U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific
Hearing on Burma: “Oversight of U.S. Policy Towards Burma”
April 25, 2015;
2:00 PM, Rayburn House
Office Building Room 2200
Testimony of Aung Din
Executive Director, U.S. Campaign for Burma
=====================================================================
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Subcommittee,
Thank you very much for holding this hearing today. I am
grateful to be here to testify about the current situation in Burma, the
country in Southeast Asia where I was born and raised. Before I start, on
behalf of the people of Burma, I would like to take this opportunity to state
my appreciation for the United States Congress’s strong interest and consistent
support for our struggle for democracy, human rights and national
reconciliation.
The
historic by-elections in Burma were held on April 1, 2012. Democracy leader Daw
Aung San Suu Kyi and her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), won 43
seats out the 44 they had contested. The ruling party, the Union Solidarity and
Development Party (USDP), won only one seat. Despite threats, violence, vote
buying and other fraudulent acts made by the authorities, the people of Burma
again courageously expressed their strong desire to be free from authoritarian
rule by voting for the NLD, just as they did in the 1990 elections. The results of the NLD’s 1990 landslide
victory were nullified by the military junta.
The Burmese regime may believe that allowing Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi and the NLD to hold nearly 7% of the seats in Parliament will not
constitute a major threat to their hold on power, as USDP and the military
still control 80% of the seats in Parliament and the military still has veto
power to kill any proposed legal changes. Furthermore, for this concession,
what they have achieved from the by-elections is enormous. The international
community recognizes their political system as all party-inclusive and
legitimate. Many international leaders see them as true reformers. The pressure
and sanctions imposed by the United States, Australia, Canada and the European
Union are being significantly eased or suspended. The Japanese government has
announced it will write off 3.7 billion dollars in debt and plans to resume
development assistance. Engagement and appeasement will flourish further. More
investment and more tourists, as well as more development assistance will flow
in. The generals and their cronies who still control the country may be able to
do shopping and send their children to schools in the United States and Europe
soon. Actually, in my opinion, the Burmese government led by President U Thein
Sein is the real winner of the by-elections.
Sadly, this election effectively eradicates the long standing objective and
expectation of Burma’s democracy forces and ethnic nationalities – the
realization of a meaningful and time-bound political dialogue between the
military, democracy forces led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and ethnic representatives
that would lead to real democratization and sustainable national
reconciliation. The NLD and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi are now entering into a new
playing field with the determination to expand their political base in the
Parliament and organize changes within the military controlled political
system.
The NLD has promised that it will work on three major issues
in the Parliament: (1) rule of law, (2) internal peace, and (3) amendments to
the 2008 Constitution. Rule of law is of vital importance as unfair laws and
decrees, designed to arrest and imprison anyone who holds different opinions
are still in place. The judiciary system is still an instrument of the regime’s
oppressive rule. Corrupt judges run the courts without due process and make rulings
as instructed by their superiors or in favor of those who pay them most. Law
enforcement officials are brutal and dangerous, and arbitrary detention and
torture are their only tools to get confessions they want from the accused.
Internal peace must also be a central concern. Current peace
talks between ethnic armed groups and the regime will not lead to the permanent
ending of civil war, without granting ethnic rights, such as a certain degree
of autonomy, self-determination, proper sharing of revenue generated from
natural resources located in ethnic areas which represents 60% of the country’s
total area, as well as a complete end to human rights violations in ethnic
areas committed by the Burmese military. Even now, severe fighting between the
Burmese army and ethnic armed groups are going on in Shan and Kachin States
having forced hundreds of thousands of ethnic people to flee from their homes
and villages.
Amending the undemocratic 2008 Constitution is the single
most important issue. This constitution grants supreme power to the military’s
Commander-in-Chief, who can run the military as he deems fit. The military is
independent from all administrative, legislative and judiciary authority; yet
can also interfere in all branches of the government. It holds 25% of the seats
in each parliament and three significant security ministries in the government,
and ensures civilian judges have no jurisdiction over armed forces. Moreover,
the Commander-in-Chief can assume all powers, dismiss the government and rule
the country in the name of a state of emergency. If Burma hopes to move toward
a genuine democratic government, civilian oversight of the military and removal
of the military’s authority over the government are imperative.
All three major campaign issues promised by Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi need constitutional amendments and additional changes to laws in order to
be fulfilled. She will enter into the new playing field with good faith that
she can work with President U Thein Sein, Parliament Speakers U Shwe Mann and U
Khin Aung Myint, and Military Commander-in-Chief General Min Aung Hlaing, to
make the country prosperous and democratic. However General Min Aung Hlaing
confirmed to his troops recently that the major task of the military is to
protect the constitution, signaling that he will not allow any reduction in his
power. Former Major General Htay Oo, who is the General Secretary of the USDP,
also recently said that the Constitution is perfect and there is nothing to
amend it, including the leading role of the military in politics.
The constitution was purposefully crafted to be difficult to
amend. At least 20% of lawmakers have to submit the Bill to amend the
Constitution to the Union Parliament, a Joint Session of the Lower and Upper
Houses, and the amendment can only be approved by a vote of more than
seventy-five percent of all the representatives of the Union Parliament.
This effectively gives a veto power to the military with its 25% of seats in
the Parliament. Even if all 75 percent of the elected representatives stand
together for the amendment, they can’t win if they can’t get even one vote from
the military bloc.
The by-election is just the beginning of new challenges for
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD. There is the risk, of course, that she may be
contained, confined and co-opted in the regime’s political system without
achieving anything. Or, she may be able to crack the door wider and recruit
more and more members of the USDP and the military to join in the alliance of
the agents of reform. There are so many uncertainties lying ahead. The current
stand-off between the ruling party and the NLD over the language of the
Parliamentary oath has made the NLD and DASSK unable to attend parliament yet,
which resumed on April 23rd. We can see from this stand point the
magnitude and depth of obstacles that DASSK will face. But, governments around
the world are rushing to reward the regime with the excuse of encouraging the
reformers.
On April 4, 2012, just three days after the by-election,
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced the U.S. response to the outcome
of the by-elections: the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) will
establish an official presence in Burma; restrictions imposed upon the UNDP
will be lifted; and an U.S. Ambassador to Burma will be nominated. In addition,
selected Burmese officials and parliamentarians will be invited to the United
States, and private organizations from the U.S. will be allowed to operate in
Burma in the non-profit sector. In addition two major financial sanctions, the
bans on investment and financial services, will be eased for selected targets.
These steps are undoubtedly being well received by the generals in Burma, who
are still engaged in killing innocent civilians in ethnic areas and keeping
hundreds of political prisoners behind bars and have not relinquished any of
their power. The generous awards from the United States and the more generous
awards from the European Union are a major victory for the Burmese regime,
which holds the policy of “give little, cheat more, and gain much” to encourage
the U.S. and EU policy of engagement.
To be sure, there have been significant changes in Burma
over the past six months, but it would be a mistake to assume that they are
irreversible or that all things are pointing in a positive direction.
Responding to positive changes is one thing; racing to provide rewards may be
regrettable.
I support the measures announced by Secretary Clinton,
except the targeted easing of bans on investment and financial services. I
strongly believe that this is too much and too fast. I asked my colleagues
inside Burma, including NLD leaders, ethnic leaders, the 88 Generation Student
leaders and some economists. They all said that they were not consulted by any
U.S. officials and they do not think this is the time to ease these important
sanctions. They are afraid that these measures will lead to another targeted
easing or permanent lifting of import restrictions, which will have to be
renewed by Congress before the end of July. They also believe such easing of
sanctions will only help cronies and families of authorities as they have
power, resources, connections, and institutions to profit from the easing of
sanctions. We can see some economic reform on the surface. But, actual practice
of doing business in Burma remains unchanged, totally controlled by the regime
and its allied cronies.
In addition, the premature lifting of financial sanctions
can greatly jeopardize the fragile peace negotiations currently underway
between the regime’s civilian authorities and ethnic nationality groups. The majority of Burma’s ethnic nationalities
populations believe the regime is engaging in these negotiations to win
economic concessions from the ethnic armed groups. If the international community rewards the
regime with economic gains, critical leverage is lost to ensure national
political reconciliation and peace is achieved.
I agree that the U.S. should respond to the positive
developments in Burma with positive measures. However, such responses by the
U.S. should be carefully calibrated. Having over 40 seats in the Parliament
through the by-election is just a start for Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Two days
before the by-elections, when a journalist asked her how she would rate the
current state of changes towards democracy in Burma on a scale of one to ten,
she said we are “on the way to 1.” She knows clearly that there is still a long
way to go.
I am sure she will aim to win the majority of seats in the
general election in 2015. The sanctions we have are leverage for her, Burma’s
democracy movement, and ethnic nationalities, a kind of the money in the bank.
We need to use it carefully, so it will last until we achieve major results.
However, the Obama administration is now in the process of implementation of
easing of major financial sanctions. That’s why I would like to make the
following recommendations and request Congress to balance the fast track action
of the administration.
(1)
Before the removal of any financial sanctions takes
place, the SDN (Specially Designated Nationals) list on Burma, managed by
Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), MUST be updated to include more
cronies and hardliners. It has been almost three years since the list has been
updated. Many cronies, who are sanctioned
by the EU and Australia, are still not included in the U.S. SDN list. This list
should be a must-check reference for U.S. companies that will do business in
Burma.
(2)
The process of selecting targets to be eased for
investment and financial services should take sufficient time and should be
made through broader consultation with the human rights community in the United
Stated and key stakeholders inside Burma, especially ethnic nationalities.
(3)
The implementation of targeted easing of bans on
investment and financial services should wait until we see clearly how NLD MPs
and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi are treated by the USDP and the military in the
Parliament and an end to attacks against the Kachin.
(4)
Binding requirements or a compulsory framework for
responsible business conduct should be imposed for any U.S. business that will
invest in Burma. Elements from OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises,
Conflict Minerals Provision of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Tibet Policy Act,
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, can be drawn to create such framework.
(5)
U.S. must pressure the Burmese regime to allow former
political prisoners to obtain passports, so they can make trips abroad, in
response to the U.S. easing of visa restrictions on Burmese officials.
(6)
U.S. must pressure the Burmese regime to allow members
of Burmese civil society to form and operate non-profit organizations freely,
in response to the U.S. granting permission to U.S. organizations to support
non-profit sectors in Burma.
(7)
U.S. must pressure the Burmese regime to release all
remaining political prisoners unconditionally, lift all restrictions imposed
upon all former political prisoners, and allow former political prisoners to go
back to schools or resume their professions in legal representation, medical
practice, teaching, etc.
(8)
As the U.S. plans to establish an official USAID
presence in Burma and support the UNDP country program, the U.S. must pressure
the regime to allow international organizations to have unhindered access to
areas affected by natural disasters and armed conflict.
(9)
U.S. must remind and keep reminding the Burmese regime
that their full cooperation with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and democratic MPs in the
Parliament and achieving negotiated political settlement with ethnic
nationalities through a meaningful political dialogue outside the Parliament
are the sole factors to justify fully lifting of all sanctions.
(10)
U.S. Congress must renew import restrictions from
Burma.
Lastly, I would like to highlight the assumption of
reformers vs. hardliners within the Burmese regime. Many international players
believe that they have to encourage so-called reformers by lifting sanctions
and pressure, and so reformers will be encouraged and hardliners will be
undermined. There is a possibility that the positive responses being made by
the international community may become irreversible while the changes in the
country are not irreversible yet. This is a very tricky issue. Encouraging the
so-call reformers in the regime should not undermine democracy activists,
ethnic nationalities, and human rights defenders, the true agents of change in
Burma.
Thank You.
