04.02.2007
ALL ETHNIC
INTERNATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY
The Junta’s Threats
by
Prof. Thann Naing
Now that the two undemocratic countries of the world has vetoed the Resolution in the UNSC, the apologists, advocates, psychopaths, cronies, supporters and fence sitters of the Junta are crowing, as the last nail in the coffin of the ethno democratic movement. Professor Thann Naing, a Principal Consulting Research Scientist and a teacher in New South Wales Universities, Australia cum the incumbent Professor of Current Affairs of AEIOU Programme, Chiang Mai University, gave a carefully analysed discussion on the existing situation. at AEIOU Program, Chiang Mai University Service Centre (UNISERV) on 9.00 to 12.00, Saturday 3rd. February 2007.
The Discussion ---
THE JUNTA’S THREATS
Both, the former President of the Czechoslovak Republic, Vaclav Havel, and South African Nobel laurite, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, expressed grave concerns about the current situation in Burma, and urged other nations to support UNSC resolutions under article 39. In a report provided to The Council in September 2005, titled “Threat to the peace: Support the call for UNSC sanctions on Burma”, five major areas were identified as having a direct impact and influence on the peace and stability of Southeast Asia. The report provided details outlining catastrophic effects for Burma, neighbouring nations, and internationally, with regard to the following five factors: (1) Over throwing the military government (2) Increasing internal conflict (3) Rampant human rights violations within Burma (4) The exodus of refugees (and internally displaced persons) and (5) The spread of HIV/AIDS and drugs within Burma, as well as neighbouring countries, and internationally.
Out of 191 countries in the United Nations, a clear majority agreed that there was a problem with the government of Burma that could pose a threat to regional peace, and some action was required to make the military junta accountable for breeches to the UN Charter. Initially, China was the only dissenting voice against any action being taken against Burma and vetoed a vote for sanctions. The Chinese representative, whilst agreeing that there were problems in Burma, argued that Burma’s problems were internal, and as such, did not warrant UN action. Representatives from other countries, South Africa and Russia, also argued that UN sanctions might be too heavy-handed, and it would be more appropriate to commence diplomatic negotiations, and conflict resolution through other channels, rather than the UNSC. The defiance of Burma’s Military government is a matter for concern among member nations in the UN. In the past, since 1991/1992 efforts were made by the UN General Assembly, and the ỦN Commission on Human Rights on behalf of the citizens of Burma, to compel the junta abide by the guidelines of the Human Rights Council. Together they have already passed almost thirty resolutions against the junta on separate occasions, and on each occasion the action was ignored by the Burmese military dictatorship.
Therefore, it came as no surprise to learn that the UN Security Council’s draft resolution for a Threat to the Peace, based on UN Charter Article 39, was vetoed at the 12 January meeting. The result of the vote was: 9 votes for, 3 against and 3 abstentions. Regardless of any acknowledgement that conflict in Burma poses a threat to domestic, regional and international peace, the military junta manages to garner support from other nations, such as Russia and China, because business and economic concerns seem to demand a higher priority than any moral imperative. The South African vote, supported by ANC, was puzzling to those who observed that country achieving their goals of equality and freedom with the help of the UN, in similar circumstances to present day Burma.
Visits from UN representatives to Burma yield no positive results. Although the list is impressive: Sadako Ogata (1990) an Independent Expert, Yozo Yokota (1992 - 1996) a Special Rapporteur, Alvaro De Soto (1995 – 1999) a Special Envoy, Rajsoomer Lallah (1996 – 2000) a Special Rapporteur, Razali Ismail (2000 – 2006) a Special Envoy, Paulo Sergio Pinhero (2000 to present) a Special Rapporteur, and finally Nigerian diplomat Ibrahim Gambari (2006 to present) a Special Rapporteur sent out by former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, they are denied access to certain areas, or misled in their interviews with internal officials. All of their reports to the UNGA and UN Human Rights Committee, about Threats to the Peace and all recommendations by the UNGA to adhere to UN Charter Article 39 have been ignored. More than 1100 political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, NLD, and ethnic leaders languish in prison or remain under house arrest. Promises to release political prisoners are false. There have been numerous reports indicating that there is an increased in prisoner numbers, and ICRC regional offices are closing. The scale of conflict between the military junta and the people, refugee numbers, conflict between groups, HIV/AIDS and the drug trade is increasing with time, and the inability to force the junta to be accountable.
Given the current stance of the military junta, and the inability of the UN to impose sanctions, enforce its rules, or even gain the co-operation of the Burmese regime, other methods of conflict resolution must be considered. There is international agreement about problems existing within Burma. However, there appears to be some disagreement about how those problems might be resolved. It is in the interest of other Southeast Asian countries to find some unity and to carefully consider the consequences of their actions when negotiating trade agreements with the junta. There is a very real possibility of the conflict in Burma spilling over the borders, (just as the numbers of refugees increase), into neighbouring countries. As long as there is conflict in Burma, the Southeast Asian region may not feel assured that the area is stable and peaceful. Once again the international community should invoke the powers of the UN, and others groups like NAM, G77, EU, ASEAN etc.,. to restore peace and security internally, regionally and internationally.
The SPDC attempts to gloss over the situation and prevent people from learning the truth. Data related to HIV/AIDS and the drug trade are grossly understated when compared with UN and Red Cross compiled information. The junta attempts to curry favour with powerful allies by honouring representatives (offering them red carpet treatment) during visits to the country, and offering financial inducements to some “so called” academics who prefer the night life of Burma to academic pursuits. These visiting ‘experts’ say whatever the junta wants as long as their pockets are filled. To make matters worse, the SPDC has started hiring PR Consultants from Washington DC, NY to create a campaign of propaganda and ‘downplay’ the threat to peace. One would have expected that lessons were learnt from mistakes made by assisting Saddam Hussein. If the junta thinks a PR company can assist it in fooling the world, they should consider the present crisis in Iraq. “Shwe’s” days are numbered; as Shakespere wrote “…as night follows day…”, this author says “SHWE will follow SEIN”, and soon!
-------------------------
Professor Dr Thann Naing
Head of Geology Department Workers’ College Branch, Rangoon University
(1970 to 1985)
PhD Candidate at School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
(1985 to 1989)
Curator, Earth Sciences Museum, School of Earth Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
(1989 to 2000)
Principal (Research Consulting Scientist), Environmental Research Centre), Sydney Australia (2000 to current)
Teacher at Universities in New South Wales State (2000 to current).
Professor in Current Affairs in Burma at AEIOU, CMU (current)
.
Your Comments here_ can use win-Burmese fonts; but not symbols (:/\<>!|{]~#$)
Last week's English article
