Whither
Burma?
Remarks by the Hon. David Kilgour
Member of
Parliament for Edmonton Southeast and Secretary
of State (Asia-Pacific)
Canadian
Friends of Burma Conference
Crowne Plaza
Hotel,
Ottawa, ON
October 9,
2002
*Check against
delivery
**See below
for related links
Dear friends
of Burma, special guest Dr. Sein Win (a
democrat in the truest sense),
Thank you
to the organisers for giving me the opportunity
to talk to you about a hauntingly beautiful
land and its peoples, full of history, which
have for the past 40 years and longer weighed
heavily on the conscience of humanity.
Let me first
explain for any newcomers why so many of
us continue to use the name Burma rather
than Myanmar. There are certainly problems
with the term “Burma” for some
of the non-Burman ethnic communities, but
none of them to my knowledge prefers the
name minted by the military clique –
which incidentally used to go by the acronym
SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council),
but now understandably prefers to call itself
the SPDC (State Peace and Development Council
– to the one with which the country
began independence from the UK in 1948.
Until a freely-elected parliament or popular
referendum indicates a national will to
change, true friends of the nation that
brings us here today seem likely to stick
with “Burma”.
Bertil Lintner
Permit me
to make some brief references to an extraordinary
book by Bertil Lintner, Burma in Revolt,
republished in 2000.[1] The book, incidentally,
is the sixth in a series published on the
homeland of his wife, Hseng Noung.
In 1948,
Lintner notes, Burma was a promising democracy
with a vigorous market economy and a higher
standard of living than virtually all of
its Asian neighbours. Today, it is one of
the very poorest of the world’s least-developed
nations and is ruled by a “medieval
military dictatorship that has been in power
since 1962.”
At independence,
the country harvested about 30 tons of raw
opium. Five years ago–the most recent
date for which Lintner offers data–the
harvest according to U.S.. estimates was
at least 25 hundred tons–an 8000 %
increase. Millions of Asians and North Americans
are being poisoned through the country’s
phenomenal success at one of the worst instances
of globalization. He notes correctly that
almost, quote:
“no
attempts have been made to address the underlying
historical, social and economic factors
behind the drug explosion in areas such
as the Golden Triangle...Without a lasting
solution to the ethnic question and the
civil war, Burma will remain a source of
political despair–and drugs from its
sector of the Golden Triangle will continue
to flood the markets of the world.”
I might add
here as a Western Canadian that in Vancouver
alone today we are losing the life of approximately
one person every day and a half to heroin
overdoses.
More Recent
Years
My own personal
interest in Burma dates back to the early
1990s, when my wife Laura and I welcome
welcomed a Burmese refugee into our home
in Edmonton, while he waited for his family
to arrive. He opened our eyes to the true
nature of the ongoing tragedy in Burma.
The whole
world had watched in horror in 1988, when
in a six week period Ne Win’s regime
murdered thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators
and imprisoned hundreds more. In 1990, we
all shared in the euphoria of Aung San Suu
Kyi’s and the National League for Democracy’s
extraordinary victory in the first elections
in more than a generation. With one unified
voice, the peoples of Burma overwhelmingly
chose the way of open, democratic and civilian
rule. This democratic miracle occurred despite
the regime’s continuous efforts since
1962 to silence dissent, bar opposition
leaders from standing for office, and placing
Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest.
The election,
of course, has never been recognised by
Burma’s military rulers. They kept
Aung San Suu Kyi under house-arrest for
fully six years. In that time, her spirit
could not be broken. She was awarded a Nobel
Peace Prize for selfless devotion to Burma.
She has garnered the respect and support
of millions of people from around the world.
Her book, Freedom From Fear, won world-wide
attention She has worked tirelessly while
under house-arrest and while free to press
the regime to enter into dialogue with Burma’s
democratic forces. Since October 2000, she
has led “secret” confidence-building
talks with the regime. In May of this year,
the entire international community welcomed
her release from house arrest. While an
important symbolic event, it was long-overdue
and only a first step towards
redemocratization.
Humanitarian
disaster
During Aung
San Suu Kyi’s continuous battles with
the regime, Burma’s peoples to her
great regret have suffered enormously. Burma
remains one of the world’s poorest
countries. Its very modest economic gains
in the last 15 years have benefited a small,
privileged elite only.
For years,
Ne Win and his successors attempted to hermetically
seal off Burma from the world. Their economic
mismanagement and reliance on forced labour,
compounded by the lingering effects of the
Asian financial crisis, sent the economy
into a full downward spiral. Annual per
capita income hovers around $US300 a year.
The most reliable World Bank survey (1997)
estimates that about one quarter of the
population (13 million people) is living
below minimum subsistence levels, with another
five million live precariously above it.[2]
According to the Asian Development Bank,
in 2001 foreign direct investment in Burma
dropped by 50% while inflation averaged
about 20%.[3] Consequently, the price of
the most basic food-stuffs such as rice
are now out of the reach of many consumers.
This, unfortunately,
is not the worst of it. Various social indicators
have now reached alarming levels. Rates
of infant mortality, maternal mortality
and malnutrition among children are growing.[4]
HIV prevalence is rapidly rising, fuelled
by population mobility, poverty and frustration.
In June 2000, the joint United Nations Program
on HIV and AIDS estimated that over 530,000
people in Burma were infected with HIV.[5]
This translates into one out of about fifty
people between the ages of fifteen and forty-nine.
Approximately 43,000 children are already
living without their mothers or both parents
because of AIDS-related deaths.
The International
Crisis Group reports that only three out
of four children enter primary school, and
of those only two out of five complete the
full five years.[6] In other words, only
30% of Burma’s children receive proper
primary schooling. Secondary schools and
universities are often closed for “security”
reasons (a euphemism for the regime’s
fear of student-led protests) , and because
there is simply a lack of resources to maintain
them.
Life in Burma’s
conflict areas is worsening. Human Rights
Watch reports that there are currently about
140,000 Burmese displaced by conflict and
ongoing political repression, who are living
in squalid refugee camps in Thailand and
Bangladesh. Hundreds of thousands more live
as internally displaced people within Burma
or outside camps in Thailand, Bangladesh,
and India.[7] Villagers in the Shan, Kayah
(Karenni) and Karen State have been forcibly
relocated, and those suspected of aiding
“insurgents” are tortured and
sometimes killed.
One particular
issue of grave concern is a June 19th report
published by the Shan Human Rights Foundation
and the Shan Women’s Action Network,
which in macabre detail describes a campaign
in which the military is alleged to have
used rape against the Shan minoriy. According
to the report, there were 625 documented
rapes committed against Shan women and girls
between 1996 and 2001. Given the seriousness
of these claims, we are all very pleased
that Burma has invited UN Special Envoy
Pinheiro to personally investigate these
allegations.
There are
few places in Asia where “human security”
is more lacking than in Burma. The situation
is not the result of some humanitarian crisis
born out of war or a natural disaster. Rather,
it is almost entirely attributable to the
regime’s economic mismanagement and
complete lack of respect for human rights.
Burma’s hopes for the future rest on
the regime’s ability to open the political
process, commit to democratic change, and
end the cycle of political repression/ economic
stagnation that has cursed Burma for almost
40 years.
Burma’s
political stagnation
As mentioned
earlier, we all welcomed Aung San Suu Kyi’s
release on May 6th.. After nearly twenty
months under house arrest, she returned
with a clear agenda: to release all political
prisoners and begin real discussions about
a time-line for a transition to democratic
rule.
Regarding
political prisoners, in the past 20 months,
fewer than 300 have been released. An estimated
1400-1600 remain imprisoned, often in terrible
conditions. UN Special Rapporteur Paulo
Pinheiro stated before the Commission on
Human Rights in March:
“I cannot
accept the view that the estimated 1,600
remaining political prisoners are criminal
offenders. The fact that they are not ordinary
criminals is officially recognized by [the
regime] since they are held separately from
common criminals. Their common denominator
is that they are in prison in connection
with alleged political opinions or activities....most,
if not all [political prisoners] are in
prison in violation of international human
rights law and ... should be unconditionally
released”.[1]
At the current
rate of releasing prisoners, as Aung San
Suu Kyi has pointed out, there will be political
prisoners in Burma until 2010.[2] Any meaningful
consideration of engagement by Canada with
the regime in Burma depends on the unconditional
release of all political prisoners.
The political
situation in Burma does seem to be experiencing
something of a thaw currently, but the SLORC/SPDC
has yet to provide any substantive reason
for anyone to believe that it intends to
give up power or even to engage in substantive
negotiations with Aung San Suu Kyi.
Freedom House
concluded in its annual report this year
that “Burma continue[s] to be ruled
by one of the world’s most repressive
regimes. The junta rules by decree, controls
the judiciary, suppresses nearly all basic
rights, and commits human rights abuses
with impunity.”[3] The UN Commission
on Human rights and the General Assembly
have expressed grave concern at continuing
human rights violations, arbitrary executions,
rape, torture, forced labour, forced relocation
and denial of freedom of assembly, association,
expression and movement in reports by Special
Rapporteur Pinheiro and, in the case of
forced labour, by the International Labour
Organization.
Canadian
policy towards Burma
Canada and
like-minded countries such as the U.S.,
U..K., and E.U. have not engaged in a high-level,
government-to-government manner since 1988.
We have no intention of changing this policy
at this time.
In 1988,
Canada suspended official commercial relations
with Burma, withdrew all support for Canadian
firms doing business in the country, including
export programs and commercial promotion;
cancelled multilateral assistance through
international financial institutions; and
suspended bilateral aid.
In 1997,
further measures were imposed to underscore
Canada's concerns over human rights, illegal
drugs and lack of political dialogue. Canada
withdrew Burma's General Preferential Tariff
eligibility; placed the country on the Area
Control List (the only export approvals
since have been for humanitarian goods);
and called on Canadian firms not to trade
or invest in Burma until improvements are
evident. Tragically for the population,
such improvements have not been forthcoming.
Permit me
to make some comments regarding our policies
of punitive commercial actions and non-engagement
at high-levels. Regarding the former, Canada
urges all Canadian companies to practise
good social corporate responsibility where-ever
they operate. Canada urges Canadian firms
not to trade with or invest in Burma until
significant improvements are evident. That
said, the Canadian government currently
does not have the legislative capacity to
punish or bar Canadian companies from operating
overseas unless similar sanctions have been
enacted by a multilateral organization of
which Canada is a member.
On the matter
of engaging with the regime, some of you
will undoubtedly have seen that Australia’s
foreign minister, Alexander Downer, was
in Burma last week, meeting with General
Than Shwe and Aung San Suu Kyi. Meeting
Aung San Suu Kyi was the precondition for
his trip -- the first by an Australian minister
since 1988. Australia has criticised Burma
over human rights abuses and political repression,
and shares many of the international community’s
concerns. Moreover, as Mr. Downer himself
has said, he hopes that Australia’s
links with Asia can help bridge the gaps
between Burma and the “West”.[4]
Japan is another country that has taken
a more open approach to their relations
with Burma. Nevertheless, Canadian policy
has not changed on this issue. Even Aung
San Suu Kyi, according to an article in
this Monday’s The Age newspaper (published
in Melbourne), continues to support tough
economic and political sanctions.[5]
In short,
the evidence before us is compelling. As
far as the government of Canada is concerned,
Burma’s unelected military regime has
not taken the necessary steps to merit the
international community’s direct engagement.
We have yet to be convinced that Any tentative
steps towards opening the system are anything
more than a public relations exercise. The
admirable efforts by UN Special Envoy Razali
Ismail to engage the regime are commendable.
Even he is reported to becoming increasingly
disappointed with the regime’s intransigence.[6]
On the humanitarian
side, since 1992 Canada has provided $18
million in aid to support peace-building
initiatives and emergency humanitarian aid
(such as food and medical aid) to Burmese
refugees in neighbouring countries, including
Bangladesh and Thailand, through international
NGOS and multilateral organizations such
as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees,
Médècins Sans Frontières,
and the International Committee of the Red
Cross.
Policy Change?
Today, the
military junta in Burma finds itself at
a cross-roads. Internationally, it is isolated.
Public support for Aung San Suu Kyi and
democratic reform has not waned; if anything
it seems to have grown. Domestically, Burma’s
economy is devastated. It has hopefully
become evident to Burma’s ruling generals
that their form of government is not sustainable.
Despite the
release of Aung San Suu Kyi, Canada does
not feel the regime has made sufficient
progress towards democracy and respect for
human rights to warrant changing our policy
towards Burma. Canada, along with like-minded
countries in the international community,
continues to call for immediate and concrete
signs that the regime is serious about change.
At the very least, these changes include:
1. The release
of all political prisoners;
2. The resumption
and formal recognition on the part of the
SLORC/SPDC that talks have taken place with
Aung San Suu Kyi; and
3. A shift
by the regime beyond “confidence-building”
to substantive talks with Aung San Suu Kyi
and the NLD.
Ensuring
the effectiveness of Canada’s policy
would not be possible without the domestic
and international support of organizations
such as the Canadian Friends of Burma, the
Centre for Human Rights and Democracy, and
many other groups represented here today.
Indeed, the international campaign calling
for a free and democratic Burma has been
a long road, fraught with disappointments
until now. Working together, I am confident
that the real change that all Burmese hope
for will be realized.
Conclusion:
A plea for reconciliation
I’d
like to conclude with a quote from Aung
San, Aung San Suu Kyi’s father and
probably the main source of Burma’s
independence. On the night of his election
as the President of the Anti-Fascist People’s
Freedom League (Burma’s first-ever
nationally elected governing party) in January
of 1946, he said,
“By
national unity, we don’t mean only
unity; we mean the unity of the entire people,
irrespective of race, religion, sex and
sectarian and party interests, in action
and not in words for national ... objectives.”[7]
These words
hold as true today as they did 56 years
ago. Aung San Suu Kyi is a hero for many
people, but she admits that she does not
speak for all people in Burma. Burma is
a culturally and ethnically rich country
that needs national reconciliation as much
as it does democracy. Hopefully one day
very soon, representatives of all of Burma’s
ethnic groups will be included in a true
national dialogue – when all the patient
and gallant Burmese can decide the fate
of their country.
Thank you.
-20-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1]Available
at:
[2]Cited
from: The Asian Wall Street Journal, Bad
News in Burma: The junta hasn’t changed
its stripes yet, 27 June 2002.
[3]Available
at: http://www.freedomhouse.org/research/freeworld/2002/countryratings/burma..htm
[4]Cited
from: BBC News, Australian Minister in Burma
talks, 2 October 2002. Available at:
[5]Cited
from: The Age, Mark Baker, Suu Kyi attacks
Downer policy, 7 October 2002. Available
at .
[6]Cited
from: The Bangkok Post, Larry Jagan, Burmese
Generals mark an anniversary: Junta has
little to celebrate, 18 September 2002.
[7]Source:
Related
Links
Canadian
Friends of Burma
Online
Burma Library
Burmanet
News
The
Irrawaddy
Free
Burma Coalition
Burma
Project
|
