Host: The leader of Burma’s democracy movement, Aung San Suu Kyi has been jailed in an undisclosed location by the military junta that rules the country. She was taken away May 30th, after a pro-military mob ambushed her motorcade, attacking her national league for democracy supporters with iron bars, bamboo spears, and guns. As many as seventy [democratic] activists may have been killed. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said that “the thugs who now rule Burma must understand that their failure to restore democracy will only bring more and more pressure against them,” and the pressure has been growing. This week, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations [ASEAN] rebuked the military junta, calling on the generals to release Aung San Suu Kyi. Will growing international pressure cause Burma’s regime to relent? I’ll ask my guests: Bo Hla-Tint, an elected official with Burma’s National League of Democracy; Aung Din, director of policy of the Free Burma Coalition and a former political prisoner in Burma; and Derek Mitchell, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
Host: Bo Hla-Tint, we’ve heard about the attack on Aung San Suu Kyi’s motorcade, but, perhaps less reported is what this motorcade was doing -- what Aung San Suu Kyi was doing, traveling in Burma. Where was she, and what she doing?
Hla-Tint: Actually, Aung San Suu Kyi and her motorcade, they had been organizing a tour in upper Burma. She had been in Mogok, [in the division of] Mandalay, and then she had to be -- she had already been in Moynwa. It is the headquarters of the northwest commander of the military. So that, after leaving Monywa, and before they arrived [at] Depayin Town, the incident [had] taken place.
Host: So, what was she doing while she was traveling around to these different cities?
Hla-Tint: According to our report from the N-L-D headquarters, they had already told or discussed with the military authority [plans] to meet the party officials, and to reopen the party offices around the country, especially [those in] upper Burma, as they had agreed with the military authorities.
Host: Aung Din, Aung San Suu Kyi was out in Northern Burma going to various National League for Democracy offices. What was she doing while she was there? [Was she] giving speeches? How was she received?
Din: Usually, what she tried to do is to meet with the people. Then, she tried to encourage them to raise their voice if they saw something that they didn’t like. They don’t have to lie. They have to raise their voices for the truth. They don’t have to be [afraid] of any kind of revenge from the authorities. They have to stand on their own truth. Those words they will encourage the youth. She feels that the youth in Burma are abandoned by the regime. They have no proper educational system. They have no expectation for job security. They have no chance at all, which means that the military regime is killing the younger generation. So, she wanted to encourage those youth not to go the wrong way, but to please concentrate on the right way. Because you are under the regime, you [have] lost everything, but if you are not fighting, you will lose everything: not only your generation, but also another generation, so you have to stand up. This is what she tried to relay as a message to those people around Burma.
Host: Well, Derek Mitchell, one of the things that the regime cited as the reason that Aung San Suu Kyi got into some trouble is that this convoy was growing as she [went] from city to city, [that there were] larger numbers of people on motorcycles leading the way, and that this was causing disturbances. Is that an indication of the growing popularity that she had as she was traveling around the country?
Mitchell: Well, it certainly was disturbing the regime, because the regime realizes just how popular she remains, and that’s disturbing to them. That’s a threat to them. It’s not that her popularity is rising; it’s that her popularity is being maintained. She’s always been extraordinarily popular throughout the country. What they had hoped and strategized was to put her away for a year or so in house arrest, release her, and that her popularity would then fade over time, and that if she traveled around Burma, there would be evidence that she wasn’t quite as popular and that she wasn’t “the Lady” anymore. The fact that she was and that she was galvanizing people was a fundamental threat to a repressive regime. They rule by fear. She rules by real affection and loyalty. That’s a threat to a brutal regime.
Host: Well, Bo Hla-Tint, what happened, to the best of your knowledge, when her convoy was attacked?
Hla-Tint: As had been reported, the motorcade arrived two miles from Depayin. She met with the welcoming crowd, and gave a speech of about fifteen minutes. But, when they left for Butalin, another mile before two monks appeared and stopped their motorcade and asked again [for her] to deliver the speech. She apologized, [saying] that it [was] too late, and that she had already delivered the speech to the crowd, and that they had to [arrive] in time at Butalin. But the man said, “No, we want to hear the speech again.” Then, suddenly five hundred people surrounded the motorcade, and some people brutally cracked the headlights as well as the mirror of the car, so that Aung San Suu Kyi’s driver decided to speed up the car to escape from that brutality.
Host: Was the attack just against her, then, or against the rest of the people in the motorcade as well?
Din: Actually, according to the information sources inside Burma, there [were] three incidents. The first one, just as U Bo Hla-Tint mentioned, happened in Ye-u two miles away from Depayin. It was an ambush. It was an assassination attempt on Aung San Suu Kyi, U Tin Oo and other [NLD] leaders. At the time when they left from Monywa, there [were] many people who accompanied them to Butalin. Butalin is a township between Moywa and Depayin. By the time when they arrived [at] Butalin, those people who came from Monywa left, which means they left Aung San Suu Kyi and her motorcade and they [proceeded] to Monywa. But on the way, they heard the news about the attack at Ye-u, so they came back -- they rushed back to the scene, but then they were blocked by the military, police and other attackers. They we were beaten mostly and also many people died on the scene. Then another incident happened again the Monywa township. The people who escaped from the second incident came back to the Monywa. They made protests during the middle of the night. Then, they destroyed a lot of the S-P-D-C [State Peace and Development Council] signboards in the townships. At the time, most of them were students from the Monywa government’s technological college, and also from Monywa University. So those people were arrested and Monywa was put under military order. So, there were three incidents on the thirtieth and thirty-first of May.
Host: Derek Mitchell, do we know who or what mounted this attack on Aung San Suu Kyi and her supporters?
Mitchell: Well, it was an organization [called] the Union for Solidarity and Development Association, or U-S-D-A. It’s kind of a government-affiliated, military-run social organization, but it’s really their civilian arm to do their dirty work at the civilian or social level. That’s officially the organization that’s expected to have mobilized and to have attacked her car. About the individuals, I’m not sure. Maybe these gentlemen have more details about the individuals. This organization is a kind of adjunct to the government -- to the military, that’s supposed to be a popular organization, supposedly popular, but is really just mobilized by the military to do dirty work.
Host: Bo Hla-Tint, do we know where Aung San Suu Kyi is now?
Hla-Tint: This morning we received a final report from our source that, according to our source, she is in Insein, the notorious Insein jail right now. They call it Tike Thit. It’s very recently developed a new building especially preparing for Aung San Suu Kyi and other leaders of the democratic movement leadership.
Host: Does this suggest that, if there’s a new building that’s been prepared, that the crackdown is going to be wider than what it’s been already?
Hla-Tint: Absolutely. This is the most brutal and the widest incident [that has] taken place in Burma. Previously, they were only trying to marginalize Aung San Suu Kyi and all the activities, but this time it has another dimension. We caldl this state-sponsored terrorism.
Host: Aung Din, how has the U.S. reacted, and has that had any impact in Burma so far?
Din: Actually, the U.S. already [has] imposed limited economic sanctions since 1997. But now, after the incidents, the United States imposed a kind of visa suspension to the members of the U-S-D-A. Also now they are talking about freezing their general financial assets in the United States. Recently, the United States’ Senate approved a Burma legislation called S-1125. It will ban all imports from Burma. On June 11th, they led by a vote of 97-1, [almost a] unanimous vote. The United States’ House of Representatives is considering approving a similar bill in the House very soon.
Host: Derek Mitchell, what kind of an effect does a ban on all imports from Burma that is passed through both houses of congress and signed by the President -- what kind of impact would that have?
Mitchell: Well, it has some financial impact, it’s something like three hundred and fifty million dollars in textile exports and things like that, but it’s not going to determine what happens in Burma. I think it’s very, very important that the United States gets behind this and shows some moral leadership -- moral authority – in this, and takes symbolic, rhetorical and substantive action. But it’s going to take some leadership in the foreign policy for an overseas [issue], particularly for ASEAN, and ASEAN, as I’m sure you’ll get to, has taken some steps in the past few days on this matter, and of course, very importantly, China. China has provided some substantial assistance to Burma, and the United States can do more, not only on its own, but [by] putting pressure on its friends and others in Asia to put more pressure and to start clamping Burma.
Host: Well, Bo Hla-Tint, with regard to ASEAN, secretary of State Colin Powell was hoping to get ASEAN, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, to take some action against Burma. What were the results of this meeting?
Hla-Tint: This meeting this week ASEAN and A-R-F, the Asian Regional Forum [delivered] made a joint communiqué, mentioning, in very soft-tones from our perspective, very soft, and they are mentioning concern about the heart of these national reconciliation processes and arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi. And they request the release of Aung San Suu Kyi and all N-L-D leaders. What we think is that ASEAN itself can do better than this, and that as a [neighboring] country, or as only one organization in the region, they can do [this] more effectively if they cooperate with the United States, the European Union, and the international community.
Host: Aung Din, do you think that the statement from ASEAN was too soft, as Bo Hla-Tint suggests?
Din: Yes, but at least, you know, since last week, they refused to make any announcement for this case of Burma. Burma is a member of ASEAN, so they don’t want to interfere in their family member’s affair. But now at least, they made an announcement calling for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi and other party leaders, which proved that United States’ pressure is very effective. Now we are waiting to see, as it’s our duty, [that of] the A-R-F that when Secretary of State Colin Powell to return, I believe Colin Powell will be able to put enormous pressure on his counterparts to raise their voices more [loudly] and [stronger].
[Simultaneous talking] Host: Derek Mitchell?
Mitchell: Let me say, adding about ASEAN, that this is a great embarrassment to them. Their strategy was, “We bring Burma into the fold,” five years ago or so, “… and if they become part of a club, then we can moderate their behavior. We’ll put pressure on them quietly in the ASEAN or Southeast Asian way, and they will change,” and so they’ve been counseling the West, saying, “Your hard-core tactics are not going to work here.” Clearly, their soft tactics have not been working here. It’s an embarrassment to the organization as a whole [when] one of the key members has been so brutal and that their tactics are not succeeding. When something like what happened in the past couple of weeks with Aung San Suu Kyi happens, its in the limelight because [there’s] a great amount of attention. There was lucky timing because of this A-R-F meeting this week that was scheduled long before this happened. But then it goes into the shadows, and they’re able to continue a kind of soft approach. Many other nations, -- China and Japan -- are also able to do that. The important thing for the United States, ASEAN and for others is to keep it in the limelight, to keep a light shining in there, and to keep a pressure on. The big worry is that, [though] we have some opportunity now, but over time, that it may fade again, and we’ll be back where we were.
Hla-Tint: Absolutely, in addition to that, we’re always mentioning that our concern is that, because the military junta is also always trying to go back to square one, after releasing Aung San Suu Kyi and arresting her again, to start the world community to ask for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi and such and such. What we or what Burma needs is a real democratization process as soon as possible. And as the promise to the world, they must engage in substantive and concrete and meaningful political dialogue as soon as possible, not just arresting or putting [her] under house arrest again and again, and not to play the game repeatedly.
Host: Aung Din, Japan also came this week and called on the regime to release Aung San Suu Kyi. Host: What kind of impact can Japan have in its role as an aid donor to Burma?
Din: It has a lot because Japan’s the only major donor to the Burmese regime. They have extended a lot of loans and also other diplomatic aide to the Burmese regime for making the construction of bridges, dams, and hydropower plants. So if they stop that diplomatic aid, which will affect the region politically and diplomatically, I believe that it will be effective.
Host: Derek Mitchell, you’ve mentioned both Japan and China. Which of those countries can have more effect on Burma?
Mitchell: Well, it’s interesting that Japan and Burma have a very good relationship. One of the strange twists of World War Two is that Japan actually had some influence in Burma and that there were some good, positive ties, strangely enough, [between] Japan and Burma. So, to some degree, they have a little bit of influence, but the real key is China. China provides all the military assistance, something like two billion dollars -- two billion dollars in a nation that’s one of the ten poorest in the world -- in military aid and military sales from China to Burma over the past nine or ten years. That, if cut off, would sort of turn off some of the moral and substantive contacts and support for that regime. China is also economically developing itself through Burma, taking advantage of resources and providing more money for the coffers of this regime. So while others are sanctioning it and others are trying to isolate, China is taking advantage, again because it’s in the shadows. They’re trying to be a constructive player in the international scene in so many other areas. The United States has a new, very positive relation with China because China is playing a constructive role, but because Burma is not so strategic, seemingly, we allow China to get away with that. I think that what needs to happen is [that we should] shine a light again on what China is actually doing and force them to do the right thing: to start to clamp down and use whatever influence they may have with that regime to build up some kind of reconciliatory dynamics within the country.
Hla-Tint: Absolutely, I fully agree with Derek that China’s role is very crucial in Burma, because very recently Than Shwe, the number one general of the military and his delegation visited China. China gave them two-hundred million [dollars] in loans. After that, this incident, a couple of weeks ago, on May 30th, [was] headed by General Soe Win. He was head of the U-S-D-A in the past as well. He mentioned publicly that, as long as they had strong support from China, they don’t need to care about the U.S. or European pressure.
Host: Aung Din, is there some hope that China will stop supporting the regime and bring some pressure to change.
Din: That’s what we hope, because now recently, it is obvious that Burma issues are on top of the United States’ foreign policy right now. So the United States and President Bush himself has shown very much interest in helping the people of Burma. So I think [before] the United States just talked about supporting the economic sanctions. Now they are talking with their counterparts to raise the issue together. So, they will talk definitely with China too to stay away from Burma, or at least, not to support Burma. I believe that the United States will bring the Burma issue to the United Nations’ security council very soon. They are discussing with China, Russia, Canada, Austria Japan, and other influential nations in the region to raise the issue together.
Host: Well, Aung Din mentions the United Nations. Dereck Mitchell, is there any role for the United Nations to play here?
Mitchell: Well, they have played a role. I mean, there is a special rapporteur. They sent a representative to Burma to try to promote this reconciliation process, so they do play a role, and they have for many years now. They’ve honored Aung San Suu Kyi in their resolutions and such, so they can play a role if there were true reconciliation. They can play a facilitative role, but again, it won’t be determinate. I don’t think Burma is listening to the U-N or that they will follow the U-N. They will follow the money. They will follow the support they’re getting externally. If that is shut off, then we may be able to see some progress. If I may make one more point on the [Chinese] factor, it’s going to be difficult to get China fully on board for obvious reasons. This is a human rights issue. This is a [democratic] issue. China has its own problems with human rights and democracy, and they don’t like other nations imposing those values on nations. Burma had its own Tiananmen Square on August 8th, 1988. It was not on T-V. It was not on C-N-N, so people [around the world] don’t know about it, but it happened. The idea that China will get on the side of those who trying to follow through on the promise of democracy is a tall order, but again, I think you have to put pressure on them, and you have to shine light on this issue over a period of time.
Host: Well, Bo Hla-Tint, we only have about twenty seconds left. How has this crackdown affected the [democratic] movement in Burma?
Hla-Tint: If the international community fails to take effective and immediate action, even Aung San Suu Kyi can be assassinated very soon, and the hope for democracy in Burma can disappear very soon. That will have a great impact.
Host: I’m afraid that’s going to have to be the last word for today. I’d like to thank my guests: Bo Hla-Tint, of the National League of Democracy; Aung Din, of the Free Burma Coalition; and Derek Mitchell, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Before we go, I’d like to invite you to send us your questions or comments. You may email them to: Ontheline @ I-b-b dot g-o-v. For On the Line, I’m Eric Felten.
