BurmaNet News, January 15 - 18, 2011

[Editor]

Dear BurmaNet Readers and Subscribers,

In an effort to ensure that the BurmaNet News is adequately serving the
needs of our readership, we ask that you take a moment to complete our
10-question survey. The survey should take 5 – 10 minutes to complete and
all responses and comments will be kept confidential. Please visit:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HWPMRCV. Again, thank you for helping us
improve the BurmaNet News.

Sincerely,
BurmaNet News editors


January 15 – 18, 2011 Issue #4121

INSIDE BURMA
Irrawaddy: Keep targeted sanctions in place, says NLD
Mizzima: Government forcibly evicts families from apartments
DVB: Rules for parliament released
DVB: Young DVB reporter ‘tortured daily’

ON THE BORDER
TIME: Influential magazine closes, deepening Burma's isolation
Irrawaddy: Suu Kyi’s release offers little hope for refugees

BUSINESS / TRADE
Vancouver Sun (Canada): Burma moves to tame the 'Great Snake'

ASEAN
VOA: ASEAN meeting urges lifting of Burma economic sanctions

OPINION / OTHER
Jakarta Post: Disturbing Myanmar – Editorial
Irrawaddy: Now is not the time to lift sanctions – Sina Shuessler
Khaleej Times (UAE): ASEAN’s political correct – Editorial
Calgary Herald (Canada): Burma on slow march to democracy – Karen Connelly

INTERVIEW
New Zealand Herald: Looking to build hope in a troubled Burma – Simon
Scott with Aung San Suu Kyi




____________________________________
INSIDE BURMA

January 18, Irrawaddy
Keep targeted sanctions in place, says NLD

Burma's opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), said it
would continue to support targeted sanctions against the country's ruling
regime while the party is reviewing other trade sanctions, according to a
senior party official.

“We have consistently supported the targeted sanctions against the regime
leadership and its cronies, and we will continue to do so. But as we have
said, we will review trade sanctions to find out if they are hurting the
people,” said Win Tin, a senior NLD leader.

His comment followed calls by the foreign ministers of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) and also by an alliance of five ethnic
political parties in Burma for an end to Western economic sanctions
against Burma.

“Such calls are dishonest and those who made them are merely toeing the
line of the military regime,” said Win Tin, adding that the sanctions have
hurt the junta and its cronies and helped the opposition in its struggle
for democracy.

On Sunday, the Asean rotating chair, Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty
Natalegawa, said that the international community should respond to recent
developments in Burma, such as last year's general election and the
release of NLD leader Aung San Suu Kyi, by removing or easing sanctions
against the country's ruling regime.

The calls from the regional body came a day after an alliance of five
ethnic minorities parties that participated in the controversial Nov. 7
election issued a joint statement urging an end to the sanctions, saying
that they “are causing many difficulties in the important areas of trade,
investment and modern technologies for the development of ethnic regions.”

“We want to see the end of sanctions against economic investments in our
country because they are hurting the people,” said Sai Saung Si, the
deputy chairman of the Shan Nationalities for Democracy Party, one of the
five ethnic political parties which issued the declaration on Saturday.

Since her release from house arrest late last year, Suu Kyi has expressed
a desire to review the sanctions, saying she was prepared to work together
with Burma's military rulers to remove sanctions that were hurtful to the
people.

While the Obama administration has initiated a senior-level diplomatic
dialogue with the Burmese military leadership, sanctions continue to be an
important tool of US policy.

The Washington Times recently quoted a US Congressional source as saying
that the Obama administration would not lift sanctions until the Burmese
regime releases all political prisoners, ends attacks against ethnic
groups and establishes a meaningful dialogue with opposition groups.

More than 2,000 political prisoners remain behind bars in Burma as the
country prepares to convene its first session of Parliament in 22 years at
the end of this month. The Parliament will be dominated by pro-military
lawmakers who won in last year's polls.

Meanwhile, the National Democratic Force, a party that broke away from the
NLD last year to take part in the election, said that it plans to submit a
bill to the Parliament that would grant a general amnesty to all political
prisoners and exiled dissidents.

____________________________________

January 18, Mizzima News
Government forcibly evicts families from apartments – Tun Tun

New Delhi – The Ministry of Industry (1) forcibly evicted families from a
three-storey apartment block at 33rd Street in Kyauktada Township in
Rangoon on Tuesday, according to area residents.

The apartment block was confiscated from Indian residents in Burma in 1963
when the Burma Socialist Programme Party ruled Burma and allocated it to
the employees of the Ministry of Industry (1).

An owner of a flat in the apartment block said on the condition of
anonymity that Htin Kyaw, a factory manager from Ministry of Industry (1),
ordered the families evicted. The apartment block has a total of 12 rooms.

There are two elderly patients in the apartments, said a resident. ‘Htin
Kyaw evicted the residents and the chairman of the Township Peace and
Development Council ignored the incident’, he said.

On January 13, the Ministry of Industry (1) sent official letters to the
families ordering them to leave the building before January 19.

On Tuesday morning, several trucks and factory workers arrived to carry
off the residents’ belongings.

On Monday afternoon, a representative of each apartment, the authorities
of the ministry and the chief officer of Military Division (4) and the
chairman of the Township Peace and Development Council tried to negotiate
the issue.

In the meeting, the authorities told apartment owners to show their
official residence permit to live in the flats. The flat owners replied
that if the Ministry of Industry (1) prosecuted them, they would go to
court, according to a resident.

An editor in Rangoon told Mizzima that the people who live in the
apartment block have residence permits.

‘Most of them are employees of the Ministry of Industry (1)’, he said.
‘Before they lived in the building, they had to apply for a residence
permit. I heard that they were ordered to leave the building about one
year ago. Some employees from the ministry resold their flats to other
people’.

On Tuesday morning, the chief officer of Military Division (4) arrived at
the building again and negotiated between the ministry and the flat
owners. A spokesperson from the Kyauktada Police Station told Mizzima that
the chief officer of Military Division (4) talked with Htin Kyaw and made
a decision to evict the families from the building.

Before 5 p.m., four families were moving their belongings, and eight
families remained in their apartment.

A flat owner said that the apartment block would be sealed off at 5 p.m.
____________________________________

January 18, Democratic Voice of Burma
Rules for parliament released – Ahunt Phone Myat

The 1000-plus MPs preparing for the first session of parliament on 31
January have been carefully instructed in what to wear, and what not to
bring.

An invitation sent out to the men and women who won seats in Burma’s
elections last November calls on MPs to report to the parliament office in
the secretive capital Naypyidaw by 27 January.

Despite the overwhelming victory of the pro-junta Union Solidarity and
Development Party (USDP), politicians from 22 parties, as well as several
independent candidates, will travel to Naypyidaw next week in lieu of the
first seating.

“Materials banned from being brought into the parliament premises include
cameras, radios, cassette players, computers, hand phones, any kind of
voice transmission or recording devices, ammunitions and explosives, bags,
shoulder bags and Gaung Baung boxes [for carrying the traditional Burmese
turban],” said Dr Myat Nyarna Soe, an MP-elect from the National
Democratic Force (NDF).

On 28 January the MPs will be issued with certificates by the Union
Election Commission to recognise them as MPs, as well as MP identification
cards, summarised personal biographies and law books.

Dr Myat Nyarna Soe said that strict dress codes had also been issued for
men and women. Men will wear a “stiff-collar shirt, appropriate type of
longyi, [Burmese] jacket and the Gaung Baung [turban]”, while women are
required to wear long-sleeved jackets and a scarf.

“Ethnic [MPs] can wear their own traditional attires and the Tatmadaw
[army] members are to wear the dress appointed by the Ministry of
Defence.”

A quarter of parliamentary seats automatically went to pre-appointed
military officials prior to the vote. They will be involved in the
election of a parliamentary head – one of the top items on the agenda for
the first session – as well as the election of a president and three vice
presidents.

Critics claim that the presence of the military alongside the 80 percent
of elected seats won by the USDP, which is backed by the ruling junta,
means that prospects of a true civilian government are unlikely.

No word has yet been given on what role the ageing junta chief Than Shwe
will play. Several of his senior military colleagues resigned their posts
prior to the elections in order to compete.

Dr Myat Nyarna Soe predicted the first session may last between two and
four weeks – the two-chamber Union Parliament will meet in Naypyidaw at
the same time the various regional legislatures convene around the
country.

____________________________________

January 18, Democratic Voice of Burma
Young DVB reporter ‘tortured daily’ – Khin Hnin Htet

A young reporter arrested following the Rangoon bombings in April last
year and sentenced to eight years in prison is being tortured on a daily
basis, a prison source claims.

Sithu Zeya, 21, was last week moved to an isolation cell in Rangoon’s
Insein prison after apparently failing to abide by prison customs.

“He is taken out of his cell every 15 minutes and forced to do squats and
crawls for not knowing the prison customs,” said the source, adding that
this had stretched over nine days and was being sanctioned by the prison’s
deputy chief, Thein Myint.

Seventeen other political prisoners in Burma’s most notorious jail have
called on authorities to cease ill treatment of Sithu Zeya, a DVB reporter
who was arrested after being caught photographing the aftermath of the
bombings.

Continued refusals by prison staff to accede to the requests have resulted
in demonstrations by the 17 political prisoners, who share the same ward
as Sithu Zeya.

“The political prisoners
are now refusing to stand to attention, a daily
routine in the prison every dusk and dawn,” said the source. “If their
demands are not met in the next three days, they will shave their heads in
protest, which is against prison regulations. They have informed the
prison authorities that if shaving their heads doesn’t work, then they
will go on hunger strike.”

Torture is rife throughout Burmese prisons, particularly among wardens
looking to extract information from political prisoners.

Sithu’s father, Maung Maung Zeya, was arrested alongside his son on 23
April and is still awaiting a verdict. He has reportedly been told that he
could walk free if he passes over information about other DVB reporters
working inside Burma.

According to their lawyer, Aung Thein, the 21-year-old confessed to his
charges of illegal border crossing and holding ties to an unlawful
association whilst under torture.

Meanwhile, political prisoners in Insein’s Ward 5 are calling on
authorities to look into issues such as lack of blankets, poor food
rations and poor medical assistance.

____________________________________
ON THE BORDER

January 18, TIME
Influential magazine closes, deepening Burma's isolation – Robert Horn

Bangkok – What one of the world's most repressive dictatorships could not
silence, the global recession and shifting donor policies finally did. The
Irrawaddy, considered the most influential English-language magazine
covering events in military-ruled Burma, indefinitely suspended
publication of its print edition this month because of financial
difficulties. "It is a sad and painful decision, but we must be
realistic," Aung Zaw, the founder and editor, tells TIME. He vowed to
press ahead with the magazine's growing website, but added that it has
been a struggle to increase revenues from online publishing.

Burma is an extremely closed society, and despite a flourishing of local
private publications in recent years, journalists and media within the
country operate under a strict and punitive censorship regime imposed by
its military rulers. The Committee to Protect Journalists, an
international organization, reported that 13 journalists are now
imprisoned in Burma, the fourth highest number in the world, and second in
Asia behind China. The Irrawaddy, founded as a newsletter in 1993 by
Burmese exiles who fled a military slaughter of pro-democracy activists in
1988, provided a window into an opaque country and a military elite
shrouded in secrecy. "It was an important resource and quite reliable,"
says Bertil Lintner, a Thailand-based author and analyst on Burma.

Lintner says that following November's elections, the first in Burma in
two decades, some international donors started cutting funds to exile
groups on grounds that real change is finally taking place within the
country and resources should be shifted there. "That's a lot of hype.
Nothing has really changed," Lintner says. The elections were regarded by
most democracy advocates and many Western governments as rigged and a sham
designed to preserve military rule. But Lintner says donors are fearful
that by continuing to support exile groups they will antagonize the
generals and lose opportunities to launch projects and programs within
Burma. Aung Zaw says some donors also cited tighter budgets because of the
global recession as the reason for a cutback in funding.

The Irrawaddy's print circulation was tiny — only 5,000 copies each month,
700 of which were clandestinely circulated within Burma — and so it was
reliant on funds from Western donors. Nonetheless, it was read by
policymakers in the diplomatic community, international organizations and
the international media, expanding its importance and influence beyond its
numbers. Most readers, however, were members of a globally dispersed
community of Burmese exiles. The magazine's online Burmese- and
English-language editions received a combined 9.1 million visitors in
2010, according to Aung Zaw.

Not all the visitors, however, were supporters. The website has weathered
three massive cyberattacks during the past three years. Aung Zaw says
evidence points to the military regime as the orchestrator of the attacks,
though they were launched from cyberaddresses mostly in China, but also in
Australia and the U.S. "It shows we are doing something right. Our
materials are subversive to the regime," Aung Zaw says.

Members of the junta, however, were also among the magazine's readers, the
founder claims, adding that government officials have told him they
include Senior General Than Shwe, the aging head of the military
government. "They hate us, but some admire us," he says. "On the other
hand, the regime will be happy to hear the news [of our suspension]."
Nonetheless, Aung Zaw and his staff, which has numbered as many as 60 in
the past, remain determined to keep reporting and even relaunch a print
edition at some point. "One day, hopefully soon, I hope to bring this
publication to Burma."

____________________________________

January 18, Irrawaddy
Suu Kyi’s release offers little hope for refugees – Alex Ellgee

Mae Sot—During the three-hour bus journey from Mae Sot to Umpiem refugee
camp there are at least five checkpoints. For Myat Thint this is a
problem. He tried to avoid eye contact with the police as they circled the
taxis demanding papers.

“Being a refugee is like being in prison,” he said after we had
successfully gotten through the first checkpoint.

An ethnic Mon, the Burmese military regime forced Myat Thint's family off
their land, which five generations of his family had lived on, in order to
build a highway. When he resisted he was sent to prison for six years, but
managed to flee to Thailand.

When asked whether he felt Suu Kyi’s release may help his situation he
said, “I am really happy that 'our mother' is not locked up, but I don’t
expect I can return home any time soon.”

He pointed out that her release could put an end to sanctions, which would
just increase forced relocations such as that which had displaced his
family in Mon State.

“The generals will exploit her release. They didn't let her go free for
the good of the country,” he said as the pick-up truck-cum-taxi roared
along the dusty border road. “The international community will think it’s
time to stop imposing sanctions, but the SPDC [ruling State Peace and
Development Council] don’t know how to organize development for the common
people. They will just force thousands from their land to increase their
profits.”

Myat Thint had just traveled to Mae Sot to take his mother to the general
hospital to receive treatment for a severe infection. He went through the
official procedure and obtained a camp pass. However his mother had to
stay longer and he wanted to stay by her side.

“She was scared to stay by herself in a Thai hospital, so I stayed an
extra day. But when they said she would have to stay even longer I had to
come back,” he said.

At the next checkpoint, he wasn’t so lucky. Once again the police swirled
around the car, as if sizing up their Burmese prey. When they got to Myat
Thint, they found that his camp pass is one day out of date. He showed
them his UNHCR card, it had little effect. He was ordered off the bus.
Later that night, he had still not arrived at the camp.

News of Aung San Suu Kyi’s release on Nov. 13 spread quickly through the
refugee camps dotted along the Thai-Burmese border. For the 130,000-plus
refugees who have escaped Burma citing oppression and human rights abuse,
it was a happy moment; but, like Myat Thint, few expect the event to
enable them to return to Burma any time soon.

On that same date, Thiha sat in his flimsy bamboo home in Umpiem refugee
camp listening to the events unfold on a wireless radio. He heard that the
barricades were removed from University Avenue and supporters were rushing
in to get a glimpse of “The Lady.”

“I was so happy when I heard that she was released,” Thiha said.

In 1996, Thiha listened to Suu Kyi’s speeches every week when she was free
to speak publicly as much as she wanted. Suddenly, though, the SPDC placed
heavy restrictions on her, including banning her weekly speeches.

In response to the SPDC’s actions, Thiha was one of many who protested. He
was subsequently caught and arrested by Burma's notorious security forces
and punished with seven years imprisonment for his actions. When he was
released, he was under heavy surveillance. He said he no longer wanted to
live under the fear that he could be arrested at any time, so fled to
Thailand.

“The moment they feel Daw Suu is getting too powerful again, I am sure
they will just place restrictions on her and lock up her supporters,” he
said.

Former Karen National Union major Saw Htoo, now a resident at Umpiem
refugee camp, said he shares the others' happiness but doesn’t see how she
can improve the country in the near future.

“Suu Kyi is sincere, and is the true leader of the country,” said Saw
Htoo. “But she can’t change the country if she has no position of power in
Burmese politics, and the regime won’t allow her to have the power to do
anything.

“Everything is up to the SPDC,” he added. “If they change their minds,
then the country can change. Meanwhile, we have to remain in the refugee
camps.”

Soe Lay, a former political prisoner of 10 years due to his involvement in
the 1988 uprising, also voiced his doubts about what Suu Kyi can achieve.

“She has been trying to achieve national reconciliation for 10 years now,
but the regime has shown no desire to work with her,” he said.

Soe Lay said he believes they will arrest Suu Kyi after Parliament is
convened at the end of January, and he warned the Nobel Peace Prize
laureate to start making plans. He suggested that she should become more
unified with the insurgent groups.

“This time, she will try non-violent methods and they will arrest her
again,” he said. “She needs to get closer to the insurgent groups and
unify them. When the time comes and she is arrested, the insurgent groups
must unify and rise up to save the country.”

One of the biggest concerns among refugees in the camps is for the safety
of Suu Kyi. Many fear the ruling junta could “take her out” at any time.
Many recall the day she was almost assassinated in May 2003 when a
government-sponsored mob attacked her convoy in Depayin killing at least
70 NLD members.

“My fear is that the SPDC organizes something similar to the assassination
of Benazir Bhutto,” said Toe Aung, a former NLD member and NLD youth
co-coordinator.

When asked whether he felt that Suu Kyi could improve the conditions for
refugees, he said, “She can try with words, but it is up to Thailand.

“Now the Thai authorities have stopped registering refugees since 2005, so
many of us remain unregistered and without any foreseeable futures.”

Naw Ploe, an ethnic Karen woman who 10 years ago fled the fighting in
Karen State and now lives in Mae La camp, said she felt Suu Kyi’s release
could even worsen their situation.

“For 10 years I have lived with my family in Thailand in relative safety
to escape all the fighting,” she said from the steps of her bamboo home.

“Suu Kyi’s release could give Thailand an excuse to send us back,” she
said. “But we can’t go back. You can see from the recent fighting that
there is no peace in Burma.”

Despite the many concerns, there has been an increase in energy among some
youths, according to May Thaw, a student in Nu Po refugee camp.

“Many of the young people in the camp are always complaining that we don’t
get real education certificates and have no future,” she said. “Now we try
not to think about what might happen, and instead just enjoy the fact that
Suu Kyi is released and appreciate the energy it gives us to be more
hard-working and brave.”

While Suu Kyi’s release has given hope to many inside Burma, it seems a
majority of those refugees who remain languishing in camps on the
Thai-Burmese border predict little change in Burma. With little hope that
Thailand will begin registering refugees again, many fear being
repatriated to military-ruled Burma in the near future.

“We are trapped between a regime which oppresses us and a country which is
scared of that regime,” said Naw Ploe. “Suu Kyi’s release is just another
performance to help the regime get richer and more powerful.”
____________________________________

____________________________________
BUSINESS / TRADE

January 17, Vancouver Sun (Canada)
Burma moves to tame the 'Great Snake' – Jonathan Manthorpe

Chinese firm awarded contract to rebuild Stilwell Road, fallen into
disrepair since its completion in 1945.

For most of the last 65 years the legendary Stilwell Road linking India
and China through northern Burma has been swallowed by the jungle,
passable only on foot, or too dangerous a route to contemplate because of
local insurrections.

But now the "Great Snake" linking India's northeastern Assam province to
China's far western Yunnan is being rebuilt in a project that will
reinforce Burma's prospects as a hub for southeast Asian trade.

Burma's new government, a thinly veiled front for the military junta, has
awarded a contract to the Chinese company, Yunnan Construction Engineering
Group, to rebuild a 312-km stretch of the road from Myitkyina in the
country's northern Kachin state, to Pangsau Pass -- nicknamed Hell Pass by
the original builders -- on the border with India's Changlang district of
Arunachal Pradesh state.

This contract will largely complete the work, which started with surveys
in 2005, to rebuild the road constructed between 1942 and late 1944 to
ferry military supplies to the armies of Chinese leader Gen. Chiang
Kai-shek battling the invading Japanese.

At the time, the road -- named for the American commander in the region
Gen. Joseph ( "Vinegar Joe") Stilwell -- was seen as an essential lifeline
in the war against Japan.

Now it is figured the Stilwell Road could cut 30 per cent off the cost of
transporting goods between China and India as well as facilitating the
trade between both those countries and Southeast Asia.

There's some disgruntlement in India that it's a Chinese company that has
the contract to rebuild this final link in the road chain. It's hard to
escape the fact that in the last few years China has taken on the
reconstruction of Burma's almost non-existent infrastructure as a
high-priority project.

This is not simply an act of generosity toward Burma's ruling generals,
who call the country Myanmar. It is aimed at giving China every advantage
in extracting and exporting Burma's large reserves of natural resources.

There's bountiful supplies of petroleum and natural gas, timber, copper,
coal, precious stones, and fish and other foods from the sea.

Beijing's figures show China invested the equivalent of nearly $9 billion
in Burma in the first five months of last year, much of it in
infrastructure schemes.

These include a 2,000-km rail link between Burma's commercial capital
Rangoon and Kunming, the capital of China's Yunnan province; a $5-billion
hydroelectric plant; and a $100-million airport for the country's new
capital, Naypyidaw, which the generals built in 2004 to give themselves
some security in the event of an American invasion.

This feverish Chinese activity has included reconstruction and paving of
the old Burma Road, which linked Rangoon to Kunming in the days when Burma
was part of the British Empire and which was the supply route for
Generalissimo Chiang and Chinese armies in the early part of the Second
World War.

But when the Japanese overran Burma in 1942, this route was cut. The
allies continued to supply Chiang by an airlift from India "over the Hump"
of mountains in northern Burma and western Yunnan.

The Stilwell Road from the railhead at Ledo in India's Assam to the
junction with the northern reaches of the Burma Road at Mong-Yu in Burma's
Shan province was intended to take about 65,000 tonnes of supplies a month
to Chiang.

This was far more than the airlift was able to move at the time.

However, though disease and the perils of construction in terrible terrain
took 1,133 American lives -- one for every mile of road built -- and those
of many more local labourers, the Stilwell Road never came close to
matching the tonnage moved by the airlift.

Indeed, it had only just made it into full swing as a transportation route
when the war ended in August 1945.

The road fell rapidly into disrepair after the war and the last clearly
documented occasion on which anyone drove its full length was in 1955.

More recently, the physical problems of travelling on what has become no
more than a footpath in many places and which in others has disappeared
entirely was compounded by the almost continuous warfare between the
military regime and the guerrillas of the ethnic minorities in the border
regions.

The junta has until now been reluctant to agree to rebuilding the Stilwell
Road for fear it would play into the hands of the ethnic militias in the
region, especially the Kachin.

Those fears seem to have subsided and the Stilwell Road may at last have
the chance to fulfil the role for which it was designed almost 70 years
ago.

____________________________________
ASEAN

January 18, Voice of America
ASEAN meeting urges lifting of Burma economic sanctions – Ron Corben

Bangkok – Foreign ministers from the Association of South East Asian
Nations (ASEAN) say economic sanctions against Burma should be lifted now
that the military has held national elections and released opposition
leader Aung San Suu Kyi from detention. But rights groups say lifting
sanctions may be premature.

ASEAN foreign ministers, meeting in Indonesia, called for the United
States, the European Union, Canada and Australia, to review the sanctions
imposed on Burma to press the military government to implement political
and economic reforms.

The foreign ministers, led by Thailand and Indonesia, also urged Burma’s
military to press ahead with efforts to reconcile with pro-democracy
leader Aung San Suu Kyi and Burma's political opposition.

The U.S. sanctions include a ban on imports, as well as restrictions on
financial transactions and foreign investment in Burma. The European Union
has also had a series of sanctions in place for several years.

The ministers say the elections and release of Aung San Suu Kyi from house
detention should be taken into account.

The managing partner of regional investment fund Leopard Capital, U.S.
businessman Douglas Clayton, says sanctions would reopen the way for
foreign investment into the country.

"We would like to see the U.S. lift its sanctions, which would be a
catalytic step towards facilitating foreign investment, because at the
moment multi-nationals are unable to deal there.  They have problems if
they deal there," said Clayton.

Debate over sanctions has been divisive. Some analysts say the sanctions
have failed to end the military’s grip on power and have caused massive
unemployment.

Meanwhile China, Thailand and India have remained key foreign investors in
the country.

A spokeswoman for the rights group Alternative ASEAN Network, Debbie
Stothardt, says lifting sanctions is premature, especially while the
military still holds more than 2,000 political prisoners in detention.

"It is incredibly naïve and illogical for ASEAN to be calling on the
international community to remove sanctions on Burma," said Stothardt.
"ASEAN should instead be calling for the military authorities and the
so-called new parliament of Burma to cooperate in an international
investigation of crimes against humanity and serious crimes in Burma
instead."

Rights groups raised doubts over the legitimacy of last November’s general
election following allegations of fraud, and concerns over restricting
participation by some opposition political parties.

Political groups close to the military secured almost 80 percent of the
votes and seats in the national parliament, with a quota of 25 percent of
the seats already set aside for military personnel.

ASEAN foreign ministers are to send a delegation to Burma in late January
to meet representatives of the new parliament and raise the issue of the
status of Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy.

____________________________________
OPINION / OTHER

January 18, The Jakarta Post
Disturbing Myanmar – Editorial

Few were expecting any surprises from the ASEAN Ministerial Retreat in
Lombok over the weekend. So when news emerged that the 10-member group was
urging an easing of sanctions against Myanmar, we found it rather
shocking, if not altogether disturbing.

The introduction of a regime sanctioned constitution, general elections
and the release of Aung San Suu Kyi are grounds for Indonesia and fellow
members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to be
cautiously optimistic, but nothing more than that. They are certainly not
worth betting Indonesia’s international credibility on.

The argument put forward using the election and Suu Kyi’s release as
rationale was flawed and premature.

The elections were held under extremely restrictive conditions, to the
point that even Indonesian foreign policy analysts here criticized the
limitations being placed on international poll watchers. In other words,
the process was not open to the kind of scrutiny and critique common in
standard elections around the world.

The right to free expression — whether through public rallies criticizing
the government or a free press — remains void.

We dare ASEAN ministers and leaders  to publicly avow that the citizens of
Myanmar have the right to express and channel their aspirations towards a
viable political opposition that has the same rights as the ruling regime.

And while the release of Suu Kyi is a nudge in the right direction, are
there any assurances of a cessation of political or ethnic persecution
when the authority of the regime is under threat? The answer remains no.

When a regime so unabashedly engaged in open political suppression with
military force, such as was the case during the saffron revolution just
three years ago, we should keep our suspicions on alert.

Nor do we find it difficult to shake off our incongruity when, in 2008, a
constitutional referendum was passed with an almost unanimous 92 percent
of the ballots, a number which Joseph Stalin would have been proud of.

We are sad ASEAN would feel it necessary to risk its credentials — yet
again — when a cloud of uncertainty still hangs over Myanmar. Indonesia
should encourage the process of opening up in Myanmar, but it should not
put its reputation on the line for a regime that only has itself to blame
for its predicament.
____________________________________

January 18, Irrawaddy
Now is not the time to lift sanctions – Sina Shuessler

The release of Aung San Suu Kyi and the holding of an election in November
2010 constitute new reasons to consider lifting international sanctions
against Burma, according to opponents of the sanctions policy, who argue
that these recent moves show that the ruling military regime is now more
open and the country is taking small steps towards democracy.

Such arguments are nothing new. So-called experts have been saying for
several years that the sanctions strategy has failed and that the European
Union should revise its policy toward Burma. For example, Michael von
Hauff, an economist at the University of Kaiserslautern in Germany, told
Deutsche Welle, Germany’s international broadcaster, that sanctions were
counterproductive and that the EU should try to engage in a dialogue with
the regime.

Christian Hauswedell, the Asia commissioner of the German Federal Foreign
Office, echoed this sentiment, writing in the preface of a publication by
the Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation in 2008 that the sanctions policy had
failed. According to Hauswedell, the EU should be led by geostrategic
factors rather than by emotions.

However, what this debate reveals is not so much the failure of the
sanctions themselves, but rather, how little is known about the European
sanctions regime and the theory of international sanctions.

Initially, sanctions were introduced as an instrument to change state
behavior by putting international pressure on a regime that was
threatening peace or violating norms like human rights. Thus, in order for
international sanctions to be effective, they had to impact on different
groups within the state in different ways. Economic sanctions have to
focus on the loss of income of groups benefiting from the targets of the
government’s policy and therefore create incentives for these groups to
undertake political reforms.

International sanctions also serve to provide moral support to opposition
groups. This can result in a regime change directly—by persuading the
government that the sanctioned policy is not worth the price—or
indirectly—by inducing popular pressure and finally the demise of the
government.

In addition, sanctions are also an instrument to uphold international
norms and to demonstrate solidarity with internal opposition groups.
Sanctions send a signal not only to the target state, but also to other
potential violators of international norms, showing that this behavior
will lead to consequences. Therefore, even if sanctions have no real
economic impact and cannot change state behavior directly or indirectly,
they send a positive signal regarding the importance of international
norms.

When taking a closer look at the European sanctions towards Burma, it
becomes obvious that they have never had an economic impact. The EU
implemented an investment ban on Burma but made exceptions for the oil and
gas industries, which constitute Burma’s most important sector for
international investment. Therefore, companies like the French oil giant
TOTAL can do their business as usual even under European sanctions.

Other European companies are also active in Burma, some in quite sensitive
areas. A report by the Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB) on the Burmese
regime’s nuclear ambitions showed the involvement of the German companies
Trumpf and Deckel Maho Gildemeister (DMG) despite the European arms
embargo, which extends to providing technical assistance and advice with
regard to military activities.

In October 2010, another German company, Ferrostaal, celebrated its 25th
year of activities in Burma as part of the Burmese-German joint venture
Myanmar Fritz Werner.

Now more German companies are looking at opportunities in Burma. As early
as December 2009, the German-Malaysian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
inspected the Burmese market’s potential for investment and trade.

“Among the European nations, Germany is one of our larger trading
partners, even considering the sanctions,” Myint Soe, the joint secretary
of the Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry,
told The Myanmar Times after the visit.

Trade sanctions against Burma have always had their critics, who say that
banning trade has a greater negative impact on ordinary Burmese than on
the regime. But even the EU's so-called “smart sanctions” have loopholes
or have been poorly implemented. When the EU identified 176 individuals as
targets of the sanctions back in 2003, it also wanted to include their
families, including their partners, children and grandchildren. However,
in the end, the list included the names of just six grandchildren.

One may ask, then, whether the EU ever had any real plan for implementing
the sanctions. If there is a problem with the sanctions, it is not with
the policy itself, but with the way it has been carried out. Critics
should therefore be pressuring the EU to devise a more feasible sanctions
policy, rather than calling for the sanctions to be dropped altogether.

It is also important to remember that even if the European sanctions are
not particularly well designed to change state behavior by putting
economic pressure on the Burmese regime, they still have a symbolic
function: providing moral support to the political opposition and
highlighting the importance of human rights and democracy.

The Burmese regime has still not fulfilled any of the European benchmarks
that must be met before sanctions can be lifted, including a tangible
dialogue between the government, the democratic opposition and the ethnic
parties, the release of all political prisoners and an end to human rights
violations in the ethnic states. If the EU lifts the sanctions at this
point, it would only demonstrate to the whole international community that
human rights and democracy have lost their importance for European
politics.

Sina Schuessler is a researcher at the Center for Conflict Studies at
Philipps University Marburg in Germany.

____________________________________

January 18, Khaleej Times (United Arab Emirates)
ASEAN’s political correct – Editorial

The Southeast Asian organisation has finally found the will to reflect on
Myanmar. The call on the part of ASEAN foreign ministers to lift sanctions
against Yangon must have come after serious deliberations.

Irrespective of the fact that the military regime reigns supreme to this
day, Myanmar has walked an extra mile in realising the goals that the
civil society and pro-democracy parties had set for itself. The November
elections, though sham in character, have at least forwarded the process
of transition to democracy with the release of Nobel laureate Aung San Suu
Kyi. It goes without saying that the ultimate victims of socio-economic
sanctions were the people and it had hardly mattered for the generals in
power. This whiff of fresh air that has come with the freedom wave is in
need of being bolstered, and the best way to do that is to empower the
people by disseminating opportunities for growth and social mobility. The
ASEAN should not merely stop at voicing for the sanctions to be lifted but
also deliberate how could a nation reeling under abject poverty and
political curbs be rehabilitated.

It’s high time the tedious process of nation building begins in Myanmar.
The world community’s focus on its political parameters and the desire to
dislodge the generals is now overstretched. Myanmar under Suu Kyi has
exhibited a unique tolerance module and that needs to appreciated and
reenacted in other flashpoints of the world. By deciding to peacefully
work with the generals for a complete transition to civilian supremacy,
Suu Kyi has put the junta on the mat. As rightly stated by Indonesian
Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa the elections should be seen as
‘conducive’, and efforts should be made to get the country back on the map
of world recognition.

As the ASEAN believes lifting of sanctions can buoy the ongoing dialogue
between pro-democracy groups and the junta, and provide a solution to the
pestering conflict. Yangon’s problem, like Pyongyang, is one of
recognition and provision of opportunities for its socio-economic
progress. This is why development must not be allowed to dissipate for
reasons of expediency. While Myanmar is another hotbed of heterogeneous
communities, the desire on the part of its ethnic groups to lift sanctions
should not be ignored. An exploding Myanmar is much dangerous than a
contained nation under the tin-pot governance of military generals.
ASEAN’s courage to speak out in adversity is genuine leadership, and
should be measured beyond the prisms of real-politick. The decision is
politically correct.

____________________________________

January 15, Calgary Herald (Canada)
Burma on slow march to democracy – Karen Connelly

Many observers, including myself, were shocked when Kim Aris received a
visa to enter Burma and visit his mother, the famous leader Aung San Suu
Kyi. The regime let him into the country on November 23, 2010, ten days
after Mrs. Suu Kyi had been released from house arrest. A day later, I was
shocked again: anyone could watch the historic reunion on YouTube.
Amazingly, some of the videos were made and posted independently by
Burmese people.

Obviously that means they had access to the Internet. I haven't been
inside Burma for a decade; at that time, there was no Internet access. The
government controlled the media diet, offering a few choices between stale
and rotten. But friends tell me that satellite dishes are increasingly
common these days, bringing with them the BBC and the Democratic Voice of
Burma. In a country with a Censorship Board as Orwellian and controlling
as Burma's, it is astonishing that, minutes after Mrs. Suu Kyi's release
from house arrest, people all over the country were watching it on
satellite TV.

Of the past 21 years, Mrs. Suu Kyi, the leader of the Burmese democracy
movement, has spent more than 15 of them incarcerated in her own home. Kim
Aris's last visit to his mother took place a decade ago, shortly after the
death of his father and Mrs. Suu Kyi's husband, Michael Aris. Though the
regime had forced the couple to live apart, Michael Aris's last wish was
to die close to his wife, or at least to visit her before his death from
prostate cancer. But the generals refused to give him a visa; Michael Aris
died in London.

It is a remarkable, heartbreaking story. The beautiful heroine fighting
peacefully against a despotic and brutal military dictatorship; the loving
family torn asunder; the long bouts of house-arrest broken by periods of
release and renewed hope, often accompanied by shows of public support
tens of thousands of people strong, echoing the first big rally that Mrs.
Suu Kyi held at the Shwedagon Pagoda in the centre of Rangoon in 1988,
when half a million people came out to hear her speak. The historic
Shwedagon rally happened just weeks after the army had been deployed in
full force to quell public protest, which they accomplished by shooting
and bayonetting hundreds of demonstrators in the streets. Many of those
killed were university and high school students. Mrs. Suu Kyi happened to
be in Rangoon-she and her family had lived in Oxford for years-because her
mother was seriously ill, but she felt compelled to take a stand against
the widespread brutality. Calling for an end to the bloodshed and a
dialogue between the generals and the people, Mrs. Suu Kyi quickly
transformed from an academic into a politician as charismatic and as
articulate as her father had been.

In the 1930s and 1940s, with brilliant statecraft and practical ingenuity,
her father Aung San worked towards and then won independence for Burma
from the British. He also successfully fought against the invading
Japanese, in part through the creation of a small elite army that would
eventually metastasize into the behemoth that rules the country today. His
assassination by political rivals in 1947 plunged the fledgling democracy
into a state of uncertainty that ended in a decisive military coup by
General Ne Win in 1962.

Such a family history only adds to the epic quality of Mrs. Suu Kyi's role
in her troubled country. Internationally, she is recognized as a true
heroine, a present-day female Gandhi, whose philosophy of nonviolent
resistance she espouses. She is also a kind of spiritual sister to the
Dalai Lama; they both promulgate the Buddhist virtues and practice of
compassion, restraint, vipassana meditation.

Yet, if we set aside the fame attached to her name and think of Mrs. Suu
Kyi as just one of millions of Burmese people who live under a
dictatorship, we still have before us the tragic history of modern Burma:
a complex, repetitive narrative of imprisonment, disappearance, forced
separation followed by renewed protest and its violent suppression.
Whether in distant exile or in the teashop, millions of people tell a
story similar to Mrs. Suu Kyi's. The outspoken father, brother, sister,
mother who disappeared at night, taken away by military intelligence
police. The activist who leaves his or her life behind, and flees to
Thailand or India rather than going to prison; the family member who
becomes a migrant labourer and goes to work illegally in Thailand, or
Singapore, or Malaysia, where work conditions are substandard, sometimes
life-threatening.

Inside the nation, the poorest families send their children to work in
larger cities, and tens of thousands of children labour in teashops and
construction sites or end up on the streets. In a country without social
safety nets, the vulnerable get lost. On the Thai-Burma border, more than
100,000 refugees of various ethnicities live in limbo in refugee camps,
having fled from army attacks, their homes and fields and lives abandoned
through force.

This exhausted cycle, nearly half a century old, is destined to change.
Clearly Mrs. Suu Kyi and her supporters labour under this conviction.
Everyone who has been working through the past five decades for a return
to democratic government believes that such a return is possible. The
hundreds of thousands of monks who still work for the good of their people
might say they themselves have perfect faith in the Buddhist notion of
annica-impermanence-especially as it pertains to the present status quo in
Burma.

The good news is that this old narrative has already begun to shift, and
not only because Burmese people desperately want to move forward. Nor is
it because the U.S. administration, after decades of non-engagement with
successive Burmese regimes, has done an about-face, deciding instead to
try rapprochement and dialogue with the government. According to
Wikileaks, even China, Burma's most crucial ally, is tired of the junta's
foot-dragging on democratic reform and sincere engagement with Mrs. Suu
Kyi and her supporters.

But the biggest surprise - one that diplomats, politicians, and NGOs are
only whispering about, fearful of being taken as traitors to the cause -
is that the military government itself wants to change.

Not as the people inside and outside Burma desire it. Not as quickly, nor
as completely. Dictators have the most to lose when it comes to the
dawning of a new age, including their illegally amassed fortunes and their
lives. They definitely do not want the clean, heroic, selfless
transformation that Mrs. Suu Kyi embodies.

But how about the slightest transformation? An infinitesimal, slow
alteration. After all, the ruling generals did permit an election to take
place, an interesting development that was overshadowed by Mrs. Suu Kyi's
release from house arrest. It's true that the regime planned it that way.
The generals diverted attention from the rigged November 7 election by
releasing Mrs. Suu Kyi from house arrest less than a week later. The
Irrawaddy, a Burmese magazine based in Thailand, recently published a
sarcastic editorial claiming that the leader of the junta, Sr. General
Than Shwe, should be Burma's man of the year, because by releasing Mrs.
Suu Kyi at such a strategic moment, he transformed international
condemnation at the vote-rigging into genuine euphoria at the celebrated
dissident's tenuous freedom.

But maybe he really should be Burma's man of the year, human rights abuses
and long desultory list of other crimes notwithstanding, if only because
the election was something of a miracle for him and his co-dictators.
These powerful men live the ultimate narrative of self-imposed isolation.
Unsurprisingly, most of their subjects hate them. They are divorced from
the reality of their people and the poverty-stricken but vibrant streets
of the cities and towns they rule.

At no time was that disconnection more tragically felt than in May, 2008,
when cyclone Nargis devastated the Irrawaddy delta region of southern
Burma. Faced with the biggest natural disaster in the nation's history,
the regime didn't know how to help its own citizens-it was too accustomed
to treating them as enemies. For several crucial days, a xenophobic Than
Shwe refused to allow aid workers into the country. Resourceful and brave
Burmese citizens took it upon themselves to help each other. Entertainers,
medical students, businessmen and thousands of Buddhist monks and nuns
mobilized to feed the people and attend the injured and sick. The
wonderful Burmese comedian Zargana was one of those who helped the most;
he was later sentenced to 60 years in prison for his efforts, because he
had acted without the permission of the military.

Two and a half years later, that same disconnected leader permits an
election to be organized and to proceed peacefully. This means that he and
his cohorts were involved in a public political action that was not
predicated on violence. That is no small thing in a place where street
protests often end in arrests, gunshots, and loss of life.

It's true that the election was a sham; the party that represents the
regime won. No one was surprised by this. But it was surprising that, in
the year preceding the election, 40 political parties formed, campaigned,
talked politics among themselves and to each other, talked politics to
their neighbours, friends, colleagues. Many of those parties were made up
of ethnic minorities, whom successive central governments of Burma have
traditionally shunted aside or gone to war against. But dozens of parties,
including ethnic ones, had an opportunity to be politically active in a
fairly open way. It's true that the military harrassed certain parties and
their supporters, or deemed the election unsafe in certain areas, so
closed the polls in those areas. This was grossly unjust, as was the
underfunding of the non-state parties.

But, as one journalist who often visits Burma told me, "There is a sense
that the democratic genie is out of the bottle. Some in the diplomatic and
Burmese community agree with me about that, although everyone believes it
will take years for serious democratic reform to take hold. Still, who
would have thought, even two or three years ago, that opposition parties
would have signboards up around the country?"

Other friends told me that there were actually campaign posters in the
streets. The significance of the election itself has been underestimated,
as has the growing presence of non-governmental organizations large and
small. Many NGOs in the country employ or fund Burmese citizens who are
trained to work democratically, in groups, through debate, consensus,
community involvement. A number of NGOs use an election process to choose
individuals for any given role, thereby teaching people about democratic
process in a literal way. One American-Burmese woman who does work in
HIV-AIDS calls NGOs the "trojan horses of democracy."

While those of us who write and think about Burma and the evolution of
democratic governance rightly abhor the many abuses of the military
government, we, too, are stuck telling the same old story about the
intransigence of the Burmese regime and the hopelessness of change. But
evolution is never hopeless; it is always there, under the surface,
already happening.

That is what I thought as I watched Kim Aris and his famous mom on YouTube.

After greeting his mother, Kim Aris took off his sweater and proudly
showed Mrs. Suu Kyi his new tattoo: a picture of the fighting peacock, the
Burmese symbol of student protest and political resistance. The gesture
seemed unnecessarily daring. How odd, I thought, that no military official
demanded he cover up. But my reactions were outdated. Most of the people
were smiling; hundreds were holding up phones and video-cams to record the
moment. Kim Aris showed her the mark of revolution on his skin and she did
what any mother would do when her son reveals a new tattoo: she smiled up
at the living, breathing surprise of him and gratefully took his arm.
After a decade, she had her son close to her again. For Mrs. Suu Kyi, it
must have been an instant of extraordinary change.

Karen Connelly is a Calgary-born writer and poet and is the author of
Touch the Dragon: A Thai Journal, which won the Governor General's award
for non-fiction. Her most recent book is Burmese Lessons, a non-fiction
account of her time in Burma and Thailand, which was also nominated for a
Governor General's award.

____________________________________
INTERVIEW

January 18, New Zealand Herald
Looking to build hope in a troubled Burma – Simon Scott with Aung San Suu Kyi

Political leaders much talked about in their own time are, with a few
notable exceptions, largely forgotten by history.

Their influence and fame begin to expire as soon as their hold on power
does and often their lives never seem to live up to their words.

They frequently become just a name in a book on a library shelf, a
paragraph, perhaps, in a student's history notes or the answer to a tricky
question at a pub quiz night.

Aung San Suu Kyi, on the other hand, seems destined to outlive her time.

More than just a spokeswoman for Burma's struggle for democracy, "The
Lady", as her people affectionately call her, is the embodiment of that
struggle itself.

Like a modern Gandhi, she lives those timeless and universal notions which
have always appealed to humans - freedom, sacrifice, endurance, peace,
courage, forgiveness and most of all, hope, when there is little reason
for it.

At 65 years of age, she has spent 15 of the past 21 years under house
arrest in Rangoon for speaking out against the country's repressive ruling
regime and yet still remains fearless.

Released from house arrest only two months ago, she is already risking her
freedom by speaking publicly about the troubles in Burma.

Although Suu Kyi has been released, more than 2000 political prisoners
remain behind bars in Burma.

The daughter of Burma's famous independence leader General Aung San and a
Nobel Peace Prize recipient, Suu Kyi became involved in politics in Burma
in 1988 and led the National League for Democracy (NLD) to victory in the
1990 elections - a victory that was denied her by the ruling military
regime which refused to give up power.

She is a mother of two and recently met her youngest son Kim Aris for the
first time in 10 years after he was finally granted a visa to visit her in
Burma.

Herald: Looking ahead in 2011, what is your vision for the future of Burma
and what kind of a role do see yourself playing in that future?

Suu Kyi: Well, what I see for 2011 is the need to try to make the people
understand that we have the capacity to bring about change. What I want
most of all is to empower the people and make them understand 'we are the
ones who can bring about change in this country'.

Herald: It seems that the Burmese people have pinned their hopes on you.
Do you feel that it is realistic for them to see you as the saviour of
Burma?

Suu Kyi: I think they should pin their hopes on themselves. I always tell
people, that they can't hope without endeavour. If they have any hopes,
they have got to work towards the realisation of their hopes. I'll do
everything I can to help bring about the realisation of the hopes of our
country, but they also have to do their part.

Herald: At the end of 2010 two key events occurred in Burma, the November
elections and your own release from house arrest. Do you think these
events can be seen as being a sign of positive change?

Suu Kyi: My release from house arrest had to do with the fact that my term
of detention was over anyway and they could not legally have kept me under
dentition anymore. Of course, if they wanted to they could have done
anything at all, but I think that they decided that it was much better to
be legalistic. So I don't think that this was anything out of the
ordinary. As for the elections, it was part of the road map that they had
written out - that they had blueprinted some years ago. So, I don't think
it was a new development. It was just another step in the road map they
had marked out.

Herald: Critics say the November vote was a charade aimed at preserving
the current rule in Burma and giving it legitimacy in the eyes of the
international community. Do you agree? Can you think of one positive thing
that came out of the election?

Suu Kyi: I think it did make some people understand what elections should
not be about, or how elections should not be conducted. I think that is
positive, if people can start to get an understanding of what should not
be done if elections are supposed to be democratic.

Herald: It seems that the ruling generals are in a bind of sorts. Even if
they really do decide they want to move the country towards democracy,
they will no doubt be fearful that by handing more power to the people
they will be putting themselves at risk for retribution, such as being put
on trial for crimes against humanity. Is there any way to get out of this
bind?

Suu Kyi: I think that we need a new kind of thinking on both sides. The
people need to be more confident of their ability to change things, and at
the same time, I think those in authority have to learn to think that they
should not see the people as the enemy.

Herald: Many people in New Zealand support you and your struggle for
democracy in Burma. Do you have anything you would like to say to them? Is
it really possible for the average New Zealander to make a difference in
Burma?

Suu Kyi: Oh, yes, of course. Anybody who supports our movement gives us
some strength, helps us in some way however small it may be. And I'm
immensely grateful to the people of New Zealand for the interest they have
taken in our movement. After all, New Zealand is far removed from us and
it is a completely different sort of society and yet, the fact that they
care enough, about the rights of the people in Burma, is a great boost to
our morale, it does strengthen us. I have been trying to build up a
network for Democracy in Burma and would like to think the people of New
Zealand would be a strong and very active part of the movement.

Herald: In January 2010 the Australia and New Zealand Free Trade Area was
established. This was a trade agreement between Australia and New Zealand
and Asean member countries, including Burma. Do you think countries like
New Zealand should sign these kinds of agreements which facilitate
economic co-operation and trade with Burma?

Suu Kyi: We would very much like to be certain that whatever business
activities [or] economic activities New Zealand undertakes with regard to
Burma, [that they] keep in sight very, very clearly the need for certain
policies in this country with regards to the rights of workers and with
regards to accountability and transparency and other necessary democratic
values.

Herald: What is your current advice to New Zealand tourists wanting to
visit Burma and why?

Suu Kyi: We are going to work out a policy on tourism as to what kind of
tourists and what way we would welcome tourists to come. How they should
come and how they should go about the country. What kind of hotels they
should use and what kind of facilities they should use and what they
should look out for.

Herald: Do you mean doing things in such a way so that money gets directed
towards the people rather than the regime?

Suu Kyi: That's right. In such a way that tourism would benefit the people
rather than the powers that be.

Herald: Your youngest son Kim was recently able to come to Burma to visit
you for the first time in a decade. What was it like seeing him after all
that time?

Suu Kyi: Oh, it was lovely. I think the loveliest thing of all was that we
didn't feel we had been apart for 10 years. It was very nice. We felt very
close to each other, as close as we have ever been.

Herald: Was there any one moment or time during your son's visit that was
especially memorable?

Suu Kyi: Just being together, I think, and he cooked breakfast for me one
day which was very nice. I didn't have time to cook for him at all.

Herald: What did he cook?

Suu Kyi: He made me a mushroom omelette. [It was] very tasty. He is a good
cook.

Herald: What are your hopes in terms of seeing him again? Do you think he
will be able to visit you again?

Suu Kyi: We hope so - both of us hope very much that he will be able to
come again soon. But it depends on many, many things, because he has other
commitments as well.

Herald: Now that you have been released from house arrest, are you
concerned about your own safety and security? Are you fearful your life is
at risk or that you may be re-arrested?

Suu Kyi: Actually, I have to admit, I don't think about it very much.
People keep speaking about my security, but I believe it is the duty of
the Government to look after the security of all its citizens including
myself.