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

The BurmaNet News: August 15, 1996
Issue #490

Noted in Passing:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=09=09We will never seek revenge against the SLORC. This sort=20
=09=09of thinking must be stopped.  I don't like the principle of=20
=09=09South Korea or Albania (where the former military leaders=20
=09=09were later tried and sentenced).(see: BURMANET:=20
=09=09INTERVIEW WITH U TIN OO)
HEADLINES:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
NATION: REPRESSION CONTINUES IN BURMA
BURMANET: INTERVIEW WITH U TIN OO=20
NATION: SUU KYI PINS HOPES ON DIALOGUE
NATION: SLORC CALLS PULLOUT INSULTING
BKK POST: MONEY TALKS, SANCTIONS ARE MUTE
UPI: ASEAN 'DOESN'T FEAR' U.S. SANCTIONS
DAP (MALAYSIA): STATEMENT ON SLORC JOINING ASEAN
STATEMENT: MALAYSIAN OPPOSITION LEADER
PRESS RELEASE: MALAYSIAN ACTIVISTS OBJECT TO SLORC VISIT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----------------

NATION: REPRESSION CONTINUES IN BURMA
August 14, 1996

The Nation's Rita Patiyasevi recently spoke with Aung San Suu Kyi
in Rangoon, These are excerpts from the interview.

Have there been big changes at all?

Well, there have been changes within the National League for
Democracy (NLD). We have reorganised and reactivated it despite
the continued repression from the authorities. We are making
headway in our own plans. So, we can call that a positive change.
    =20
What about the crackdown in late May?=20
Do you consider the arrest of a number of NLD members a setback
to your plans?

No, that was not a setback because what the recent crackdown
indicated was that they have to reckon with the strength of the
NLD. It demonstrated very clearly the nervousness of the
authorities. After all, we were planning a conference of about
250 people, a very small conference at that. The fact that such a
small conference made the authorities so nervous reveals their
position more than it reflects any weakness on our part .

What made them so nervous?

They know we have the  support of the public at large, that the
Burmese people in general want a political system that will
guarantee their security and their freedom, and that they are
behind the NLD now as they were in 1990.

You have been calling for international 2 sanctions against the
regime. Do you think your call has been well received by the
international community?

We did not call for international sanctions to begin with. But we
now endorse the idea of international sanctions because we have
come to the conclusion that investments in Burma have not in any
way helped the people in general nor has it helped the course of
democracy. Our main worry about sanctions previously was that
this might harm the people of Burma, that it might have adverse
effects on the public at large. But we have come to the
conclusion that investments in Burma have so far not benefited
the majority of people.

There are few people who have benefited from these investments.
In fact, it has only made  the privileged elite even wealthier.
So we do not think that sanctions will hurt the people and that
is why we support the idea of sanctions.

Carlsberg and Heineken have decided to withdraw Burma Do you
think it's a direct result of your endorsement of sanctions?

I don't think it's a direct result of my endorsement of
sanctions. I think it is as a result of the actions taken by the
State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) over the last few
months. I think people are beginning to see that repression is
increasing and not decreasing in Burma and also that the climate
is not right for investment. I think businessmen decide for
themselves whether or not they should invest. Very few
businessmen decide to disinvest for political reasons.
     =20
Of course, these two are connected. Where there is misgovernance,
there cannot be a proper climate for economic development. You
cannot have development and growth when there is such gross
misgovernance and no economic security of any kind.

What would you like to tell the people who continue to  invest,
and  those who want to invest, in Burma?

We had said before, and I repeat, that investments are not going
to bring in the kind of results that we want. In order for
investments to bring in long term returns, there has to be - as a
basic necessity - rule of law because those who invest and those
who engage in economic activities have to know what their rights
are. They also have to be confident enough that their rights will
be protected by the law. But in a country where there is no rule
of law, nobody knows what their rights are. Even if they have
been given certain privileges, nobody knows how long these will
last. They cannot be sure that these privileges will not be
withdrawn the very next  day.

Burma has been given observer status in Asean. Does it worry you?

Not necessarily. We knew at the last meeting that they were going
to give Burma observer status. It wasn't a surprise to us at all.
Being an observer speaks for itself. So what?

Now that Burma has been given observer status by Asean, it is=20
only a matter of time before it will be allowed to join the
regional grouping. What is your response to that?

We have always said that Burma, in it present situation, cannot
be accredited in the region. I do not think Burma under this
regime will be in a position either to contribute towards peace
or prosperity in Southeast Asia.

What should Asean do then?

It's not for me to tell them what to do. I think it is for Asean
to recognise the fact that for the sake of harmony and prosperity
in this  region they  should take a firm stand with regard to
countries where the internal situation is such that there can be
neither harmony nor prosperity.

That means Asean will continue to exercise the so-called
constructive engagement policy which you oppose.

We have never said that we are opposed to constructive
engagement. What we have said is that constructive engagement
should genuinely be constructive, with both sides taking part.
Otherwise, one cannot call it either constructive or engagement.

And you don't see anything constructive with this policy, do you?

We do not see anything constructive in it and I think this is why
the international community pays more attention to what we are
saying now. Since last year, we have been saying that there has
been no progress towards democratisation. In addition to this, E
think the world is beginning to see that there has been no change
in Slorc's attitude towards those who do not agree with them.
They believe in annihilation, attack, crushing and all these
related words. You must have read those signboards - enemies)
destructionist . . . what not . . . I think the increased
interest of the international community in Burma and the
increased support for our cause owes a lot to the actions of
Slorc itself.

The Asean countries claim they prefer quiet diplomacy in helping
to bring about democracy in Burma. Do you think there is such a
thing as quiet diplomacy going on now between the junta and Asean
countries?=20

Well if it's quiet, we don't get to hear about it, do we?

Have you given up hope on Thailand?
=20
No, it's not that. It's not that we have given up hope on
Thailand or on anything. We believe in depending mainly on
ourselves. We also believe in getting as much international
support as we can. Because  ours is a just cause and we do not
think there's anything wrong with trying  to support a just
cause. But our main strength lies with us here inside the
country. And when I say I have no expectations, it doesn't mean
that we think the Thais will never achieve anything. It's just
that we don't put our expectations on others.

Do you think your influence on the Burmese public in general is
as strong as it used to be ?=20

I have never thought that I had personal influence on the Burmese
public as such. I have influence only as somebody working for the
democracy movement. I do not believe in  trying to maintain or
promoting personal influence - that is not the democratic way.
What we want is support for f movement of democracy, not support
for, myself as an individual.

Canada has proposed the idea of  putting up a contact group, but
this idea was shot down by Asean. Do you think it's a good idea?=20

I am not sure about the details but I have such a vague
impression of what the contact group is meant to be and how it is
expected to operate that I can't really make any meaningful
comments on it.

Will the NLD go ahead with the drafting of a rival constitution?=20

I don't think that I agree with the word rival, but we are going
to carry on. We are going to carry on with the responsibility
that was given to us by the party congress to draw up the draft
constitution.

Is there a new middle class in Burma now that may be an agent of
change some time in the future?

I don't think there is a new middle class in Burma. There is a
commercial class and, as I said earlier, there is a very
privileged elite. There is no such thing as a new middle class
because if there was then civil servants should belong under this
classification. But  when you look at the  situation of the
civil- servants in Burma, you can see that they cannot possibly
be classified as part of the middle class, especially under such
a system. If the civil servants were to live within their
official salary, they would sink right into the level of the
lower classes because they are so  badly paid.  And as=20

for those civil servants in a position to receive bribes, they
have become so wealthy they are right in the upper income
bracket. So I would have thought that under the { present system,
the middle class is weak- I er than it has ever been.

How do you see the future of the NLD?=20

We will carry on with our work. We are a political organisation
and we expect our future to be that of an honourable political
organisation.

When he was in Jakarta for the Asean meetings, Foreign Minister U
Ohn Gyaw said that it was only a matter of time before Slorc
would transfer power to an elected government after the
constitution is completed. What do you think of that?

We don't really put too much importance on promises made by Slorc
because they rather have a habit of breaking promises.

So that means the military will hand over power?

According to the constitution, the military will have the right
to take over power any time. So its a constitution that is a
regression rather than progression towards democracy.

Do you believe in the theory that economic growth would=20
eventually bring about political liberalisation?=20

No I do not.=20
Not in the  case of Burma.=20
Not in the case of any particular country. I don't think there's
any proof that economic liberalisation automatically leads to
political liberalisation.=20

Do you think the international reaction  to the recent crackdown
on the NLD by (S1orc is too mild? =20

No, I think it was strong. I don't think people have heard of
Burma-before. But the crackdown by Slorc attracted 90 much
international attention. And I don't think there has been  such
extensive news coverage on Burma.=20

What kind of  message have you been sending out to the people
attending your weekend rally?=20

We don't have just a single message as such. We like to think
that our rallies are, in fact, a kind of democratic forum where
we discuss political, social and economic, issues and other
things of interest to our  country . And I generally respond to
letters that come from the people. So if there is one message, I=20
suppose it centres on encouraging their participation in the
endeavour to bring about democracy. They should not just depend
on the NLD and me.=20

What about  younger people? What is the level of political
awareness that you think they should have?
=20
I don't quite know what you mean. There are, of course, some who
say that younger people now are less politically aware than
younger people in 1988. I don't think this is quite so because in
1988 our young people too were not allowed freedom of thought.
The kind of political awareness they had then was one that was
generated by the Burmese way to socialism. I don't know whether
that really  made them  politically aware. Nowadays, I think
there are young people who do not have much time for, or interest
in, politics  because of economic difficulties. You have probably
heard that more children are working in Burma. There are more
child labourers in Burma  now  than there used to be. And as for
teenagers in schools and in universities, they are facing so much
repression now than before.=20

Are they better organised now than before?=20

Again, I'm a little surprised when they . make comparisons with
the situation in 1988. The events in 1988 were spontaneous and-
the organisation came after the movement. It was not that the
students were organised in political groups and then started this
movement. People forget this because the democratic movements in
Burma that started in  1988-were so very widespread that people
now have this perception that there were lots of  political
groups which came together and organised this great movement. It
was not like that at all. All these  political groups emerged out
of the movement.   =20

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

BURMANET: INTERVIEW WITH U TIN OO=20
late May, 1996
by a BurmaNet Correspondent in Rangoon

BurmaNet Editor's Note: U Tin Oo was formerly the Minister of Defense
under the Ne Win goverment.  In 1976, he was sacked, because members of=20
his staff were accused of planning a coup to overthrow General Ne Win. U=20
Tin Oo was accused of knowing about the plot but not reporting it, and  he=
=20
was sentenced to 7 years imprisonment with hard labor.  He had always been =
=20
perceived as being outside the military rulers' clique and was very popular=
=20
among the soldiers, because he always treated them with consideration and=
=20
made sure their needs were being met.  After U Tin Oo was released from=20
prison in 1980, he spent two years as a monk and then became a lawyer.
In 1988, he joined with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and U Aung Gyi to form the=20
NLD, and he is currently one of the 5 Central Committee members.  Every=20
Sunday afternoon, he, along with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and U Kyi Maung,=20
address pro-democracy supporters from Daw Suu's gate at 54 University=20
Avenue.  He is 70 years old, but still ardently committed to the pro-democr=
acy=20
movement and very much appreciated by the people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---------------

Q: How did you get involved with the NLD?
A: I was no longer in the Army.  I was involved in Buddhist meditation,=20
leading a quiet life.  After the March, 1988 events, some colleagues came t=
o=20
my house and asked why former military staff weren't participating in the=
=20
demonstrations.  They urged me to participate.  So I discussed it with U=20
Aung Shwe.  Everyone told me that I was close to the military so I should=
=20
lead.  So I started a group.  We saw it as our second struggle for freedom=
=20
(the first being for independence from Great Britain).   We had to restore=
=20
back our rights.

U Aung Gyi, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and I each led separate groups. =20
Because of the urging of other people, we met together.  I went to see Daw=
=20
Aung San Suu Kyi, and it touched me a great deal.  I found her to be very=
=20
similar to her father, very able.  I saw that she could lead the whole=20
movement.  So at the end of August, after 8-8-88, we decided to join=20
together.

U Aung Shwe was the Chairman of the Patriotic Comrades League and I=20
was the Deputy Chair.  When U Aung Gyi, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and I=20
joined together to form the NLD, U Aung Gyi was the Chair, I was the Vice=
=20
Chair, and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was the General Secretary.  Later U=20
Aung Gyi left, and I became the Chair and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was still=20
the General Secretary.  There was no Vice Chair at that time.

Q: Could you describe your activities between 1988-1990?
A: I traveled with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and U Kyi Maung campaigning. =20
Sometimes all three of us went together.  Sometimes just two of us went.

Q: What did you do after the election in 1990?
A: I was imprisoned for 3 years.  I was charged with:
1. having correspondence with foreign leaders - high treason
2. trying to split the Army
3. actions seditious to the government

During the trial I was not allowed the right to cross-examine or produce an=
y=20
witnesses.  When I talked, I was told to sit down.  It was a martial law co=
urt,=20
and I could only enter a plea.  I pleaded not guilty.  When I was asked wha=
t=20
I had to say about my punishment, I said I was not trying to split the army=
.  I=20
love the army and the people.  I received a 3 year sentence.

After I served two years and a few months, I thought I would be released=20
soon.  But then I was sent to another court and charged again.  They said=
=20
my water festival speeches (from before being jailed) were seditious.  I=20
pleaded not guilty.  I also told them that they could not charge me twice=
=20
with the same charge.  Also, according to the law, they must combine the=20
charges within 12 months, and now it is too late. =20

The court was stunned.  They recessed.  Then they came back and said, 'this=
=20
is a martial law court and we can do whatever we see fit'.  I was sentenced=
=20
another 7 years, but released sooner.  I served a total time of more than 4=
=20
years.

I met Daw Aung San Suu Kyi the night she was released (from house=20
arrest).  All the leaders came and we agreed that we must continue our=20
work.

Q: What are your specific duties in the NLD?
A: I am responsible for peasant affairs and organizational matters, and I l=
ead=20
the legal aid committee.

Q: Can you describe the duties of the other senior NLD members?
A: U Kyi Maung is responsible for research, trade/commercial/economic=20
policy, and information.  Daw Aung San Suu Kyi takes care of human rights,=
=20
youth, and women's affairs.  U Than Htun (an NLD Executive Committee=20
member) is responsible for labor and workers.  He was the Secretary for Lab=
or=20
in the democracy period (1948-62).  U Soe Myint, an NLD MP, was the Secreta=
ry=20
for Peasant Organizations during the democracy period.  Now he is helping=
=20
with peasant affairs. =20

Originally there were 4 NLD MPs who were Secretaries during the=20
democracy period.  Now 2 are dead or disabled, and 2 remain. =20

No one is ambitious about their posts.  We are too old.  I am 70, and U=20
Aung Shwe and U Kyi Maung are 78.

U Win Htein is Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's personal assistant. (he was=20
arrested a few days before this interview and has not been released).  He=
=20
handled correspondence and day to day matters.  He was from the military=20
clique.  When Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was about to go to Upper Burma=20
(during the election campaign), she needed a liaison between the military=
=20
and the people.  She chose him. He was in the Army Research Department,=20
and he is brilliant.  During his training in the military academy, he got t=
he=20
awards for best cadet, and best literature.  He gained all three top prizes=
.=20

He was dismissed from the Army at the same time as me.  He was displeased=
=20
with the military administration.  He thought they were unjust to me (for=
=20
sacking me).  He met with me, and the army didn't like it, so the army=20
sacked him to.

U Win Htein is more senior than most of the present regional commanders,=20
so he can deal with them.  He helped write some of the NLD policy papers. =
=20
The Executive Committee gives the policy guidelines, and he writes out the=
=20
papers and resubmits them.

U Aye Win is the liaison officer for foreign correspondents and embassies. =
=20
(He was also arrested in late May and has still not been released.)

U Win Htein's wife handles monastery affairs and household management. =20
She helps with domestic duties in the compound. =20

Now I am taking some of Win Htein's work.  I am reading the papers,=20
briefing Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and discussing policy with her.

Q: Can you explain how the role of the military has evolved in Burma?
A: After the war (WWII), the British took over again and the Burma Army=20
was formed.  The Army was still aloof from politics.  The people had no=20
fear at all. As long as they obeyed the law, there was no interference.  Th=
e=20
courts and executive (branch) were free and separate.  Gradually, these=20
separate powers became unified under 1 man (Ne Win). =20

Than Shwe doesn't know the virtues and value of parliamentary democracy. =
=20
He was regimentally trained in a one party system.  They (the Army) can't=
=20
formulate how to proceed with democracy. =20

If they dare to proceed, the people will love them again.  We will never ha=
ve=20
reprisals (seek revenge against the SLORC).  This sort of thinking must be=
=20
stopped.  I don't like the principle of South Korea or Albania (where the=
=20
former military leaders were later tried and sentenced). =20

The military since 1988 is so different from before.  They are enjoying =20
their wealth so much now.  They are frightened and don't want to lose what=
=20
they have. =20

Q: Can you describe the different branches of the military?
A: The infantry is always supreme.  All three services are combined under=
=20
the Commander of the Infantry who always becomes the Chief of Staff. =20
There is only 1 Chief of Staff, the others (Air Force, Navy) are only Vice=
=20
Chiefs of Staff.  But the government gives prestigious jobs to the Air Forc=
e=20
and Navy too.  There is no split between different units in the military. =
=20
They are united.

In 1958, (after U Nu, the Prime Minister, handed over power to General Ne=
=20
Win to form a caretaker government), the Army formed a solidarity organizat=
ion=20
in order to get law and order.  This organization gave support to the party=
 which=20
the Army liked.  The people didn't like it, so (in 1960) the people voted f=
or the=20
other side - U Nu's party.  He won a landslide victory. =20

Now the SLORC is trying the same thing.  If you enroll in the USDA (Union=
=20
Solidarity and Development  Association), you get privileges - money, work.=
 =20
At the village level, you are allowed to have a fish pond.  They are trying=
 to get=20
solidarity through privileges.  If there are no privileges, then they would=
 have no=20
support.  They don't have the people's will.  In 1958 and 59 there was a lo=
t of=20
pressure too.  There were forced rallies with slogans just like now.  Now i=
f=20
you are in the government and don't go, you don't get a promotion. =20

Every time they make the people shout the slogan "lackeys of the West" or=
=20
"neo-colonialists", the people think.  They understand.  The West is very=
=20
far away.  The people realize the real danger is nearby from the East -=20
China.

Military personnel cannot meet NLD people.  They will be interrogated=20
immediately if they do.  The Ministry of Home Affairs listens, writes=20
reports, and discusses the weekend speeches (by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, U=20
Tin Oo, and U Kyi Maung).  If there is an infringement of the law, the=20
SLORC can arrest them.  The Ministry looks for infringements in the=20
speeches. =20

The SLORC is closely watching other countries.  The pressure is very good. =
=20
Not only the West but also Japan and Thailand.  We are very happy about=20
Thailand.  (After the arrests of NLD MPs in late May, the Thai Foreign=20
Ministry came out with a statement critical of the SLORC.)

NLD policy is: no violations, no demonstrations, never again as in 88.  Thi=
s=20
is definitely shunned.  We must follow the traffic light.  If there is any =
sign=20
for green, we push through.  If yellow, we are careful.  If red, we have to=
=20
consider how to proceed. =20

Q: Can you comment on NLD relations with the various ethnic groups in=20
Burma?
A: We welcome cease-fires.  Cease-fires are good, but there must be a=20
political solution.  We denounce armed activity as a political instrument. =
=20
The groups can determine their destiny for themselves, have autonomous=20
states, after discussion with all the groups.  Let's sit down and talk.

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

NATION: SUU KYI PINS HOPES ON DIALOGUE
August 14, 1996

RANGOON - Democratic leader Aung San Suu Kyi said that a dialogue
between different political parties was the only way for Burma to
achieve democracy and have a constitution that had the support of
people.

"Dialogue will have to come. We have always said that in the end
all problems are solvable through dialogue, and I have repeated
this so often that those who are intelligent start such a
dialogue quicker than those who are not so intelligent," she said.=20

She gave an interview to The Nation just a few days before the
Burmese official newspaper, New  Light of Myanmar commented on
Monday that a dialogue with the Burmese opposition, led by Nobel
Peace laureate Suu Kyi, would hinder the current progress being
achieved by the military government. It added that that the
government had no time for compromises with the opposition or
other organisations.

She said the State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc) may
not want a dialogue because they either felt they could get away
with it or were probably afraid of it.

She faulted Slorc for giving her a lot of attention in the media,
referring to a series of articles in the state run newspaper that
were critical of her.

On economic sanctions, she said she endorses them now, even
though she did not call for them earlier, because investments in
Burma had not helped the people.       =20

The United States recently passed a bill which brings in
conditional sanctions, and Holland's Heineken and Denmark's
Carlsberg breweries recently backed out of deals to open up
business in the country.

"We have said since last year that there has been no progress
towards democratisation. We still see no progress towards
democratisation. Slorc's attitude to those who do not agree is
very narrow-minded and very harsh. They believe in annihilation,
in crushing," she said.

Suu Kyi said that she was determined to continue her weekend
rallies in front of her residence in defiance of a recent
government order that prohibits free speech.

At present, she said the weekend rallies have attracted more
people then ever before despite bad weather and the possibility
of Government harassment.=20

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

NATION: SLORC CALLS PULLOUT INSULTING
August 14, 1996

RANGOON - Burma's state-run press has accused European brewers
Heineken and Carlsberg of insulting the Burmese people by
deciding to cancel their investments in Burma.
    =20
In an official commentary entitled "Can Human Rights Be Achieved
only by Drinking Beer?" that appeared in yesterday's New Light of
Myanmar newspaper, the military government said the decision to
withdraw "amounts to declaring psychological warfare on Myanmar
people".

A growing boycott campaign in Europe and the United States
against companies doing business with Burma's government prompted
both Holland's Heineken and Denmark's Carlsberg in July to back
out of deals to open breweries in Burma. =20
    =20
The commentary said, however, that the brewers pulled out because
they couldn't cope with competition from other brands.

"Unable to beat other rival beer brands in Myanmar and due to
other commercial reasons, Heineken and  Carlsberg withdrew their
plans under the pretext of human rights and democracy," the paper said.

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

BKK POST: MONEY TALKS, SANCTIONS ARE MUTE
August 14, 1996

The United States is doing a healthy business with Burma's
military government despite Washington's disapproval of Rangoon's
poor record on democracy and human rights.

According to a trends report released recently by the American
Embassy in Rangoon, America's exports of "dual use" goods and
tourists to Burma, as well as Burma's exports of garments to
America, are on the rise.

The dual use goods, for both civilian and military consumption,
accounted for about a quarter of America's total direct exports
to Burma which amounted to US$16.1 million last year, say US
Department of Commerce statistics.

These included explosive and pyrotechnic products, roller
bearings, internal combustion engines and parts and machinery
specialised for "particular industries" of which the ultimate
consumers or uses are reportedly unknown to the embassy.

The volume of these exports has increased by more than twice to
40 times compared with any recent year, said the report. Burmese
imports of US-origin goods that are re-exported from third
countries, such as Singapore, are "several times greater", it added.

In mid-1996 alone, $30 million worth of dual use heavy
construction equipment was sold to the Burmese Defence Ministry's
Directorate of Procurement, the report quoted representatives of
a US-based manufacturer as indicating.

The Burmese Directorate of Procurement is responsible for
procuring imports of finished goods for the military, including weapons.

America's import of garments marked as being of Burmese origin
accounted for a "large and growing" share of the customs value of
total imports which have increased "rapidly and steadily" in
recent years, the report said.

Garment imports from Burma in 1995 amounted to $65.1 million, or
80.4 percent of the total value of $80.9 million in customs
revenue collected during the year.

The garment imports represented a 38.4 percent increase on the
same items imported in 1994 when garments made up 70 percent of
the total of $67.2 million collected in customs duties during the year.

In the absence of data from the Burmese government on textiles
and garments, the report quoted industry sources as estimating
that America imports about two-thirds of Burma's garment exports.

American tourist visits to Burma have increased at an average
rate of 88.8 percent from 586 in the  1991/92 Burmese fiscal year
to 3,942 in 1994/95. During the first 11 months of 1995/96, 4,989
American citizens visited Burma.
    =20
The United States has been among the most confrontational in its
policy towards the State Law and Order Restoration Council
(SLORC) on grounds that the ruling regime has violated human
rights, failed to recognise the results of general elections in
1990, and exported narcotics.

But this has not affected trade and investment trends. According
to the embassy report, export of dual use merchandise is not
restricted by the US government. Washington does not grant
licences to export arms to Burma.

Although the textile trade agreement between the two countries
has not been renewed since 1990, about 30 Rangoon-based garment
factories, half of which are wholly or partly operated by Hong
Kong or South Korean firms, are still producing chiefly for
American markets with most-favoured-nation tariff treatment.

The report partly blamed US Customs Service regulations for the
well being of Burmese products in the US market. The label "Made
in Myanmar", the country's official name under the SLORC, for
goods imported from Burma is one that relatively "few Americans
recognise".   =20

Laws are yet to take effect. According to the report, the US
government's Committee on the Implementation of Tariff Agreements
(CITA) currently imposes quotas on six  categories of garment
imports from Burma, but American law authorises CITA to restrict
imports only when they "threaten to disrupt" US markets.

So does the legislation recently passed by the US Senate. The law
conditionally directs President Bill Clinton to impose economic
sanction  on  Burma if the military regime increases repression
of pro-democracy  leaders.=20

The bill contains "flexibility" which will help prevent America
from losing face and suffering adverse repercussions in future,
said one Asian diplomat.=20
    =20
"The United States has to think of its own interests and it knows
well that economic sanctions will not be effective unless the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations and  the European Union
cooperate," he said.

Both the Clinton administration and American oil companies
reportedly lobbied hard against the 5 sanction.

Energy firms Unocal and Texaco are among the six most active US
investors in Burma.

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

UPI: ASEAN 'DOESN'T FEAR' U.S. SANCTIONS
August 14, 1996
From: John Scherb <mcs@primenet.com>

Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said Wednesday the Association of=20
Southeast Asian Nations does not fear potential retaliatory sanctions from=
=20
the United States for accepting Burma as member of the regional group.
       =20
The Malaysian leader said ASEAN member nations were confident the
United States would not take punitive action because of its investments=20
in the region.
       =20
"The United States has interests here. When there is oil they will come,"=
=20
he told reporters after paying a farewell visit to Gen.Than Shwe, chairman=
=20
of Burma's ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council.
       =20
Than arrived Monday for an official visit.
       =20
Burma was accorded observer status at the recent Association of Southeast=
=20
Asian Nations' Regional Forum in Jakarta last month, despite pressure from=
=20
the United States to isolate the Burmese government. Washington has accused=
=20
Burma's military regime of suppressing human rights.

Asked whether there was any objection among Asean members to the
entry of Burma into ASEAN, Mahathir said: "Perhaps...but those who
don't want Burma are the Western countries."
       =20
Mahathir, who reiterated Malaysia's position to fully support the entry of=
=20
Burma as a full member of ASEAN, hoped it could happen next year to=20
enable the group to cover all 10 nations in Southeast Asia.
       =20
ASEAN will mark its 30th anniversary next year. At that time,Burma is=20
expected to be accepted into the regional association, as are Laos and=20
Cambodia.
       =20
The Malaysian Muslim Youth Movement and other organizations have
objected to Than's visit.
       =20
"We are shocked by the willingness of our government to consort
with a regime notorious for its atrocities and disregard for the
basic human rights of its citizens," said a protest statement given
to the Malaysian Foreign Ministry.
       =20
But Mahathir said Than's visit improved understanding between the
two nations.
       =20
"We now have a better understanding of Burma and the problems
faced by its government, which is attempting to overcome them. They
have brought progress and other people should acknowledge it.
       =20
"When we said we want to have constructive engagement with Burma,
the Western countries laughed at us. They are being cynical."

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

DAP (MALAYSIA): STATEMENT ON SLORC JOINING ASEAN
August 12, 1996
From: khleee@pc.jaring.my

Press Statement by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General
and MP for Tanjong, Lim Kit Siang, in Petaling Jaya on Sunday, 11th August =
1996:

The Chairman of Myanmar's State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC)
Senior General Than Shwe's five-day visit to Malaysia starting tomorrow mus=
t
not be used by the military junta as an ASEAN endorsement of its repressive
regime and draconian laws.

The Malaysian Government should tell  General Than Shwe firmly and clearly
that SLORC's membership of ASEAN would depend on democratisation and an end
to flagrant human rights abuses in Burma.

General Than Shwe should be informed of the demand of the All Burma
Students' Democratic Front, issued on the occasion of the eighth anniversar=
y
of the 8.8.88 democratic uprising in Burma, namely:

1. Unconditionally  release all political prisoners.
2. Cancel all its unjust laws and orders.
3. Declare nation-wide cease fire.
4. Abolish the sham National Convention.
5. Enter dialogue with the democratic forces led by Aung San Suu Kyi.

      General Than Shwe must be made to understand during his visit that
Malaysian public opinion want to see Burma return to the mainstream of the
international community,  that the military junta should stop being the
worst enemy of the Burmese people and that it should initiate a national
reconciliation in Burma by embarking on a process of democratisation and
national reconciliation by allowing full and meaningful participation of al=
l
democratic forces and ethnic nationalities in shaping the destiny of  the
country.

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

STATEMENT: MALAYSIAN OPPOSITION LEADER
August 14. 1996
From: John Scherb <mcs@primenet.com>

Statement by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General=20
and MP for Tanjong, Lim Kit Siang=20

Announcement that MAS will inaugurate new air service to Yangon before=20
launching of =B3Visit Myanmar Year=B2 in November most cynical and in very=
=20
bad taste=20

The announcement by the Transport Minister, Datuk Dr. Ling Liong Sik=20
yesterday that MAS will inaugurate a new air service to Yangon in time for=
=20
the launching of the =B3Visit Myanmar Year=B2 by the Myanmese military=20
junta on November 18 is most cynical and in very bad taste.=20

Burma=B9s Opposition Leader, Aung San Suu Kyi has called for the=20
interntional boycott of the =B3Visit Myanmar Year=B2 organised by the=20
Myanmese military junta as foreign tourists visiting Myanmar would=20
tantamount to supporting the authoritarianism, crackdown on democracy=20
and flagrant violation of human rights by the State Law and Order=20
Restoration Council (SLORC).=20

Even if the Malaysian government is not prepared to give support to Aung=20
San Suu Kyi=B9s call for international boycott of the =B3Visit Myanmar Year=
=B2,=20
there is no reason or justification for MAS or theTransport Ministry to be=
=20
so cynical as to allow profit motives to exclude all sensitivities to the=
=20
struggle and sacrifices of the pro-democracy movement in Burma.=20

During the current visit of the SLORC Chairman, General Than Shwe,=20
Malaysians have been urged to move into Burma in a big way to get a=20
=B3head-start=B2 over other countries in the exploitation of the economic=
=20
opportunities and potentials in Burma.=20

Profit motives cannot be the sole or the most important consideration in=20
policies of state or Malaysia would not have severed diplomatic relations=
=20
with South Africa in the sixties or given full support to the international=
=20
economic sanctions campaign against the apartheid regime.=20

As a South East Asian country, the government must ensure that Malaysia=20
is not at the =B3tail-end=B2 in the international community in our concerns=
=20
and support for the aspirations of the Burmese people for the restoration=
=20
of democracy and human rights.=20

ASEAN=B9s =B3constructive engagement=B2 policy towards SLORC is only credib=
le=20
and justifiable if it has a significant dimension on =B3democracy and human=
=20
rights=B2, and this is why Malaysia and the other ASEAN nations must show=
=20
greater concerns about progress towards democratisation and national=20
reconciliation in Burma rather than just to get a financial and economic=20
=B3head-start=B2 over other countries in the cynical exploitation of the=20
natural resources of Burma.=20

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

PRESS RELEASE: MALAYSIAN ACTIVISTS OBJECT TO SLORC VISIT=20
August 13, 1996
From: Myo Aye <082903@bud.cc.swin.edu.au>

MEDIA ALERT

A delegation of activists and representatives will deliver a public stateme=
nt
to Wisma Putra objecting to the state visit of General Than Shwe, head of
Burma's murderous and brutal State Law and Order Restoration Council=20
(SLORC). The statement will be handed to the Department of Foreign=20
Affairs, which has organised the state visit, at Wisma Putra at 11 a.m.=20
on Wednesday, August 14.=20

PRESS STATEMENT

We, the undersigned organizations, wish to state our concern and objection =
to
the state visit of Gen. Than Shwe, head of Burma's murderous and brutal Sta=
te
Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC).

We are shocked by the willingness of our government to consort with a regim=
e
notorious for its atrocities and disregard for the basic human rights of it=
s
citizens.

This is the regime guilty of the massacre of thousands of unarmed civilians
exactly eight years ago, the regime who refuses to honour the result of the
1990 election which it organised, the regime who continues to jail, torture=
,
murder and enslave thousands of Burmese.

As General Than Shwe arrives in Malaysia, tens of thousand of Burmese=20
Muslims continue to be oppressed in humiliating and life-threatening ways. =
=20
This includes the desperate situation of the Rohingyas, who still continue=
=20
to seek refuge in Bangladesh, despite repatriation efforts.  At this time 5=
0,000
Rohingyas continue to be refugees in Bangladesh, with more people fleeing=
=20
the brutal SLORC every day.

General Than Shwe's regime has also refused to honour the outcome of the=20
1990 elections, an election which  the SLORC itself organised.  Instead,=20
it has continued to harass and plague the elected representatives of the=20
Burmese people, jailing with impunity these MPs and their supporters.=20
In May, more than260 members of the National League for Democracy,=20
including elected MPs, were arrested and detained without trial.  Torture,=
=20
murder and other atrocities against supporters of the will of the Burmese=
=20
people continue under General Than Shwe's regime. Deaths in custody=20
are common, notably, U Hla Than, the elected representative from the=20
Cocos Island constituency, who died as a result of torture, last week.

Hundreds of thousands of Burmese citizens continue to be subjected to=20
forced labour under hazardous and life-threatening conditions for the=20
SLORC's so-called "development" projects.

Therefore, it is extremely unfortunate and disappointing that Malaysia=20
has put itself in a position to be seen as an accomplice of the SLORC.

We call upon our government, to use this opportunity to express concern=20
at the crisis in Burma and encourage the SLORC to cease these atrocities=20
against our 47 million neighbors.  It is clear that the situation in Burma =
is=20
not an internal matter.  Malaysia set an excellent example in the context o=
f=20
Bosnia and South Africa, let it not jeopardize its credibility by unconditi=
onally
supporting a regime smeared with the blood of hundreds of thousands of our
fellow Asians.

ENDORSED BY:
ABIM (Malaysian Youth Muslim Movement)
ASA Media Centre
Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development
Burma Solidarity Group Malaysia
Cenpeace
Center for Orang Asli (Indigenous Peoples) Concerns
Democratic Action Party Socialist Youth
Ideal Time
INSAN
JUST World Trust
Labour Resource Centre
Parti Rakyat Malaysia (Peoples Party Malaysia)
Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall Youth
SUARAM
Support Committee for Urban Pioneer Settlers
United Chinese School Teachers Association

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


