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


The BurmaNet News: July 26, 1996 
Issue #475

Noted in Passing:                                      
                In a sense, the entire international community is a bit 
                short on practical ideas (on Burma) said Department 
                of Foreign Affairs and Trade official, Mr John Dauth, 
                (see: SMH: AUSTRALIA ADMITS, BURMA CAMPAIGN 
                HASN'T WORKED)
HEADLINES:
=========
VOA: ASEAN WRAP
REUTERS: AUSTRALIA WILL NOT SUPPORT SANCTIONS
SMH: AUSTRALIA ADMITS, BURMA CAMPAIGN HASN'T WORKED
BKK POST: BURMA ISSUE DOGS ASEAN LEADERS
STATEMENT: IS THE ASEAN REALLY CONSTRUCTIVE?
BKK POST: BURMA'S CUSTOMS DUTIES AT BLACK MARKET
SLORC-NLM: NEW LIGHT EDITORIAL
VOA: SE ASIAN BUSINESS BRIEFS
WP: BURMA; NO PLACE FOR TOURISTS
FEER: CHEAP KYATS
THE NATION: BURMA PLANE CRASH KILLS 8
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VOA: ASEAN WRAP
July 25, 1996
From: John Scherb <mcs@primenet.com>

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations has wrapped up
nearly a week of meetings, conferences, and consultations in 
Indonesia.  Burma dominated western attention, although many 
other issues were discussed. 

The issues discussed among the Asean members and their 
"dialogue partners" of the Asean regional forum ranged from 
nuclear testing to democratization in Burma.  Participants said 
the discussions were frank, but extremely useful.

The most potentially divisive issue between Asia and the west was
Burma.  The west has condemned Burma for its treatment of 
pro-democracy activists.  Asean nations say that is an internal 
matter and pushing Burma -- which is expected to be an Asean 
member by the year 2000 -- will only alienate it.

In the end, both camps sat down to listen to what Burma had to 
say.  Participants said no minds were changed.  But, as New 
Zealand foreign minister Don McKinnon said, it was good both
camps could work out a way to at least talk about the Burma 
problem.

This organization reached a very important benchmark and, I
believe, a level of maturity in dealing with the issue of 
Myanmar.  In my view, you have an extraordinary wide range of 
opinion on what is happening in that country from every member 
here of the ARF (Asean Regional Forum).  And the result of the 
fact that Myanmar was here, represented by the foreign minister, 
and by members of the SLORC regime (Burma's military government),
the number of bilaterals that were held with Myanmar would leave 
the Myanmar regime in no doubt as to the variety of opinions and 
beliefs of members of the ARF.

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

REUTERS: AUSTRALIA WILL NOT SUPPORT SANCTIONS
July 25, 1996
From: John Scherb <mcs@primenet.com>

JAKARTA, - Australia said on Thursday it did not support sanctions 
against Burma as they would be ineffective without the backing of the 
country's Asian neighbours.
         
Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, speaking to
reporters after the end of the ASEAN Post Ministerial
Conference, said proposals for sanctions by some European
countries would not pressure the Rangoon government to undertake
political reforms.
         
``We haven't supported sanctions in relation to Burma. We
don't believe sanctions will be effective. Burma has a history
in modern times of isolationism. I don't think sanctions would
have the effect that those who promote sanctions desire,'' Downer said.
         
``ASEAN wouldn't support sanctions, nor would China and as a
consequence any promotion of sanctions is unlikely to be
effective,'' Downer, who met his Chinese counterpart Qian Qichen
on Thursday, said.
         
ASEAN -- the Association of Southeast Asian Nations -- has
blocked calls from the European Union and the United States for
moves to force Burma to ease a crackdown on its pro-democracy
movement during this week's ASEAN Regional Forum meeting in
Jakarta.

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

SMH: AUSTRALIA ADMITS, BURMA CAMPAIGN HASN'T WORKED
July 23, 1996
From: John Scherb <mcs@primenet.com>

Australia has acknowledged that pressure on Burma's ruling military 
junta has failed to curb serious human rights abuses and political 
repression.

A senior Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade official, Mr John Dauth, 
said yesterday that Australia lacked any "clear ideas" on how the ruling 
State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) in Rangoon could be 
persuaded to improve its human rights record.

"In a sense, the entire international community is a bit short on practical 
ideas," he said.

Mr Dauth confirmed that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Downer, had 
protested about Rangoon's treatment of political opposition when he met his 
Burmese counterpart, Mr Ohn Gyaw, before the ASEAN Regional Forum 
(ARF) talks which begin this morning.

Mr Downer was also expected to raise Burma's human rights record in 
informal talks last night with the 19 foreign ministers in an effort to 
devise a regional strategy for dealing with Rangoon which, along with 
India, will join the security grouping today.

However, Mr Ohn Gyaw signalled before his talks with Mr Downer that the 
SLORC was unlikely to end its suppression of the opposition National 
League for Democracy (NLD) and its leader, the Nobel Peace Prize winner 
Ms Aung San Suu Kyi.

Mr Ohn Gyaw also said it was pointless for foreign governments to protest 
about the treatment of Mr Nichols because he was a Burmese citizen and only 
represented some European governments on an unofficial basis. 

He also dismissed the validity of the 1990 elections where the NLD gained a 
clear majority and denied that the junta had arrested or detained opposition 
supporters in a May crackdown.

He said that the 1990 election in Burma was invalid because at that time 
the country did not have a constitution.

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

BKK POST: BURMA ISSUE DOGS ASEAN LEADERS
July 25, 1996
by Saritdet Marukatat and Nussara Sawatsawang

BURMA continued to trouble Asean yesterday when it rejected 
proposals for a contact group that were welcomed by the European 
Union.

European support for the Canadian proposal, which could emerge as 
a mechanism similar to the contact group the United Nations set 
up in Bosnia, has dashed Asean's hopes that the Burma issue would fade.

Asean ministers expressed irritation their Western dialogue 
partners have prolonged an issue they feel should have ended when 
Ohn Gyaw Burma's Foreign Minister, explained Rangoon's position 
to 20 participants at the Asean Regional Forum.

Western concern about human rights abuse and the lack of dialogue 
between the State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) and 
the Burmese democracy movement was made clear in statements 
delivered by the foreign ministers of Australia, Canada the 
United States and Ireland, which holds the EU presidency.

S. Jayakumar, Singapore's Foreign Minister, speaking for Asean, 
dismissed the contact group initiative by Lloyd Axworthy, his 
Canadian counterpart, by saying: "the proposal was not on the 
prepared agenda. Therefore, it should be dropped from 
discussion."

Canada's proposal was unlikely to go further, said Amnuay 
Viravan, the Foreign Minister. "We don't think Asean should take 
it because this is United Nations' business," he said.

Asean favoured "quite diplomacy" over open forums, said Mr 
Amnuay. "Canada should have consulted Asean in advance if it 
wanted us to play a key role in the plan."

Announcing his initiative, Mr Axworthy suggested a contact group 
be formed to "draw out the Slorc" to improve conditions for the 
Burmese people.

"It is incumbent on us all to pursue ways to encourage the Slorc 
to make a real commitment to democratic reform and national 
reconciliation," said Mr Axworthy. The plan could succeed if 
Asean took a leading role.

Dick Spring, Ireland's Foreign minister, welcomed the idea and 
said it needed cooperation from Rangoon and Asian states. "In a 
situation like this, it is important that you have to get an 
agreement hopefully from Myanmar itself and from the Asian 
counties," he said.

Alexander Downer, Australia's Foreign Minister, said: "Our hopes 
have been frustrated by deteriorating conditions in Burma." He 
called on Rangoon to resume dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi.

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

STATEMENT: IS THE ASEAN REALLY CONSTRUCTIVE?
July 20, 1996
From: caroline@ksc.net.th
by Dr. Naing Aung
Chairman of the All Burma Students' Democratic Front (ABSDF)

        In 1988, the Burmese military brutally crushed the mass uprising
and calls for democracy by its people; took over the reins of government;
and renamed itself as Slorc. The ASEAN countries have since recognized
Slorc. Soon after Thailand initiated the Constructive Engagement Policy
towards Burma, which the ASEAN subsequently adopted.  Under this policy,
the ASEAN countries are to keep a warm relationship with Slorc, so that
the grouping can encourage Slorc to make reforms for the country's
development.
        
>From the beginning, the concept of constructive engagement policy
is in open clash with the democratic forces worldwide. Partly, the
difference is based on ideology, and partly, it is based on the ASEAN's
vested economic interest in Burma. Therefore, the arguments in favor of
the constructive engagement policy deserves a close look. 

(1) That the economic development takes priority over the political 
development.

The ASEAN holds that the economic development of a country is the
pre-condition for its political development; therefore, developing the
economy takes first priority; and engaging Slorc to help Burma develop
economically will eventually lead to the country's political development.
Even if this line of thought holds true, the ASEAN so far has not done
anything substantive towards the kind of economic reforms Burma needs.
What it has done so far results more in its own benefits? The genuine
economic progress for Burma will come about only when its political 
system makes fundamental changes required by a healthily progressing 
economy. Such measures as developing key infrastructures and human 
resources, sound public sector planning, and stopping the State/ military 
from taking gross advantage in various sectors of business, are some of 
the policies that will propel Burma towards a true and sustainable market-
oriented economy. Such measures call for the kind of government that 
puts the national interest above self-enrichment, and Slorc's vision of  the
future Burma political system is not conducive for such governments 
to come into power. The ASEAN can argue that their countries have 
managed to bring about economic development despite the restrictive 
political environment. However, the dimensions and magnitude of 
political conflicts in Burma is too grate even to let any real economic 
development takes root. As any ordinary Burmese can tell, the economic 
hardship despite a number of direct foreign investments during the last 
few years, has been the worst since the 1962 military take-over. 

One reason for such economic disaster is because the lion's share of the 
benefit goes to financing the country's armed forces and to the private 
hands of its masters and their families, whereas it should have gone to 
developing the country's human resources. 

The ASEAN's economic engagement with Slorc does not lead to real 
economic development of Burma and its people, although it does lead 
the ruling junta towards the insatiable taste for power and money. 
Therefore, the ASEAN's economic engagement is not constructive for 
Burma and its  people; it is only beneficial for the ASEAN countries to 
take advantage of its vast natural resources, cheap labor and largely 
untapped market.
        
Then, there is the question of citizen's right and dignity. 

Should they be sacrificed in the name of economic development? Should
the economic policies of a government represent the interests of the people
if those people have no say in the government? True, meeting the basic
necessities of life is all important. But for many people, earning these
necessities of life in a dignified way is just as important. Giving
incremental right and dignity to the citizens means not fully recognizing
it in the first place; it means gauging the citizen's resignation to a
government's domination. 

(2) That Slorc is the ruling government and close relationship with it is
instrumental to the influence on its behavior. 
        
Establishing relations with Slorc can be seen as a normal practice
in international relations as it is presently the government in power, de
facto though it may be. However, this close relationship has not been
instrumental in securing the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi a year ago,
nor has it been in securing the release of NLD party MPs recently. In
fact, there has been no incidence where the close relationship with Slorc
has affected its behavior for the better. On the other hand, there are many
incidence where ASEAN either saying nothing or speaking in defense of  
Slorc is tantamount to approval in Slorc's eyes. 

The few instances in which individual ASEAN countries speak out against the
unacceptable behavior of Slorc do come up from time to time though. Being
close only to Slorc without any real recognition of the appeals made by
the NLD, the party with overwhelming and legitimate public mandate, the
ASEAN has become oblivious to the genuine desire of Burma's people. 
Instead, the ASEAN is attentive only to the desire of Burma's junta.
(Accepting Burma into the group and thereby giving it the much-wanted
legitimacy is one such example.) The ASEAN's constructive engagement 
is lacking essence without engaging the NLD as well. 

(3) That the development of democracy in Burma is its internal affair and
the ASEAN should not interfere in its development.
        
The birth of a political system that represents the people, is based on the 
people and is for the people, is  good for that country and is inevitably 
good for the world. This is the ideology that knows no boundarys
or limitations. It is really a blessing for someone, some nations to be in
a position to offer a helping hand to a less fortunate ones' struggle
towards a better future, rather than just standing by with indifference. 

Nonetheless, in this era of global village, it is hardly possible to stay
completely aloof. Ties in various forms will interact.  Economic ties will
end to support political ties. Economic support to a government who 
is lacking its people's support as Slorc's, is equivalent to its standing 
politically.

Is it not interfering in Burma's internal politics? Given such
interrelations, is it not safe to say that the birth of democracy in Burma
is also in the good interest of the world community?
        
Behind the facade of maintaining that development of democracy in
Burma is its internal affairs, one underlying reason for this stand is the
ASEAN nation's acceptance and practice of soft authoritarian rule to
varying degree despite their varying levels of democratization. Should
Burma become a full democracy, the wave would be more or less felt by
their own populace. Helping Burma gain full democracy will inevitably
expose most ASEAN members' irony in handling democracy in their own
countries. 

(4) On the issue of regional security and stability
        
One of the ASEAN's main concerns is the regional peace and stability. 
In the case of Burma, the ASEAN thinks that engaging Slorc will
help attain it. The unspoken point of consideration under this thinking is
the relationship between China and Slorc. China is a super power and it is
giving Slorc its full backing. The ASEAN does not want to run the risk of
turning Slorc into China's arms by leaving it alone. Also, the ASEAN does
not want to strain its relationship with China on Burma issue. It seems
these are the real causes of concern for the ASEAN's engagement with 
SLORC for regional peace and stability.
        
On the other hand, the ASEAN has not given any thought on what the
NLD-led democratic forces think about future Burma's relationship with
China. The NLD has already declared that it would practice an independent
and progressive policy of neutrality. The mass majority of the people of
Burma as represented by the NLD, it does not want foreign invasion of any
kind, nor does it want to be hostile towards any foreign country, be it 
East or West. 
        
Engaging also with the NLD-led democratic forces can clear up any
undue concerns for the ASEAN. One-sided engagement with Slorc 
for regional peace and stability does not seem to be a balanced proposition. 
        
Another point to consider is how Burma can contribute to the region's 
peace without first achieving its internal peace. The mass exodus
of Burma's refugees in all directions of the country's borders, is the
living proof of how it cannot. This is proof in how lack of internal
peace in Burma will affect the region's peace and stability. Vast
disparity and repression economically and politically has driven all these
people away. Slorc's handling of internal conflicts by force has failed to
achieve peace in the country.  Fundamental changes in current Burma's
political system are essential for ensuring peace in the country.  We have
not yet seen how the ASEAN's constructive engagement policy will help
achieve internal peace in Burma.  We have seen only the worsening peace
process in Burma because of Slorc's misguided arrogance fueled by the
regional support both economically and politically it believes it has
gathered. 

(5) Pressures or persuasion towards Slorc

One argument for constructive engagement policy is that pressures
in the form of sanctions cannot be effective for it will only worsen the
ordinary citizen's life; thus, it is better to exercise gentle persuasion
instead. We have to look into the history of modern Burma to see if this
argument can be valid. During the 26 years from 1962 to 1988, Burma
practiced closed-door policy starting in 1988, the people of Burma
experienced even more hardships and repression in the form of monopoly,
market manipulation, corruption, favoritism, and nepotism to the extent
not known before. So, will the sanctions hurt the ordinary people of
Burma. It might to some segments of the population. However, it will not
make a big dent on the whole population already used to the increasingly
worsening economic situation. The long experience of isolation and
hardship since 1962 has prepared the people of Burma to subsist on what's
available in the country without depending on foreign money.  However,
Slorc has comparatively few years of experience managing the country's
wealth. It is not yet prepared to face strict economic isolation and tough
sanctions in its existence.  Economic pressures will definitely undermine
its administration. For the vast majority of the people in Burma, economic
pressure will definitely undermine its administration. For the vast majority
of the people in Burma, economic pressures will mean a worthwhile
investment. 
        
After all, economic hardship has increased for the vast majority since 
foreign investment in 1988. It seems, lack of it might mean the people
may be better off.
        
One other question is whether it can be effective without China's
participation. It seems China's participation will not matter much since
China itself is still in the process of constructing its own economy and
it is not in a position to put economic pressure on Burma.  Besides, China
does not have considerable investment in Burma. Border trade is about the
main activity going on between China and Burma. China alone certainly
cannot support Burma's economy. The ASEAN is in a position to explain to
China, its dialogue partner, the need for economic pressure in Burma.
        
All application of economic pressure on Burma, refers only to the
duration of bringing about a viable political settlement in Burma. It will
not be forever. We appeal to the ASEAN and the world community to
cooperate in this important endeavor that will help restore true peace and
stability in Burma. 
        
If the ASEAN chooses to do so, the time for mutually beneficial
economic cooperation from Burma will eventually come sooner. The 
ASEAN can have a clear conscience, knowing that the economic 
pressures put on Slorc will not hurt the people of Burma as 
much as it hurts SLORC. Doing so will help put real meaning into the 
ASEAN's constructive engagement policy. 

Constructive or Destroy?
        
Now is the crucial time for Slorc. It is trying its best to secure
its hold on power long term. It is forcing its version of national
constitution which would guarantee the military's dominant role in the
nation's politics. On the economic front, it is keeping Burma's national
income and resources for the military and its elates.
        
The people of Burma, the NLD and other democratic forces, do not
approve of such mis-handling of Burma's income and resources by Slorc. 
And, Slorc thinks that silencing the people and the NLD-led democratic 
groups by force, at the same time legitimizing itself with a forced
constitution,
will ensure its hold on power and be able to continue its abuses unabated. 

It is unfortunate for the people of Burma that the current policy the
ASEAN holds towards Burma is serving against their best interests. On
behalf of the people of Burma, we earnestly appeal to the ASEAN to review
the constructive engagement policy. 

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

BKK POST: BURMA'S CUSTOMS DUTIES AT BLACK MARKET
July 25, 1996

BURMA'S finance minister Brigadier-general Win Tin said his 
ministry has recent been levying customs duties at the black 
market exchange rate instead of the over valued official rate, 
state media said yesterday.

Win Tin's comments mark, the first time an official has publicly 
confirmed rumours in business circles that the government has 
been levying duties at the open market rate. To be in accord with 
the political of the market economy, custom duties were cut down 
to one-tenth and arrangements are made to evaluate imported items 
based on the open-market rate.

The change has been seen as part of a move by the junta to even 
out the exchange rate.

In December, the government legalised the exchange of foreign 
exchange certificates (FECs) for kyats.

Previously the FECs, which rate for the past couple of months.

On the black market, one dollar bought 155 kyats yesterday 
compared to the official rate of 5.9 kyats per dollar.

"Previously, customs duties were high but the state suffered when 
values of imported items were calculated based on the official 
rate, state-run newspapers quoted Win Tin as saying in a speech.

"On the other hand, the items are sold based on the unofficial 
were introduced as a parallel currency in 1993 mainly so foreign 
tourists would not have to deal at the over valued official rate, 
could only be exchanged for dollars.

Win Tin said recent fluctuations that sent the open market rate 
soaring as high as 170 kyats to one dollar-denominated FEC had 
stabilised.

He said some of the fluctuation was due to regular market factors 
and attempts by "subversives" to hinder economic progress. (BP)

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

SLORC-NLM: NEW LIGHT EDITORIAL
July 19, 1996 (The New Light of Myanmar)
From: strider@igc.apc.org

 As recalled by the entrepreneurs themselves at the Visit Myanmar 
[Burma]  Year and Myanmar Development Forum the other day, speaker 
after speaker endorsed the good work the State Law and Order Restoration 
Council had done in jettisoning the centralised economy and substituting 
it with the outward-looking market economy.

As Mr Joe Peng, one of the principal speakers, had noted, he came to 
Myanmar in 1985 and found his hands tied.  Nonetheless, he went away, 
vowing to come back for he believed he could work out something viable.
He, and many other goodwill ambassadors came back and found the 
conditions conducive to investment.  They had high praise for the people, 
specially those in working age, their industry, honesty and the will to 
learn.  They were working for mutual benefit.

However, it was not to be.  The publicity these garment manufacturers 
obtained through visiting Western media later turned sour because the 
contractors like Liz Claiborne, Eddie Bauer, Macy's and suchlike received 
the brunt of the protests over dealing with Myanmar.

Understandably, and as the venturers had pointed out, it was Daw Aung 
San Suu Kyi and the NLD [National League for Democracy] behind the 
mischief. They would rather let their fellow citizens suffer when they 
should be encouraging foreigners to do business here.

They played into the hands of the foreign destructionists and 
obstructionists so well that instead of the entrepreneurs getting more 
orders, they were having to cut them.

Does it please the NLD and its leader, Daw Suu Kyi, to make the job 
holders jobless?  Does it also please them to have no aid coming our way? 
 No loans?  Investments, international banking and loans are intertwined.
The West threatens us with sanctions just because it cannot succeed in 
its machinations to wrest power for Daw Suu Kyi and the NLD.

Yesterday, this paper carried a thought-provoking article -- The 
Unforgettable 19th July -- which is a page from history and which is 
worth reading side by side, so to say, with today's developments.  [ed. 
note:  this "thought-provoking" article conjured an image of Aung San 
murdering his own daughter and spitting in her face.] The waters of Inya 
Lake which touch Daw Suu Kyi's shore and that of U Saw's cottage bear 
witness to the cached munitions destined to retard our regaining of 
independence and today's machinations hand in-glove with neocolonialists 
designed to make Myanmar poorer and shove it under colonialism again.

Laws in any country are made to serve the needs of the time, to be 
obeyed, whether they are strictly enforced or not, specially those that 
are meant for preservation of public order.

It is seen that while there are those who champion nonconformity, there 
are also those who goaded by their distant cohorts willingly flout them.  
A case in point is the State Law and Order Restoration Council [SLORC] 
Law No 5/96, namely, Law Protecting the Systematic Transfer of 
Responsibility and the Successful Performance of the National Convention 
against Disturbances and Opposition.

In the public interest and that of preservation of public order, this 
law, plus observations at the Forum should be respected.

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

VOA: SE ASIAN BUSINESS BRIEFS
July 25, 1996 (excerpt)
From: John Scherb <mcs@primenet.com>

An international consortium led by the ho group of Thailand 
announced plans this week to build a 200-million dollar business 
center in a Rangoon suburb.  The complex in Thulnna, northeast of
the Burmese capital's city center, will consist of a 22-story 
world trade center, office, retail buildings, residential 
buildings and a recreation center.  The plan is the largest 
foreign investment in Burma's real-estate sector.

Construction will begin in three months and the project is 
expected to be completed in five years.  The Bangkok-based ho 
family is ethnic Chinese-Burmese whose fortune is based on gem 
trading and publishing.

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

WP: BURMA; NO PLACE FOR TOURISTS
July 25, 1996
From: John Scherb <mcs@primenet.com>
By Jeff Greenwald 

Lacking the mythical panache of Tibet, Burma (renamed Myanmar by the 
military government that seized power in 1988) remains one of Asia's 
most obscure and oppressed nations. The history of the country called the 
"Golden Land" by Western adventurers who visited five centuries ago has 
been tarnished by corruption, ethnic "cleansing" and the slaughter of 
peaceful demonstrators -- including students and Buddhist monks.

There is a growing trend in favor of disengagement from Burma, an echo of 
the strategy used against South Africa during apartheid. On June 25, 
Massachusetts became the first state to enact legislation barring state or 
local companies from dealing with the country. Corporations like Pepsi, 
Un\ocal and Arco, which have struck deals with Burma's notorious State 
Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), are under fire from 
universities and human rights groups nationwide.

Ignoring these developments, Burma's ruling junta is promoting 1996 as 
"Visit Myanmar" year, with a goal of half a million tourists. Roads are 
being resurfaced, railroads are being improved, and new hotels are 
springing up all over Yangon (Rangoon) and Mandalay.

This glitzy tourist infrastructure -- as the Burmese activist and 1991 
Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has noted -- is being built at 
enormous human cost. The clearing of the moat around Mandalay Palace, a 
potentially huge tourist attraction, required more than 20,000 forced 
laborers. Railway construction has enslaved more than 100,000 
villagers, in rotating shifts, since 1993. SLORC is confiscating family 
farmland to make room for golf courses and beach resorts, and bulldozing 
entire neighborhoods to clear space for foreign-financed hotels. Uprooted 
residents are being moved to "New Towns," located in inhospitable areas; 
others are being relocated to "human zoos," where tourists can photograph 
them more conveniently.

Yet tour operators like Mountain Travel continue to sell Burma as an 
upbeat, exotic destination. Publishers like Passport Books continue to 
release up-to-date Burma guidebooks, whetting the appetites of travelers 
everywhere. And they do this in full awareness that every dime spent on 
visa fees and foreign exchange fattens the coffers of a murderous, 
exploitive regime.

Travel and tourism has become one of the world's largest industries, able 
to make or break some national economies. What would happen, one 
wonders, if we travelers recognized -- and used -- this power? What 
might be possible if the vast community of globe-trotters joined together, 
agreeing not to give our money to governments that torture and abuse their 
citizens? And suppose we began this overdue experiment with a complete 
boycott of travel to Burma?

Tourism is a drop in the bucket of Burma's foreign exchange, the lion's 
share coming from a thriving heroin trade and lucrative deals with 
American and French oil companies. The argument has been made (by 
guidebook publishers and expedition companies, mainly) that a travelers' 
boycott will have no impact on the SLORC leadership.

Not directly, perhaps; but a boycott of tourism to Burma might have 
secondary effects well worth the effort. It would demonstrate that world 
travelers constitute a unified force whose members value human rights 
above the transient pleasures of sightseeing. It would encourage opposition 
leader Aung San Suu Kyi, demonstrating widespread support for her 
democratic goals. It would send a signal to Congress, which is considering 
official sanctions against SLORC. Finally, a well-publicized tourist boycott 
would increase global awareness of the situation in Burma -- casting the 
companies doing business with SLORC into the light and increasing the 
pressure for total divestment.

Burma is one of Asia's loveliest countries, and the appeal of its jungles, 
beaches and Buddhist pagodas is undeniably seductive. But it is 
unconscionable to visit those sights for pleasure when such travel 
supports a government notorious for political executions and drug 
trafficking. How many of us would have traveled to Germany in the 1930s, 
aware that our tourist dollars were supporting the Nazi regime?

"We are totally against the `Visit Myanmar' campaign," said Aung San Suu 
Kyi during an interview with the Kyodo Japanese news agency on July 9. 
"This is tantamount to supporting authoritarianism in Burma." I suggest 
we honor Suu Kyi's wish. Let the luxury hotels lie empty and the tourist 
palaces collect dust. Let us turn our backs on Myanmar's greedy despots 
and demonstrate our support for Burma's struggling democracy movement 
by voting with our wings.

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

FEER: CHEAP KYATS
July 25, 1996

The Burmese kyat fell from 151 to 160 to the dollar by the close 
of business on July 11. The following day it started at 162 and 
dropped to 169 by 1:30 pm. And it's still headed down. The kyat 
is also rapidly declining in value against the Thai baht along 
the Burma-Thailand border. Contributing to the slide are rumours 
that the Rangoon junta to implement a 60% pay rise for all civil 
servants on August 1 and will merely print more money for the 
purpose. Political instability and the possibility of US and 
European sanctions against Rangoon have also affected the 
exchange value of the currency. (FEER)

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

THE NATION: BURMA PLANE CRASH KILLS 8
July 25, 1996

RANGOON - At least eight people were killed and 14 others 
seriously injured when a Myanmar Airways plane crashed yesterday 
as it landed in bad weather at Mergui airport in southern Burma, 
a transport Ministry source said.

Myanmar Airway Flight 307, from Rangoon t Mergui, about 550 
kilometres south of Rangoon, was carrying 44 passengers and five 
crew, the source said.

An official said the Fokker-27 aircraft crash-landed short of the 
runway but had no further details. The source said no foreigners 
were believed to be aboard the flight. (TN)

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

----------------------------------------------------------
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:        [volunteer temporarily away]
Fonts:                                  tom@cs.colgate.edu
High School Activism:     nculwell@facstaff.wisc.edu
History of Burma:            zni@students.wisc.edu
International Affairs:   Julien Moe: JulienMoe@aol.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
Resettlement info:      an400642@anon.penet.fi 
Rohingya culture                volunteer needed
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"   
volunteering:           refugee_help@mail.serve.com
World Wide Web:              FreeBurma@POBox.com

[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

