Facing the evidence…

By  Raluca Enescu 

          From one of those forwarded e-mails I received some time ago: “There is a saying claiming that, when you realise you’re riding a dead horse, the wisest thing you can do is to dismount. However, business often offers alternative strategies; this includes officially declaring “Actually, this horse is not dead”; if facing the evidence, changing the declaration to “No horse is too dead to be useful for us.

            This example often came into my mind, as I studied and followed closely the case of Total Oil’s investment in Burma.

            The fourth largest company in the world, Total Oil, is in close business relationships with Burma’s brutal military dictatorship. As Aung San Suu Kyi said, “Total has become the main supporter of Burma’s military regime”. Adding to this the fact that Total opted to employ as security, through the regime's Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise, an Army internationally renowned for its extreme and unrelenting brutality, unleashing a terrible and lasting devastation on the communities of the region, and the multiple accusations concerning the use of forced labour, Total Oil’s attitude has, unsurprisingly, faced strong criticism from groups concerned about democracy and human rights from all around the world.

            You don’t have to be an expert in ethical business, or especially concerned about Burma’s democracy movement to realise that doing business with one of the most repressive dictatorships in the world, which is guilty of a huge number of human rights abuses, and, by those business, offering to it an important financial support, which they would mostly use for empowering their oppression organ, cannot be called “constructive engagement”, as Total keeps on claiming, despite the increasing number of protests towards their attitude of complicity with Burma’s military junta.

            Total definitely knew what it was doing when it decided to invest in Burma; it knew what it was doing when it kept its investment, while others decided to withdraw, for ethical reasons.

            “Total's decision to stay in Myanmar expresses the Group's deep-seated belief that economic development and human rights progress go hand in hand.” Total’s representatives say on their website. But can we consider their declaration realistic? Let’s try to analyze the consequences that Total’s investment in Burma had on the country’s situation.

            First of all, Total’s project provides significant annual revenue to the regime. Some sources estimate as much as $450million. Natural gas is now Burma's largest single source of export revenue, accounting for around 30% of export earnings in 2002/2003.

According to the Burma Campaign UK, “Total’s investment in Burma has helped the regime to build its military capacity, in particular the acquisition of Russian MIG fighter planes.

Jane's Defence Weekly reported in July 2001 that Rangoon was buying 10 MiG-29 jet fighters from the Russian Aircraft-building Corporation for US$130 million and that the money was coming from Thai gas purchases. The down-payment for the MIGs (30 percent of the total) came in the same week that the state-owned Petroleum Authority of Thailand paid Burma US$100 million in royalties, for gas due to be piped ashore from fields in the Gulf of Martaban. Before the Thais made this payment under the terms of its 1995 contract, Burma had almost depleted its foreign exchange reserves. According to Robert Karniol, Asia editor of Jane's Defence Weekly, the Russians had been unwilling to sell aircraft to Burma until revenue began to flow from the Martaban gas field.”

But supporting financially the oppression organ used to maintain in power a military dictatorship trough the use of sheer force is not the only thing Total’s decision to keep its investment in Burma can be criticised for.

The Total pipeline has been closely associated with serious human rights abuses - including forced labour, forced relocation, forced portering (carrying of munitions), beatings, torture, rape and the use of civilians as human mine sweepers.

“The accusation that the Yadana project has benefited from the heavy use of forced labour by Burmese citizens, including children, the elderly, and the infirm is well-documented.”, says Burma Campaign UK’s report “Total Oil-fuelling the oppression in Burma” There are countless reports that Burmese soldiers in the pipeline region conscripted thousands of civilians to perform forced labour for the benefit of the pipeline. As onshore work commenced, the military directed the construction of service roads and helipads, as well as their own camps and barracks, through the use of forced labour.

Typically the army called on village heads to send forced labourers on a rotational basis. Each group coming for one to two weeks leaving only when a replacement group arrived. Hundreds of acres of land were cleared, bamboo and trees cut down, stumps dug out and ground levelled. Villagers dug wells and trenches, built fences, cut thatch and made posts and boards to build barracks. Villagers had to supply their own shelter in which to sleep during conscription and their own food and water. They worked through the heat of the day under threat of punishment and ill treatment.”

 Testimonials from villagers, as shown in ERI’s reports “Total denial continues” and “Fuelling abuse” paint a grim picture:

“They did not give us any food… they even did not allow us to make huts for ourselves. Most of us used plastic sheets or sacks for our beds so many got malaria, colds and coughs…We had about 10 people who were 60 to 70 years old…if you had headache, coughing, cold and a little fever they did not let us take a rest.”
Villager from the pipeline region
            “For three weeks we had to dig the mound with only seven people… At that time we were beaten by soldiers… (Because the soldiers thought we were not working, they) called all of us and punished us… (T)hey asked us to jump like frogs.”
Villager from the pipeline region
            “They kicked us when we did not have enough strength to take out the stumps. At that time I wanted to take revenge against them in my heart, but I dared not.”
Villager from the pipeline region

On the subject of forced labour, Total’s website says: “Certain incidents may have escaped Total's attention in the very early phases of the project”. While Michel Viallard, head of Total Myanmar has said, “In the very first months, we learnt about the use of forced labour by the army... and we decided voluntarily to pay the people who had been conscripted.” However, this does not excuse Total from its responsibility towards people in countries where the company operates.

Total was fully aware of the dangers inherent in deploying Burmese Army troops in an area where civilian families were living. Despite this, the company opted to employ, through MOGE (Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise), the services of an Army internationally renowned for its extreme and unrelenting brutality.

The Production Sharing Contract (PSC) between TOTAL and MOGE signed on 9 July 1992 makes direct reference to the security issue. Under “Rights And Obligations of MOGE and Contractor” it reads: “MOGE shall: assist and expedite (TOTAL’s) execution of the Work Programme by providing at cost…security protection and rights of way and easements as may be requested by (TOTAL)”.  It is made explicit (in the PSC contract) that security personnel were to be “made available from resources under MOGE’s control”( – i.e. the Burmese Army.) (Total Contract, page 70. PSC – TOTAL-MOGE, 9 July, 1992.)

“As a direct consequence of the militarization of the pipeline region countless human rights violations against the local population have occurred over the years. First hand testimony from victims, witnesses and army defectors from the area testify to a litany of abuses including forced labour, forced relocation, torture and rape carried out by pipeline security troops - some of which have become known to local communities as the “TOTAL battalions” (Light Infantry brigades 273 and 282 who set up barracks around 1995-1996).”, says Burma Campaign UK’s report “Total Oil-fuelling the oppression in Burma”

And-trough all this time, Total’s so called “constructive engagement” has not even resulted in a single democratic reform by the regime.

The fact is not really surprising- why would a brutal and corrupted dictatorship which maintains itself in power specifically trough the use of oppression make any move towards political and social reform when it is a lot easier and more advantageous for them to maintain the same, or even worse abusive regime, by strengthening their grip on people using an oppression organ financially supported by the funds coming from a giant company that believes, or at least claims that this is called “constructive engagement”???

Total Oil is now more than ever, facing the evidence that trying to achieve constructive engagement by doing business with an abusive regime is at least as illogical as riding a dead horse. And there is an evidence that we, as responsible citizens of the world, have the moral duty not to ignore. (The facts presented in this article are based on Burma Campaign UK’s report-“Total Oil-Fuelling the oppression in Burma”)

Raluca Enescu