Burma 2007 - Berichte und Meldungen
|
The brutal and ongoing suppression of the "saffron revolution" has refocused international attention on the appalling human rights and political situation in Burma.
Civilised people have been shocked by the images of Buddhist monks and other civilians being arrested and killed in Rangoon and other cities.
Understandably, revulsion at the actions of the SPDC regime has led to calls for firm action to be taken against the generals who have mismanaged Burma for nearly half a century (since the military takeover of 1962).
The challenge facing the international community is how to persuade the junta to better respect the human, civil and political rights of citizens. Whether this requires reform of the military government - and some kind of gradual transition to democracy - or a more abrupt form of regime change is debatable. What is clear, however, is that Burma needs change - and soon.
In the meantime, for people in rural areas, not much has changed. Communities continue to be subject to a range of abuses committed by the Burmese military and government, and sometimes by armed non-state groups. The situation is especially difficult for ethnic people in areas affected by armed conflict, or who are threatened by the construction of large-scale infrastructure projects such as dams, and whose livelihoods have been undermined by natural resource extraction (logging and mining), or because their land has been confiscated by the army or other powerful actors.
It is of the utmost importance that the international community does not forget the plight of these people. Today in Burma, more than 500,000 internally displaced people (IDPs), most of whom come from the Karen, Karenni, Mon, Shan and other minority groups, are among the most oppressed and needy people in the country. Also of concern are 150,000 refugees living in ten camps in Thailand, as well as some two million migrant workers in the kingdom (most of whom also come from Burma).
In recent weeks, some international donors have responded to the situation in Burma by committing additional money to humanitarian projects inside the country, implemented by international and local agencies working in government-controlled areas. This is an entirely appropriate response. Burma receives much less foreign aid per capita than other countries with similar development and poverty indicators. I have long argued that more aid should be targeted at needy groups in Burma, and that assistance projects should be implemented in partnership with local civil society networks, and - where appropriate - with some state agencies, such as the departments of health and education.
However, foreign aid to Burma should not be seen as a zero-sum game. Assistance to vulnerable groups inside the country should not be provided at the expense of communities in the border zones. Refugees and IDPs in eastern Burma and Thailand remain in need of international protection and assistance. However, the international NGOs which have for over two decades supplied the refugee camps in Thailand, and directed international awareness of the plight of IDPs in Burma, are currently experiencing a serious funding crisis.
The Thailand Burma Border Consortium (TBBC) is the main NGO responsible for providing food and shelter to displaced people from Burma. Over the past few years, the TBBC and other NGOs have worked with the refugee communities to ensure a greater degree of participation in the governance of the camps, on the part of women and various minority and non-elite groups. Today, the refugee regime on the border stands as an example of "best practice": the various communities represented in the camps enjoy a degree of ownership over administration and the distribution of relief supplies, which is unusual in refugee situations around the world. However, these achievements are in danger of being undermined, as the TBBC is being forced to cut supplies to the refugee camps due to a chronic lack of funding.
The donors who have for so many years supported the TBBC and other NGOs working with refugees along the Thailand border should continue to do so. With increasingly large numbers of refugees taking up the "durable solution" of resettlement in third countries, the camps may be closed within a decade. In the meantime however, thousands of people still flock to the border every month - although the Thai authorities are making it increasingly difficult for them to gain access to the refugee camps.
Since the late 1990s, the civil war in Burma has entered its final stage. The few remaining armed groups still at war with the SPDC are facing a desperate situation, and the civilian populations living in areas under their influence or control are more vulnerable than ever. Given the dire humanitarian situation along the border, IDPs and refugees in and from Burma deserve our continued support. Now is not the time to abandon the long-suffering people of the borderlands.
Uproar in Burma, silence in Asean - August 27, 2007
Rare public protests against hike in fuel prices indicate rare opportunity to bring about change.
The whole world has condemned the suppression of peaceful demonstrations in Burma in the past week. The detention of leaders of the 88 Generation Students by the military regime in Rangoon has also been taken up by the United Nations, European Union and the international community. There have been protests before in Burma, mostly small and sporadic since 1988, but this time around the protests were bigger and prolonged. It was a watershed in Burmese politics and could mark the beginning of the end of one of the world's rogue regimes.
The Rangoon regime is used to suppressing its own people without worrying about the consequences. After all, why should they? They have everything under control with their armed security forces and thousands-strong civilian gang - the Union Solidarity and Development Association - whose members are on the streets ready to beat up democracy-loving people and ordinary civilians at a moment's notice. For decades, the Burmese students and people have wanted to express what went wrong in their society. They could not do it. When the paranoid junta leaders decided to move from Rangoon to Naypyidaw in 2005, the Burmese people were shocked.
They knew the junta leaders had spent a fortune to create the Disneyland-like new capital. And to further burden the already tight budget, the junta has grand plans to build a cyber city and, of course, a nuclear plant. But the junta leaders do not have the kind of money they claim to have. Revenues from gas and oil are not expected to come in abundantly until 2010. What else was left but to end fuel subsidies and further squeeze the ordinary people.
So when the junta decided to increase fuel prices, the Burmese people decided they had had enough. Most of the people earn meagre incomes to live from day to day. With the rise in fuel prices, the cost of food and other necessities also shoot skyward. The prices of eggs and garlic have increased by 90 per cent, meat by over 50 per cent. It means the people have to spend at least 90 per cent of their income on food. How can they survive like that? Ending the fuel subsidies will not bring the junta much revenue anyway.
The International Monetary Fund has been advising the junta on how to modernise its economic management and tax collection system. In normal circumstances, the junta's latest move would have been considered sound economic policy. But given the long-standing suppression and suffering of the Burmese people, the fuel-price hike represents a small window to speak out. It could be the straw that broke the camel's back. The students and the public sensed correctly that the time had come to show solidarity on the streets. If there was a lesson learned from the 1988 pro-democracy uprising, it was that one must not look down on the suppressed and hopeless Burmese people because they can rise up. The junta's spell was broken.
As usual, Asean has been dead silent. Senior Asean officials are meeting now in Singapore to finalise the draft of the Asean Charter, a document meant to strengthen the grouping. But it is hypocritical for Asean to talk about making Asean one community or one family. Since its admission in 1997, Asean has had traumatic dealings with Burma. The Burmese regime has never behaved in a way that would enhance a close-knit Asean family. The junta does not care a hoot what Asean thinks. When Thailand had a coup last year, quite a few Asean leaders had strong views on Thai democracy. When it comes to Burma, the leaders are more willing to keep their mouths sealed. It would not be wrong to say that Asean has been always more sympathetic to the Burmese junta. Obviously, a future collapse of the junta would impact on the grouping's democratic space and openness. Asean must have a clear awareness of Burma's situation. The group can no longer sit idle. How can Asean be people-oriented and have a charter that is people-centred if the current suppression of the Burmese people continues without the grouping voicing strong concern?
Archiv
|
|