Lisbon Rolls Out Red Carpet for Shan-Karen Duo
(Oct. 12, 2004)
(published by Burma's Chinese) (boxun.com)
Portugal's top brass were somehow unable to represent their country at the two-day Asia-Europe summit that begins today, but its top diplomat who has been in the field for 37 years was able to devote more than one hour entertaining two of Burma's foremost dissidents at his office yesterday, reports Saw Sarky, Karen representative from Lisbon:
"Audience with such people are normally no more than 15-30 minutes," said the 52-year old Karen National Union's Central Committee member matter-of-factly on the meeting with Dr Antonio Monteiro, Foreign Minister since July, "but we were there from 15.15 to 16.20 discussing Burma."
Sarky and his Shan sidekick, Sai Wansai, 54, of the Shan Democratic Union, were on the last lap of their European lobbying tour that began last month.
Dr Antonio Monteiro, Minister of Foreig n Affairs, Portugal The two made an appeal through Portugal that the European Union demands the following points to Rangoon:
Termination of the "national convention" and commencement of the Tripartite
Dialogue
Nationwide ceasefire
Freedom of movement for all stakeholders
Conference participated by all main non-Burman groups
Reinstatement of all banned political parties
Release of all political prisoners
Independent investigation of the Depayin massacre (30 May 2003)
The pair also urged consideration of the following options if and when its
demands were not met:
Heightened sanctions
Putting Burma on UN Security Council agenda
Full recognition of representatives elected in 1990
Diplomatic pressures including coercive diplomacy
Benchmark policy
Empowering civil societies in Burma
"The main achievement," Sarky summed up, "was the full understanding conveyed to us by the foreign minister with regards to the role of the non-Burman ethnic nationalities in the triangular configuration of Burma's politics."
"We are therefore highly confident that Dr Monteiro will highlight not only the struggle for democracy in Burma but also the struggle for equality by the ethnic nationalities in future meetings with his European counterparts," he concluded.
The twosome have since 2001 made 8 trips together lobbying European governments "in our struggle for the restoration of democracy, right of self determination, equality and universal human rights in Burma."
For text of the letter to Foreign Minister Antonio Monteiro, please consult attachment.
Foreign Minister Antonio Monteiro
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Address:Palácio das Necessidades, Largo do Rilvas, 135 4 Lisboa Codex
Tel.:(3511) 396 98 50
Fax:(3511) 60 97 08
E-mail:fidzd@dgac.mne.gov.pt
7th October 2004
Democratisation/Reconciliation in Burma
Dear Foreign Minister Antonio Monteiro:
First of all, we, on behalf of the non-Burman ethnic nationalities and in particular, the Shan and Karen peoples, would like to thank you for granting us an audience and takes time to discuss the issue of Burma with us. We also like to take this opportunity to thank and acknowledge the Portugal government’s steadfast commitment and encouragement in our struggle for the restoration of democracy, rights of self-determination, equality and universal human rights in Burma.
As you are well aware, the military junta in Burma has been rejecting any meaningful solution suggested by the international community, especially the U.N., EU and U.S., for more than a decade now. ASEAN has also tried over the past few months to instil a favourable political climate, notably the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, without success. But lately, ASEAN members reverted their stand and have been insisting that EU accepts Burma’s participation in ASEM summit without condition. This, in turn, has created a mode of “we” against “them” rhetoric, in relation to the EU, which
is very unfortunate. We sincerely hope that you will be able to alter this false assumption and project a more pragmatic approach, where EU-ASEAN relation is concerned.
The conflict-ridden and poverty-stricken Burma would profit no one, in the long run. Even though some neighbouring countries, either out of geo-political consideration or need of Burma’s natural resources to fuel their economy, have been reluctant to pressure the military junta, the spill-over effects such as problems of unregulated mass migration, refugees, internally displaced persons, drugs trafficking, HIV/AIDS, other contagious di sease and so on have reached regional proportion, which no country would be able to coup or deal with in the long run. The logic here can only be to help resolve the conflict in Burma based on all-inclusiveness, which the U.N. has been urging for so long. Everyone is convinced that a conflict free Burma will be helped and endorsed by the international community and in no time, it will cease to be a burden to its neighbours. But the problem is that the military junta is suppressing all democratic elements within the country and have been taking all kinds of measures to monopolize political power and determined to cling on to power at all cost. In short, the junta has long become a liability, in our struggle for freedom and democracy, rather than an asset. We are convinced that this conclusion has also long been reached in the minds of the people within ASEAN, but only reluctant to voice it publicly for whatever reason they might have in store. EU could and should emphasize this poi nt and suggest that only the collaborated pressures and actions of ASEAN and EU could improve or change the political landscape in Burma. The tug of war should be ASEAN plus EU against the
Burmese military junta and not vice versa, as has been wrongly presumed.
While we understand the need of EU to be flexible for the realization of ASEM summit and has agreed upon the low-level participation of Burma this coming October in Hanoi, your warning to the junta that sharpened measures would be applied if progress is not forth-coming should be seriously heeded. In our opinion, the new sanctions measures of banning EU-registered firms from making finance available to Burmese state enterprises and EU’s vote against extending loans to Burma from international bodies could be quite effective, compare to the recent symbolic sanctions. But we would like to urge the EU to also look at capital-intensive trade sanctions and ban on remittances to have maximum effect, if possible.
To s um up, we would like to appeal that EU demands the following points to the military junta.
To terminate the national convention and pave way for a genuine reconciliation process by calling for tripartite dialogue between the SPDC, NLD and non-Burman ethnic nationalities.
To call for a nation-wide ceasefire and stop all kinds of gross human rights abuses, especially the scorched earth policy or ethnic cleansing, using rape as a war weapon of war in non-Burman ethnic nationality areas.
To facilitate freedom of movement for resistance armies leadership and exiled politicians for consultation with their own people and political parties.
To endorse and facilitate a conference of five main non-Burman groupings,
comprising of the ceasefire armies, non-ceasefire armies, legal ethnic-based political parties, deregistered ethnic-based political parties, and exiled ethnic groups.
To reinstate all banned political parties and allow them to function freely. To release all political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi and leaders of ethnic nationality groups.
To allow an independent investigation of the Depayin Massacre.
In case the EU’s measures applied for change are not fruitful, we would like
to urge that the following options be put under consideration.
Heighten the existing bans by incorporating commerce sanctions, coupled with ban on financial remittances.
Strengthen the will and ability of the UN, including all other possible approaches through UN Security Council, in co-ordination with the US. Recognize the elected members of parliament as the legitimate representatives of Burma.
Make use of diplomatic pressures, like downgrading or severance of diplomatic relations.
Implement benchmarks policy to encourage democratisation process. Apply “power mediation”* or “coercive diplomacy” to ensure real democratic change.
Empower and rebuild the civil societies in Burma.
The term "power mediation" is advanced by the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance in its book titled “Democracy and Deep-Rooted Conflict:
Options for Negotiators”where the mediator has the power to persuade the parties to obey. It could use incentives and punishments to persuade the parties to yield from their inflexible positions to reach a compromise.
Wishing you success in all your endeavours.
Sincerely,
Sai Myo Win (a.k.a.) Sai Wansai
General Secretary of SDU & Ambassador Plenipotentiary of Shan State for Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation (UNPO) & Europe
Saw Sarkis Istanbulyan
CC member of KNU; Plenipotentiary Representative for Europe & Special Envoy
to East Timor
(boxun.com)
Click here to leave your comments on BBS
|
|
|
|
