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

The BurmaNet News: September 5, 1996
Issue #507

Noted in Passing: 
                She will never give in to this most evil form of moral 
                blackmail. . . .- Mr M. Aris (see: WASHINGTON POST: 
                W. AVERELL HARRIMAN DEMOCRACY AWARD) 

HEADLINES:
==========
NATION: BURMA'S MUSLIM REFUGEES GO BACK HOME TO 
WASHINGTON POST: W. AVERELL HARRIMAN DEMOCRACY AWARD 
SUN MAGAZINE: MALAYSIA'S MORAL BLACKOUT
INDEPENDENT ARTICLE: THE SUHARTO CLAN'S GLOBAL FORESTRY 
NYT: BURMESE JUNTA SEEMS HEADED FOR SHOWDOWN
BSA ANNOUNCEMENT: FORMATION OF THE NEW CENTRAL 
BSA ANNOUNCEMENT: FORMATION OF WOMEN AFFAIRS 
ASIA TIMES: WHY UNOCAL IGNORES CALLS FOR MYANMAR SANCTIONS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NATION: BURMA'S MUSLIM REFUGEES GO BACK HOME TO 
UNCERTAINTY AND POSSIBLE PERIL
September 4, 1996  by ANIS AHMED
Reuter

TEKNAF, Bangladesh - Nur Bahar, a widowed mother of five children, 
huddled with over 100 others under a plastic sheet on a boat in driving rain.

They were awaiting a half-hour voyage across the turbulent Naf River to
Burma's Kaningchang frontier post, a journey that would end more than 
four years in refugee camps in the Cox's Bazar district of southern 
Bangladesh.

Only a few seemed eager to return home, where representatives of the 
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) would 
receive them, check their identities and hand them over to Burmese 
immigration officials.

"The repatriation process is very slow," said Rakibuddin Ahmed, 
Additional Relief and Repatriation Commissioner of the UNHCR, who 
was keeping a close eye on the home-bound refugees.

More than 250,000 refugees, called Rohingyas, fled to Bangladesh in 
early 1992 from west Burma's Muslim-majority Arakan province to 
escape what they said was military persecution.

Repatriation began that September following an agreement between 
Dhaka and Rangoon. But more than 44,000 Rohingyas are still in refugee 
camps in the Cox's Bazar area, Ahmed said.

He said the refugees went through health screening and were given two 
weeks' food, plus clothes, cooking pots and other utensils - mostly 
provided by the UNHCR - before leaving.

On arrival in Burma' they receive some money, two months' rations 
and a transport allowance to their homes, Ahmed said.

"None of those returned has come back. They are well taken care of (in
Burma)," Ahmed said.

Stephanie Aquino, a UNHCR filed officer who accompanied the returnees 
on Aug 20, said the repatriation had been a smooth operation.

Ahmed said the UNHCR played an important role in "identification,
certification and repatriation" of the Rohingyas, whom he described 
as "mostly economic refugees".

Refugee Rashid Ahmed, 35, from Burma's Maungdow district, did not agree.

"How can you call the process smooth when we are sent back against our
will?" he asked, then stopped talking when Bangladeshi officials approached.

Mohammad Shahid, also from Maungdow, said he did not object to 
going back. "But I am not sure what await me back home. "I was tortured 
by the Burmese military before fleeing to Bangladesh. Now they say 
things 
are all right there. I wonder if that is true," Shahid said.

Local officials said up to 4,000 Rohingyas had received in Bangladesh
between last March and May in what looked like a new influx. Some 700 
were pushed back and the rest disappeared, apparently mixing with local 
Muslim who speak the same dialect and have physical similarities with 
the Rohingyas.

"We don't call new entrants 'refugees' until they are registered with 
the local immigration department," one official said.

Others say some 350,000 Rohingyas have been living in the Cox's 
Bazar area, Bangladesh's premier sea resorts on the Bay of Bengal, 
almost permanently.

"About 100,000 of them.. fled to Bangladesh during an exodus in 1978 
but never went back. Many of them acquired Bangladesh citizenship 
and voted in elections," an official said.

"Some of them have also managed to migrate to other countries by using 
both genuine and forged Bangladeshi passports," he added.

Cox's Bazar residents complain that the Rohingyas compete with local 
people for jobs. "Our only vocation is fishing. We work mostly as hired 
crews on fishing trawlers. But the Rohingyas take a large share of our 
living," said fisherman Abdul Kadir.

Journalist Nurul Islam said the illegal immigrants had taken shelter in 
the hills and were depleting the forests.

"They also act as agents of Burmese insurgent groups, especially the RSO
(Rohingyas Solidarity Organisation) and the ARIF (Arakan Rohingya 
Islamic Front)," he said. 

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

WASHINGTON POST: W. AVERELL HARRIMAN DEMOCRACY AWARD 
August 30, 1996   
From: John Scherb <mcs@primenet.com>

>From an address by Michael Aris in Chicago on Aug. 26 upon receiving on 
behalf of his wife -- Aung San Suu Kyi, democracy leader of Burma -- 
the 

You have just heard my wife, Suu [via video address] speak of how the 
movement for democracy in her country is cruelly persecuted under a 
regime that rules by fear, lives by fear. However, she omitted to tell 
you 
that it is she herself who stands at the sharpest end of this ruthless 
campaign to destroy the struggle for freedom in Burma. In the state 
controlled media, she is subjected to an endless, hysterical torrent of
abuse, ridicule, insults and lies. All over Burma, people are bullied 
to 
attend mass rallies to denounce her.

If the president were here today, I would say to him: With respect, Mr. 
President, when it comes to embattled wives, you really can't compete.

Few who have seen Suu's calm face or heard her measured words will 
guess 
how much she has had to suffer for the promise of hope she has given to 
so 
many. It is not that she is really hurt by the daily abuse. That she regards
as an occupational hazard. . . . Rather it is what the military intelligence
does to those who are near and dear to her -- the close friends, family 
members and helpers who disappear into prison, some never to return. 
All 
this is done solely with the aim of destroying her where they think she 
is 
weakest, forcing her to give up the struggle to save the lives and 
liberty 
of her dearest friends. But it doesn't work. She will never give in to 
this most 
evil form of moral blackmail. . . . 

Will we ever understand the peculiar mixture of fear, greed and 
ignorance 
which drives a military dictatorship to do these things to a 
defenseless 
woman?

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

SUN MAGAZINE: MALAYSIA'S MORAL BLACKOUT
August 24, 1996
From: deb <deb@pactok.peg.apc.org
by Sheryll Stothard

A media release I received last week ended with a quote from Cenpeace
spokesperson, Fan Yew Teng: "Last week, we had an electricity blackout
and our Prime Minister said he was ashamed. This week, we have a moral
blackout and no one talks about it."

    He was referring to the five-day state visit of General Than
Shwe, head of Burma's - oh sorry, - Myanmar's State Law and Order
Restoration Council (SLORC).

    As a Malaysian, I have to share in the shame and question the
inconsistency in our foreign policy as far as genocidal butchers are
concerned. As a taxpayer, I protest that some of my tax dollars have 
been spent on hosting a representative from one of the most repressive,
immoral and backward "governments" in the world.

    I am not an activist. In fact, I frequently am irritated by the
holier-than-thou exhortations NGOs are sometimes given to. Yet, in this
situation, I am sure I echo the feelings of many non-NGO, non-activist
Malaysians as far as the SLORC is concerned.

    Why do I feel so strongly about this? Why can't I accept ASEAN's 
policy of "constructive engagement" with the SLORC?

    For one thing, I cannot reconcile myself with Malaysia's split
identity problem when it comes to human rights abuses in foreign
countries. Flying in the face of established Western agendas, over the
last decade, Malaysia has been laudably vocal in condemning human rights
abuses in places like Bosnia, the Middle East, Chechnya and South Africa.

    However, that well-known Malaysian moral outrage tapers off into
a whimper as we get closer to home. We dismiss the genocidal atrocities
in East Timor even to the extent of saying that Malaysians who get killed
in the crossfire deserve it. Indonesia is a member of ASEAN and we cannot
criticise our partners - that seems to be the underlying reason.

    With Myanmar, we don't even have that excuse, however feeble. Why
invite Southeast Asia's version of Radovan Karadzic as a state guest to
our country? The economic reasons aren't even compelling enough to
warrant mention. Surely, we're making enough money economically
plundering Vietnam, Cambodia and various  impoverished African states.
Why start acting like desperate vultures looking for a fast buck in Myanmar?

    Take away the bleeding heart liberalist rhetoric of Western
proponents of democracy. Take away even the personality cult of Nobel
Peace Prize recipient Aung San Suu Kyi. Take away Western threats of
economic sanctions. Take away all that, even John Boorman's silly movie
Beyond Rangoon. What do we have?

    The SLORC was formed in September 1988 and promptly declared
martial law. This was just an academic continuance of the brutal regime
of Ne Win and his military cronies who assumed power after a coup in
1962. Earlier in 1988, the army gunned down pro-democracy students and
started a nationwide offensive against the country As best and 
brightest -
young people who were the only hope Myanmar had for a long time.

    How can anyone shoot their children? Why bother to educate them
and then gun them down like defenseless animals in the streets? Even the
SLORC doesn't bother denying that this happened. How can Malaysia
officially accept this? Why rant and rave about Bosnia when we accept,
condone and even encourage the same in Myanmar? What does that say 
about us?

    Malaysia takes pride in the fact that Islam is its official 
religion. 
Malaysians are frequently referred and looked up to by the 
international 
Muslim community as respected spokespersons for the faith. Yet, we have 
invited a representative of a government responsible for the decimation 
and ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in the Arakan area of Myanmar.

    Since the SLORC took over till 1992, over 260,000 Muslim
Myanmarese have fled the country. Backed by the SLORC, a border
development programme was introduced for the purpose of forcibly 
removing the Muslim population from the country's north-western 
frontier. 
The SLORC says that there are 690,000 Muslims in the Arakanese area. 
Muslim groups and the Bangladeshi government calculate the population 
at 1.4 million. That's quite a lot of Muslims for the SLORC to kick 
out, 
rape, maim and kill.

    I have been using the word "government" loosely in reference to
the SLORC. Well, technically and morally, I am wrong and so is anyone
else who thinks so.

    In May 1990, the National League for Democracy won a landslide
victory in Myanmar's general elections, winning 392 of the 485 seats
available, despite the harsh conditions imposed on the NLD and on Aung
San Suu Kyi by the military.

    When it was time to hand over power to the elected government,
the SLORC responded by throwing  NLD MPs into jail. Many have been
tortured and killed since.

   To businessmen who have jumped on the bandwagon to Myanmar, 
some cautionary advice is in order. Even if you are, as most 
businessmen 
are, completely amoral, doing business with the SLORC is a huge 
investment risk. You might initially make some money off the blood 
spilled by a population enslaved by the SLORC. But enjoy the short 
ride while it lasts. If the SLORC can decimate and kill its own people, 
it is unlikely that they will honour any agreement made with foreigners 
the moment a higher bidder - whether Asian or Western - turns up.

    Malaysians have a responsibility to ensure that our reputation
for tolerance and moral integrity in this region is not compromised. The
future of Myanmar is in the hands of ASEAN, not the West. We are in the
position to effect much needed change in that country. In light of the
SLORC's history, "constructive engagement" is not the way to go. We are
not doing the people of Myanmar a favour by inviting their killers to our
country to talk business. Instead, we have justified the oppression. And
in the case of Malaysian companies doing business there, we're just
twisting the knife in deeper.

    And for that, I am truly and deeply ashamed. Surely, we are
better than that. Or are we?

Sheryll Stothard
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
sheryll@pc.jaring.my

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

INDEPENDENT ARTICLE: THE SUHARTO CLAN'S GLOBAL FORESTRY 
INTERESTS       by George J. Aditjondro  (abridged)
September 3, 1996

[BurmaNet Editor's Note: This article is from Professor George J. 
Aditjondro, 
the first Indonesian academic-dissident in self-imposed exile in 
Australia.  
Professor Aditjondro received his PhD from Cornell and taught in 
Indonesia 
until recently.  After he began to publicly oppose Indonesia's 
occupation of 
East Timor, the Indonesian military gave him the choice of either 
fleeing 
Indonesia or spending up to 6 years in jail after undergoing a sham trial.
In a note to Free Burma activists who protested in Washington DC at the 
SLORC and Indonesian embassies he wrote, "Thanks for demonstrating in 
front of the Indonesian embassy. As a token of my gratitude to you and 
all the
Burmese pro-democracy activists who have also began to link their struggle
with the struggle of my people, I wrote the attached article. Let us 
keep joining 
hands in our struggles."]

        A new trend of South-South colonialism has emerged recently, where
southern transnational companies are making heavy investments in more
backward Third World countries. This observation was raised by a
spokesperson for the World Rainforest Movement, Marcus Colchester, in an
interview with the Sydney Morning Herald , last Saturday, August 31, 1996.
In this article, titled "How Asia's logging companies are stripping the
world's forests," several examples of this new trend has been mentioned,
with Malaysian and Indonesian companies at the forefront.

        The only Indonesian company mentioned explicitly, is MUSA, which
has a 60,700-hectare concession in Suriname. This is actually an
understatement, because Indonesian companies have also began to log, or
began large timber plantations and associated wood-based industries, in
several other countries. The brief reference to MUSA is also an
understatement, because it omits the high-power backing which this company
enjoys in Suriname and in Indonesia. It is, in fact, a company owned by
President Suharto's relatives from his home village of Kemusu in
Yogyakarta, which has branch offices in Suriname, Hong Kong, and
Singapore.

        Hence, the following cases delineate some of the (known) overseas
forestry and/or wood-processing industries controlled or owned by the
Suharto clan.

Case No. 1: How dictators support each other:  Tommy Suharto, the first
Indonesian foreign investor in Burma

        The first Indonesian investor in Burma is PT Rante Mario, one of
the numerous companies under the Humpuss Group, controlled by President
Suharto's youngest son, Hutomo Mandala Putra, aka as Tommy Suharto.
Through a joint venture with a Burmese state company, Myanmar Timber
Enterprise (MTI), PT Rante Mario is planning to build a wood processing
industry with an investment of US$ 75 million.

        In the first five years (since 1994), this joint venture will only
produce logs and lumber. After that, it will go into plywood production.
"Rante Mario will become a test case in involving foreign investors in
Myanmar in forest management," said Herry Sunardi, general director of PT
Rante Mario to an Indonesian business magazine, Swasembada , in its
December 1994 edition, page 41. "If this projects succeeds, then other
investors will be attracted, and that is when Myanmar will be a challenge
to Indonesia's timber export market," adds the Humpuss Group executive.

        Sunardi bases his argument on his data of Burma's excellent
forestry potentials. According to him, from Burma's total forest of 66
million hectares, 32.4 million consists of high-density forest.

        The Humpuss executive's data, however, contradicts some other
sources. According to WWF data, Burma's natural environment is already
worse off than Indonesia. As published on page 42 in the November 20, 1995
edition of another business journal, Warta Ekonomi , Burma has already
lost 71% of its natural habitat, compared with 49% in the case of
Indonesia. Area wise, Indonesia still has nearly 750,000 Km2 of natural
habitat, while Burma only has nearly 226,000 Km2. So, one can say that to
conserve Indonesia's own natural forest, President Suharto is allowing his
beloved youngest son to destroy a friendly nation's forest.

        No wonder that Suharto so vehemently opposes any "Western
interference" in ASEAN's "domestic affairs", after the SLORC's Myanmar --
not Aung San Suu Ky's Burma -- has been accepted as an observer in ASEAN.
Especially since another son of the Indonesian ruler is also involved in
the telecommunication industry in Burma. PT Elektrindo Nusantara, which is
51% owned by Bambang Trihatmojo, Suharto's second son, has followed his
younger brother's step by investing in small telephone central units for
256 subscribers in Rangoon, as a pilot project for a much bigger deal with
the SLORC (Swasembada, August 1995: 16, 28).

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

NYT: BURMESE JUNTA SEEMS HEADED FOR SHOWDOWN
September 2, 1996
From: Zaliwin@aol.com
By Seth Mydans

Yangon, Myanmar, Sept. 1 -- It was raining hard on Saturday, but for an hour
applause and whistles and laughter came from under a sea of black umbrellas
as Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, a spray of pink flowers in her hair, taunted the
military Government, saying, "Why are you so afraid of us?"

Within the crowd of 2,000, squatting on both sides of University Avenue as
traffic crept by, people hunched over small tape recorders, risking 
arrest to
spread the words of the leader of the hard-pressed democratic movement in
Myanmar, formely Burma.

For 13 months, since releasing her from six years of house arrest, the
Government has permitted Mrs. ASSK, 51, to hold regular weekend rallies at
her front gate in the capital, formerly called Rangoon, even as it continues
to arrest her supporters and attack her in the press.

But in recent months the positions of the two sides have been 
hardening, and
foreign diplomats here say this small window of freedom that has been
accorded Mrs. ASSK may be closing.

Hopes for a dialogue have faded, and the struggle between the military rulers
and their democratic opponents is now one of heightened confrontation.

"We are increasing the momentum of our work, and they are increasing the
momemtum of arrests," Mrs. ASSK told foreign reporters before Saturday's
speech.

One Western diplomat who comes every week to the rallies said he found Mrs.
ASSK to be "more tense, more stressed."

"She is under a lot of pressure," he said.  "She has to keep the 
momentum up,
but fatigue is setting in.  Some of her leaders are old.  Some are in prison.
 Some have died.  She knows she will lose a waiting game; there is nothing
more to wait for."

For its part, the military junta continues to whittle away at here supporters
with arrests and prison sentences.  Stepping up its pressure, it has begun
identifying and detaining the more demonstrative members of the crowds 
at her
weekly rallies, said one of her chief lieutenants, U Tin Oo.

The military has already proved its stubborness, quashing a popular uprising
in 1988 with mass killings and discarding the results of a free 
election in
1990 when Mrs. ASSK's party, the National League for Democracy, won 85
percent of the seats in parliament.

Some people, though, like one medical doctor who stood under an 
umbrella with
a tape recorder in his hand, say they come to here rallies every week.

"I have relatives in Australia, and they are rich and well-educated," the
doctor said.  "Just because I live in Burma, why can't I be rich and educated
too?"

The rallies have also become a tourist attraction, and the crowd on Saturday
was sprinkled with visitors from the United States, France, Japan, Spain,
Germany and Britain, airming their cameras at Mrs. ASSK as she laughed and
gesticulated in the rain.

Around the city this weekend, though, a number of people said they did not
dare to attend, including some who work for Government enterprises and said
they had been ordered to stay away.

But word spreads, as one chemist said, "from mouth to mouth.

"I have been to see here twice and I like her," the chemist said.  "In Burma
if you like someone you will follow them."

Nevertheless, he said, the Government was succeeding in eroding her
popularity with its continuing attacks in the press, "like water 
dripping on
a stone."

Mrs. ASSK's main weapon now seems to be the support of Western countries,
particularly the United States.  But any moves the West may take, like an
economic boycott, have aleady been undercut by the support that the military
Government receives from its neighbors in the region.

Foreign analysts here say the Government seems to have been emboldened 
by its
induction in July as an observer member of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations, the regional economic and political grouping.  In recent weeks these
countries have signaled their intent to continue to do business with Myanmar
despite its human rights record.

Speaking at the associations July meeting in Jakarta, Indonesia, Myanmar's
Foreign Minister, U Ohn Gyaw, stated his Government's position on human
rights in words not unlike those used by some of his neighbors.

"We respect the norms and the ideals of human rights," he said.  "But 
as in
any other country in Southeast Asia, we have to take into consideration our
culture, our history, our ethos.  What is good in other countries 
cannot be
good in our country."

At her meeting with reporters on Saturday, Mrs. ASSK described the continuing
arrests of her supporters since May, when the Government detained more than
250 members of her party in advance of a gathering at her house that marked
the sixth anniversary of their aborted election victory.

Though she said all but 11 of those people had since been released  she said
at least 61 more had been arrested since May and about 25 had been 
tried and
sentenced to prison terms.

"We want the whole world to know that there is no rule of law in Burma,:"
 she said.  "They are not interested in fair play.  Their main drive is to
crush the movement for democracy."

Just down the street from her house was a giant red billboard that read:
"People's desire: Oppose those relying on external elements, acting as
stooges, holding negative views.  Crush all internal and external destructive
elements as the common enemy."

But near this denunciation of the democracy movement stood white-shirted
policemen directing the traffic that crept past the rally.

It is a precarious balance that holds the seeds of confrontation.

Asked what she would do if the Government moved to ban here rallies, Mrs.
ASSK responded, "We would continue to hold the rallies."

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

BSA ANNOUNCEMENT: FORMATION OF THE NEW CENTRAL 
COMMITTEE IN SAFE CAMP
August 16, 1996  (abridged)
From: "All Burma Students' Democratic Front" <lurie@mozart.inet.co.th

BURMESE STUDENTS ASSOCIATION - BURMESE STUDENTS CENTRE
DECLARATION ON THE FORMATION OF THE NEW CENTRAL COMMITTEE

* The seventh conference of the Burmese Students Association (BSA) was 
held on July 26th, 1996 at the Burmese Students Centre (BSC) in
Ratchaburi, Thailand and attended by the representatives of the
Burmese students who are taking sanctuary in the B.S.C.

The conference recognized the need to strive for a common goal of
maintaining and enhancing the historic dignity of Burmese Students
and the struggles for democracy in Burma.

The conference forged its resolve to generate a new comprehensive
link between the students and Thailand's Interior Ministry office
concerned, running the student affairs for greater understanding.

The conference underscored the importance of United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and Catholic Office for Emergency
Relief and Refugees (COERR) a non-governmental organization, which
are taking care of the Burmese students in the BSA .

The conference stressed that all the students living in the B.S.C
must respect Thai culture and traditions.

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

BSA ANNOUNCEMENT: FORMATION OF WOMEN AFFAIRS 
SUB-DEPARTMENT IN SAFE CAMP
August 24, 1996  (slightly edited/abridged)
From:  <lurie@mozart.inet.co.th
                                          
To be able to perform and carry out the social welfare, the Education 
Programme and Health-Care of Women and to provide the necessary 
assistance to improve the knowledge of Women in the Burmese Students 
Centre, a Womens Sub-Department was successfully set up under the 
Organization Department of B.S.A on August 19,1996.

AIMS
1. To work in coordination with those responsible, for the promotion, 
as 
necessary, of education, social welfare, health and other areas of need 
among the women population at the Burmese Students Centre.

2. To oppose, to bring to light the violations of human rights
suffered by Burmese women at home and abroad and to struggle for
the protection of their basic rights and privileges.

3. To strive for the privilege to participate honourably as Burmese
women, in the activities of women in harmony with the activities of
women groups around the world.

OBJECTIVES
1. To support Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, a Burmese and leader of the people 
of Burma in her struggle for democracy and for human rights in Burma.

2. To give more significance to the role of women in the future
development of Burma and to help the women become able and
efficient individuals who could keep abreast with the world.

3. To assist the women so that they will be able to bring up their
offspring in the understanding of and respect for democratic
principles in a future democratic Burma.

PROGRAM FOR ACTION

1. To provided health care and education to children at the centre 
during 
their stay here before they leave with their parents for a third country.
     
     (a) To set up a day nursery for young children here at the centre.
     (b) To set up a mother and child welfare association here at the centre.

2. To organise training that will impart more knowledge to the women here.
     
     (a) Handicraft trainings (sewing, knitting and other needlework).
     (b) Trainings on the rights of women and activities of women
         groups from around the world.
     (c) Training on democratic principles.

3. To document acts of violation of the basic rights suffered by
Burmese women at home and abroad and to join hands with the
international women groups so that their basic rights and
privileges could be safeguarded.

     (a) Collection of news and reports (at home, along the border and 
abroad).
     (b) Release of information (to different groups and  organizations).

4. To assist those women here at the centre who are in need of help. 

We appeal to each and every interested individual and group for
help and support so that our aims and objectives could be realized
and our program for action could be successfully carried out and 
accomplished.

Women Affair Sub-Department
Burmese Students Association

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

ASIA TIMES: WHY UNOCAL IGNORES CALLS FOR MYANMAR SANCTIONS
September 4, 1996
by Steven Brookes

Over the past several months, human rights groups in Europe and United 
States have been stepping up their calls for tough economic sanctions 
in 
Myanmar, arguing that constructive engagement favored by ASEAN has 
failed to bring about democracy. Faced with the threat of consumer 
boycotts, Pepsi, Heinken and a number of other multinational companies 
have already withdrawn. But some of the most significant foreign 
investors 
in Myanmar say the activists are misguided and argue that their 
projects 
create a wealth of jobs and economic opposites. Two of the most visible-
France's Total and  the American company Unocal- are involved in a 
U$1.2 billion pipeline project that will export natural gas to 
Thailand, 
boosting both the country's economic growth  and its domestic power 
supplies. During a trip to Yangon this weekend, Unocal president John  
IMLE spoke with Asia Times correspondent Stephen  Brookes about 
the pipeline  project, US sanctions legislation and the economic future 
of Myanmar.

        Q: As the biggest United State investor in Myanmar,
Unocal has become a prime target for the pro-sanctions activists.
Has the pressure affected your commitment to staying?

          A: We're fully committed. We feel that we're making an
investment in the right kind of place, at the right time and for
the right reasons. First of all, it's good for our shareholders-it
makes sense from a business point of view. Secondly, we're
firmly convinced makes sense for Myanmar, for its future its people.

        Q: Yet, the human rights groups argue that foreign
investments only benefit a few people and that they keep an
illegitimate regime in power.

        A: I disagree with that point of view. These investment
employ people and provide meaningful improvements in health,
education and economic opportunity, not only in terms of the
jobs that our projects provides, but in terms of development
projects we're founding-for example, shrimp farming and
livestock raising. These are providing people with economic
opportunities that they simply didn't have before, and wouldn't have 
any 
other way, things that this economy is not able to provide internally.

        Q: So you see a significant economic overflow?

        A: Absolutely, Economic projects bring a multiplier
effect into the economy. The number of our direct employees is
not astounding - there are between 300 and 600 Myanmars who
work for us, depending on the season. But beyond that, there's a
population of about 20,000 people whose lives are being
directly affected by the project we're sponsoring. They have
doctors available for the first time, for example. And we're
seeing signs of growing prosperity.

        Q: What about the charges that people have been
forcibly relocated out of the area and forced to work as porters?

        A: Those accusations are absolutely unfounded and
untrue. We have carefully researched that area going back for
year's using satellite photography and local maps. There have
been no villages moved in the area if this pipeline and there has
been no use of conscripted labor on this project.

        Q: Even by the military?

        A: Even by the military. There are military units there to
provide security for the pipeline, surveying and eventually
construction crews.. There was an attack in March 1995 and
one earlier this year. Of course, those attack require security
forces to be in the area. We do not pay the army for that
security. It just goes with being there.

        Q: There seem to be two points of view on foreign
investment : One that it preserves the status quo, the other that
it promotes change.

        A: In our experience, economic opportunity and
progress always create change for the better in terms of
government, human rights and the general welfare of the people.

        Q: So what effect do you think sanctions would have?

        A: We believe that sanctions are rarely, if ever,
productive and certainly would not be productive in terms of
their stated goals in Myanmar. The movement in favor of
sanctions is well-intentioned, but it might even stagnate the
move toward democracy and I think if's counterproductive.
Sanctioning US business out of  a national like Myanmar simply
isolates the United States. I fail to understand how the people in
favor of sanctions think they can influence a government by disengagement.

        Q: What about the effects on the US business community?

        A: The propensity of our Congress to adopt sanctions
makes us a less reliable coventurer for foreign companies. I also
worry about the perception of governments, who may be
looking at a European company versus a US company. They
want someone who's going to be there for decades and they
wonder, is there a political risk with the US Congress? Will they
have sanctions problems?  So they pick a European
organization. It's a huge problem for US business.

        Q: It looks like a watered-down version of the original
sanctions legislation may get passed in September. How would
that affect you?

        A: There is a Senate bill which has a sanctions
amendment  attached to it [HR3540] which is in the approval
process now. We're not happy to have that sanctions legislation
coming along, but in terms of possibilities, it's one we think we can 
live with.

        Q :Were you concerned about the McConnell bill [ an
earlier, stronger version of sanctions legislation]?

        A: The McConnell sanctions, if they had passed, would
have caused us to immediately divest. Word of that possibility
was out and for the last year we were accumulating the names
of companies, mostly Asian companies, who wanted to buy our
share of the project. So the project should have continued- the
effect would simply be to replace US investors with other
investors. But it would not have any effect on the project. And
one could wonder if the new owners would have the same
attitude about the socioeconomic parts of the project that we have had.

        Q: How about pressure from your from your ow shareholders?

        A: Well, 95 percent of our shareholders are squarely
behind this investment policy and 100 percent of our outside
directors are behind it. There seems to be an activist group of
shareholders who are against our investment in Myanmar, but
they're also against certain investments in Canada, Indonesia and
Azerbaij an-I would classify them as anti-investment! But
they're very small minority.

        Q: Aung San Suu Kyi recently came out in favor of
sanctions, but she's also been saying investors should stay away
because the economy is in bad shape. What's your view?

        A: I've been here off and on since 1989, and I'm
astounded by the amount of economic progress that has been
made. I didn't think I've ever seen a similar rate of progress
anywhere. And with respect to not investing because the
economy is sluggish or poor, that's how we create better
economics- by investing . By putting money into the system and
letting it circulate and letting people use it to buy the things they
want, educate their children, improve their health care.

        Q: What effect will the energy supplies from the gas
pipeline have on the broader economy? Investors often point to
poor electricity as a key infrastructure problem in Myanmar.

        A: That's right. And we've noticed in Thailand , as an
example, when natural gas production allowed the economical
increase of power generation, that economy really took of. They
had inexpensive power and that's needed for industry. The cycle
begins building upon itself. It creates rapid economic growth for
most of the population.

        Q: You've been meeting with some of the top people in
the government here. Do you think they're serious about moving
toward a full market economy?

        A: I don't think there's any doubt  about it. You see signs
of it all over this nation-individual businesses in what was
formerly a socialist system. The Asian propensity for doing
business in an entrepreneurial way is alive and well in this
country. They're throwing the economy open to the markets of
the world, and the results are unfolding at a rapid speed.

        And after this visit, I think that this government is
seriously committed to transitioning itself into a democracy.
That is their publicly-stated goal and I think that is not
understood in the United States.

        Q: What would you tell foreign investors about doing
business here?

        A: I would ask them to look very objectively and not
believe everything they read in the press. Talk to the leadership,
talk to people who live here, talk to their businessmen- and
then judge for themselves whether it's a good place to invest.

********************************************************
----------------------------------------------------------
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
Pipeline Campaign               freeburma@irn.org
Resettlement info:      refugee_help@mail.serve.com 
Rohingya culture                volunteer needed
Shan history/culture:   Sao Hpa Han: burma@ix.netcom.com
Shareholder activism:       simon_billenness@mail.cybercom.net 
Total - France          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

Geographical Contacts:

Massachusetts           simon_billenness@mail.cybercom.net 

[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"  (NOTE: this is a lower case "L",
not the numeral one).

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

