http://www.mizzima.com/news/world/3465-burma-has-nuclear-ambitions-report-.html
Burma has nuclear ambitions: report
Saturday, 30 January 2010 15:57 Mungpi
New Delhi (Mizzima) – Burma’s military junta nurses nuclear ambitions, though there is insufficient evidence to prove the regime is building a secret nuclear reactor or facilities, a leading ‘Think Tank’ from the United States said.
David Albright, Paul Brannan, Robert Kelley and Andrea Scheel Stricker, well-known experts of proliferation of nuclear weapons, in a report said the Burmese regime’s suspicious links to North Korea and Russia’s agreement to sell a nuclear reactor to Burma in 2001 has led to suspicion of the junta’s nuclear intentions.
The report published by the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) on January 28, 2010, said “Although evidence does not exist to make a compelling case that Burma is building secret nuclear reactors or fuel cycle facilities, as has been reported, the information does warrant governments and companies adopting extreme caution in any dealings with Burma.”
The authors of the report said, suspicions about Burma’s nuclear intentions came after the junta reached an agreement with Russia to sell a research reactor in 2001 and the resumption of a formal military relationship between North Korea and Burma in 2007 intensified.
Though information available is incomplete, US officials are concerned that the Burmese regime’s relationship with North Korea could possibly extend to nuclear cooperation, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying, in July 2009, “We know there are also growing concerns about military cooperation between North Korea and Burma, which we take seriously.”
Philip J. Crowley, Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, on Thursday told reporters in Washington, “We – in our discussions with Burma, do have concerns about certain activity and the potential – that create risks to the global non-proliferation agenda.”
The report, titled ‘Burma: A Nuclear Wannabe; Suspicious Links to North Korea; High-Tech Procurements and Enigmatic Facilities’, said certain equipment, which could be used in a nuclear or missile programme, went to isolated Burmese manufacturing compounds of unknown purpose.
Evidence on Burma and North Korea’s relationship supports that the two countries have discussed nuclear cooperation, “but is not sufficient to establish that North Korea is building nuclear facilities for Burma’s military junta, despite recent reports to the contrary,” the report said.
“Nonetheless, no one can ignore the possibility of significant North Korean nuclear assistance to this enigmatic, military regime,” said the authors, giving the example of North Korea’s secret sales of a reactor to Syria, which went unnoticed even by the world’s best intelligence agencies until late in the reactor’s construction.
The authors also urged governments and companies to be vigilant in examining Burma’s enquiries or requests for equipment, whether via Burmese governmental entities, Burmese trading companies or other foreign trading companies because Burma is buying a wide variety of suspicious dual-use goods internationally.
“Companies should treat enquiries from Burma no differently than those from Iran, Pakistan, or Syria,” the report said.
Another evidence, leading to suspicion of Burma’s nuclear ambition is the reported presence of officials from Namchongang Trading (NCG), a North Korean trading company that has sanctions imposed by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), the authors said.
While the nature of cooperation between Burma and NCG, which also reportedly assisted Syria’s reactor project, remains largely unknown, the NCG was said to have sold equipment to Burma or provided some type of technical assistance.
Though there is no concrete evidence of North Korea supplying Burma a reactor, the report said, “Any involvement by NCG in Burma is bound to increase suspicions about such a sale.”
The report also analyses the possibilities of Burma using North Korean trading entities to acquire overseas sensitive nuclear and nuclear dual use goods.
“Its military cooperation with North Korea has increased over the last several years, fuelling concerns about nuclear cooperation. North Korea could also supplement Burma’s own foreign procurement networks, and it could sell nuclear goods made in North Korea,” the report said.
The authors said, given the evidence, there remain sound reasons to suspect that the military regime in Burma might be pursuing a long-term strategy to make nuclear weapons. However, contrary to public reports, the military junta does not appear to be close to establishing a significant nuclear capability.
“Information suggesting the construction of major nuclear facilities appears unreliable or inconclusive,” the report said.
Although Burma and North Korea appear to be cooperating on illegal procurements, who is helping who cannot be determined with the available information, the authors said.
“Nonetheless, the evidence supports that the regime wants to develop a nuclear capability of some type, but whether its ultimate purpose is peaceful or military remains a mystery,” the report said.
The authors, while concluding, suggest that the outstanding questions about the regime’s activities require that there be more scrutiny of Burma to ascertain if there is an underlying secret nuclear programme.
“A priority is to establish greater transparency over Burma’s and North Korea’s activities and inhibit any nuclear or nuclear dual-use transfers to Burma. A related problem is ensuring that Burma is not helping North Korea acquire nuclear and other military goods illegally,” the report suggested.
Burma has nuclear ambitions: report
Burmese Army Still Recruiting Under-age Soldiers
http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_id=16176
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By LAWI WENG Wednesday, June 24, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Burmese army is still recruiting under-age soldiers in contravention of a United Nations call to stop the practice, according to child labor activists in Burma.
In the latest incident, a 16-year-old youth was taken late at night by an army truck from Light Infantry Division 77, based in Pegu.
Aye Myint, a leading labor activist in Pegu Division, said the youth was taken from a local restaurant where he worked. His parents were told by an officer at the Pegu army base that the youth had been sent to a recruitment center in Rangoon’s Mingalardon Township.
Aye Myint said the youth’s family has lodged a letter of complaint with the International Labour Organization (ILO) office in Rangoon on June 17. The Irrawaddy tried
unsuccessfully to contact the office on Wednesday.
Kyin Toe, chairman of the National League for Democracy (NLD) in Twante Township, said another family had complained to his office that their under-age son had been recruited by the army.
Burma’s state-run media maintains that the government is screening recruits and releasing any found to be under age. It reported that 68 children were detected recently in various military training schools and were released to their parents or guardians.
The ILO says it has been instrumental, together with the International Committee of the Red Cross, in the release of 12 under-age recruits. A further 14 cases are still being processed.
The New York-based Human Rights Watch has said that 70,000 under-age soldiers are serving in the Burmese armed forces.
The UN also says in its latest report on the situation that the Burmese military junta is still recruiting child soldiers. The report on “Children and Armed Conflict” was released this month.
Human rights groups say children are recruited at train stations, bus depots, tea shops, outside video halls and movie cinemas or even while walking home at night.
The groups say the young recruits are threatened and beaten if they refuse to agree to undergo military training. After their training, many are sent to areas where the army is in conflict with ethnic groups.
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group | www.irrawaddy.org
Burma’s rural economy on verge of collapse: economist
http://www.mizzima.com/news/inside-burma/2107-burmas-rural-economy-on-verge-of-collapse-economist.html
by Mungpi
Monday, 11 May 2009 22:48
New Delhi (Mizzima) - Unless Burma’s military rulers inject cash into the rural credit system, the country’s rural economy will likely collapse as farmers in rural areas face a “chronic shortage of credit”, an economist told Mizzima.
Sean Turnell, an Economics Professor at Macquarie University in Australia, said that because of a lack of a proper economic policy to uplift Burma’s rural economy, the rural credit system is “completely dried up” and in desperate need of cash assistance.
“I am getting report after report that there is a chronic shortage of credit in cash,” said Turnell, adding the rural economy is suffering despite the ruling junta having significant foreign reserves derived from the sale of natural gas.
Turnell said the estimate of the junta’s foreign reserves from the sale of natural gas during fiscal year of 2007-08 is about US $5 billion. However, these reserves are not spent on developing the rural economy, which is on the verge of collapsing with the credit system “completely drying up”.
Meanwhile, a report by the Financial Times, citing a new International Monetary Fund report on Burma, said natural gas exports have swollen the country’s foreign exchange reserves to a record high of US $3.6 billion – despite investment into social welfare remaining minimal.
The as of yet unpublished IMF report, which the Financial Times cited, said unless the Burmese government makes improvements in its business climate, the future of the country is “bleak”.
The IMF argued Burma's economy was hit hard by the global economic slowdown and the devastating cyclone of May 2008, which killed 140,000 people and caused the growth in gross domestic product to slow to about 4.5 percent last year, down from 5.5 percent a year earlier.
The country’s ruling military generals, however, do not include all of its gas revenue in the annual public account, instead reporting only a portion of the foreign revenues, which are calculated at the 30-year-old official exchange rate of six kyat to a dollar, according to the report. Currently, a US dollar on the black market fetches approximately 1,050 kyat.
Turnell, agreeing with the report’s calculation, said the Burmese junta’s practice of accounting for foreign exchange revenue at the old and obsolete exchange rate in effect captures less than one per cent of the total budget revenue from the sale of gas for fiscal year 2007-08, as opposed to the 57 percent it would account for if valued at the market rate.
He estimates that Burma’s generals will earn between US $3-3.5 billion from the sale of gas for fiscal year 2008-09.
But, at the same time, farmers are facing an acute shortage of investment funds, he said. Many farmers are forced to sell their products immediately after harvest and to buy the same food that they are selling for consumption.
Turnell, who has closely followed Burma’s economy for several years, said the global economic slowdown has indirectly impacted Burma’s agriculture sector, which largely depends on exports to neighboring countries.
With the declining price of rice, farmers, particularly in the Cyclone Nargis-hit Irrawaddy delta, will find it extremely difficult to plant paddy in the upcoming monsoon, as they are heavily indebted and will try to reduce cost, he maintained.
In the absence of a rural credit system being implemented by the government, farmers will again be dependent on local money lenders, who usually demand high interest rates, up to 20 percent, leaving farmers with an insurmountable debt obligation.
Turnell said that to come out of this crisis, in the short term the Burmese government could inject some of its gas revenue into a rural credit system through the Myanmar Agriculture Development Bank (MADB) or another existing institution.
Alternatively, he said the junta could simply remove restrictions that forbid commercial banks from lending to farmers.
“It’s so bizarre. I can never understand this particular law, which actually outlaws the commercial banks from lending to the farmers,” he added.
He also warned that unless the government comes in to help the farmers in the rural areas, “food shortages could be on the card in later the year.”
Reports of UN election monitors leave primary Mon political parties unmoved; boycott remains
http://democracyforburma.wordpress.com/2009/03/07/reports-of-un-election-monitors-leave-primary-mon-political-parties-unmoved-boycott-remains/
2009 March 7
tags: 2010 Election, Burma, Human Rights, Junta, Mon, world focus on Burmaby peacerunningThe two primary political parties representing Mon people say they will not participate in Burma’s 2010 elections, in spite of recent reports indicating that international observers will be invited to monitor the process.
Monitoring is not likely to make the elections free and fair, spokesmen for the New Mon State Party (NMSP) and the Mon National Democratic Front (MNDF) told IMNA, nor will it resolve underlying problems with country’s constitution.
Few details on the monitoring have been publicized, raising questions about the extent of any monitors’ mandate. To date, Burma’s State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) government has made no official public statement; save for a few paragraphs in the Bangkok Post on March 1st and a follow-up story by the Irrawaddy the next day, the story has received little to no international coverage.
According to the Bangkok Post, Burmese Prime Minister Thein Sein recently told Thailand’s Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva that Burma would welcome observation by UN special envoy Ibrahim Gambari, UN staff and other western observers. The Post based its story on a statement by Thailand’s deputy government spokesman Suphachai Jaisamut.
Nai Ong Mange, NMSP party spokesman, cautioned that the UN has made no official announcement regarding monitoring, let alone provided details about how, where and what monitors would be allowed to observe. “The UN has not officially announced how they will observe the 2010 election,” Nai Ong Mange told IMNA. The NMSP is the largest Mon political party and has officially controlled a small amount of territory in Mon State since agreeing to a ceasefire with the SPDC in 1995.
“If the UN monitors, it will only be able to do and see what the SPDC says to do and see,” continued Nai Ong Mange. “They will not come to the ethnic areas – they will not make the election free and fair.”
Media, human rights and democracy groups have widely reported poll tampering during a constitutional referendum held in May 2008. Reported abuses – particularly in primarily ethnic rural areas – include voter intimidation, pre-filled ballots and result fabrication. Official figures, meanwhile, say the country’s new constitution was confirmed by a vote of more than 90%.
“Although UN Monitors might join the election now… they can do nothing,” agreed MNDF spokesman Nai Hong Dein. The MNDF is another respected Mon political party, which won 5 seats in Burma’s later-annulled 1990 elections.
“The SPDC will not change, they will not review the constitution,” explained Nai Hong Dein. “The constitution is not for the ethnic nationalities; it is for strengthening the SPDC. Although there may be monitors, we will not participate. Even if they monitor, Burma will not become a democratic country. It will not become a federal country.
Both the NMSP and MNDF have announced that their refusal to participate in the 2010 election is primarily predicated on opposition to Burma’s constitution. According to the groups, the constitution provides insufficient protection for ethnic minorities and is too difficult to amend.
Nai Ong Mange also highlighted the SPDC’s continued failure to provide details on how the election will be conducted. Details explaining how political parties can be officially formed have not been released, he said, nor have rules explaining how poll stations and voting areas will be allocated. Indeed, though rumors indicate that the election is tentatively scheduled for March 2010, there has been no official SPDC statement.
In the past, at least one Mon politician interviewed by IMNA has criticized the lack of clarity regarding election rules as a deliberate strategy to weaken opposition parties.
But though both the MNDF and NMSP appear firm in their refusal to join the election, both spokesmen said their parties would not oppose the formation of political parties by other Mon groups. “If the NMSP and MNDF don’t join, a Mon political party will appear,” said Nai Hong Dein. “I won’t say that this political party is good or bad.”
“If a 3rd party appears… the NMSP will not bother this party. They can do what they want to do. If the people and monks support them, it is good and they have a right to participate,” agreed Nai Ong Mange.
The NMSP stance appears to mirror that of the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), which will require KIO members to leave the party if they contest the election. “If an NMSP member wants to form a political party, they can go – it is their choice,” said Nai Ong Mange. “But the NMSP will not back these members. We will not support them and we will not bother them. But they will have to leave the party – they cannot use the NMSP name.”
Imna Mon News
from → Burma
Sanctions Are Not to Blame for Burma’s Economic Woes
http://www.irrawaddy.org/opinion_story.php?art_id=15229&page=1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By MOE ZAW OO Tuesday, March 3, 2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, some critics of the National League for Democracy (NLD) have taken the party’s leadership to task for continuing to call for sanctions on Burma.
It is not enough to blame sanctions for the prolonged poverty in Burma while urging the NLD to confess policy mistakes. We need to identify and implement a workable strategy that exploits the junta’s weaknesses—not just place blame and point fingers.
Isolation has been the policy of Burma’s military ever since it stole power from the country’s civilian government in 1962. The current junta, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), has proved intransigent and has refused to concede any aspect of its policy as a result of sanctions or engagement. Champions of both policies realize this.
The underlying question is this: What will influence the junta to peacefully solve the current crises facing Burma? If sanctions, targeted or total, could be made to work more effectively, policymakers who advocate this approach would be applauded.
Similarly, pro-engagement policymakers would be praised if their strategy actually succeeded in changing the regime.
On October 4, 2007, under extreme pressure from the international community following its brutal crackdown on the peaceful monk-led Saffron Revolution, the SPDC issued Statement 1/2007. This statement called on NLD General-Secretary Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to renounce “confrontation, utter devastation, and demanding all types of sanctions, including economic sanctions,” as a precondition for meeting with junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe.
The word “confrontation” entered Burma’s political lexicon in 1989, when the junta accused the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi of confrontational activities during her organizational trips across Burma. For the junta, any activity that threatens their hold on power is an act of confrontation.
Aung San Suu Kyi introduced the phrase “utter devastation” during a press conference in Burma on July 11, 1995, the day after she was released from her first period of house arrest. “We must choose between dialogue and utter devastation,” she said at the time.
The junta’s call for the elimination of “all types of sanctions, including economic sanctions,” has a long history. However, the sanctions debate is not about the impact of the sanctions on political change in Burma or the international community’s options for imposing pressure on the Burmese junta. Instead, the debate is about whether sanctions negatively impact the people of Burma. Sanctions should not be used as a scapegoat for the economic problems in Burma. The cause of the crisis in Burma is the junta, not the sanctions.
For years, international ministers and diplomats have discussed policy toward Burma and the junta’s disregard of international and public opinion.
Recently, at a news conference in Indonesia on February 18, 2009, Hillary Clinton, the new US Secretary of State, stated that her government was “looking at possible ideas” to try to promote positive change in Burma. “Clearly the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn’t influenced the Burmese junta, [but] reaching out and trying to engage them has not influenced them, either,” she said.
In an interview in 2003, former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who was the primary person responsible for admitting Burma into the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) during the 1997 Asean Summit in Kuala Lumpur, warned that Burma might be expelled from the regional grouping if its military rulers continued to defy world pressure to release Aung San Suu Kyi. “I fought hard for Myanmar [Burma] to be admitted into Asean. I think the leaders of Myanmar should consider public opinion,” he said.
When the UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari visited Burma recently, the SPDC’s Prime Minister Gen Thein Sein told him that “the UN should make an effort to lift economic sanctions imposed on Myanmar, if the organization wants to see a prosperous Myanmar with political stability.”
Thein Sein seemed to suggest that lifting economic sanctions would guarantee Burma’s future prosperity and political stability. Obviously, that would not happen. The special envoy reported to the Security Council after his recent visit that he had achieved “no tangible results” in his efforts to move Burma closer to democracy.
As Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s founding prime minister, explained during an interview with a columnist from the University of California’s Los Angeles Media Center, “These are rather dumb generals when it comes to the economy. How can they so mismanage the economy and reach this stage when the country has so many natural resources?”
Lee also asserted that he could not understand how the generals could expect Burma to remain so isolated, adding that even medicine had to be smuggled into the country from Thailand.
The junta manipulates the international community, and the SPDC’s contempt for international opinion is obvious. Neither a confession from the NLD nor blaming sanctions will result in tangible outcomes for democracy in Burma. Therefore, instead of focusing on confession and blame games, we must identify the most effective ways, both internationally and within Burma, to penetrate the junta’s impervious shield.
The author is a former political prisoner and currently member of the foreign affairs section of the National League for Democracy (Liberated Area).
Posts
