19 November 2010
"Voters were watched closely while casting votes. It was not free. There will not be change… We were scared and there was nothing we could do".
- A voter in Shan State
Burma’s November elections took place in an environment marked by widespread violence and intimidation as the regime sought to exploit the pervasive climate of fear in Burma to ensure complete control over the electoral process. Intimidation and threats were carried out in the lead up to the elections, in order to ensure a lack of a viable political opposition and to guarantee popular support for regime-backed parties. These threats proved to be largely successful, and when they were not, the regime often followed up with prompt repercussions. Such election related human rights violations took place across the country, but were noticeably worse in ethnic areas, highlighting the regime’s long-standing policy of ethnic discrimination and persecution. This disregard for ethnic rights has translated in heightened tension between ethnic communities and the central regime, and an associated risk of increased armed conflict in ethnic areas.
Burma Election Tracker has collected over 200 reports involving violence and intimidation; sources range from media groups, to citizen reports, to inside networks and personal interviews.
As a whole, many incidents of intimidation relied upon, and perpetuated the deeply entrenched climate of fear in Burma. The polling booths were designed to diminish voter secrecy, and allow for greater surveillance of voters. A Peace and Diversity party candidate Aung Myo Oo stated:
The polling booth officials … are sitting near the voters while they are voting … So there is no security for them. I think this is deliberate … This is not a secret ballot. This insecurity means the voters are afraid of possibly being watched from behind and have doubts over the privacy of their ballot. It’s not good if the voter feels insecure at a polling station. They might think they will be in trouble unless they vote for the USDP
Aung Myo Oo’s statements corroborated with citizen reports gathered by Burma Election Tracker from voters. An Arakan voter stated, “I voted for USDP because there were may security officers. Others also did the same,” while another voter in Rangoon said, “There were USDP members 10 yards away form the polling station and as well as in the polling station telling people to vote for them. I voted for USDP as I was afraid of them.” This climate of fear was present during the pre-election and post election period, and significantly affected the ability of voters to truly voice their opinions. [...]
Read further >>
viernes, 19 de noviembre de 2010
ESSAY: BURMA'S "CARPE DIEM MOMENT"
From time to time, Burma hits the world headlines. It did so in September 2007, when Buddhist monks courageously led peaceful protests against the country’s brutal military regime, and faced a bloody crackdown. The following year, when Cyclone Nargis struck and the regime initially rejected international aid and access for aid workers, horrific stories of the dead, dying and displaced were again on our television screens. Then last year, after an American Mormon, John Yettaw, swam across the lake to the home of detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, the international spotlight was briefly on Burma. Ironically, it was Aung San Suu Kyi who was put on trial, and sentenced to a further three years for having a visitor without permission – even though he arrived uninvited. Burma’s dictator, Senior General Than Shwe, reduced the sentence to 18 months, in an act deliberately designed to make him look compassionate while keeping her out of the way until after the regime’s sham elections.
Once again, Burma is in the news. The scenes last weekend of Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi emerging from her latest stretch of seven years’ house arrest, and greeting crowds of thousands waiting at the gate of her home, were as visually inspiring as Nelson Mandela’s walk out of prison twenty years ago. Scenes of her addressing crowds the next day from the offices of her banned party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), and giving interviews to the BBC and ABC, had been unimaginable even a few weeks ago. She has, after all, spent a total of 15 of the past 20 years in detention.
Yet Burma has suffered from the international media’s short attention span. Each time a key event occurs, the media spotlight shines into the darkness of Burma for a few days, and then the media circus moves on and world attention moves with it. This time, we must not let that happen.
While Aung San Suu Kyi’s release is very welcome, there is a long way to go before Burma’s suffering at the hands of this regime is over. Comparisons with Mandela’s release have been made by many commentators, but the parallel stops at the gate of her house. Mandela was freed because South Africa’s apartheid regime was crumbling, and FW de Klerk knew he had to reform. He engaged with Mandela to chart a peaceful transition to democracy, and Mandela’s release was part of a process of change. In Burma, if the generals have their way, there will be no change.
Aung San Suu Kyi has been freed not because Senior General Than Shwe, Burma’s dictator, has become a reformer, but because he cares more than we realise about his international image, and offers this fig leaf to divert attention from the sham elections, offensives against Burma’s ethnic groups and crimes against humanity.
So the international community must ask what next?
Aung San Suu Kyi has signalled her determination to unify the democracy movement and engage in dialogue with the generals. She has displayed a remarkable absence of bitterness, and extraordinary magnanimity in suggesting she would like the generals to have the opportunity to be the real heroes in this. They can do that by defying all expectations, abandoning their past track record, and taking up her offer of talks. For this to happen, the international community must help.
First, pressure on the junta must be maintained and intensified. Now is not the time to go soft. The message must be given, clearly and unambiguously, to the regime that until it frees all the remaining 2,200 political prisoners, declares a nationwide ceasefire in the ethnic areas and engages in a meaningful dialogue with the democracy movement led by Aung San Suu Kyi and genuine representatives of Burma’s ethnic groups, we cannot speak of progress.
The regime’s widespread and systematic use of rape as a weapon of war, forced labour, torture and the recruitment of child soldiers must stop, and there must be access for international humanitarian organisations to all parts of the country. The military must end its shoot-on-sight policy in which ethnic civilians, including the elderly, women and children are killed at point-blank range.
Since 1996, more than 3,500 villages in eastern Burma alone have been destroyed. In other parts of the country, particularly Chin, Arakan and Kachin states in western and northern Burma, religious persecution of Christians and Muslims is a policy alongside rape and forced labour. Only when all the people of Burma, regardless of ethnicity and religion, are assured equal rights and real peace can we talk of progress.
Equally, however, the junta should be assured that if it does these things, its relationship with the outside world can change and sanctions can be eased. A carefully co-ordinated strategy of targeted pressure and high-level engagement must be developed. The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon must take personal leadership of these efforts, and lead a new UN initiative to encourage dialogue in Burma. Australia should play its part in encouraging this.
Dialogue is the one policy which unites everyone. The UN, the European Union, the United States, the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and even China have called for dialogue. Aung San Suu Kyi and the ethnic nationalities have always indicated their readiness to talk. Now a sustained effort to begin talks must be made. For Burma’s regime, this is an opportunity to prove us all wrong and respond to the wishes of Burma’s people. For Ban Ki-moon, and the entire international community, this is an opportunity to restore the UN’s credibility, show leadership and finally stand by Aung San Suu Kyi and the people of Burma with action rather than rhetoric. This is a carpe diem moment.
Benedict Rogers is a human rights activist working with Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) based in London. He has made more than 30 visits to Burma and its borderlands, and is the author of 'Than Shwe: Unmasking Burma’s Tyrant' (Silkworm Books, 2010).
Once again, Burma is in the news. The scenes last weekend of Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi emerging from her latest stretch of seven years’ house arrest, and greeting crowds of thousands waiting at the gate of her home, were as visually inspiring as Nelson Mandela’s walk out of prison twenty years ago. Scenes of her addressing crowds the next day from the offices of her banned party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), and giving interviews to the BBC and ABC, had been unimaginable even a few weeks ago. She has, after all, spent a total of 15 of the past 20 years in detention.
Yet Burma has suffered from the international media’s short attention span. Each time a key event occurs, the media spotlight shines into the darkness of Burma for a few days, and then the media circus moves on and world attention moves with it. This time, we must not let that happen.
While Aung San Suu Kyi’s release is very welcome, there is a long way to go before Burma’s suffering at the hands of this regime is over. Comparisons with Mandela’s release have been made by many commentators, but the parallel stops at the gate of her house. Mandela was freed because South Africa’s apartheid regime was crumbling, and FW de Klerk knew he had to reform. He engaged with Mandela to chart a peaceful transition to democracy, and Mandela’s release was part of a process of change. In Burma, if the generals have their way, there will be no change.
Aung San Suu Kyi has been freed not because Senior General Than Shwe, Burma’s dictator, has become a reformer, but because he cares more than we realise about his international image, and offers this fig leaf to divert attention from the sham elections, offensives against Burma’s ethnic groups and crimes against humanity.
So the international community must ask what next?
Aung San Suu Kyi has signalled her determination to unify the democracy movement and engage in dialogue with the generals. She has displayed a remarkable absence of bitterness, and extraordinary magnanimity in suggesting she would like the generals to have the opportunity to be the real heroes in this. They can do that by defying all expectations, abandoning their past track record, and taking up her offer of talks. For this to happen, the international community must help.
First, pressure on the junta must be maintained and intensified. Now is not the time to go soft. The message must be given, clearly and unambiguously, to the regime that until it frees all the remaining 2,200 political prisoners, declares a nationwide ceasefire in the ethnic areas and engages in a meaningful dialogue with the democracy movement led by Aung San Suu Kyi and genuine representatives of Burma’s ethnic groups, we cannot speak of progress.
The regime’s widespread and systematic use of rape as a weapon of war, forced labour, torture and the recruitment of child soldiers must stop, and there must be access for international humanitarian organisations to all parts of the country. The military must end its shoot-on-sight policy in which ethnic civilians, including the elderly, women and children are killed at point-blank range.
Since 1996, more than 3,500 villages in eastern Burma alone have been destroyed. In other parts of the country, particularly Chin, Arakan and Kachin states in western and northern Burma, religious persecution of Christians and Muslims is a policy alongside rape and forced labour. Only when all the people of Burma, regardless of ethnicity and religion, are assured equal rights and real peace can we talk of progress.
Equally, however, the junta should be assured that if it does these things, its relationship with the outside world can change and sanctions can be eased. A carefully co-ordinated strategy of targeted pressure and high-level engagement must be developed. The UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon must take personal leadership of these efforts, and lead a new UN initiative to encourage dialogue in Burma. Australia should play its part in encouraging this.
Dialogue is the one policy which unites everyone. The UN, the European Union, the United States, the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and even China have called for dialogue. Aung San Suu Kyi and the ethnic nationalities have always indicated their readiness to talk. Now a sustained effort to begin talks must be made. For Burma’s regime, this is an opportunity to prove us all wrong and respond to the wishes of Burma’s people. For Ban Ki-moon, and the entire international community, this is an opportunity to restore the UN’s credibility, show leadership and finally stand by Aung San Suu Kyi and the people of Burma with action rather than rhetoric. This is a carpe diem moment.
Benedict Rogers is a human rights activist working with Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) based in London. He has made more than 30 visits to Burma and its borderlands, and is the author of 'Than Shwe: Unmasking Burma’s Tyrant' (Silkworm Books, 2010).
jueves, 18 de noviembre de 2010
Think janata, not junta
The release of Aung San Suu Kyi comes at an important juncture in India’s relations with Burma. During the visit of General Than Shwe — leader of the junta and Chairman of the State Peace and Development Council — to India earlier this year, the two sides concluded a raft of economic and security deals and agreements. The lengthy joint statement issued at the end of the visit made no reference to the political situation within Burma, let alone anything about the internment of Ms Suu Kyi. This was particularly problematic in the context of political developments in the country: the adoption of undemocratic election laws; the disqualification of Ms Suu Kyi and the dissolution of her party, the National League for Democracy.
India’s stance has been criticised by Western democracies. US President Barack Obama’s pointed observations in his speech to the Indian parliament captured the prevailing views on this subject. India, he noted, had “often shied away” from condemning gross violations of human rights. When the Burma junta openly suppressed democratic aspirations of its people, “democracies of the world cannot remain silent”. India’s concerns, he suggested, stemmed from a misplaced concern about violating the principle of state sovereignty.
In fact, concerns about state sovereignty have seldom inhibited India from speaking its mind. Think of India’s consistent and vocal criticism of apartheid in South Africa — not least when Western democracies were mealy-mouthed on the issue. Rather, India’s stance on Burma reflects both its better understanding of the problem and its realpolitik calculations. The latter, however, seem to be based on questionable assumptions. And there is scope to finetune and bring them in sync with our democratic identity and values.
The dominant Western narrative about Burma is of a struggle dating back to the 1980s between forces of democracy led by Ms Suu Kyi and the repressive junta. This captures an important facet of the political context in Burma, but it is too simplistic and myopic. Any meaningful attempt towards a democratic transition will have to address a larger set of problems — issues that played a critical role in weakening democracy and tightening the junta’s grip in the first place. The country’s debilitating problems date back to World War ii. Some of the most difficult and brutal battles of the war were fought in Burma. The British decided that a war-ravaged Burma was not worth holding on to. By the end of 1946, they began to parley with the leader of the Burmese resistance forces, Aung San (father of Ms Suu Kyi). The following year tragedy struck, as Aung San and several members of his cabinet were murdered under circumstances that still remain obscure. Worse, by 1948 the situation in Burma had spiralled into a civil war.
The communist party was the first group to take up arms against the government. Soon, an Islamist insurgency erupted in the north of Arakan. Shortly thereafter, the Karens and Kachins of the highlands turned against the Rangoon government. A couple of years later, the Shans joined the ranks of rebelling tribes. These groups had enjoyed considerable autonomy under the British and feared that their standing would be eroded in a self-proclaimed Buddhist Burma. Some of the groups were rather well armed, having played a major role in the anti-Japanese resistance during World War ii. Others benefited from covert support by China and Thailand.
This anarchical situation resulted in gradual militarisation of the Burmese state. The military began to consume the largest slice of the financial pie and became by far the most powerful actor. Only in 1989 did the government begin to negotiate ceasefire accords. These have been concluded with 16 groups so far. But the underlying disputes are yet to be resolved. A broad attempt at national reconciliation will have to focus on these disputes as well as the demands of Ms Suu Kyi. Reacting to her release, foreign minister S.M. Krishna expressed hope that this would be “the beginning of the process of reconciliation in Burma”. But New Delhi can do more than simply hope for “an inclusive approach to political change”. It can certainly nudge the junta to move further and faster.
Part of the reason why India is unwilling to do so is its concern about China’s influence in Burma. China is its largest trading partner, supplying everything from military equipment to foodgrain. China’s involvement in a range of infrastructure projects has also been a matter of concern for India. These are seen as facilitating China’s access to the Indian Ocean. Yet New Delhi should not over-estimate China’s clout nor regard every Chinese move as detrimental to Indian interests. Historically, Burma’s relationship with China was rarely smooth. Although the two sides managed to resolve the boundary dispute, China continued to assist Burmese communists and insurgents. At the height of the Cultural Revolution, anti-Chinese riots erupted in Rangoon. It was only after 1989 that China and Burma grew closer, united by the international criticism of their human rights record.
Nevertheless, in the past few years the Sino-Burma honeymoon appears to have ended. The junta purge of 2004 and the dismantling of military intelligence network removed key Chinese contacts. The decision in November 2005 to relocate the capital to Naypyidaw took the Chinese by surprise. Beijing made its displeasure clear in January 2007, when its envoy told the UN Security Council that the problems in Burma were “quite serious”. Later that year, Beijing allowed the Security Council to issue a presidential statement critical of the junta. In the wake of Cyclone Nargis the following year, the Chinese urged the junta to cooperate with the UN.
New Delhi need not assume that a more forthright stance towards the junta will necessarily redound to Beijing’s advantage. Our Burma policy has to remain ahead of the trajectory of political developments inside that country. Let’s not forget the central feature of recent democratic transitions: before it happens every revolution seems impossible, but after it happens it seems inevitable. The challenge is to avoid being caught out by history.
- Srinath Raghavan is a Senior Fellow at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/dc-comment/think-janata-not-junta-023
India’s stance has been criticised by Western democracies. US President Barack Obama’s pointed observations in his speech to the Indian parliament captured the prevailing views on this subject. India, he noted, had “often shied away” from condemning gross violations of human rights. When the Burma junta openly suppressed democratic aspirations of its people, “democracies of the world cannot remain silent”. India’s concerns, he suggested, stemmed from a misplaced concern about violating the principle of state sovereignty.
In fact, concerns about state sovereignty have seldom inhibited India from speaking its mind. Think of India’s consistent and vocal criticism of apartheid in South Africa — not least when Western democracies were mealy-mouthed on the issue. Rather, India’s stance on Burma reflects both its better understanding of the problem and its realpolitik calculations. The latter, however, seem to be based on questionable assumptions. And there is scope to finetune and bring them in sync with our democratic identity and values.
The dominant Western narrative about Burma is of a struggle dating back to the 1980s between forces of democracy led by Ms Suu Kyi and the repressive junta. This captures an important facet of the political context in Burma, but it is too simplistic and myopic. Any meaningful attempt towards a democratic transition will have to address a larger set of problems — issues that played a critical role in weakening democracy and tightening the junta’s grip in the first place. The country’s debilitating problems date back to World War ii. Some of the most difficult and brutal battles of the war were fought in Burma. The British decided that a war-ravaged Burma was not worth holding on to. By the end of 1946, they began to parley with the leader of the Burmese resistance forces, Aung San (father of Ms Suu Kyi). The following year tragedy struck, as Aung San and several members of his cabinet were murdered under circumstances that still remain obscure. Worse, by 1948 the situation in Burma had spiralled into a civil war.
The communist party was the first group to take up arms against the government. Soon, an Islamist insurgency erupted in the north of Arakan. Shortly thereafter, the Karens and Kachins of the highlands turned against the Rangoon government. A couple of years later, the Shans joined the ranks of rebelling tribes. These groups had enjoyed considerable autonomy under the British and feared that their standing would be eroded in a self-proclaimed Buddhist Burma. Some of the groups were rather well armed, having played a major role in the anti-Japanese resistance during World War ii. Others benefited from covert support by China and Thailand.
This anarchical situation resulted in gradual militarisation of the Burmese state. The military began to consume the largest slice of the financial pie and became by far the most powerful actor. Only in 1989 did the government begin to negotiate ceasefire accords. These have been concluded with 16 groups so far. But the underlying disputes are yet to be resolved. A broad attempt at national reconciliation will have to focus on these disputes as well as the demands of Ms Suu Kyi. Reacting to her release, foreign minister S.M. Krishna expressed hope that this would be “the beginning of the process of reconciliation in Burma”. But New Delhi can do more than simply hope for “an inclusive approach to political change”. It can certainly nudge the junta to move further and faster.
Part of the reason why India is unwilling to do so is its concern about China’s influence in Burma. China is its largest trading partner, supplying everything from military equipment to foodgrain. China’s involvement in a range of infrastructure projects has also been a matter of concern for India. These are seen as facilitating China’s access to the Indian Ocean. Yet New Delhi should not over-estimate China’s clout nor regard every Chinese move as detrimental to Indian interests. Historically, Burma’s relationship with China was rarely smooth. Although the two sides managed to resolve the boundary dispute, China continued to assist Burmese communists and insurgents. At the height of the Cultural Revolution, anti-Chinese riots erupted in Rangoon. It was only after 1989 that China and Burma grew closer, united by the international criticism of their human rights record.
Nevertheless, in the past few years the Sino-Burma honeymoon appears to have ended. The junta purge of 2004 and the dismantling of military intelligence network removed key Chinese contacts. The decision in November 2005 to relocate the capital to Naypyidaw took the Chinese by surprise. Beijing made its displeasure clear in January 2007, when its envoy told the UN Security Council that the problems in Burma were “quite serious”. Later that year, Beijing allowed the Security Council to issue a presidential statement critical of the junta. In the wake of Cyclone Nargis the following year, the Chinese urged the junta to cooperate with the UN.
New Delhi need not assume that a more forthright stance towards the junta will necessarily redound to Beijing’s advantage. Our Burma policy has to remain ahead of the trajectory of political developments inside that country. Let’s not forget the central feature of recent democratic transitions: before it happens every revolution seems impossible, but after it happens it seems inevitable. The challenge is to avoid being caught out by history.
- Srinath Raghavan is a Senior Fellow at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi
http://www.deccanchronicle.com/dc-comment/think-janata-not-junta-023
miércoles, 17 de noviembre de 2010
Now We Must All Stand With The Lady by Jared Gensen
She hasn’t been able to talk to her supporters in over seven years. But two days ago, they gathered at the iron gates surrounding the decaying home that has been her prison for 15 of the past 21 years. As they cheered and cried, she said to them, “Thank you for welcoming me like this. We haven’t seen each other for so long, I have so much to tell you.”
Aung San Suu Kyi has been the face and heart of the democracy movement in Burma since the 1988 pro-democracy uprisings were brutally crushed by the military junta. “The Lady,” as she is affectionately known, has suffered in her home while the junta has so cruelly isolated her from the world. It has been her Buddhist faith, her almost supernatural inner strength, and her commitment to restore democracy to Burma that has carried her forward. To see her set free felt like the world was witnessing history – a moment of extraordinary joy and hope for the Burmese people and for people everywhere whose lives are held hostage by dictatorial regimes.
But, it’s only a moment. Today, the real work begins. The international community must not naively think that democracy will now come to Burma. Suu Kyi has been released from her illegal detentions before. And the junta only tightened its grip on power.
Now, Suu Kyi’s work of freeing her own people must begin anew. And the international community must redouble its efforts to support her and them. There are still some 2,200 other political prisoners in Burma. And beyond them, the junta has systematically and thoroughly repressed the fundamental human rights of the more than 50 million Burmese people. Freedom of expression and freedom of association are tightly controlled. The regime uses tens of thousands of child soldiers. Hundreds of thousands of people are regularly conscripted to perform forced labor. But most shocking is the junta’s brutal repression of its ethnic minority peoples. The junta has destroyed over 3,500 villages in a relentless scorched-earth campaign of killing, torture, and rape.
Perhaps contrary to the inclinations of those watching Burma from afar, the international community must now increase pressure on the Burmese junta—not reduce it. The world should celebrate Suu Kyi’s release. But her release did not happen because of a change of heart on the part of the junta leader Than Shwe. Instead, it is a sign of how confident he feels that his sham elections held a week ago have relegated her irrelevant to the future of the country. Make no mistake. This regime has been uncompromising and relentless in its drive to consolidate and make permanent its grip on power. Suu Kyi’s release is anything but a sign of flexibility.
What is required in Burma is national reconciliation between the junta, Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy party, and ethnic leaders. Empowered by the UN Security Council, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon should immediately travel to Burma to initiate such a process. It must be the Secretary-General himself because there have been more than 40 visits by lower-level UN envoys to Burma in the last two decades that have not achieved any significant concession from the regime. Suu Kyi’s last release in 2002 was, in part, a result of the UN-led initiative to persuade the junta to participate in such a dialogue. Than Shwe, however, later refused to participate. For any process to work, it must therefore have benchmarks, deadlines, and consequences for those parties which obstruct progress.
To get the junta to the negotiating table, the international community must impose legal, political, and economic pressure on the military junta. The UN must follow the recommendation of its own Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Burma and establish a commission of inquiry into the junta’s perpetration of war crimes and crimes against humanity against the people of Burma. The United Kingdom, United States, and a dozen other countries have embraced this call to action. Ultimately, it will be for the Burmese people to decide how they wish to achieve justice and accountability. But initiating such a process will send a clear message to the ranks of the military that if they do not resolve the situation through negotiation, accountability may be externally imposed.
Furthermore, the current regime of economic sanctions against the junta is toothless and so poorly implemented that it is little more than symbolic. Not only should sanctions name the junta’s bankers in Singapore and Dubai and deny them access to global markets, but the UN Security Council should be urged to enact a global arms embargo to deny the regime the weapons it uses to repress its own people.
I harbor no illusions about the difficulty of implementing such a challenging agenda. But now, more than ever, the international community must rally around Aung San Suu Kyi and her people. Although she is finally free from her house arrest, the people of Burma are not free so long as the military junta remains in power. We must take to heart what Suu Kyi has so powerfully pleaded, “Please use your liberty to promote ours.”
Aung San Suu Kyi has so much to share with her people. And her people have so much to tell her. I can only hope that the world’s leaders have just as much to tell the junta.
Jared Genser is president of Freedom Now, a campaign group that advocates for the release of political prisoners, and served for four years as international counsel to Aung San Suu Kyi as retained by a member of her family. The views expressed here are his own.
Aung San Suu Kyi has been the face and heart of the democracy movement in Burma since the 1988 pro-democracy uprisings were brutally crushed by the military junta. “The Lady,” as she is affectionately known, has suffered in her home while the junta has so cruelly isolated her from the world. It has been her Buddhist faith, her almost supernatural inner strength, and her commitment to restore democracy to Burma that has carried her forward. To see her set free felt like the world was witnessing history – a moment of extraordinary joy and hope for the Burmese people and for people everywhere whose lives are held hostage by dictatorial regimes.
But, it’s only a moment. Today, the real work begins. The international community must not naively think that democracy will now come to Burma. Suu Kyi has been released from her illegal detentions before. And the junta only tightened its grip on power.
Now, Suu Kyi’s work of freeing her own people must begin anew. And the international community must redouble its efforts to support her and them. There are still some 2,200 other political prisoners in Burma. And beyond them, the junta has systematically and thoroughly repressed the fundamental human rights of the more than 50 million Burmese people. Freedom of expression and freedom of association are tightly controlled. The regime uses tens of thousands of child soldiers. Hundreds of thousands of people are regularly conscripted to perform forced labor. But most shocking is the junta’s brutal repression of its ethnic minority peoples. The junta has destroyed over 3,500 villages in a relentless scorched-earth campaign of killing, torture, and rape.
Perhaps contrary to the inclinations of those watching Burma from afar, the international community must now increase pressure on the Burmese junta—not reduce it. The world should celebrate Suu Kyi’s release. But her release did not happen because of a change of heart on the part of the junta leader Than Shwe. Instead, it is a sign of how confident he feels that his sham elections held a week ago have relegated her irrelevant to the future of the country. Make no mistake. This regime has been uncompromising and relentless in its drive to consolidate and make permanent its grip on power. Suu Kyi’s release is anything but a sign of flexibility.
What is required in Burma is national reconciliation between the junta, Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy party, and ethnic leaders. Empowered by the UN Security Council, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon should immediately travel to Burma to initiate such a process. It must be the Secretary-General himself because there have been more than 40 visits by lower-level UN envoys to Burma in the last two decades that have not achieved any significant concession from the regime. Suu Kyi’s last release in 2002 was, in part, a result of the UN-led initiative to persuade the junta to participate in such a dialogue. Than Shwe, however, later refused to participate. For any process to work, it must therefore have benchmarks, deadlines, and consequences for those parties which obstruct progress.
To get the junta to the negotiating table, the international community must impose legal, political, and economic pressure on the military junta. The UN must follow the recommendation of its own Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Burma and establish a commission of inquiry into the junta’s perpetration of war crimes and crimes against humanity against the people of Burma. The United Kingdom, United States, and a dozen other countries have embraced this call to action. Ultimately, it will be for the Burmese people to decide how they wish to achieve justice and accountability. But initiating such a process will send a clear message to the ranks of the military that if they do not resolve the situation through negotiation, accountability may be externally imposed.
Furthermore, the current regime of economic sanctions against the junta is toothless and so poorly implemented that it is little more than symbolic. Not only should sanctions name the junta’s bankers in Singapore and Dubai and deny them access to global markets, but the UN Security Council should be urged to enact a global arms embargo to deny the regime the weapons it uses to repress its own people.
I harbor no illusions about the difficulty of implementing such a challenging agenda. But now, more than ever, the international community must rally around Aung San Suu Kyi and her people. Although she is finally free from her house arrest, the people of Burma are not free so long as the military junta remains in power. We must take to heart what Suu Kyi has so powerfully pleaded, “Please use your liberty to promote ours.”
Aung San Suu Kyi has so much to share with her people. And her people have so much to tell her. I can only hope that the world’s leaders have just as much to tell the junta.
Jared Genser is president of Freedom Now, a campaign group that advocates for the release of political prisoners, and served for four years as international counsel to Aung San Suu Kyi as retained by a member of her family. The views expressed here are his own.
The future of Myanmar and ASEAN after the elections
Bambang Hartadi Nugroho, Jakarta | Tue, 11/16/2010 9:54 AM | Opinion
A | A | A |
The Nov. 7 general election in Myanmar has become a cause for concern for many, with critics calling it undemocratic, because it prohibited the leading opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), from contesting.
The military junta went farther by keeping NLD leader and Nobel laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi, together with many of her colleagues in custody. The only significant opposition party allowed to put up its candidates was the National Democratic Force (NDF) with only 164 candidates, compared to the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) and the National Unity Party (NUP) with 1,112 and 995 candidates respectively. Moreover, the Constitution of 2008 mandates that 25 percent of the seats in the parliament should go to military appointees in any case.
The outcome of the election announced Wednesday saw the USDP win by landslide, with around 80 percent of the available seats in the parliament. This result, however, was not unpredictable given the composition of the parties allowed to stand.
From the beginning, the junta had designed the poll to maintain the status quo and hold on power regardless of mounting criticism from across the world. Thus, it is hard to imagine there will be a significant change in the domestic situation in Myanmar.
The question now is how this election result will impact on the future of Myanmar and its people, including the opposition and ethnic minorities, and on the future of ASEAN as the main regional actor that has constantly been defending Myanmar from external pressure, although lately ASEAN also has shown signs of impatience towards the slowness of change in its youngest member.
The Burmese government finally released Suu Kyi on Nov. 13 as planned, around a week after the election. However, based on previous experiences, there is no real guarantee that the junta will keep its promise. And even if she really is freed, there are doubts she can do much under the current situation and in the future.
Some believe Suu Kyi still has a chance to gain support from Burmese people as she did soon after her release in 2002, when she held rallies all around the country and made speeches in front of her supporters. However, in terms of political movement, it is unwise to rely solely on charisma and influence, because it is going to take a lot more than that to push for political reforms.
This effort will even be tougher assuming that the junta will not be kind enough to simply let Suu Kyi and her colleagues to stage anti-government rallies, especially now that the junta can claim to have secured a mandate from the people.
For the ethnic minorities that account for approximately 30 percent of Myanmar population, there is a little hope the election will bring any changes to their fate. Historically, the military regime has always been discriminatory against ethnic minorities such as the Karen and Rohingya.
In a wider context, the result of this poll can affect the development of ASEAN cooperation. It would be exaggerating to say that the future of ASEAN will be determined by what happens in Myanmar, but we must admit that problems in the Indochinese sub-region could probably impact negatively on ASEAN.
From the beginning, ASEAN has always rejected the western approach towards these issues, which focus on pushing agendas through political and economic sanctions.
Through its “constructive engagement” approach, ASEAN has tried to engage Myanmar since the early 1990s by building economic cooperation, while at the same time trying to counter pressures from the US and Europe. SEAN believed that by engaging Myanmar, it would be able to exercise influence to persuade the junta to adopt political reform. However, recent developments indicated that this belief did not hold true.
Of course ASEAN’s future development does not depend solely on the issue of Myanmar, but Myanmar has become and will remain an unsolved matter for ASEAN if it insists on the principle of non-interference, which has justified its non-action against Myanmar.
Some ASEAN members have, to some extent, violated this principle, including Indonesia which recently suggested that the junta should have allowed media coverage on the election process to ensure its fairness and impartiality. Yet, that was the most they could do: They commented only on individual basis, unable to use a stronger and more formal institutional mechanism to put pressure on Myanmar.
Evidently, ASEAN has lost very precious momentum to push Myanmar to reform itself.
Finally, the issue of democratization in Myanmar is vital for ASEAN not only to rebuild its reputation — after being heavily criticized for protecting the military regime — but more than that, it is also important in order to strengthen political and regional security cooperation.
ASEAN states have set the common goal of creating a Political and Security Community by 2015, in which one of the strongpoints is to promote democracy and the protection of human rights within the region.
That is why the need to encourage Myanmar to carry out political reform is vital to ASEAN.
Nevertheless, the group has failed to do so, and they will have to wait — if unable to create—new momentum in the future to mount pressure on Myanmar.
Hopefully, when the new momentum comes, ASEAN will be able to maximize it, for the sake of Burmese citizens, and for the sake of ASEAN’s institutional development.
The writer is assistant lecturer at the Department of International Relations, University of Indonesia.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/11/16/the-future-myanmar-and-asean-after-elections.html
A | A | A |
The Nov. 7 general election in Myanmar has become a cause for concern for many, with critics calling it undemocratic, because it prohibited the leading opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), from contesting.
The military junta went farther by keeping NLD leader and Nobel laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi, together with many of her colleagues in custody. The only significant opposition party allowed to put up its candidates was the National Democratic Force (NDF) with only 164 candidates, compared to the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) and the National Unity Party (NUP) with 1,112 and 995 candidates respectively. Moreover, the Constitution of 2008 mandates that 25 percent of the seats in the parliament should go to military appointees in any case.
The outcome of the election announced Wednesday saw the USDP win by landslide, with around 80 percent of the available seats in the parliament. This result, however, was not unpredictable given the composition of the parties allowed to stand.
From the beginning, the junta had designed the poll to maintain the status quo and hold on power regardless of mounting criticism from across the world. Thus, it is hard to imagine there will be a significant change in the domestic situation in Myanmar.
The question now is how this election result will impact on the future of Myanmar and its people, including the opposition and ethnic minorities, and on the future of ASEAN as the main regional actor that has constantly been defending Myanmar from external pressure, although lately ASEAN also has shown signs of impatience towards the slowness of change in its youngest member.
The Burmese government finally released Suu Kyi on Nov. 13 as planned, around a week after the election. However, based on previous experiences, there is no real guarantee that the junta will keep its promise. And even if she really is freed, there are doubts she can do much under the current situation and in the future.
Some believe Suu Kyi still has a chance to gain support from Burmese people as she did soon after her release in 2002, when she held rallies all around the country and made speeches in front of her supporters. However, in terms of political movement, it is unwise to rely solely on charisma and influence, because it is going to take a lot more than that to push for political reforms.
This effort will even be tougher assuming that the junta will not be kind enough to simply let Suu Kyi and her colleagues to stage anti-government rallies, especially now that the junta can claim to have secured a mandate from the people.
For the ethnic minorities that account for approximately 30 percent of Myanmar population, there is a little hope the election will bring any changes to their fate. Historically, the military regime has always been discriminatory against ethnic minorities such as the Karen and Rohingya.
In a wider context, the result of this poll can affect the development of ASEAN cooperation. It would be exaggerating to say that the future of ASEAN will be determined by what happens in Myanmar, but we must admit that problems in the Indochinese sub-region could probably impact negatively on ASEAN.
From the beginning, ASEAN has always rejected the western approach towards these issues, which focus on pushing agendas through political and economic sanctions.
Through its “constructive engagement” approach, ASEAN has tried to engage Myanmar since the early 1990s by building economic cooperation, while at the same time trying to counter pressures from the US and Europe. SEAN believed that by engaging Myanmar, it would be able to exercise influence to persuade the junta to adopt political reform. However, recent developments indicated that this belief did not hold true.
Of course ASEAN’s future development does not depend solely on the issue of Myanmar, but Myanmar has become and will remain an unsolved matter for ASEAN if it insists on the principle of non-interference, which has justified its non-action against Myanmar.
Some ASEAN members have, to some extent, violated this principle, including Indonesia which recently suggested that the junta should have allowed media coverage on the election process to ensure its fairness and impartiality. Yet, that was the most they could do: They commented only on individual basis, unable to use a stronger and more formal institutional mechanism to put pressure on Myanmar.
Evidently, ASEAN has lost very precious momentum to push Myanmar to reform itself.
Finally, the issue of democratization in Myanmar is vital for ASEAN not only to rebuild its reputation — after being heavily criticized for protecting the military regime — but more than that, it is also important in order to strengthen political and regional security cooperation.
ASEAN states have set the common goal of creating a Political and Security Community by 2015, in which one of the strongpoints is to promote democracy and the protection of human rights within the region.
That is why the need to encourage Myanmar to carry out political reform is vital to ASEAN.
Nevertheless, the group has failed to do so, and they will have to wait — if unable to create—new momentum in the future to mount pressure on Myanmar.
Hopefully, when the new momentum comes, ASEAN will be able to maximize it, for the sake of Burmese citizens, and for the sake of ASEAN’s institutional development.
The writer is assistant lecturer at the Department of International Relations, University of Indonesia.
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/11/16/the-future-myanmar-and-asean-after-elections.html
Myanmar's Suu Kyi seeks to revive political party
November 16, 2010 12:00 AM
YANGON, Myanmar — Myanmar democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi began the nuts and bolts work of reviving her political movement Monday, consulting lawyers about having her now-disbanded party declared legal again.
Suu Kyi was released over the weekend from 7½ years in detention. On Sunday, she told thousands of wildly cheering supporters at the headquarters of her National League for Democracy that she would continue to fight for human rights and the rule of law in the military-controlled nation.
The 65-year-old Nobel Peace laureate must balance the expectations of the country's pro-democracy movement with the realities of freedom that could be withdrawn any time by the regime. Although her party is officially dissolved, it has continued operating with the same structure. But without official recognition, it is in legal limbo, leaving it — and her — vulnerable to government crackdowns.
The junta recently staged Myanmar's first elections in 20 years, and in a step that will blunt some of the long-standing international criticism of its conduct, released Suu Kyi a week later. Having made those ostensible moves toward democratization after five decades of military rule, it is unlikely to make more concessions — like restoring the NLD's legal status — without getting something back from Suu Kyi and her party, such as dropping opposition to Western sanctions.
Suu Kyi, who has been detained for 15 of the past 21 years, has indicated she would continue with her political activity but not whether she would challenge the military with mass rallies and other activities. She has been noncommittal on sanctions, saying that she would support lifting them if the people of Myanmar provided strong justification for doing so.
In an interview Monday with the BBC, Suu Kyi said she sought "a nonviolent revolution" and offered some reassuring words for the military.
"I don't want to see the military falling. I want to see the military rising to dignified heights of professionalism and true patriotism," she said.
The British-educated Suu Kyi also said she did not fear being detained again.
"I'm not scared," she said. "I know that there is always a possibility, of course. They've done it back in the past, they might do it again."
Nyan Win, who is her lawyer as well as a party spokesman, said Suu Kyi met with her lawyers Monday morning and also party officials from areas outside Yangon who have been keeping her political network alive during years of repression.
He said Myanmar's High Court this Thursday will hold a hearing to decide whether to accept a case from Suu Kyi arguing that her party's dissolution "is not in accordance with the law." The party was disbanded earlier this year under a new law because it failed to reregister for Nov. 7 elections, complaining conditions set by the junta were unfair and undemocratic.
Suu Kyi's side says the new Election Commission has no right to deregister parties that were registered under a different Election Commission in 1990. The party also contends that the court is legally bound to hear their case.
Full results from this month's elections have yet to be released, but figures so far give a military-backed party a solid majority in both houses of parliament.
In London, British Prime Minister David Cameron told the House of Commons he talked to Suu Kyi by telephone on Monday morning.
"Her tenacity and courage in the face of injustice has been truly inspiring. I spoke to her this morning to pass on the congratulations of everyone in the country on her release and her remarkable stand on democracy and human rights," Cameron told lawmakers. "We must now work to ensure that her release is followed by freedom for more than 2,000 other political prisoners."
Many observers have questioned whether her release on Saturday was timed by the junta to distract the world's attention from the polls, decried by Western nations as a sham designed to perpetuate control by the military which has ruled Myanmar, also known as Burma, since 1962.
The NLD won 1990 elections by a large margin but the regime barred it from taking power.
Nyan Win said Suu Kyi's lawyers are also pursuing a separate legal case against the junta, involving an appeal to the Human Rights Council, a U.N. body, over her latest 18-month sentence of house arrest which has just ended.
Suu Kyi was convicted of violating conditions of a previous term of house arrest by briefly sheltering an uninvited American who swam to her home. Her legal team argues that the ruling — also applied to two women companions living with Suu Kyi — was illegal and unlawful as it was based on the 1974 Constitution, which was abrogated in 1988.
Since Myanmar's Special Appellate Bench on Nov. 11 turned down an appeal to overturn lower court decisions in that case, Suu Kyi's lawyers are taking her case to the U.N. council.
Although the junta often seems to defy critical international opinion, it has shown sensitivity to pressure from U.N. organizations. Past condemnation by the U.N.'s International Labor Organization over the junta's use of forced labor led to the opening of a special U.N. office in Yangon to hear workers' complaints.
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101116/NEWS02/11160339/-1/NEWSMAP
YANGON, Myanmar — Myanmar democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi began the nuts and bolts work of reviving her political movement Monday, consulting lawyers about having her now-disbanded party declared legal again.
Suu Kyi was released over the weekend from 7½ years in detention. On Sunday, she told thousands of wildly cheering supporters at the headquarters of her National League for Democracy that she would continue to fight for human rights and the rule of law in the military-controlled nation.
The 65-year-old Nobel Peace laureate must balance the expectations of the country's pro-democracy movement with the realities of freedom that could be withdrawn any time by the regime. Although her party is officially dissolved, it has continued operating with the same structure. But without official recognition, it is in legal limbo, leaving it — and her — vulnerable to government crackdowns.
The junta recently staged Myanmar's first elections in 20 years, and in a step that will blunt some of the long-standing international criticism of its conduct, released Suu Kyi a week later. Having made those ostensible moves toward democratization after five decades of military rule, it is unlikely to make more concessions — like restoring the NLD's legal status — without getting something back from Suu Kyi and her party, such as dropping opposition to Western sanctions.
Suu Kyi, who has been detained for 15 of the past 21 years, has indicated she would continue with her political activity but not whether she would challenge the military with mass rallies and other activities. She has been noncommittal on sanctions, saying that she would support lifting them if the people of Myanmar provided strong justification for doing so.
In an interview Monday with the BBC, Suu Kyi said she sought "a nonviolent revolution" and offered some reassuring words for the military.
"I don't want to see the military falling. I want to see the military rising to dignified heights of professionalism and true patriotism," she said.
The British-educated Suu Kyi also said she did not fear being detained again.
"I'm not scared," she said. "I know that there is always a possibility, of course. They've done it back in the past, they might do it again."
Nyan Win, who is her lawyer as well as a party spokesman, said Suu Kyi met with her lawyers Monday morning and also party officials from areas outside Yangon who have been keeping her political network alive during years of repression.
He said Myanmar's High Court this Thursday will hold a hearing to decide whether to accept a case from Suu Kyi arguing that her party's dissolution "is not in accordance with the law." The party was disbanded earlier this year under a new law because it failed to reregister for Nov. 7 elections, complaining conditions set by the junta were unfair and undemocratic.
Suu Kyi's side says the new Election Commission has no right to deregister parties that were registered under a different Election Commission in 1990. The party also contends that the court is legally bound to hear their case.
Full results from this month's elections have yet to be released, but figures so far give a military-backed party a solid majority in both houses of parliament.
In London, British Prime Minister David Cameron told the House of Commons he talked to Suu Kyi by telephone on Monday morning.
"Her tenacity and courage in the face of injustice has been truly inspiring. I spoke to her this morning to pass on the congratulations of everyone in the country on her release and her remarkable stand on democracy and human rights," Cameron told lawmakers. "We must now work to ensure that her release is followed by freedom for more than 2,000 other political prisoners."
Many observers have questioned whether her release on Saturday was timed by the junta to distract the world's attention from the polls, decried by Western nations as a sham designed to perpetuate control by the military which has ruled Myanmar, also known as Burma, since 1962.
The NLD won 1990 elections by a large margin but the regime barred it from taking power.
Nyan Win said Suu Kyi's lawyers are also pursuing a separate legal case against the junta, involving an appeal to the Human Rights Council, a U.N. body, over her latest 18-month sentence of house arrest which has just ended.
Suu Kyi was convicted of violating conditions of a previous term of house arrest by briefly sheltering an uninvited American who swam to her home. Her legal team argues that the ruling — also applied to two women companions living with Suu Kyi — was illegal and unlawful as it was based on the 1974 Constitution, which was abrogated in 1988.
Since Myanmar's Special Appellate Bench on Nov. 11 turned down an appeal to overturn lower court decisions in that case, Suu Kyi's lawyers are taking her case to the U.N. council.
Although the junta often seems to defy critical international opinion, it has shown sensitivity to pressure from U.N. organizations. Past condemnation by the U.N.'s International Labor Organization over the junta's use of forced labor led to the opening of a special U.N. office in Yangon to hear workers' complaints.
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101116/NEWS02/11160339/-1/NEWSMAP
Myanmar people overjoyed but worry about Suu Kyi
YANGON (Reuters) - The release of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi is still being celebrated in Myanmar but fears about her safety or re-arrest are running high among her adoring supporters.
The Nobel laureate and daughter of the country's independence hero was released on Saturday after seven years in detention but many are concerned her freedom could be short-lived if the country's oppressive army rulers decide to wield their power.
"I'm very worried about her security," said Soe Myint, a taxi driver in Myanmar's biggest city, Yangon.
"If something happens to her, they will be responsible for this," he added, referring to the army regime that has ruled the former British colony for 48 years.
In a country where distrust of the military runs deep, her supporters would have every reason to be concerned.
Suu Kyi's motorcade was attacked in May 2003 by pro-junta thugs in the town of Depayin while on a countryside tour. She was placed back under house arrest, which the regime called "protective custody."
Suu Kyi has spent 15 of the past 21 years in some form of detention because of her fight against military dictatorship in Myanmar and there is little doubt the junta sees her as the biggest threat to its power.
"The Depayin incident is still haunting us," said Hla Thein, a retired teacher. "To be honest, I doubt we can expect any meaningful changes following her release but we are all worried about her."
Suu Kyi has twice been freed and twice re-arrested since she was first placed in detention in July 1989 for "endangering the state."
TRUMPED UP CHARGES
In May last year, Suu Kyi was weeks away from the expiry of a term of house arrest when American intruder John Yettaw swam to her lakeside home saying God had sent him to warn her terrorists would try to assassinate her.
She allowed the intruder to stay for two nights and as a result was given an 18-month extension to her term for breaking a law protecting the state against "subversive elements."
Critics said the charges were trumped up to sideline her from politics. Some of her supporters fear something similar could happen again.
"To my great relief, another John Yettaw did not show up before she was released," added taxi driver Soe Myint. "I thought the military would create some reason to extend her house arrest." Suu Kyi was greeted by thousands of her supporters when she was released on Saturday and she appears not to have lost her charisma and mesmerizing influence on the people. Although she will play no official political role following a November 7 election boycotted by her party and won convincingly by a pro-military party, few think she will fade from the spotlight.
Her supporters expect her to push for reforms and freedoms but know there are limits to how much she can do in a country tightly controlled by the military and governed by a new constitution critics say was designed to keep Suu Kyi at bay.
They are just happy to see her free.
"I don't think we can expect anything out of her release since it does not depend on her alone. I'm just happy to see her free," said Khin May, a retired bank clerk.
"I will be very glad if nothing happens to her. I hope she doesn't get arrested again."
Story & Photos Copyright 2010 Reuters
http://kgmi.com/Myanmar-people-overjoyed-but-worry-about-Suu-Kyi/8575454
The Nobel laureate and daughter of the country's independence hero was released on Saturday after seven years in detention but many are concerned her freedom could be short-lived if the country's oppressive army rulers decide to wield their power.
"I'm very worried about her security," said Soe Myint, a taxi driver in Myanmar's biggest city, Yangon.
"If something happens to her, they will be responsible for this," he added, referring to the army regime that has ruled the former British colony for 48 years.
In a country where distrust of the military runs deep, her supporters would have every reason to be concerned.
Suu Kyi's motorcade was attacked in May 2003 by pro-junta thugs in the town of Depayin while on a countryside tour. She was placed back under house arrest, which the regime called "protective custody."
Suu Kyi has spent 15 of the past 21 years in some form of detention because of her fight against military dictatorship in Myanmar and there is little doubt the junta sees her as the biggest threat to its power.
"The Depayin incident is still haunting us," said Hla Thein, a retired teacher. "To be honest, I doubt we can expect any meaningful changes following her release but we are all worried about her."
Suu Kyi has twice been freed and twice re-arrested since she was first placed in detention in July 1989 for "endangering the state."
TRUMPED UP CHARGES
In May last year, Suu Kyi was weeks away from the expiry of a term of house arrest when American intruder John Yettaw swam to her lakeside home saying God had sent him to warn her terrorists would try to assassinate her.
She allowed the intruder to stay for two nights and as a result was given an 18-month extension to her term for breaking a law protecting the state against "subversive elements."
Critics said the charges were trumped up to sideline her from politics. Some of her supporters fear something similar could happen again.
"To my great relief, another John Yettaw did not show up before she was released," added taxi driver Soe Myint. "I thought the military would create some reason to extend her house arrest." Suu Kyi was greeted by thousands of her supporters when she was released on Saturday and she appears not to have lost her charisma and mesmerizing influence on the people. Although she will play no official political role following a November 7 election boycotted by her party and won convincingly by a pro-military party, few think she will fade from the spotlight.
Her supporters expect her to push for reforms and freedoms but know there are limits to how much she can do in a country tightly controlled by the military and governed by a new constitution critics say was designed to keep Suu Kyi at bay.
They are just happy to see her free.
"I don't think we can expect anything out of her release since it does not depend on her alone. I'm just happy to see her free," said Khin May, a retired bank clerk.
"I will be very glad if nothing happens to her. I hope she doesn't get arrested again."
Story & Photos Copyright 2010 Reuters
http://kgmi.com/Myanmar-people-overjoyed-but-worry-about-Suu-Kyi/8575454
Aung San Suu Kyi freed, but Burma taken hostage by the generals
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (ALTSEAN-Burma)
Burma Lawyers' Council (BLC)
Joint Press Release
Paris-Bangkok, 15 November 2010 - The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (ALTSEAN-Burma), and the Burma Lawyers’ Council are pleased to see Daw Aung San Suu Kyi regain her freedom on 13 November after spending 15 of the last 21 years in detention in Burma.
FIDH, ALTSEAN-Burma and BLC assert that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s detention was arbitrary and unlawful, as is the detention of all other political prisoners in Burma. The organisations therefore demand their immediate and unconditional release and the full restoration of their civil and political rights. Their release will be a crucial first step towards genuine national reconciliation. FIDH, ALTSEAN-Burma and BLC further demand that the prior convictions of these political prisoners be overturned and that redress be provided to them and their families for the physical and psychological suffering resulting from the deprivation of their fundamental rights.
While Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s release is technically unconditional, it remains to be seen whether she will be able to fully exercise her fundamental rights and freedoms, including her right to participate in political activities. It is to be remembered that the junta considerably restricted her freedom of movement following her previous releases from detention.
Suu Kyi’s release came six days after the 7 November general elections which violated internationally accepted standards. Not satisfied with the pro-military provisions of the 2008 Constitution and the repressive election laws and decrees, the Burmese junta perpetrated blatant electoral frauds by intimidating and manipulating voters to ensure a landslide victory for their proxy parties.
The oppressive and exclusive elections and the provisions of the 2008 Constitution have placed Burma in grave danger of a serious intensification of its long-running internal conflicts. Such an increase in violence will almost certainly be accompanied by a spike in serious international crimes. The post-election clash between Burmese troops and a splinter group of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA), which drove as many as 20,000 people across the border to Thailand, as well as military clashes in Shan State is a sign that the general elections and their results are aggravating the root causes of conflict in Burma. This is why the international community must renew its efforts to work with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to ensure that the peoples of Burma are free.
“While Suu Kyi is freed, her country has effectively been taken hostage by the SPDC generals who designed the fraudulent 7 November elections to extend their illegitimate hold on power,” said Souhayr Belhassen, FIDH President. “The message from the international community must be unequivocal and steadfast at this critical juncture: the SPDC and the next military-dominated regime must cease all human rights abuses, hold perpetrators to account, and commit to a process of inclusive and transparent dialogue with all stakeholders in order to enable a genuine transition to democracy and national reconciliation.”
“The release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi should be unconditional and she must be allowed to contribute meaningfully to the process of national reconciliation and the democratic transition of Burma. This must include a fundamental review of the 2008 Constitution, which entirely fails to guarantee peace and stability to civilians,” said U Thein Oo, Chairman of BLC.
“The international community should not be complacent now that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is free. The regime stole an election last week, 2,200 people continue to be arbitrarily detained as political prisoners, ethnic nationality communities continue to be threatened by serious international crimes and escalating conflict. The entire country remains hostage to impunity. Burma needs concrete action now,” insisted Debbie Stothard, Altsean-Burma Coordinator, and FIDH Deputy Secretary-General.
Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (ALTSEAN-Burma)
Burma Lawyers' Council (BLC)
Joint Press Release
Paris-Bangkok, 15 November 2010 - The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (ALTSEAN-Burma), and the Burma Lawyers’ Council are pleased to see Daw Aung San Suu Kyi regain her freedom on 13 November after spending 15 of the last 21 years in detention in Burma.
FIDH, ALTSEAN-Burma and BLC assert that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s detention was arbitrary and unlawful, as is the detention of all other political prisoners in Burma. The organisations therefore demand their immediate and unconditional release and the full restoration of their civil and political rights. Their release will be a crucial first step towards genuine national reconciliation. FIDH, ALTSEAN-Burma and BLC further demand that the prior convictions of these political prisoners be overturned and that redress be provided to them and their families for the physical and psychological suffering resulting from the deprivation of their fundamental rights.
While Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s release is technically unconditional, it remains to be seen whether she will be able to fully exercise her fundamental rights and freedoms, including her right to participate in political activities. It is to be remembered that the junta considerably restricted her freedom of movement following her previous releases from detention.
Suu Kyi’s release came six days after the 7 November general elections which violated internationally accepted standards. Not satisfied with the pro-military provisions of the 2008 Constitution and the repressive election laws and decrees, the Burmese junta perpetrated blatant electoral frauds by intimidating and manipulating voters to ensure a landslide victory for their proxy parties.
The oppressive and exclusive elections and the provisions of the 2008 Constitution have placed Burma in grave danger of a serious intensification of its long-running internal conflicts. Such an increase in violence will almost certainly be accompanied by a spike in serious international crimes. The post-election clash between Burmese troops and a splinter group of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA), which drove as many as 20,000 people across the border to Thailand, as well as military clashes in Shan State is a sign that the general elections and their results are aggravating the root causes of conflict in Burma. This is why the international community must renew its efforts to work with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to ensure that the peoples of Burma are free.
“While Suu Kyi is freed, her country has effectively been taken hostage by the SPDC generals who designed the fraudulent 7 November elections to extend their illegitimate hold on power,” said Souhayr Belhassen, FIDH President. “The message from the international community must be unequivocal and steadfast at this critical juncture: the SPDC and the next military-dominated regime must cease all human rights abuses, hold perpetrators to account, and commit to a process of inclusive and transparent dialogue with all stakeholders in order to enable a genuine transition to democracy and national reconciliation.”
“The release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi should be unconditional and she must be allowed to contribute meaningfully to the process of national reconciliation and the democratic transition of Burma. This must include a fundamental review of the 2008 Constitution, which entirely fails to guarantee peace and stability to civilians,” said U Thein Oo, Chairman of BLC.
“The international community should not be complacent now that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is free. The regime stole an election last week, 2,200 people continue to be arbitrarily detained as political prisoners, ethnic nationality communities continue to be threatened by serious international crimes and escalating conflict. The entire country remains hostage to impunity. Burma needs concrete action now,” insisted Debbie Stothard, Altsean-Burma Coordinator, and FIDH Deputy Secretary-General.
lunes, 15 de noviembre de 2010
Aung San Suu Kyi: Burma's National Leader by Aung Zaw
Burma's Nobel peace laureate and democratic leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, is free at last. Her release will no doubt raise hopes and expectations. She is not just the leader of her own party, the National League for Democracy; Aung San Suu Kyi is also regarded as the national leader in Burma.
Aung Zaw is founder and editor of the Irrawaddy magazine. He can be reached at aungzaw@irrawaddy.org.
In her absence, critics inside and outside of Burma privately or openly questioned her relevance and popularity, suggesting that she no longer represented a majority of Burmese people. They were wrong.
Britain's Rangoon ambassador, Andrew Heyn, has the answer: "As for her relevance, all the evidence points to a regime that still fears that she is very relevant." Burma's oppressed citizens have not forgotten her.
Since the news of her imminent release reached residents in Rangoon, many Burmese, including the younger generations who have never seen her in person, bravely flocked into her party headquarters to show support and walked to her lakeside house, chanting and waiting for her release in spite of the presence of the troops and riot police. The question now is how she will confront challenges and the new political landscape in her country.
The political challenges that Aung San Suu Kyi will face will be very much different from what she encountered during the two previous times she was freed from house arrest, the first in July 1995 and the second in May 2002.
The regime has just held a general election and rigged the votes and will soon claim "victory" with an improbable 80% of the vote. The regime will form a new government and convene parliament. But Aung San Suu Kyi won't be sitting there. So the generals may think they have sidelined her effectively. This calculation could be wrong.
Burma's sullen military leaders have taken a political risk to free the immensely popular democracy leader, but they might have also thought that, since they are in full control of the situation in the country and secured their role in future politics, her freedom was a risk worth taking. However, Aung San Suu Kyi could remain a thorn in the side of the regime.
Despite its views and values, the government of Burma has no shortage of friends around. The Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean) said the election was a "significant step forward". Asean's Vietnamese chair said in a statement published by the Vietnamese state media on Tuesday: "Asean encourages Myanmar [Burma] to continue to accelerate the process of national reconciliation and democratisation for stability and development in the country." China offered full backing to the election.
Aung San Suu Kyi's non-violence struggle also won friends and admirers around the world and she remains a symbol of democratic struggle in Burma. She has been asking her captors to have a meaningful political dialogue, but the past meetings between the regime leaders and Aung San Suu Kyi have reached nowhere. Instead she has been locked in and locked out again and again.
It is believed that Aung San Suu Kyi will continue to call for political dialogue; she will also call for the regime to free more than 2,000 political prisoners who remain behind bars.
More importantly, she will play a pivotal role in reconciling and restoring the unity of ethnic nationalities. Indeed, prior to her release Aung San Suu Kyi was interested in the second Panglong Conference—the first one was held in 1947, a year before the country regained its independence from Britain. At the conference, led by her father, several ethnic leaders formed a united front for independence. Since Aung San Suu Kyi can win the trust of the divided ethnic nationalities in Burma, the second Panglong Conference is as important as the first. The question is whether the regime will allow it to take place.
Aung San Suu Kyi wants to find a way to lift the international economic sanctions and is in favour of international humanitarian aid going into Burma and border regions. However, the question is how the regime will react to her olive branch.
Lastly, her supporters and party members have also expressed great concern for her safety. They know that the regime will remain unfriendly to Aung San Suu Kyi in spite of the release—this is not a gesture of goodwill from the regime, who have cooked up several charges against her in the past to lock her up.
What they don't want is for her to be Burma's Benazir Bhutto.
(This article appears on London-based newspaper Guardian on Saturday.)
Aung Zaw is founder and editor of the Irrawaddy magazine. He can be reached at aungzaw@irrawaddy.org.
In her absence, critics inside and outside of Burma privately or openly questioned her relevance and popularity, suggesting that she no longer represented a majority of Burmese people. They were wrong.
Britain's Rangoon ambassador, Andrew Heyn, has the answer: "As for her relevance, all the evidence points to a regime that still fears that she is very relevant." Burma's oppressed citizens have not forgotten her.
Since the news of her imminent release reached residents in Rangoon, many Burmese, including the younger generations who have never seen her in person, bravely flocked into her party headquarters to show support and walked to her lakeside house, chanting and waiting for her release in spite of the presence of the troops and riot police. The question now is how she will confront challenges and the new political landscape in her country.
The political challenges that Aung San Suu Kyi will face will be very much different from what she encountered during the two previous times she was freed from house arrest, the first in July 1995 and the second in May 2002.
The regime has just held a general election and rigged the votes and will soon claim "victory" with an improbable 80% of the vote. The regime will form a new government and convene parliament. But Aung San Suu Kyi won't be sitting there. So the generals may think they have sidelined her effectively. This calculation could be wrong.
Burma's sullen military leaders have taken a political risk to free the immensely popular democracy leader, but they might have also thought that, since they are in full control of the situation in the country and secured their role in future politics, her freedom was a risk worth taking. However, Aung San Suu Kyi could remain a thorn in the side of the regime.
Despite its views and values, the government of Burma has no shortage of friends around. The Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean) said the election was a "significant step forward". Asean's Vietnamese chair said in a statement published by the Vietnamese state media on Tuesday: "Asean encourages Myanmar [Burma] to continue to accelerate the process of national reconciliation and democratisation for stability and development in the country." China offered full backing to the election.
Aung San Suu Kyi's non-violence struggle also won friends and admirers around the world and she remains a symbol of democratic struggle in Burma. She has been asking her captors to have a meaningful political dialogue, but the past meetings between the regime leaders and Aung San Suu Kyi have reached nowhere. Instead she has been locked in and locked out again and again.
It is believed that Aung San Suu Kyi will continue to call for political dialogue; she will also call for the regime to free more than 2,000 political prisoners who remain behind bars.
More importantly, she will play a pivotal role in reconciling and restoring the unity of ethnic nationalities. Indeed, prior to her release Aung San Suu Kyi was interested in the second Panglong Conference—the first one was held in 1947, a year before the country regained its independence from Britain. At the conference, led by her father, several ethnic leaders formed a united front for independence. Since Aung San Suu Kyi can win the trust of the divided ethnic nationalities in Burma, the second Panglong Conference is as important as the first. The question is whether the regime will allow it to take place.
Aung San Suu Kyi wants to find a way to lift the international economic sanctions and is in favour of international humanitarian aid going into Burma and border regions. However, the question is how the regime will react to her olive branch.
Lastly, her supporters and party members have also expressed great concern for her safety. They know that the regime will remain unfriendly to Aung San Suu Kyi in spite of the release—this is not a gesture of goodwill from the regime, who have cooked up several charges against her in the past to lock her up.
What they don't want is for her to be Burma's Benazir Bhutto.
(This article appears on London-based newspaper Guardian on Saturday.)
EL ROL DE SUU KYI-
What Role Could Suu Kyi Play?
BANGKOK — Aung San Suu Kyi is burdened by huge expectations. Despite the international backing and massive show of domestic support for her, the reality is in Burma is very little she can do to challenge the military's monopoly on politics, the economy and judiciary, Reuters reports. For details, see: http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-52918320101115?pageNumber=1
BANGKOK — Aung San Suu Kyi is burdened by huge expectations. Despite the international backing and massive show of domestic support for her, the reality is in Burma is very little she can do to challenge the military's monopoly on politics, the economy and judiciary, Reuters reports. For details, see: http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-52918320101115?pageNumber=1
COMUNICADO DE AMNISTIA INTERNACIONAL
¡Aung San Suu Kyi ya está en libertad! La Premio Nobel de la Paz, cofundadora del principal partido de la oposición en Myanmar - la Liga Nacional para la Democracia -, ha sido puesta en libertad después de pasar más de 15 de los últimos 21 años detenida.
Su liberación es una buenísima noticia, pero es también un recordatorio de la represión en Myanmar, donde más de 2.200 personas siguen encarceladas por motivos políticos.
Lo que diferencia a esas personas de Aung San Suu Kyi es que no han conseguido el Premio Nobel de la Paz y que no son conocidas. Lo que les hace iguales es su valentía, el riesgo que corren y nuestro empeño por sacarlas de la cárcel.
En Amnistía Internacional, llevamos más de 20 años exigiendo respeto por los derechos humanos en Myanmar. Ahora que Aung San Suu Kyi puede por fin disfrutar de su libertad, tu apoyo es imprescindible para que miles de personas desconocidas puedan correr la misma suerte Aung San Suu Kyi. Sólo con tu apoyo y el de las miles de personas que formamos parte de Amnistía Internacional podremos conseguirlo.
En nombre de Aung San Suu Kyi y de todas las personas a las que trasmites esperanza: Muchas gracias por tu compromiso con los derechos humanos.
Esteban Beltrán
Director Amnistía Internacional – Sección Española
Su liberación es una buenísima noticia, pero es también un recordatorio de la represión en Myanmar, donde más de 2.200 personas siguen encarceladas por motivos políticos.
Lo que diferencia a esas personas de Aung San Suu Kyi es que no han conseguido el Premio Nobel de la Paz y que no son conocidas. Lo que les hace iguales es su valentía, el riesgo que corren y nuestro empeño por sacarlas de la cárcel.
En Amnistía Internacional, llevamos más de 20 años exigiendo respeto por los derechos humanos en Myanmar. Ahora que Aung San Suu Kyi puede por fin disfrutar de su libertad, tu apoyo es imprescindible para que miles de personas desconocidas puedan correr la misma suerte Aung San Suu Kyi. Sólo con tu apoyo y el de las miles de personas que formamos parte de Amnistía Internacional podremos conseguirlo.
En nombre de Aung San Suu Kyi y de todas las personas a las que trasmites esperanza: Muchas gracias por tu compromiso con los derechos humanos.
Esteban Beltrán
Director Amnistía Internacional – Sección Española
The Women’s League of Burma Welcomes Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's Release And Demands Ongoing Action to Ensure Freedom for All of Burma
The Women’s League of Burma (WLB) warmly welcomes Daw Aung San Suu Kyi back into active political and public life and we hope to soon celebrate the reinstatement of her inalienable rights, especially her freedom of movement. Though her release brings us joy and hope, we also clearly recognize that this alone does not fully ensure democratic progress for the country unless all political prisoners are released unconditionally.
In 1990, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), won the country’s first election in decades by a landslide. The military regime did not honor the election result and she has been kept under house arrest for 15 of the last 20 years. Even while under house arrest, she has demonstrated unwavering and determined political leadership, provided inspiration and garnered respect from the people of Burma and democracy‐loving people around the world. The recent expression of public support leading up to her release shows that although she was kept out of the publics’ eye, she is always in their hearts. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is a true role model of the kind of leadership Burma is desperately yearning for; someone who can facilitate trust building, cooperation, dialogue, and progress.
WLB calls for her release to be unconditional but final and her security must be guaranteed. Though her liberty rekindles hope, the SPDC must meet other essential benchmarks of democratic progress. She is one of many political prisoners, and one of millions of women in Burma struggling against military rule.
The recent election is a clear example that the military regime's focus is to ensure power through all methods of manipulation and control, and this election must not be recognized. The military regime's ongoing attacks against civilians, even in recent days, are a clear sign they do not mean to bring peace to the country and this is unallowable. We urged the SPDC to cease all hostilities and stop fighting in the ethnic areas. The international community must continue to firmly call for the release of all political prisoners, an end to crimes against humanity, and genuine national reconciliation with effective action until the SPDC response the calls.
WLB believes that all women in Burma will continue to face injustice and violence as long as the junta is holding on to power. Therefore, we urge all the people of Burma to work together and rise up using peaceful means to end the military dictatorship in Burma.
WLB honors Daw Aung San Suu Kyi for her tireless work in pursuit of democracy in Burma and will continue to work alongside her until our mutual aims are achieved.
In 1990, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), won the country’s first election in decades by a landslide. The military regime did not honor the election result and she has been kept under house arrest for 15 of the last 20 years. Even while under house arrest, she has demonstrated unwavering and determined political leadership, provided inspiration and garnered respect from the people of Burma and democracy‐loving people around the world. The recent expression of public support leading up to her release shows that although she was kept out of the publics’ eye, she is always in their hearts. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is a true role model of the kind of leadership Burma is desperately yearning for; someone who can facilitate trust building, cooperation, dialogue, and progress.
WLB calls for her release to be unconditional but final and her security must be guaranteed. Though her liberty rekindles hope, the SPDC must meet other essential benchmarks of democratic progress. She is one of many political prisoners, and one of millions of women in Burma struggling against military rule.
The recent election is a clear example that the military regime's focus is to ensure power through all methods of manipulation and control, and this election must not be recognized. The military regime's ongoing attacks against civilians, even in recent days, are a clear sign they do not mean to bring peace to the country and this is unallowable. We urged the SPDC to cease all hostilities and stop fighting in the ethnic areas. The international community must continue to firmly call for the release of all political prisoners, an end to crimes against humanity, and genuine national reconciliation with effective action until the SPDC response the calls.
WLB believes that all women in Burma will continue to face injustice and violence as long as the junta is holding on to power. Therefore, we urge all the people of Burma to work together and rise up using peaceful means to end the military dictatorship in Burma.
WLB honors Daw Aung San Suu Kyi for her tireless work in pursuit of democracy in Burma and will continue to work alongside her until our mutual aims are achieved.
EL PODER POLITICO DE LA DAMA BIRMANA por Benedict Rogers
The Lady’ retains potent political role
By Benedict Rogers |
Originally appeared in Mizzima News
Tomorrow, Aung San Suu Kyi will have spent a total of 15 years and 20 days in detention. Under Burmese law, she should be released, and it is looking increasingly likely that she will be. Although the regime has a poor track record of keeping its word or upholding its own laws, the regime will want to divert attention away from last Sunday’s sham elections which perpetuate military rule, and give the international community a fig leaf.
The regime has played it well from their point of view – legally they should have released her when her period of house arrest expired last year, but then, conveniently, American Mormon John Yettaw came to the junta’s aid, swam across the lake, and landed Suu Kyi with three years’ hard labour. In an act designed to appear compassionate, Than Shwe reduced this to 18 months’ house arrest – conveniently timing her release for six days after the sham elections.
On paper, Suu Kyi appears to have been sidelined from Burmese politics. The new constitution prohibits her from running in elections, and the election laws required political parties contesting the elections to expel any prisoners among their members. Unsurprisingly, her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), could not expel their leader, a Nobel Peace laureate and a most powerful symbol of the struggle for freedom in Burma, and so the NLD boycotted the polls and was banned as a party by the regime.
In reality, however, Suu Kyi retains the most extraordinarily potent political role. She is as central and relevant to Burma’s politics as ever. No one else has the capacity to inspire, mobilise and unite people. On my visits to Burma in recent years, ordinary people of all generations have spoken with immense respect and affection for “The Lady”. This year, I stood on one side of Inya Lake and looked straight across at the dilapidated house in which she had been confined for most of the past two decades.
The few people who have been able to meet her in recent years, particularly British Ambassador Andrew Heyn, have spoken of her continuing physical and mental energy and total commitment to her country’s struggle. Among the ethnic nationalities, she is the only Burman whom people speak of with genuine love and respect. Indeed, to those who say she is no longer relevant, I would ask: well then why has the regime kept her locked up for all these years?
If she steps out from her house in the next few hours, it will be as visually momentous as Nelson Mandela’s walk out of prison in South Africa. There is, however, one key difference. Mandela was freed because South Africa’s apartheid regime was crumbling, and F.W. de Klerk knew he had to reform. He engaged with Mandela to chart a peaceful transition to democracy, and Mandela’s release was part of a process of change. Mandela and de Klerk worked hand-in-hand. In Burma, if the generals have their way, there will be no change.
That is why it is essential that the international community make it clear that Suu Kyi’s release, while welcome, is by itself no measure of progress. She herself said when she was last released in 2002: “My release should not be looked at as a major breakthrough for democracy. For all people in Burma to enjoy basic freedom – that would be the major breakthrough.”
Pressure must be increased on the regime to seize the moment of her release, and engage in a genuine dialogue with her, the democracy movement and the ethnic nationalities. If it wants to show it is serious, the regime must release the more than 2,100 political prisoners currently in jail, including Min Ko Naing, Ko Mya Aye, Ko Ko Gyi and Hkun Htun Oo. The military must declare a nationwide ceasefire, and end its offensives against ethnic civilians. Rape, forced labour, torture, the forcible recruitment of child soldiers and the destruction of villages must stop.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon must deploy all the resources available to him to revive a UN-led initiative to encourage dialogue in Burma. Dialogue is the one policy that unites everyone. The UN Security Council, General Assembly, Human Rights Council and office of the Secretary General; the European Union, the United States, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) and even China, have called for dialogue. Suu Kyi and the ethnic nationalities have both indicated their readiness to talk – indeed, dialogue and national reconciliation is the centrepiece of their platform.
The alternative to dialogue is continued, perhaps increased ethnic conflict and political instability. That is the regime’s choice. Its record does not inspire hope, but with targeted high-level pressure from the international community led by Ban Ki-moon, if Suu Kyi is freed, there is an opportunity to be seized. Last Sunday’s elections failed to bring about Burma’s freedom – but let this Sunday mark a new dawn for Burma.
By Benedict Rogers |
Originally appeared in Mizzima News
Tomorrow, Aung San Suu Kyi will have spent a total of 15 years and 20 days in detention. Under Burmese law, she should be released, and it is looking increasingly likely that she will be. Although the regime has a poor track record of keeping its word or upholding its own laws, the regime will want to divert attention away from last Sunday’s sham elections which perpetuate military rule, and give the international community a fig leaf.
The regime has played it well from their point of view – legally they should have released her when her period of house arrest expired last year, but then, conveniently, American Mormon John Yettaw came to the junta’s aid, swam across the lake, and landed Suu Kyi with three years’ hard labour. In an act designed to appear compassionate, Than Shwe reduced this to 18 months’ house arrest – conveniently timing her release for six days after the sham elections.
On paper, Suu Kyi appears to have been sidelined from Burmese politics. The new constitution prohibits her from running in elections, and the election laws required political parties contesting the elections to expel any prisoners among their members. Unsurprisingly, her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), could not expel their leader, a Nobel Peace laureate and a most powerful symbol of the struggle for freedom in Burma, and so the NLD boycotted the polls and was banned as a party by the regime.
In reality, however, Suu Kyi retains the most extraordinarily potent political role. She is as central and relevant to Burma’s politics as ever. No one else has the capacity to inspire, mobilise and unite people. On my visits to Burma in recent years, ordinary people of all generations have spoken with immense respect and affection for “The Lady”. This year, I stood on one side of Inya Lake and looked straight across at the dilapidated house in which she had been confined for most of the past two decades.
The few people who have been able to meet her in recent years, particularly British Ambassador Andrew Heyn, have spoken of her continuing physical and mental energy and total commitment to her country’s struggle. Among the ethnic nationalities, she is the only Burman whom people speak of with genuine love and respect. Indeed, to those who say she is no longer relevant, I would ask: well then why has the regime kept her locked up for all these years?
If she steps out from her house in the next few hours, it will be as visually momentous as Nelson Mandela’s walk out of prison in South Africa. There is, however, one key difference. Mandela was freed because South Africa’s apartheid regime was crumbling, and F.W. de Klerk knew he had to reform. He engaged with Mandela to chart a peaceful transition to democracy, and Mandela’s release was part of a process of change. Mandela and de Klerk worked hand-in-hand. In Burma, if the generals have their way, there will be no change.
That is why it is essential that the international community make it clear that Suu Kyi’s release, while welcome, is by itself no measure of progress. She herself said when she was last released in 2002: “My release should not be looked at as a major breakthrough for democracy. For all people in Burma to enjoy basic freedom – that would be the major breakthrough.”
Pressure must be increased on the regime to seize the moment of her release, and engage in a genuine dialogue with her, the democracy movement and the ethnic nationalities. If it wants to show it is serious, the regime must release the more than 2,100 political prisoners currently in jail, including Min Ko Naing, Ko Mya Aye, Ko Ko Gyi and Hkun Htun Oo. The military must declare a nationwide ceasefire, and end its offensives against ethnic civilians. Rape, forced labour, torture, the forcible recruitment of child soldiers and the destruction of villages must stop.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon must deploy all the resources available to him to revive a UN-led initiative to encourage dialogue in Burma. Dialogue is the one policy that unites everyone. The UN Security Council, General Assembly, Human Rights Council and office of the Secretary General; the European Union, the United States, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) and even China, have called for dialogue. Suu Kyi and the ethnic nationalities have both indicated their readiness to talk – indeed, dialogue and national reconciliation is the centrepiece of their platform.
The alternative to dialogue is continued, perhaps increased ethnic conflict and political instability. That is the regime’s choice. Its record does not inspire hope, but with targeted high-level pressure from the international community led by Ban Ki-moon, if Suu Kyi is freed, there is an opportunity to be seized. Last Sunday’s elections failed to bring about Burma’s freedom – but let this Sunday mark a new dawn for Burma.
AUNG SAN SUU KYI FREE
* We are happy today because she is free. Let's help her now to bring freedom back for 55 million of enslaved and oppressed Burmese.
And watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdtMNl7ynkg
(why are they afraid of Aung San Suu Kyi ?)
* Nos alegramos hoy de que ella sea libre; ayudémosla ahora a devolver la libertad a 55 millnes de birmanos esclavizados y oprimidos.
Mirad este video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdtMNl7ynkg
* Ens alegrem de que ella avui sigui lliure; ajudem-la ara a tornar la llibertat a 55 milions de Birmans esclavitzats i oprimits.
Mireu aquest video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdtMNl7ynkg
* Nous sommes heureux aujourd'hui, pace que elle est libre: Aidons-le maintenant a rendre la liberté a 55 milions de Birmans opprimés
Regardez ce video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdtMNl7ynkg
Friendly regards /Saludos cordiales / Cordialment vostre! Avec mes amitiés
And watch this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdtMNl7ynkg
(why are they afraid of Aung San Suu Kyi ?)
* Nos alegramos hoy de que ella sea libre; ayudémosla ahora a devolver la libertad a 55 millnes de birmanos esclavizados y oprimidos.
Mirad este video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdtMNl7ynkg
* Ens alegrem de que ella avui sigui lliure; ajudem-la ara a tornar la llibertat a 55 milions de Birmans esclavitzats i oprimits.
Mireu aquest video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdtMNl7ynkg
* Nous sommes heureux aujourd'hui, pace que elle est libre: Aidons-le maintenant a rendre la liberté a 55 milions de Birmans opprimés
Regardez ce video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdtMNl7ynkg
Friendly regards /Saludos cordiales / Cordialment vostre! Avec mes amitiés
sábado, 13 de noviembre de 2010
viernes, 12 de noviembre de 2010
EL PRECIO DE LA NOVIOLENCIA Y DE PONER TU LIBERTAD AL SERVICIO DE LOS OTROS
La noviolencia tiene un precio personal muy alto: por eso muchos activistas optan por lineas mas cercanas a ir contra que no querer devolver el golpe.
En un mundo tremendamente violento, donde recibimos mas ataques que premios, como puede ser que todavia queden lideres como Suu Kyi que defiendan ese revolucionario argumento de la noviolencia y la compasion. Muchas culturas defiende la revolucion mediante la creacion de formulas de opresion( political, judicial, mediatica, estatal,...) La noviolencia es tan revolucionaria que muchos de estos supuestos revolucionarios la rechazan siquiera como alternativa
Para responder al porque de esta cuestion, debemos mirar un poco al pasado, y preguntarnos como los lideres politicos como Gandhi, Mandela, Dalai Lama, Lech Walessa o el propio Jesus, utilizaron el concepto combinado de Fuerza y Verdad como el metodo mas seguro para provocar un cambio social; antagonista de la persuasion ignorante y carcelaria de los totalitarios.... el objetivo no es convencer al adversario, ni subyugarle, ni difamarle, ni golpearle.... es simplemente trabajarse uno mismo para poder provocar un cambio en el otro.
La violencia es una energia, fuerza, pensamiento o patron interno que los seres humanos llevamos en nuestro programa interno que debe ser modificado... Martin Luther King definia en " Cartas desde la Cárcel de Birmingham" los cuatro pasos fundamentales en cualquier campaña noviolenta:
- demuestra que la injusticia existe
- intenta negociar con tu oponente por todos los medios no abuses del poder aunque te asista la razón
- purifica tu mente, tu cuerpo y palabra
- actua pro-activa y noviolentamente contra la injusticia
¿Estarias tu dispuesto a pagar el precio de la noviolencia? ¿ Estarias dispuesto a poner tu libertad al servicio de otros? ¿ Estarias dispuesto a aguantar golpes inaguantables y pagar el precio personal que conlleva no utilizar los metodos violentos?... ¿Estarias dispuesto a estar preso injustamente como hizo Suu Kyi, Gandhi o Mandela?...
La respuesta es que muy pocos lo estan, porque implica un alto grado en la evolucion de la conciencia personal y un cambio en la politica de este planeta y lo mas facil es tirar por el camino andado de usar la fuerza.
Como nunca es tarde para cambiar, no useis la violencia contra nadie, necesitamos re-existir a este sistema violento. Cuanto más useis la violencia y metodos violentos, mas violentos os volvereis. No podemos mantener la paz con division. Realmente la alternativa es la noviolencia.
En un mundo tremendamente violento, donde recibimos mas ataques que premios, como puede ser que todavia queden lideres como Suu Kyi que defiendan ese revolucionario argumento de la noviolencia y la compasion. Muchas culturas defiende la revolucion mediante la creacion de formulas de opresion( political, judicial, mediatica, estatal,...) La noviolencia es tan revolucionaria que muchos de estos supuestos revolucionarios la rechazan siquiera como alternativa
Para responder al porque de esta cuestion, debemos mirar un poco al pasado, y preguntarnos como los lideres politicos como Gandhi, Mandela, Dalai Lama, Lech Walessa o el propio Jesus, utilizaron el concepto combinado de Fuerza y Verdad como el metodo mas seguro para provocar un cambio social; antagonista de la persuasion ignorante y carcelaria de los totalitarios.... el objetivo no es convencer al adversario, ni subyugarle, ni difamarle, ni golpearle.... es simplemente trabajarse uno mismo para poder provocar un cambio en el otro.
La violencia es una energia, fuerza, pensamiento o patron interno que los seres humanos llevamos en nuestro programa interno que debe ser modificado... Martin Luther King definia en " Cartas desde la Cárcel de Birmingham" los cuatro pasos fundamentales en cualquier campaña noviolenta:
- demuestra que la injusticia existe
- intenta negociar con tu oponente por todos los medios no abuses del poder aunque te asista la razón
- purifica tu mente, tu cuerpo y palabra
- actua pro-activa y noviolentamente contra la injusticia
¿Estarias tu dispuesto a pagar el precio de la noviolencia? ¿ Estarias dispuesto a poner tu libertad al servicio de otros? ¿ Estarias dispuesto a aguantar golpes inaguantables y pagar el precio personal que conlleva no utilizar los metodos violentos?... ¿Estarias dispuesto a estar preso injustamente como hizo Suu Kyi, Gandhi o Mandela?...
La respuesta es que muy pocos lo estan, porque implica un alto grado en la evolucion de la conciencia personal y un cambio en la politica de este planeta y lo mas facil es tirar por el camino andado de usar la fuerza.
Como nunca es tarde para cambiar, no useis la violencia contra nadie, necesitamos re-existir a este sistema violento. Cuanto más useis la violencia y metodos violentos, mas violentos os volvereis. No podemos mantener la paz con division. Realmente la alternativa es la noviolencia.
SUU KYI, INCANSABLE LUCHADORA PACIFICA Y UNA AMENAZA PARA LA JUNTA BIRMANA
Su frágil figura es el símbolo desde hace 20 años de la resistencia a la junta militar en Birmania, pero la líder de la oposición y Premio Nobel de la Paz Aung San Suu Kyi, a punto de ser liberada, es también una figura aislada tras siete años bajo arresto domiciliario.
Aung San Suu Kyi, de 65 años, que ha pasado la mayor parte de los últimos 20 años en la cárcel o bajo arresto domiciliario, es una incansable luchadora pacífica desde 1988 por instaurar la democracia en su país.
Suu Kyi es apodada 'La Dama de Rangún' y a menudo comparada con Nelson Mandela, que logró llegar al poder tras pasar 27 años en las cárceles sudafricanas.
Pero la fortaleza de la junta birmana y la disolución del partido de la disidente, la Liga Nacional para la Democracia (LND), que boicoteó las elecciones del domingo pasado, parecen alejarla del poder en un futuro inmediato.
El 27 de mayo de 1990, el partido de Suu Kyi arrasó en las elecciones legislativas, pero la junta se negó entonces a admitir su derrota. Veinte años más tarde, aquellos resultados nunca fueron reconocidos y en las elecciones legislativas del pasado domingo -calificados de mascarada por Occidente-, la junta militar proclamó una victoria aplastante.
Sin embargo, "nadie puede ignorar el peso político e ideológico (de Aung San Suu Kyi). Ella y su partido (...) han creado una dinámica política. Gracias a ella, se habla ahora de derechos humanos, de libertados civiles o de democracia en Birmania" según Renaud Egreteau, politólogo de la universidad de Hong Kong.
Nacida en 1945, Suu Kyi, cuyo combate infatigable fue recompensado en 1991 con el Premio Nobel de la Paz, es hija del héroe de la independencia birmana, el general Aung San, asesinado cuando ella tenía dos años.
Fue educada en las mejores escuelas de Rangún y continuó sus estudios en India, donde su madre fue nombrada embajadora en 1960, y en Oxford, en el sur de Gran Bretaña. En 1972, se casó con el británico Michael Aris, un especialista en Tíbet, con quien tuvo dos hijos.
De regreso a Birmania, en abril de 1988, cuando su madre estaba muriendo, Aung San Suu Kyi habló en público por primera vez en agosto de ese año y pasó a formar parte del movimiento de oposición que hizo tambalear el poder militar.
Durante los disturbios de agosto y septiembre de 1988, reprimidos de forma sangrienta, cofundó la LND, que se convirtió en el principal partido de oposición.
Suu Kyi fue confinada de 1989 a 1995, y luego disfrutó de su 'libertad' hasta el año 2000, cuando volvió a ser obligada a permanecer en su casa de Rangún durante 19 meses. Tras una nueva liberación de un año que le permitió tomar conciencia de su inmensa popularidad, la cual alarmó al gobierno militar, fue detenida en mayo de 2003 y puesta bajo vigilancia.
La violenta represión a finales de 2007 de un movimiento prodemocrático pacífico liderado por monjes budistas llevó a la líder opositora a anunciar, a través de un emisario de la ONU, que "por el interés de la nación", estaba "dispuesta a cooperar" con los militares en un nuevo proceso de diálogo. Pero en enero de 2008, informó de que dicho proceso "desprovisto de un calendario" no conducía a nada.
En agosto de 2009, fue condenada a una pena de 18 meses de arresto domiciliario. Ante esta situación, la LND tuvo que elegir entre excluirla de la formación o disolverse y decidió boicotear los comicios del domingo pasado.
Aung San Suu Kyi, de 65 años, que ha pasado la mayor parte de los últimos 20 años en la cárcel o bajo arresto domiciliario, es una incansable luchadora pacífica desde 1988 por instaurar la democracia en su país.
Suu Kyi es apodada 'La Dama de Rangún' y a menudo comparada con Nelson Mandela, que logró llegar al poder tras pasar 27 años en las cárceles sudafricanas.
Pero la fortaleza de la junta birmana y la disolución del partido de la disidente, la Liga Nacional para la Democracia (LND), que boicoteó las elecciones del domingo pasado, parecen alejarla del poder en un futuro inmediato.
El 27 de mayo de 1990, el partido de Suu Kyi arrasó en las elecciones legislativas, pero la junta se negó entonces a admitir su derrota. Veinte años más tarde, aquellos resultados nunca fueron reconocidos y en las elecciones legislativas del pasado domingo -calificados de mascarada por Occidente-, la junta militar proclamó una victoria aplastante.
Sin embargo, "nadie puede ignorar el peso político e ideológico (de Aung San Suu Kyi). Ella y su partido (...) han creado una dinámica política. Gracias a ella, se habla ahora de derechos humanos, de libertados civiles o de democracia en Birmania" según Renaud Egreteau, politólogo de la universidad de Hong Kong.
Nacida en 1945, Suu Kyi, cuyo combate infatigable fue recompensado en 1991 con el Premio Nobel de la Paz, es hija del héroe de la independencia birmana, el general Aung San, asesinado cuando ella tenía dos años.
Fue educada en las mejores escuelas de Rangún y continuó sus estudios en India, donde su madre fue nombrada embajadora en 1960, y en Oxford, en el sur de Gran Bretaña. En 1972, se casó con el británico Michael Aris, un especialista en Tíbet, con quien tuvo dos hijos.
De regreso a Birmania, en abril de 1988, cuando su madre estaba muriendo, Aung San Suu Kyi habló en público por primera vez en agosto de ese año y pasó a formar parte del movimiento de oposición que hizo tambalear el poder militar.
Durante los disturbios de agosto y septiembre de 1988, reprimidos de forma sangrienta, cofundó la LND, que se convirtió en el principal partido de oposición.
Suu Kyi fue confinada de 1989 a 1995, y luego disfrutó de su 'libertad' hasta el año 2000, cuando volvió a ser obligada a permanecer en su casa de Rangún durante 19 meses. Tras una nueva liberación de un año que le permitió tomar conciencia de su inmensa popularidad, la cual alarmó al gobierno militar, fue detenida en mayo de 2003 y puesta bajo vigilancia.
La violenta represión a finales de 2007 de un movimiento prodemocrático pacífico liderado por monjes budistas llevó a la líder opositora a anunciar, a través de un emisario de la ONU, que "por el interés de la nación", estaba "dispuesta a cooperar" con los militares en un nuevo proceso de diálogo. Pero en enero de 2008, informó de que dicho proceso "desprovisto de un calendario" no conducía a nada.
En agosto de 2009, fue condenada a una pena de 18 meses de arresto domiciliario. Ante esta situación, la LND tuvo que elegir entre excluirla de la formación o disolverse y decidió boicotear los comicios del domingo pasado.
KIM ARIS , HIJO MENOR DE AUNG SAN SUU KYI, PIDE UNA VISA PARA ENTRAR EN BIRMANIA
Burma's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi will focus on international relations if she is released from house arrest, according to sources close to the National League for Democracy (NLD).
“She is expected to be released in the evening of November 12,” said the source on condition of anonymity. “After her release, she will mainly focus on diplomatic relations with foreign countries, both regional and around the world.”
Her release from an 18-month extension of detention expires Saturday. according to her lawyer Nyan Win.
Suu Kyi said that the country's problems over the past years associated with the junta have been well-founded, according to the source. This time, her politics will be to expand her relations within the international community and to bring democracy to Burma, he said.
She also plans to use her home only for her private life, not for political gatherings, said the source, adding that she intends to advise NLD party elders do likewise.
Now aged 65, Suu Kyi entered the political arena in Burma when she was 43. She has since struggled relentlessly for democratic change in the country. She has been detained under house arrest three times and has spent no less than 15 years in detention. After her release, she has no immediate plans to travel across the country, said the source.
News agency Reuters recently quoted her lawyer Nyan Win as saying that she will not accept any conditions imposed on her freedom after she is released.
Suu Kyi opposed the election held on Sunday and urged voters to exercise their right not to vote. Her party, the NLD, carried out a “No Vote” campaign throughout the pre-election period.
Observers said that the voter turnout was low in Sundays' general election, mainly due to two factors: Suu Kyi's call for the election boycott; and massive fraud by the junta in collecting advance votes before election day.
Meanwhile Kim Aris, 33, the youngest son of Suu Kyi, has applied for a visa to enter Burma. He last saw his mother more than 10 years ago.
In an interview in Bangkok on Monday, he said that he did not know if his mother would be released on Saturday. “They’re unpredictable—these people. We’ll see what they’ll do,” he said.
Kim said he would talk only about their family, “nothing political,” if he is allowed to visit her.
“She is expected to be released in the evening of November 12,” said the source on condition of anonymity. “After her release, she will mainly focus on diplomatic relations with foreign countries, both regional and around the world.”
Her release from an 18-month extension of detention expires Saturday. according to her lawyer Nyan Win.
Suu Kyi said that the country's problems over the past years associated with the junta have been well-founded, according to the source. This time, her politics will be to expand her relations within the international community and to bring democracy to Burma, he said.
She also plans to use her home only for her private life, not for political gatherings, said the source, adding that she intends to advise NLD party elders do likewise.
Now aged 65, Suu Kyi entered the political arena in Burma when she was 43. She has since struggled relentlessly for democratic change in the country. She has been detained under house arrest three times and has spent no less than 15 years in detention. After her release, she has no immediate plans to travel across the country, said the source.
News agency Reuters recently quoted her lawyer Nyan Win as saying that she will not accept any conditions imposed on her freedom after she is released.
Suu Kyi opposed the election held on Sunday and urged voters to exercise their right not to vote. Her party, the NLD, carried out a “No Vote” campaign throughout the pre-election period.
Observers said that the voter turnout was low in Sundays' general election, mainly due to two factors: Suu Kyi's call for the election boycott; and massive fraud by the junta in collecting advance votes before election day.
Meanwhile Kim Aris, 33, the youngest son of Suu Kyi, has applied for a visa to enter Burma. He last saw his mother more than 10 years ago.
In an interview in Bangkok on Monday, he said that he did not know if his mother would be released on Saturday. “They’re unpredictable—these people. We’ll see what they’ll do,” he said.
Kim said he would talk only about their family, “nothing political,” if he is allowed to visit her.
Suu Kyi's Release Will Raise Hope and Expectation By AUNG ZAW
Will the regime free Burma's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi soon?
Suu Kyi’s aides and her faithful followers believe so. They say the Nobel Peace Prize winner may be released from her latest term of house arrest this weekend. They also predict that after her release, Suu Kyi will mainly focus on diplomatic relations with foreign countries, both regional and around the world.
The pundits inside and outside Burma wonder whether the regime would dare to take the security risk of freeing Suu Kyi, with skeptics saying the regime could extend her detention. Plenty of charges against Suu Kyi could be cooked up, including her recent call to boycott Sunday's election, and enough excuses could be found for not freeing her. The final decision doubtless rests with junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe.
Suu Kyi's release would raise hope and expectation. The charismatic leader remains a political figurehead in Burmese politics—ethnic leaders who recently witnessed with concern the renewed fighting between junta forces and a Karen splinter group say that, like her father, independence hero Gen Aung San, she is the one who can reconcile Burma’s deep political and ethnic divisions.
To those who quietly or openly question her relevance in Burmese politics and her stance during her absence from the political scene, Britain's Rangoon ambassador Andrew Heyn has the answer: “As for her relevance, all the evidence points to a regime that still fears that she is very relevant.”
Many will certainly agree with his assessment. But they also want to hear what her next move is likely to be and her strategy to break the political stalemate. They await her stance on western sanctions, her opinion of Burma’s fixed election results, her policy on humanitarian assistance to Burma, foreign investment, the proposed commission of inquiry into crimes against humanity, and her views on the divided international approach toward Burma—particularly on China’s much-criticized policy position.
But why should the regime need to free Suu Kyi at this time?
One reason is Sunday's election, in which the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) claims to have won an improbable 80 percent of the vote.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) said the election was a “significant step forward.” Asean’s Vietnamese chair said in a statement published by the Vietnamese state media on Tuesday: “Asean encourages Myanmar [Burma] to continue to accelerate the process of national reconciliation and democratization for stability and development in the country.”
In other regional applause for the election, China's official Global Times said Bejing supported “Myanmar's plan to transform its political system, but knows it will not happen overnight.”
Opposition parties which contested the election were unhappy with the way it was held and threatened to boycott the outcome because of widespread fraud, a questionable practice of advance voting and other abuses. Twenty candidates of three of the parties that contested the election launched a nationwide action calling for a new vote, on the grounds that Sunday's polling was neither free nor fair.
Suu Kyi, whose National League for Democracy boycotted the election, is said to be interested in looking into the complaints of election fraud once she is free.
Ethnic armed groups and ethnic opposition parties will certainly be watching how Suu Kyi reacts to the conflict in ethnic regions and anticipating her important role in the national reconciliation process.
Many will be watching to see how Suu Kyi deals with the “new landscape” in Burma. There are hopes that Suu Kyi, now 65, will undertake her political moves carefully and cautiously.
Even if Than Shwe decides to pull the strings from behind the scenes, Suu Kyi will be encountering a new leadership. Suu Kyi can expect a new generation of army leaders who are tough and hardline, however, and who will not be too enthusiastic to see her tour Burma building up a democratic opposition.
But how will this new leadership react to Suu Kyi and the political potential she possesses? Or it will just be a vicious circle?
Suu Kyi’s aides and her faithful followers believe so. They say the Nobel Peace Prize winner may be released from her latest term of house arrest this weekend. They also predict that after her release, Suu Kyi will mainly focus on diplomatic relations with foreign countries, both regional and around the world.
The pundits inside and outside Burma wonder whether the regime would dare to take the security risk of freeing Suu Kyi, with skeptics saying the regime could extend her detention. Plenty of charges against Suu Kyi could be cooked up, including her recent call to boycott Sunday's election, and enough excuses could be found for not freeing her. The final decision doubtless rests with junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe.
Suu Kyi's release would raise hope and expectation. The charismatic leader remains a political figurehead in Burmese politics—ethnic leaders who recently witnessed with concern the renewed fighting between junta forces and a Karen splinter group say that, like her father, independence hero Gen Aung San, she is the one who can reconcile Burma’s deep political and ethnic divisions.
To those who quietly or openly question her relevance in Burmese politics and her stance during her absence from the political scene, Britain's Rangoon ambassador Andrew Heyn has the answer: “As for her relevance, all the evidence points to a regime that still fears that she is very relevant.”
Many will certainly agree with his assessment. But they also want to hear what her next move is likely to be and her strategy to break the political stalemate. They await her stance on western sanctions, her opinion of Burma’s fixed election results, her policy on humanitarian assistance to Burma, foreign investment, the proposed commission of inquiry into crimes against humanity, and her views on the divided international approach toward Burma—particularly on China’s much-criticized policy position.
But why should the regime need to free Suu Kyi at this time?
One reason is Sunday's election, in which the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) claims to have won an improbable 80 percent of the vote.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) said the election was a “significant step forward.” Asean’s Vietnamese chair said in a statement published by the Vietnamese state media on Tuesday: “Asean encourages Myanmar [Burma] to continue to accelerate the process of national reconciliation and democratization for stability and development in the country.”
In other regional applause for the election, China's official Global Times said Bejing supported “Myanmar's plan to transform its political system, but knows it will not happen overnight.”
Opposition parties which contested the election were unhappy with the way it was held and threatened to boycott the outcome because of widespread fraud, a questionable practice of advance voting and other abuses. Twenty candidates of three of the parties that contested the election launched a nationwide action calling for a new vote, on the grounds that Sunday's polling was neither free nor fair.
Suu Kyi, whose National League for Democracy boycotted the election, is said to be interested in looking into the complaints of election fraud once she is free.
Ethnic armed groups and ethnic opposition parties will certainly be watching how Suu Kyi reacts to the conflict in ethnic regions and anticipating her important role in the national reconciliation process.
Many will be watching to see how Suu Kyi deals with the “new landscape” in Burma. There are hopes that Suu Kyi, now 65, will undertake her political moves carefully and cautiously.
Even if Than Shwe decides to pull the strings from behind the scenes, Suu Kyi will be encountering a new leadership. Suu Kyi can expect a new generation of army leaders who are tough and hardline, however, and who will not be too enthusiastic to see her tour Burma building up a democratic opposition.
But how will this new leadership react to Suu Kyi and the political potential she possesses? Or it will just be a vicious circle?
QUE DEBE ENFRENTAR AUNG SAN SUU KYI CUANDO SALGA
Issues Suu Kyi Should Deal With by Editorial of Irrawaddy
Burma's democratic leader Aung San Suu Kyi has spent 15 of the past 21 years in detention. Her latest period of house arrest, which began in May 2003, is due to end this weekend, and she is expected to re-engage in politics after her release. The Irrawaddy has identified six areas where her leadership could be instrumental in finding long-term solutions to political and cultural issues.
• The Junta: Suu Kyi has tried to seek a political dialogue with the junta to restore national reconciliation in the country, but that effort has failed during the past 20 years. The junta has refused to open a door for a genuine dialogue. For now, she should work to engage a broad participation of other stakeholders from the academic, social and economic sectors to seek a broad-based consensus for national reconciliation throughout the country.
• Political Prisoners: Despite her release, there are more than 2,100 political prisoners locked up in prisons across the country. The release of all political prisoners should be a priority when she resumes the leadership of the democratic movement.
• National Unity and Ethnic Armed Conflicts: She has already initiated the idea of holding “a second Panglong conference” to restore the unity of all ethnic nationals residing in the country, but she has not been able to effectively deal with the issues affecting the cease-fire and non-ceasefire ethnic groups in the past. The recent armed conflicts between the junta's troops and a splinter group of the cease-fire Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) in Karen State showed the need to end armed conflicts. She should focus on a dialogue with all ethnic groups, including the cease-fire armed groups, that leads to the creation of a second Panglong conference.
• Political Division: Political divisions have intensified due to the recent election. Democratic forces are divided into two political camps: those who boycotted the election and those who contested the election. As democratic leader, Suu Kyi should seek an opportunity to talk with both camps and try to reconcile their differences. She should first initiate a reunion of the NLD and the National Democratic Force (NDF), which broke away from the NLD. Moreover, unlike the political landscape before her detention in 2003, new political parties now exist. She must initiate a political strategy to include them in a reconciliation effort.
• The 2008 Constitution and the 2010 Election Results: The NLD rejected the Constitution as undemocratic. The Nov. 7 election held in accord with the Constitution was deeply flawed by the junta's vote rigging and violations of its own electoral laws. Suu Kyi should take this opportunity to form a broader political alliance to address Constitutional and parliamentary issues.
• Sanctions, Aid and the International Community: Suu Kyi has voiced her interest in finding a way to lift the international economic sanctions that affect the people and she has tried to extend her hand to the junta to cooperate in lifting the sanctions. After a review of all sanctions, she should work for their elimination, and work to formulate a clear policy on international humanitarian aid to Burma, and seek ways to broaden access to international aid programs that seek to work inside the country.
Burma's democratic leader Aung San Suu Kyi has spent 15 of the past 21 years in detention. Her latest period of house arrest, which began in May 2003, is due to end this weekend, and she is expected to re-engage in politics after her release. The Irrawaddy has identified six areas where her leadership could be instrumental in finding long-term solutions to political and cultural issues.
• The Junta: Suu Kyi has tried to seek a political dialogue with the junta to restore national reconciliation in the country, but that effort has failed during the past 20 years. The junta has refused to open a door for a genuine dialogue. For now, she should work to engage a broad participation of other stakeholders from the academic, social and economic sectors to seek a broad-based consensus for national reconciliation throughout the country.
• Political Prisoners: Despite her release, there are more than 2,100 political prisoners locked up in prisons across the country. The release of all political prisoners should be a priority when she resumes the leadership of the democratic movement.
• National Unity and Ethnic Armed Conflicts: She has already initiated the idea of holding “a second Panglong conference” to restore the unity of all ethnic nationals residing in the country, but she has not been able to effectively deal with the issues affecting the cease-fire and non-ceasefire ethnic groups in the past. The recent armed conflicts between the junta's troops and a splinter group of the cease-fire Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) in Karen State showed the need to end armed conflicts. She should focus on a dialogue with all ethnic groups, including the cease-fire armed groups, that leads to the creation of a second Panglong conference.
• Political Division: Political divisions have intensified due to the recent election. Democratic forces are divided into two political camps: those who boycotted the election and those who contested the election. As democratic leader, Suu Kyi should seek an opportunity to talk with both camps and try to reconcile their differences. She should first initiate a reunion of the NLD and the National Democratic Force (NDF), which broke away from the NLD. Moreover, unlike the political landscape before her detention in 2003, new political parties now exist. She must initiate a political strategy to include them in a reconciliation effort.
• The 2008 Constitution and the 2010 Election Results: The NLD rejected the Constitution as undemocratic. The Nov. 7 election held in accord with the Constitution was deeply flawed by the junta's vote rigging and violations of its own electoral laws. Suu Kyi should take this opportunity to form a broader political alliance to address Constitutional and parliamentary issues.
• Sanctions, Aid and the International Community: Suu Kyi has voiced her interest in finding a way to lift the international economic sanctions that affect the people and she has tried to extend her hand to the junta to cooperate in lifting the sanctions. After a review of all sanctions, she should work for their elimination, and work to formulate a clear policy on international humanitarian aid to Burma, and seek ways to broaden access to international aid programs that seek to work inside the country.
MILES ESPERAN LA SALIDA DE AUNG SAN SUU KYI
The Irrawaddy
More than 200 journalists, diplomats and supporters continued to wait at 7 p.m. On Friday near the home of Burmese democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi in anticipation of her release.
Nyan Win, Suu Kyi's lawyer, earlier said that she would not accept a conditional release and that her detention could no longer be extended since her sentence is due to expire at 7 p.m. Saturday.
Her release will come just a few days after the country's military regime held an election marred by reports of widespread vote rigging. Her deputy, Tin Oo, said that the release order has been already signed but she is more likely to be released on Saturday morning.
As news of her possible release spread, about 1,000 of her local supporters gathered at the NLD headquarters in Rangoon, and many supporters from other parts of the country began traveling to the former capital, Rangoon sources said.
Faced with widespread public resentment of the results of the Sunday elections which produced the landslide victory for the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), the regime is expected to impose restrictions on Suu Kyi's movements even if she is unconditionally released.
“The junta would surely attempt to restrict her [Suu Kyi's] movements so that she cannot reach out to the public and ethnic minority groups.” said Nyan Win. “ She would not accept such restrictions.”
This would, however, raise the possibility of a new round of confrontations between Suu Kyi and the country's military leaders. After being freed from house arrest in 2002, she faced a 2003 assassination attempt near Depayin.
Suu Kyi's NLD—which was officially disbanded for failing to register for this year's controversial election—boycotted the election, saying it was held under undemocratic conditions. In the 1990 election, the NLD won an overwhelming majority of the vote, but the junta officially nullified the results.
The National Democratic Force, an NLD splinter group comprised of former leading NLD members, participated in the polls and was roundly defeated by the junta-backed United Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), which allegedly benefited from widespread vote rigging.
On Thursday, Burma's state media announced that the USDP has gained majorities in both houses of parliament.
Over the past 20 years, Suu Kyi has unsuccessfully called for dialogue with the military junta in an attempt to break the country's political deadlock. Observers question whether that call will remain relevant given that the election results have paved the way for continued military rule by members of the current junta, which will control the new parliament with a civilian facade.
The 65-year-old Nobel laureate has been released twice before in the 15 years of the past 21 that she has spent under house arrest.
In Aug. 2009, Suu Kyi's current period of detention was extended by 18 months over a bizarre incident in which an American swam uninvited to her lakeside home.
Despite Suu Kyi's expected release, the junta continues to detain more than 2,100 political prisoners, including prominent former student leaders who have been sentenced to up to 60 years imprisonment.
“We are expecting her clear leadership as all of us are confused and angry with the elections. We will see how she will cope with the illegal status of the party [NLD] and respond to the election results and the new government,” a Suu Kyi supporter in Rangoon said.
More than 200 journalists, diplomats and supporters continued to wait at 7 p.m. On Friday near the home of Burmese democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi in anticipation of her release.
Nyan Win, Suu Kyi's lawyer, earlier said that she would not accept a conditional release and that her detention could no longer be extended since her sentence is due to expire at 7 p.m. Saturday.
Her release will come just a few days after the country's military regime held an election marred by reports of widespread vote rigging. Her deputy, Tin Oo, said that the release order has been already signed but she is more likely to be released on Saturday morning.
As news of her possible release spread, about 1,000 of her local supporters gathered at the NLD headquarters in Rangoon, and many supporters from other parts of the country began traveling to the former capital, Rangoon sources said.
Faced with widespread public resentment of the results of the Sunday elections which produced the landslide victory for the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), the regime is expected to impose restrictions on Suu Kyi's movements even if she is unconditionally released.
“The junta would surely attempt to restrict her [Suu Kyi's] movements so that she cannot reach out to the public and ethnic minority groups.” said Nyan Win. “ She would not accept such restrictions.”
This would, however, raise the possibility of a new round of confrontations between Suu Kyi and the country's military leaders. After being freed from house arrest in 2002, she faced a 2003 assassination attempt near Depayin.
Suu Kyi's NLD—which was officially disbanded for failing to register for this year's controversial election—boycotted the election, saying it was held under undemocratic conditions. In the 1990 election, the NLD won an overwhelming majority of the vote, but the junta officially nullified the results.
The National Democratic Force, an NLD splinter group comprised of former leading NLD members, participated in the polls and was roundly defeated by the junta-backed United Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), which allegedly benefited from widespread vote rigging.
On Thursday, Burma's state media announced that the USDP has gained majorities in both houses of parliament.
Over the past 20 years, Suu Kyi has unsuccessfully called for dialogue with the military junta in an attempt to break the country's political deadlock. Observers question whether that call will remain relevant given that the election results have paved the way for continued military rule by members of the current junta, which will control the new parliament with a civilian facade.
The 65-year-old Nobel laureate has been released twice before in the 15 years of the past 21 that she has spent under house arrest.
In Aug. 2009, Suu Kyi's current period of detention was extended by 18 months over a bizarre incident in which an American swam uninvited to her lakeside home.
Despite Suu Kyi's expected release, the junta continues to detain more than 2,100 political prisoners, including prominent former student leaders who have been sentenced to up to 60 years imprisonment.
“We are expecting her clear leadership as all of us are confused and angry with the elections. We will see how she will cope with the illegal status of the party [NLD] and respond to the election results and the new government,” a Suu Kyi supporter in Rangoon said.
LA NLD PREPARA LA BIENVENIDA DE DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI- IRAWADDY
The members of the National Leader for Democracy (NLD) cleaned the secretariat room in their headquarters on Thursday in preparation for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi and her resumption of political leadership.
“We are all busy working to welcome Daw Suu back, preparing a secretariat room for her at party headquarters,” said Win Tin, secretary of the NLD and a close associate with Suu Kyi.
Suu Kyi is due to be released on Saturday (Nov.13), according to her lawyer Nyan Win. Meanwhile, the Burmese authorities have tightened the security in Rangoon.
Asked whether Suu Kyi will immediately re-engage in politics or focus more on humanitarian issues after her release, Win Tin said: “It is not my decision, but I believe she will focus on politics and we will also urge her to resume her leadership, especially when our country's politics is in a state of emergency.”
“Daw Suu is passionate to be involved in the humanitarian works that the NLD has been extending out at the grassroots level to help people since the aftermath of the cyclone Nargis. We are now getting momentum in this area and I personally want to urge her to restore her leadership that the people really want and need.”
Regarding her political stand on the junta, Win Tin said Suu Kyi has always kept the door open to dialogue with the junta and he believes she will remain open to such dialogue.
He even hoped her release would come today because the generals who believe in astrology may think the date 11/11 (Nov. 11) would be auspicious for her release. But a Rangoon resident said: “Nothing is certain, including her release, under military rule.”
“We are all busy working to welcome Daw Suu back, preparing a secretariat room for her at party headquarters,” said Win Tin, secretary of the NLD and a close associate with Suu Kyi.
Suu Kyi is due to be released on Saturday (Nov.13), according to her lawyer Nyan Win. Meanwhile, the Burmese authorities have tightened the security in Rangoon.
Asked whether Suu Kyi will immediately re-engage in politics or focus more on humanitarian issues after her release, Win Tin said: “It is not my decision, but I believe she will focus on politics and we will also urge her to resume her leadership, especially when our country's politics is in a state of emergency.”
“Daw Suu is passionate to be involved in the humanitarian works that the NLD has been extending out at the grassroots level to help people since the aftermath of the cyclone Nargis. We are now getting momentum in this area and I personally want to urge her to restore her leadership that the people really want and need.”
Regarding her political stand on the junta, Win Tin said Suu Kyi has always kept the door open to dialogue with the junta and he believes she will remain open to such dialogue.
He even hoped her release would come today because the generals who believe in astrology may think the date 11/11 (Nov. 11) would be auspicious for her release. But a Rangoon resident said: “Nothing is certain, including her release, under military rule.”
LIBRE PERO NO SEGURA- LA COMUNIDAD INTERNACIONAL NO PUEDE FALLAR
Si mañana Aung San Suu Kyi es finalmente liberada la Comunidad Internacional no puede cometer el mismo error que hizo en el pasado, interpretando este gesto como un signo de cambio por si mismo.
En el pasado ya se dió. La Comunidad Internacional y Naciones Unidas tienen que adoptar caminos mas positivos que materializen y garantizen el cambio positivo y la vida de la propia Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Si relajamos simplemente la presión a los generales, interpretaran que pueden hacer cualquier cosa bajo la minima presion.
La liberacion de DASSK es una oportunidad unica para iniciar el camino de un autentico dialogo con los generales. Durante michos años Naciones Unidas, ASEAN, USA y hasta China han intentado llevar a Birmania hacia un cambio politico basado en el dialogo tripartito: NLD, etnicas y generales. Este dialogo es la clave para una reconciliacion nacional y para garantizar la transicion hacia la democracia.
Cuando Naciones Unidas vuelva a visitar Birmania es importante que lo haga el propio Ban Ki- Moon ya que los enviados anteriores no tuvieron gran suerte. Las propirdades para este proceso de dialogo son : la segura liberacion de todos los presos politicos, el alto al fuego y el cese a las etnias por parte de los militares
En el pasado varias veces Aung San Suu Kyi fue liberada y despues engañada o hecha presa. Ella sabe perfectamente que su liberacion no es nada definitivo sin los miles de presos politicos libres.
En el pasado ya se dió. La Comunidad Internacional y Naciones Unidas tienen que adoptar caminos mas positivos que materializen y garantizen el cambio positivo y la vida de la propia Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Si relajamos simplemente la presión a los generales, interpretaran que pueden hacer cualquier cosa bajo la minima presion.
La liberacion de DASSK es una oportunidad unica para iniciar el camino de un autentico dialogo con los generales. Durante michos años Naciones Unidas, ASEAN, USA y hasta China han intentado llevar a Birmania hacia un cambio politico basado en el dialogo tripartito: NLD, etnicas y generales. Este dialogo es la clave para una reconciliacion nacional y para garantizar la transicion hacia la democracia.
Cuando Naciones Unidas vuelva a visitar Birmania es importante que lo haga el propio Ban Ki- Moon ya que los enviados anteriores no tuvieron gran suerte. Las propirdades para este proceso de dialogo son : la segura liberacion de todos los presos politicos, el alto al fuego y el cese a las etnias por parte de los militares
En el pasado varias veces Aung San Suu Kyi fue liberada y despues engañada o hecha presa. Ella sabe perfectamente que su liberacion no es nada definitivo sin los miles de presos politicos libres.
AUNG SAN SUU KYI PUEDE ESTAR LIBRE MAÑANA
‘The Lady’ retains inspiring, potent, uniting political role
Friday, 12 November 2010 22:32 Benedict Rogers
London – Tomorrow, Aung San Suu Kyi will have spent a total of 15 years and 20 days in detention. Under Burmese law, she should be released, and it is looking increasingly likely that she will be. Although the regime has a poor track record of keeping its word or upholding its own laws, the regime will want to divert attention away from last Sunday’s sham elections which perpetuate military rule, and give the international community a fig leaf.
The regime has played it well from their point of view – legally they should have released her when her period of house arrest expired last year, but then, conveniently, American Mormon John Yettaw came to the junta’s aid, swam across the lake, and landed Suu Kyi with three years’ hard labour. In an act designed to appear compassionate, Than Shwe reduced this to 18 months’ house arrest – conveniently timing her release for six days after the sham elections.
On paper, Suu Kyi appears to have been sidelined from Burmese politics. The new constitution prohibits her from running in elections, and the election laws required political parties contesting the elections to expel any prisoners among their members. Unsurprisingly, her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), could not expel their leader, a Nobel Peace laureate and a most powerful symbol of the struggle for freedom in Burma, and so the NLD boycotted the polls and was banned as a party by the regime.
In reality, however, Suu Kyi retains the most extraordinarily potent political role. She is as central and relevant to Burma’s politics as ever. No one else has the capacity to inspire, mobilise and unite people. On my visits to Burma in recent years, ordinary people of all generations have spoken with immense respect and affection for “The Lady”. This year, I stood on one side of Inya Lake and looked straight across at the dilapidated house in which she had been confined for most of the past two decades.
The few people who have been able to meet her in recent years, particularly British Ambassador Andrew Heyn, have spoken of her continuing physical and mental energy and total commitment to her country’s struggle. Among the ethnic nationalities, she is the only Burman whom people speak of with genuine love and respect. Indeed, to those who say she is no longer relevant, I would ask: well then why has the regime kept her locked up for all these years?
If she steps out from her house in the next few hours, it will be as visually momentous as Nelson Mandela’s walk out of prison in South Africa. There is, however, one key difference. Mandela was freed because South Africa’s apartheid regime was crumbling, and F.W. de Klerk knew he had to reform. He engaged with Mandela to chart a peaceful transition to democracy, and Mandela’s release was part of a process of change. Mandela and de Klerk worked hand-in-hand. In Burma, if the generals have their way, there will be no change.
A long-time National League for Democracy supporter awaits the release from house arrest today of Aung San Suu Kyi outside the NLD head office in Bahan Township, Rangoon. By early evening, leaders told those hoping to see Suu Kyi, after reports she would be released a day early, to come back tomorrow.
That is why it is essential that the international community make it clear that Suu Kyi’s release, while welcome, is by itself no measure of progress. She herself said when she was last released in 2002: “My release should not be looked at as a major breakthrough for democracy. For all people in Burma to enjoy basic freedom – that would be the major breakthrough.”
Pressure must be increased on the regime to seize the moment of her release, and engage in a genuine dialogue with her, the democracy movement and the ethnic nationalities. If it wants to show it is serious, the regime must release the more than 2,100 political prisoners currently in jail, including Min Ko Naing, Ko Mya Aye, Ko Ko Gyi and Hkun Htun Oo. The military must declare a nationwide ceasefire, and end its offensives against ethnic civilians. Rape, forced labour, torture, the forcible recruitment of child soldiers and the destruction of villages must stop.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon must deploy all the resources available to him to revive a UN-led initiative to encourage dialogue in Burma. Dialogue is the one policy that unites everyone. The UN Security Council, General Assembly, Human Rights Council and office of the Secretary General; the European Union, the United States, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) and even China, have called for dialogue. Suu Kyi and the ethnic nationalities have both indicated their readiness to talk – indeed, dialogue and national reconciliation is the centrepiece of their platform.
The alternative to dialogue is continued, perhaps increased ethnic conflict and political instability. That is the regime’s choice. Its record does not inspire hope, but with targeted high-level pressure from the international community led by Ban Ki-moon, if Suu Kyi is freed, there is an opportunity to be seized. Last Sunday’s elections failed to bring about Burma’s freedom – but let this Sunday mark a new dawn for Burma.
Benedict Rogers is a human rights activist working with Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), a group based in London. He has made more than 30 visits to Burma and its borderlands, and is the author of Than Shwe: Unmasking Burma’s Tyrant (Silkworm Books, 2010).
Friday, 12 November 2010 22:32 Benedict Rogers
London – Tomorrow, Aung San Suu Kyi will have spent a total of 15 years and 20 days in detention. Under Burmese law, she should be released, and it is looking increasingly likely that she will be. Although the regime has a poor track record of keeping its word or upholding its own laws, the regime will want to divert attention away from last Sunday’s sham elections which perpetuate military rule, and give the international community a fig leaf.
The regime has played it well from their point of view – legally they should have released her when her period of house arrest expired last year, but then, conveniently, American Mormon John Yettaw came to the junta’s aid, swam across the lake, and landed Suu Kyi with three years’ hard labour. In an act designed to appear compassionate, Than Shwe reduced this to 18 months’ house arrest – conveniently timing her release for six days after the sham elections.
On paper, Suu Kyi appears to have been sidelined from Burmese politics. The new constitution prohibits her from running in elections, and the election laws required political parties contesting the elections to expel any prisoners among their members. Unsurprisingly, her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), could not expel their leader, a Nobel Peace laureate and a most powerful symbol of the struggle for freedom in Burma, and so the NLD boycotted the polls and was banned as a party by the regime.
In reality, however, Suu Kyi retains the most extraordinarily potent political role. She is as central and relevant to Burma’s politics as ever. No one else has the capacity to inspire, mobilise and unite people. On my visits to Burma in recent years, ordinary people of all generations have spoken with immense respect and affection for “The Lady”. This year, I stood on one side of Inya Lake and looked straight across at the dilapidated house in which she had been confined for most of the past two decades.
The few people who have been able to meet her in recent years, particularly British Ambassador Andrew Heyn, have spoken of her continuing physical and mental energy and total commitment to her country’s struggle. Among the ethnic nationalities, she is the only Burman whom people speak of with genuine love and respect. Indeed, to those who say she is no longer relevant, I would ask: well then why has the regime kept her locked up for all these years?
If she steps out from her house in the next few hours, it will be as visually momentous as Nelson Mandela’s walk out of prison in South Africa. There is, however, one key difference. Mandela was freed because South Africa’s apartheid regime was crumbling, and F.W. de Klerk knew he had to reform. He engaged with Mandela to chart a peaceful transition to democracy, and Mandela’s release was part of a process of change. Mandela and de Klerk worked hand-in-hand. In Burma, if the generals have their way, there will be no change.
A long-time National League for Democracy supporter awaits the release from house arrest today of Aung San Suu Kyi outside the NLD head office in Bahan Township, Rangoon. By early evening, leaders told those hoping to see Suu Kyi, after reports she would be released a day early, to come back tomorrow.
That is why it is essential that the international community make it clear that Suu Kyi’s release, while welcome, is by itself no measure of progress. She herself said when she was last released in 2002: “My release should not be looked at as a major breakthrough for democracy. For all people in Burma to enjoy basic freedom – that would be the major breakthrough.”
Pressure must be increased on the regime to seize the moment of her release, and engage in a genuine dialogue with her, the democracy movement and the ethnic nationalities. If it wants to show it is serious, the regime must release the more than 2,100 political prisoners currently in jail, including Min Ko Naing, Ko Mya Aye, Ko Ko Gyi and Hkun Htun Oo. The military must declare a nationwide ceasefire, and end its offensives against ethnic civilians. Rape, forced labour, torture, the forcible recruitment of child soldiers and the destruction of villages must stop.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon must deploy all the resources available to him to revive a UN-led initiative to encourage dialogue in Burma. Dialogue is the one policy that unites everyone. The UN Security Council, General Assembly, Human Rights Council and office of the Secretary General; the European Union, the United States, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) and even China, have called for dialogue. Suu Kyi and the ethnic nationalities have both indicated their readiness to talk – indeed, dialogue and national reconciliation is the centrepiece of their platform.
The alternative to dialogue is continued, perhaps increased ethnic conflict and political instability. That is the regime’s choice. Its record does not inspire hope, but with targeted high-level pressure from the international community led by Ban Ki-moon, if Suu Kyi is freed, there is an opportunity to be seized. Last Sunday’s elections failed to bring about Burma’s freedom – but let this Sunday mark a new dawn for Burma.
Benedict Rogers is a human rights activist working with Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), a group based in London. He has made more than 30 visits to Burma and its borderlands, and is the author of Than Shwe: Unmasking Burma’s Tyrant (Silkworm Books, 2010).
lunes, 4 de octubre de 2010
LO CREEREMOS CUANDO LO VEAMOS: LIBERACION DE AUNG SAN SUU KYI
Burma Campaign UK today expressed caution following reports that Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of Burma’s democracy movement, could be released after the elections.
An unnamed official has reportedly told the AFP news agency that her release will happen after the elections. According to Burmese law, Aung San Suu Kyi should be released on November 13th. The United Nations has repeatedly ruled that her detention breaks international law.
“We hope this report is correct, but regime officials have said similar things in the past and Aung San Suu Kyi has remained in detention,” said Mark Farmaner, Director of Burma Campaign UK. “We’ll believe it when we see it.”
Aung San Suu Kyi is currently serving her third period of detention since 1989. On October 24th she will have spent a total of 15 years in detention.
“Even if Aung San Suu Kyi is released, it would be wrong to attach too much political significance to the release,” said Mark Farmaner. “She has been released twice before without there being any political change in the country. It is more likely that the dictatorship will try to use her release to attempt to persuade the international community to relax pressure on them. However, the number of political prisoners has almost doubled in the past three years. If they release all or the majority of political prisoners along with Aung San Suu Kyi, then this could be the start of something with broader political significance.”
An unnamed official has reportedly told the AFP news agency that her release will happen after the elections. According to Burmese law, Aung San Suu Kyi should be released on November 13th. The United Nations has repeatedly ruled that her detention breaks international law.
“We hope this report is correct, but regime officials have said similar things in the past and Aung San Suu Kyi has remained in detention,” said Mark Farmaner, Director of Burma Campaign UK. “We’ll believe it when we see it.”
Aung San Suu Kyi is currently serving her third period of detention since 1989. On October 24th she will have spent a total of 15 years in detention.
“Even if Aung San Suu Kyi is released, it would be wrong to attach too much political significance to the release,” said Mark Farmaner. “She has been released twice before without there being any political change in the country. It is more likely that the dictatorship will try to use her release to attempt to persuade the international community to relax pressure on them. However, the number of political prisoners has almost doubled in the past three years. If they release all or the majority of political prisoners along with Aung San Suu Kyi, then this could be the start of something with broader political significance.”
Myanmar's Sham Election By NICK CLEGG
We are now a month away from the first elections in Burma in 20 years. That should give us cause to celebrate. Sadly, that is wishful thinking. Burma’s 55 million people continue to suffer brutal oppression. Abject, needless poverty is, for most, a daily reality. These elections will be little more than a sham to perpetuate military rule.
So when Asian and European leaders meet on Monday in Brussels, the U.K. will be calling for us to speak with one voice against the gross mistreatment of the Burmese people.
That means being unequivocal: These elections will be neither free nor fair. Opponents of the ruling party lack resources and are systematically targeted by the current regime. Thousands of political prisoners remain incarcerated. Various ethnic parties have been refused the right to participate. Last month the military dissolved the National League for Democracy — its biggest perceived threat.
The situation is little better for those parties which are being allowed to participate. The regime they oppose has passed deeply unfair election laws and runs the election commission. In Burma all media is heavily censored by the state.
So the election result is a foregone conclusion. Under the constitution a quarter of seats are already reserved for the military. In half of the remaining seats parties loyal to the regime will run uncontested, their opponents unable to field a candidate. The regime is therefore guaranteed a substantial majority — before a single vote is even cast.
The consequence for Burma is the return to power of a ruling elite that has presided over widespread human rights abuses, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, rape and torture. That same regime has been guilty of profound economic mismanagement and corruption. While they routinely blame sanctions for weak development, the truth is that they have squandered Burma’s natural resources and export opportunities. The country’s infant mortality rate is now amongst the highest in Asia.
These failings are undeniable. Yet some are tempted to overlook the deep flaws in the approaching election. Clearly, it would be more convenient for the international community to quietly agree that any election is better than no election. Burma would recede in the mind, allowing us to “move on.” That is attractive for nations that insist we should not interfere in one anothers’ affairs. And the West could not be accused, as it sometimes is, of attempting to recreate the world in its own image.
These are not reasons to ignore the truth. The European Union has already made it clear that sanctions — targeted at the regime and its sources of revenue — will not be lifted until genuine progress is made on the ground. We must now work with our Asian partners, using our collective clout, to push for that progress. Members of the Asia-Europe Meeting group, or ASEM, account for nearly 60 percent of the global population — and the same proportion of global trade. Burma’s military regime should know that, until it satisfies international demands, it will meet the same disapproval whether it looks East or West.
Not only is that our shared moral duty, but it is in our strategic self-interest too. Without a process of national reconciliation in Burma, the risk of instability is real. Ethnic cease-fires look increasingly fragile. A return to conflict would have devastating humanitarian consequences, undermining regional security and leading to further refugee flows into neighboring countries and beyond.
So we must continue to exert pressure on the regime to engage all opposition and ethnic groups in a meaningful dialogue. The objective must be a fair settlement that gives ethnic groups a political voice and protects their minority rights. All prisoners of conscience — including the opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi — must be released without delay. Reconciliation must be geared toward the social and economic development that has long evaded the Burmese state.
This week is an opportunity for Asian and European nations to reaffirm that message. Military men must know that swapping their uniforms for suits will not change the demands of the international community. We will not be pacified by a democratic facade. Our expectations will not drop.
Nick Clegg is deputy prime minister of Britain.
So when Asian and European leaders meet on Monday in Brussels, the U.K. will be calling for us to speak with one voice against the gross mistreatment of the Burmese people.
That means being unequivocal: These elections will be neither free nor fair. Opponents of the ruling party lack resources and are systematically targeted by the current regime. Thousands of political prisoners remain incarcerated. Various ethnic parties have been refused the right to participate. Last month the military dissolved the National League for Democracy — its biggest perceived threat.
The situation is little better for those parties which are being allowed to participate. The regime they oppose has passed deeply unfair election laws and runs the election commission. In Burma all media is heavily censored by the state.
So the election result is a foregone conclusion. Under the constitution a quarter of seats are already reserved for the military. In half of the remaining seats parties loyal to the regime will run uncontested, their opponents unable to field a candidate. The regime is therefore guaranteed a substantial majority — before a single vote is even cast.
The consequence for Burma is the return to power of a ruling elite that has presided over widespread human rights abuses, including arbitrary detentions, enforced disappearances, rape and torture. That same regime has been guilty of profound economic mismanagement and corruption. While they routinely blame sanctions for weak development, the truth is that they have squandered Burma’s natural resources and export opportunities. The country’s infant mortality rate is now amongst the highest in Asia.
These failings are undeniable. Yet some are tempted to overlook the deep flaws in the approaching election. Clearly, it would be more convenient for the international community to quietly agree that any election is better than no election. Burma would recede in the mind, allowing us to “move on.” That is attractive for nations that insist we should not interfere in one anothers’ affairs. And the West could not be accused, as it sometimes is, of attempting to recreate the world in its own image.
These are not reasons to ignore the truth. The European Union has already made it clear that sanctions — targeted at the regime and its sources of revenue — will not be lifted until genuine progress is made on the ground. We must now work with our Asian partners, using our collective clout, to push for that progress. Members of the Asia-Europe Meeting group, or ASEM, account for nearly 60 percent of the global population — and the same proportion of global trade. Burma’s military regime should know that, until it satisfies international demands, it will meet the same disapproval whether it looks East or West.
Not only is that our shared moral duty, but it is in our strategic self-interest too. Without a process of national reconciliation in Burma, the risk of instability is real. Ethnic cease-fires look increasingly fragile. A return to conflict would have devastating humanitarian consequences, undermining regional security and leading to further refugee flows into neighboring countries and beyond.
So we must continue to exert pressure on the regime to engage all opposition and ethnic groups in a meaningful dialogue. The objective must be a fair settlement that gives ethnic groups a political voice and protects their minority rights. All prisoners of conscience — including the opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi — must be released without delay. Reconciliation must be geared toward the social and economic development that has long evaded the Burmese state.
This week is an opportunity for Asian and European nations to reaffirm that message. Military men must know that swapping their uniforms for suits will not change the demands of the international community. We will not be pacified by a democratic facade. Our expectations will not drop.
Nick Clegg is deputy prime minister of Britain.
Trade Unions Call on ASEM to Act on Burma
Brussels, 1 October 2010 (ITUC OnLine): Trade unions from across Asia and Europe, gathered in Brussels in for o the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) Leaders’ Summit are calling on ASEM Leaders to take action on Burma, including demanding the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners and the ending of attacks on the civilian population, particularly ethnic communities and democracy supporters.
The ITUC is concerned that some in the international community is viewing national elections in Burma next month as a reason to relax pressure on the regime. The elections are deeply flawed: pro-democracy voices have been excluded, other parties have been prevented from campaigning effectively, and regardless of the outcome of the vote, the military is guaranteed effective control of government under a flawed constitution. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon stated on 27 September that elections will not be credible without the release of political prisoners, including democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
The international community needs to significantly step up pressure on the regime until there is tangible progress towards an inclusive and democratic constitution and full respect for human rights.
ASEM governments and social partners can play their part by cutting the trade and investment ties that are keeping the regime in power, in line with the 2000 ILO resolution on Burma.
With the regime stepping up its war against its own people, ASEM Leaders should call on the UN Security council to approve a total arms embargo on Burma and support a UN Commission of Inquiry into crimes against humanity.
To put pressure on the regime to remove its ban on trade unions and give Burmese workers a voice, ASEM governments should support the launch of an ILO Commission of Inquiry into Freedom of Association in Burma in the ILO Governing Body.
Pressure on the regime to end all forms of forced labour must be stepped up. Those who are guilty of using forced labour must be punished and the recruitment of children into the military must stop. A significant starting point would be to ensure that the ILO is able to work freely across the country, including to investigate cases of forced labour.
The ITUC represents 176 million workers in 151 countries and territories and has 301 national affiliates. http://www.ituc-csi.org and http://www.youtube.com/ITUCCSI
The ITUC is concerned that some in the international community is viewing national elections in Burma next month as a reason to relax pressure on the regime. The elections are deeply flawed: pro-democracy voices have been excluded, other parties have been prevented from campaigning effectively, and regardless of the outcome of the vote, the military is guaranteed effective control of government under a flawed constitution. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon stated on 27 September that elections will not be credible without the release of political prisoners, including democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
The international community needs to significantly step up pressure on the regime until there is tangible progress towards an inclusive and democratic constitution and full respect for human rights.
ASEM governments and social partners can play their part by cutting the trade and investment ties that are keeping the regime in power, in line with the 2000 ILO resolution on Burma.
With the regime stepping up its war against its own people, ASEM Leaders should call on the UN Security council to approve a total arms embargo on Burma and support a UN Commission of Inquiry into crimes against humanity.
To put pressure on the regime to remove its ban on trade unions and give Burmese workers a voice, ASEM governments should support the launch of an ILO Commission of Inquiry into Freedom of Association in Burma in the ILO Governing Body.
Pressure on the regime to end all forms of forced labour must be stepped up. Those who are guilty of using forced labour must be punished and the recruitment of children into the military must stop. A significant starting point would be to ensure that the ILO is able to work freely across the country, including to investigate cases of forced labour.
The ITUC represents 176 million workers in 151 countries and territories and has 301 national affiliates. http://www.ituc-csi.org and http://www.youtube.com/ITUCCSI
EUROPA DA UNA CALUROSA BIENVENIDA A LOS CRIMINALES BIRMANOS
A WARM WELCOME TO THE BURMESE CRIMINALS!
NYAN WIN, BURMESE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, IS GIVEN A GOOD RECEPTION IN
BRUSSELS AT THE OCCASION OF THE ASEM8 FORUM.
ACTIONS BIRMANIE CONDEMNS THE PRESENCE OF THIS HIGH-LEVEL REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE BURMESE MILITARY JUNTA.
In his last March report, the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations, O.Quintana,
condemned the junta in strongest terms : " Given the gross and systematic nature of human rights violations in Myanmar over a period of many years, and the lack of accountability, there is an indication that those human rights violations are the result of a State policy that involves authorities in the executive, military and judiciary at all levels" and went on to specify that: " some of these human rights violations may entail categories of crimes against humanity or war crimes '.
Following these recommandations, 12 countries, of which 8 EU Member States, have recently called for the establishment of a commission of inquiry on the war crimes and the crimes against humanity committed by the Burmese junta.1
Not only is Belgium dragging its feet by not having yet joined the list of countries in favour of this initiative. It is also laying the red carpet for the Burmese criminals’ spokesperson to walk upon!
BIRMANIA POR LA PAZ CONDEMNS THIS OUTRAGEOUS PRESENCE IN EUROPEAN TERRITORY !!
STOP IMPUNITY
EUROPE MUST SUPPORT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF
INQUIRY WITH A MANDATE TO EXAMINE THE CRIMES COMMITTED IN BURMA!
WHERE IS THE SPANISH GOUVERMENT?
1 The countries in favour of an international commission of inquiry are the following :
USA, Canada, New Zealand, Australia
France, The UK, Netherlands ,Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Lithuania, Ireland
NYAN WIN, BURMESE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, IS GIVEN A GOOD RECEPTION IN
BRUSSELS AT THE OCCASION OF THE ASEM8 FORUM.
ACTIONS BIRMANIE CONDEMNS THE PRESENCE OF THIS HIGH-LEVEL REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE BURMESE MILITARY JUNTA.
In his last March report, the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations, O.Quintana,
condemned the junta in strongest terms : " Given the gross and systematic nature of human rights violations in Myanmar over a period of many years, and the lack of accountability, there is an indication that those human rights violations are the result of a State policy that involves authorities in the executive, military and judiciary at all levels" and went on to specify that: " some of these human rights violations may entail categories of crimes against humanity or war crimes '.
Following these recommandations, 12 countries, of which 8 EU Member States, have recently called for the establishment of a commission of inquiry on the war crimes and the crimes against humanity committed by the Burmese junta.1
Not only is Belgium dragging its feet by not having yet joined the list of countries in favour of this initiative. It is also laying the red carpet for the Burmese criminals’ spokesperson to walk upon!
BIRMANIA POR LA PAZ CONDEMNS THIS OUTRAGEOUS PRESENCE IN EUROPEAN TERRITORY !!
STOP IMPUNITY
EUROPE MUST SUPPORT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF
INQUIRY WITH A MANDATE TO EXAMINE THE CRIMES COMMITTED IN BURMA!
WHERE IS THE SPANISH GOUVERMENT?
1 The countries in favour of an international commission of inquiry are the following :
USA, Canada, New Zealand, Australia
France, The UK, Netherlands ,Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Lithuania, Ireland
domingo, 3 de octubre de 2010
POR QUE ESPAòA NO APOYA A LA COMISION DE NACIONES UNIDAS DE CRIMENES CONTRA LA HUMANIDAD Y DE GUERRA EN BIRMANIA A DIFERENCIA DE OTROS PAISES EUROPEOS
We are very welcomes the decision of the Irish Government to support the establishment of a UN Commission of Inquiry into war crimes and crimes against humanity in Burma. Ireland joins France, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Lithuania in backing the proposal for an investigation into human rights abuses in Burma.
In March 2010, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Burma called on the UN to consider the possibility of establishing a Commission of Inquiry into crimes committed in Burma which violate international law, stating that the abuses were 'a state policy that involves authorities in the executive, military and judiciary at all levels'. Human rights violations committed by the Burmese military include deliberate and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, sexual violence against women and young girls, forced labour, use of child soldiers, forced displacement of more than a million people, torture, and summary executions.
In March 2010, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Burma called on the UN to consider the possibility of establishing a Commission of Inquiry into crimes committed in Burma which violate international law, stating that the abuses were 'a state policy that involves authorities in the executive, military and judiciary at all levels'. Human rights violations committed by the Burmese military include deliberate and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, sexual violence against women and young girls, forced labour, use of child soldiers, forced displacement of more than a million people, torture, and summary executions.
CAPITALISMO AUTORITARIO y PARTIDOS DE IZQUIERDAS ESQUIZOIDES ARRIESGAN LA LUCHA DE LOS DERECHOS HUMANOS EN EUROPA by Anthony Dworkin
The European Union’s hopes of supporting human rights and
democracy around the world are at risk of being defeated by
changes in the global balance of power. The EU is committed
to putting democracy, human rights and the rule of law at the
centre of its foreign policy. But as the West loses its political
and economic dominance in global affairs, it must increasingly
compete for influence with rising powers that have shown no
interest in promoting human rights or democracy outside their
borders – and some of them not even within their own borders.
The spectacular success of authoritarian capitalism in China
and the current economic crisis in the West have undermined
the appeal of liberal democratic political systems. Some newly
democratic countries have failed to meet the hopes of their
citizens, while authoritarian regimes have become more
effective at blunting pressures for political reform. Across the
world, there is increasing opposition to the idea that the West
should tell countries how to run their own affairs.
Links to the full briefs:
The EU and Human Rights at the UN: 2010 Review
Towards an EU Human Rights Strategy for a Post-Western World
democracy around the world are at risk of being defeated by
changes in the global balance of power. The EU is committed
to putting democracy, human rights and the rule of law at the
centre of its foreign policy. But as the West loses its political
and economic dominance in global affairs, it must increasingly
compete for influence with rising powers that have shown no
interest in promoting human rights or democracy outside their
borders – and some of them not even within their own borders.
The spectacular success of authoritarian capitalism in China
and the current economic crisis in the West have undermined
the appeal of liberal democratic political systems. Some newly
democratic countries have failed to meet the hopes of their
citizens, while authoritarian regimes have become more
effective at blunting pressures for political reform. Across the
world, there is increasing opposition to the idea that the West
should tell countries how to run their own affairs.
Links to the full briefs:
The EU and Human Rights at the UN: 2010 Review
Towards an EU Human Rights Strategy for a Post-Western World
BIRMANIA, LA MAYOR PRISION DEL MUNDO AL AIRE LIBRE by Giancarlo Bocchi
En vísperas de una farsa electoral
Birmania, la mayor prisión del mundo al aire libre
En ningún país del mundo hay tantas formaciones guerrilleras activas como en Birmania: algunas de éstas están, lógicamente, en contra de la dictadura, mientras otras han acordado el cese al fuego, o han decidido trabajar para el enemigo.
Texto y fotografía de Giancarlo Bocchi
Birmania. El destino de Birmania está marcado por sus riquezas. Es rica en gas natural, piedras preciosas y materias primas. Sin embargo, viéndola en el mapa parece un exquisito bocado entre las fauces de China e India, naciones muy distintas entre sí, y al mismo tiempo sedientas de materias primas y regidas por un desarrollo industrial desenfrenado. Pero por el momento, este bocado está siendo disfrutado por los generales que llevan 50 años en el poder
En 1989, Birmania fue re-bautizada como Myanmar por la Junta Militar. El 7 de noviembre del presente año se llevaran a cabo las elecciones, una farsa impuesta por el general Than Shwe, el corpulento y astuto hombre fuerte de la Junta Militar dictatorial, la cual gobierna ininterrumpidamente a este país desde 1962. Se trata de una de las más vetustas y crueles dictaduras del siglo XX. Con estas elecciones busca darse un paradójico tinte de legalidad.
Experto en “guerra psicológica” del Ejército nacional, Than Swe es un sátrapa asiático paranoico que idolatra la astrología hasta el punto de considerarla un instrumento en las decisiones políticas. Con las elecciones quisiera desplazar a la comunidad internacional, poner fuera de la jugada a la oposición democrática y reforzar sus nexos con China. Está listo para quitarse el uniforme militar y ponerse ropa civil como neo-presidente, trajes que el sastre de la confianza le ha confeccionado. En las elecciones-farsa quedarán excluidos los mayores exponentes de la oposición democrática, todos aquellos que han purgado condenas dictadas por los tribunales especiales de la dictadura, comenzando por la premio nobel Aung San Su Kyi, esa valiente mujer relegada por los generales a doce años de arresto en su casa de Rangoon (la ex-capital que fue re-bautizada por los generales como Yangoon).
Mas
Birmania, la mayor prisión del mundo al aire libre
En ningún país del mundo hay tantas formaciones guerrilleras activas como en Birmania: algunas de éstas están, lógicamente, en contra de la dictadura, mientras otras han acordado el cese al fuego, o han decidido trabajar para el enemigo.
Texto y fotografía de Giancarlo Bocchi
Birmania. El destino de Birmania está marcado por sus riquezas. Es rica en gas natural, piedras preciosas y materias primas. Sin embargo, viéndola en el mapa parece un exquisito bocado entre las fauces de China e India, naciones muy distintas entre sí, y al mismo tiempo sedientas de materias primas y regidas por un desarrollo industrial desenfrenado. Pero por el momento, este bocado está siendo disfrutado por los generales que llevan 50 años en el poder
En 1989, Birmania fue re-bautizada como Myanmar por la Junta Militar. El 7 de noviembre del presente año se llevaran a cabo las elecciones, una farsa impuesta por el general Than Shwe, el corpulento y astuto hombre fuerte de la Junta Militar dictatorial, la cual gobierna ininterrumpidamente a este país desde 1962. Se trata de una de las más vetustas y crueles dictaduras del siglo XX. Con estas elecciones busca darse un paradójico tinte de legalidad.
Experto en “guerra psicológica” del Ejército nacional, Than Swe es un sátrapa asiático paranoico que idolatra la astrología hasta el punto de considerarla un instrumento en las decisiones políticas. Con las elecciones quisiera desplazar a la comunidad internacional, poner fuera de la jugada a la oposición democrática y reforzar sus nexos con China. Está listo para quitarse el uniforme militar y ponerse ropa civil como neo-presidente, trajes que el sastre de la confianza le ha confeccionado. En las elecciones-farsa quedarán excluidos los mayores exponentes de la oposición democrática, todos aquellos que han purgado condenas dictadas por los tribunales especiales de la dictadura, comenzando por la premio nobel Aung San Su Kyi, esa valiente mujer relegada por los generales a doce años de arresto en su casa de Rangoon (la ex-capital que fue re-bautizada por los generales como Yangoon).
Mas
sábado, 2 de octubre de 2010
El coraje de resisitir documental del Flavio Signore se estrena el proximo 7 de Octubre en Gava
El documental del director Flavio Signore y Concha Pinos directora de Birmania por la paz, EL CORAJE DE RESISITR, sera presentado el proximo 7 de Octubre en Gava..
Se trata de la version de 30 minutos para las escuelas y activistas que formara la herramienta principal para las futuras elecciones birmanas.
La version larga de 90 minutos que incluye las elecciones de Noviembre, se estrenara en las salas de cine el proximo 10 de Diciembre, Dia Internacional de los Derechos Humanos.
Te agradecemos tu apoyo, invita este documental a tu ciudad.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)