BLOGGER TEMPLATES AND TWITTER BACKGROUNDS

Thursday, December 15, 2005

UN's Annan Should Seize this Chance



When the UN Security Council is briefed by the UN on Burma, as it is about to be, it will be the first time the issue has been brought before the Council in the 17 years since a new military regime came to power in Rangoon, after a huge pro-democracy protest had been brutally suppressed in Burma.

While China and Russia—who both voted against the move in the UNSC—have said the briefing will be only a one-time event, and only an “informal consultation as a whole,” the US, Britain, the Philippines, Romania and others in the majority who voted in favor are working to ensure the Council offers its support for UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to move on Burma.

The success of this briefing and any subsequent efforts of the international community, such as the Asean Summit early this week, to press the Burmese regime to democratize and respect human rights now depends a great deal on Annan himself. It’s not clear whether Annan will give the briefing himself.

Most observers expect the secretary general to at least attend the briefing and offer his own comments, as well as answer the Council’s questions. All Council members, except the regime’s allies, hope that he will ask the Council to empower him in his efforts to bring about national reconciliation in Burma. If he does, however, he must first make it clear to the doubtful Council members —China, Russia, Japan, Brazil and Algeria—that the situation in Burma justifies UNSC involvement.

Encouragingly, in his report to the UNSC on December 9 on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, he said that “The emerging crisis in … Burma highlights other concerns for the protection of civilians. In these cases humanitarian access and the ability to protect the civilian population from the long-term social and economic consequences of conflict are denied …”

He also mentioned in the report that these conflicts lead to the forced recruitment of child soldiers through abduction, kidnapping, enslavement and coercion or intimidation of their parents or guardians. We believe that he is well aware of the claim by regime critics that an estimated 70,000 child soldiers have been drafted into the Burmese military in this way. He also highlighted forced displacement of rural communities as one of the most disturbing features of conflict. He added that there are 15 million refugees and 25 million internally displaced persons through conflicts worldwide. We believe that there are more than 2 million Burmese refugees, and 650,000 IDPs hiding in eastern Burma, who are within this category of violence.

In his report, Annan also highlighted the use of sexual violence against women and girls as a deliberate method of warfare that has become more horrifying in recent years. Although his examples of sexual violence were from conflicts in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo, we hope he is also aware of the Burmese military’s use of rape as a weapon in conflicts with ethnic insurgencies. The use of sexual violence as a weapon of war by the Burmese army has been reported by UN rapporteur on the human rights situation in Burma Paulo Sergio Pinheiro, and has also been included in the texts of many consecutive resolutions of the UN General Assembly and the UN Commission on Human Rights.

The ball is now in Annan’s court, whether he briefs the Council or not. His mandate on Burma could well be strengthened, as called for by detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy and other Burmese. Judging from his report, we feel he may well use this rare opportunity effectively, and take seriously the plight of the people of Burma, for whom he has shown a lot of concern during his tenure as the secretary general.

Now is Annan’s chance to ask the powerful UNSC for the authority he needs to negotiate a peaceful and non-violent national reconciliation for the Burmese people. Although several countries have worked to get this far at the Council, the West and allies alone cannot provide this mandate.

In his report to the October opening session of the UN General Assembly on the human rights situation in Burma, Annan demanded the Burmese regime resume dialogue with representatives of all ethnic groups and political leaders as soon as possible, release all political prisoners, lift remaining constraints on all political leaders, allow reopening of the offices of the opposition NLD and include these groups in the generals’ proclaimed road map to democracy. He said he hoped to see these steps implemented by the first half of 2006.

The majority of countries on the Security Council have handed Annan a golden opportunity. We hope he will seize the moment to ask for the Council’s blessing in handling Burma. This would strengthen his mandate on Burma, and maybe help him to fulfill his earlier demands.

Aung Din, a former political prisoner in Burma, is co-founder and policy director of the Washington-based US Campaign for Burma.

Monday, December 12, 2005

Kofi Annan's Big Moment on Burma

Kofi Annan's Big Moment on Burma

Aung Din
December 12, 2005
Washington, DC

As ASEAN leaders in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia pressure Burmese military junta for the release of all political prisoners, including Nobel Peace Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi and tangible improvement of the failed democratization process, the UN Security Council is planning to hear a briefing on the situation in Burma. This will be the first time the UN Security Council will discuss Burma in the 17 years since Burma's popular uprising in 1988. Although China and Russia have already said that it will be only a one-time event and only an "informal consultation as a whole", the United States, United Kingdom, the Philippines, Romania and other allies on the Security Council are working to ensure the Council offers its support for UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan's effort on Burma. The success of this briefing and any subsequent efforts of the international community to democratize and bring respect for human rights in Burma now depend a great deal on the Secretary-General himself.

Most observers expect that the Secretary-General will attend the briefing and offer his own comments, as well as answer questions the Council himself. All Council members, except the regime's allies, hope that Mr. Annan will ask the Council to empower him in his effort to facilitate national reconciliation in Burma. However, before he asks for the Security Council's support, he must first make it clear to the doubtful members of the Council --China, Russia, Japan, Brazil and Algeria-- that situation in Burma justified for the Security Council's involvement.

Encouragingly, in his report to the UN Security Council on last Friday, December 9, 2005, on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, he stated that "The emerging crisis in ... Burma highlights other concerns for the protection of civilians. In these cases humanitarian access and the ability to protect the civilian population from the long-term social and economic consequences of conflict are denied ...."

He also mentioned in the report that these conflicts rely upon child soldiers, who are commonly recruited and used against their will, through abduction, kidnapping, enslavement and coercion or intimidation of their parents or guardians. We believe that he is well aware of over 70,000 child soldiers forcibly recruited into the Burmese military. He also highlighted forced displacement within borders as one of the most disturbing features of conflict. In a graph attached in his report, he stated that numbers of refugee and internally displaced persons (IDP) are 15 millions and 25 millions respectively in 2004 all over the world. We believe that over two million population of Burmese refugees and over 650,000 populations of Burmese IDPs, hiding in Eastern part of
Burma certainly fall within this "disturbing" category of violence.

The Secretary-General also highlighted the use of sexual violence, particularly against women and girls as a deliberate method of warfare that has become more horrifying in recent years. Although his examples of sexual violence in armed conflict are in
Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo, we hope that he is also aware of the Burmese military regime's use of rape as weapon of war in ethnic nationality areas. The use of sexual violence as a weapon of war by the Burmese army has been reported by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Situation in Burma, Professor Paulo Sergio Pinheiro and has also been included in the texts of many consecutive resolutions of the UN General Assembly and the UN Commission on Human Rights.

The ball is now in Mr. Annan's court. His briefing to the Security Council will determine whether the supportive countries on the Council will be able to strengthen his mandate with the support of the Security Council, as requested by National League for Democracy and the people from all walks of life in Burma. Judging from his above-mentioned report, we feel that he will use this rare and unique opportunity effectively and seriously for the sake of the people of Burma, for whom he has shown a lot of concerns during his tenure as the UN Secretary-General.

It is also important to note that the UN's current and previous Special Envoys to
Burma have often complained of a weak mandate given by the UN General Assembly. Now is Mr. Annan's chance to request from the UN's penultimate body the authority he needs to negotiate a peaceful and non-violent national reconciliation for the Burmese people. Although many countries have worked to get this far at the Council, the West and other allies alone can not provide this mandate. As former editor of the Far Eastern Economic Review Michael Vatikiotis said in a recent opinion piece, the Secretary-General must ask --- and negotiate--- for it himself.

In his report to the 60th session of UN General Assembly on the situation of human rights in Burma, Mr. Annan demanded the Burmese regime resumes dialogue with the representatives of all ethnic nationality groups and political leaders as soon as possible, releases all political prisoners, lifts the remaining constraints on all political leaders, allows reopening of the offices of National League for Democracy, and includes aforementioned groups in the regime's political road map. He went further by saying that he hoped to see these steps implemented by the first half of 2006.

The majority of the Countries on the Security Council have handed the Secretary-General a golden opportunity. We hope that Mr. Annan will seize the moment and request empowerment from the UN Security Council. Such backing will strengthen his mandate and help him keep his words


[Aung Din is a former political prisoner and Co-Founder and Policy Director of Washington, DC-based US Campaign for
Burma.]

Thursday, December 8, 2005

A Burmese Perspective and Efforts by the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi to Engage with the International Community

The American Society of International Law, Tillar House

Burma: A Challenge to the International Legal System
December 8, 2005, 6:30 PM- 8:30 PM
Sponsored by ASIL and the ASIL's New Professionals Interest Group

Presentation of Aung Din, Policy Director, US Campaign for Burma

A Burmese Perspective and Efforts by the NLD/ASSK to Engage with the International Community

Introduction

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me begin with my appreciation to the ASIL and the ASIL's New Professionals Interest Group for sponsoring this event at very critical time. I would also thank all of you for gathering here today and your interest in
Burma. As a Burmese citizen, it is encouraging to see people around the world taking an interest in my country. Thanks Andrew for your kind introduction.

As a Burmese citizen, an activist working for freedom and democracy in
Burma and a supporter of our leader Aung San Suu Kyi and her party National League for Democracy, I came here to speak the efforts of Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD to engage with the International Community and the International Legal System to bring justice in Burma.

I believe many of you already knew what is Burma? And what is happening in
Burma? For those, who don't know very well, let me say very briefly about Burma. Today Burma can be described as a country of South East Asia, being ruled by the world most brutal dictatorship, which use all forms of abuses, including arbitrary detention, extrajudicial killing, forced relocation and forced labor, use of rape as weapon of war, purposely destruction of villages to oppress the population for its control of power. Burma is also a major producer and trafficker of heroine and illicit drugs. Burma's dictator General Than Shwe is second worst dictator in the world, according to the Parade magazine, just after Kim Jong IL of North Korea. Burma army has forcibly recruited over 70 thousands child soldiers, the most number of child soldiers in the world, according to Human Rights Watch. According to Amnesty International, Burma's regime incarcerated over 1,200 political dissidents, including 1991 Nobel Peace Prize Recipient Aung San Suu Kyi and over a dozen Members of Parliament. According to a recent report produced by Council on Foreign Relations, Burma is the source of unique HIV strain and spreading it to neighboring countries, China, India and South East Asia, through its drug trafficking route. Berlin-based Transparency International in October ranked Burma as the world's third most corrupt country, sharing the same rank with Haiti and Turkmenistan and just above Bangladesh and Chad, out of 159 countries. Over 650,000 people are hiding in the mountains and forests in the Eastern part of Burma, as the internal displaced persons (IDPs) to avoid the killing of the regime's soldiers, while over two millions people of Burma are living in neighboring countries as the refugees or illegal immigrants.

Well. This is my homeland! Clearly,
Burma is not in good shape.

Burma: 17 Years of Resistance

17 years after a popular uprising in Burma in 1988, calling for democracy, human rights and an end of military rule, the state of Burma has deteriorated dramatically and particularly for ordinary Burmese. The 1988 popular uprising was crushed brutally by the military ruler. But because of some pressure from internal and external forces including some members of the international community, a multi-party election in
Burma was held in 1990. Even though the National League for Democracy party, led by Aung San Suu Kyi won a landslide victory, the party was unable to assume power. To this day, the military regime continues to refuse to honor the election results and the international response to Burma's crisis is still a polarizing issue.

The
United States is a leader among democratic countries, including European Union, in pressuring Burmese junta through strong economic sanctions, an arms embargo, ban on financial transaction, freezing the regime's assets in the US, targeted visa restriction and other diplomatic measures. While the U.S. and EU choose to pressure and isolate the regime, neighboring countries choose the opposing way; so-called constructive engagement. China becomes the strongest ally and major weapon supplier of Burmese military junta. It makes another giant neighbor India to worry that it might lose influence over Burma against its arch-rival China. Now, under the "Look East" policy, India is also dealing nicely with Burmese military junta to counterbalance China, by providing some military equipments, military training, soft loans, financial assistance and mutual state leader visits. ASEAN's policy of non-interference among the member States also protects the regime from the international pressure.

Burma: A Challenge to the International Legal System

When non-violence democracy movement is being crushed brutally by the dictator, NLD and the people of Burma cried out loud to international civilized community for help. Aung San Suu Kyi mentioned repeatedly that "Please use your liberty to promote ours."

In Customary International Law, grave, repeated and systematic violations of human rights are forbidden. There are norms banning slavery, racial discrimination, tortures and genocide. There are norms prohibiting forcible denial of the right of peoples to self-determination .These rules bind the Nations regardless of whether they have rectified the specific conventions or not. Now, there is legal entitlement for any State or International Organization competent in area of human rights to request States where gross and large-scale violations of human rights are occurring to stop such violations. If they are not ended, International Community has authority to impose the measures to enforce the ending of such violations. Intervention in the affairs of individual State is fully justified, so long as serious and large-scale violations had been committed by its ruler, regardless of whether they amounted to a threat to the peace or not.
Burma is such a case now. International Legal System is being requested by the people of Burma and human rights activists around the world to organize International Intervention in Burma. This is a great challenge for International Legal
System.

Burma and the UN General Assembly

Three weeks ago, on November 18, 2005, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on Burma, in which the General Assembly expressed grave concern over the extension of house arrest and consistent harassment of senior leaders of the National League for Democracy, particularly Aung San Suu Kyi and Vice Chairman U Tin Oo. The Assembly strongly called on the Burmese regime to end systematic human rights violations, bring human rights abusers to justice, immediately release political prisoners, enable human rights defenders to safely pursue their activities, and end recruitment of child soldiers, rape and sexual violence by the armed forces, and systematic enforced displacement that led to refugee flows to neighboring countries. The General Assembly also urged the Burmese regime to become a party to all international human rights instruments and fully cooperate with the Special Envoy and the Special Rapporteur to bring the country towards civilian rule.

This is the 15th resolution adopted by the UNGA in 15 years in a row. As usual, the Burmese regime declared that it would not associate with the resolution and rejected it as it did in the past 14 years. The regime's Ambassador called on all developing countries to stand with his government in the name of the spirit of the Non-Aligned Movement and the unity of developing countries, and to defeat the European Union drafted resolution. The representative of
Cuba proposed a motion of non-action to kill the draft resolution on Burma and urged all delegates to vote for it. After the vote, Cuba's proposal was defeated by 54 in favor, 77 against and 35 abstentions. Later, the resolution on the situations of human rights in Burma was adopted by consensus.

This is the dangerous message for all of us. People like us, who are being ruled and abused by the brutal dictatorship, have expected and believed for many years that United Nations is an important venue in international legal system to complain our unbearable sufferings, ask for help and get support. In this 60th General Assembly, all, except one, country specific resolutions on
Burma, Iran, Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan were challenged with "No Action Motions" proposed by these tyranny regimes with the support of many other countries. Although six resolutions were passed after these motions were defeated by majority in votes, the resolution on the human rights situation in Sudan was killed. Over 50 countries from developing world and Non-Aligned Movement, notably and ironically with including South Africa, a country which was free from the Apartheid rule after decades of freedom movement and successful international campaigns and India, the so-called largest democracy in the world, aligned with the dictators to stop addressing human rights situation of unfortunate people. We now know that in this world, rhetoric and reality are often opposites.

I would say that this is a big challenge for the International Legal System and International Law Society. Imagine that if the resolution on
Burma is killed. What will happen? There will be no legal international concerns on the situation in Burma; no legal denunciation from international community on Burmese military junta for its systematic human rights violations; no more mandate for Secretary-General to use his offices for assisting realizing of political dialogue in Burma; no more UN Special Envoy; no more UN Special Rapporteur; and no more UN involvement. We will have no place to cry. And dictators like Burmese regime will be out of the scope of International Legal System or International Legal System will be irrelevant to those who run the country with iron fists and are conducting crimes against humanity.

Since last year, we knew that there were growing numbers of countries, trying to kill the country specific resolutions in UN General Assembly. This year they proved that they are becoming stronger than before and they might have sufficient numbers to kill all country specific resolutions in the next year, if international law society and democratic countries are unable to reform to address this ongoing challenge.

Burma and the UN Security Council

Last Friday, the UN Security Council, for the first time in the 17 years, agreed to invite senior officials from the UN Secretariat to brief the situation in
Burma, in a close door meeting. This is a compromise between the U.S-led countries that believe the involvement of Security Council in Burma is long overdue and another group of China, Russia, Algeria, Brazil and Japan that believe that situation in Burma is no immediate threat to the international peace and security. Anyway, we welcome this decision and we hope that Secretary-General Kofi Annan will be able to convince all members of the Council that this is the time to act in Burma.

Actually, the National League for Democracy (NLD) has called for UN Security Council intervention in
Burma since 2003. After the Depeyin Massacre, in which scores of NLD members were beaten to death by the regime's militia in Upper Burma, in which Aung San Suu Kyi and U Tin Oo were narrowly escaped from mass assassination, but subsequently arrested and detained to this day, NLD party requested the UN Security Council to intervene in Burma.

One day after the launch of the report "Threat to the Peace; A Call for the UN Security Council to Act in Burma", on September 21, 2005, NLD issued a statement, special appeal to international community to support the President Vaclav Havel and Bishop Desmond Tutu's call for Security Council to Act in Burma. In that statement, NLD leaders appreciate President Havel and Bishop Tutu, express their desire and commitment for peaceful change in
Burma through meaningful dialogue, urge all member states of Security Council to address the situation in Burma and especially request permanent member states of the Council to refrain from exercising use of veto powers. NLD's strong endorsement for Security Council action in Burma is overwhelmingly echoed by the people from all walks of life in Burma, including veteran politicians, ethnic national parties, student and youth leaders and even some ceasefire ethnic groups.

Again, on
October 28, 2005, NLD issued another statement, in which it repeated the request of all member states of Security Council to agree to act in Burma. At the same time, rank and file members of NLD tried to meet with respective Embassies in Rangoon and make personal appeal directly. We deeply appreciate the U.S, especially to those officials from the Congress, State Department, the White House and US's Mission in New York, who have been working tirelessly to raise Burma at the Security Council. Now, the ball is in Kofi Annan's court.

Now, the Ball is in Kofi's Court

It is sure that
Russia and China have no intention to follow up any action after the briefing. We understand that U.S. and United Kingdom, together with many other members have decided to bring Burma on the Security Council's formal agenda. The briefing of Kofi Annan or his representative will weigh in to one side to win.

Russia and China are repeatedly saying that human rights situation mentioned in the report are exaggerating and current situation in Burma is nothing more than domestic problem. But Kofi Annan can prove that these facts mentioned in the report are exactly mentioned in his reports to General Assembly in this year and in the past years as well as the 28 consecutive resolutions adopted by consensus by the UN General Assembly and Commission on Human Rights in 15 years. Consensus means that they, Russia and China also included in decision making. How can they say these are exaggerating?

By comparing with the previous cases which Security Council decided to involve, Jared and a group of smart and dedicated lawyers, pointed out that the situation in Burma constitute the threat to the Peace. Kofi Annan also can truly say that all 28 resolutions are ignored by the regime and effort of his offices to mediate in
Burma is totally ineffective, not because of his lack of will to work out, but because of his lack of powerful backing from Security Council. He should ask the Council to empower him with the Council's mandate to vigorously engage in the national reconciliation and democratization in Burma. We hope that he knows he can do more than expressing disappointment again and again. We also hope that he will use this rare opportunity effectively and seriously. By having strong empowerment from the Security Council through a binding resolution, his effort of assisting democratization in Burma will be more effective and he may practically expect the changes in Burma in the first half of 2006, a dead line set by himself in his report to UNGA on October 10, 2005...

Finally, I would like to make clear that we are not just wishing; but we are working continuously and tirelessly to bring about changes in
Burma through international legal system. Let me conclude with the remark of Aung San Suu Kyi, "In a country like ours which is totally crushed by a military regime, justice is a dream. But it is a dream that we are determined to realize."

Thank you.

Aung Din
Policy Director
US Campaign for
Burma

Thursday, December 1, 2005

The Face of Burma 2005, Aung Din

The Faces of Burma 2005

By The Irrawaddy
December 2005
http://www.irrawaddy.org/aviewer.asp?a=5284&z=102



Aung Din [Exiled Activist]

When Burmese opposition groups claim that the country’s ruling junta holds its population of some 54 million as hostages, skeptics may dismiss it as little more than exaggerated rhetoric. For Aung Din, a former political prisoner and co-founder of a Washington-based lobby group, the claim carries more weight; particularly after hearing the news that the junta had arrested every member of his family, except his octogenarian grandfather.

In the aftermath of deadly bomb attacks in Rangoon last May, the government—having no clues to the identities of the bombers—began interrogating the families of exiled dissidents who were outspoken critics of the military government. Aung Din’s family quickly became targets of Burma’s revamped intelligence agency, which detained his mother, sister and brother in an undisclosed location for several days. They were later released after foreign media organizations reported on the arrests.

According to information received by The Irrawaddy, members of Burma’s thuggish Union Solidarity and Development Association distributed posters with Aung Din’s picture throughout Rangoon, identifying him as a suspect in the bomb attacks. The posters also included the names of his family members, who were thus implicated with Aung Din as suspects without any supporting evidence. As a result, their safety—as well as their reputations—was put at considerable risk

“I felt so bad for my family members,” said Aung Din, the policy director at US Campaign for Burma. “But I hope they would understand that I never get involved in violent activities. This is the military’s hostage-taking harassment.” Given his past affiliations in Burma, it is not surprising that the junta has targeted him. Now in his early 40s, Aung Din was once a student union leader and colleague of prominent student leader Min Ko Naing during the 1988 uprising.

Aung Din was arrested in early 1989 and spent more than four years in prison. Following his release in 1993, he completed his studies in engineering and left Burma. He spent several years in Singapore before moving to the Thai-Burma border in 2000 to join the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners. A year later, he arrived in the United States to work with the Free Burma Coalition.

A dispute with FBC founder Dr Zarni over the group’s policy on Burma led Aung Din and American activist Jeremy Woodrum to leave the group in 2003 and form their own organization, the US Campaign for Burma. Zarni would later reverse his previous position on Burma by coming out against economic sanctions, criticizing democratic opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and traveling to Rangoon to meet with the country’s ruling generals.

USCB efforts—particularly its international campaign to celebrate Suu Kyi’s 60th birthday—have demonstrated how coordinated action around the world can make the Burmese junta vulnerable and focus media attention on opposition activities. Aung Din, considered by many to have close ties with the political establishment in Washington, often appears on short wave radio broadcasts. While some critics have branded him a hardliner, Aung Din says that he is simply a “principled activist” working in exile for the benefit of the opposition movement in Burma.

Thursday, October 13, 2005

Maybe This Time



Irrawaddy: Maybe this time – Aung Din

Thu 13 Oct 2005
Filed under: News, Opinion
http://www.burmanet.org/news/2005/10/13/irrawaddy-maybe-this-time-%E2%80%93-aung-din/

A new proposal on Burma would directly involve the UN Security Council

A round-up of Burmese opinions on the possibility of effective UN action posted by The Irrawaddy on its website a few weeks ago crystallized what many of us have been feeling for some time: The UN may be a paper tiger incapable of bringing change to Burma. Let’s be honest. What has the UN done for Burma lately?

Most Burmese would agree that the answer is “not much.” Indeed, it is increasingly looking as if Burma—like Rwanda, Srebrenica, and Darfur—will go down in history as one of the UN’s great failures. Meanwhile, the military regime continues to rack up its list of atrocities: millions pushed into forced labor, more child soldiers than any other country in the world, 2,700 villages destroyed in eastern Burma since 1996 and the use of rape as a weapon throughout the country, to name but a few.

One might expect that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan would be embarrassed by this series of failures on Burma and want to correct his future actions. In one year, he was “concerned,” then “increasingly concerned,” then “gravely concerned” and then—inexplicably—only “concerned” again.

But is lack of progress in Burma really Annan’s fault? He is not the one burning down villages and forcing hundreds of thousands of refugees to flee their homes both inside the country and across borders. Whose fault is it? Clearly the ruling State Peace and Development Council is the primary barrier to progress in Burma. Who else is to blame? Is it China, which has provided billions of dollars in weaponry and equipment to the regime? Is it Asean, which has exercised a policy of “constructive engagement” that was in reality a policy of hoping for slow change through the pursuit of business interests?

What about the US and EU, who responded to the opposition National League for Democracy’s call for sanctions on Burma while also spending millions on humanitarian assistance, yet not offering a framework for international negotiations? All these are UN members, yet the UN as a whole has failed to bring change to Burma.

Still, we should not lose hope in the UN system. It represents the only source of global legitimacy in today’s world, despite its weaknesses. As Burmese, it is in our interest to strengthen the UN system. After all, the UN’s calls for national reconciliation in Burma are not wrong; they are just weak. The 14 consecutive resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly and 13 consecutive resolutions by the Commission on Human Rights represent not only the collective opinion of the international community, but the desires of the Burmese people.

The democracy movement, military regime and those not involved in politics all say they want to see genuine national reconciliation in Burma. This desire extends beyond Burma—Asean, the US, EU, China, India, Japan and others have all called for it. Moreover, all want to see change soon. As Singapore’s Lee Kwan Yew recently said about Burma: “To stay frozen in time means they are building up problems for themselves, and those problems will overflow into Asean.”

The UN’s three accomplishments—uniting world opinion, injecting a reasonable sense of urgency, and agreeing on a common mechanism for change—are real and not without merit. The problem is that the mechanism needs adjustment. The Burmese regime has had more than a decade to cooperate with the good offices of the UN secretary-general, but it has refused. Ten years of failure is enough to show that the present mechanism is broken.

One positive proposal for fixing this broken mechanism and strengthening the UN’s role in Burma—indeed, the only pro-active proposal—was launched on September 20 by former Czech President Vaclav Havel and 1984 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Desmond Tutu. They proposed a UN Security Council resolution that would compel the SPDC to work with the secretary-general. It would also authorize him to report back periodically to the council. Unlike UN General Assembly and Commission on Human Rights resolutions that are unenforceable, the UNSC resolution would be binding. This means that the regime must work with Annan towards national reconciliation—or stand in violation of the UN Charter. In what appears to be a nod towards building an international consensus that all can agree on, Havel and Tutu did not call for sanctions to be applied through the council.

The UNSC has cited serious refugee flows, drug production, human rights abuses, the overthrow of a democratic government and armed conflict among factions in its past decisions to take action on a country. What is unique about Burma is that all of these factors are at play, and many are especially severe. Indeed, no UNSC member should fear that a resolution on Burma would set a precedent for action on its own country—Burma is beyond the pale.

World leaders should embrace this proposal. In fact, the level of support for the proposal will test whether countries and regions mean what they say when they claim to support UN efforts in Burma. After all, isn’t this what everyone has agreed on: national reconciliation through dialogue, multilateral talks, and diplomacy?

Aung Din is a former political prisoner in Burma and co-founder and policy director of Washington DC-based US Campaign for Burma.

Thursday, May 5, 2005

Burma: Non-Violence Movement for Democracy and the Role of International Community

Harvard Burma Action Group, Harvard University
May 5, 2005

Burma: Non-Violence Movement for Democracy and the Role of International Community
-------------------------------

Thank you very much for inviting me to speak here today.

A few months ago, I flew from Washington, DC to Charlotte, North Carolina. On the plane, an American gentleman, who was sitting beside me, asked my country of origin. I answered, “I come from Burma”. He said, “What? Bahamas!” So, I tried to describe my country to him. I said “O.K do you know Thailand?" “Yes. I know”, he answered. “Thailand is a beautiful country with colorful beaches, wonderful mountains, virgin islands and famous culture.” Obviously, he knew Thailand very well. I told him, “Well, Burma is a neighboring country of Thailand. We share a border”. He still didn’t get it. So, I gave another description, “Do you know the golden triangle, which is notorious for production of heroine and illicit stimulants." Well, successfully, it rang a bell. “Oh! I see, Khun Sa, Khun Sa? I remember now. A drug lord; a narcotic kingpin. You are from his country, right?" Reluctantly, I said “Yes.” At least, now he knew my country.

This is a reality that we have to accept painfully and sadly. While our neighbor Thailand is famous for its beauty, culture and hospitality, my country Burma is notorious for narcotic production, human rights abuses, and poverty and as a heaven for drug lords, who are wanted by the US Government and International Law Enforcement agencies.

------------------------------

Let me tell you a brief history of
Burma. Burma is one of the Southeast Asian Countries and surrounded by China, India, Bangladesh, Thailand, Andaman Sea and Indian Ocean. Burma has a population of 52 millions people, comprised of eight major ethnic nationalities and several minority groups. Actually, the last census conducted in Burma was in 1981.Therefore, the population is estimated based on the rate of population growth. The majority of population is ethnic Burman and the major religion is Buddhism.

Today Burma united under a monarchy early in the 11th century. In 1885, Burma was invaded and colonized by the British. Japanese Fascists also ruled Burma for three years, from 1945 to 1947. Burma's independence movement started in 1920 and achieved success in 1948.

When independent, Burma exercised a parliament democracy system. Democracy and Human Rights were guaranteed by the government, which was elected by the people. But this did not last very long. On March 2, 1962, General Ne Win and the military staged a coup. Since then, political parties, student unions, trade unions and independent organizations have not been allowed to exist. From that time onward, Burma had lost Democracy and Human Rights. However, this also marched the beginning of the democracy movement in Burma.

From 1962 onward, students and workers held the various strikes peacefully in University campuses and in the factories against the military regime, demanding the Democracy and Human Right for the people of Burma. All strikes ended with bloody oppression by the military government. Hundreds of students and workers were killed, detained and forced to flee Burma. It is true that ending tyranny is the work of generations.

When I was young, I saw my father disappear from home many times. Sometimes, he disappeared for a week, sometimes two weeks; once he was away from home for nearly two years. When he came back home, he was weak and unhealthy and needed many months to recover. He was taken by the authorities for interrogation. He was tortured by his interrogators and kept in solitary confinement. Before I realized what was happening, I cried together with my mother every time my father was taken. When I realized that my father was taken by the authorities for his link to underground anti-dictatorship activities, I stopped crying and I was very proud of him. I consoled my mother and waited quietly for the day when my father would be back. I always wished that nobody would come and take my father again. I also prayed that my father and his colleagues would topple the military dictator. Since 1962, the people of Burma has been tried hard to remove the military dictatorship by peaceful means. There are plenty of mass protests in 1962, 1969, 1973, 1974, 1976, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1996 and 1998. The people of Burma have never passed these days quietly and silently without showing their resistance to the regime. Tens of thousands of people sacrificed their lives during these struggles for free Burma.

The movement for democracy in Burma reached its peak in 1988. Burmese students successfully organized a nationwide popular demonstration, calling for freedom, democracy and an end of single party rule. We joined together with millions of people from all walks of life and challenged the authorities peacefully. Under strong pressure of mass protests, General Ne Win resigned and agreed to hold a multi-party general election. We ended the single party rule in Burma in 1988 and paved the way for a multi-party democracy. But, before we were able to establish a civilian government, the current military regime came to power, brutally killing thousands of peaceful demonstrators in the streets. This military regime, led by dictator Than Shwe runs the country by using guns and creating a climate of fear through arbitrary arrest, extrajudicial killing, using rape as weapon of war, and other forms of abuses. Since 1988, as many as ten thousand peaceful demonstrators were killed by the brutal military; thousands of Burmese people were forced to flee the country and became the refugees in the neighboring countries; hundreds of ethnic women and girls were raped by soldiers; between 600,000 and one million people became internal displaced persons and the target of soldier in free fire zones; I can not count the number of broken families and the lives being destroyed by the military dictators. Currently, more than one thousand and three hundred activists are being incarcerated. I was one of them between 1989 and 1993.

---------------------------------

I was arrested on
April 23, 1989. I was on the way back to one of my hiding places, when a group of soldiers stopped the bus. Then, I was removed from the passenger bus by force. My hands were cuffed behind my back and my head was covered with a dirty hood. I was thrown into an army trunk and brought to an interrogation center. I was there with no food, no drink, no toilet, and no sleep for one week. One group came into the room. They used no words but began kicking, beating, punching and hitting me. Because I was blindfolded and handcuffed, I didn’t know where these attacks came from and who the attackers were. I was like a ball in a soccer field, a ball being kicked by twenty-two players, sometimes in the air, sometimes on the ground. Once they were satisfied with the torture, they left and another group came in for interrogation. And interrogations and torture went on all days and nights. I requested many times for a drink of water. But it was never granted. I lost consciousness many times, but they only took off the hood, poured cold water on my face and put the hood back. They didn’t even allow me to pass out. I was only allowed to have food, drink and the rest after seven days of interrogation. Then interrogations and torture still continued, but not frequently.

One month later, I was sent to the notorious Insein prison, where thousand of dissidents were being held. I was in solitary confinement for 13 months without trial. There was no family contact either. Only on May 23, 1990, I was sent before the military court. I was sentenced to four years imprisonment with hard labor. My trial only took 15 minutes. I had no defense lawyer.

Most of the political prisoners are put in the cellblock. In the cellblock, up to five prisoners shared a tiny cell, eight foot by twelve foot. We had to sleep on the concrete floor with a bamboo mat. The cell was constructed with four concrete walls and ceiling that was too high. There was one iron-gate at front and a small window covered with wire-mesh high on the back wall. And there were only two small chamber pots for excrement.

When we were in the cellblock, there were many rules to follow. We had to wake up at six am and sit in front of the door for about two hours for a head count. We had to sit again at five pm for about two hours for another head-count. We only had fifteen minutes per day to leave the cell to throw out our excrement and bathe. At nine pm, we had to lie down in our place and nobody was allowed to sit or stand or walk in the cell. We were not allowed to talk to other political prisoners in the adjacent cells. We couldn’t even say a courtesy word, such as, hello or Good morning or Good night.
----------------------------

Once, I was in a solitary confinement. I drew a calendar on the wall with a piece of brick. From day 1 to day 30, from Sunday to Saturday and I marked a cross on every day I passed. And one month ended. I drew another month and marked again. One day, a prison officer noticed these calendars and I was given a punishment for violation of the prison rules. They said that as a first time offender, I had to be put in the pitch-black cell as a minimum punishment for three days. Then I was brought into the pitch-black cell. When I looked at that cell, I didn’t see any difference. But I found the difference when I was in there.

It was similar to the other cell, 8 foot by 12 foot. But the window at the back wall and the iron-gate at the front were covered with metal plate. When they closed the door, there was no light in the cell. That’s why it was called pitch-black cell. Furthermore, there was no bamboo mat, no blanket and no chamber pot. And I was naked. They took off my prisoner uniform before they put me into there. A few hours later, I was scared and shaking. Coldness, darkness and loneliness attacked me in the cell. I cried. I shouted. I sang songs. But this made echo in the cell and made me more scared. I tried to sleep on the floor. It was too cold. I couldn’t lie down for more than 15 minutes. I cursed the military junta with dirty words. I ran in the cell. I jumped. I did everything that made me feel alive and still sane. It was the first time I started to look for a religion to worship under this huge amount of fear. I have to admit that I may have become crazy if they had put me in that cell for more than three days. I even decided that I would try to avoid punishment in the prison in the future. But it was very difficult to do so. Firstly, we could not always obey those dirty regulations. Secondly, there are many rules that cannot be remembered all the time. Thirdly, prison authorities are always trying to find mistakes of the political prisoners purposely. Therefore, almost all political prisoners have to go through the experiences of punishment in jail. And I received punishment again and again.
-------------------------------------

Once, our leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi said "In a country like ours, which is totally crushed by a military regime, justice is a dream. But it is a dream that we are determined to realize." Yes, we are determined to realize the dream, which is freedom, justice and democracy in Burma. We are working to realize the dream by peaceful means.

Martin Luther King had a dream to make his people have equal rights in the United States. Bogyoke Aung San had a dream to make Burma free from the British Colonial rule. Nelson Mandela had a dream to abolish Apartheid and White minority rule in South Africa. And they were not just dreaming, they made their dreams come true.

Our dream is simple, reasonable and appropriate. We want to live in peace. We want to live in a safe and secure environment. We want to be free from fear. We want to have the freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of association, freedom to choose the government we want. We want to have justice which is above everybody. Of course, realizing this kind of dream is not a simple job. It comes with enormous difficulties and requires a huge amount of sacrifices.

As we are trying to realize the dream by peaceful mean against 400,000 strong, well-equipped and brutal military forces, we need the kind assistance of the international community.

Our leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), call on the international community to pressure the Burmese military junta politically, economically and diplomatically. Similar to the international campaigns supporting South African's anti-apartheid movement, we want international governments to punish the Burmese regime with strong and collective economic sanctions. We want international corporations not to invest in Burma. We want foreign tourists not to visit Burma. We want the United Nations Security Council to be involved in Burma. These are the roles we want international community to play to support Burma's non-violence democracy movement. We are not asking for military intervention. We are just asking the international community to help Burma's democracy movement by putting concrete, collective and concerted pressure against Burma's military junta.

These demands are very reasonable. Refusal to recognize this regime as a legitimate government by the international community will highlight the illegitimate and illegal rule of Burma's junta. Cutting the economic lifeline of the regime by economic sanctions will weaken the stronghold of the regime's abusive mechanism. Denunciation by international community of this regime's human rights abuses on its own people will make the regime responsible and accountable for these crimes against humanity. This helps the democracy movement to be much stronger and to have more leverage. We expected to challenge the brutal military with the help of democracy loving people from all over the world.

But the world we live in today is very diverse and polarized. When the United States and European Union, whose priority is to respect human rights and democracy, impose economic sanctions and pressure against Burma's junta, China, India, Thailand and many other countries, whose priority is just business interest, continue doing business with Burma's regime and profiting. While thousands of foreign tourists listen to the request of Burma's democrat and avoid visiting Burma, hundreds of other foreigners are heading to Burma and helping to fill the pockets of the generals. Even in the United States, while the US Congress, the US Administration and the people strongly support Burma's democracy movement by imposing comprehensive economic sanctions and banning new investment in Burma, some US corporations like UNOCAL are still doing business in Burma, making a handsome profit and helping Burma's military regime to be richer and stronger. While responsible citizens of the US listen to Aung San Suu Kyi and stay away from Burma, New York-based Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. is running a five-star hotel and a luxury cruise ship in Burma and promoting expensive travel to Burma by University Alumni Associations and Museums.

Actually, we have no time to waste with disappointment and depression. We believe in the power of grassroots activists and students. We request your solidarity. And we believe that your solidarity and action will lead to world leaders responding to our request fairly and consistently. That's why; I am here today, meeting with you.

First, please continue your campaign asking Harvard University to divest from the UNOCAL. By investing in UNOCAL, Harvard University will be a partner in crime with UNOCAL. Bare in mind that the profits Harvard University is receiving from the UNOCAL, are being stained with the blood, sweat and tears of the innocent citizens of Burma, who have been forced to relocate from their native land, whose lands were forcibly confiscated for a gas pipe-line project, who were forced to work without compensation in the gas pipe-line area, who were killed brutally and who were raped by the regime's soldiers funded by the UNOCAL. Harvard should divest from UNOCAL as quickly as possible to save its dignity.

Second, we would like to urge you to help us boycott tourism to Burma. As I mentioned earlier, some travel agencies are promoting lucrative tours to Burma among the University Student Alumni Associations and the Museums. Two years ago, the Harvard Museum took this offer and made a visit to Burma. Please tell your friends that making a luxury tour to Burma at this time while the people of Burma are suffering enormous human rights abuses by the regime, is very unethical and undermining our non-violence movement.

Third, it is important for Burma's democracy movement that the US maintains its current level of pressure against the regime. The Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, which was adopted in 2003 unanimously in the US Congress, is going to be resubmitted to the Congress in mid May, this month for an extension of another year. Senators McConnell and Feinstein in the Senate, Congressmen Tom Lantos and Peter King in the House are preparing to reintroduce in both chambers. Please call your members of Congress, urging them to co-sponsor and support this legislation when it comes to the floor.

Let me also explain one of the campaigns we are undertaking worldwide. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi will be sixty years old on June 19, 2005. She is an icon of democracy, a unique leader in Burma's democracy movement and the only imprisoned Nobel Peace Laureate in the world. Like people did seventeen years ago in 1988 on Nelson Mandela's seventieth birthday, we are planning to hold worldwide events on June 19th to honor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, all political prisoners and the courageous people of Burma.

Here is some progress so far. City and County of San Francisco decided to name June 19th, as Aung San Suu Kyi Day. The City of Berkeley will be next soon. A famous singer has already written a song dedicated to Aung San Suu Kyi to be released in the first week of June. Over 60 people in the US will arrest themselves at home for one day on June 19th to show their solidarity with Aung San Suu Kyi. There will be mass protests on June 17, Friday, in front of the Burmese regime's embassies in at least 12 countries. Hundreds of people are sending birthday cards to our office for Aung San Suu Kyi. We hope that you will be part of these activities.

Well, like I said, we are not dreaming. We are working to realize the dream. The journey to the dream might be very long; it might be full of dangers; it might be an ocean of fire. But, we will never ever give up. We will not make our friends in prison disappointed. We will not make the souls of our friends who sacrificed their lives for this dream disappointed. We are working to realize the dream and we will reach the dream that we want soon, by working together with you all. Let's make our dream come true together.


Thank you.


Aung Din

Saturday, March 12, 2005

Dreaming and Realizing the Dream

DREAMING AND REALIZING THE DREAM
AUNG DIN

March 12, 2005

2005 Annual Burma's Human Rights Day Event
Unitarian Fellowship Hall, 1924 Cedar Street (at Bonita), in Berkeley, California

Organized by the Burmese American Democratic Alliance (BADA); and co-sponsored by The Global Fund For Women of San Francisco, the Berkeley Unitarian Unitarian Universalist Social Justice Committee, the Burmese American Women's Alliance (BAWA) and the Political Prisoner Supporting Committee of the West Coast Burma Pro-Democracy Conference

*****************************
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to begin by thanking the Burmese American Democratic Alliance and The Global Fund For Women of San Francisco, the Berkeley Unitarian Universalist Social Justice Committee, the Burmese American Women's Alliance (BAWA) and the Political Prisoner Supporting Committee of the West Coast Burma Pro-Democracy Conference for organizing and sponsoring this remarkable event. I also would like to thank all of you for being here today. I am very honored to be here with you all.

Seventeen years ago, on March 13, 1988, my fellow students Phone Maw was killed by the police during a student protest at the Rangoon Institute of Technology (RIT), which was only engineering school in Burma at that time and what we called "RIT" in short form. I was a final year mechanical Engineering student and few months away from my graduation.

I was at D Hall, one of six hostels for male students, when I heard noises coming from the main entrance of the school. I put down my books and ran to the main entrance to find out what was happening. What I saw was very ugly. My fellow students were inside the compound, shouting slogans that denounced the police and authorities for their injustice and unfairness. On the other side of the concrete wall that divide the main street and the school, police were kneeling on the street, aiming their guns at the students, ready to shoot. It was a very ugly scene indeed, unarmed students were confronting with well-armed police. Within a minute, I was among my fellow students, shouting the slogans at the police with enormous anger.

A few minutes later, two fire engines came to the scene. We were sprayed by the water cannon. At first, the speed of water was not strong, so that some students were dancing and making the police angry. Later, small materials were dropping around us. At first we thought these were canned milk, but suddenly we realized that these were smoke bombs. Dark smoke covered the air, and we could not see each other. Then we heard very loud noises, something like thunder, many times. Police shot at the students, who were immobilized by the pressure of water cannon and darkness of the smoke. We ran disorderly back into the main building.

When we were at the main building, we checked each other. Many of us were injured, some by falling on concrete floor, some were temporarily blinded due to the smoke, and some sustained gun shot wound. Among them, three students, Phone Maw, Myint Oo and Soe Naing were in critical condition. I have never seen people with so much blood before, except in the movies. It was the first time in my life that I saw wounded persons, who were lying on the floor, motionless. Some said that they were already dead and some disagreed. Our professors came and arranged a car and brought them to the hospital immediately. Later, we learned that Phone Maw was already dead and Soe Naing died five days later at the hospital. He was treated as an accused and put at the prisoner ward in the
Rangoon General Hospital. He was chained with his bed even in his critical condition till the day he died.

When the government’s radio, television and newspaper announced that incident, it was mentioned as a group fight between the RIT students and the commoners. The government’s media even reported that the commoners killed Phone Maw during the fight. These false press announcements instigated the fury of students from all Universities and Colleges. To protest the unfair treatment by the government, all University students gathered inside their school campus and held the anti-government strikes, demanding for justice and reformation of the student unions to protect the student rights.

At Rangoon University, a student strike was held to support to denounce the government. On March 16, Rangoon University students decided to march to RIT to join with RIT students. They left from the campus in a peaceful and orderly manner. When they reached the main road, the massive riot police blocked the road with barbed wires, armored cars and fire engines.

The riot police, with angry face and bloodthirsty manner were ready to attack the students. They even shouted at the students, saying “stupid students, trouble makers", and used some dirty words. Student leader Min Ko Naing and some students approached the riot police and requested that they open the road. But all the requests made by the students were in vane. Within a few seconds, all the riot police ran into the students and beat them with their batons mercilessly. Many students were beaten to death on the spot. Some students collapsed to the ground and were kicked by the police. Some police stole the students’ personal belongings, such as gold chains, rings, watches, during the rampage.

Students were running in panic without knowing where they were going. Some students were trapped between the riot police and Inya Lake, next to Rangoon University and famous for it’s panoramic scenery. Students collapsed into the lake when the riot polices ran after them and beat them continuously. There were so many bodies floating in the lake that the water of Inya Lake turned red. Cries of the defenseless students and the angry and blood thirsty shouting of riot police echoed above Inya Lake, once a chosen place for lovers and the most beautiful symbol of Rangoon University. Plenty of slippers, school bags and books without owners left on the road.

One year later, in March 1989, we planned to hold an event making the one year anniversary of March 13 at the RIT campus. We also decided to name this day "Anti-Dictatorship Day of Burma". Later, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi called us to her residence and presented her idea to name this day "Human Rights Day of Burma". After serious discussion, we all agreed to call March 13 "Human Rights Day of
Burma" as Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has suggested.

March 13, 1988 is a day to remember. It was a day that the university students were killed by the authorities. It was a day that ignited the nationwide popular uprising calling for democracy, human rights and an end of single party dictatorship. It was a day that sent a strong signal to then dictator General Ne Win to withdraw from his single party dictatorship. I really appreciate the leaders and members of the BADA and San Francisco Bay Area activists for remembering this day.

Now, let me tell you about the title of my presentation. A few weeks ago, I was busy with preparation for our second annual conference. We entitled the conference "Burma: Realizing the Dream". Actually, it was quoted from a part of one of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's speeches. She said "In a country like ours, which is totally crushed by a military regime, justice is a dream. But it is a dream that we are determined to realize." Yes, we are determined to realize the dream, which is freedom, justice and democracy in Burma. We are working to realize the dream. That's why; when Ko Nyunt Than called me and asked me to give the title of my presentation, I quickly answered that the title was "Dreaming and Realizing the Dream".

You might be Bill Gates, the world richest person in the world, in your dream. You might be the President of the United States, the most powerful person in the world in your dream. You might be falling in love with the most beautiful man or woman in your dream. You might be receiving Noble Peace Prize in your dream. No. No. No. I don't mean any of these dreams.

The dream I mean is something that you wish for your family, for your society, for your country, for future generations and for your own people. Martin Luther King had a dream to make his people have equal rights in the United States. Bogyoke Aung San had a dream to make Burma free from the British Colonial rule. Nelson Mandela had a dream to abolish Apartheid and White minority rule in South Africa. And they were not just dreaming, they made their dreams come true.

When I was young, I saw my father disappeared from home many times. Sometimes, he disappeared for a week, sometimes two weeks; once he was away from home for nearly two years. When he came back home, he was weak and unhealthy and needed many months to recover. He was taken by the authorities for interrogation. He was tortured by his interrogators and kept in the solitary confinement. Before I realized what was happening, I cried together with my mother when my father was taken. When I realized that my father was taken by the authorities for the reason that he had possible contacts with the outlaw communist party, I stopped crying. I consoled my mother and waited for the day when my father would be back. I always wished that nobody would come and take my father again. My mother wished the same as well. But, we knew that wishing something and crying out loud could not be helpful. We were helpless and vulnerable.

When we look at the day that Phone Maw was killed by the police, it was obvious that no one or no organization had helped to defend the students. General Ne Win's government simply put the blame on the students. We had a wish that we had the right to defend students mistreated by the authorities. We wanted the opportunity to complain about the authorities for their misconduct, unfairness and injustice toward the ordinary citizens in
Burma. We knew that wishes never come true without actions. We quickly organized nationwide student protests calling for freedom, democracy and justice. We joined together with the people from all walks of live and challenged the authorities peacefully. We were working to realize the dream. We ended the single party rule in Burma in 1988 and paved the way for multi-parties democracy.

Our dream is simple, reasonable and appropriate. We want to live in peace. We want to live in a safe and secure environment. We want to be free from fear. We want to have the freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of association, freedom to choose the government we want. We want to have justice which is above everybody. Of course, realizing that kind of dream is not a simple job. It comes with enormous difficulties and requires the huge amount of sacrifices that we have paid for seventeen years and we are still paying for.

Since 1988, as many as ten thousand peaceful demonstrators were killed by the brutal military; thousands of Burmese people were forced to flee the country and became the refugees in the neighboring countries; hundreds of ethnic women and girls were raped by the soldiers; between 600,000 and one million people became internal displaced persons and the target of soldier in the free fire zones; I could not count the number of broken families and the lives being destroyed by the military dictators. Currently, more than one thousand and three hundred activists are being incarcerated. What does that mean? We have not reached the dream yet.

When I was in prison, especially at the time I was tortured severely, I had a belief that my colleagues, my comrades, who share this dream with me would continue to work for the dream, and I would be free when we realized the dream. We all have a common dream. We all are working to realize this dream. With people who are determined to realize the dream, our dream will come true sooner. And then we will be free. I am sure that over 1,300 political prisoners including our leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, have a belief that their friends, their colleagues, their people, people like you all in this room will continue to make the dream come true. They knew that we are not dreaming. They believe that we are working to realize the dream.

Now, I am here to appeal to all of you to make the dream come true together. As the courageous people of Burma are taking a risk everyday, confronting with the brutal regime to reach their dream, we, people outside the country are also responsible to help them realize the dream. Let's work together to make this dream come true.

If you look at the situation carefully, you will know that the days of the military regime are numbered. Generals in Rangoon are eating their own flesh. Once, they proudly said that their unity in the military is solid and nobody could crack it. But, today, they are cracking themselves. Power struggle, mistrust and competition for lucrative business opportunities among the Generals are growing day by day.

On the other hand, the frustration and disappointment of the international community is also growing. Even some friendly governments of the regime, such as Singapore and Malaysia, began to speak openly about losing patience with the regime and their concern about gradually deteriorating relation with the United States and the European Union over Burma. Let me put it this way, the international community is mounting the pressure against the military regime. The United States has imposed comprehensive sanctions since 2003. The European Union is also increasing its measures against the military junta. ASEAN nations are also putting a lot of heat on the regime concerning the possibility of US and EU' boycott on the summit and ministerial meetings in 2006, when the regime will hold the ASEAN chairmanship. The United Nations has already announced that it would not recognize the results of the regime's national convention for undemocratic and inconclusive manners. There are many attempts in the United Nations to put Burma on the UN Security Council.

As you all are in the United States, the most powerful country in the world and the country of freedom loving people, you are surrounded by the people who are the most able persons to help Burma's democracy movement. Please contact the members of Congress in your state and district and make some requests.

First, it is important for Burma's democracy movement that the US maintains its current level of pressure against the regime. The Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 is going to be resubmitted to the Congress in April for Congressional review and extension of another year. Senators McConnell and Feinstein in the Senate, Congressmen Tom Lantos and Peter King in the House are beginning to prepare to reintroduce this one in the Congress. Please call your members of Congress, urge them to co-sponsor and support this legislation when it comes to the floor.

Second, the US Congress adopted legislation last year, calling on the UN Security Council to address the Burma issue. Since this is the will of the US Congress, please urge your members of Congress to push the Bush administration to raise Burma at the UN Security Council at every opportunity. You should also urge members of Congress to join with other Parliamentarians around the world, especially the European Parliament and ASEAN Parliamentarian Caucus, to put pressure on ASEAN as a whole for the suspension of Burma from its Chairmanship in 2006.

Third, even though US Congress allocates money for Burma's democracy movement every year, there is no fund for IDPs (Internal Displaced Persons) in Eastern Burma until now. These IDPs are the most vulnerable and helpless and need emergency assistance from the international community. Between 600,000 and one millions Ethnic nationalities are being displaced inside Eastern Burma and killed by the soldiers day after day. We need to urge the US Congress to allocate a significant amount of money for the organizations that are assisting the IDPs by crossing the border.

Let me also explain one of the campaigns we are undertaking worldwide. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi will be sixty years old on June 19, 2005, which is three months away from now. She is an icon of democracy, unique leader of Burma's democracy movement and the only imprisoned Nobel Peace Laureate in the world. Like many people did a few years ago in 1988 on Nelson Mandela's seventieth year birthday, we are planning to hold worldwide events on this day to honor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, all political prisoners and the courageous people of Burma. We are planning to hold 60 House Arrest parties nationwide. We request you to arrest yourself for one day at your home on that day. On that day, you can invite your friends to come and see you at home. You can show the video documentaries and other materials about Burma, and you all can share the moment together. You should ask the visitors to donate some money to help our activities. You can invite your members of Congress from your district and state. They might come or they might send their staff to your house arrest party. So far, we have 25 people who have pledged to hold a house arrest party on June 19, 2005 and I hope you all will join us. You can contact to me for more information and planning.

Well, like I said, we are not dreaming. The journey to the dream might be very long; it might be full with dangers; it might be an ocean of fire. But, we will never ever give up. We will not make our friends in prison disappointed. We will not make the souls of our friends who sacrificed their lives for this dream disappointed. We are working to realize the dream and we will reach the dream that we want soon, by working together with you all. Let's make our dream come true together.

Thank you.

Aung Din