19 July 2008 : Burma News Late Extra
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Myanmar should release political detainees: SEAsian officials
Myanmar security tight on anniversary
Suu Kyi banned from Myanmar Martyrs' day gathering
Thailand: Stop Forced Returns of Karen Refugees to Burma
Spy games: The Case of Naing Naing
Do 'the lessons of our grandfathers' still apply today?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Myanmar should release political detainees: SEAsian officials
AFP
by Jason GutierrezFri Jul 18, 1:10 PM ET
Myanmar should release all political detainees, senior Southeast Asian officials said Friday in a recommendation to their foreign ministers ahead of a two-day meeting next week.
If endorsed, the recommendation would signal a toughening of the bloc's attitude and would be included in a joint statement to be issued after the meeting of ministers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) starting Sunday.
The proposals on Myanmar, an ASEAN member, also call on the junta "to take bolder steps in what they're doing to move along the roadmap to democracy," a senior official said.
ASEAN operates according to a longstanding policy of non-interference in its members' internal affairs and has been widely criticised for its policy of "constructive engagement" regarding Myanmar, which is under European Union and US sanctions over its human rights record.
"We felt we should say a little bit more than usual, unlike before, when we just take whatever they say," the official said.
He said the Myanmar officials did not want any political developments mentioned in the draft, but as everybody else did they had no choice.
Myanmar's detainees include democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been held under house arrest for most of the past 18 years.
Myanmar was also criticised internationally for its delay in allowing foreign aid into the country after a May 2-3 cyclone that left 138,000 people dead or missing.
It subsequently allowed aid workers to enter under an arrangement with ASEAN and the United Nations.
Military-ruled Myanmar will accede next week to the ASEAN Charter, which commits Southeast Asian nations to notions of democracy and human rights, Singapore's foreign minister said in an interview with Dow Jones Newswires.
The charter commits ASEAN members "to strengthen democracy, enhance good governance and the rule of law, and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms."
Myanmar's foreign minister is expected to brief his peers about recent political developments in his country as well as the continuing post-cyclone efforts, a Southeast Asian diplomat told AFP.
Just seven days after the cyclone, Myanmar insisted on holding a referendum on a military-backed constitution.
It said that despite the devastation, 98 percent of voters turned out for the ballot and more than 92 percent endorsed their constitution.
The opposition party of Aung San Suu Kyi dismissed the referendum outcome as a "sham."
Myanmar says the constitution will clear the way for democratic elections in two years, but critics say it will only enshrine military rule.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Myanmar security tight on anniversary
AP
Sat Jul 19, 5:37 AM ET
Hundreds of riot police and soldiers ringed a monument in downtown Yangon on Saturday as officials gathered to commemorate the shooting death 61 years ago of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi's father.
Myanmar independence hero Gen. Aung San and other government leaders were assassinated by gunmen during a Cabinet meeting on July 19, 1947, shortly after Britain granted independence to the Southeast Asian colony.
Flags were flown at half staff in the capital to mark the day, a state holiday. Unlike past years, foreign diplomats were not invited to the tightly guarded wreath-laying ceremony at the Martyr's Monument located near the famed Shwedagon pagoda.
Opposition activists have suggested that the ruling military junta is trying to downgrade the importance of Aung San's legacy as a way of undercutting the popularity of his daughter, who remains under house arrest.
Diplomats in Yangon said the Foreign Ministry had informed them that the government intended this year to hold a low-key ceremony because it comes just two and a half months after Cyclone Nargis devastated much of the region south of Yangon, leaving at least 85,000 people dead and about 50,000 missing.
Police cordoned off the monument, putting up heavy metal barriers and coils of barbed wire across roads.
Dozens of policemen carrying assault rifles and shotguns manned the barricades during a heavy downpour.
Security was also tight around the headquarters of Suu Kyi's political party, the National League for Democracy, which said it would hold a separate ceremony.
In a statement, the NLD urged the junta to "immediately and unconditionally" release Suu Kyi and other detained pro-democracy activists.
Suu Kyi has been detained for more than 12 of the past 18 years.
Myanmar, also known as Burma, has been under military rule since 1962.
Suu Kyi's party swept the last general elections in 1990, but the military refused to hand over power.
The international community has increased pressure on the junta since it violently quashed peaceful mass protests last September. At least 31 people were killed and thousands more were detained.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Suu Kyi banned from Myanmar Martyrs' day gathering
AFP
Sat Jul 19, 5:31 AM ET
Myanmar's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi was kept under house arrest Saturday as others gathered to pay tribute to her late father on Martyrs' day.
Suu Kyi had not been invited to attend the annual ceremony by the ruling military, according to an official from her National League for Democracy party.
"She wasn't invited to attend the ceremony although the authorities used to send her an invitation," the official told AFP.
Martyrs' day commemorates the assassination of General Aung San and eight other leaders on July 19, 1947 while they were holding a meeting for Myanmar independence from Britain.
The military government hosted a short memorial early Saturday morning at the Martyrs' mausoleum close to the famous Shwe Dagon pagoda in the country's main city Yangon.
The mayor, Brigadier General Aung Thein Linn, some government officials and family members of the country's late leaders all attended the 61st anniversary event.
But invitations to foreign embassies were cancelled by the foreign affairs ministry without reason, the diplomats confirmed.
Suu Kyi was only two-years-old when she lost her father. Myanmar got its independence a year later in January 1948.
Aung San Suu Kyi has spent most of the last 18 years under house arrest and has currently been detained since 2003.
About 300 NLD members gathered in front of party headquarters on Saturday morning, saluting the spot where the leaders were gunned down.
Amid tight security and with armed police trucks present, the gathering was peaceful with no shouting or marching as has been known in previous years.
But the NLD reiterated its call for the immediate and unconditional release of Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners.
Earlier this month 14 Suu Kyi supporters were charged for protesting against the extension of her house arrest.
Myanmar has been ruled by the military since 1962. The NLD won a landslide victory in 1990 elections but the junta never allowed them to take office.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thailand: Stop Forced Returns of Karen Refugees to Burma
Human Rights Watch
Civilians Forced Back Into Conflict Zone, More Returns Threatened
(New York, July 18, 2008) – Thai security forces should immediately stop forcing Karen refugees and asylum seekers to return to Burma from refugee camps in Thailand, Human Rights Watch said today.
The Karen, an ethnic group who have fled armed conflict and human rights violations in Burma, face persecution and violent reprisals by the Burmese military government if forced to return, Human Rights Watch said.
“Forcing civilians back into an active war zone may be an easy answer for Thailand, but it’s brutal – a completely inhumane and unacceptable solution,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The Thai government should cooperate with international relief agencies and UNHCR to ensure that it upholds the rights of civilians under international law.”
On July 17, local Thai paramilitary forces, the tahaan prahn (literally “hunter-killer soldiers”) rounded up 52 Karen from two refugee camps in Thailand’s Mae Hong Son province along the Burma border, 39 – mostly women and children – from Mae Ra Ma Luang refugee camp and 13 from Mae La Oon camp. They permitted 17 students to stay on the Thai side, but sent 35 refugees across the border to the Ei Tu Hta relocation site in Burma.
The refugees, part of a larger group of more than 280 who fled to the Thai camps in early 2008 during a major military offensive in Eastern Burma, were told late on July 16 that they would be forced back the following day. According to local refugee sources, tahaan prahn commanders announced that all new arrivals since April will eventually be forced back to Burma.
Although Thailand has not signed the 1951 Refugee Convention, it is bound by the principle of non-refoulement, a firm prohibition in customary international law on returning refugees to any country where they are likely to be persecuted or their lives are at risk.
“The Thai government has ignored its obligations to protect refugees fleeing persecution and violence in Burma,” said Adams. “Sending these people back over conflict zones dominated by the Burmese army is disgraceful.”
Human Rights Watch called on the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the European Union, the United States, and other states to pressure the Thai government to immediately cease the refoulement of refugees and continue to provide sanctuary to people fleeing fighting or persecution in Burma.
“The Thai government cynically launched this illegal operation during the first day of a major Buddhist holiday, Choul Vosa, or Buddhist Lent,” Adams said. “This, along with the Thai media’s preoccupation with escalating border tensions with Cambodia over the Preah Vihear temple, provides effective cover for Thailand’s serious breach of international law.”
Ei Tu Hta relocation site in Burma, located along the Salween River, has grown during the past two years to nearly 4,300 civilians who have fled attacks and abuses by the Burmese army. The overcrowded camp receives limited international and local health and food assistance, which is often blocked by local Thai security forces. In addition, the camp faces the constant risk of attack because of its proximity to Burmese army encampments.
Thai security forces only permitted the 52 civilians sent to Ei Tu Hta camp on July 18 to carry two weeks’ supply of food and basic plastic sheeting, and prohibited the refugees from carrying mosquito nets or cooking utensils.
More than 100 civilians arrive at Ei Tu Hta camp each month as the Burmese army continues its offensive in Northern Karen State despite the monsoon rains. Human Rights Watch believes that there are now more than 90 Burmese army battalions (more than 10,000 troops) operating in the area. The soldiers are forcing Karen civilians into relocation sites, or burning their villages and food stocks with the aim to clear the area.
More than 50,000 civilians have fled or been displaced by the army offensive against civilians in Eastern Burma, which has been ongoing since 2006. They join more than half a million internally displaced civilians in Eastern Burma. The offensive in Eastern Burma is the largest operation by the Burmese military in several years. It has been denounced by international groups, including the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), in a June 2007 statement, and Amnesty International in a June 2008 report.
Refugee protection in Thailand has sharply deteriorated during the past several years, as the Royal Thai Government’s procedures for registering refugees has been bogged down. There are an estimated 20,000 unregistered people out of 148,000 in the nine Karenni and Karen minority refugee camps along the border, many of whom would likely qualify as refugees. Without registration, most are not eligible for food and shelter, nor do they receive formal protection from the UNHCR. In March 2007, Thai security forces forcibly returned nearly 100 Rohingya Muslim men from Western Burma to an area controlled by a pro-SPDC armed group along the Thailand Burma border.
For more than a year, Thai security forces and Ministry of Interior officials have been threatening unregistered refugee camp residents with forcible return. The hundreds who arrived at the two Karen camps of Mae Ra Ma Luang and Mae Ra Moe have been routinely threatened with return since May by local security forces, claiming to act on behalf of the central authorities in Bangkok.
“The root causes of why people flee Burma haven’t changed, but states such as Thailand continue to turn a blind eye to serious abuses while continuing to do business with the Burmese government,” Adams said. “Thailand should raise concern about Burmese human rights violations that cause forced displacement as well as responding humanely to its victims seeking asylum at their borders and in their territories.”
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2008/07/18/thaila19401_txt.htm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Spy games: The Case of Naing Naing
The Irrawaddy
BEYOND 1988 — REFLECTIONS
By AUNG NAING OO
Saturday, July 19, 2008
February-July, 1989: I met Naing Naing in early 1989. He was a good-looking, 20-year-old young man, and it never occurred to me that he might be a spy.
He was from Kyaik Hto—the town next to the famous pagoda that hangs on a cliff—in Mon State, but I didn’t know that. No one in the camp knew him, except Myo Nyunt, my housemate from the “Mirror House.”
Myo Nyunt was also from Kyaik Hto, but we never discussed the fact that he knew Naing Naing from his home, something I discovered only much later, when it was too late.
I met Naing Naing in Mae Sot, the Thai-Burma border town. He was working in a shop that sold clothes and other household utensils behind Porn Thep Hotel in the heart of town. We did not realize he was a paid shop assistant. We only knew him as the cousin of a Thai reporter named Joe, a Thai-Muslim who spoke Burmese and was a regular visitor to the camp along with his Thai journalist buddies. We understood that Joe’s family owned the shop.
Naing Naing was not Joe’s cousin. Of course, we realized that much later—but only after his cover was blown.
It was S. Aung Lwin, the camp chairman, and Htun Htun Zaw, the camp quarter master, who took me to Naing Naing’s shop the first time. They said that “the Thai guy” who had given himself a Burmese name in the shop was generous, and if they bought one item, he would give them an extra for free. I had heard similar stories from other peoples.
When I asked them why he was so generous, they said he was gay, although that didn’t seem to explain why he should be so generous with students from Camp Thay Baw Boe. Perhaps, he was expecting sexual favours from the students who came to the shop, they speculated.
One day I dropped by to buy the shop to buy some underwear. As I hoped, I got two for one. Because I was with Htun Htun Zaw at the time, he introduced me to Naing Naing. And Naing Naing spoke to me in accented Burmese much like a Thai on the border or an ethnic minority from a remote area of Burma would speak the language.
About a month later, the camp chairman, vice-chairman, the quartermaster and I all happened to be in Mae Sot at the same time. Taking advantage of the visit of leaders from Camp Thay Baw Boe, Naing Naing invited us for dinner.
We gladly accepted his invitation because we could not afford to have dinner at restaurants on our own; our regular eateries in Mae Sot were either cheap roadside stalls or a house belonging to a former Burmese army officer, Captain Soe Min.
The dinner was great and Naing Naing bought some “Mae Khong,” a popular Thai whiskey. After drinking smelly “jungle juice,” enjoying Mae Khong was certainly a step forward— something I normally could not afford.
As we grew tipsy and enjoyed our dinner, Naing Naing began to tell us about himself. He said he was a first-year student studying economics at the prestigious Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok. He said he could speak Burmese because he was born in Mae Sot, a border town with many Burmese. That made sense, since many people from both sides of the border speak each others’ language, though perhaps not fluently and with good accents.
He then told us about an exam that U Tin Myint Oo and Daw Aye Aye Thant, the family of the late Burmese UN Secretary-General U Thant (who were then living in Bangkok), were planning for us.
“What kind of exam?” I asked. Naing Naing said, “The one they (the Thant family) are planning for you leaders—some kind of leadership exam.” I was still curious but also quite pleased to hear I was recognized as a leader by a well-known family from Burma, so I stopped asking questions.
Surprisingly though, Naing Naing spoke in accented or broken Burmese the whole time at the restaurant. Perhaps, I was drunk and could not tell him from a Thai speaking Burmese and a Burmese pretending to be a Thai.
Naing Naing then asked us if he could visit the camp. We readily said yes since he had shown such generosity and friendship. He did visit us, and he befriended a lot of people in the camp. Later his visits became more frequent. Every time he came, he brought food, and I saw him enjoying time around the bonfire. Still, we did not have the slightest idea that he was a spy.
Then during one of his visits, a picture was taken in front of the sign “Jungle University – Camp Thay Baw Boe” which was in front of the camp training school. It was Naing Naing’s camera. Coincidentally, the camp chairman and the quarter master were about to leave for Mae Sot and Naing Naing asked them to be in the picture. They obliged, and I took the picture. Naing Naing then went back to Mae Sot with them. Less than week later, Naing Naing was back in the camp with more supplies.
A week later, S. Aung Lwin returned to the camp, upset and angry. He told me that the picture I had taken of him with Naing Naing’s camera in front of the Jungle University sign had appeared on Burmese TV. I could not believe my ears. I knew what that meant; Naing Naing must be working for the government.
S. Aung Lwin said we had to resolve the problem swiftly and quietly. I had never been in such a situation before and was worried about the consequences if all the camp residents found out who Naing Naing really was. There were many trigger-happy students in the camp, and the camp leaders did not want any blood on our hands.
Our first hurdle was dealing with a group of students from the town of Yin Nyein, a group that Naing Naing had been staying with during his visits to the camp. I asked Win Shwe, the leader of the group, to come and see me. I explained the problem to him. No sooner had I finished my explanation than Win Shwe jumped up, angry and agitated. He then accused me of making up the story. So I asked him to go to Mae Sot and see some people who had seen the picture on TV. I gave him the expenses for the trip.
Naing Naing did not know what was going on behind the scene, and that his cover had been blown. To make the case more pressing, Naing Naing was in the camp when we found out about the picture.
Win Shwe returned from Mae Sot the next day. He was even angrier. He now felt cheated by the friendship that he and his group had shown to Naing Naing. Win Shwe, an honest but a short-tempered man, was ready to eliminate Naing Naing. He kept saying, “I will kill him. I will kill him.” However, we could not allow that.
The Camp Committee immediately held an emergency meeting and decided to send Naing Naing back to Thailand before the matter got out of hand. We realized he was not a full-blown spy but an informer. Luckily for him, it was the early days of ABSDF and the camp did not have the procedures in place to bring him to trial.
In order to make sure that the case remained secret, we asked Win Shwe to accompany Naing Naing across the border and not to kill him. He promised us not to hurt the spy or kill him. I was still not sure, given his earlier rage. So I asked Kyaw Zwa, my trusted housemate who was also from my hometown, and a few others to accompany them, to ensure an uneventful send-off.
When they arrived on the border near the suspension bridge, the camp entourage punched and kicked Naing Naing and warned him never to return to the camp. Black and blue, he walked across the bridge. I never saw him again.
In the final analysis, Naing Naing was a low-level informant. His job was to gather intelligence about us. He gleaned some low-value information, and the camp was not harmed. He took advantage of our lax security, and more importantly, our friendship.
Probably, camp residents who came into contact with Naing Naing knew he was not a Thai but a Burmese. We did not have time to pay attention to what he was doing in the camp, and he could have easily fooled us on this account. On our part, because we did want to cause a stir in the camp, we did not conduct a thorough investigation to determine what he may have learned.
One of our shortcomings was that we did not check with Joe about his relationship with Naing Naing. It turned out that Myo Nyunt thought I knew that Naing Naing was from Kyaik Hto, so he never mentioned he knew Naing Naing from his hometown.
Sun Tzu said, “Be subtle” in spying, but Naing Naing was not. That was why he was caught red-handed. Looking back though, he was clearly an expendable spy for the government. He could have easily been killed if caught elsewhere.
We learned a lesson from Naing Naing, but most of all we were happy that we spared a life, the life of an informant who befriended us in order to spy.
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=13410
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Do 'the lessons of our grandfathers' still apply today?
Tom Griffin, 19 - 07 – 2008
OurKingdom is a part of openDemocracy
Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): "The conflicts of today and the conflicts of tomorrow require that we relearn many of the lessons of our fathers and grandfathers somewhat overlooked in the stasis of the cold war," the Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannatt said on Thursday.
In a speech to Labour's Progress group, Dannatt outlines his proposals for permanent cadres of army stabilisation specialists.
These small units would specialise in the training and mentoring of indigenous forces – the type of tasks conducted by our Mentoring and Training Teams in Afghanistan and Iraq. But I see these organisations as being far more. My vision is that they would form the spine of our enduring cultural education and understanding. I can envisage a multi-disciplined and inter-agency organisation that would be capable of both fighting alongside local forces, and delivering reconstruction and development tasks in areas where the civil agencies cannot operate.
I believe we should develop a career path that would see an officer spending a tour with indigenous forces, followed perhaps by an attachment to DFiD overseas, or a local council at home or a police force in Africa or elsewhere. Perhaps, this is where we start to embed our deep language and cultural training, not just for our current areas of operation, but potential future conflict zones. This is the stuff of our grandfathers and great uncles but, we are in a continuum, not in a new paradigm – so these skills are still very relevant.
If Dannatt's speech harked back to an earlier era, the subsequent discussion highlighted constraints that are different from those of the past.
One member of the audience asked why the British Army didn't intervene in Burma or Zimbabwe.
In response, Dannatt suggested that Burma was "probably an area of the world beyond our acknowledged sphere of influence and beyond our capacity to do anything about."
In Zimbabwe, he said: "The problem may just have been too great for us not just in terms of distance and the size of the country, but of course also there was really no international support for Great Britain to have done that. Certainly to have got ourselves involved in operations in somewhere like Zimbabwe without at least implied United States support would have been difficult to do. I think also the same would have applied for many of the other African countries around. The notion of 'African solutions to African problems' is probably the right long-term solution, as painful as it is watching what Zimbabwe is going through at the moment."
One could argue that very similar contraints existed in Iraq, with one notable exception, and are likely to exist across much of the world in future.
As a result, the scope for the 'liberal interventionism' which Dannatt advocates may well depend on the kind of multilateral diplomacy that liberal interventionists have increasingly disdained in recent years.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
