.

It doesn’t mean that the planet is really going to hell. The media will
always search out what bad news there is and highlight it.

A broader view of events would report that not one country in the world
was invaded in the past year. Not a single one out of 192, or however many
it is.

That’s not bad, considering our history, and it’s not just a fluke. No
countries were invaded in 2009 either, or in 2008. In fact, the last time
a country really got invaded was Iraq in 2003.

It is the absence of really big events (which are generally really bad
events) that characterizes the year. No Second Great Depression, for
example (though the essential work on avoiding that was actually done in
2009).

No Great Flu Pandemic. No war on the Korean Peninsula despite the sinking
of the South Korean frigate Cheonan in March and North Korea’s shelling of
Yeonpyeong Island in November.

No American attack on Iran, despite all the threatening language. No
large-scale killing on the Israeli-Palestinian front, though of course no
progress toward a peace settlement either.

No high-casualty terrorist attacks on Western countries, though lots in
Pakistan, Iraq, India and Afghanistan. (Why do attacks on Western
countries matter more? Because they tend to go berserk when they are
targeted.)

No financial meltdown in Europe, though both Greece and Ireland have been
put through the wringer.

No recession at all in the emerging economies of the former Third World,
which still account for less than 40 percent of the world’s economy but
provided two-thirds of the world’s growth over the past year. And maybe
that’s the real news of 2010: this was when the new world order finally
became manifest.

This revolution has been predicted since economist Jim O’Neill at Goldman
Sachs first grouped the big developing countries with fast-growing
economies together as the BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India, China) in 2001.

Subsequent Goldman Sachs studies predicted that their combined economies
would be larger than the combined economies of today’s rich countries by
2050, and every update of the study has brought that date closer.

It is still probably five to 10 years away, but this was the year when
China, the biggest of the BRICs, overtook Japan to become the world’s
second-largest economy. It also overtook the United States in 2010 to
become the world’s biggest producer of cars. For all practical purposes,
the revolution is no longer imminent. It is here.

This is as big an event as the end of Pax Britannica and the rise of the
United States, Germany and Japan to great-power status at the end of the
19th century.

Just last year the G8, the group of seven rich Western countries plus
Japan, was still at least notionally the board of management of the world
economy, while the G20, incorporating the emerging economies, was a mere
courtesy gesture to the new players.

This year, the G20 was where real action was, and the preceding G8 meeting
was just a regional strategy session before the big event.

The consequences of this historic shift in the world’s center of gravity
will play out over the years and the decades to come, but the reality and
irreversibility of the change is now undeniable ― even if China’s
economy, at the moment, is the biggest bubble in the history of the world.

Apart from that, what else can we say about 2010 that is in any way
meaningful? Lists are traditional at this time of year, but there isn’t
really much point in a list that includes an oil spill in the Gulf of
Mexico, a British royal wedding, and 33 trapped Chilean miners. If you
must have a list, go online and you’ll find hundreds of the things. They
all mean virtually nothing.

And then there’s predicting the future. The year-ender format always
includes some predictions about the future, but the real future is full of
surprises. Just consider what a reasonable person would have predicted, on
the available evidence, in the last couple of years that ended with “10.”

In 1810, all the European empires had been at war for more than 15 years,
with fighting in every continent.

In the next five years, Napoleon would invade Russia and lose an army of
half a million men, Britain and the United States would fight a war that
included the burning of Washington and Toronto, and after Napoleon was
finally defeated at Waterloo in 1815 the old absolute monarchies would
come back all over Europe.

So who would have predicted in 1810 that after a few more bad years Europe
would enjoy a full century of almost uninterrupted peace and soaring
prosperity, or that democracy would spread to most of the big European
countries? Nobody.

Same with 1910. It was very near the end of the Long Peace by then, but
nobody knew that at the time. World War I would shatter the old world in
only four years’ time, World War II would come only a quarter-century
later, and by the end of the 20th century the European empires would all
be ancient history. Nobody foresaw it. Nobody could.

And the future? Who knows? One could seize the opportunity to bang on
about the world’s failure to address the threat of radical climate change,
but this year’s failure is not worse than last year’s, nor in all
probability than next year’s.

Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are
published in 45 countries. He can be reached at 76312.1476 at compuserve.com.
His latest book, "Climate Wars,” is distributed in most of the world by
Oneworld.

____________________________________
INTERVIEW

January 4, Radio Free Asia
Prodding generals to negotiating table

In a program aired on Dec. 17, Aung San Suu Kyi urges Burma’s military
rulers to join talks aimed at national reconciliation and discusses the
future of Burmese youth both inside the country and abroad.

Q: The Burma Communist Party (BCP) was founded by General Aung San [Aung
San Suu Kyi’s father] himself, who served as its secretary. This
organization took a leading role in Burma’s independence movement, but had
to go underground in 1948. You have said that you and the NLD are prepared
to work together with any party or political organization to achieve
democracy. Therefore I would like to know whether you are willing to work
with the BCP and whether, after democracy is established, there is any
intention of recognizing the BCP as a legal party.

A: At this time, when we are working for internal peace and reunification
in our country, it is better to look forward toward the future than to
look back to the past. So this is a time to work not just for one group or
organization but for everyone, and for all groups and organizations.
Therefore, I would like for all groups and organizations to think together
about what they can do to help achieve national reconciliation.

When democracy is achieved and human rights have been fully restored, all
of the groups and organizations will also gain their appropriate rights
and privileges. This would apply not just to the Communist Party but to
everyone. I would like to say that democracy and human rights will provide
a more secure life for everyone.

Q:  I am asking this question from Norway. With regard to the negotiations
with the military for national reconciliation, I recall that you have said
that there will not be a losing side and a winning side—but that both
sides will come out as winners as a result of those talks. At this time,
the military has complete control over power in the country. They also
have a huge control over economic activities, and they rely on their power
for the security of their daily lives. So if, as a result of these
negotiations, they have to give up all of their power, or share their
power, this would amount to a loss for them. How could one say that they
would also be on the winning side?

A: I think that having dignity and a secure life is much better than
holding on to power. That kind of a genuine secure life can be achieved
only through a political solution. If everyone can agree, through
negotiations and discussions, on national reconciliation, the
people—including all military personnel—will be able to live a secure
life. I do not believe that all of the people in the Tatmadaw [military]
government are interested only in power. I think that there are also those
who value dignity and living a secure life.

Q: How are you planning to successfully bring the military government to
the dialogue table? I would also like to know how those of us who are
living abroad can support and help you in your efforts to bring about
national reconciliation. [The questioner is calling from London, and is
the director of the rights group Burma Democratic Concern.]

A: To persuade the Tatmadaw government to come to the negotiation table,
all of us must put our efforts together to make them understand that these
talks are in everyone’s interests. Just as we are putting our efforts
together, you must also put your efforts together. These negotiations are
in everyone’s interest—they are for the whole country. Everyone must work
together to make the Tatmadaw government understand that these talks are
for the peace of mind, freedom, and secure life of all groups and
organizations. All kinds of methods must be used, and I would like to say
that we are also looking for new ways all of the time.

Q: Those of us who have watched the people in Burma struggle for many
years to achieve democracy want to continue to support them. [The caller
is a member of Australia’s parliament.] Would you advise us on ways to
continue with our help to them? There are a lot of people in Australia who
steadfastly support you and the people of Burma in their struggle for
freedom. We heard you very clearly when you said, “Please use your freedom
so that we can achieve ours.”

A: May I take this opportunity to say that we are thankful to all of our
friends in Australia for the many years of help they have given us in our
struggle for democracy in Burma. As to how you can help us more in our
efforts: the emergence of an all-inclusive political process is very
important at this time. Everyone abroad and in Burma must work together
for the emergence of such a political process. So we would like all of our
friends in Australia to also put their efforts together, using their own
methods, so that the people governing Burma will clearly understand that
an all-inclusive political process is needed for our country to really
develop and genuinely get on the road toward democracy.

Q: I don’t really have a question, it is actually a request for the
benefit of Burmese children and youth now living abroad. They learn about
you in their social and political studies in school, and you are always on
their minds. I think that they would be very happy if you could write and
send some letters from Burma to all of these young people living abroad.
Also, can you tell us how the young people of Burma can help and protect
our country.

A: Establishing contact with our Burmese children abroad is something that
I think about all the time. I would like to write to them. Also, if
possible, I would like to get in touch with them on the Internet. I have
been planning and making arrangements to do these things, and I hope that
I can get in touch with the children of Burma directly. I would also like
to ask all parents to encourage and help their children to be interested
in Burma.

Q: I fled to Burma’s border while attending first-year classes for my
Masters of Science degree. [The caller now lives in a refugee camp.] Now
that you have been released from detention, what will you do to help
students inside the country? Although there are universities in Burma,
they are empty and have no practical equipment. Also, do you have plans to
open more schools, computer classes, and English-language classes—not in
Rangoon but in the districts and more remote areas that are hard to reach?

A: A foundation has been established with the money I received from my
Nobel Prize and from other prizes, and we are helping Burmese students who
live abroad through this foundation. But the help we can provide is
limited by the foundation’s capabilities. We are trying to expand our
activities as much as possible. As for the youth inside Burma, we cannot
do as much as we would like, as our organization is a political
organization. But we help as much as we can with the education of youth
who have been in contact with the National League for Democracy, as well
as with the families of political prisoners, and we will continue to do
this. We have also arranged English-language and computer classes as much
as we can. We will continue to do this as well.