REPRESSION IN BURMA 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.
20 June 2003, VOA
http://www.voanews.com/uspolicy/archive/2003-06/a-2003-06-20-2-1.cfm
Friday, June 20, 2003
REPRESSION IN BURMA
Posted by Aung Din at 5:38 PM 0 comments
Labels: Interviews
Thursday, June 19, 2003
Joint Hearing by CHRC and CWC, US House of Representatives
Joint Congressional Human Rights Caucus and Congressional Women's Caucas
Members' Briefing,
United States House of Representatives
June 19, 2003
2255 RHOB
Washington, D.C
Aung Din, Director of Policy
Free Burma Coalition
Mr. Chairman,
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf of 50 million Burmese who are locked in a battle with an illegitimate military regime to bring peace, democracy and human rights to our country. My name is Aung Din, and as you mentioned I serve as the director of policy for the Free Burma Coalition, an organization based in the United States with national and international chapters.
I'd like to start by thanking Congressmen Tom Lantos, Frank Wolf, Joseph Pitt, Lane Even, Mark Sounder and Jerry Weller and the Congressional Human Rights Caucus and Congressional Women's Caucas for hosting this event today, our leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's 58th birthday and Women of Burma Day. I'd especially like to thank Congressman Tom Lantos and Peter King for introducing legislation on Burma in the House of Representatives. As you know, this legislation passed the Senate last week by a vote of 97-1, and the Bush administration has endorsed it in the House. We urge the House to support President Bush and Congressman Lantos by immediately passing this legislation. Please do this to support the Burmese people.
As you know, on May 30th, Burma's military regime launched a brutal and despicable attack on our democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Hundreds of thugs brutally attacked her convoy in the middle of the night, with blunt bamboo stick, steel rods, and pipes. They brutally beat her supporters, and it is likely that scores were killed. At the same time, the regime shut down all NLD offices across the country and over 150 NLD supporters and members have disappeared or been arrested.
Sadly, I am not surprised by these events. Things like this happen all the time in Burma.
In 1988, I was a student at the Rangoon Institute of Technology when I and many of my fellow students helped to organize a nationwide demonstration that almost overthrew the military government. As millions of people marched on the streets, the military regime opened fire on us. Up to 10,000 people were murdered in a matter of weeks, including students, women, monks and infant children. Those who survived were jailed and suffered daily torture sessions. I was one of them.
When they arrested me, they handcuffed me, threw a hood over my head, and pulled me off the bus I was riding. I was sentenced to four years in prison in a kangaroo court without the benefit of a lawyer. For political prisoners such as myself, each day centered on interrogations, beatings, and mental torture. When the guards noticed I had written a calendar on my wall with a small piece of brick, I was thrown in pitch-black solitary confinement. When I forgot to stand at attention, I was forced to crawl on sharp, pointed stones for 100 yards while the prison guards beat me with sticks and belts. Many of my fellow prisoners were tortured even more. They were tortured for dropping a cup of water. They were tortured for teaching English--they were tortured for anything. Often, when I tried to sleep, I could hear the screams of those being tortured.
Even today, there are still an estimated 1,600 political prisoners in Burma, including men, women, and students. But, there are many things worse than being a prisoner. The regime has raped thousands of women. The regime uses slave labor throughout the country. The regime has recruited 70,000 child soldiers. The regime has burned down thousands of villages, and forced millions of people to flee their homes.
I could talk about human rights abuses in Burma for many hours, but I want to leave time for questions and answers, so please let me explain why we need sanctions immediately. If we think carefully, we will see that sanctions are the right policy tool at the right time for three reasons:
First, there are some people who say that sanctions on Burma will only hurt the people. This is simply not true. It is true that some people will lose their jobs, but in Burma the regime receives most of the money from trade. They do not allow private business. They do not allow free enterprise. They and their cronies own and control the means of production. This is not free trade. This is supporting tyranny.
Second, we should pass these sanctions because the United States and the West have a great deal of influence over Burma's economy. The United States alone accounts for between 20 and 25% of Burma's exports--a huge portion. The European Union imports a similar amount, so together they can make a huge difference.
Sometimes, the regime says they can depend only on Asian nations. This is not true. The regime is bluffing, and we should not believe their lies. Just as they lie and say they would not attack Aung San Suu Kyi, they lie and say that they can rely on Asian nations. In truth, Asian nations do not want to invest in Burma because of the regime. They cannot depend on Asian nations and China because these countries will not support them.
Third, the people of Burma have asked for the sanctions. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her political party won 82% of the seats in parliament, but the regime refused to recognize the results. Now, the democratic movement is asking for sanctions. In the United States, you always respect the results of final votes in Congress. Please respect the elected leaders of Burma also.
Fourth, United States should pass these sanctions even if Aung San Suu Kyi is released. This is not about one woman. This is about freedom for all the Burmese people. As Senator McConnell said, the regime cannot play "catch and release" game forever.
Finally, sanctions must be matched by international political pressure. Sanctions are a step in the right direction, but they are not enough. We need concrete international political pressure. Specifically, the United States should move to place Burma on the agenda of the United Nations Security Council. The Security Council should immediately consider increasing pressure on the regime by applying sanctions of its own.
In closing, let me say that we greatly appreciate the support from the United States. American people believe in freedom and democracy more than any other country in the world. Someday, I hope that Burma will also be free. When we remember our history, we will say that in our time of need, the United States supported our struggle. I hope that the representatives sitting in this Congress will shine the light of democracy and help us on our path to freedom.
Thank you
Aung Din
Posted by Aung Din at 5:36 PM 0 comments
Labels: Testimonies
Wednesday, June 18, 2003
Testimony Before U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, June 18, 2003
HEARING ON
“A REVIEW OF THE DEVELOPMENTS OF DEMOCRACY IN
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN
SENATE FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE
TESTIMONY BY U AUNG
DIRECTOR,
INTRODUCTION
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf of 50 million Burmese who are locked in a battle with an illegitimate military regime to bring peace, democracy and human rights to our country. My name is Aung Din, and as you mentioned I serve as the director of policy for the Free Burma Coalition, an organization based in the
I'd like to thank you, Senators McConnell and Feinstein, and the members of the United States Senate for the overwhelming bipartisan vote to approve the Burma Freedom and Democracy Act last week. By supporting this legislation, you sent a clear message to the people of
Since you have already heard much about the events surrounding
In 1988, I was a student at the Rangoon Institute of Technology when I and many of my fellow students helped to organize a nationwide demonstration that almost overthrew the military government. We marched proudly in front of the American Embassy and waved our banners, because we knew that Americans believe in freedom and democracy. We avoided the Soviet embassy for the same reason.
Tragically, as millions of people marched on the streets, the military regime opened fire on us. Up to 10,000 people were murdered in a matter of weeks, including students, women and infant children. Those who survived were jailed and suffered daily torture sessions.
Mr. Chairman, this was one year before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Unfortunately, because the military refused to let any international news media inside the country, no one knew what happened to us. After seeing my colleagues gunned down on the streets, I was very scared, but I knew I couldn't give up. I continued to organize
demonstrations and protests, and eventually, I was captured by the regime.
When they arrested me, they handcuffed me, threw a hood over my head, and pulled me off the bus I was riding. I was taken to a military interrogation center, where I was held with no food, no drink, no toilet, and no sleep for one week. My hood was never removed. Successive shifts of interrogation officers beat, kicked, and hit me. When I asked for water, they laughed at me. When I asked to use the bathroom, they beat me even more. Many times I almost passed out, but they poured cold water onto my head to wake me up so my beatings could continue.
A month later, I was put in solitary confinement, where I stayed for over a year. In
If there is a hell on earth, it must be
Our families did not escape either. My brother was also arrested for his participation in the freedom struggle. Many parents and families were forced out of their jobs by the regime. The regime through the military intelligence (MI) apparatus, conducts a scorched earth campaign against anyone associated with the democracy movement.
OTHER POLITICAL PRISONERS
I want to tell you about the other brave people of
My friend Min Ko Naing has been in prison since 1989. For the Burmese people, Aung San Suu Kyi is like George Washington. Min Ko Naing is like Sam Adams—he is a true hero. Just as much as Aung San Suu Kyi, he was the main leader of our revolution. He spoke at rallies across the country and called on the people to believe in freedom. I think that he understood freedom and democracy at its roots, far before many of the rest of us.
We were both arrested almost at the same time. He was also severely tortured. Unlike me, however, he has been held in solitary confinement for 14 years. It might be that the military regime will never release him.
In 1994, U.S. Congressman Bill Richardson met Min Ko Naing in prison. He told the Congressman to continue the struggle for freedom and democracy. The military
punished Min Ko Naing by transferring him 500 miles away from his family. Now, his family can only visit him once a year. He has never been permitted to leave his 8 x 10 foot cell for more than 15 minutes per day.
The regime has offered to release Min Ko Naing if he will sign a document forswearing any political activity and condemning the democracy movement. He has refused. In the face of such brutal tyranny, he continues to fight back against the regime. His courage should inspire us.
INFORMATION
One way that we are working to bring change to
We are also very grateful for services from the Voice of America and Radio Free Asia. Even though many people have been sentenced to long prison terms for listening to the radio, the people of
PROTESTS
My people also continue to organize protests around the country. Last August, two of my colleagues were arrested for organizing a protest in downtown
I know that it doesn't make it in the news very often, but not a month goes by that the people of
ATTENDING PRO-DEMOCRACY SPEECHES
The Burmese people are also defying the military regime by attending speeches of Aung San Suu Kyi. These are really more than just speeches--they are democracy rallies.
In December, 20,000 people came to see her speak in Arakan state. In March, 30,000 people came to watch her speak in
RECOMMENDATIONS
I would like to close my testimony by making a few recommendations for future policy on
In order to accomplish regime change, we must do the following things:
We need increased resources to fund the struggle inside
The
Push the United Nations Security Council to act on
The United Nations Security Council must act now on
The regime has been given 2 and 1/2 years to bring change to
We know that freedom isn't free. Its cost is measured in the bodies of dead democracy activists, broken families and years stolen from the lives of political prisoners. We are willing to pay the price and we do so every day. We want people around the world to know that we are freedom fighters, not victims.
Posted by Aung Din at 11:48 AM 0 comments
Labels: Testimonies
Tuesday, June 3, 2003
Burma--A Step Backward
Burma -- A Step Backward? The Burmese government has ignored calls from governments and international rights groups demanding the release of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. She and other opposition leaders were taken into custody Friday after clashes between her supporters and pro-government demonstrators in northern Burma. The government also closed all the offices of her party, the National League for Democracy. The crackdown is a serious setback for efforts at political reconciliation. The Burmese government freed pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest just more than a year ago, after international pressure and intervention by a UN special envoy. In the past year, she has been allowed to travel around Burma to meet with members of her political party, the National League for Democracy. Although there were still constraints on her activities, Burmese in exile and others who follow Burmese developments had renewed hope that the military government was becoming more willing to work toward political reconciliation. But there was no real dialogue between Aung San Suu Kyi and the generals ruling Burma. While she tried to keep a low profile, she attracted increasingly larger crowds and periodic incidents occurred. Former Burmese political prisoner, Aung Din, says when the government picked up Aung San Suu Kyi last week, it made a serious step backward. "They saw that Aung San Suu Kyi still has the popularity. Aung San Suu Kyi still has the popular support of the people. Also they found the people-power movement starting to revitalize, so this is what they are scared of. ... They decided to isolate Aung San Suu Kyi from the people," Aung Din said. Aung Din was vice chairman of the All Burma Federation of Student Unions and a leader of the 1988 democracy movement when he was arrested by the Burmese government. He was imprisoned from 1989 to 1993. He is now director of policy and strategy at the Free Burma Coalition, an umbrella organization of exiled Burmese dissidents in the United States and Canada. Aung Din says the government orchestrated the attack on Aung San Suu Kyi's entourage last Friday, using military, police, and members of a government organized group called the Union Solidarity and Development Association. He says the government offered freedom to criminals in prison who participated in the ambush. The government says members of Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy initiated the clash by attacking pro-goverment groups, and says it has temporarily detained her and her colleagues to protect them. Burma specialist, Professor David Steinberg says if members of the Union Solidarity and Development Association were involved in the incident, it must have been with government and military permission. "There is no question that the military are the ones that have the political power, and the military power. They are the ones that must bear the responsibility for any incident. Whoever might have caused it, however it might have started is quite irrelevant, since they are the ones who have the control," Professor Steinberg said. Professor Steinberg, the director of Asian studies at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, says the crackdown on the National League for Democracy has undercut whatever limited progress was made toward reconciliation. He says it has undermined the efforts of UN special envoy to Burma, Razali Ismail who brokered closed-door reconciliation talks between the government and Aung San Suu Kyi in 2000. "I think he was very important in the freeing of Aung San Suu Kyi. The role of the United Nations has been, I think, critical. And Ambassador Razali has been a positive influence. That he is going back now is significant, because I know in the past he has been rather depressed about the lack of progress since Aung San Suu Kyi was released," Professor Steinberg said. Ambassador Razali was planning to make his 10th visit to Rangoon later this week. He has said he still hopes to make that visit. Aung Din, however, does not see the work of Ambassador Razali and the United Nations as significant. "We don't think the United Nations can do something better for our people of Burma. The United Nations can make numerous resolutions demanding the military to stop the human rights abuses, something like that. But there is no such a mechanism to enforce those resolutions," Aung Din said. Aung Din says the government of Burma is not going to make democratic reforms as long as the international community is divided on how to treat Burma. He notes the United States and the European Union have imposed economic sanctions to try to force Rangoon to enter a dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi. But Burma's neighbors, including China, India, Japan and the countries of Southeast Asia, prefer a softer approach; encouraging a political dialogue while maintaining economic ties with Rangoon. Professor Steinberg says the generals in Rangoon should pay attention to the industrialized world, because they are poised to impose further sanctions on Burma. "When they released Aung San Suu Kyi, there was a great euphoria in the external world, outside of Burma. And at that time, I told the Burmese government that, "you have created expectations, and if you do not live up to those expectations, the situation will be worse," because there is already in the Congress a move to have added sanctions on Burma and the European Union has given Burma until October, I believe, to make some positive changes. Otherwise they will impose greater sanctions," he said. Professor Steinberg says the crackdown is a setback not only to political reform, but can also hinder efforts to address the country's health, education, and humanitarian needs. And if the economy worsens, he says, that can lead to an increase in migrant labor problems and illegal drug trafficking.
Washington
03 June 2003 (VOA)
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/archive/2003-06/a-2003-06-03-4-1.cfm
Posted by Aung Din at 5:42 PM 0 comments
Labels: Interviews
