Burma Smile

Photo by Jotman.

Fox News Award

The Fox News Award will be a regular weekly feature at Jotman. It will go to a media organization that has gone the extra mile during the course of the week to make the public more stupid.*

This week's award goes to the New York Times for its decision to hire Bill Kristol to write a weekly op/ed column. Kristol was one of the intellectual architects of the Iraq War.

_________
* Otherwise corrupting the ethic of creativity and global citizenship. Not only does Fox News instill narrow-mindedness in its US viewers, its overseas broadcasts undermine the ethic of global citizenship abroad by promoting anti-Americanism.

World leadership material

I believe this man has the ethical compass to lead Americans, and the instincts for world leadership. I'm talking about US presidential candidate John Edwards (WaPo):

The enemy he sees is corporate America and corporate greed. His message seeks not to unite America but to finish what he describes as "an epic struggle" against forces that are, literally, killing America -- destroying jobs, holding down wages, putting ordinary Americans out of work or denying them medical care.

A true leader confronts genuine problems, not trivial ones. By contrast, fellow Democratic Party contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton hesitate even to name this root cause of America's troubles today (and by extension, those of the whole world).

Shortly after Benazir Bhutto’s assassination, John Edwards was on the phone with the Pakistani President. To me, that kind of small deed speaks volumes about his willingness to constructively engage other nations.

Check out his video interview with Bill Maher.

Questioning Burma's richest trading partners

Two rich developed countries conduct a sizable amount of trade with Burma. In 2008, what will be Japan's excuse for having written Burma another check for $120 million? What will be Singapore's excuse for having earned another $850 million selling goods to Myanmar?

BURMA EXPORTS $2.3 billion in gas, wood products, pulses, beans, fish, rice, clothing, jade and gems.
Destination: Thailand 48.8%, India 12.7%, China 5.2%, Japan 5.2%

BURMA IMPORTS $5.3 billion in fabric, petroleum products, fertilizer, plastics, machinery, transport equipment; cement, construction materials, crude oil; food products, edible oil
Source: China 35.1%, Thailand 22.1%, Singapore 16.4%, Malaysia 4.8%

The United States is party to a bilateral free trade agreement with Singapore. It would be interesting to know if Myanmar indirectly benefits from this arrangement (FYI, here is the "United States - Singapore Free Trade Agreement").

_____________
Note: "Import figures are grossly underestimated due to the value of consumer goods, diesel fuel, and other products smuggled in from Thailand, China, Malaysia, and India."
Source: CIA World Factbook. All figures are for 2006.

Burma Smile

Photo by Jotman.

Pakistan and Thailand: nations on the brink

Comparisons are inevitable. Encouraged by the success of the People's Power Party (PPP) at the polls, the exiled former prime minister of Thailand, Thaksin, had been engaged in a public relations campaign: "I will return" he declared. His opponents were issuing rebuttals, threatening his arrest upon return. Observers had begun to ask: will it be adoring crowds or handcuffs that greet Thaksin if he steps off a plane from Hong Kong?

That's when the news from Pakistan broke. Only weeks after returning home from exile, former Pakistani president Benazir Bhutto, the leader of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), is assassinated.

For Thais, it was a rude awakening: a reminder that the road back to democracy can be treacherous; a reminder that Thailand is no stranger to violent extremism. The frequency of violence within the Southern most provinces of Thailand in recent years may well have exceeded that within Pakistan.

Moreover, Thais remember New Year's Eve when Bangkok got bombed. They know that acts of terrorism leave not only detestation, but unanswered questions. Any uncertainty as to who is to blame for such deeds can be exploited for political gain. It remains a troubling fact that the Thai junta rushed to pin blame for the bombing of Bangkok on supporters of Thaksin. Thais have yet to see a shred of evidence that would justify the accusation.

In Pakistan today, the recriminations have only just begun.

Burma Smile

Photo shows a fellow passenger on my bus journey through the north of Burma. I describe our ordeal in this jot.

My talk with a man who got behind the wheel for Burma

Today I spoke with a Burmese activist from Toronto who is litteraly driven to raise awareness about the Burma crisis in North America. Si Thu is on the final leg of "Driving for Burma," a trip around North America.

Si Thu has driven over twelve thousand kilometers. When I spoke to him by phone about two hours ago, he was in the snowy town of Jasper located high in the Canadian Rockies. Along the way he has led car rallies, parades, meetings, and protests outside Chinese consulates. Also, he has interviewed some leading Burma dissidents living in the United States. These interviews, along with daily updates, are posted on his blog, Driving for Burma.

Si Thu is what is known in the Burmese community as a "generation 88" leader. In 1988 the students rose up against the government and thousands were killed by security forces. When the crackdown came, Si Thu joined the ABSDF (All Burma Students' Defense Forces). He retired from combat in 1992.

Si Thu is a man with a mission: to raise awareness about the situation in Burma in the wake of the monks' protests in September.

Some of his reactions have been quite startling, to say the least. Seeing his car emblazoned with the words "Free Burma" on the side, Si Thu says one guy asked:

"Burma? What kind of company is that?"

So the journey has been an education. For onlookers, but also for Si Thu. The trip has revealed the extent to which the September protests have awakened North America's Burmese community to the plight of the homeland.
"After September they saw it. It changed them. They said, 'I want Burma to be free.' They have come out of their houses. Now they show their faces."

Most gratifying to him has been to see the reaction from young North American Burmese.

The New Generation -- kids from 20 to 26 -- they have been thinking only about their jobs, their careers. Now they say, 'I'm ready to give my life for my country.

When I see this this really really makes me happy.

He had an message for these young people. It went something like this:

You want to do politics. I say doing politics means doing good for Burma. And you are doing good for Burma if you get a degree, if you make your business a success. All you need to do is this: be good yourself. The more you can succeed, the more you can help Burma to succeed in the future.

Now you're doing things not just for yourself. Now you can do it for them. So try to learn here. One day, you will go back to Burma and you will be able to give the people a hand.

I'm saying if you want to help the political situation in Burma, you don't need to go to stand outside the Burmese Embassy everyday. Just make the most of the opportunities you have here -- opportunities people in Burma don't have. But that one day you can share.

Not surprisingly, this kind message seemed to have a galvinizing effect on the young people Si Thu spoke to. The messenger was very much effected by these enounters as well.

I told Si Thu that Westerners were always asking me what they could do to help Burma. I asked what advice he had for North Americans. Si Thu said:

Canadians have Chevron Gas Stations. Chevron invests in
Burma. I urge them not to buy their gas there.

To Americans, I say if you are in a store and happen to see an alternative to something made in China -- in those cases where there is a choice -- try to buy that instead. Also, I tell Americans to get write their Congressmen, to tell them to support the Jade Bill.

So what's next for Si Thu? He would like to do another drive like this one again in the future, only bigger and better:

"What I want to do is to go with five others next time -- including a good speaker of English -- and hit every major city, every university in North America."

I wish Si Thu continued success and a safe journey. More information about Si Thu and his "Driving for Burma" campaign is available on his blog.

Anniversary of the tsunami in Thailand

Tsunami orphans living in Khao Lak were the subject of a recent film documenting their lives and feelings about the sea. Some of these Thai children -- students at a newly built school -- were handed cameras and video recorders and invited to film their world. Here's the first installment:



More background info about the documentary and the kids here.

Burma Smile

Photo by Jotman.

In Thailand appearances can be deceptive

Blogger Fonzi at Thailand Jumped the Shark criticized the US State Department Monday for praising Thailand's return to democracy before the final results had even been announced. He said it was too early to congratulate Thailand. I think Fonzi's basic instinct here is correct. It is too soon to say what the 2007 election results portend; yes, it's early to be patting anyone on the back here.

Despite the rise of the Thaksin-allied PPP Party -- poised, perhaps, to form the next government -- I see that many of the same questions I had before the election remain as pressing as ever.

The royalists. If Privy Council President Prem was behind the coup, were the royalists' goals achieved during the interim? If the point was to get Thaksin out of their hair, have they succeeded? Few commentators seem to think so. If not, what is to prevent the royalists from spending more political capital to get what they want? Nothing actually prevents this. Many of the royalists are getting on in years. They may not think they have so much to lose by behaving more assertively.

I blogged about the security emergency declared in the run-up to the election, and there was that pre-election rush to pass legislation giving emergency powers to the Thai prime minister: what was that all about? Until a new government has been sworn in, there remains a strong likelihood that these powers will be exercised. Recall Prem's words on the eve of the vote.

Thaksin. Thaksin says he intends to return, and will return as soon as he feels assured that the army will allow his plane to land. Does Thaksin really mean it when he says he will be staying out of politics for now? There is anger about what the coup did to the country; some new frustrations about the economy. For example, taxi drivers seem to be earning much less than a year ago. Imagine the crowds of well-wishers greeting Thaksin on his triumphant return to Thailand. Perhaps such a scene will be enough to make the former Thai prime minister think twice about leaving politics. The very specter of such a spectacle may well be too disturbing for some royalists even to contemplate.

If allowed to return to Thailand a free man, Thaksin will be in an enviable position. He will return as a Thai version of Bill Clinton: an unimpeachable comeback kid.

Photo: by Jotman.

Thai election results for 2007

As of late Sunday evening, the PPP Party -- formed by supporters of deposed PM Thaksin -- may have won 233 seats in the 480 seat parliament. The Democratic Party fared better than expected winning maybe 161 seats. But some smaller pro-military parties -- and potential coalition partners for the Democrats -- fared more poorly than expected.*

Bangkok Pundit (BP) -- who is live-blogging the results -- sees evidence here that military's show of support for a particular party might be toxic.** Noting that the Democrats did quite well, PB observes that another smaller party, Puea Paendin, which the military had backed, fared poorly. He suggests that if the military had more fervently backed the Democrats they would have done even worse:

If the military had really supported the Democrats I wonder what that would have done for their poll numbers. The military can control or limit the information that people receive, but they can't make people vote for their candidates. The elite should take notice.

All my jots concerning the 2007 election are gathered here. BP's blog has comprehensive coverage of the Thai election results. There is breaking analysis at New Mandala also.
_____
* The largest of the small parties, Chart Thai, has won maybe 40 seats, but had been expected to win about 60 seats.
** I have revised this paragraph since its initial posting, as I had misinterpreted BP (see comment).

Thailand election: the invisibles

The names of the two most powerful and popular figures in Thailand will not be on the ballots today. Yet the outcome of the election will largely be determined by the one segment of the population which is most loyal to both these men.

Although it could well be argued that the popularity of HM the King is incomparably vaster, the core constituencies of the deposed prime minister and the reigning sovereign overlap considerably.

I'm talking about the rural poor.*

The two most powerful men in Thailand approach this group -- which comprises the vast majority of the Thai population -- very differently; their respective visions for rural Thailand differ immensely.

The first vision, espoused by Thai royalists, is the notion of the happy peasantry -- uncorrupted by global consumerist culture, absolutely loyal to the monarchy which protects them. This view of the Thai countryside is captured by the term "Sufficiency Economy." It's a philosophy espoused by HM the King. The path to this ends is sometimes referred to as "Thai-style democracy."

The second vision, that of the deposed populist Prime Minister, views Thailand's poor as future consumers and entrepreneurs. It sees them as members of a rudimentary welfare state which extends to them low-interest loans and medical insurance.

The basic question of Thailand today, underlying the coup -- underlying today's election -- is whether poor rural voters are full and equal participants in government. Shortly after the 2006 coup, University of Michigan historian Thongchai Winichakul wrote:

Democracy anywhere in the world is never a rule of the educated, the smarter, the urban, or the better-informed. It is a rule by popular mandate. No matter if/how ignorant people are, the elected government has the rights to rule. It is true that democracy does not mean only election. But election is the ultimate and inviolable source of legitimacy to rule. The higher moral or good ethics is not. The higher education is not. The better access to information is not. Nor are weapons or any unelected aristocrats . . .

So what's next for Thailand? General Prem,** who ought to know the answer to this question as well as anyone, had this to say:

Question: After following the events all year, what is
your main concern for the country?
General Prem: The king’s advice must be kept firmly in
mind and put it into practice.

__________
Photo: By Jotman. Depicts the 2006 coup as it unfolded on the streets of Bangkok. More here.
* Essentially, this is a point which has been made by observers of Thailand, summarized here.
** From this recent interview.

Thailand general election 2007: results forecast and live-bloggers

Update: latest Thai election results posted here.

Here is a summary of the predicted outcome for the Thai election (via Bangkok Pundit):

Thailand’s third-largest newspaper, the Daily News, on Dec. 14 predicted the PPP could win around 190 seats, the Democrats about 125 and the Chart Thai party, headed by former Prime Minister Banharn Silpa-archa, 58 seats.

Bangkok Pundit (BP) says the Matichon Weekly's forecast looks quite similar. With the new constitution the number of MPs was reduced to 480. So at least according to the most recent polls, it doesn't look like the PPP is likely to win a majority. An (unstable) minority government is most likely outcome.

Who is live-blogging the Thai election?

Bangkok Pundit will live-blog the Thai election results, providing summarized translations from the Thai media (print and TV).

New Mandala team will be live-blog the Thai vote from Canberra.

The Election in Thailand: General Prem has spoken

In 9 hours, Thais will have their first opportunity to vote in a general election since elected PM Thaksin was deposed by coup d'etat in September 2006. The PPP, a party supported by the deposed Prime Minister, is expected to pick up a majority of seats in the new parliament.
Camera in hand, I was on the streets of Bangkok as the tanks rolled in 2006, and I have blogged some emergent ideas and trends that will have a bearing on the results of this election:

• It is widely acknowledged that the 2006 military coup was actually a royalist coup ( see here and here).
• The new Constitution, passed by a referendum in August, made it harder for any single part to obtain a majority.
• New laws increase the powers of the courts.

This election takes place at a time when Thai security forces across the country have been placed on high alert. I have speculated about the meaning of this.

Here is the big question facing Thailand today: Will the results of this election be allowed to stand, especially if the PPP Party, acknowledged to be partial to the deposed PM, wins a majority?

General Prem speaks
It is widely believed that General Prem, president of the Privy Council, was behind the first coup (see these jots). Yesterday, General Prem was asked whether he thought the results of the election should be respected. His ominous reply was published on Dec. 21 in the Matichon (via New Mandala):

Question: After the election, should everyone
accept the result?
General Prem: Of course. There are rules. These rules have to be accepted.
Question: Even were PPP to win the election and its leader Samak Sundaravej form the government, must the rules be accepted?
General Prem: (after pausing to think) I . . . I would not go that far, would not go that far. So what's this election really about? That's the subject of my next post.

__________
Photo: By Jotman. Depicts the 2006 coup as it unfolded on the streets of Bangkok. This was among the first photos taken of the coup. More here.

Burma Smile

A bicycle rickshaw driver. Photo by Jotman.

Xenophobia

Eva Ósk Arnardóttir, a young Icelandic woman, tried to visit America for the holidays, and this is what happened to her:

During the last twenty-four hours I have probably experienced the greatest humiliation to which I have ever been subjected . . . they were treating me like a very dangerous criminal. . . two armed guards placed me up against a wall. A chain was fastened around my waist and I was handcuffed to the chain. Then my legs were placed in chains. I asked for permission to make a telephone call but they refused. So secured, I was taken from the airport terminal in full sight of everybody. . . all because I had taken a longer vacation than allowed under the law.

. . .I was fingerprinted once again and photographed. I was made to undergo a medical examination, I was searched and then I was placed in a jail cell. I was asked absurd questions such as: When did you have your last period? What do you believe in? Have you ever tried to commit suicide?

Eva's offense? She had overstayed a visa by a couple weeks back in 1996. You can read the rest of her horror-story here. Other Icelanders report similar experiences on visiting the US -- see here.

The Burma (Myanmar) Interviews

Last updated: December 28, 2007  (Several additional interviews by Jotman listed here).


This page tracks interviews* -- mostly with Burmese people -- conducted in the wake of the September 2007 protests. This list includes not only the Jotman interviews, but a selection of interesting interviews available elsewhere on the Internet.

For example, Si Thu is presently driving across North America "to create awareness about human rights and political conditions prevailing in Burma." Along the way, Si Thu has bee interviewing various Burmese activist exiles along the way. Check out Driving for Burma blog. Nicholas Farrelly at New Mandala blog has recently interviewed several Burma scholars. Interviews from such sources are included here.

Feel free to suggest other interviews for inclusion on this list. By presenting a range of opinions in one place, I hope this resource will facilitate an exchange of ideas.

Interviews with people residing in Burma

U Gambira - a leader of the All-Burma Monks Alliance. He was imprisoned shortly after he gave this interview. (Penned this WaPo op/ed just prior to his arrest)

Anonymous monk in Burma

Rangoon businessman - discussion about media and technology

Construction foreman - discussion about media.

Burma war veteran - tells of how the regime repaid his military service by taking away his house.


Interviews with people who escaped Burma after Sepetember 2007
Ashin Kovida - escaped monk & protest leader
U Pan Cher - Rangoon protest leader (Jotman, coming soon)
U Sandawara - one of 'the 4 escaped monks': "We will make the next protest twenty times bigger than the last one."
Two returning escaped monks (Jotman, coming soon)




Interviews with people in the border regions

Maung - revolutionary leader: "We are planning possible things that would force the regime to enter into dialogue."
Zaw Nyein Latt - chairman, Burma Political Prisoners' Union (BPPU):

Myint Oo - Central committee member, All Burma Students' Defense Forces (ABSDF)



Interviews with people in Thailand and overseas

Burmese student demonstrator - outside Myanmar embassy in Bangkok

Maureen Aung-Thwin - director of the OSI Burma Project/Southeast Asia Initiative
Bo Bo Kyaw Nyein - son of late former Deputy Prime Minister U Kyaw Nyein (See also: "May I suggest" 2007 article at BBWOB , Oct. 2007 article, "strategy" 2006 article, "understanding the generals"2006 article)

Ko Thiri Nyunt - former ABSDF joint-general secretary (Burmese original version here)

Mr. Lee - chairman, League for Democracy in China

Gustaaf Houtman - editor of Anthropology Today on the origins of the Burmese military state.

Si Thu - Burmese activist and former ABSDF officer who drove across North America to raise awareness of the situation in Burma.

Soe Aung - spokesman for the National Council of the Union of Burma, an exile group based in Bangkok

Harn Yawnghwe - director of National Reconciliation Program and Brussels based Euro-Burma Office; senior advisor to Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC). He is the son of Sao Shwe Thaike the last prince of Yawnghwe and the first president of the Republic of Union of Burma.

Mike Robertson - climbed the the lower 219 meters of the Eiffel Tower (324m) on November 12, 2007 to raise awareness about Total, a French company that refuses to suspend or cease their operations in Burma.

Htein Lin - Burmese artist; political prisoner who spent seven years in prison during the 1990s.

Ricken Patel - Co-founder and executive director of Avaaz.org, an organization mobilizing people around the world against the Burmese regime. Talks to the BBC about "people power" and the role of global public opinion.

Sein Win - Prime Pinister the of National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma; Chairman, Party for National Democracy (PND).






___________________
*Note: Only interviews with English translations have been included in my list.
Photos: all photos are by Jotman.

Burma Smile

Are these the final preparations for a second coup?

This morning, I rode in a taxi. Two newspapers I had been reading lay open on the seat beside me. The Nation was unfolded to a reveal a page 2 article, "PM orders tightened security into New Year." The Bangkok Post was turned to a page 3 article,"Security beefed up for ballot."

What were these two reports really all about?

My cab stopped at a traffic light on a street that runs past Thai Military Headquarters. Police stood ready to direct traffic at the center of the intersection. After five minutes, a motorcade zoomed past.

By coincidence, that's when the most probable meaning of the articles hit me. The sheer scale of security preparations described in the two reports pointed to only one thing: the final preparations for a second military coup may be underway.

BACKGROUND FACTS:
- Thailand's general election is scheduled for December 23. The date would mark Thailand's return to democracy. Since the coup of Sept. 19, 2006, Thailand has been administered by an interim government appointed by HM the King. Elections were promised within one year.
- The Nation reported today that the PPP party is leading in the polls and "expected to win." PPP is favored by supporters of the deposed PM Thaksin and those unhappy with the military-backed interim government. If elected, PPP is likely to undo the "achievements" of the first coup, perhaps putting coup leaders on trial.
- Rumors of a December "event" have been circulating since the summer and tracked by blogger Bangkok Pundit (BP).

SECURITY MEASURES REPORTED TODAY:
- Government spokesman Chaiya said "as a part of the plan, the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) would install 1,300 security cameras across the capital within seven days."
- Thai PM Surayud "has ordered tightened security nationwide into the the New Year to ensure stability during the Dec. 23 general election and the formation of the new government" and "demands a security plan be implemented from December 15 until there is a new prime minister in a new government."
- The PM gave orders for stepped-up security measures and demanded his instructions be followed closely if any serious incidents occur during the period.
- Some officials suggested the premier should impose martial law if there is a security threat
- "Officials will fan out to gather intelligence," Chaiya said.

THE TWO SMOKESCREENS
SMOKESCREEN No. 1: the threat of terrorist bombings
- "We are most concerned about New Year celebrations," Chaiya said.
- Spokesman Chaiya said that Private entrepreneurs would also be asked to hold many events to count down to the New Year because a single big celebration could be more of a target for an attack.
- Surayud emphasised that relevant authorities must closely monitor the situation in tourist centres including Bangkok, Chiang Mai, Pattaya, Phuket, Hat Yai and Samui Island.
- In the event of a serious incident, all security authorities should heed only his orders, issued in his capacity as chairman of the government's anti-terrorism committee.

SMOKESCREEN No. 2: intelligence that political protests will turn violent
- Mr Chaiya denied Gen Surayud's security concerns and instructions implied he expected a serious incident in the near future. Intelligence reports referred only to the potential of provocations and protests, not any bombing, he said. Gen Surayud would simply like security authorities to be ready for any eventuality.
- "The PM is concerned that there may be unexpected incidents, like those that occurred late last year, because this government works amid the conflicting opinions of people, provocations, propaganda, and psychological and political attacks," said gov. spokesman Chaiya Yimwilai.
- Asked whether the government foresaw any unrest coming, Chaiya said: "Intelligence reports say there will be movements and rallies that may be incited toward violence."
- PM demanded intelligence reports from the national Intelligence Agency and the National Security Council.

JOTMAN'S ANALYSIS
Those behind Thailand's military-backed governement may have been preparing for a second coup since the summer (and possibly since prior to last year's bombings in Bangkok). With the opposition PPP Party poised to win the general election, the first stages of the coup d'etat would appear to have been set in motion Thursday in Bangkok.

If a second coup occurs, there will likely be protests throughout the country, especially in the north where PPP support is highest, and also in Bangkok. By 1) raising the specter of more terrorist bombings , and 2) at the same time, hinting that that protests associated with the political process in Thailand could become violent, the military-backed interim government has prepared the country for the coming crackdown.

All that we are waiting for now is the provocation. Perhaps this will come as some kind of terrorist incident -- perhaps another series of bomb explosions in Bangkok. These will be linked to the opposition PPP party.

Protests are likely to erupt across the country if -- in the wake of a terror incident -- it is announced that the elections have postponed. The high state of security is necessary not to deter potential terrorists, but to quell the demonstrations. (It is also important that the interim government be in a position to say: we did our best to prevent the violence).

The bombings in Bangkok at New Years were pinned on Thaksin supporters. If a terrorist incident occurs in Bangkok within the next 10 days it will be blamed on people associated with Thaksin and the PPP Party which is poised to win the election. Or perhaps only "a plot" will be uncovered.

Thailand stands on the brink of an abyss. Fortunately, it is not too late for supporters the military-backed regime to reconsider.


Photos: video stills show a motorcade in Bangkok.

Don't call us terrorists

This is Part III (see Part I, II) of Jotman's exclusive interview with Muang, a Burmese rebel leader.

Maung has pledged to renew the struggle against Burma's military regime should it refuse to negotiate seriously.

"If that day arrives, don’t say “terrorists” to us! You know we are all innocent."

“Nobody outside the SPDC (Burmese junta) is calling you terrorists,” I replied.

Obviously Maung had a good reason to make this statement. He sounded pained, and wounded, as though some Westerners had actually used the term in reference to his activities. Maung, as you will recall, was formerly on the Central Committee of the ABSDF (All Burma Students Defense Forces)

"If you say terrorists to us, then you must also say the SPDC is terrorists as well. Officially."

Someone must have fired this accusation at his former group, I thought. But who? Maung continued:

There are terrorists running our country. You see it. You saw it. Many many times. If you let them go ahead, then it means you support terrorism in our own land. This is not fair. Who protects us? We have to protect ourselves.

So we will try our best. The situation forces us to do this.

I only say to people not to look at us as terrorists.

Here we go again, I thought.

“I don’t think anybody’s calling you that.” I said, emphatically.

“Because it’s happened before – to a lot of people -- like me."

My ears perked up. This was the explanation, the story I had been seeking.

"I was a part of ABSDF before. I was dealing with the international . . . And some people were trying to change our organizational. . . maneuver, and tactics. They even forced us to put down our weapons. And do only politics. In the border area, doing only politics is . . . a little funny for us. Survival. How to protect ourselves. Who will protect ourselves? So then, that’s the situation. They even interfered – "

“Who is they?”

"Some NGOs, let me say this. I don’t want to mention the names. But they know themselves. And then the world .. . there is only some things that NGO says Afghanistan and Iraq. They used their forces to attack after September 11. So they asked us – a lot of NGOs – not to hold a gun, even to protect ourselves. We asked them, well, who will protect us in the jungle? They had no answer.

I had heard that the so-called PATRIOT Act passed by the US Congress in the wake of 9/11, mistakenly designated the Karen Resistance Army (KRA) a "terrorist organization." The KRA has been fighting a decades-long war with the Myanmar junta.

“Tell me about the connection between 9/11 and the situation here.”

Before 9/11 the organizations like ABSDF in the border were asked by one NGO – I know the specifics here because I was involved with ABSDF at the time – asked the organization to give up arms. So that if we don’t then this NGO won’t continue supporting the humanitarian aid. And then we refused and then they stopped providing humanitarian support for the family member of ABSDF.

You know when we look at the situation after September 11, America didn’t sort out everything in a peaceful way. They used their own forces. . . To invade the other country. And other countries went along with that sending forces to support the Americans as well --

"I don’t know that’s your best argument for your case, really." I interjected. "The Iraq war has made many people around the world very angry at America. "

Maung continued: "When we are attacked, when we are in danger: we can protect ourselves. When the people are under attack – that’s a life and death situation – they must protect themselves. Even a dog will protect himself by trying to fight. I think we have the right to do this.

I imagine if Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were looking down upon the world from some high cloud, they would scarcely recognize the United States government. But they would understand Maung.

________
Note: The "War on Terror" has rewarded Burma's junta in other ways. According to AidWatch, the Australian government actually funded the training of Myanmar intelligence officers: "In 2004-2005 AUSAID funded training 'for senior officials in the theory of counter terrorism recognition and collaboration for combating terrorism'. The project funded counter-terrorism workshops, later delivered to 600 government personnel in Burma."
Photo: "A pool hall in Burma" by Jotman.

Burma Smile

I'm back to posting "Burma Smiles." This woman was about to plant a tree when I took this photo in November.

Prime minister's monkey business keeps dashing hopes for progress on environmental issues

Related Links: UNFCC wikipedia, UNFCCC website, UN climate change conference in Bali website, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) website, IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (Nov. 17, 2007 - AR4 Synthesis Report)

In the days leading up to the Bali conference on climate change, the world seemed poised to set plans in motion that would put major curbs on emissions of greenhouse gases that cause global warming. The release of major study of global warming in November* signaled the clear and present danger confronting the entire human race. Arriving in Bali last week, delegates' optimism about tackling a major environmental crisis was reminiscent of the scene at the General Assembly in New York only a year ago.

Photo (Jotman) : "Prime Minister poses for Bali photo op."

Last year at the UN headquarters, the countries of the world were poised to sign onto an extraordinary international agreement to end "bottom trawling" -- a despicable fisheries practice that effectively destroys seabed habitat. But one country was instrumental in scuttling that agreement. When this nation introduced a toothless "compromise" initiative, perhaps the last best hope for protecting undersea life on earth was sabotaged (see post).

Something eerily similar seems to be afoot this December in Bali where negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Kyoto Protocol are being held.*

The country in question pledged a 6% CO2 reduction under the Kyoto Accord, but instead has increased its emissions by 33%. Essentially, this country signed the Kyoto Accord, but has ignored it.

As you may have guessed, the country is Canada.

BBC reports:

US opposition to the Kyoto Protocol has partly been predicated on the argument that major developing countries, as well as the industrialised world, should accept binding targets for reducing emissions.

The argument has been freshly made in Bali by Canada. A set of "Canadian Principles for a post-2012 Climate Change Agreement", leaked to environmental groups, states: "The agreement should include binding emission reduction targets for all major emitters. "

"Developed countries should be required to take action more quickly, but major industrialised developing countries should also have binding targets."

Major developing economies such as China, India and Brazil argue that their per-capita emissions are a long way below western levels, and that taking on targets would slow their economic growth.

In September the US hosted the first meeting of the "major economies" group - also known as the "big emitters" - bringing together the biggest greenhouse gas producers from the developed and developing worlds.

The same group has been meeting again on the fringes of the Bali talks, which environmental groups say is a US move designed to undermine the UN process. The US has announced a further "big emitters" summit at the end of January.

Photo (Jotman): "US President Bush hides behind Canadian Prime Minister Harper."


Opposing the Canadian block is the EU and developing countries. They want industrialized nations to start talks on a further set of emissions targets. Both sides have a valid point. Although the West brought about the climate change crisis, the rapidly industrializing East is poised to make a bad situation far worse. As Al Gore pointed out in his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech today, the US and China must work together to solve the problem.

The conflict is between those who argue, on the one hand that total emissions need to be the determining factor, and those who would focus on per-capita emissions. North Americans and Australians have the highest carbon emissions on a per-capita basis. The average citizen of China, for example, don't account for high emissions; but as a country, China's carbon emissions will soon surpass even America's.

Why has the EU been quick to side with the developing world?

Europeans and the Japanese have lower per-capita carbon emissions than the North Americans and Australians. They don't feel the need to own giant houses in isolated suburbs requiring long commutes. In Osaka or Rome an SUV is not considered a birthright. Basically, Europeans and Japanese don't consume as much as North Americans and Australians. The latter have perfected the high-carbon emission lifestyle. The individual inhabitants of Canada, the US, and Australia bear the largest share of responsibility for global warming on a per-capita basis. They are also among the wealthiest people on earth; their countries among the most resource-rich; and they tend to be well-educated.

Clearly, it's up these nations most responsible for a problem take the lead in solving it. Especially as the countries in question possess the skills and resources to set things right. What they lack today is leadership.

Another strategy of industrialized countries in Bali has been to turn the agenda to trade issues. Specifically, the West wants the developing countries to lower trade barriers on low-carbon energy products. Non-profit organizations are crying foul, accusing the Western block of attempting to "recycle failed WTO initiatives". Perhaps its a fair point. The World Trade Organization was set up for discussion of trade issues. And at recent talks Western industrialized countries refused to open their markets to agricultural products from poor countries, so those talks stalled.

So what's with Canada? Canada's Prime Minister, Stephen Harper is an ideological cousin of George W. Bush. On the home front, when it comes to social issues, Harper's Conservative Party is far more progressive than its American counterpart, the Republicans. But internationally, Canada's young government is rudderless; it acts as if George W. Bush were its only constituency.

Experience taught us to expect nothing by way of leadership from the former Australian Prime Minister John Howard or outgoing US President Bush. Most disappointing is the young Canadian Prime Minister.

At least the European Union and Australia's new PM Kevin Rudd are taking steps in the right direction. But it looks as if the level of international resolve and leadership necessary to tackling the climate change crisis will have to wait until after the 2008 US presidential elections.

Photo (Jotman): "President Bush returns the favor."

* The backdrop to the Bali summit is the comprehensive assessment of climate science, impacts and economics produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) during the course of 2007. The Bali conference is sometimes referred to as COP-13 or MOP-3
Photos: Taken at Ulu Watu Bali by Jotman. Ulu Watu is an spectacular temple situated on some high cliffs not far from Nusa Dua, the site of the UNFCCC conference in Bali.
Other sources: UNDispatch, DeSmogBlog, BBC News

Thailand celebrates the 80th birthday of its King

Perhaps never again in its history will Thailand be so united around a single figure as it was on Wednesday. The occasion marked the eightieth Birthday of His Majesty King Bhumibol, Rama IX of the Chakri Dynasty. He is the world's longest serving head of state, and the longest-serving monarch in this nation's history.



I stood on the grounds of the Bangkok's Royal Palace yesterday not so much to get a glimpse of Thai royalty, as to observe the Thai people. I wanted to experience firsthand a social phenomenon on a scale which can only be witnessed a few times in a given century anywhere in the world: a wildly popular monarchy at its height. Such a heartfelt spectacle may never again be seen in Asia, at least in our lifetimes. To give you a feeling for it -- and what I'm really attempting to document here is an emotion -- I submerged myself in a human sea of yellow shirts and took this video.

I have seen dozens of fireworks displays in my life, but the the sudden explosions of light towards the end of the video represent the most awesome spectacle of fire I have ever witnessed. It was terrifying. This is not to downplay the singing of royal anthems which preceded it -- scenes which still give me the shivers.

Elsewhere on this blog I have taken a more analytical approach to the Thai monarchy, but any interpretation of the institution is incomplete without appreciating the depth of feelings of the Thai People for their sovereign.

Photos and Video: Jotman

Burma smile of the day

This cute Burmese boy is the latest installment in Jotman's "Burma Smiles" series. I took this photo when I was inside Burma recently.

Blowing up the magic show

Part II of Jotman's interview with Maung (Part I)

At at a hideout in somewhere in the Thai-Burma border region, my conversation with the Burmese revolutionary leader continued.

Maung said, "I think this is just a magic show from the SPDC (the junta), this talk about organizing a dialogue. I have a question: when? And where? Or how?"

I asked Maung: “So you are confronted with this 'magic show' -- and I understand you are trying to do real work to change the situation, but how does their 'magic show' -- the feigned negotiations -- effect what you plan to do?”

“That’s a good question." said Maung. "Because you know we are winning. If you just look at the situation in September: A lot of people were killed; so many monks were beaten up. And we know how it affected the people of Burma. Even within the military. They have a problem with this. Some people who really care about religion might ask: who gave the order? Who gave it to shoot the monks? Because in ‘88 Ne Win’s government used the soldiers by telling them to shoot . . . the Communists. And that movement wasn’t as popular as this movement. "

Maung continued:

This time someone ordered the soldiers to shoot the 'fake monks.' How did these people become the fake monks? To think these fake monks recited the Meta Sutta! That’s absurd. It’s in Pali, and only the real monks know Pali.

The people are winning the psychological war. I think if they (the military regime) continue to do more to against the monks, I think they are preparing the rope to hang themselves. And at the same time I think people should prepare something different. They cannot put their hope in outside countries coming to save them.

A US invasion? Very rare hope. UN Security Council? Just one country can object and nothing happens. No hope there either. And although there is a very rare hope about sanctions, those sanctions need to be ensured. If a country is ordering sanctions, it must make sure – it must ensure -- its companies are out. This is very important.

Maung would have more to say about foreign companies in Burma at a later time (which relates to what he said next):

"So I think people have to go ahead in any way they can. We will try to find the easiest target; one that will make the SPDC weak. If the SPDC is not weak, they will not consider dialogue. Clearly.

I asked Maung about the next move:

The next move? We don’t know. We will see the situation. If they are really thinking about a change, it is good.

But we must prepare something at the same time. If not, well then, we are ready to do different things. Maybe this could violence -- as well. And when this happens, don’t call Burmese people, and the Burmese People Movement “terrorists.”

Because nobody is calling the SPDC “terrorists.” Everyone understands that the SPDC has robbed the power of the people of Burma – for many years. And now people are trying to rob the power from SPDC. This is fair! We can use any way. We can use any method. This is fair!

Who can we hope for? Who will save us? We see no one. So that we must stand up, to do.

We are all leaders. We don’t hope about leaders. We are all leaders. Whoever is doing are the leaders. They are the leaders of the future. We will find our own leaders in the fight, in the struggle. We will not hope for any leaders (to drop down) from the sky. We will find our own leaders in the fight.

So we are planning possible things that would force the regime to enter into dialogue – which is what we all want.

Which is what we all want. Maung tapped out each syllable of the phrase on the side of his chair with the palm of his hand.

"To force the country to change in a peaceful way." he added. "If not, what do we have to do? That will be our last choice."

Continued. In future interview segments, Maung talks to Jotman about potential targets and defends the right of the Burmese people to take up arms against the regime.
Photo: By Jotman, depicts a building in Myanmar.

Burma smile of the day

I was walking down a street in Burma when this lovely redhead poked her head out of her shop and beamed a big smile my way. Shortly thereafter, my camera now out of the bag, I made my way back up the street in the hope that she would reappear. That's when I took this picture.

Revolutionary may take fight against Burma junta to another level

In the wake of the crackdown, some Burmese are preparing to take the fight against the junta to another level. At an outpost in the Thai-Burma border region, I met with a breakaway rebel leader who is plotting new strategies intended to make the junta take negotiations more seriously.

On the back of my interpreter’s motorcycle, we turned up a narrow lane. Along the lane we passed two Burmese monks. Each carried a plastic bag.

Eventually we came to a driveway leading to a traditional house near a rice field. A large rust-colored satellite dish had been planted in the garden. The house itself was large, but otherwise plain. A young boy appeared at a gate, sticking his head between the bars. He was soon joined by yelping dogs. They were not vicious dogs, just noisy. The boy opened the gate. Tailed by the dogs, we followed him into the house.

We removed our shoes at the door. The building was made of wood – it could have been thirty years old. The inside was spotless. On one wall hung a tattered flag of the Burmese student army, the ABSDF. Some ordinances – mortar shells -- were positioned along a banister that stretched the length of the room. In the centre of this spacious room was a big table, around which were plastic chairs. There was a large drawing board at the end of the table, and in one corner, behind an orange sofa, a computer. Sure enough, next to the door we had come in, the obligatory Che poster.

Maung asked if I had a camera. When I answered “yes” he told me firmly “no pictures.”

The boy who had let us in appeared halfway down a staircase, pretend fired a plastic gun in my direction, and quickly disappeared.

“My son,” said Maung who then shouted something at the boy in Burmese.

Maung asked me to take a seat on the orange sofa. Straddling the back of a chair, arms folded, his gaze seemed penetrating. Maung would have know that I was the Jotman, though he did not bring it up. I set the voice recorder on the coffee table and turned it on.

“What do you want to know?”

“To start with, I want to hear your thoughts about Aung San Suu Kyi’s recent message – via Gambari -- about resuming negotiations with the junta.”

Maug replied:

"We never trust SPDC. Because they are not the government for one thing. And then they never do they promise. They are not men.

I am not setting forth just an optimistic ideology. But as for Aung San Suu Kyi, she must always think of an optimistic approach to changing the country. Because she doesn’t want any more suffering and bloodshed. That’s the basis from which she’s working. And so she must say this: that she hopes that dialogue would happen.

But as for myself, I doubt how this dialogue would be fair. So there should be equality in dialogue. That is, everyone sitting around the table must have the same rights. How could it be possible to have a proper dialogue with military leaders, holding such excessive power. They have guns, money -- they have everything."

The front door suddenly opened and two monks appeared. They were the monks we had passed on the road. In their hands they held clear bags. Maung called out to us and they approached where we sat. I saw that their bags contained shirts and slacks -- civilian clothes. Maung got out of his seat and prostrated himself on the floor before the monks. After this, I shook their hands.

"They have come from Rangoon," said Maung. "Would you like to talk with them?"

"Certainly."

"That can be arranged. But first they have some business to attend to," said Maung. "Where were we?"

"You were asking whether the dialogue with the junta could be fair," I said.

Maung took a deep breath and continued:

"Yes. This is just like a game (to them). You see, they are still arresting people. Even Aung San Suu is under house arrest. How can I believe dialogue could occur in Burma under such circumstances? It’s a joke to the opposition. We cannot see this. They are still arresting, imprisoning, and torturing people. They are still searching the town for the protesters.

They are funny. They just want to extend their time in power. Take the National Constitutional Convention that they did – or have been doing – whatever! It’s the longest national convention in the history of the world I think. Since 1990 until the past couple months. And they could probably do this again, with the dialogue. If people are preparing dialogue for the next 10-20 years, they have time to prepare themselves for an extension of their rule. To strengthen themselves, for further oppression, for tightening their grip. The next twenty years? We don’t know what will happen. Maybe the people will just pick up and leave the country.

These guys are bandits. They rob the peoples’ property, which they keep in their hands, and they never give it back. They think it is dangerous for them to distribute power to the people.

Maung glanced to his left towards the boarded window and continued:

I think it is not too late for them to do so – to return power back to the people. People can still understand and forgive them. But if they keep stubbornly try to hold their power, it is dangerous.

Let’s compare Burma to Iran and North Korea. Those regimes know how to negotiate. They understand give and take. But not the Burma regime. These people, they have no concept of how to negotiate. They have no idea. They only know how to pull the trigger. That’s why the country is going backwards. They are bringing the country back to the stone age. Whoever thinks of future generations will fight against this system, because we don’t want to go back. We don’t want to be isolated from world society. This is also important."

Continued. In future interview segments, Maung talks to Jotman about the right of the Burmese people to armed struggle and some such options under consideration.

__________________
Photo: By Jotman; it was taken at sunset on the Thai-Burma border (If you look closely you can see some Burmese paddling across the river on an inner tube).
Note: Certain details have been altered to protect Maung.

Burmese smiles

I recently paid another visit Burma where I took photos of people I met on the streets. The experience reminded me that it was not my disdain for the regime that first motivated me to blog about Burma, but the fact I found the people so darn likable. As for the military junta, clearly these people deserve better. You can't look at their smiling faces and think otherwise.

Over the next week, every day I will post another photo of a person I met in Burma.

Photo: by Jotman. Shows two Burmese boys outside a temple.