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

The BurmaNet News: September 13, 1996
Issue #513
Noted in Passing: 

                It was like talking to answering machines with carefully
                censored pre-recorded messages - service correspondent
                at the SLORC press conference (see: IPS: FOREIGN 
                REPORTERS FROWN AS RANGOON FORCES A SMILE)

HEADLINES:
==========
ASIAN WALLTREET JOURNAL: MYANMARS GO TO COURT
ABSDF: INTERIM STATEMENT ON REUNIFICATION STATEMENT
RANGOON RADIO: NLD MP FROM SHAN STATE RESIGNS  
IPS: FOREIGN REPORTERS FROWN AS RANGOON FORCES A SMILE
ANNOUNCEMENT: AUNG SAN SUU KYI ON PEPSI: TAPES AVAILABLE
HRWA: PROTECTION NEEDED FOR MUSLIM  REFUGEES
THE NATION: TOUGHER STAND SOUGHT IN BATTLE AGAINST JUNTA
SCMP: THAI COMPANY TO EXPLORE GOLD, COPPER IN MYANMAR
NATION: LETTER - ABOMINABLE SLORC
BKK POST: SIX DKBA MEN KILLED IN ATTACK
BKK POST: BURMESE MUSIC COMES OUT FROM UNDER A HARD ROCK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------

ASIAN WALLTREET JOURNAL: MYANMARS GO TO COURT
September 6 -7, 1996 (Review and Outlook)

On the whole, it has seemed inappropriate to us for foreign nationals to
bring legal battles that belong in other jurisrictions to the US court system.
As long as there are some American judges who can't resist a high - publicity
case, however, the hopefuls will keep coming. Ask the attorneys who
persuaded California federal Judge Manuel Real to order Swiss Banks to pay 
Philipino ligitants in a tourture and suffering case against there deceased
President, Ferdinand Marcs.

But one difference between that case and the action filed in California Tuesday 
by Burmese dissedents and democrats is that the target this time is an
American company, the oil giant Unocal. The other difference is that the
plaintiffs don't need to win any money to claim victory. As Unocal itself
has acknowledged, the motive for the suit is chiefly 'political'.

The thrust of the complaint is that Unocal, by participating in a $1.2billion
natural gas project in Burma, is implicated in human rights violations
committed by Burma's State Law and Order Council, SLORC. The plaintiffs
are a US based exile group calling themselves The Natonal Coalition Government
of Burma, and the Thailand based Federation of Burmese trade Unions.
The suit does not accuse Unocal - which is building the Yadana gas pipeline 
in partnership with SLORC and France's Total SA - of any wrong doing.
But it alleges that the American company knew of or should have known
that it's Burmeses partners were deporting villagers and engaging in other 
abuses to facilittate construction. Among other charges, the suit alleges that 
Unocal is "vicariously liable" for the use of thousands of forced labourers
to clear jungle, build a road along the pipeline route and work on a railroad.

Unocal is hopping mad. The allegations filed in a US federal court Tuesday
have been haunting the company like a bad dream for several years. Now , as 
always, Unocal strenuously denies that it or SLORC has done anything wrong
on the project. In a statement released Tuesday, Unocal calls the lawsuit
"frivilous" and says that "all people who work on the pipeline are paid a better
than average wage, people have been more than compensated for any land use
and villages are in the same place they always have been."

Given the seriousness of the charges, many of which have been documented
elewhere in Burma in the past, there remains a compelling moral interest in 
discovering the truth. Unocal' problem is that no matter how many times it
says that the Yadana project "is an outstanding model of economic 
development" no one can know for sure, because Burma is the kind of place 
where foreigners are not permitted to wander freely. In a country where even
clowns are in prison for making practical jokes, getting information from
the locals is dangerous for all involved.

If Unocal wants to clear it's name, a day in a US court may not be bad way,
because there the Burmese plaintiffs will be held to a far more rigorous
standard of proof than that required on the Internet and  university campus
bulliten boards.

Meanwhile, Unocal's protests that it is being persecuted fall on deaf ears.
No one forced the company into partnership with one of the most reviled
regimes. When it signed on with SLORC, Unocal evidently thoiught the 
rewards were worth the risk. Unfortunately instead of reforming itself out
of power, SLORC has appeared to have interpreted the steadfastness of 
companies like Unocal and countries like Thailand as a green light to
arrest more, not fewer, Burmese freedom lovers. Can anybody be surprised
if some of the mud thrown at SLORC has landed on the shirts of people 
standing nearby?

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

ABSDF: INTERIM STATEMENT ON REUNIFICATION STATEMENT
September 12, 1996
From: "All Burma Students' Democratic Front" <lurie@mozart.inet.co.th>

On the 11th of September 1996, the Thailand Times newspaper
reported that, due to the Moe Thee Zun faction refusing to agree
to the voting process, there is a "deadlock" in the ABSDF
reunification conference.

The ABSDF reunification conference states that this report is
unfounded and totally wrong. As the leaderships of both factions
had prepared well in advance for the reunification talks, the
process is proceeding smoothly. All of us have also agreed that
there will be ballot to elect the central committee that will
lead the ABSDF. Since we are making decisions for the working
programs and the strategy to enable the front to achieve success
in the democratic struggle, we are taking more time than estimated.

The report by the Thailand Times newspapers on the 11th of
September is totally wrong and different from what is taking
place. This reunification conference was called with aim of unity
in our thoughts and the result will be one ABSDF.

We stated that very soon conference will be concluded
successfully with promise for the removal of the dictatorship and
progress of the democratic movement.

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

RANGOON RADIO: NLD MP FROM SHAN STATE RESIGNS  
September 6, 1996

[Translated Text] U Hlaing alias U Tun Hlaing of
the National League for Democracy [NLD], an elected member
of the People's Assembly in Yawnghwe Township Constituency-
1, Shan State during the Multiparty Democratic General
Elections, citing poor health, has submitted his resignation
out of his own volition to withdraw as elected
representative. 

The Multiparty Democratic General Election Commission
has accepted his resignation effective today in accordance
with Section 11, Subsection E of the People's Assembly
Election Law. 

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

IPS: FOREIGN REPORTERS FROWN AS RANGOON FORCES A SMILE
September 10, 1996
By Teena Gill

     BANGKOK, Sep 10 (IPS) - Burma's military rulers have for years paid
     little regard to the various attacks on the regime by the foreign
     media, but under pressure from international investors, Rangoon is
     starting to sit up and take notice.

             But critics of the military junta say the regime has so many
     skeletons in its cupboard and so little public relations skills that
     the attempted media-friendly approach is unlikely to
     achieve  the objective of cleaning up the tarnished image of the
     Burmese  authorities.

             As part of the new approach, Burmese officials held a rare
     press  briefing for more than 20 Rangoon-based foreign journalists
     eaier this month and appealed to them to report events in the
     country ''objectively''.

             Though journalists present were eager to take in the usually
     hard  to get 'official comments', there was reported
     disappointment all  around when ministers stonewalled all questions
     about Burma's  human rights record.

             ''It was like talking to answering machines with carefully
     censored pre-recorded messages,'' a wire service correspondent who
     attended told IPS. He did not want his name revealed for fear  that
     the authorities might bar him from re-entering Burma.

             But the regime made the most of it with the junta's
     mouthpiece 'Newlight of Myanmar' carrying a huge splash on the press
     briefing  even publishing individual pictures of attending
     journalists.

             According to Rangoon based analysts, the Burmese junta's
     change in strategy towards foreign media began back in July because
     of pressure from foreign investors who themselves are under
     constant  attack from human rights campaigners urging them to
     withdraw from  Burma (also known as Myanmar).

             In recent months activist campaigns and media pressure in
     North America and Europe have forced multinationals like Pepsi,
     Carlsberg and Heineken to withdraw from Burma and those foreign
     investors that remain are worried they too will be targeted by pro-
     democracy forces.

             The regime is also unhappy with the reported poor response to
     its  declaration of 1996 as a 'Visit Burma Year', which it has
     blamed  on ''hostile foreign media coverage''.

             The response of the State Law and Order Restoration Council
     (SLORC) as the regime calls itself, has been to revive its
     information committee to brief foreign journalists every month about
     their viewpoint of events in and round Burma.

             Official media in Burma is reported to have cut down on its
     attacks on pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi on the premise that
     even bad publicity is better than no publicity.

             Almost in tandem, foreign companies like oil giants Total and
     UNOCAL have also increased their public relations efforts by
     sending press releases and information 'fact sheets' to journalists
     around the world.

             The oil companies have come under attack from human rights
     group  and Burmese dissidents for allegedly using ''forced labour''
     at  their pipelines and drilling installations inside Burma.

             Notably, the military regime has not confined its efforts to
     wooing foreign journalists visiting Rangoon but has extended its
     public relations efforts also to Bangkok, from where a number of
     critical English language dailies are published and often
     smuggled  into Burma for dissemination.

             In August, countering news reports in Bangkok criticising the
     sentencing of Suu Kyi's personal assistant Win Htein to more
     than  14 years in prison, the Bangkok based Burmese embassy wrote a
     letter to national dailies ''explaining'' the reasons behind the
     action.

             According to the embassy, Win Htein, a former Burmese Army
     captain, was 'guilty' of arranging a video recording showing the
     failure of the summer rice crop in some parts of the Burmese
     countryside. The embassy claimed the video was part of a
     ''conspiracy'' to spread ''disinformation'' and ''confusion''.

             ''The military regime's attempt at public relations reminds
     one of the adage that it is better to keep your mouth shut and let
     people wonder whether you are a fool than to open it and remove all
     doubt,'' says Aung Naing Oo, a Bangkok-based dissident student
     leader.

             He argues that no amount of positive media coverage --
     particularly botched attempts -- can camouflage certain basic facts
     about the regime's human rights record.

             In May, more than 260 members and supporters of Suu Kyi's
     National League for Democracy (NLD) were detained as the
     authoities vainly tried to prevent the pty from holding a
     major  congress.        Most have been released, but continue to
     suffer harassment.

             ''If the regime can sentence someone to 14 years in prison
     for making a video recording like the case of Win Htein, you can
     imagine how brutal it is,'' says Aung Naing Oo.

             In Burma, the military has ruled the country with an iron
     fist since the early 1960s. But it was in 1988 following the violent
     crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in which hundreds were
     killed due to indiscriminate firing by soldiers that the extent
     of  the regime's ruthlessness was reported to the outside world.

             The regime's image has not got any better.

             One year after the crackdown, the regime put Suu Kyi under
     house  arrest -- she was only released last year -- and in 1990 the
     junta  refused to give up power after being trounced by the NLD in
     parliamentary elections.

             Meanwhile, international human rights groups have documented
     several instances of how the junta has been using and continues
     to  abuse the rights of ethnic minorities in building the country's
     infrastructure.

             Analysts point out that having successfully clung onto power
     all  these years despite international condemnation, the regime
     is now  craving for respectability.

             Aiding the regime in its efforts to attain greater
     international  recognition in recent years are countries like
     Malaysia and  Indonesia which have used their strong influence in
     the  Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) to bring Burma
     into the fold of the regional body.

             This year, Burma was invited officially for the first time as
     an  observer at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) at a meeting in
     Jakarta. Since then, the regime has applied for full membership
     of  the grouping and Malaysia has indicated it is keen to have Burma
      join the body as early as next year. 

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

ANNOUNCEMENT: AUNG SAN SUU KYI ON PEPSI: TAPES AVAILABLE
Spetember 12, 1996
From: zni@students.wisc.edu (zar ni)

We are distributing audiotape copies of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's phone
interview wherein she made specific comments (about 2 and half minutes) on
PepsiCo's "withdrawal".  For those spiders who are persuading their
university procurement and other officials not to do business with PepsiCo,
her comments are right on and to the point. This tape is one of the most
potent tools in presenting our case before city councils, student
governments, faculty senates, and other university officials including
presidents, boards of regents and trustees, and procurement officers.
Coming directly from the legitimate leader of Burma's democracy movement
and an elected government, the statement that PepsiCo is still in Burma is
very very powerful.  And playing this tape before relevant bodies of
officials is highly recommended.

The tape is about 10 minutes in length and has been aired nationally on the
Pacifica Radio Network and other stations.  Thanks are due to Leslie Kean,
the co-director of Burma Project/USA in Mill Valley, California for giving
the FBC permission to reproduce the tapes for the Pepsi Boycott campaign.

We request $5 donation per tape to cover the cost (mailing, padded
envelopes, tapes, etc.) and the FBC members donated labor. Please
make checks payable to "Free Burma Coalition" and mail them to The Free
Burma Coalition, University of Wisconsin, 225 N. Mills St., Madison, WI
53706

After they lost their bids to Harvard and Stanford dining services ($1
million and $4-6 million loss respectively) due to the efforts of our
colleagues in those schools in particular and the growing Free Burma
movement in general in the US, PepsiCo announced its "withdrawal" from
Burma this past April.

Now PepsiCo is waging an agressive PR campaign to whitewash its image on
campuses. It has been sending out letters to the University Procurement
Divisions. It is giving away Pepsi drinks in public areas on campuses. It
is sending their PR managers and local reps to talk to student governments
at various schools.  The major official line is something like the
following:

We have withdrawn from Burma.  So we are no longer bad. So please take our
products back.

PepsiCo has not withdrawn from Burma at all.

  Their announcement was a calculated PR move to placate the growing Pepsi
Boycott movement.  They continue to have licensing agreements with their
local contractor who has led mass rallies echoing the SLORC's call for
annihilation of Burma democracy activists and supporters.

History of PepsiCo and Burma:

1991 PepsiCo began its operation in Burma by entering a joint venture with
local businessman Thein Tun

1996 April

PepsiCo got kicked out of  Harvard dining services for failing to dislose
the list of farm product suppliers (Pepsi was engaged in "countertrade"
whereby it was trading in products that were produced by slave labor (i.e.,
ordinary Burmese citizens including children working at gunpoint by the
SLORC trrops). Countertarde here means, according to PepsiCo, "a barter
system, whereby PepsiCo purchases and sells products (i.e., rattan, mung
beans, sesame seeds) to pay for concentrate and other imported materials."
On the one hand, PepsiCo maintained, and still maintains, publicly " Our
overall belief is that global trade is a humanizing and positive influence
in the world."  On the other hands, PepsiCo was knowingly buying products
out of slave labor farms!

PepsiCo lost its bid to open a late-night restaurant (Taco Bell!!) at
Stanford University student union when 2,000 students signed pepition, in a
matter of several days, to protest the prospect of Taco being on their campus.

Pepsi was  removed from the list of available soft drinks at Colgate
University, NY provided by the Marriot Corp.

PepsiCo and it's subsidairies most notably Taco Bell, Kentucky Fried
Chicken, Pizza Hut continued to find themselves confronted with grassroots
consumer boycotts at over 70 colleges and a smaller number number of high
schools where Free Burma folks were active.

PepsiCo could not provide services and goods to city councils of Ann Arbor,
Berkeley, Madison, Oakland, Santa Monica, Oakland, San Francisco because of
its involvement in Burma.

PepsiCo Board of Directors was publicly challenged by the socially
responsible shareholders such as Rev. Joe LaMar of Maryknoll Fathers and
Brothers and Simon Billenness of Franklin Research and Development at their
annual shareholder meeting.  The Interfaith Center on Corporate
Responsibility sponsored a shareholder resolution calling on PepsiCo to
terminate its business in Burma "until political prisoners are released and
political power is transferred to the democratically-elected government of
Burma".  PepsiCo management got enough votes to defeat the resolution.

PepsiCo announced its "withdrawal" from Burma and sold 40% equity interest
to the local business partner, but said that the it would keep the franchise
agreement for several more years.  To this day, PepsiCo continues to supply
their local contractor with cola syrup, sells its formula, and maintains a
licensing agreement.

In response to PepsiCo's outrageous lies, the Free Burma Coalition announed
its October Fast for Burma.

News stories about Burmese citizens and students boycotting Pepsi products
inside Burma appeared in Thai and other international newspapers.

May 1996
PepsiCo was criticised by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi for continuing to do
business in Burma.

Summer 1996
PepsiCo came up with a "new" argument that they are merely a third party
trader in the Bruma market and that they are just fulfilling the contractual
obligation.

Fall 1996
Campus-based Pepsi Boycott movement is going full steam ahead with several
groups meeting with their college presidents, dinining services officers,
and procurement managers.  City and community-activists are also working on
Burma city council ordinances whereby PepsiCo will be denied business
opportunities with the City.

October Fast for Burma (Oct. 7 noon -Oct. 9 noon)

Sources: PepsiCo in Burma: Pepsi-Cola Products Myanmar Ltd.: A Report to
Shareholders; The Proxy Resolutions Book (January 1996), ICCR, New York;
Free Burma listserv; BurmaNet.

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

HRWA: PROTECTION NEEDED FOR MUSLIM  REFUGEES
September 13, 1996 (Human Rights Watch Asia)
From: hrwatchuk@gn.apc.org

In The Rohingya Muslims - Ending a Cycle of Exodus?,
released today, Human Rights Watch/Asia documents the
repatriation of more than 200,000 Burmese Muslims from
Bangladesh to their home state in northern Burma, and
concludes that the arrival of an estimated 10,000 new refugees
by the end of May 1996 raised important questions about the
role of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
(UNHCR) and about the promotion of  voluntary  return to
countries with particularly abusive governments.
     
On September 3, 1996, the Bangladesh Foreign Minister,
Abdud Samad Azad, started a three day visit to Rangoon to
discuss, among other things, the repatriation of nearly 50,000
Burmese Muslim refugees remaining out of the 270,000 who fled
to Bangladesh in 1992.  But even as these discussions took
place, new asylum-seekers were fleeing Burma. In the week of
August 26, two refugees reportedly died after they stepped on
landmines as they tried to cross the border into Bangladesh. 
On April 20, fifteen others drowned when their boat capsized
while being towed across the Naf river back to Burma by
Bangladesh border guards. The cycle of exodus is clearly not over.
     In February and March 1996, Human Rights Watch/Asia
interviewed some of the early arrivals in the new influx of
refugees to Bangladesh and found that forced labor, lack of freedom
of movement, and the forcible disappearance of family members
triggered their exodus.  The 34-page report, based on those
interviews and other data collected since then, documents a pattern
of continuing discrimination against the Muslims in Arakan state,
from the denial of citizenship to forced relocations and forced labor.    

     The UNHCR signed agreements with the governments of Bangladesh
and Burma in May and November 1993, giving the UNHCR a role in
repatriation on both sides of the border. The repatriation of
thousands of Burmese has taken place in the context of developments
within the UNHCR, which has seen a shift from providing refugee
relief to promoting voluntary repatriation as the most durable
solution to refugee problems.  

     UNHCR officials and the UNHCR annual report have cited the
Rohingya repatriation as a success and vindication of this new
position.  Human Rights Watch/Asia strongly questions the degree to
which the rights of the refugees have been protected in the
process. A draft of Human Rights Watch/Asia's findings was sent to
the U.N. High Commissioner, Mrs. Sadako Ogata in Geneva; comments
from her office have been incorporated in the final text.  However,
differences of opinion and interpretation between Human Rights
Watch and the UNHCR inevitably remain, notably on the issue of the
voluntariness of the repatriation at different times. 

     There is no dispute that the first stage of the repatriation,
between September 1992 and the end of 1993, was forced.  At the
time, the UNHCR was not present in Burma and had no agreement with
the Burmese government to provide assistance to returnees.  Even
more seriously, while the UN agency was present in the camps in
Bangladesh, it could not prevent major abuses, including beatings
and the denial of food rations by camp authorities directed at
forcing the refugees back to Burma. 

     The second repatriation effort took place after the UNHCR had
established a limited field presence in Arakan state in early 1994.
It began promoting mass repatriation on the grounds that the
situation in Arakan was now conducive to return, and it gave up the
hard-won right to interview each refugee individually to ensure
that she or he was returning voluntarily. Human Rights Watch/Asia
examines the extent to which the refugees have been able to make
fully informed decisions about their return, based on knowledge of
their right to request continued asylum and objective information
about conditions in Arakan.  It also looks at various elements of
the reintegration program and the consequences of the UNHCR having
as its implementing agency or government partner an ostensibly
civilian agency that in some parts of Arakan is under the direct
command of the military. 

     Human Rights Watch/Asia applauds the UNHCR s efforts to work
toward preventing refugee outflows by promoting human rights, but
notes that the UNHCR has in many cases avoided addressing human
rights concerns in Arakan. In particular, the UNHCR must ensure
that it does not neglect its responsibilities to the refugees in a
situation where there is a conflict of interest: where the need to
publicize and advocate against continued abuses takes second place
to the need to maintain good relations with both the country of
origin and the host country. The UNHCR s policy since June 1996 of
discouraging and reportedly assisting the government to prevent
possible asylum seekers from leaving Burma is a cause for great concern.  

      In the final analysis, the refugee problem will not be solved
until and unless the Rohingyas are recognized as citizens by the
Burmese government and granted the rights they are currently
denied,  said Zunetta Liddell, Human Rights Watch/Asia s London-
based research associate.  They will remain a vulnerable group,
always ready to flee if the alternative is to suffer further abuse.
   
     Human Rights Watch/Asia recommends that the Burmese government
(SLORC, or State Law and Order Restoration Council) immediately
amend or repeal the 1982 Citizenship Act to abolish its over-
burdensome requirements for citizens in a manner which has
discriminatory effects on racial or ethnic minorities, and to grant
the Muslims of Arakan State full citizenship and accompanying
rights, in particular the right to freedom of movement.  The SLORC
should also cease the practice of forced labor in Arakan State and
across Burma in compliance with the 1930 ILO Convention on Forced
Labor which the government signed in 1955, and it should permit the
new UN Special Rapporteur to Burma to visit the area on his mission
later this year, and he should be guaranteed free and confidential
access to residents.

Human Rights Watch/Asia also urges the Bangladesh government
of Sheikh Hasina to state unequivocally that it will permit
individuals to seek asylum. In doing so, it should provide
objective information to refugees on which they can make an
informed decision to return and should ensure that refugees are
fully aware of their right to protection from refoulement if they
can establish a well-founded fear of persecution if they are
returned. Bangladesh is obliged to give all asylum seekers the
opportunity to claim refugee status. The Bangladesh government
should demonstrate its commitment to international human rights
standards by becoming a party to the 1951 Convention Relating to
the Status of Refugees and the 1967 Protocol. Even without having
become a party to the Convention, Bangladesh should fulfill  its
obligations with regard to the principle of non-refoulement which
is customary international law.

     Finally, Human Rights Watch/Asia calls on the UNHCR to conduct
a thorough evaluation of its policy of promoting mass repatriation
to Arakan State at a time when the situation there has not
substantially improved. Under current circumstances, if the
conditions in Arakan State deteriorate, UNHCR should not tolerate
violations by the Bangladesh government of the right to seek asylum
or the principle of non-refoulement.  The UNHCR should also
reassess its classification of Burmese Muslims newly arrived in
Bangladesh from Burma as  economic migrants  and seek assurances
from Bangladesh that they will not be returned against their will
without having had the opportunity to apply for refugee status. 

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

THE NATION: TOUGHER STAND SOUGHT IN BATTLE AGAINST JUNTA
September 12, 1996

UNITED NATIONS - A Burmese opposition leader urged Socialist International
yesterday to take a "stronger and more concrete stand" against the military
government in Burma.

In a speech to the organisation's 20th congress, Win Khet of the National
League for Democracy said democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi remains in
danger despite her release last year from six years of house arrest.

Win Khet told the congress that diplomatic efforts by Japan and Southeast
Asian governments to engage Burma in dialogue have failed to achieve any
relaxation in curbs against democracy.

"It is clear.... that the Burmese generals are determined not to change," he
said. "Instead of reconciliation, they are intent on destroying all opposition."

He said it was time "for governments, especially those represented in the
Socialist International, to take a stronger and more concrete stand." Win
Khet expressed appreciation for Denmark's efforts to urge the European Union
to impose sanctions on the military government.

"I sincerely urge the other nations represented here to also act," Win Khet
said. "Unless the Burmese generals are told that their actions will not be
tolerated, they will continue to ruthlessly suppress the Burmese democracy
movement."

Win Khet said democracy activists "cannot rule out the possibility that they
(generals) will act against Aung San Suu Kyi. She is in personal danger." He
did not elaborate.

Despite the grim picture, Win Khet said prospects for change were not
hopeless. He said Burma's economic problems were adding pressure on the
regime but were also creating a severe shortage of goods.

"Domestic support for the democracy movement is growing," he said. "People
are becoming more outspoken and even the ethnic armies that have signed
ceasefires with (the generals) are beginning to coordinate their calls for
political dialogue and democratic reforms."

He also cited campaigns by labour unions, non-governmental organisations and
some politicians in the United States, India, Japan, Australia, Taiwan and
Western Europe on behalf of the democracy movement.

Socialist International, an association of 120 democratic socialist parties
worldwide, opened its 20th congress at the UN headquarters on Monday.

Delegates are discussing issues such as globalisation, security and ways to
promote social democratic ideals during an era when state management of the
economy has fallen out of favour. (TN)

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

SCMP: THAI COMPANY TO EXPLORE GOLD, COPPER IN MYANMAR
September 10, 1996 (South China Morning Post)

Thailand's Asia Investment Co. Ltd. will conduct mineral prospecting,
exploration and feasibility study on potential deposits of gold, copper and base
metal in southern Myanmar's Shan state, official daily the New Light of
Myanmar reported today.  Under the agreement signed here monday between 
the Thai company and Myanmar's department of geological survey and mineral 
exploration of the ministry of mines, the exploration will be carried out in 
Pindaya and Ywangan regions.  Asia Investment Co. Ltd. is the second Thai 
company that entered agreement with myanmar this year to explore gold and 
copper after Atina Time Square Ltd.  The report quoted Myanmar Minister for 
Mines, Lt. Gen. Kyaw Min, as saying that Myanmar has provided initial tax 
exemption and a better investment climate to encourage foreign companies 
investing in Myanmar to proceed to the production stage.  According to official 
statistics, approved foreign investment in Myanmar's mining sector has exceeded 
322 million US dollars in 28 related projects as of the end of may this year.  
A total of 15 foreign companies have been involved in mineral explorations in 
Myanmar. They are from Australia, Canada, Singapore, Thailand and the 
United States.

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

NATION: LETTER - ABOMINABLE SLORC
September 12, 1996

In reply to Joe Cummings' argument that a boycott of tourism
would ill-serve the people of Burma, I have to disagree.

The call for a boycott from the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi was in
response to Slorc's announcement of a tourism campaign known as 
Visit Myanmar Year 1996, which was initially supposed to start at
the beginning of this year. It is now officially starting in
November. The pro-democracy movement has always stated that to
support this campaign means supporting Slorc; staying away until
after this tourism campaign ends is a way of showing your support
to the movement for democracy and human rights in Burma. Nobody
is suggesting that you seal off the country to the outside world,
but given that sanctions occur, the tourism campaign is totally
boycotted, and Cummings' book has low sales, how arrogant to
think that with foreigners unable to visit Burma Slorc's
oppression would be worse. Does he really think that the Burmese
people are unable to bring their situation to the international
community themselves?

The author is wrong when he states that many foreigners leading
the boycott movement haven't been to Burma in years.

Firstly, the boycott movement was initiated and supported by the
Burmese democracy movement and in partnership with foreign
activists. The Burmese people are not able to speak out without
repercussions. To avoid the risk of imprisonment, through
relationships with those who can speak out, information is
distributed.

Secondly, a lot of the information that came from the country
supported by photographs was done by people who have travelled
extensively throughout the country and continue to do so.

To say that the average Burmese is politically better off
now is ridiculous. There is still a one-party system, laws are
arbitrarily announced in response to any successful initiative
from the opposition, meetings are banned, gatherings are
forbidden and freedom of the press remains a distant. dream as ever.

Ethnic rights are ignored, health and education put on the back
burner, and economic policies are catered for the elite, their
family and friends. The army controls the country and in that
position conducts horrendous human rights abuses in rural areas,
including Slorc-controlled territory.

I would also like to respond to Cummings' statement about the
Moustache Brothers but I can't, because it would make their
situation and that of their families more difficult than it
already is. To use them in this article to support tourism is
nothing more than disgusting. They cannot respond from the labour
camps, or the tiny prison cells where they are chained like dogs
to each other.

To say that the greatest human rights abuses currently taking
place are shielded from the foreign public's view is about the
only correct fact that Cummings has stated.

However, how does one define the greatest human rights abuse? For
a person living in urban Burma, under the watchful and active eye
of the military intelligence personnel, knowing that to do what
most people consider a normal and not radical form of behaviour,
such as writing a poem or meeting friends to discuss their lives,
could land you in jail for up to seven years.

Or is it the farmer who is forced to either become a porter for
the army, or labour for nothing for the "development" projects?

Or is it the woman who was elected by the majority of the people,
placed under house arrest, "freed" and then publicly insulted by
the regime and made to fight for her right to speak to the people
who voted for her?

As for his comment on the restoration of Mandalay Palace,
Cummings is incorrect when he states that forced labour was
discontinued and convicts used instead. Many of my friends who
live in and around Mandalay were still forced to work for the
restoration work done at the palace even after this abuse was
exposed to the world.

The author presents himself as a non-biased observer of the
current situation in Burma but goes on to say that he is the
principle author of the Lonely Planet Guide books to that
country. It need hardly be said that a travel boycott of Burma
would significantly reduce the sales of his book.

In the author's own words, "The State Law and Order Restoration
Council (Slorc) ... is abominable.

Faith Doherty 
Southeast Asian Information 
Network 
Chiang Mai

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

BKK POST: SIX DKBA MEN KILLED IN ATTACK
September 12, 1996

Six members of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army were killed and four
others wounded during an attack on a Karen National Union base in Burma
opposite Ban Muenruechai, Phop Phra in Tak province.

The fighting was started by some 100 DKBA at about 11 a.m. yesterday at the
KNU temporary base about three kilometres west of the Thai-Burmese border
with heavy weapons and rifles.

KNU reinforcements, despatched to the scene shortly afterwards, attacked the
DKBA soldiers from the rear.

The 30-minutes firefight caused casualties on the DKBA, according to border
sources. (BP)

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

BKK POST: BURMESE MUSIC COMES OUT FROM UNDER A HARD ROCK
September 12, 1996

Music: As a official attitudes to Western music soften, heavy metal pirates
are reaping the benefits

PHILIP McCLELLAN, Rangoon, AFP

TWO decade after Burmese strongman Ne Win showed his disapproval of popular
music by personally destroying a drum kit in the dance hall of leading
hotel, hard rock is making a comeback in Burma.

In a side street in downtown Rangoon, Zaw Win sells the latest hard rock
from the Metalzone, a narrow shop where stacks of freshly-pirated cassettes
line walls decorated with posters of wild-haired rockers.

These "recording" shops have been. Mushrooming across the capital in recent
years as official attitudes towards Western music soften -  a trend only
helped by the increased availability of pirating equipment.

Popular music in Burma has come a long way since the Ne Win stormed into a
hotel where is two unmarried daughters had sneaked off to go dancing and
demolished the house band's drum kit.

For the next two decades, dance halls were boarded up in accordance with Ne
Win's wishes and popular music went underground - grudgingly accepted, but
officially shunned.

Today, heavy metal has become the music of choice for many young Burmese,
particularly the thrashing sounds of Los Angeles-based rocker Metallica.

The Metazone's Zaw Win, who confides that his tastes run to love songs and
country music, says that while his shop stocks everything from Burmese
ballads to the enough Metallica.

While Metallica have made great inroads in the Burmese capital, the
leather-clad rockers are unlikely to be reaping many royalties from Rangoon.

In a small room at the back of the Metazone, where a group of teenagers are
watching footage of an old Sex Pistol concert, are stacks of tape recorders
and countless compact discs and vinyl records of top Western acts.

"These CDs are bought in Singapore," Zaw Win says, pointing to several large
poles of compact discs. "We copy them onto cassettes and then sell them. I
would sat we sell about 100 cassettes day - mainly Metallica."

The pirated tapes of Western rock music are selling without interference
from the authorities, and the music is also generating anew cottage industry.

Iron Cross is perhaps Burma's best known rock outfit, and probably one of
the hardest working bands in the world - even though concerts are few and
far between in Rangoon.

The band members are busy putting the finishing touches to their 25th album
of the year at the capital's premier recording facility, Lynn Studio, in a
leafy Rangoon suburb. Last year the band recorded "at least" 40 tapes - not
including collaborations with other groups.

The secret to Iron Cross' prolific output is due to what Tony Lynn, after
whom the studio is named, calls "copy music."

Each new album or collection of songs arriving in Burma is painstakingly
translated into Burmese, after which the band layers in guitars, vocals,
drums and the inevitable keyboard.

Iron Cross alone puts out about one tape every 10 days, mainly copies,
although the band also finds time to put out a handful of recordings of
their original songs every year.

The industry is demand driven, with shops like the Metalzone making requests
for copies of songs or albums to be recorded. The band of choice?

"Metallica," says Lynn. "The young people mostly like heavy metal."

However, while business is booming for the recording industry, live music
remains frowned upon by the authorities, and is only allowed on special
occasions.

Iron Cross keyboard player Bangnar Naing, who is adding his touch to a Bryan
Adams song, says the band hasn't played live in Rangoon since April.

Tony Lynn says the main problem is the cost involved and low-profit margin,
but when pressed admits that the authorities are less than keen about
allowing live heavy metal shows.

"There are no restrictions on the type of music," he says.

"The main problem is that they worry about people getting all hot and
dancing and dancing. They think that they won't be able to control the
audience." (BP)

