------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------
"Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies"
----------------------------------------------------------

The BurmaNet News: April 18, 1996
Issue #386

HEADLINES:
==========
L.A. TIMES: AUNG SAN SUU KYI STRIVING TO BUILD A DEMOCRACY
NATION: SUU KYI THOUGH SILENT STILL MOVES THE MASSES
BKK POST: SUU KYI'S PARTY BARRED FROM HOLDING CEREMONY
THE EASTERN HERALD TRIBUNE: CAMPS BUSTED AT MIZORAM
ASIA TIMES: PEPSI'S STILL A HIT ON YANGON CAMPUSES
ASIA, INC: DAVID DEVOSS TALKS TO LT. GEN. CHIT SWE
THE TIMES (LONDON): BUSINESS LETTERS - BURMA AND TOURISM
INTELASIA: PALAUNG WOMEN ...FOR TOURISM ....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

L.A. TIMES: AUNG SAN SUU KYI STRIVING TO BUILD A DEMOCRACY
AMID THE HARSH REGIME OF MYANMAR
April 14, 1996
From: ktint@earthlink.net (Kyaw Tint)

By Scott Kraft

Aung San Suu Kyi had a rigid routine during the six years she spent under
arrest in her family's lakeside home. She would rise at 4:30 a.m. for
exercise and meditation, then spend the day reading biographies or
autobiographies and listening to the radio. The only human being she would
see was the maid.

Although free for eight months now, she still spends most of her days in
that two-story house. But the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner is hardly
isolated. Two appointments secretaries, one for foreign dignitaries and the
other for fellow party members, have guided thousands of visitors to meet her.

"I'm afraid I can no longer keep to a strict timetable," Suu Kyi says. "I
can't get up at 4:30 anymore because there are times I don't get to bed
until 2 a.m. If I got up early, I wouldn't be able to operate full-steam
for 12 hours."

Many here hoped her release was a first step toward democracy in Myanmar.
But the military regime, which nullified her party's victory in the 1990
elections, still runs the country. It is  stage-managing a constitutional
convention while trying to attract foreign investment.

Suu Kyi is biding her time and rebuilding her party network. Her weekdays
are filled with appointments and on weekend, hundreds of supporters gather
outside the gated compound to hear her speak and answer their questions.
Soon, she says, the government will come to its senses.

Even as the government tries to ignore her, Suu Kyi, 50, remains the
most-respected political figure in Myanmar. Her father, Aung San, is
considered, even by her detractors, as the greatest hero of Burmese
independence. He was assassinated in 1947, when she was 2.

Suu Kyi left Burma in 1960, at age 15,  and later received a degree from
Oxford University. She married a Briton, Michael Aris, who is now a
professor and specialist in Tibetan studies at Oxford. In 1988, she
returned to Burma to tend to her ailing mother and became a leader of
pro-democracy movement.

Aris and the couple's two sons, Kim, 18, and Alexander, 22, who are in
school abroad, usually visit Suu Kyi at holidays, as they did during her
years of house arrest, if the government grants them visas. Suu Kyi is
prevented from leaving Myanmar only by the certainity that she would never
be allowed to return.

In person, Suu Kyi is low-key and polite, though her determination is
evident. She always refers to the country as Burma and the capital as
Rangoon, purposefully ignoring the government's decree that the nation be
called Myanmar and the city, Yangon.

She meets visitors at home in a square room surrounded by 1940s-era
photographs of her family and a wall-sized painting of her father. "The
painting is a bit Andy Warhol, don't you think?" she says. "But it's really
a very good likeness."

* * *
Question: How would you assess the eight months since you've been released?
What are the positive developments and the disappointments?

Answer: Well, in politics, I don't think you ever get disappointed as such.
It's an occupational hazard  that things don't always turn out as you would
wish them to. You hope for the best and prepare for the worst. That's
politics.
But we still have the strong support of the people and we manage to get
along with our party building.

Q: Many in the West thought that when you were released, everything would
begin to improve.

A: I don't think it's as simple as that. There are some people who say I
was released because the government thought the National League for
Democracy was dead. But in fact, it is far from dead. There have been
miscalculations like that in the past by the government.
In the 1990 elections, the government thought we might win a plurality but
not an absolute majority. In fact, we got 82%, with the result that those
elections have been totally ignored and our members persecuted.

Q: So you aren't disappointed in the slow pace of change?
A: I wouldn't say "disappointed" is the word. There is so much happening
within our party that it does compensate for what is not happening on the
other side.  Of course, we know that the best thing for the country is
national
reconciliation, which can only take place through dialogue. And we hope
that it will take place sooner rather than later. But that doesn't mean we
just sit and hope. We have other work to do and we carry on.

Q: So you aren't impatient with the pace of things?
A: If you are very busy, you have no time to be impatient. If you ask us
when do we want democracy, well, we want it now, of course. I feel just as
strongly about that as anybody else. But because we are so occupied with
our numerous jobs, we are not that impatient.

Q: Do you think the current constitutional conference, in which your party
is not participating, is a step in the right direction?
A: No. That constitution is not headed for democracy. In the first place,
they are not allowing political parties to operate effectively, and without
political parties operating effectively there can be no multiparty
democracy. The constitution they are writing really doesn't mean anything.
A constitution is just a piece of paper unless it has the support of the
people. Such constitutions do not last.

Q: So what can you do to get this government to change direction?
A: It is the will of the people that the country should become a democracy,
and I'm sure the people will join in guiding the country to its democracy.
We will do what we can as a legally registered party. We will use political
means  of reaching our goal. This is our constant.

Q: So you are talking about passive resistance.
A: We don't really believe that the way to bring about democracy is by
encouraging popular uprisings. We believe that democracy will come through
the strength of the political will of the people, expressed through
political parties.

Q: How does it feel to be a free citizen?
A: I'm a free citizen but  the country is not free. So I feel like a
citizen in an unfree country. I appreciate the opportunity to be in touch
with the people. That is what our work is all about.
You know, I always felt free. I felt free when I was under house arrest
because it was my choice. I chose to do what I'm doing and because of that.
I found peace within myself. And I suppose that is what freedom is all about.

Q: Do you think that it is possible the government thought it could make
you a non person by releasing you?
A: Sounds likely, doesn't it? Yes, it seems likely.

Q: The government often points out that you are married to a foreigner. How
important is that criticism to the average Burmese?
A: I don't think it means very much. If I were married to a Burmese, they'd
probably attack my husband's family for other reasons that he was foreign.
Don't forget that they are also attacking --very, very viciously-- other
party leaders  who are not married to foreigners.

Q: Is your husband able to visit you?
A: He came for Christmas, but this year he was refused a visa for the
Easter holidays. So he comes if he gets a visa.

Q: You have frequently called for dialogue with the government.
A: Yes, we believe in dialogue and we will always believe in dialogue
because that's the way all political problems end up.

Q: Has the government made any overtures to you?
A: Our party has a policy that we will make no statements about dialogue
until we decide we are ready to bring out an official version.

Q: So you're saying .......?
A: What I'm saying is that I'm not answering your question (laughs).

Q: If there is an election based on the government's new constitution,
would your party participate?
A: We don't even know whether there is going to be a constitution or what
sort of constitution. In any case, I don't think we should be talking about
the next elections when the issue of the last elections has not yet been
resolved.

Q: Currently, the government is promoting foreign investment, and many
companies, including Unocal in Los Angeles, have investments here. What's
your message to those companies?
A: We always said -- very, very clearly -- that Burma is not right for
investment. The climate is not right because the structural changes
necessary to make an investment really profitable are not yet in place.
We have now acquired in Burma a small group of very, very rich people. We
did not have such people eight years ago -- people who could go to a hotel
and spend $1,000 on a meal. That was unheard of. And the gap between the
haves and the have-nots is increasing. That does not make for social
stability.

Q: Do you think the government's hold on power will be strengthened as it
opens up the economy?
A: Well, it is not a free market. Some are freer than others in their
access to the market. The mechanism necessary for a really healthy open
economy does not yet exist. And one of the most important parts of that is
the rule of law. You have to know where you stand . . .  Without that,
there can be neither credibility nor confidence. And every businessman must
agree that good business cannot be done without credibility and confidence.

Q: What do you do to discourage investment?
A: It's not just what I say and it's not just the support there is abroad
for the movement for democracy.  Potential investors who really study the
situation the situation in depth, who don't just take a superficial view,
will come to their own conclusion that the time is not right.
They may want to put a little bit here so they can have a toe hold, waiting
for the day when Burma takes off. Of course, that day will be when
democracy comes.

Q: In your heart, do you think that will come? Are we talking five years?
A: I can't really say. But certainly I don't think it will be that long.
On the other hand, I know there will be a lot of problems to deal with once
we have democracy. In fact, I think we'll probably have more problems after
we have democracy than before. This is always the case when a system
changes from an authoritarian system to an open and transparent one.

Q: You tell the crowds that democracy is no panacea.
A: I tell them that under a democracy, we will have to be prepared to take
responsibility for our country's problems. Once they have democracy, they
can no longer blame the government because they are really the government.

Q: But won't there need to be pressure to bring about change here?
A: There is international pressure.  But of course what is more important
is that there is pressure from within.
The Burmese people are tired of authoritarianism, and they have seen for
themselves that authoritarian system has not done the country any good at
all. Our standards of education are falling. Standards of health are
falling. The fact that we have new hotels does not make up for the fact
that our children are less well-educated.

Q: Were you surprised, after your release, that there was  still strong
support for you? Did you worry that you might have been forgotten?
A: No, no. I was not that surprised. It is nothing to do with me. It has
more to do with the desire of the people for a system that gives them both
liberty and security. This is what the people want, isn't it? People want
to be free and at the same time they want to be secure.

Q: And you personally?
A: It is not me they are supporting in particular. The government seems to
think it's me personally that the people are supporting. The government
always gets things wrong.
We won the elections in 1990 because the people wanted democracy. It was
not because of me.

Q: Do you worry about your safety?
A: No. I don't worry very much at all. It's not because I'm all that
courageous or anything. It's just that there is no point in it. If they
want to do anything to me they can do it any time they like.
=======
Note: Scott Kraft, Paris bureau chief for the Times, interviewed Aung San
Suu Kyi at her home in Yangon, Myanmar.

How To Write to L.A. Times:
The Times welcomes expressions of all views. Letters should be brief and
subject to condensation. They must include valid mailing address and
telephone number. Pseudonyms and initials will not be used.
By Fax: (213) 237-7679
INTERNET <letters@latimes.com>

***************************************************************

NATION: SUU KYI THOUGH SILENT STILL MOVES THE MASSES
April 17, 1996

Aung San Suu traditional New Year or 'transition" address on
Sunday was heard by few Burmese.  Her quiet words about
reconciliation are anathema to the official media and few
among the independent press in Burma are willing to risk
antagonizing the country's leadership by giving them a forum.

But while the military government has been successful in muting her,
Suu Kyi's silent presence nevertheless remains a potent force inside Burma.

Eight years after the democracy movement stirred in Burma,
the political standoff remains.  Burma continues to be a
dispirited, divided country, and there is little to suggest
there will be any dramatic changes in the near future.

There has been mounting disquiet outside Burma about Suu
Kyi's inability to force concessions from the junta or even
break the shackles that have been placed on her own
movements.  When she tries to board trains they 'break
down", when she attempts to fly the planes are delayed, her
car trips into the countryside are blocked for various
reasons.  All the time Burma's economy continues to grow and
the military government appears to becoming more entrenched
in power.

Weak defence

But such thinking ignores the paradox that Suu Kyi's
weakness is also the military weakness.

If one house-bound woman leading a disorganized, essentially
broken political movement can still inspire such anxiety
among Burma s military leaders, it suggests that their hold
on power is anything but secure.

In an interesting front page article last week in the
official press, the junta gave a rare if weak defence of
their hold on power despite being overwhelmingly rebuffed
during the last election.  In sum, it argued that six years
on, the electorate had changed, the times had changed, and
therefore the results were no longer valid.  Whatever the
writer's intention, the commentary was little more than an
implicit acknowledgment of the illegitimacy of the military's rule.

Power politics is a strange phenomenon.  No matter how
strong the force that defends a political entity or how the
level of fear aroused to repel opponents, governments still
need what the Chinese called the "mandate of heaven" to
survive.  Cold war hostilities and decades of ideological
indoctrination couldn't hold the east bloc regimes together
in the face of populations fed up with the bankrupt status quo.

And the generals in Rangoon appear aware of this.

Since the pullout of Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy
from the national convention, which is supposed to set the
guidelines for a new constitution, the government seems to
have lost all enthusiasm for the meetings.  Laws continue to
be passed that will enshrine a leading role for the
military, and bar a future political role for Suu Kyi, but
the convention has become a meaningless waste of official energy.

Ironies of democracy

As a result the junta appears to have redoubled its efforts
to improve the material welfare of Burma's citizens before
appealing once again to them to sanction its rule at the
ballot box.  But they are going about it in entirely the
wrong way by creating an economy that is only likely to
inflame popular resentment with the government.  Villagers
are dragooned into armies of slave labourers to build
infrastructure projects, private land is seized for
military-backed projects, and the wealth gap is widening rapidly.

One of the ironies of democracy is that despite all the fine
words written about it, in the end it essentially boils down
to the right to be self interested.  And the Rangoon junta
can expect little in the way of sympathy from a population
watching a small minority getting richer at their exclusion.

One of the fundamental problems facing the generals is that
they have few people they can trust.  Even the young thugs
they hired last month to pelt Suu Kyi with tomatoes to come
through for them.

In a land of enemies, both imagined and real, the Slorc
continues to shun the one person who could bring them the
respectability and security they so crave.

That person is of course Suu Kyi. Reconciliation and
cooperation are the only way forward for Burma. But at
Sunday's "Thingyan' celebrations even NLD aides agreed there
would be no transition any time soon. (TN)

***************

BKK POST: SUU KYI'S PARTY BARRED FROM HOLDING CEREMONY
April 17, 1996
Rangoon, Reuters

BURMA'S ruling generals barred Aung San Suu Kyi's opposition
party from holding a tradition Buddhist ceremony yesterday
and prevented those members who had not heard of the ban
from visiting her, party official said.

Win Htain, spokesman for Suu Kyi's National League for
Democracy (NLD), said up to 300 supporters were stopped by
police and prohibited from approaching her lake-side house
to pay respect according to the tradition of the Buddhist
new year.

It was the first report in a month that Burma's Slorc, were
trying to restrict activities of the NLD or its leader.

Suu Kyi has played a cat-and-mouse game with the Slorc since
she was freed from six years of house arrest last July.

In March the military council barred her from travelling to
Mandalay, saying the train coach she was booked on had a
mechanical problem.

Many NLD supporters yesterday had hoped to pay their
respects to Suu Kyi and other senior party members. At
Buddhist New Year, Burmese people traditionally pay respect
to their elders and visit pagodas and shrines to make merit.

They also planned to march in a procession to a lake near
the Shwedagon Pagoda to free fish as part of the New Year's
merit making, party members said.

Win Htain said Burmese authorities on Monday refused an NLD
request to hold the ceremony, saying the NLD should not
"take political advantage" of religion. Those who turned up
apparently did not know of the government's decision, he said.

Suu Kyi and other senior party members heard the supporters
were prohibited from approaching the house and went to meet
them. After she spoke, the group dispersed, Win Htain said.

UN human rights investigator Yozo Yokota said in Geneva
yesterday that forced labour, torture and arbitrary killing
were widespread in Burma. "I continue to be concerned about
the serious restrictions imposed upon the enjoyment of civil
and political rights. The people in Burma today do not enjoy
the freedoms of opinion, expression, publication and
peaceful assembly and association," he said.

He also said he was very concerned by reports from Rangoon
suggesting that the level of "political intimidation and
repression" had been rising since his visit last October.

The human rights situation in Burma has worsened since last
autumn following a slight improvement with the release of
the dissident Aung San Suu Kyi last July, UN official said  Monday.

Japan's Professor Yozo Yokota, a special UN human rights
reporter, told journalists he had been informed that
"political prisoners were severely tortured."

The number of victims of forced labour had increased and the
Slorc had tightened control over political life, while the
army was allegedly committing grave human rights violations.

"At this moment the situation is very difficult for
political leaders," Yokota said.

Yokota said he did not know the exact number of political
prisoners in Burma. He put it at less than 1,000, but
recalled that the international human rights organisation
Amnesty International spoke of 2,000.

Yokota said he had noted a certain relaxation during his
last visit to Burma in October. The country has been under
military dictatorship following the suppression of a popular
uprising in 1988.

Yokota noted that other political leaders had also been
freed, foreign journalists admitted to the country, and
meetings of several thousand people permitted to take place
in front of the house where Aung San Suu Kyi was confined.

But since then the situation has deteriorated, apparently
after the military government had reached negative
conclusions about its relaxation policy.

Yokota said various factors had promoted him to revise his
judgment. These included "disturbing information" of attack
by soldiers on villagers and refugees, the fact that Aung
San Suu Kyi had not been permitted to travel to Mandalay in
the north of the country, "further harsh measures taken
against political leaders," reported cases of torture and
renewal of forced labour.

Yokota proposes in his report, to be presented to the UN
Commission on Human Rights this week, that human rights
observers should be sent to Burma.

But he said he had received no response from the Burmese
authorities to this suggestion. (BP)

********************************************************

THE EASTERN HERALD TRIBUNE: CAMPS BUSTED AT MIZORAM
April 15, 1996   (India)
From: "FTUB (WB)" <aungsan@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>

Imphal, April 14: Camps of Myanmar based militant organizations,
NUPA and ALP were raided and over run by Assam Rifles troops in
the remote southern tip of Mizoram in the area of Parva under operation
code named Vajra. The operation was launched between  April 6 and April 9.
 
The surgical operation netted 32 militants who were armed AK-47 and
M-16 rifles. The militants have been handed over to the Mizoram
authorities to be dealt with according to the law of the land. Family
members and children of the militants who were staying at the camp
have also been handed over to the state authority. The raid claimed no
causalities on either side. This information made available by the PIB
(Defense Wing) said the Assam Rifles "in keeping with their true
traditions and respect for Human Rights rendered civic action to the
old, infirm and disabled".
 
Note: NUPA (National Unity Party for Arakan)
      ALP (Arakan Liberation Party)
      PIB (Press Information Bureau)

******************************************************

ASIA TIMES: PEPSI'S STILL A HIT ON YANGON CAMPUSES
April 16, 1996

[BurmaNet Editor's Note: There have been other reports of Burmese
in Mandalay boycotting Pepsi.  Many people in Burma are also unaware
of the boycott campaign in the United States, because such news is
never reported in the newspapers, which are all controlled by the SLORC.]

A boycott against PepsiCo on US college campuses appears to
be spreading, as students at some 75 schools protest against
the company for doing business in Myanmar. Student
activists, citing the government's use of forced labor, have
targeted Myanmar as this year's fashionable political cause.

And PepsiCo, one of the first big international companies to
do business in Myanmar (it currently has some US$8 million
in revenues there), has been singled out for a boycott.

In a bow to political correctness, Harvard University
recently transferred a US$200,000 contract from PepsiCo to
Coca-Cola after student activists complained. "The problem
that Pepsi has is that they can find people that feel like
this on campuses around the world," said Simon Billinness,
an analyst at Franklin Research & Development.

Everywhere that is, except the University of Yangon itself,
where a sampling of students interviewed by Asia Times
indicated an entirely different attitude. "Why should we
stop drinking Pepsi? asked one student outside the University's
Department of Economics. "It's a good company that's created a
lot of jobs here."

One student noted she had recently stopped drinking Pepsi -
but not for political reasons. "Did they change something in
the ingredients?" she asked. "It doesn't seem to taste as
good as it used to. I drink Mirinda now," she added. Mirinda
is an orange drink also bottled by PepsiCo. (AT)

***************

ASIA, INC: DAVID DEVOSS TALKS TO LT. GEN. CHIT SWE, THE
BURMESE FORESTRY MINISTER
April 1996
From: "Moe K. T." <moe@ORI.U-TOKYO.AC.JP>

When Chit Swe was a young chemistry student at Rangoon University in the
late 1940s, he often joined rowdy demonstrations against the incompetent
British colonial government. Forty years later, ironically, he was a senior
member of the military-dominated State Law and Order Restoration Council
(SLORC) that crushed students protesting the incompetence of Ne Win's
socialist regime. SLORC grabbed the reins of power, and Burma was officially
renamed Myanmar. As SLORC's forestry minister, Lt. Gen. Chit Swe, 64, has
become a key figure in the battle to slow global warming through his efforts
to save Burma's massive teak forests. On a lazy Sunday afternoon in Rangoon,
he talked with ASIA, INC.'s David DeVoss about trees:
        From the moment the military took control of the government in 1988
    it was clear Myanmar needed a market-oriented economic system.
    There was no debate over the need to dump socialism.

    Everybody knew we needed national and international investors to
    develop the economy.

    Our greatest asset has always been timber. Half of Myanmar's 66
    million hectares is covered with forest, and I mean natural
    hardwood forest, not the rubber and oil-palm trees that Malaysians
    call forest. But we didn't have a forestry policy or modern laws
    that would allow its development.

    All we had was the Forest Act of 1902 introduced by the British
    Raj. It "protected" public lands by preventing their development by
    natives. Of course, since the British liked to hunt, the act
    neglected wildlife preservation entirely. In 1994 Myanmar adopted a
    new law that allows the establishment of commercial plantations
    while protecting elephants, tigers and anteaters, plus dozens of
    species of birds. It's a law that promotes conservation, yet gets
    value from the forest.

    But having tremendous forest resources doesn't mean a country can
    automatically profit from them. Because socialism allowed no
    opportunity for profit, little was done to improve the forests or
    modernize the process of extraction. In an attempt to attract
    investment we made a foolish mistake in 1989 by granting 36 Thai
    companies 42 timber concessions in the Manerplaw and Three Pagodas
    Pass border areas.

    We couldn't cut timber there because of the Mon and Karen
    insurgencies, so we gave five-year concessions to the Thais. We
    canceled them after three years because they produced no tangible
    benefit to the government or the people along the border. Our
    policy today is to grant harvest quotas to Singapore, Hong Kong and
    Taiwanese companies. Never again will we give concessions.

    Because of the irresponsible exploitation of tropical rain forests
    elsewhere, there's a huge demand for Myanmar's forest resources. I
    have more than 100 proposals from timber companies on my desk. But
    today the government is more careful about the companies it selects
    for joint ventures.

    Companies hope to come in with a nominal investment and extract our
    raw materials. They promise to reinvest profits from the sale of
    those raw materials. We call this "frying the fish in its own fat."
    Myanmar wants the investment capital up front. We want companies
    that have the resources to build sawmills, equip furniture
    factories and replace elephants trained to skid logs with machinery
    suited to low-impact logging. We can't build an economy solely by
    exporting logs.

    Myanmar needs all the friends it can muster because 26 years of
    socialism have left us at a competitive disadvantage. We are a much
    richer country in terms of natural resources than Malaysia, yet
    Malaysia earns $5 billion each year from timber sales while we
    struggle to get $200 million. But Malaysia invests $350 million a
    year in its timber industry while Myanmar's input averages $6.2
    million.

    We will not destroy our forests to develop economically. Even a
    developing nation like Myanmar must be concerned about global
    warming. Of course, there will always be a place in Myanmar for
    logging, but, in truth, I'd prefer we made money from ecotourism.

***********************************************************

THE TIMES (LONDON): BUSINESS LETTERS - BURMA AND TOURISM
April 12, 1996     by Mr. Paul Strachan
From: zni@students.wisc.edu

Sir, Your report (earlier editions, April 6) on slave labour in Burma was
derived from an organization called Burma Action Group (BAG) whose
members advise people not to visit Burma to see things for themselves.  In
fact, the country is enjoying peace and prosperity for the first time since
the
Japanese marched in 1942.

Corvee labour does exist as it has done in Burma for over a millenium.
With a barter economy in rural areas, the traditional form of taxation is
in the form of labouring on public works projects.  It is a requirement
that if a household cannot pay a basic poll tax then one member must give
two weeks a year to work on such projects.

Without this system of civic contribution the Irrawaddy valley would be
unirrigated and the people longago disappeared from hunger.  I have
witnessed corvee labour used on tourist-related projects.  I am a Burmese
speaker and have talked closely with the villagers concerned and have found
no evidence of "abuse and suffering" or the "many people who have lost
their lives" as BAG suggest.

Such scaremongering will only hurt the ordinary Burmese people who look
forward to Visit Myanmar Year as an opportunity for betterment.  If
camcorder-wielding tourists had been in Rangoon in 1988 the soldiers might
not have fired.  Tourists make nasty regime behave.  The forced isolation
that BAG advocate would only return Burma to its former Albanian state,
where human rights most certainly would not flourish.

Sincerely

PAUL STRACHAN
(Managing Director),
Irrawaddy Flotilla Company,
Ancaster Business Centre,
Cross Street, Callander, Midland
April 8, 1996

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

TIMES (LONDON): BUSINESS LETTERS - BURMA'S LABOUR FORCE
April 16, 1996
Response from Miss Zunetta Liddell and others

Sir, We cannot let the letter from Mr Paul Strachan of the Irrawaddy
Flotilla Company on tourism and forced labour in Burma (April 10) pass
without comments.  As representatives of human rights organizations we have
all researched, edited and published reports documenting the extensive
abuse of civilians as unpaid labourers on roads, railways, and bridges or
as porters to carry supplies and ammunition for the army.

It is true that Burma has laws in place, dating from the British colonial
period, which permit the Government to use unemployed men for projects
which will directly benefit the local community.  These were superceded by
Burma's accession in 1955 to the 1930 Convention on Forced Labour, and in
1995, after repeated criticism by the International Labor Organization, the
Government undertook to repeal them.  The European Union is currently
investigating Burma's use of forced labour, with a view to revoking the
import preferences in ______ (one word here not readable)
while Burma currently enjoys status as a least developed country.

Burma's famous city of Pagan, now a major tourist attraction, was also
built by forced labour in the 12th century, and the wealth of Europe and
northern America was developed on the backs of slaves. But this is the late
20th century, and the international community as a whole has laid down
minimum standards of labour rights which the Burmese Government must
uphold.

Yours etc,

ZUNETTA LIDDELL
(Human Rights Watch/Asia)

CARMEL BEDFORD
(Article 19),

MARK COVEY
(Anti-Slavery International),
33 Islington High Street, NJ
April 11

Letters for publication may be faxed to 0171-782-5046

********************************************************

INTELASIA: PALAUNG WOMEN ...FOR TOURISM ....
April 15, 1996  (also printed in The Nation on April 17, 1996)
From: Julien H Moe <JulienMoe@AOL.COM>

BANGKOK 15 April [IntelAsia]- Hundreds of thousands of people from
Burma have slipped across the border into Thailand in search of work.

    The immigrants, mainly illegal, play a game of cat and mouse with police
and immigration officers but there is one small group who do not have to run
and hide when authorities approach.

    Women from Burma's Padaung minority are without doubt the most
distinctive members of Thailand's Burmese immigrant population.

    The Padaung are a small sub-group of the Karen ethnic group, living in
eastern Burma's Kayah state. The women traditionally put brass rings around
their necks, pushing their shoulders down and giving the appearance that they
have extremely long necks.

    The origin of the practice is unknown, but according to Padaung legend
the spirits once got angry with women and sent a tiger to bite them in the
neck so they began putting on the rings to protect them from the prowling
jungle cats.

    ``We make our necks long because our grandmothers did it, and our great
grandmothers did it before them,'' said Saw Yo Le, who, in her mid fifties,
is the oldest among some 50 Padaung women living in northwest Thailand's Mae
Hong Son province.

    But for 12-year-old Moo Yang there is a much more simple reason for
placing the rings around her neck: ``Wearing brass rings around your neck
makes you beautiful.''

    Moo Yang said she has been putting the rings around her neck since she
was six years old and now wears 18.

    Her mother said she has already spent about 4,000 baht ($160) on rings
for her daughter's neck.

    The women said it was every Padaung woman's dream to make her neck as
long as possible with a maximum of 32 rings, though no one could explain why
32 was the most they can wear.

    ``The most important thing for a woman in our tribe is to earn enough
money to buy the brass rings for our necks,'' said Saw Yo Le, who already has
22 rings, for which she said she paid 6,000 baht ($240).

    The Padaung women have been a major tourist attraction in northwestern
Thailand since they were first brought out to live in a ``cultural centre''
near the border more than 10 years ago.

    With a steady stream of tourists paying more than $10 each to snap photos
of the women, local authorities have turned a blind eye to the illegal
immigrants in their midst who regularly get star billing in tourism promotion
campaigns for the area.

    The Burmese government has also seen the tourist-pulling power of the
``long-necked'' women and recruited them to travel from their hill country in
Kayah state to Rangoon and other tourist centres.

    But several of the women in Thailand said the main reason they came to
Thailand was because they did not want to be forced to travel to Rangoon and
perform in tourist shows without pay.

    Na Nge, a 22-year-old woman who wears 20 rings on her neck, said she got
nothing when she was ordered to go to Rangoon and perform traditonal dances
and pose for the cameras as part of the Burmese government's tourism
promotion drive.

    She said the local military government officials in Kayah state regularly
take different groups of women, and some men, down to Rangoon, but she was
never paid anything for the three trips she made to the Burmese capital.

    ``They only gave us rice and curry,'' she said, adding that each time 10
Padaung women and six men were taken by bus from Kayah state to Rangoon for
up to 10 days before they were sent back home and another group was taken
back in their place.

    Na Nge said she decided to make the difficult and dangerous journey to
the Thai border and live with her aunt in the hope that she might make some
money to buy more brass rings.

    There Padaung women, as well some men, live in three northwestern Thai
border villages. They were either brought out by tourist companies or moved
there on their own.

    They earn their living posing for tourists' pictures, selling souvenirs
and raising pigs and chickens while the Padaung men hunt and seek jungle
products to sell.

    ``Living in this village, some days I can make 100 or 200 baht ($4-$8),''
Na Nge said.

