Burma's Government in Exile Condemns Mumbai Attack

(By: Mungpi, Courtesy: Mizzima News, first published on Friday, 28 November 2008)

New Delhi (Mizzima) – The Burmese government in exile – National Coalition Government of Union of Burma – on Thursday strongly condemned the terrorist attacks in Mumbai that killed over 100 people and injured over 200, calling it 'cowardice and a foolish' act. Dr. Tint Swe, Minister of the Prime Minister office of the NCGUB, who is based in New Delhi, said "We condemn any act of terrorism, no matter who the perpetrators are. And if the attacks are carried out for political motives it is cowardice and a foolish act."

On Wednesday evening terrorists carried out at least 10 separate attacks on India's commercial hub of Mumbai killing at least 100 including 14 police and injuring more than 200 people. The terrorists, armed with AK 47, grenades and low intensity bombs stormed Mumbai’s busiest and most opulent sites including the century old railway station Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminal (CST), the former Victoria Terminus, Hotel Taj Palace and The Trident hotel, both of which had guests including foreign tourists. According to reports, the terrorists, who began attacking since Wednesday night, continue to be holed up at with least 30 hostages in the Trident Hotel on Thursday and have left nearly 2000 guests stranded in the Taj hotel.

While the terrorist group did not make any demands, an Islamic group 'Deccan Mujahideen' a group that was previously unheard of claimed responsibility for the attacks, according to reports. A similarly named 'Indian Mujahideen' had earlier claimed responsibility for several blasts across the country including the 21 bomb blasts in Ahmedabad in July that claimed 56 lives. Till the time of filing the story, at least five to seven terrorists are still holed up in the Taj hotel and bomb blasts were also heard from inside the Hotel, while terrorists were said to have held at least 30 hostages in the Trident hotel, according to an Indian TV Channel NDTV.

In the course of a gun battle, up to 14 police including Maharashtra state's Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) chief Hemant Karkare, Additional Commissioner Ashok Kamte and encounter specialist Vijay Salaskar were killed, reports said. The police in turn killed at least five terrorists during the shootout. Dr. Tint Swe said India like several other countries has its own sets of problems and conflicts but resorting to violence and conducting terrorist attacks are unacceptable.

“It is understandable that groups have diverse ideologies and countries have their own conflicts. But resorting to violence is unacceptable,” said Dr. Tint Swe, extending his deep concern and solidarity towards the victims of the attacks. While condemning the attacks, Dr. Tint Swe said terrorism seems to be spreading fast within the region and that governments including India should handle it with utmost importance.

“If we look at the past few months or even a year, we can see that there have been several blasts across India. Similarly, there were also blasts occurring in India's neighbouring country Burma and in several other south and southeast Asian countries," Dr. Tint Swe said. “Looking at this, we can say terrorist attacks are becoming a trend these days, and that governments needs to resolve them with utmost importance,” he added.

Similar to India, which has witnessed several bomb attacks in the past one year, Burma also witnessed increasing bomb blasts in the past year with perpetrators targeting mainly the former capital city of Rangoon. The latest blast in Rangoon took place on October 19 at a house in Rangoon's suburban township of Shwepyithar, killing a man, whom the military government said was the perpetrator himself. In September alone, at least four blasts occurred in Rangoon, injuring at least seven people. But, the military government, which has maintained a tight rule over the country since 1962, are quick at pointing a finger at opposition groups, including members of detained Nobel Peace Laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's party – the National League for Democracy (NLD), and border-based ethnic armed rebel groups who are fighting for self-determination, each time a blast occurs.

Dr. Tint Swe, while condemning the terrorist attacks, praised India's freedom of press, which has enabled citizens to keep abreast of the latest situation on the ground. “Unlike Burma, India's freedom of press has allowed the media to cover the full extent of the event unfolding. But in Burma, since the media has been blacked out, information related the blasts seems to be out of reach to the people,” he added.

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

Burma Review strongly condemns terrorist attacks in Mumbai

Burma Review strongly condemns the cowardice terrorist attacks in Mumbai and stands with the family members who suffered huge loss of losing their innocent loved ones. It also pays deepest tribute to the members of different enforcement agencies of India and their families who lost their dear ones in the supreme act of sacrifice for the nation. Any terrorist outfits in whatever names, if they think that, India can be bogged down with any act of terrorism then they have not understood the Indian culture and civilization well. If India stands with the principles of non-violence, it doesn’t mean that, Indian people can’t stand against heaviest of violent cowardice attacks, which was even reflected in the interview given by a very common women belonging to the poor fishermen ‘Koil’ community to ‘India TV’ news channel that, if she would have known that they are terrorist, She & her community would have first acted to finish them.

Moreover, ‘the cult of violence’ in any religious uniform or ideological garb to resolve any world problem or issues is a misguided and foolish act of harming the society as well as the community for which they claim to serve. If anyone who holds any grudge against any policies of any government then there are many ways to bring those issues in mainstream debate and this principle applies for any part of the world. The only thing needed is to develop ‘the art of political complaining’, which Gandhi ji used to say that, ‘Asian’s are very weak in these arts’ and I think his observation still applies in contemporary society generating foolish ‘cult of violence’ in the name of religious or ideological garb.

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

India, China & Russia’s Voting with Junta in UN General Assembly Third Committee Meeting: Right or Wrong?

On 21^st of November 2008, in another historic 44th & 45th Meetings of United Nations General Assembly Third Committee on the draft resolution concerning situation of human rights in Burma (document A/C.3/63/L.33), three important nations of world community – India, China & Russia once again sided with Burma’s ruling military junta. However despite siding with junta as usual by India, China and Russia, the draft resolution which attempts to restore situation of dialogue and human rights with Burma’s infamous military regime got approved and passed with a recorded vote of 89 in favour to 29 against, and 63 abstentions. The countries which abstained and remain absent also helped diplomatically the resolution passed smoothly and should be considered as a sympathetic to the cause of freedom of Nobel laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi suffering more than thirteen years in house arrest. Most importantly, it also raises the question to debate that the argument of Junta or the decision of India, China and Russia going with that argument by voting with Junta is right or wrong or the argument of USA, EU etc. are right in proposing the human rights resolution concerning Burma?

India, China, Russia, and Burma’s official Argument:

While participating in the debate, India officially said that, “his country had consistently emphasized the importance of the promotion of human rights through dialogue and cooperation. Initiatives on the human rights situation in Myanmar should begin from a “forward-looking” standpoint and be conducted in a ‘non-confrontational manner’. Additionally, recent steps taken by the Government of Myanmar, specifically in terms of progress in political reforms, must be recognized. The draft resolution did not reflect those positive steps taken, nor was it in line with the Secretary-General’s mission to develop his good offices, with a view to improving the situation on the ground. Instead, it seemed to have a tone of condemnation about it and, as such, his delegation had voted against the resolution.” China repeating the same argument of previous year said that, “her delegation had always opposed to the practice of using country-specific resolutions to exert pressure on a developing country. With the Human Rights Council and its Universal Periodic Review mechanism in operation, countries concerned about violations of human rights in particular regions should refrain from introducing country-specific resolutions in the Third Committee. In addition, she noted that the co-sponsors had generated strong doubt over their desire to build consensus and real dialogue, because of the exclusive nature with which they conducted consultations on the draft.” Russian Federation said that, “drafts of “selective, politicized and one-sided” country-specific resolutions often led to confrontations among Member States. The creation of the Human Rights Council and the establishment of the Universal Periodic Review offered new opportunities now to establish better international cooperation on human rights. With that in mind, the consideration of country-specific situations should now be conducted within the framework of the Universal Periodic Review, and not the Third Committee.”

Burma said that, “the draft resolution was flawed procedurally and in terms of substance, and was part of a ‘yearly ritual’ meant to put political pressure on his country under the pretext of promoting and protecting human rights. Compared to last year, it was a harsher text, which attested to the desire of its co-sponsors to maintain that political pressure. It had even attempted to politicize the tragic humanitarian disaster resulting from Cyclone Nargis.”

The gist of Indian, Chinese, Russian and Burmese Argument’s:

From the positions taken by India, China, Russia and Burma following points emerges to vote with Junta in UN General Assembly third committee meeting, which also emerged in the same manner last year in UN Security Council meeting against Anglo-US resolution.

First, it should be through ‘dialogue and cooperation and begin from a forward looking stand point’. Second, it should be in a ‘non-confrontational manner’ and ‘consensus’ based. Third, indicating towards the constitutional referendum held in May 2008, it also stressed to recognize the recent positive steps taken by Junta. Fourth, it should go with Secretary General’s good office initiatives and avoid condemnation. Fifth, the resolution should be not country specific and exert pressure on developing country but utilize the offices of Human Rights Council and its universal periodic review mechanism (both Chinese and Russian argument). Sixth, it should not be “selective, politicized and one-sided” country-specific resolutions, which often led to confrontations among Member States.

Opposition to the Resolution: Right or Wrong?

Now, we come to the first point of argument of voting with Junta on the theme of ‘dialogue and cooperation’ and ‘forward looking stand point’. The proposer’s of this argument misses the point that, how a real dialogue could take place, when you put the leader of NLD and most of its executive members behind prison bars? Any political party in any nation and its leader functions taking opinions of its key executive working committee members, whereas in Burma; the leader of NLD – Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is in house arrest for more than thirteen years and restricted to meet her fellow party members. In May 2008, during the referendum month, the junta extended her house arrest for another term despite appeals of freedom made by UN Secretary General and many ASEAN ministerial meetings official resolutions giving a strong psychological message of suppression to the Burmese people of result of even non-violent political protest. Burmese people knew that what would be their fate by going against referendum, when even world’s celebrated personality could suffer in a prolong house arrest, so the outcome of referendum could be well assumed? Moreover, the referendum had been held when Burma was suffering with worst gigantic scale natural disaster – Cyclone Nargis. Last year when Junta extended the house arrest, the honourable foreign minister of Burma- Mr. Nyan Win said to his Japanese counterpart – Taro Aso in Hamburg, Germany during the ASEM (Asia Europe Meeting) that, ‘it had been a very difficult decision’ to neutralize the criticism in ASEM. But this year in May 2008, they extended the house arrest a day after Junta’s Supremo General Than Shwe met with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon making mockery of the office and prestige of the UN Secretary General’s office.

Moreover, the said extension even violated the Junta framed country’s state protection law, enacted in 1975, which allows one year extensions of a house arrest only for up to five years. In addition the choice of ‘dialogue and forward looking stand point’ doesn’t rest with Daw Suu Kyi, who is in a prolonged house arrest. And junta started the so called dialogue after the September 2007 mass uprising of monks by appointing Labour Minister –Mr. Aung Kyi as a liaison minister and the schedule of meeting with concerned liaison minister doesn’t rests with Daw Suu kyi but on the whims of Junta without ‘any fixed time frame’. In addition till now only five meetings had taken place and the last one being held in January 2008. So the forward looking point can’t be achieved without the freedom of Daw Suu Kyi and her political co-workers. The military regime which considers – Daw Suu Kyi and Min Ko Naing as a ‘bubble political leaders’ has got any attitude of political dialogue could be well understood (please see article written by Yebaw Tin Shwe entitled, “For successful completion of National Convention, The New Light of Myanmar, 20 May 2007, p.7)?

The Second point of debate revolves around the ‘confrontational’ attitude of west and USA and should be consensus based. This point has been a hot issue since long relating even with economic sanction policy of west and some even went to writing in ‘The Guardian’ newspaper of UK recently that, Daw Suu and NLD took confrontational attitude due to the western nations support. This point is also related with the sixth point of argument of Russia. Although, every time I read this argument, I felt surprised that how a lady who has been said in Junta’s mouthpiece – ‘The New Light of Myanmar’ that, “The restrictions will never be lifted until she abandons her practice of liberal policy. Even if the restrictions on her are lifted in such a situation, the release will bring no changes…today Myanmar is practicing the national politics, not liberal policy. So, she should give the first priority to the national cause and the second priority to democracy,” holds confrontational attitude and who are actually confrontational? (The New Light of Myanmar, 18 October 2006 also published earlier on 5^th of July 2006, two times repeat publication of the same article written by Maung Cetana entitled, “She Who Turned Alien or Danger to the Nation” reflects the secondary priority towards democracy of the regime).”

Moreover, the USA started imposing economic sanctions on Burma’s military regime after the enactment of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 pursuant to section 8 (b) (3) of PL 108-61, long years after the May 1990 elections, in which NLD of Daw Suu won landslide victory and Burmese military regime’s refusal to start a dialogue with NLD and Daw Suu Kyi. In addition, Daw Suu is not controlling the sanctions issue, its decision rests with EU and US house of Congress and Senate. The confrontation issue which has been projected by Russia and China had been creation of China & Russia itself by which military gets emboldened to refuse release of political prisoners in Burma. The regime which doesn’t recognize political prisoners in Burma itself reflects who wants confrontation?

The confrontation issue is also related with referendum issue and NLD’s refusal in accepting the results, which is also related with the third point of the argument of India, China Russia and Burma. But neutral observers should also took note of the point that, how can NLD or Daw Suu accept the so called referendum results as a positive steps by Junta, when it was conducted against the many resolution of the same Human Rights Council, UN General Assembly resolution and official ASEAN resolutions, which specifically asked first for the release of all political prisoners including Daw Suu Kyi and taking view of different political groups and ethnic communities?

The fourth point that, “it should go with Secretary General’s good office initiatives and avoid condemnation” is a sarcastic joke on Secretary General’s good office itself. Does Russia and China forgot or intentionally attempted to forget that few days before the concerned meeting of GA third committee, on 12^th of November 2008, the UN Secretary General – Ban Ki-moon, “expressed his deep concern at reports that authorities in Myanmar have issued lengthy jail terms to some participants in last year’s peaceful demonstrations in the Asian country” and he called, “once again for the release of all political prisoners and all citizens of Myanmar to be allowed to freely participate in their country’s political future as part of an inclusive national reconciliation process (please see UN SG Press Release of 12^th November 2008).” Again on 18^th of November 2008, the five independent United Nations experts on human rights demanded that, “authorities in Myanmar hold fair and open re-trials for dozens of prisoners of conscience sentenced to lengthy prison terms and immediately release their jailed defence counsels, but instead of listening to the voice of UNSG and UN experts, the junta continued with awarding long prison terms to non-violent political protestors including Burma’s famous artists and comedian’s.” Now it clearly reflects that how much Junta regards the institution of UNSG? Junta might feel great by thinking that they have succeeded in getting votes of India, China and Russia in UNGA third committee but they foolishly missed the great golden diplomatic opportunity of freeing Daw Suu Kyi, when it was announced that UNSG would visit Burma in December 2008 and welcoming in advance for his journey to the golden land.

The argument of fifth point by Junta’s supporters that it should be not country specific is in utopian paradigm. If any problem exists with particular country then naturally concerned country’s specific name will emerge. And it is not the first time that UN bodies have taken a country specific resolution concerning Burma. There are numerous examples in which even Russia and China took the country specific resolution in UN history. And particularly here in Burma, the ruling military council had been given temporary role to play by then Prime Minister – Mr. U Nu having faith on his military commanders but military snatched the power in 1962, and later exploited to remain in power even after achieving the concerned goal and May 1990 elections. The tactics of attaching developing word in country’s name by China is an old Chinese diplomatic tactics of cajoling developing nations since the time of Chou-en-Lai. As far as the Human Rights Council mechanism and its Universal periodic review mechanism are concerned. One should not forget that, Burma’s military regime, which hasn’t taken a notice of UNSG appeals a few days back and repeated appeal by earlier UN Secretary General – Mr. Kofi Annan and many ASEAN and UN official resolutions due to the Chinese and Russian instigation to Junta, how could work with Universal Periodic review mechanism? Russia and China knows that more the restoration of democracy problem remains’ in Burma in the guise of Human Rights Council and its Universal Periodic Review meetings of delaying tactics, which also avoids the road of UN Security Council resolutions, the more they will get the opportunity in grazing the economic fields of Burma?

The sixth point of confrontation issue has been already explained and regarding “selective, politicized and one-sided” agenda point of Russia. It is one sided because West and USA etc. are raising the important issue of house arrest of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi against ethos of Human Rights Charters. Whether Russia and China can refuse that they had also demanded release of Daw Suu but Junta’s refusal doesn’t harm their economic interest, so it fits their diplomatic maneuverings?

However, unfortunately Junta emboldened by these supports feel that they have been successful in cornering Western Bloc’s initiatives without realizing that Burmese ethos rests with individual freedom & democracy and denigrating their own world’s celebrated personality like - Daw Suu Kyi will ultimately harm Burma’s long term prestige. Because Daw Suu Kyi is not less patriotic than any Burmese soldiers. Junta may think about - Daw Suu Kyi as her enemy but they should also accept the fact that Daw Suu Kyi’s vision of non-violent political struggle for the restoration of democracy has saved lives of many talented Burmese people, soldiers and military leaders. Likewise, Burma’s ethnic leaders involved with futile arms struggle should also misses the point that, a united and strong Burma will serve better for all and they should give an open call to world media / press that, they are ready to surrender their arms before Daw Aung San Suu Kyi defeating the propaganda of certain military commanders that, they are the saviors’ of Burma. India, which could have diplomatically avoided going with Junta by even abstaining (even if it has not reached to the point of abandoning constructive engagement with Junta by voting against the military) as world’s largest democracy like – Pakistan, Bhutan, Nepal, South Africa etc. and ASEAN Members like – Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia or followed absent like – Cambodia, but India unfortunately voted with Junta. If ASEAN+1 and BIMSTEC prevent India to oppose the Junta then they should have taken note that only – LAO PDR, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei from ASEAN went with Junta and Sri Lanka’s going with Junta is after the emergence of new honeymoon with China after the recent criticisms of Sri Lanka on Tamil issues by Prime Minister – Dr. Manmohan Singh’s due to the internal politics and DMK pressure. There are many instances in Modern Indian history that, Gandhi ji used to always keep with himself his worst critics to resolve his own mistakes and preventing himself to fall into wrong path of his experiments but probably Burma’s ruling military council prefers sycophants’ foreign policy experts to get more and more exploited of their resources?

(By: Rajshekhar, Burma Review)

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

(Document: GA/SHC/3940)

Voting pattern on the Situation of Human Rights in Myanmar (GA THIRD COMMITTEE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATIONS, Sixty-third General Assembly, 44th & 45th Meetings, dated 21^st of November 2008.

The draft resolution on the situation of human rights in Myanmar (document A/C.3/63/L.33) was approved by a recorded vote of 89 in favour to 29 against, with 63 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Belgium, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Latvia, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Lucia, Samoa, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Vanuatu.

Against: Algeria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Brunei Darussalam, China, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Egypt, India, Iran, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Libya, Malaysia, Myanmar, Namibia, Nicaragua, Niger, Oman, Russian Federation, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Zimbabwe.

Abstain: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Dominica, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Indonesia, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Suriname, Swaziland, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Yemen, Zambia.

Absent: Cambodia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Gabon, Madagascar, Micronesia (Federated States of), Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Tajikistan, and Tunisia.

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

Junta's Holy Steps of Democracy

Title: "Junta's Holy Steps of Democracy"

Artist: Pawan, Burma Review

Burma Review publishing again the art work of Mr. Pawan, an ace cartoonist from India to its esteemed readers. Earlier, Burma Review published Mr. Pawan’s cartoon entitled, “Junta Ready to Cooperate with UN” on 17th November 2007 after the historic August-September Saffron revolution ,which can be viewed at burmareview.wordpress.com. His masterly stroke of brush is a small attempt to unfold the true picture of a great nation of Asia suffering under military rule.


Born in 1977, Mr. Pawan belongs to a new generation of cartoonist from the Bihar State of India, who soon found a respectable place in different national media organizations. He has drawn more than thousands cartoons till now on different streams of contemporary Indian social and political life for many reputed Indian media organizations like – The Times of India (English Daily), Navbharat Times (Hindi Daily), Dainik Jagran (Hindi Daily), Prabhat Khabar (Hindi Daily), Aaj (Hindi Daily) and a series of cartoons on Children’s rights for UNICEF entitled, “Crytoons”, which became soon talk of the town for his social-political concerns. His other famous brush strokes are on India’s leading politician, Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader and present honorable Minister for Railways - Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav titled, “Laloo Toons”, “Laloo Lila” and “Kholna Mana Hai”. Once India’s mainstream English daily – “The Times of India” wrote about him that, “He doodled his way into the world of cartoons”.

Rajshekhar
Editor, Burma Review
INDIA

World Community strongly condemns the ‘inhuman prison terms’ for non-violent protestors in Burma

Burma Review from India joins the world community’s strong condemnation of inhuman long prison terms for non-violent peaceful democracy protestors in Burma of August-September 2007 Saffron revolution including the fellow blogger - Nay Phone Latt, Ms. Suu Suu Nwe and others. In a press release issued yesterday by the UN Secretary General – Ban Ki moon voiced deep concern at the ‘severe’ prison terms for Burmese democracy demonstrators and once again called for the “immediate release of all political prisoners in Burma” and said that, “all citizens of Myanmar to be allowed to freely participate in their country’s political future as part of an inclusive national reconciliation process.”

In addition, the United States Foreign Policy Division in a daily press briefing’s held on 12^th November 2008, the Deputy Spokesperson – Mr. Robert Wood explained to media about the – “United States strong condemnation of the Burmese regime’s harsh sentencing of at least thirty political activists to between two and sixty-five years in prison,” and stated that, “These brave democracy activists are peaceful citizens whose only crime was to challenge the regime’s illegitimate rule.” The US State department once again reiterated, “The call on the regime to begin a genuine dialogue with democratic and ethnic minority representatives and to immediately release all of Burma’s over 2,000 political prisoners, including Aung San Sui Kyi and those convicted in recent days.”

The United States further condemned the manner in which the trials were conducted and said that, “the regime held closed court sessions and did not allow family members or lawyers to attend. We reiterate our call for the regime to cease harassing and arresting civilians for peacefully exercising their internationally recognized human rights.” When asked about the procedures of resolving the crisis, the United States Deputy Spokesman – Mr. Wood explained that, “we will continue to work with our allies to try to see if there are ways we can, you know, come up with additional pressure to put on the Burmese. You know, we are very concerned about the situation in Burma, as we have said many times. And we’re going to continue to look for ways to increase that pressure on the Burmese. And we call on them, again, to release all political prisoners from detention. So we’ll continue working this issue.”

Apart from UN Secretary General and the United States, the United Kingdom, Canadian Foreign office etc. have also strongly condemned Burma's ruling military government for harshly punishing more than 20 pro-democracy activists with long prison terms of up to 65 years, and called for their immediate release. Earlier on Monday, the European Union, in a statement, said the junta's planned election in 2010 would be illegitimate unless it first releases all political prisoners, including Burmese pro-democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi.

It is noteworthy that, apart from a young fellow blogger of twenty-eight years of age– Nay Myo Kyaw, who used to wrote blogs under the name Nay Phone Latt and Ms. Suu Suu New; the Burmese ruling military regime sentenced long prison terms to other non-violent democracy protestors like – Mr. Jimmy (aka) Kyaw Minn Yu, Min Zeya, Ant Bwe Kyaw, Zeya (aka) Kalama, Thet Zaw, Aye Than (aka) Thant Tin, Zaw Zaw Min, Pandeik Tun, Nilar Thein, Mar Mar Oo, Sandar Min, Mie Mie (aka) Thin Thin Aye, Thet Thet Aung and Kyaw Kyaw Htwe.

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

US strongly Condemns Prosecution of four Burma democracy Defense Lawyers

In a Press Statement released on November 7, 2008 by the Deputy Spokesman of the US State Department (No. 2008/939) - Mr. Robert Wood, the United States has strongly condemned the recent prosecution by Burma’s military regime of four democracy defense lawyer’s right to legally represent the case of political detainees. Burma Review welcomes the action of US State department, which attempts to restore human dignity to defend oneself through legal constitutional means.

It is important to note that in last two weeks new developments in Burma, defense attorney Nyi Nyi Htwe was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment and three others, U Aung Thein, U Khin Maung Shein, and Saw Kyaw Kyaw Min, face possible prison time for contempt of court after they lodged complaints about the lack of due process in their clients’ trials, which is a blatant violation of civic rights ordained in Human Rights Charter of United Nations. The US State department in its press release reiterated that, “these actions represent a blatant attempt by the regime to intimidate these lawyers and demonstrate its contempt for the rule of law,” and made a call to the Burmese ruling military regime - to release immediately Nyi Nyi Htwe and drop all charges pending against U Aung Thein, U Khin Maun Shein and Saw Kyaw Kyaw Min.

It has further stressed vocally, that, “Burma’s military regime cease harassing and arresting citizens for peacefully exercising their internationally recognized human rights, and to release all political prisoners immediately, and to begin a genuine dialogue with democratic and ethnic minority groups on a transition to a civilian, democratic government in Burma.” This also implies the consistent demand of immediate release by US government of NLD leader and Nobel laureate – Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s from detention, who had already spent more then thirteen years in house arrest away from her family for the cause of peaceful non-violent democratic change in Burma.

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

Whether Mrs. Michelle LaVaughn Obama would be another Laura Bush on Burma’s question of Democracy?

In coming January 2009, when world would be celebrating arrival of change of a new year, a radical change of seat of power will take place in America's White House. The historical judgment which American people gave on 4th of November 2008 by electing a first Black-African democrat President - Mr. Barack Obama on the slogan “Change we need” instead of a Republican candidate and Vietnam War hero - Mr. John McCain will result in Mr. Obama taking the place of US President - Mr. George W. Bush. Through this also history will witness the change of position of first lady, Mrs. Obama or Mrs. Michelle LaVaughn Obama taking the position of present first lady – Mrs. Laura Bush – the vocal champion of Burma’s democratic cause. The outgoing US President might be villain in some West Asian Countries for his policy on Iraq but his last term will be remembered as a great friend of India like Mr. Obama’s recent view’s that, “India is not a threat to Pakistan but militants and terrorism?” I hope that the new democratic President of America would fulfill the unfinished task of great democratic leader – John F. Kennedy of making close and strong US-India relations, which become casualty of cold-war politics.




US first lady Mrs. Laura Bush hit international media headlines in the year 2006 for the demand of unconditional release of Nobel laureate – Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, when she hosted a ‘forum on Burma’s democratic cause’ at UN headquarters. However then, She expressed vehemently that, “her long-standing concern about Burma is not new to media person’s and it began several years ago when she learned the compelling story of Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate incarcerated in house arrest since her party won elections in 1990 and the Burmese military rejected the electoral result.” Her reaction about Burma’s ruling military Junta was that, so far as we can tell, military thumb their nose at the rest of the world but that doesn't mean the rest of the world shouldn't continue to speak out about these issues. When great Saffron revolution of monks took place in Burma in August-September last year, she was among first to make a call like Daw Suu Kyi made in 1988 democratic revolution to Burmese soldiers that, “Don’t fire on your people but join the movement.”



However then, Mrs. Laura Bush was strongly criticized by many Burma political analysts and even in Burma blogs that, she doesn’t know the subject and country but she is attempting to dwell into the area without achieving any results for becoming important. For the critiques of Mrs. Laura Bush, every time I read attack’s on her one famous immortal statement of America’s one of the greatest leader - Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. echoed in my ear, that, “If you want to be important—wonderful. If you want to be recognized—wonderful. If you want to be great—wonderful. But recognize that he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. That's a new definition of greatness. And this morning, the thing that I like about it: by giving that definition of greatness, it means that everybody can be great, because everybody can serve. You don't have to have a college degree to serve. You don't have to make your subject and your verb agree to serve. You don't have to know about Plato and Aristotle to serve. You don't have to know Einstein's theory of relativity to serve. You don't have to know the second theory of thermodynamics in physics to serve. You only need a heart full of grace, a soul generated by love. And you can be that servant.”



Every time when I found Mrs. Laura Bush speaking for Daw Suu Kyi’s freedom, I waited with pain expecting golden missed call from Indian National Congress Party President - Mrs. Sonia Gandhi to speak in same manners. But I never heard even a word from her in recent times, which she spoke many years back. I know, she wants to speak but the powerful lobby of foreign policy experts at South Block in New Delhi prevented her that it will jeopardize the relations with Burma’s military junta.


When the news first broke in India, that, Mr. Barack Obama is going to be the new President of America, every media - print or electronic draw a line with conclusion that, Mr. Barack Obama is very much influenced by Mahatma Gandhi. Even political leaders spoke about that. One is praising – Mr. Barack Obama as a philosophical disciple of Mahatma Gandhi because he is successful in becoming President of America. But the same media and leaders feel shy of asking vocally for the release of another philosophical disciple of Mahatma Gandhi - Daw Aung San Suu Kyi suffering under military rule because she is presently not in power.



Mrs. Laura Bush would be not there as a US first Lady in White House after coming January and Mrs. Michelle LaVaughn Obama will be there and those wants genuine democratic change in Burma and freedom of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi will miss her greatly. Mrs. Obama – a trained American lawyer of law firm ‘Sidley Austin’ and alumni of the University of Chicago had maintained a safe distance from the politics during Mr. Obama’s senatorial tenure giving more attention to the family. The new coming US First Lady’s policy of maintaining distance & balance from politics had been more related to giving chance to the American people to interact more with Mr. Barack Obama.



Now the question emerges that the new first lady – Mrs. Obama, who knows international law better as a practicing lawyer then outgoing First Lady – Mrs. Laura Bush, who had Master Degree of Library Science speak like Mrs. Bush on Burma and unlawful detention of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi or not? Whether, she would be another Laura Bush on Burma’s democratic question or need subject and verb agree to serve like the silence of Congress President – Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and BJP leader – Shri Lal Krishna Advani?





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

All Burma Monks’ Alliance and the 88 Generation Students Group Calls for UN Security Council Action in Burma

(Given below is the joint statement issued by two prominent human rights organizations that organized non-violent peaceful protests in August - September 2007 against the ruling military junta in Burma popularly known as the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), the All Burma Monks’ Alliance and the 88 Generation Students group, in support of the report on Burma, submitted by the Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to the 63rd session of the UN General Assembly on October 20, 2008.)

Joint Statement Issued by

All Burma Monks’ Alliance and the 88 Generation Students

Yangon (Rangoon), Myanmar (Burma)

6 November 2008

Burmese Monks and the 88 Generation Students call on the United Nations Security Council to Reinforce Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Mandate for Realizing Democratic Change in Burma

1. The All Burma Monks’ Alliance (ABMA) and the 88 Generation Students, two prominent organizations working to restore freedom and democracy in Burma, today issued a joint statement welcoming the report, submitted by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to the General Assembly on October 20, 2008 on the situation of human rights in Burma.

2. We appreciate Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for his clear understanding of the position of key stakeholders in Burma, including the National League for Democracy party, Members of Parliament-elect, ethnic political parties, as well as other relevant groups, such as the 88 Generation Students, the All Burma Monks’ Alliance and the All Burma Federation of Student Unions. We all declared our rejection of the military junta’s new constitution and its illegitimate conduct and use of force and fraud to adopt it. We sincerely believe that immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and the realization of a meaningful and time-bound dialogue between the military junta, the National League for Democracy party led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and ethnic representatives are the most important issues to address in order to pave the way for national reconciliation and democratization.

3. In his report, the Secretary-General rightly stated that “specific suggestions of the United Nations to improve the credibility and inclusiveness of the political process have thus far not been taken up by the Government.” We fully agree with the conclusion made by the Secretary-General that “there is no alternative to dialogue to ensure that all stakeholders can contribute to the future of their country. In this regard the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners will be the key for the resumption of an enhanced, all-inclusive, substantive and time-bound dialogue”.

4. Thus far, we have found no evidence that the military junta in Burma is endeavoring to implement the recommendations made by the Secretary-General and his Special Envoy, contained in the successive resolutions from the General Assembly and Human Rights Council as well as in the Presidential Statements of the Security Council. More than 2,100 democracy activists are still incarcerated, hundreds more are before the kangaroo courts, all fundamental rights of the people are severely restricted, the junta’s civilian militias are more aggressive in harassing NLD party members and human rights defenders, military offensives in ethnic areas have intensified, recruitment of child soldiers has become more and more widespread, and tens of thousands of people are fleeing the country every day to be free from human rights abuses.

5. Therefore, we earnestly call on the UN Security Council to take effective and collective action in support of the Secretary-General’s good offices role in Burma. Without strong enforcement from the Security Council, the military junta that rules our country of Burma will continue to undermine the Secretary-General’s good offices mandate and the United Nations, and more and more people of Burma will die unnecessarily.

All Burma Monks’ Alliance

The 88 Generation Students

Rangoon, Burma

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