------------------------ BurmaNet ------------------------ "Appropriate Information Technologies, Practical Strategies" ---------------------------------------------------------- The BurmaNet News: March 9, 1997 Issue #661 HEADLINES: ========== NCUB: PRESS RELEASE NO (13) KYODO: 21 DEAD IN THAILAND ROAD ACCIDENT ABMU: STATEMENT ABOUT SLORC'S OFFENSIVE AGAINST KNU BKK POST:GOVT SLAMMED ON REFUGEES BKK POST:WORK ON FRIENDSHIP BRIDGE STARTS AGAIN THE NATION: FROM A 'BUFFER' TO A HINDRANCE THE NATION: MUTUAL GAINS IF KAREN DEFEATED BKK POST: KARENS 'NOT REFUGEES,' ARMY CHIEF INSISTS BKK POST: UNHCR INTERVENTION SOUGHT THE NATION: KISSINGER SEES SMOOTH POWER TRANSFER ASIA TIMES:CLINTON'S EMPTY THREAT SANCTIONS BKK POST:THAI FORCES CLASH WITH KAREN REBELS ANNOUNCEMENT: ACTIVIST MA NADI SPEAKS OUT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NCUB: PRESS RELEASE NO (13) March 8, 1997 From: All Burma Students' Democratic Front _____________________________________________________________________ NA T I O N A L C O U N C I L OF THE U N I O N OF B U R M A _____________________________________________________________________ 15 died from Cholera outbreak at Refugee camps in Kanchanaburi province, Non-Government Organisations denied access The conditions of refugees who fled SLORC brutal offensive in KNU Brigade 4 area are worsening. These refugees were evacuated by Thai officials to Htaw Ma Pyo village on Burma side of the border and to the near-by camp on Thai side opposite Suan Phung in Ratchaburi province. According to yesterday’s report from the border, 15 people died from a currently occurring Cholera out-break which started on March 4, 1997. Refugees are facing a lack of adequate shelters, medicine and basic necessities because humanitarian aid organisations have been repeatedly prohibited by Thai border officials from visiting the refugee camps. In the absence of security and assistance, many refugees are attempting to leave the refugees camps for villages deeper inside Thailand. More than five refugees who attempted to run-away from the camps died yesterday in a car accident that resulted 21 deaths, in Kanchanaburi province. All Non Government Organisations (NGOs), journalists and even two U.S. embassy officials have been denied access to the refugee camps in Kanchanaburi province which is under the control of the Thai 9th Army. The NCUB is deeply concerned about the current situation of Karen refugees in these camps and appeals to the international community, especially the Royal Thai Government, to ensure security and assistance to Karen refugee camps in Kanchanaburi. Information Committee National Council of the Union of Burma (NCUB) ************************** KYODO: 21 DEAD IN THAILAND ROAD ACCIDENT March 7, 1997 BANGKOK, March 7 Kyodo - A total of 21 persons -- seven Myanmarese children, 12 Myanmarese workers and two Thai drivers -- died when a 10-wheel truck collided with a pickup in the western Thai town of Kanchanaburi, local police said Friday. The accident also left 17 Myanmarese workers including some children injured and hospitalized in Kanchanaburi hospitals, police said. ''Most of the patients are seriously injured and have had surgery. But one of them was allowed to go home,'' said an official of a hospital in Kanchanaburi where a total of 13 victims were admitted immediately after the accident occurred. The truck, the driver of which was believed to be ''unconscious,'' crossed into the opposite lane and rammed the right front part of the pickup which was carrying 26 passengers on their way to a construction site in Kanchanaburi Province, some 120 kilometers west of Bangkok, police said. The truck also carried 10 Myanmarese workers of a sawmill in Kanchanaburi. It carried some empty water tanks as well, police said. *********************** ABMU: STATEMENT ABOUT SLORC'S OFFENSIVE AGAINST KNU March 6, 1997 From: "All Burma Students' Democratic Front" _______________________________________________________________ A L L B U R M A M U S L I M U N I O N _______________________________________________________________ Statement of ABMU about SLORC's offensive against KNU ----------------------------------------------------- After ignoring the proposed cease-fire, SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council ) has launched its general offensive against KNU (Karen National Union) in the middle of February that over ran KNU Brigade 6 area. About 2,000 Muslims along with many Karen people have to flee from the area, crossed the border into Thailand as new refugees and extended the population of Muslims refugees of the border to 20,000. Meanwhile the inner parts of the area, some of the villagers left behind were resettled by the SLORC. But, a Muslim mosque of Kyaikdon village was destroyed and set ablaze along with a Muslim religious school, properties and farm-land belong to the Muslims were looted by the SLORC's army. Muslims were denied to resettle and at the gun point they were then chased out of the area. ABMU which is the member of DAB, "Democratic Alliance of Burma", and NCUB, National Council of the Union of Burma, will continue its anti-military dictatorship struggle until genuine peace and democracy were restored in Burma. We would like the entire people of ASEAN countries and sympathizers of the world to know the situation in Burma, especially those of Malaysia and Indonesia who are playing leading role in ASEAN, and their Governments are very close the SLORC and blindly supporting the constructive engagement towards Burma. Central Committee All Burma Muslim Union March 6, 1997 Contact address; P.O Box 11-445 Bangkok 10110 ****************************** BKK POST:GOVT SLAMMED ON REFUGEES March 8, 1997 Brussels, AFP, AP The European Commission on Thursday added its voice to international criticism of the Thai government over its repatriation of refugees fleeing across the border from Burma. "The commission regrets that by denying refugees access to their territory, the Thai authorities are putting these people's lives in danger," the European Union's executive arm said in a statement. At least 15,000 refugees have crossed into Thailand since Rangoon began an offensive earlier this month against the Karen National Union (KNU), the last major ethnic insurgency yet to sign a ceasefire agreement with Burma's military rulers. Thailand came under severe criticism from the United Nations and Western governments last week following reports that it had forcibly repatriated some of the Karen people, including women and children, back into harm's way. And the United States on Thursday renewed pressure on Thailand to open its borders to the Karens. Thailand continues to come under intense criticism from foreign countries and human rights groups for sending hundreds of Karen men, women and children back to Burma last week. The Thais insisted the refugees would be safe. But human rights groups said they were being sent back into the path of the Burmese offensive to crush the rebel KNU. Burma's army is accused of rape, random execution and burning villages. Three Republican US congressmen sent Prime Minister Chavalit Yongchaiyudh a letter on Thursday demanding respect for the refugees' "basic human rights" and calling the repatriations "against international law and internationally accepted humanitarian standards." It was signed Benjamin Gilman of New York, chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Relations; Christopher Smith of New Jersey, chairman of the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights; and Dana Rohrabacher of California. Spokesmen for the prim minister's office and the Thai Foreign Ministry said they had no knowledge of the letter. But previous such criticism has been rejected as misjudging Thai intentions. The Thai army, however, appeared to succumb to the international outcry over the weekend, transferring some 2,300 refugees reportedly slated for deportation to a safer location inside Thailand. Burmese troops raiding across the border had twice tried to attack their camp. A Thai army spokesman, speaking on condition of anonymity, said it had always been Thailand's policy to help unarmed people. The spokesman had been asked to clarify remarks attributed to General Chetta Thanajaro, the army commander, on Wednesday that Thailand would allow all Karens to enter the country if they were unarmed. The remarks appeared to be a reversal of General Chetta's stance last week to bar entry to all fighting age males, saying he did not want Thailand turned into a guerrilla rear base. But statements form Thai officials have been inconsistent and confusing over refugee policy and under what circumstances any repatriations took place. A spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees had no immediate comment on General Chetta's remarks. The Coordinating Committee of Human Rights Organisations in Thailand was hopeful the general was indicating a new policy. But the committee's spokesman, Pairoj Pholphit, said he was not confident it was official and would be carried out. ******************************** BKK POST:WORK ON FRIENDSHIP BRIDGE STARTS AGAIN (abridged) March 8, 1997 Wassana Nanuam Thailand yesterday resumed construction work on the Thai-Burmese Friendship Bridge after a two year delay caused by border demarcation disputes. The deadlock over construction of the bridge ended after technical committees from both sides met earlier this week to thrash out their differences and to resolve to use a 1989 map to set the borderline, said a source at the army. Army chief Gen Chetta Thanajaro has urged Thailand's Highways Department to speed up construction to complete the bridge within three months. Lt Gen Khin Nyunt, first secretary general of the State Law and Order Restoration Council, yesterday called Gen Chettha and congratulated him on the success of the talks. Construction of the bridge linking Thailand's Mae Sot with Burma's Myawaddy was suspended on June 7, 1995 by the Burmese government which complained that Thai businessmen had enlarged the embankment on their side of the Moei River, thus altering the borderline marked by the river. Construction work on the bridge and the digging in the river would be done at the same time, the source quoted the army chief as saying. *************************************************** THE NATION: FROM A 'BUFFER' TO A HINDRANCE March 6, 1997 Yindee Lertcharoenchok Thailand's current policy on Burma has taken a 180-degree turn and is now driven solely by economics. This probably explains why the Karen have been sacrificed in the name of so-called Thai national interests, writes The Nation's Yindee Lertcharoenchok in the first instalment of a two-part series. The past month saw a sudden explosion of violence and disorder along the Thai-Burma border and the resulting human tragedy has moved many to tears. The ethnic Karen are bearing the brunt of suffering, in the name of "common interests" between the powers-that-be in Burma and Thailand. On the surface, the brutal Jan 28 and 29 attacks on three Karen refugee camps in Tak province; the ongoing Burmese Army's all-out offensive to capture Karen rebels' tow remaining controlled territories; the Feb 25 meeting of the Thai and Burmese Army chiefs; and last week's deportation of Karen refugees back to the war zone by the Thai Army looked like mere isolated incidents without any connection. But the situation on the ground, during and after those occurrences, has brought forth a startling sad reality. All the seemingly confusing incidents were in fact inter-related. And they were also well-calculated, probably with the acknowledgment well ahead of time, of the Thai side. The events on the border, now it seems, have reached a state of chaotic crisis that the general public will find it difficult to understand and follow. Coupled with this, contradictory, and often complacent, statements have been made by top Army generals, especially Army Chief Gen Chettha Thanajaro and several government leaders, particularly Prime Minister Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh. The concerted attempts by the Army and government leaders to play down the whole border upheaval and the ensuing border tension, as well as their profound effects on Thailand, are tantamount to a deliberate distortion of information on their part to mislead the Thai public in general. It does not take much to conclude that there might have been connivance and collusion, by the Thai Army with their Burmese counterparts, in attempts to annihilate the unarmed Karen civilians - by itself a gross crime against humanity. Thailand and Burma have different goals and objectives in mind in their desire for peace and stability along the common 2,500-kilometre frontier. Those differences also extend in the search for a quick solution, whether by peaceful efforts or the use of force, to the five decades of Burmese ethnic insurgency. While the under-developed Burma looks at peace and stability in terms of national security and as a sign of the government' ability to assert and consolidate its sovereign control across the whole country, the more developed Thailand sees peace in Burma as a golden opportunity for the Kingdom to use the geographical proximity to exploit Burma's enormous economic potentials. It is a widely-known fact that resource-starved Thailand has looked at Burma's abundant natural resources - untapped due to three decades of self-imposed isolation - as a new source to replenish the country's dwindling reserves. As it is, natural resources are urgently needed to help sustain the Thai economy. Moreover, the country does not want to be left behind in the regional and global rush to take advantage of the Burmese junta's open economy. What happened in the past month was the final stage in the 180-degree turn in Thailand's post-Cold War national security strategy towards its western front. In short, the country's economic needs and interests have overtaken national security to the extent that Thai sovereignty and national integrity are often compromised, deliberately or unintentionally by authorities concerned. At the same time as national priority changes, the role and duties of the armed forces also sway, over time, into a grey area. From the defender of national sovereignty and territorial integrity, the military now assumes as its duty a role in the world of diplomacy as well as guardian of Thai economic interests. The military's self-imposed new role in non-security affairs is a direct interference into the traditional work of the Foreign and Economic Ministries. Moreover, powerful politicians-cum-businessmen, whose prime concern is personal economic profit, have smartly exploited the strengths and weaknesses of the Thai bureaucracy and military. They have used the latter's lack of coordination, and the absence of a unified national policy towards Burma, to their full advantage. Unfortunately, the Burmese junta also knows the weaknesses of Thai policy makers and implementors. And they too have been exploiting the loopholes for their own benefit. With the adoption of a new policy towards Burma, driven primarily by economics, the distinction between national and personal financial interests has become blurred. Now, various special interest groups and powers-that-be often claims to represent or work for the benefit of the whole country. By virtue, of this, the concept of national security now has transformed itself into an obscure area. The Burmese rulers, once a threatening historical foe and aggressor to, Thailand, are now "a friend". Yet the Kingdom's traditional allies - over a dozen Burmese ethnic insurgent groups - are seen as a hindrance to Thailand's economic progress and prosperity. Despite their three decades (1960s to 1980s) of good service as a natural "buffer zone" to ward off communist threats to Thailand and the previous Burmese socialist ideology, the armed ethnic movements - Karen, Karenni, Mon, Shan, Wa etc. - are now standing in the way and must go. The fact is reflected in the pressure Thailand has, over the past few years, exerted on the weakening Mon, Karenni and Karen groups to negotiate and enter into ceasefire agreements with the ruling Burmese State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc). To successive Burmese governments, the country's ethnic strife for greater autonomy is a threat to national unity, peace and stability. With Thailand sharing its interest to see and end to ethnic arms struggle in exchange for Burma's rich border resource and economic opportunities, Slorc, for the first time in contemporary Burmese history, manages to flex its military muscles and stretch central authority to cover the whole 2,500-kilometre frontier with its eastern neighbour. What Thai people see today is the change of national policy at the highest level, with the Army basically acting as its implementor. In fact, the change was introduced and devised by Chavalit, then army commander-in-chief, who broke the international isolation of the Slorc by paying a highly controversial visit to Burma in December 1988. The new economics-oriented direction was primarily based on the multi-aspect assessment by top security officers and politicians that the Slorc will continue to stay on in power in the coming years. Shortly after his trip, Chavalit forcibly deported several hundreds of Burmese students back to Burma despite strong protests from Burmese pro-democracy groups and the international community. The Slorc's subsequent generous logging and fishing concessions to over a dozen Thai companies, which are either owned or affiliated with the then Army or government leaders, are believed to be a reward for the Thai action. With Chavalit now assuming the premiership, the mission and policy "to befriend" the Slorc at any cost is even more obvious. Its implementation and fulfillment are in high gear through the hand-picked General Chettha, who is said to be another close friend of the Slorc leadership. Interestingly, as soon as Chavalit took power last November, the Slorc's interest and patience to pursue the laborious peace talks with the Karen National Union (KNU), who appeared hard-headed, also became exhausted. The Slorc's persistent demands that KNU "return to the legal fold" and "renounces armed struggle" was tantamount to a declaration of a decisive war against the group. Until today, it was extremely difficult to understand why Chettha and his well-equipped Army, that had been alerted way ahead of time of the looming Burmese operation against the KNU's 4th and 6th Brigade and its civilian supporters, have failed miserably to avert the tragedy inflicted on the Karen population and, to a certain extent, on Thai border villagers. Although it is legitimate for the Thai Army and government to claim that the fighting is an internal affair of Burma, they seem to have forgotten that armed hostilities always spill over the border. As a result of this, there is a direct impact on Thailand in the form of an influx of refugees and the loss of Thai lives and property. Moreover, Chettha still owes a clear public explanation as well as an apology as to why his Army failed in its duties to safeguard the nation's sovereignty and territorial integrity when hundreds of Burmese troops as well as their proxy, Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA), boldly marched into Thailand to attack in late January. Not only was there no defence put-up by the Thai Army on the ground at the time of the incursions, but also top Army officers deliberately refused to raise the issue as well as submit strong protests to the Slorc. This is likened to allowing criminals to escape punishment with the Army's subsequent apologetic excuses that protests are meaningless because the Slorc has never, and will never, acknowledge its violent aggression. (TN) ******************************************************* THE NATION: MUTUAL GAINS IF KAREN DEFEATED March 7, 1997 The Burmese ethnic minorities are in the way of Thailand and Burma realising mega-profits from development projects along the common border, writes The Nation's Yindee Lertcharoenchok in the last of a two-part series. It is equally sad to hear of the ungentlemanly and irresponsible statements made by local and central Army officers. They blame the violent raids on the refugee camps as the result of internal camp conflicts among divided Karen groups, even though Thai people living in the affected neighbourhood pointed their fingers at forces belonging to the Burmese junta and Rangoon's allies, the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army. The Army's inability to respond to the encroachment by foreign forces and its refusal to retaliate has only led the public to believe that it is a partner to the terror unleashed on the Karen refugees and Karen National Union (KNU) members and their relatives in the camps, by the Burmese junta calling itself the State Law and Order Restoration Council (Slorc). Interestingly, history seems to be repeating itself. The January intrusions and destruction of refugee camps, as well as Chettha's seeming indifference towards the repeated violations of Thai sovereignty, are akin to events in 1989. In the early part of that year, hundreds of Burmese troops, without any qualms whatsoever, crossed into Thailand in their attempt to attack KNU strongholds from the rear. When Burmese efforts failed, the intruders set fire to the Thai village of Baan Wang Kaew in Mae Sot before their withdrawal. Gen Chavalit Yongchaiyudh, then army commander-in-chief, faced similar harsh criticisms for his failure to take action against the Burmese intruders. In fact, Chavalit's equally complacent attitude, at that time, towards the Thai mishap provoked widespread rumours and public debates that he had secretly agreed to let the Burmese use Thai soil to attack the KNU. Despite Chavalit's repeated vows to get a hefty Bt19-million compensation from the Burmese for the destruction of Baan Wang Kaew, the Slorc, however, has never recognised its own blatant acts of terrorism. Worse still, a few years later, the Thai government decided to settle the embarrassing problem by taking money from national coffers to pay the Thai victims. The Thai Army's endless tolerance to the continuous territorial transgressions and its attitude to quickly let the incidents pass off, without any debate, are a national disgrace. In other countries, such a violation would certainly have brought about a military response or a war to protect national dignity. Even worse is the Army's usual habit of overlooking its own mistakes and quickly blaming somebody else. Local and international media as well as Thai and foreign relief agencies are often the primary targets of the Army's unrelenting backlash, and often times, threats. Thai Army officers never cease to exploit ''nationalistic consciousness or nationalism" to urge the Thai media to stand on its side or not publicise the Army's misdeeds. Despite an attempt to modernise itself, the Army still lacks transparency and self-scrutiny. What appears before the public today is that Thailand ­ both the Army and the government ­ has been playing a subservient role to the dictates of the Slorc. As it so appears, Thailand stands ready to appease Burma's junta at any cost even to the extent of compromising its national pride, sovereignty and territorial integrity for the return of meagre financial benefits to some small interest groups. Such a stance totally defeats Thai foreign diplomacy. It is still a big puzzle why Prime Minister Gen Chavalit and his protege Chettha are obsessed with the resumption of the construction of the Thai-Burmese bridge. Work on the span over the Moei River was halted in mid-1995 by Slorc leader and Army Chief Gen Maung Aye. Chavalit has made it known that he will only go to Burma when the bridge is completed or its construction resumed. Obviously, he wants to use the so-called ''Thai-Burmese Friendship Bridge" to claim some credit on his trip. Maung Aye also expressed his desire the see progress on the work before Chavalit's visit. Aside from the two leaders, local Thai industrialists and small interest groups are pushing hard to get the project completed. To many, the bridge, which was built with funds from the Thai government, is a mere symbol of friendship between the two countries, and lacks any real concrete significance. There are no guarantees that the Slorc will not close the border crossing there at will, thus interrupting the communications between the two countries. Moreover, the bridge does not mean that either Thailand or Burma would mutually allow the latter's people to travel further inland to their respective capitals. With or without the bridge, Thai and Burmese goods often find their way across the common border even when the Burmese checkpoint at Myawaddy is periodically shut down. One thing, however, seems clear. Chettha is absolutely confident that the territorial dispute near the bridge, which brought an abrupt end to its construction, will be soon resolved. This only serves to confirm the notion that Thai and Burmese armies have reached some sort of a secret deal. The key to the whole mystery were the talks on Feb 25 in Tachilek between Chettha and Maung Aye. Maung Aye informed the Thai general of Slorc's decision to crush the KNU and to establish order on the Thai-Burmese frontier before Burma's admission into Asean in July. Once a member of Asean, Burma does not want other members to be concerned of its internal affairs, Maung Aye was reported to have said. The Burmese general also repeatedly assured the inquisitive Chettha that Burma would welcome home its refugees from Thailand provided that the Thai side helped screen them. The safety assurance probably prompted Chettha to go ahead with the Army's hasty plan to send home over 100,000 Karen refugees, including over 20,000 new arrivals from the latest Burmese military offensive. On the same day as Chettha's chat with Maung Aye, the Army's 9th Division, at Chettha's order, started the forced repatriation of refugees who had freshly arrived in the Kanchanaburi area. In total, about 900 refugees, mainly women, children, the elderly and the disabled, were trucked on two consecutive days from their refuge of less than a week at Bongti Pass to Ratchaburi's Suan Phung district. At the same time, their male family members, some as young as 10 years old, were sent across the border directly into the war zone. Local Thai troops at Suan Phung revealed last Thursday that they had already sent across the border two batches of Burmese, the first of which had some 1,000 people and the other of about 800. Nobody knows for certain whether the first group of 1,000 are Karen refugees or illegal Burmese immigrants arrested around Bangkok. The Burmese attack to capture the KNU's 4th Brigade area, located opposite to Kanchanaburi, and the synchronised, but hastily-organised, Thai deportation of the refugees further to the south in Ratchaburi are obviously for an economic reason. Relocating the civilian population, made up of KNU supporters, away from the strategically and economically important area completely goes against Thai morality and humanitarian principles. This, coupled with the Burmese army's success in dislodging the KNU from its 4th Brigade and reducing the Karen rebels into a dispensable force, are in accordance with mutual Thai and Burmese interests. What will both sides gain from the defeat of the KNU? It is a known secret that the war-battered KNU has been the biggest thorn in the flesh of both Thailand and Burma which have strong economic interests in the rebel-active areas, particularly the 4th Brigade in Mergui and Tavoy districts. Although the defeat of the KNU means the virtual destruction of the western ''buffer zone" for Thai national security, the Burmese army's full control of the two districts will match the two countries' desire to create a ''safe corridor" ­ free from threat of guerrilla sabotage ­ for a number of mammoth economic projects in the normally tense area. Apart from the Yadana project, in which American oil giant Unocal and French powerful petro-industry firm Total are investing billions of dollars to extract natural gas from Burma's Gulf of Martaban for sale to Thailand, other projects on the Thai drawing board include the development of a deep-sea port at Tavoy and a highway linking Tavoy to Kanchanaburi at Bongti Pass. The construction of a Thai highway up to Bongti Pass will be completed next month. The Thai construction giant Italthai already signed a memorandum of understanding to do the feasibility study of the Tavoy deep-sea port and will most likely win the construction concession. Other projects include the highway from Three Pagoda Pass in Kanchanaburi to Burma's Thanbyuzayat; logging concessions; and lead and antimony mines close to the Thai border. There are also unconfirmed reports of plutonium deposits in the area. The Yadana project, Burma's single largest foreign investment, is already close to being behind schedule due to threats from the KNU as well as strong protests by local Thais in Kanchanaburi against the pipeline route through a Thai nature reserve. The delay in Yadana's operation by either side will cost partners in the consortium, which includes the Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT) and Burma's Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise, a hefty financial fine, up to Bt100 million baht a day. If the delay is on the Thai side, the PTT will have to pay Bt30 million a day to consortium partners and another Bt70 million to the power plant in Ratchaburi for the purchase of diesel oil as a substitute for the natural gas. A number of prospective Thai investors, individuals, brokers and various interest groups want a piece of the lucrative pie and all the projects are said to have a strong political backing from higher-ups. It seems that when economic interests strike national interests, pride and morality must give way. (TN) ****************************************************** BKK POST: KARENS 'NOT REFUGEES,' ARMY CHIEF INSISTS March 6, 1997 Wasana Nanuam UN assistance denied The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) will not be allowed to provide assistance to ethnic Karens taking asylum in Thailand, Army chief Chettha Thanajaro said yesterday. Only non-governmental organisations can take care of these people, Gen Chettha said. He said he considers members of the Karen National Union who fled fighting in Burma as people who escaped the dangers of war, not refugees. UNHCR representative Amelia Bonifacio early this week met Foreign Minister Prachuab Chaiyasarn, who confirmed that Thailand adheres to humanitarian principles in granting asylum and relief assistance to the Karen refugees. Thai authorities denied reports that the military had forced the refugees back into Burma. Ms Bonifacio said UNHCR did not provide assistance to the refugees because a number of NGOs are giving them food, shelter and medical care. Gen Chettha confirmed that the refugees would be sent back to safe areas in Burma once peace returns to the border. "Whoever thinks they can do better, go ahead," he said. Burma has guaranteed the safety of the refugees, he pointed out, as proven when Burmese authorities took good care of 500 Karen rebels who surrendered to government forces recently. All Karen refugee camps are to be moved deeper into Thailand and will be protected by the Thai military, he said. He asserted that the relocation will not affect Thai border villagers or destroy watershed areas. Gen Chettha hailed Thailand for exercising "the greatest mercy in the world" towards the refugees, as it agreed to take in not only children, women and the elderly, but also adult males. Those men, however, are subject to strict control because authorities fear they might cross back into Burma to help in the fighting and might bring weapons back with them, he said. Gen Chettha said that the Friendship Bridge across the Moei River, linking Tak's Mae Sot district with Myawaddy in Burma, should be completed in four months. Both countries were able to settle boundary disputes based on a 1989 map, he said. (BP) ******************************************************* BKK POST: UNHCR INTERVENTION SOUGHT March 7, 1997 UN agency urged to prod Burma for truce A senior national security official has called on the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to persuade Burma to seek a ceasefire with ethnic rebels. National Security Council deputy chief Kachadpai Buruspattana said yesterday that to tackle the problem at its roots the UNHCR should hold urgent talks with the Burmese government to urge it to seek ceasefire agreements with rebel groups fighting for greater autonomy for decades. Fighting between Burmese troops and Karen rebels has driven a large number of civilians to seek refuge in Thailand. "Now the time is proper for the UNHCR to hold talks with the State Law and Order Restoration Council. Burma may soften its stance as it will become a full member of Asean," he said. Mr Kachadpai made his suggestion during yesterday's meeting with UNHCR representative Amelia Bonifacio and Francois Fouinat, director of its regional bureau for Asia and the Pacific. During the meeting, the UNHCR pledged to provide assistance to Thailand in sheltering Karen refugees. It also sought permission to inspect refugee camps. Currently, a number of NGOs have played a major role in providing food, shelter and medical care to the refugees. Mr Kachadpai also denied reports that Thailand had forced refugees back into their country, but said they would be sent back to safe areas in Burma once the situation returned to normal. The problem of some 1,800 Lao refugees in Nakhon Phanom's Napho camp was also raised during the meeting. Mr Kachadpai said Thailand planned to close the camp officially around June. Meanwhile, Democrat MP Suvaroj Palang yesterday praised Army Commander-in-Chief Chettha Thanajaro for the army's humanitarian stance in helping Karen refugees in Ratchaburi province. He also defended the army over allegations that the armed forces enforced repatriation. Mr Suvaroj, a member of the House Human Rights Committee, also brought Gen Chettha a letter from a Karen leader who reportedly praised and thanked the army commander "for humanitarian support given to the refugees". The Chumphon MP, who witnessed early this week the relocation of Karen refugees deep inside Thailand, said several Karen leaders were satisfied with the army's handling of refugees. "They want me to convey their appreciation and gratitude to the army and Thai government for the humanitarian assistance," he said. He said reports of forced repatriation by the army contradicted what was genuinely happening in the area. He said he was personally satisfied and could not understand why the army was the target of criticism by human rights groups. Gen Chettha remained unperturbed over the allegations, saying that he "was not concerned at all". "I will not try to correct the misunderstanding as I don't think I've done anything wrong," he said, urging the press to comprehend the situation. He said he plans to seek a meeting with Interior Minister Sanoh Thiengthong soon to discuss the refugee problem. (BP) ****************************************************** THE NATION: KISSINGER SEES SMOOTH POWER TRANSFER IN CHINA (abridged) March 6, 1997 Puangthong Rugswasdisap PHUKET ­ Former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger believes there will a smooth transition of power in China in the post-Deng Xiaoping era, but yesterday warned Beijing to be careful not to cause anxiety over security issues in the region. He also approves of the Association of Southeast Asian Nation's (Asean) policy of constructive engagement towards Burma. Kissinger ­ national security adviser to president Richard Nixon before assuming the post of secretary of state for both Nixon and president Gerald Ford ­ played a vital role in reshaping the US-China relationship, from contention to cautious cooperation, 25 years ago. He was also a key figure in US involvement in the Vietnam War. He disagreed with strong criticism by the international community of human rights abuses in Burma, and agrees with Asean's policy of constructive engagement. He said that as a member of a minority group in American society, he shares the view that US foreign policy should focus more on respecting the actions of other societies, and should not be involved in the domestic reform of other countries. ''We don't know what the consequences are. So I hope the dispute between America and Myanmar [Burma] will be settled in the next two years, before there is any damage," Kissinger said. Kissinger, who is on a week-long holiday in Thailand with his wife, has sought advice from Pitak on trade and investment prospects in Asia. He is an adviser to the National Broadcasting Co and Chase Manhattan Bank. (TN) ******************************************************* ASIA TIMES:CLINTON'S EMPTY THREAT OF MYANMAR SANCTIONS COMES HOME TO ROOST 5th March 1997 Stephen Brookes There's a lot of embarrassed foot-shuffling going on in Washington these days over the threat to impose economic sanctions on Myanmar. Last October, United States President Bill Clinton signed legislation calling for a ban on new US investment "if and when the Burmese military regime harms or arrests [opposition leader Aung San] Suu Kyi or mounts a massive repression against the dissidents". The threat didn't seem to bother Myanmar's ruling State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) very much. Shortly after the bill was signed, Suu Kyi's car was violently attacked and a member of her staff injured. Student dissidents were arrested during protests in December; verbal attacks against "stooges of neocolonialists" continued to be a staple of the state-run press, and the operations of the opposition National League for Democracy were severely restricted. As far as Suu Kyi is concerned, that's enough reason to impose sanctions immediately. "The conditions in Burma now are such that they do meet the requirements of sanctions," she said on February 2. "Widespread repression of the democracy movement was one of the conditions of the imposition of sanctions and I think we can say very, very clearly that there is large-scale repression of the democracy movement going on." The US press has been chiming in as well. The Washington Post called on Clinton last week to "stop dithering" and impose sanctions, and The New York Times opined that the decision "should not be difficult". But the decision appears to be very difficult, indeed. US State Department spokesman Nicholas Burns responded to Suu Kyi's appeal by saying that "the United States has not decided to impose additional sanctions" and the issue seems to have become an embarrassment for everyone involved. Neither of the sanction bill's co-sponsors, Senator Dianne Feinstein nor former senator, now Defense Secretary William Cohen, has called for sanctions to be invoked, and Secretary of State Madelaine Albright - who until recently had been one of the world's most vociferous Myanmar-bashers - hasn't uttered a peep about the country over the past few weeks. So what's going on? US officials aren't saying. But it probably boils down to two things: Myanmar's expected entry into the Association of Southeast Asian Nations later this year; and the fact that the US sanctions were an empty threat from the beginning. ASEAN membership is the crucial factor. Washington has often fumbled the question of why it has pursued a policy of "constructive engagement" with China despite widespread human rights abuses there, while calling for Myanmar to be punished for much lesser abuses. US officials have explained that the overall Sino-US relationship was too important to be "held hostage" to a single issue, whereas in Myanmar the situation was more "clear cut". The reality, of course, was that US economic interests in Myanmar were negligible, making sanctions a cost-free measure. As financier George Soros put it last year: "The amount of American investment in Burma is relatively insignificant, so we can still afford to live up to our moral principles." But now that Myanmmar's imminent entry into ASEAN is assured, the costs of sanctions have increased enormously. ASEAN member states have hotly rejected Western attempts to keep Myanmar out of the group and further US meddling in Asian affairs is only likely to backfire. Attacking Myanmar now, say analysts in Yangon, is guaranteed to anger the country's future ASEAN partners and disturb Washington's economic and political relations with the entire region. That's a hefty price to pay for a policy which has little realistic chance of succeeding. As Soros noted, the amount of US investment in Myanmar is insignificant - so how could sanctions have any real impact on the SLORC? And as US officials privately admit, the Cohen-Feinstein bill was never really meant to be implemented - it was just a way for US politicians to talk tough on human rights while killing the much tougher sanctions legislation (the so-called McConnell bill) that was put before Congress last summer. But now Washington has a problem. Back when sanctions were a cost-free proposition, Congress could act tough on Myanmar without worrying about the consequences. Now the game has changed, but the threats have already been made. Having vowed to impose sanctions, the US will look like a paper tiger if it backs off. No wonder there's a resounding silence on Myanmar in Washington these days. It won't be pleasant for Clinton, but the smart thing to do would be simply to admit the truth, that the sanctions threat was empty from the very beginning and that any economic action now would cause more harm than good. He should get on with what the US should have been doing all this time - pursuing a pragmatic strategy that promotes US interests in Myanmar. It was foolish enough to set out on the path of phony sanctions in the first place. Staying the course will only make matters worse. ************************ BKK POST:THAI FORCES CLASH WITH KAREN REBELS March 8, 1997 Tak Thai troops fought a two-hour battle with intruding Democratic Karen Buddhist Army rebels on Thursday, according to a border official. Security forces from the 4th Infantry Regiment and Border Patrol Police Company 3504 clashed with at least ten DKBA guerrillas who crossed the border into Thailand between kilometres 105-106 of Tha Song Yang Mae Sariang highway on Thursday. The intruders retreated into Burma after nearly two hours of fighting. In another development, eight stray mortar rounds landed at Ban Nong Luang in Umphang district here around 8.30 am yesterday as Burmese troops clashed with Karen National Union guerrillas at Htee KaPler inside Burma. Some 50 Thai border police on patrol near Ban Nong Luang about two kilometres from the frontier had to withdraw from the area. ******************************** ANNOUNCEMENT: INTERNET LISTENER AND ACTIVIST MA NADI SPEAKS OUT IN 2ND MARCH PROGR AM March 4, 1997 From: "ausgeo@msn.com " The March 2 program of the Democratic Burmese Program originally on 2NBC in Australia, is now available for real-time playback via RealAudio from BurmaSong at This is a Burmese-language program featuring Burma news, views, Internet Activist Listener Ma Nadi's revolutionary poem and music of Burma presented by Burmese now living in Australia. Any suggestion about the program will be appreciated, Please sends E-mail to (ausgeo@msn.com ). Democratic Burmese Program *******************