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

The BurmaNet News: May 25-27, 1996
Issue #421


HEADLINES:
==========
THE NATION: ANOTHER STOCK ASEAN RESPONSE ON BURMA
BKK POST: LAISSEZ-FAIRE OR LIBERTY: POLICY OPTIONS IN BURMA
THE NATION: US DIPLOMAT WILL ATTEND BESIEGED SUU KYI CONGRESS
THE NATION: JAPAN AIRLINE SEEKS FLIGHTS TO RANGOON
BKK POST: JUNTA ADOPTS NEW METHODS IN DEALING WITH SUU KYI
BKK POST: ANOTHER AMERICAN COMPANY DECIDES TO PULL OUT OF BURMA
THE NATION: BURMESE LEADERS TAKE A BULLET IN THE FOOT
THE NATION: US CLOSELY MONITORS SITUATION IN RANGOON
THE NATION: SUU KYI TO HOLD MORE CONGRESSES
THE NATION: SUU KYI THE MODEL OF GRACE UNDER PRESSURE
THE NATION: TIME ASEAN RECOGNISED SUU KYI'S LEGITIMACY
BKK POST: RANGOON RISKS ALL WITH UNWISE WAVE OF ARREST
------------------------------------------------------------
THE NATION: ANOTHER STOCK ASEAN RESPONSE ON BURMA

May 26, 1996

A confrontation is looming between the military junta in Burma
and the opposition National League for Democracy over a planned
conference today scheduled to coincide with the sixth anniversary
of the abortive 1990 national elections.

The regime, calling itself the Slorc has detained for
"questioning" over 200 NLD members and supporters ahead of
today's conference. Many were seized in their homes in the middle
of the night or plucked off the street.

But the Slorc's moves have not dented the resolve of opposition
leader and Nobel Peace Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. Suu Kyi said
today's conference would go on even without the majority of its
invited participants.

"I think the intention is to try and make it impossible for us to
hold our conference," she said. "But we are still going to go
ahead with our plans unless they make it physically impossible
for us to do so."

Suu Kyi, who was released from six years of house arrest last
July, also did not rule out the possibility that she and other
top NLD members might be arrested before the start of the
conference.

The arrests over the past three days in Rangoon, are a clear
indication that the NLD has the backing of the Burmese people.

As Suu Kyi told a press conference on Friday: "We don't need to
say anything to the outside world now. The outside world can see
for itself that the Slorc is nervous. Two hundred to three
hundred holding a conference, that's not even as big as a Slorc
faction, and yet they got so nervous that they started rounding
people up. They are nervous because they know they do not have
the support of the people of Burma."

The Slorc is showing its true colours and it comes as no surprise
to us. Many people, however, thought that once Suu Kyi was
released from house arrest Slorc would create some sort of
situation where compromises could be worked out and perhaps there
could be a transition to democracy. They were proved wrong over
the past few days, with the military junta showing that under no
circumstances is it going to recognise the results of the 1990
elections in which the NLD won the majority of seats.

This crackdown is the straw that breaks the camel's back and the
international community is not going to bend over to give the
benefit of the doubt to the military regime anymore. The world is
watching, and little do the Burmese generals realise that by
arresting the pro-democracy NLD members they have alienated many
who were willing to give them a second chance. If Suu Kyi is re-
arrested today the Slorc might as well write off its chances of
dealing with the West, in particular the US.

There is a piece of legislation pending in the US Congress called
the Burma Freedom and Democracy Act of 1995 which would prohibit
American companies from investing in Burma and development their
infrastructure. If Suu Kyi is re-arrested, without doubt, the
Burma Freedom and Democracy Act will sail trough Congress.

Republican Senator Mitch McConnell in moving the bill said:
"Foreign investment in Burma is directly supporting and
strengthening the military junta. Each dollar that foreign
companies bring into Burma serves to buy the guns, buy the
bullets and pay the soldiers that are killing the Burmese people
and keeping the rest of Burma oppressed.

"In Burma millions of people turned out to vote for Suu Kyi and
the NLD. The NLD claimed 82 per cent of the vote. The fact that
they were robbed of the reward of free and fair elections defines
America's opportunity and obligation," Senator McConnell added.
The Burma Freedom and Democracy Act is going to be taken up in
the next few weeks in the Senate International Relations
Committee before moving on to Congress and it is still being
debated at the Senate subcommittee level.

On Thursday, State Department spokesman Nicholas Burns said the
US would explore further sanctions against Burma with Congress.

"We do not rule further US sanctions against Burma and we are
ready to explore various measures with the Congress. What we want
to do is to have an effective US response," Burns said when
issuing not to go Burma because of the crackdown.

There is a growing consensus in the US that Burma is a place
where its politicians can make a stand because it is not a
country that is tied in with the American economy. So making a
stand for democracy, on the part of the US, would not injure the
interests of many American citizens involved in trade with the
Slorc regime - unlike China or Indonesia.

The response of Asean so far, to the on-going arrests in Burma,
has been pathetic. Asean officials at a recent meeting, at the
resort island of Langkawi in Malaysia, to develop the resource-
rich Mekong basin - which includes part of Burma - said the
recent arrests were "international politics". "I don't think it
is our business to question," Ahmad Kamil Jaafar, secretary-
general of Malaysia's foreign ministry said on Thursday.

This was also echoed by Thailand, Burma's immediate neighbour.
The arrest of NLD members was an internal affair, Thai Foreign
Ministry spokesman Surapong Jayanama said.

But can we expect anything out of the regional grouping, whose
leaders just see the country with dollar signs in front of their
eyes, and view Suu Kyi as a thorn in their side to bleed Burma
dry. Perhaps a cue can be taken, when in 1991 Indonesian troops
fired upon unarmed pro-democracy demonstrators in East Timor's
capital of Dili. The stock Asean response was: "It was an
internal affair."

There needs to be a brave admission by Asean that their so-called
constructive engagement policy has failed to draw Burma back into
the mainstream of the international civil community, and other
means need to be explored to find a just and peaceful solution
for the country.

Unless and until this is done, Burma will always be engulfed in a
climate of fear perpetuated by an illegal government. (TN)

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

BKK POST: LAISSEZ-FAIRE OR LIBERTY: POLICY OPTIONS IN BURMA

Earlier this month, US SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL (R, Kentucky),
chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, gave the keynote
address at the Free Burma Conference which was held at the Paul
Nitze School for Advanced International Studies. The following is
the full text of his speech.

May 26, 1996

THERE is a story former Secretary Baker likes to tell - it is one
about a farmer, who after many years had earned enough to buy a
small plot of his own land - a dusty, dry plot filled with stones
and tree stumps, barren of any life.

For three years, stone by stone, stump by stump, he cleared his
fields. Back-breaking work - day in and day out without rest - he
toiled and finally he was rewarded with an abundant harvest.

Well, the first thing he did was call his preacher to come bless
his bounty. The preacher walked field to field amazed by the
richness of what the saw. He plucked a tomato, and held it high:
"Why this is the most ripe, plump tomato I have seen in years,"
he said, "Thank the Lord."

He moved on to a field of melons and was awed by their fullness,
how juicy they were. "God is indeed great," he said.

Finally, the preacher just couldn't say enough about the farmer's
crisp, tangy apples and he held one high. "Praise the Lord!" he
said.

Well, the farmer couldn't stand it anymore and burst out,
"Preacher with all due respect, I sure wish you could have seen
this field when God was farming it all by himself."

US leadership: What is at stake?
To me, the US role in Burma is a little like the farmer's friend
- we may get some credit, but others do the heavy lifting. At the
end of the day, it will be the Burmese people, led by Aung San
Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy (NLD) who will have
laboured long under intolerable conditions - bearing up to every
hardship, breaking down walls of adversity - to bring democracy,
justice, peace and prosperity to Burma.

At the same time, they cannot - they should not - struggle
without the support of the US. It is my view that Burma's liberty
must be served by America's leadership. A few weeks ago, in a
courageous statement to the UN Commission on Human Rights, Aung
San Suu Kyi appealed again to the international community to
directly and immediately support the restoration of democracy and
respect for the rule of law.

She summoned us to take concrete steps to implement the results
of the 1990 elections in which the Burmese people spoke with a
strong, resolute voice, and the NLD carried the day. Less we
forget, the NLD did not squeak by with a 43% mandate as did our
sitting president - the leader of the free world.

The NLD claimed 392 seats in the parliament, winning 82% of the
vote. Now, that's a mandate! Unfortunately, a shining moment for
democracy has been blackened by a ruthless dictatorship. To this
day, the generals who make up the Slorc maintain a chokehold on
Burma's life.

Burma is a battleground - between democracy and dictatorship;
between those who believe in open markets and those who openly
market their self-enriching schemes; between the many who embrace
freedom and the few who breed fear between Suu Kyi's supporters
and Slorc's sycophants.

There are few modern examples where our choice is so stark, where
the battle lines are so sharply drawn. While I could devote a
considerable portion of my remarks to cataloguing Slorc's
appalling political and human rights record, I will leave that to
some of your panellists.

Many of you who are participating in today's event have done a
remarkable job calling attention to the atrocities carried out by
Slorc. There is no question that arbitrary killings, detentions,
torture, rape, and forced labour and relocations are tools
routinely abused to secure Slorc's position, power and wealth.

"Notwithstanding these conditions, many of you must be wondering
why a conservative Republican has taken interest in Burma, Suu
Kyi and her cause? After all , Democrats are usually the hard
charges in Washington's human rights campaigns. Some may have
decided that this is my quirky crusade to export American morals.

No doubt, these people have concluded I just don't understand our
economic interests in the area, that I fail to appreciate
regional sensitivities. In short, I just don't get it.

American interests: The drug epidemic
Well, there are several factors which have contributed to my
commitment. First, is Burma's association with a key US interest:
the drug epidemic. But let me step back for a moment. When I
moved to the Foreign Operations Subcommittee, I was struck by the
enormous gap in the public's understanding of how US aid serves
US interests. It concerned me that misperceptions were fuelling
an isolationist drive - undermining the imperatives of US
engagement.

It is not just the myth that we could trim the deficit if we cut
the 50% of the budget Americans mistakenly think we spend on
foreign aid. No matter what we spend, American have little sense
of what we gain with our investment. So, I have spent years
giving speeches, communicating with constituents, and holding
town meetings reinforcing the linkage between our aid and
interests.

The shortest bridge to cross this divide rests upon an
understanding that our resources are used to combat international
narcotics trafficking, terrorism and nuclear related crimes -
threats Americans really understand. Although the tragedy in
Okalahoma City shocked people into recognition of the danger
terrorism represents, our nation's drug problem hardly needs such
a seismic event to get attention.

Every community has a problem When I tell a gathering of
Kentuckians that 65% of the opium used in the heroin that swamps
our streets comes from Burma, they take note of Rangoon. When
they learn the military junta is harbouring one of the globe's
most notorious narco-warlords, they appreciate the need to
restore a democratic government which will join us in credible
effort to control drugtrafficking.

The Clinton Policy: Political narcolepsy
The Golden Triangle's deadly exports initially caught my eye, but
it is the(Clinton) administration's policy - or lack thereof -
which fixed my gaze. This is one of the few occasions where the
White House has been consistent; unfortunately they have been
consistently wrong.

As Suu Kyi has repeatedly emphasised since her release, Burma
today is not one step closer to democracy. Indeed, I think the
situation has seriously, dangerously and unnecessarily
deteriorated.

In November 1994, after a long, disheartening silence, Deputy
Assistant Secretary of State Tom Hubbard, travelled to Rangoon to
issue an ultimatum. The administration called international
attention to their new, toughline. Slorc was expected to make
concrete progress in human rights, narcotics and democracy.

If they were appropriately responsive, they could expect improved
ties. If not, in Hubbard's words, "the US bilateral relationship
with Burma could be further downgrade."

As most of us learn early in life, you don't taunt a bully. Slorc
moved swiftly to call our bluff. Major attacks were launched
against ethnic groups, generating tens of thousands of refugees.
Democracy activists were rounded up, tortured and killed.
Negotiations over Red Cross access to prisoners ground to a halt,
prompting the organisation to close its office in Rangoon.

And, the administration remained strangely silent. As the
situation worsened, and (US Ambassador to the UN) Madeleine
Albright was dispatched to repeat the message. This time it was
under scored with a personal meeting and statement of support for
dialogue with Suu Kyi.

Those of us who follow Burma were hopeful that our UN ambassador,
with a tough reputation, would press forward with a clear
strategy. Sadly, once again, Slorc rose - or should I say sunk -
to the occasion. The noose tightened around Suu Kyi and the NLD,
and the Administration shuffled past critics in silence.

Today, when I ask the State Department, "What is US policy?",
virtually every official tells me, "We share your goals, we
support Aung San Suu Kyi's cause." Unfortunately, this is a
transparent substitute of platitudes for progress. I know they
feel my pain - Burma's agony. They question is: what is the cure?

The course ahead: Status quo or sanctions?
After hollow policy pronouncements and weak-willed waffling from
the Administration, Slorc is convinced it will pay no price for
repression. We are left with few real options with the potential
for success. The business community, well represented here today,
prefers the status quo.

They suggest that our Asean partners will not support a strategy
of escalating isolation. A tougher line will only result in a
loss of market share to our French, Italian or other competitors.
They also argue economic progress will yield political results.
This is Vietnam. Burma is like China.

Well, I am a vocal advocate of MFN for China. I have supported
normalising relations with Vietnam. In both instances, we have
effectively used the economic wedge to pry open access to totally
closed societies. Trade is an important tool in these two cases
because it is our only tool. Burma is quite different.

In Burma, millions of people turned out to vote for the NLD. The
fact that they were robbed of the reward of free and fair
elections defines both America's opportunity and obligation. The
appropriate analogy with Burma is not China or Vietnam, it is
South Africa where our application of sanctions clearly worked -
just ask Nelson Mandela. That is the course I recommend the US
pursue.

In 1996, the advocates for democracy in Burma are facing the same
challenges as the 1986 opponents of apartheid. I heard exactly
the same arguments then, as I do now. Let me draw some parallels
for you. When Senators Roth, Dodd, and I introduced the first
sanctions bill a decade ago, both the Reagan Administration and
the business community argued the political value of our sizable
capital investment - US investment - was a meaningful catalysts
for change.

Major American corporations called attention t their hiring
policies, scholarship programmes, and contributions to hospitals,
schools and community development projects. In sum, I was told
that withdrawing US investment would hurt, not help, the common
man.

Not so, says Bishop Tutu. In an April letter to the Bay Area
Burma Roundtable he said, "The victory over apartheid in South
Africa bears eloquent testimony to the effectiveness of economic
sanctions."

There are other, relevant parallels. South Africa represented a
major fault line in Cold War struggle for power. With Soviet
proxy forces engaged in conflicts in Angola and Mozambique, South
Africa assumed an important position in our regional strategy.
The apparent Chinese colonisation of Burma should stimulate
similar interest. If there is a single issue which should cause
our Asean partners deep concern, it is the expanding military and
political ties between Rangoon and Beijing.

Like South Africa, Burma may not represent an immediate security
problem, but the long term trends demand our attention. In South
Africa, there was a grassroots, well organised, vocal African
American constituency supporting sanctions. In Burma, the
constituency should be every American community concerned by our
drug epidemic.

In South Africa, good corporate citizens developed a corporate
conscience and pulled out. In Burma, Amoco, Columbia Sportswear,
Macys, Eddie Bauer, Liz Claiborne, Levi Strauss, and now Pepsi
have answered the call to divest.

In South Africa, sanctions affected substantial, longstanding
foreign investment. In Burma, less is at stake and sanctions are
largely preemptive. But, American investment - however little -
is still propping up a few generals.

We are not improving the quality of life for most Burmese. US
capital is simply subsidising global shopping sprees for a
handful of Slorc officials and their families. Just as Slorc has
increased pressure on Burma's democracy movement, we must
increase pressure on Slorc.

I believe the time has come to ban US investment. We should cut
off a primary source of Slorc's power. This is the heart of the
Burma Freedom and Democracy Act which I introduced with Senators
Moynihan, D'Amato and Leahy. The Banking Committee will hold a
hearing on the bill this Friday (May 17), moving the bill one
step closer to final passage.

Since a companion bill in introduced by Congressman Rohrabacher
is also moving through the House, it is my hope that the US will
impose sanctions on Burma before (the US) congress adjourns.

A few weeks ago. Aung San Suu Kyi noted, "There is a danger that
those who believe economic reforms will bring political progress
to Burma are unaware of the difficulties in the way of
democratisation. Economic and politics cannot be separated, and
economic reforms alone cannot bring democratisation to  Burma."

She has emphatically opposed any foreign investment, calling
instead for the international community to take firm steps to
implement the 1990 elections. And, while she has stressed the
NLD's commitment to solving political problems through dialogue,
she recently warned the world that she was not prepared to stand
idly by as Slorc attacked her supporters.

Shortly after these remarks, Slorc surrounded her compound with
razor wire, effectively cutting off the thousands of loyal and
peaceful citizens who make a weekly pilgrimage to hear her speak.

Suu Kyi is prepared to accept her re-arrest. Although she is
under constant surveillance and severely limited in her
movements, she has not chosen to join her husband and children in
exile.

Suu Kyi has sacrificed over and over again to secure Burma's
freedom. Let us hope it will not take the sacrifice of her life
to impel this Administration to assume the mantle of leadership -
fitting for the only remaining superpower - and chart a course
for the ship we captain called liberty. (BP)

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

THE NATION: JAPAN AIRLINE SEEKS FLIGHTS TO RANGOON

May 26, 1996

Yindee Lertcharoenchoke, The Nation

JAPAN'S second largest national carrier, All Nippon Airways
(ANA), applied last Friday to the Japanese Ministry of Transport
for permission to operate two flights a week between Osaka and
Rangoon, the Burmese capital.

ANA spokesman in Tokyo, Anthony Concil, said the company expected
the approval to come through soon, allowing the carrier to
proceed with its first scheduled flight to Rangoon on July 16.

The airline would make an official announcement of its maiden
flight and begin booking and ticket sales when approval was
granted, he said.

"Approval usually does not take a long time," Concil said.

If the flight service proceeds as planned, ANA will be the first
Japanese carrier to operate direct flights between Burma and
Japan. The governments of the two countries made a bilateral
aviation agreements last year.

ANA has not yet fixed ticket fares for the six-hour non-stop
flights to leave every Tuesday and Sunday from Osaka's Kansai
Airport for Maingaladon airport in Rangoon.

The ANA flight will depart Kansai at 5:30 pm arriving in Rangoon
at 9:10 pm, and leave Mingaladon at 11 pm to arrived in Osaka at
7:25 am the next day.

The airline announced it would use a Boeing 767-300ER, and the
204 seats will be divided into two classes.

Passenger traffic to Burma has increased considerably in 1995
doubled the 1994 figures according to the airline.

ANA expects to carry 37,000 passengers on the route in the first
year of operation, Concil said.

The Japanese airline currently operates 500 domestic flights per
day and 250 international flights a week.

Under the Burmese-Japanese aviation agreement, a Burmese national
carrier can operate an equal number of flights on the same route.

However, an international airline source said he doubted if the
official Myanmar Airline had the potential or aircraft to fly
between Rangoon and Osaka at this time despite an increase in
passengers wanting to travel between the two countries.

Burma's signing of three key international conventions against
hijacking under the framework of the international Civil Aviation
Organization made the ANA flights possible. (TN)

***********

THE NATION: BURMESE LEADERS TAKE A BULLET IN THE FOOT

May 27, 1996

SINCE her release last July, Burmese opposition leader Aung San
Suu Kyi has come under increasing pressure to do something other
than haplessly wave olive branches at the military government.
Eight years after the military crushed a popular uprising and
installed itself in power, it seemed to be finally gaining the
upper hand in its struggle with Suu Kyi's NLD.

Foreign investment had began to surge, Rangoon's leaders had been
accepted to various regional and international forums, many of
the warring ethnic groups had agreed to stop fighting and most
civic dissent had been effectively snuffed out by the junta's
pervasive security network.

By the beginning of this year some Suu Kyi supporters were even
beginning to express disenchantment with her leadership. A potent
political symbol while under house arrest, Suu Kyi, it was said,
didn't have the ruthlessness needed for Asian-style power
politics.

The overriding feeling evoked by Burma was no longer indignity
but resignation.

In the last four days, however, the momentum appears to have
swung back again. Slorc is on the defensive and squirming under
the international spotlight. As if to form, it wasn't anything
that Suu Kyi did so much as the junta's gross over-reaction that
stirred international outrage.

Apparently panicked by Suu Kyi's call for an NLD assembly of
delegates who won seats in 1990 election, Slorc rounded up at
least 238 of the officials as well as 24 ordinary party
supporters. In some cases, they arrested delegates' wives when
the wanted NLD official couldn't be found.

The crackdown prevented Suu Kyi from holding a full conference,
which was only ever going to be a symbolic challenge anyway, and
handed her a huge public relations victory.

Diplomats from several Western Embassy showed up at the congress.
But more significantly they were joined in Suu Kyi's compound by
representatives from two of Slorc's most crucial diplomatic and
trading partners - Japan and Thailand.

The appearance of envoys from Tokyo and Bangkok is enormously
damaging to Slorc because key to its survival are not only
questions of guns and butter, but also the bigger issue of
legitimacy.

It is this matter that will decide the fate of the junta and it
is one that no longer has so much to do with the election held in
1990 as to who the world perceives realistically represents the
Burmese people in 1996.

Slorc's leaders believed they had done enough by throwing open
the economy to foreign investors to win over the stomachs and
minds of the Burmese people. Bur their behaviour is so repugnant
and uncompromising that they make it difficult for foreign
governments to comfortable deal with them.

The roundup was such as a heavy-handed action that it undermined
all Slorc's claims to represent the will of the people. It showed
them up or what they are -  a government that lives and rules by
fears.

It also prompted old international foes like Washington to step
up their diplomatic offensive.

Suu Kyi has repeatedly stressed the need to increase the pressure
on Slorc. Her stated goal is not the destruction of Slorc or the
Union of Burma but reconciliation of its many conflicting
parties.

The world is once again listening, even Thailand. Perhaps it is
time for the generals to open their ears to this modest message
as well. Suu Kyi has repeatedly stressed the need to increase the
pressure on Slorc. Her stated goal is not the destruction of
Slorc or the Union of Burma but reconciliation of its many
conflicting parties.

The world is once again listening, even Thailand. Perhaps it is
time for the generals to open their eyes and ears to this modest
message as well. (TN)

***********

THE NATION: US CLOSELY MONITORS SITUATION IN RANGOON

May 27, 1996

Reuter, AFP

WASHINGTON - THE White House on Saturday said it was "deeply
concerned" about arrests by the military in Burma and will
dispatch a special envoy to discuss a coordinated response with
European and Asian allies.

"The United States is deeply concerned by reports that the
military regime in Burma is detaining hundreds of members of the
democratic government," white House Press Secretary Mike McCurry
said in a statement.

He also urged Rangoon to release "immediately and
unconditionally" more than 250 members of the opposition NLD who
were arrested in the past week to prevent them from attending the
party congress, which began yesterday.

"We have urged the regime to release all the detainees
immediately and unconditionally and not to interfere with the
effort of the NLD to meet at a conference in Rangoon on Sunday,"
McCurry said.

He added that Washington would bring up the problems in Burma at
future G-7 meetings and at regional meetings in Asia.

McCurry said that the situation in Burma was "reviewed on Friday
at a senior-level White House meeting, where a decision was made
to dispatch an envoy to consult with European, Asia and other
friends and allies on a coordinated response."

An administration official, who asked not to be identified, said
it was expected that the White House will "make a decision early
next week" on naming the individual who will consult with allies.

"We are very interested in seeing how the events of this weekend
unfold" before recommending and allied response, the official
said. The statement added that the United States had informed
Rangoon's military leaders of its concern as well as members of
the international community. (TN)

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

THE NATION: SUU KYI TO HOLD MORE CONGRESSES

May 27, 1996

Associated Press

RANGOON - THROWING down a gauntlet to the Burmese military
regime, Aung San Suu Kyi opened an opposition congress yesterday
that the government had arrested hundred =s of her supporters to
stop and she vowed to hold several more.

Later, up to 10,000 people - four times the usual number and the
biggest opposition crowed in years - gathered outside the gates
of her compound to hear her customary weekend remarks. The size
of the crowed indicateed a renewed courage among ordinary Burmese
many believed had been cowed by the regime.

Authorities made no move to interfere with the crowd. The only
security forces visible were traffic police guiding vehicles away
from the throng, which remained peaceful.

More lively than usual, the crowd clapped and cheered as Suu Kyi
and other opposition leaders said they had tried of waiting for
the Slorc to meet their appeals for dialogue.

"The Slorc has broken a lot of promises," Suu Kyi said. "The
Slorc should make up all the promises they have broken. It;s time
they have changed their ways. It's better late than never."

Earlier, Suu Kyi delivered an opening conference speech that
marked her biggest challenge to the ruling junta since her
release from six year of house arrest last July. It signaled that
she not longer would allow the regime to simply ignore her
repeated calls for dialogue to bring democracy to Burma.

Rather than be cowed by a week of mass arrests, Suu Kyi declared
to the congress that her NLD would "increase out actions to
fulfil the will of the people and bring about national
reconciliation."

Though supporters applauded every sentence and chanted "Long Live
Aung San Suu Kyi," only 17 were original delegates to the party
congress, the opposition's most important planned meeting in six
years.

At least 238 other delegates languished in detention following a
nationwide roundup to prevent the meeting, which marks the sixth
anniversary of parliamentary elections in 1990 when Suu Kyi's
party won 392 of 458 contested seats.

Another 24 ordinary party members were also in custody, bringing
the total to 262, Suu Kyi said. Reports that one delegates had
died in custody were unfounded.

Suu Kyi said that the conference would end tomorrow. She refused
to discuss the party policy being debated until it ended.

Suu Kyi said the next congress could be held as early as a few
months from now - posing a new challenge to the legitimacy of the
junta, which refused to honor the 1990 election and pulled out
the stops to derail the current congress.

Though the meeting might have passed largely ignored, the arrests
last week catapulted Burma back into world head-lines and put new
scrutiny on the junta's courting of foreign companies eager to
profit by developing Burma's economy, destroy during 34 years of
military rule.

Wearing a traditional sarong, her hair tied back in jasmine
flowers, Suu Kyi indicated the opposition would keep the regime
under pressure by holding several more congress - implicitly
daring the junta to stop her further destroy its reputation.

"This is no longer a meeting of elected representatives of the
NLD," Suu Kyi said. "we have decided, therefore, this will be the
first in a series of NLD congress."

Suu Kyi spoke from a bamboo-and-thatch pavilion at her home
constructed especially for the event.

Banners displayed the emblem of her party, a fighting peacock.

There was no immediately response from government officials. The
state-controlled press, which ignores Suu Kyi's remarks,reported
on business deals and junta leaders visiting Buddhist shrines.

Diplomats from the United States, Japan, France, Britain and
Australia attended the meeting, evidence of a fresh wave of
international support for Burma's beleaguered opposition.

Suu Kyi declared that six years of denied rights and suffering
had merely strengthened the appetite of Burma's people for
democracy. (TN)

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

THE NATION: SUU KYI THE MODEL OF GRACE UNDER PRESSURE

May 27, 1996

Robert Horn, Associated Press

RANGOON - Aung San Suu Kyi may harbour some venom toward the
generals ruling her nation, but the unflappable, shrewd woman
leading Burma's pro-democracy the "cobra" they call her.

In an interview on Saturday, the petite titan of Burma's
opposition kept her renowned grace under pressure, while around
her the military regime took steps to suppress her democratic
movement.

For all the nervousness she showed, she might have been meeting
friends for a weekend chat. Dressed in a sarong and white blouse,
her hair decorated with jasmine flowers, Suu Kyi looked the
picture of tranquillity. "My mother taught me how to conquer
always said, 'You hope for the best, and you prepare for the
worst,' and I've always thought that's the best advice you can
give any politician."

Suu Kyi vowed that the meeting would go on, even if only one
person was able to attend. Volunteers hung banners with the party
emblem of a fighting peacock at her monsoon - stained home to
underscore the point.

"I think she's an extremely brilliant woman who's more astute
than that whole collection of guys who call themselves the
Slorc," said Josef Silverstein, Professor emeritus at Rutgers
University and writer on Burma for more than 40 years.

For outsiders who remember television footage of Suu Kyi staring
down soldiers with rifles in 1989 - or more recently saw the
events portrayed in John Brookman's film, "Beyond Rangoon" - Suu
Kyi embodies the struggle of ordinary Burmese for a say in their
lives.

Yet she's no ordinary woman. Her father, Aung San, let the fight
for independence first against Britain, then Japan, He was
assassinated by political rivals when she was only two.

Suu Kyi's quick wit, keen analytical mind and steely
determination also derive from her education, first in Burma,
then India, Britain and Japan. Much of that time was spent under
the tutelage of her mother, Khin Kyi, who serve as a diplomat.

"You must not underestimate out people," Suu Kyi said. "I may be
the figurehead of the organization because they believe in this
movement, not in me."

Maybe. But she remains a martyr figure whose humility and sense
of justice inspire awe, the way Mahatma Gandhi did in India and
Nelson Mandela in South Africa.

Her activities earned her a Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, as
Mandela's did two years later.

As it was for Gandhi, non-violence is Suu Kyi's guiding
principle. Careful not to reveal her next moves- spies are
rumoured to operate in her house - hold - since nonetheless says
she restrains party members who want to build barricades.

"Now is not the time for demonstrations, but we are not ruling
them out," she said. "There are other ways of making your country
ungovernable by an unpopular government."

The shop-lined warrens of Rangoon are quiet and do not look
ungovernable.

Afraid of arrest and worse, Burmese do not talk about politics
with outsiders and seem in no mood to try revolution.

The last time they tried, in 1988, hundreds were killed in the
streets and thousands more hunted down in the following months.

Suu Kyi loses her poise - only briefly - when told that critics
point to her people's silence as evidence the fight has gone out
of them and they no longer want democracy.

"We have fought," she said "You can not say the Burmese people
have not fought."

"We have lost a lot of lives and we have struggled... We are
fighting a non-violent battle - that is all." (TN)

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

THE NATION: TIME ASEAN RECOGNISED SUU KYI'S LEGITIMACY

May 27, 1996

Japan and the seven members of the regional group Asean hold the
key to influencing the future course of Burma, writes KAVI
CHONGKITTAVORN.

JAPAN and Asean are emerging as the most important foreign
influences on the future course of Burma. Japan's generous
financial and humanitarian assistance and Asean's unconditional
political support have permitted the military regime, officially
called Slorc, to consolidate its position and withstand mounting
pressure from the West since 1988.

The release of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi last July
manifested Slorc's increased confidence in its ability to handle
domestic problems as it moved to brush up its international image
and improve ties with the countries in the region, especially
Asean states. Growing confidence, or perhaps arrogance,
subsequently convinced Slorc leaders they they could pre-empt
yesterday's NLD meeting by detention more than 250 of its
members.

Of all the countries, Tokyo is best-placed to ensure that Slorc
does not incarcerate the opposition because the Slorc leaders
have good relations with Japan and that country's politicians.
Before Suu Kyi was freed the Japanese embassy was the only
country to be informed in advance.

It was not surprising that Japan was the first country to resume
the so-called "humanitarian aid" to Slorc immediately after her
release. Last year,Tokyo gave US$ 15.4 million (Bt 385million) to
Rangoon. Tokyo stopped its official aid to Burma after the 1988
coup but lifted the freeze last July and offered grants-in-aid
for programmes in nurse training.

Before 1993, countries like the US, Australia and Canada, and the
European Union were critical of Slorc. They had called for trade
sanctions against the regime which refused to surrender power
after losing the election in May 1990 and stands accused of
committing mass violations of human rights. Their attitudes have
some what softened mainly because of lobbying from Asean that the
situation would be better tracked by Slorc and the Burmese people
as well as countries in the region.

Sad but true, Asean has succeeded to a certain extent in the past
three years in bringing Slorc out of its cocoon and encouraging
it to participate in various activities. Burma, although Asean's
encouragement, attended numerous seminars on trade and economic
and political and security cooperation. The Slorc leadership's
coming out culminated with its attendance at a meeting for the
head of governments of Asean, Laos and Cambodia. Burma also
signed the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapons Free Zone last
December. In return, trade and investment between Burma and
individual Asean members has grown considerably.

Asean hopes that with repeated exposure and increased investment,
Slorc will charge for the better. That has not happened yet.
Rangoon has conceded little in the areas of democratisation and
human rights. That explained why Thailand, one of the strongest
supporters of Slorc, took a different line this time. Foreign
Ministry spokesman Surapong minced no words when he said Thailand
was concerned with last week's developments. He said the arrests
were considered counter-productive to the democratisation and
national reconciliation process in Burma.

Whether Thailand's tough response will prompt support from other
Asean members remains to be seen. At the least, Asean can no
longer ignore the Burmese issue and political developments there.
Asean needs to reappraise and, if need be, to forge a common
strategy in engaging Burma more seriously when its foreign
minister meet in mid-July in Jakata.

One of options is to initiate dialogue between Asean and Suu Kyi,
after years of negligence. Such action would strengthen her
demand for a meaningful dialogue with military leaders.

Asean's recognition of Suu Kyi will be a positive step in
bringing pressure to bear on Slorc. After all, Asean together
with Japan do have considerable leverage against the regime.
Postponing Burma's observer status in Asean and membership in the
upcoming Asean Regional Forum is an additional bargaining chip.

It is interesting to note that Asean has never adopted a common
position on Burma, especially on the constructive engagement
policy. This policy wad first pronounced by Thailand in July 1991
in Kuala Lumpur in defending its supports of Slorc against
growing criticism of Asean's western dialogue partners at the
time.

Since then, this policy has been mentioned or used by Asean
leaders sparingly. Each Asean country continues to pursue its
policy of Burma to ensure maximum benefit for itself, and its
trade and investments. Likewise, Asean has never criticised
Slorc. Among the dialogue partners, Japan has maintained the
highest profile in trade and economic cooperation.

In return, Burma has been trying to maximise its association with
Asean. Rangoon thought at the time that Suu Kyi's freedom would
win over Asean and gain it observer status in Asean and a seat in
the second Asian Regional Forum in Brunei last year.

To Slorc, it would serve as a rubber stamp for the much-needed
legitimacy. But it did not happen.

Most of the Western friends of Asean have now pursued a policy
that essentially follows in Asean's footsteps. They said that
they have common objectives to see a democratic Burma. They also
agreed to disagree on their approach toward Burma.

Some key political figures in the US have advocated  strong
measures against Slorc for last week's crackdown. But this
pressure has yet to translate into a tangible policy against
Slorc. For instance, Senator Mitch McConnell, chairman of the
Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, has
called for all-out trade sanctions against Burma. In the past,
former Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans has insisted that
Rangoon be set a series of benchmarks in exchange for
international acceptance. Releasing Suu Kyi was but a small step
toward that objective.

Granted their close ties Slorc, Japan and Asean could have done
more to positively influence the future course there. At the
least, they should hold firm that any deterioration of the
current political situation will not be welcome and it could
affect Burma's desire to integrate with the regional grouping.

Strategically speaking, both Japan and Asean see eye to eye that
Burma is too important to be left alone and excluded from the
Asean Regional Forum. They have learned one hard lesson that
leaving Burma out in the cold was to leave the door open for
China to play a more dominant role there. In a similar vein,
India, which used to strongly oppose Slorc, turned around and in
1994 began to court the regime as a balance to China.

In the final analysts, Japan and Asean can not go on backing
Slorc for the sake of countering the Chinese influence or merely
to prove the West wrong. They have to take into consideration the
public sentiment and the opposition's legitimacy.

After all, a future Asean member that is popular supported by the
Burmese people would be asset. A pariah nation joining mine the
organisation's credibility. (TN)

***********

BKK POST: RANGOON RISKS ALL WITH UNWISE WAVE OF ARREST

May 27, 1996

IT is difficult to know what the Burmese dictators are thinking
of in their new intimidation of the country's main pro-democracy
party. The detention of more than 200 supporters of Aung San Suu
Kyi puts new focus and lends new urgency to the campaign for a
free Burma. The Rangoon regime's aim was to halt the weekend's
long-scheduled meeting of Mrs Suu Kyi's NLD. It has risked much
by its ill-advised actions.

In the event, the NLD meeting got under way as scheduled,
although tensely. Most of its members who were elected to
parliament six years ago were missing, held at junta gunpoint.
Rangoon has called worldwide attention to its own brutal methods,
In Bangkok and elsewhere in the world, demonstrations were held
by sympathisers of Mrs Suu Kyi and Burmese democrats. Many
government protested, from the US to Australia, and from Tokyo to
London.

Of course, the furtive Slorc itself will not reveal its
intentions. Absurdly Foreign Minister Ohn Gyaw, who was in Japan
when the detentions began, said reports from Rangoon of the
detention were "fabricated". He will need a lot of luck to sell
that line. Nor was it, as the foreign minister claimed,
"difficult to verity including Aung San Suu Kyi are saying." If
the minister had turned on the television in his luxury hotel
suite, he could have been Mrs Suu Kyi speaking for herself.
Instead, he demonstrated how far behind the times the Rangoon
leadership really is.

Firsthand accounts from Rangoon described the mood as "grim".
News of the detentions spread fear of new political turmoil and
violence. An article in state-controlled newspapers last
Wednesday warned NLD supporters against holding their weekend
congress. The ominous Slorc warning said the meeting would be
illegal,meaningless and "also extremely dangerous for them."

Mrs Suu Kyi maintained her wellknown calm and optimism. With her
own survival once again threatened, she managed the type of quip
which has earned her admiration and the Nobel Peace Prize. "If
they want to arrest me, they can arrest me," she told a reporter.
"I'm always here."

Slorc has refused to deal with his fact since 1990, when the NLD
won Burmese elections by an overwhelming majority. Even if Slorc
violence wipes out the party, the pro-democracy mood of the
country will not go away. Mrs Suu Kyi's attempts to negotiate
national reconciliation and political progress have been rejected
by the junta. Just as seriously for Rangoon, the military leaders
have rejected attempts by others to promote improvement.

Slorc has made it difficult to support Burmese attempts to enter
the world and global economy. Japanese Ambassador Yochi Yamagushi
was negitiating between Slorc and Mrs Suu Kyi only hours before
the new wave of detentions began. The shuttle talks by the
Japanese envoy were specifically approved by Rangoon leaders.

Not that this is anything new for the junta. It has embarrassed
many attempts to help Rangoon improve its image by conciliatory
discussion. Even Thailand's questionable policy of "constructive
engagement" with Burma has been attacked and insulted. Successive
Thai governments have risked their very popularity with voters by
dubious support of Burmese policy. Our governments and our people
have been slandered for their trouble.

Slorc's actions in the next few days will be important. Although
we have little hope Rangoon will listen, we hope the regime will
reverse itself and defuse the anxiety. At the least, it should
release the detained NLD members and allow the party to meet in
peace. If the unthinkable occurs, and Mrs Suu Kyi is arrested
once again or the regime acts violently against her, Slorc will
risk everything.

So long as there is hope for reconciliation in Burma, Rangoon
will have a change to continue its show, controversial gains in
the world community. It is unlikely such rewards could continue
if Slorc again turns brutal. The regime's release of Mrs Suu Kyi
from house arrest last year resulted in some acceptance of the
junta by its neighbours and others. Any reversal of that policy
will be met by major outcry.

The Rangoon regime must realise, and then accept, that Burmese
have the right to choose both their own system of government and
leaders. As Lord Budddha pointed out, the only thing constant in
our world is change. Slorc and the dictatorship are not immune to
this law. The only questions is how a change will come to Burma's
political landscape. One can only hope it will come peacefully.
Cordial negotiations on national reconciliation should be the
goal of all Burmese. (BP)
----------------------------------------------------------
BURMANET SUBJECT-MATTER RESOURCE LIST

BurmaNet regularly receives enquiries on a number of different
topics related to Burma. If you have questions on any of the
following subjects, please direct email to the following
volunteer coordinators, who will either answer your question or
try to put you in contact with someone who can:

Campus activism:        zni@students.wisc.edu
Boycott campaigns: [Pepsi] ai268@freenet.carleton.ca
Buddhism:                    Buddhist Relief Mission:
brelief@gol.com
Chin history/culture:        plilian@asc.corp.mot.com
Fonts:                                  tom@cs.colgate.edu
History of Burma:            zni@students.wisc.edu
International Affairs:  Julien Moe: moe@gramercy.ios.com
Kachin history/culture:      74750.1267@compuserve.com
Karen history/culture:  Karen Historical Society:
102113.2571@Compuserve.com
Mon history/culture:         [volunteer needed]
Naga history/culture:   Wungram Shishak:
z954001@oats.farm.niu.edu
Burma-India border            [volunteer needed]
Pali literature:                 "Palmleaf":  c/o
burmanet@igc.apc.org
Rohingya culture                Kyaw Oo: myin@erols.com
Shan history/culture:   Sao Hpa Han: burma@ix.netcom.com
Shareholder activism:       simon_billenness@mail.cybercom.net
Total/Pipeline          Dawn Star: cd@utopia.EUnet.fr
Tourism campaigns:              bagp@gn.apc.org     "Attn.
S.Sutcliffe"
World Wide Web:              FreeBurma@POBox.com
Volunteering:                   christin@ksc.net.th

[Feel free to suggest more areas of coverage]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---

The BurmaNet News is an electronic newspaper covering Burma.
Articles from newspapers, magazines, newsletters, the wire
services and the Internet as well as original material are
published.
It is produced with the support of the Burma Information Group
(B.I.G) and the Research Department of the ABSDF {MTZ}

The BurmaNet News is e-mailed directly to subscribers and is
also distributed via the soc.culture.burma and seasia-l
mailing lists. For a free subscription to the BurmaNet News, send
an e-mail message to: majordomo@igc.apc.org

For the BurmaNet News only: in the body of the message, type
"subscribe burmanews-l" (without quotation marks).
For the BurmaNet News and 4-5 other messages a day posted on
Burma issues, type "subscribe burmanet-l"

Letters to the editor, comments or contributions of articles
should be sent to the editor at: strider@igc.apc.org

