Wow! I am stunned by the eloquence of the rhetoric, and I am amazed by the excellence of the English grammar. Who wrote this? There is a new Thomas Jefferson among us. Makes me want to show up at the UDD rally in Bangkok next Saturday, February 20.
So the Reds finally hired a decent English copywriter. Unfortunately they’re still a loosely affiliated group with factional divisions and no clear leader other than the eternally poisoned Thaksin. While my sympathies generally lie with their grievances, so long as they are led by opportunistic cynics and scary strongmen like Jatuporn, Jakrapob, Chavalit, Chalerm, and Panlop, their movement will never fully occupy the moral high ground.
This seizing of Thaksin’s assets is a false alarm. There’s plenty of money floating around overseas for both sides. We’re treading water until the Real Event comes, the one that has nothing to do with Thaksin.
How could constructive engagement be achieved if we avoid dealing with the institution that calls the shot? We have to engage with the Burmese military if we are serious about non-proliferation issue.
The objectives are very clear: to assist Myanmar on her urgent needs and to divert her from nuclear option. To effectively achieve these two goals, we have to engage with the State.
On the brain-drain issue, the U.S. has solved the migration problem by issuing J1 type of visa. J1 visa means the person is the property of the country they came from and must return regardless after finishing their studies within 2-3 years.
I hope there is a way out of this impasse. It’s irresponsible of Anupong and Prem to have caused the country to be so divided throughout the land. Never in the recent history had the Thais fighting each other to this degree.
Anupong and Prem have calculated that as long as they hold the power of the gun, they can ignore the feeling of so many other Thais.
The split cuts deep into the police and the military as well. Anupong and Prem are moving all their people to control the police and the military because they have made the decision on the use of force as the solution.
“Using exclusively non-violent means to achieve these objectives.”
It is interesting that the Reds are pretty consistent with this claim, and yet security fears are being stoked by the Bangkok Post:
Security forces ready for action
Troops take up position at key city locations
Soldiers in Bangkok have been put on a high Level 3 alert after weekend bomb scares set nerves jangling ahead of next week’s Supreme Court decision on the Shinawatra family assets.
I have refrained from commenting on the nuclear issue or the North Korea issue as of yet, but I will say that I feel it is highly irresponsible of academics to continue to refer to unsubstantiated claims as fact.
Yes, the political situation in Myanmar is such that sources are often anonymous, and scholars sometimes rely on informants who for good reason do not want their names mentioned. However, this presents a major challenge to academia, and one that too many scholars do not take on. All these reports of hearsay from random sources should not be referenced. Rather, sources of expertise on the issue of weapons and arms in Myanmar such as Andrew Selth should be consulted. See his excellent paper on the Coco island military base for how rumours and hearsay eventually got accepted as fact, and were later proved completely untrue.
Interestingly, when academics and journalists report on Burma’s supposed nuclear buildup, the end result is exactly what the SPDC hopes to achieve – stimulating a perception of insecurity in the minds of external actors such as ASEAN and Australia, and creating bargaining chips for future negotiations and interactions.
Lofty ideals with which most clear thinking individuals would agree entirely. However you can be certain that the ‘haves’ will fight tooth and nail, using all the dirty tricks that they can to preserve the status quo.
I really fear for the non violent future of this Country.
“not everyone is attempting to flee this nation for greener pastures abroad”
It would be unfortunate indeed if all those who left the country were dismissed as selfishly motivated. An often unappreciated contribution of “exiles” (if only temporary) from Burma are the remittances from the 3-5 million migrant workers in (especially) Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and the Gulf. I’ve heard one estimate that their contributions through remittances equal the junta’s revenue from gas sales! and is a major factors preventing the complete economic collapse of millions of households in Burma. I know this is somewhat off topic from the scholarships, but it would be a shame if the efforts/contributions of migrant workers (most of whom will never get scholarships to study abroad and many of whom left school early in order to work and support their families) was missed.
Interesting point about “not everyone is attempting to flee this nation for greener pastures abroad”. This is true even with Anglo families and I’m told there remain an odd European or two still living in Burma since independence. Besides, you know even the so called boat people must have the wherewithall to do so. The overwhelming majority will just have to stick it out.
The pull of the land you were born in is certainly great especially Burma. You might have seen the story about this lone Punjabi man among the crowds during the Saffron Revolution. He slipped across the border (the Burmese find it hard to tell one Sikh fellow with a turban and beard from another, and he had the right papers to show at the checkpoints), and whem interviewed his voice broke as he said it hadn’t upset him as much to have lost his parents as having to leave Burma, his homeland. That’s why we’d be heading straight home like a shot as soon as things change for the better.
For now, I don’t think you’ll get to see the statistics on scholars (those on green passports) who never return. It’s not something that started only in the military era but it has certainly got a lot worse, and that’s not including people who ostensibly leave for a visit or those who slip across the border.
For security purposes, I can only say that I am one of the above! You know how it is…
And yes, of course, I am a foreigner, and never could, and didn’t intend, to make claims pretending to understand the views and mindframe of a tatmadaw commander or of any Burmese person. I am however, a foreigner engaging in humanitarian issues and living in country, and have experience working with the government both up in Naypyidaw and at village and township levels. Yes, the government is suspicious of all NGOs (in the ways that U Moe Aung has mentioned), and of foreigners in general. I definitely agree with that. I am only trying to put myself in their shoes to *try* to understand motives, opinions, decisions. But I would never claim to fully understand…
First off, this is not confirmed, but I would not expect the first year or two of the scholarships to be awarded to anyone in the government. They will first go to people from CBOs, NGOs, UN. That’s my guess…
Yes – certainly it would be a concern that the recipients of the scholarship would not want to return to Burma. However, this is not a concern that is exclusive to Burma, and I think you will find that the scholarships have been very successful for recipients from many developing countries. I believe that AusAID and DIAC work together to ensure that applicants have proven incentive to return to their home country at the end of their studies, and there are very stringent guidelines. In addition, Australian immigration policy does not allow every single international student to immigrate – only those with qualifications under the Skilled Migration program, of occupations that Australia is in great need of. As such, I don’t think that most of the intended recipients will be doing, lets say, medical degrees in Australia, but more likely Master’s in Public Health, for example, which doesn’t land you automatic post-graduation PR status. I am not naive about the incentives to stay on in Australia, but trust me, there are a bunch of educated Myanmar nationals who receive scholarships to study in U.S., U.K., etc., and return to Myanmar in order to contribute to their country in one way or another. And not all of those are nationalists or from family’s with good government/business connections. I am only thinking of a few friends here in Yangon, but yes, not everyone is attempting to flee this nation for greener pastures abroad.
@ U Moe Aung,
Yes, exactly, that’s what I was inclining towards. There are large numbers being sent to training academies in Moscow, and Western countries should pick up their game if they want their ideologies to be spread to important actors in Burma. Your Indonesia comparison is very interesting. Western governments are currently funding a lot of below-the-radar civil society iniatives in Myanmar. Donors have found these programmes to be very productive and interesting. I just think its exciting that another Western country will be restarting its scholarship project in Myanmar – just gives more opportunities for those who want to contribute to civil society in some way or the other here in Myanmar.
Hla Oo, re Epoch times- — yes and the beginning of Dictator Watch’s manifesto reads :
“Are you for democracy, or dictatorship?
Are you part of the solution, or part of the problem?
Do we – meaning all the life on Earth – do we live, or do we die?”
Makes me want to shout out ‘yeah man!’ and don a tie-dye. I think it’s probably written by someone who has forgotten their own security to be on the cusp of life and death because they won’t eat much more than lentil soup. Same ‘for us, against us’ mentality as Dubya, except from the tangent of ‘everyone not eating lentils is part of the problem!’
I am prepared to believe Ball and Thornton without reading into it much though. I’m not going to staunchly question people who’ve reputations to uphold and spent a lot of time on analysis because I assume they’ve done a lot of questioning.
These are very helpful, thought-provoking comments.
I am not in a position to assess the quality of The Epoch Times/Dictator Watch anecdote. I know that at my local supermarket The Epoch Times is available, free-of-charge. I have only looked at it once-or-twice.
And, of course, I agree with the more general point that we need to be very cautious about all of the evidence swirling around these matters. Reliability (and dubiousness, etc.) needs to be taken into consideration. Perhaps somebody out there will be in a position to clarify the drone story…and provide some firmer evidence one way or the other…
So engagement on more levels than just handshakes from Senator Webb! Comparatively, drones flying over another isolated regime like Syria is a major story easily google-able. Where are the drones being launched from in Thailand? Is violation of airspace a violation of sovereignty?
The Dictator Watch site seems a little dubious, but.. OK.
Following is from the Epoch Times web site FAQ section.
“The Epoch Times was originally founded by a group of Falun Gong practitioners inspired by the lack of information about the persecution of Falun Gong. The Epoch Times has since grown and diversified, and is now run by a large international staff that align themselves to the values in which the paper was founded.”
Are the news from a free weekly newspaper published as a propaganda mouth-piece for a well-known fanatic Buddhist cult really reliable as a reference for a serious issue like Burmese nuclear weapons?
There are such reports, including Scott Johnson, “Scorched Earth, Scorched Intervention“, The Epoch Times, 28 June 2009. This may be the one that Charles F. read.
The relevant stanza is:
I spoke with long time Burma activist Roland Watson of Dictatorwatch, who reports in 2008 that KNU soldiers had intercepted SPDC communications describing attempts to shoot down unmanned drones flying over their military sites. Presumably, the drones were CIA, launched for spying on the SPDC’s nuclear capabilities.
Some weeks later, Burma protested to Thailand about overflights by unmanned surveillance drones that were apparently launched across Thai territory by US agencies. These would have yielded low-level photographs and air samples, in addition to satellite imagery.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
“Red in the land”
Suzie, do you think that there is a good chance of serious violence erupting between the reds and yellows?
“Red in the land”
Wow! I am stunned by the eloquence of the rhetoric, and I am amazed by the excellence of the English grammar. Who wrote this? There is a new Thomas Jefferson among us. Makes me want to show up at the UDD rally in Bangkok next Saturday, February 20.
“Red in the land”
So the Reds finally hired a decent English copywriter. Unfortunately they’re still a loosely affiliated group with factional divisions and no clear leader other than the eternally poisoned Thaksin. While my sympathies generally lie with their grievances, so long as they are led by opportunistic cynics and scary strongmen like Jatuporn, Jakrapob, Chavalit, Chalerm, and Panlop, their movement will never fully occupy the moral high ground.
This seizing of Thaksin’s assets is a false alarm. There’s plenty of money floating around overseas for both sides. We’re treading water until the Real Event comes, the one that has nothing to do with Thaksin.
Australia’s constructive Burma engagement
How could constructive engagement be achieved if we avoid dealing with the institution that calls the shot? We have to engage with the Burmese military if we are serious about non-proliferation issue.
The objectives are very clear: to assist Myanmar on her urgent needs and to divert her from nuclear option. To effectively achieve these two goals, we have to engage with the State.
On the brain-drain issue, the U.S. has solved the migration problem by issuing J1 type of visa. J1 visa means the person is the property of the country they came from and must return regardless after finishing their studies within 2-3 years.
“Red in the land”
I hope there is a way out of this impasse. It’s irresponsible of Anupong and Prem to have caused the country to be so divided throughout the land. Never in the recent history had the Thais fighting each other to this degree.
Anupong and Prem have calculated that as long as they hold the power of the gun, they can ignore the feeling of so many other Thais.
The split cuts deep into the police and the military as well. Anupong and Prem are moving all their people to control the police and the military because they have made the decision on the use of force as the solution.
“Red in the land”
“Using exclusively non-violent means to achieve these objectives.”
It is interesting that the Reds are pretty consistent with this claim, and yet security fears are being stoked by the Bangkok Post:
Security forces ready for action
Troops take up position at key city locations
Soldiers in Bangkok have been put on a high Level 3 alert after weekend bomb scares set nerves jangling ahead of next week’s Supreme Court decision on the Shinawatra family assets.
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/32952/security-forces-ready-for-action
More on Burmese nukes
I have refrained from commenting on the nuclear issue or the North Korea issue as of yet, but I will say that I feel it is highly irresponsible of academics to continue to refer to unsubstantiated claims as fact.
Yes, the political situation in Myanmar is such that sources are often anonymous, and scholars sometimes rely on informants who for good reason do not want their names mentioned. However, this presents a major challenge to academia, and one that too many scholars do not take on. All these reports of hearsay from random sources should not be referenced. Rather, sources of expertise on the issue of weapons and arms in Myanmar such as Andrew Selth should be consulted. See his excellent paper on the Coco island military base for how rumours and hearsay eventually got accepted as fact, and were later proved completely untrue.
Interestingly, when academics and journalists report on Burma’s supposed nuclear buildup, the end result is exactly what the SPDC hopes to achieve – stimulating a perception of insecurity in the minds of external actors such as ASEAN and Australia, and creating bargaining chips for future negotiations and interactions.
“Red in the land”
Lofty ideals with which most clear thinking individuals would agree entirely. However you can be certain that the ‘haves’ will fight tooth and nail, using all the dirty tricks that they can to preserve the status quo.
I really fear for the non violent future of this Country.
Australia’s constructive Burma engagement
“not everyone is attempting to flee this nation for greener pastures abroad”
It would be unfortunate indeed if all those who left the country were dismissed as selfishly motivated. An often unappreciated contribution of “exiles” (if only temporary) from Burma are the remittances from the 3-5 million migrant workers in (especially) Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and the Gulf. I’ve heard one estimate that their contributions through remittances equal the junta’s revenue from gas sales! and is a major factors preventing the complete economic collapse of millions of households in Burma. I know this is somewhat off topic from the scholarships, but it would be a shame if the efforts/contributions of migrant workers (most of whom will never get scholarships to study abroad and many of whom left school early in order to work and support their families) was missed.
Australia’s constructive Burma engagement
Dylan,
Interesting point about “not everyone is attempting to flee this nation for greener pastures abroad”. This is true even with Anglo families and I’m told there remain an odd European or two still living in Burma since independence. Besides, you know even the so called boat people must have the wherewithall to do so. The overwhelming majority will just have to stick it out.
The pull of the land you were born in is certainly great especially Burma. You might have seen the story about this lone Punjabi man among the crowds during the Saffron Revolution. He slipped across the border (the Burmese find it hard to tell one Sikh fellow with a turban and beard from another, and he had the right papers to show at the checkpoints), and whem interviewed his voice broke as he said it hadn’t upset him as much to have lost his parents as having to leave Burma, his homeland. That’s why we’d be heading straight home like a shot as soon as things change for the better.
For now, I don’t think you’ll get to see the statistics on scholars (those on green passports) who never return. It’s not something that started only in the military era but it has certainly got a lot worse, and that’s not including people who ostensibly leave for a visit or those who slip across the border.
“It’s the queen herself doing it…”
[…] http://www.newmandala.org/2010/02/08/its-the-queen-herself-doing-it/ […]
Australian Foreign Minister on Burma policy
@ U Hla Oo,
For security purposes, I can only say that I am one of the above! You know how it is…
And yes, of course, I am a foreigner, and never could, and didn’t intend, to make claims pretending to understand the views and mindframe of a tatmadaw commander or of any Burmese person. I am however, a foreigner engaging in humanitarian issues and living in country, and have experience working with the government both up in Naypyidaw and at village and township levels. Yes, the government is suspicious of all NGOs (in the ways that U Moe Aung has mentioned), and of foreigners in general. I definitely agree with that. I am only trying to put myself in their shoes to *try* to understand motives, opinions, decisions. But I would never claim to fully understand…
Australia’s constructive Burma engagement
@ U Hla Oo,
First off, this is not confirmed, but I would not expect the first year or two of the scholarships to be awarded to anyone in the government. They will first go to people from CBOs, NGOs, UN. That’s my guess…
Yes – certainly it would be a concern that the recipients of the scholarship would not want to return to Burma. However, this is not a concern that is exclusive to Burma, and I think you will find that the scholarships have been very successful for recipients from many developing countries. I believe that AusAID and DIAC work together to ensure that applicants have proven incentive to return to their home country at the end of their studies, and there are very stringent guidelines. In addition, Australian immigration policy does not allow every single international student to immigrate – only those with qualifications under the Skilled Migration program, of occupations that Australia is in great need of. As such, I don’t think that most of the intended recipients will be doing, lets say, medical degrees in Australia, but more likely Master’s in Public Health, for example, which doesn’t land you automatic post-graduation PR status. I am not naive about the incentives to stay on in Australia, but trust me, there are a bunch of educated Myanmar nationals who receive scholarships to study in U.S., U.K., etc., and return to Myanmar in order to contribute to their country in one way or another. And not all of those are nationalists or from family’s with good government/business connections. I am only thinking of a few friends here in Yangon, but yes, not everyone is attempting to flee this nation for greener pastures abroad.
@ U Moe Aung,
Yes, exactly, that’s what I was inclining towards. There are large numbers being sent to training academies in Moscow, and Western countries should pick up their game if they want their ideologies to be spread to important actors in Burma. Your Indonesia comparison is very interesting. Western governments are currently funding a lot of below-the-radar civil society iniatives in Myanmar. Donors have found these programmes to be very productive and interesting. I just think its exciting that another Western country will be restarting its scholarship project in Myanmar – just gives more opportunities for those who want to contribute to civil society in some way or the other here in Myanmar.
More on Burmese nukes
Hla Oo, re Epoch times- — yes and the beginning of Dictator Watch’s manifesto reads :
“Are you for democracy, or dictatorship?
Are you part of the solution, or part of the problem?
Do we – meaning all the life on Earth – do we live, or do we die?”
Makes me want to shout out ‘yeah man!’ and don a tie-dye. I think it’s probably written by someone who has forgotten their own security to be on the cusp of life and death because they won’t eat much more than lentil soup. Same ‘for us, against us’ mentality as Dubya, except from the tangent of ‘everyone not eating lentils is part of the problem!’
I am prepared to believe Ball and Thornton without reading into it much though. I’m not going to staunchly question people who’ve reputations to uphold and spent a lot of time on analysis because I assume they’ve done a lot of questioning.
More on Burmese nukes
Thanks The Frog and Hla Oo,
These are very helpful, thought-provoking comments.
I am not in a position to assess the quality of The Epoch Times/Dictator Watch anecdote. I know that at my local supermarket The Epoch Times is available, free-of-charge. I have only looked at it once-or-twice.
And, of course, I agree with the more general point that we need to be very cautious about all of the evidence swirling around these matters. Reliability (and dubiousness, etc.) needs to be taken into consideration. Perhaps somebody out there will be in a position to clarify the drone story…and provide some firmer evidence one way or the other…
Best wishes to all,
Nich
More on Burmese nukes
Apologies Charlie and Nich.
So engagement on more levels than just handshakes from Senator Webb! Comparatively, drones flying over another isolated regime like Syria is a major story easily google-able. Where are the drones being launched from in Thailand? Is violation of airspace a violation of sovereignty?
The Dictator Watch site seems a little dubious, but.. OK.
More on Burmese nukes
Following is from the Epoch Times web site FAQ section.
“The Epoch Times was originally founded by a group of Falun Gong practitioners inspired by the lack of information about the persecution of Falun Gong. The Epoch Times has since grown and diversified, and is now run by a large international staff that align themselves to the values in which the paper was founded.”
Are the news from a free weekly newspaper published as a propaganda mouth-piece for a well-known fanatic Buddhist cult really reliable as a reference for a serious issue like Burmese nuclear weapons?
More on Burmese nukes
Nich,
Thanks for the assist. That IS the article I was referring to, though I couldn’t remember where I had read it.
More on Burmese nukes
The Frog and Charles F.,
There are such reports, including Scott Johnson, “Scorched Earth, Scorched Intervention“, The Epoch Times, 28 June 2009. This may be the one that Charles F. read.
The relevant stanza is:
Last year the Sydney Morning Herald also reported (based on the Ball and Thornton research) that:
Best wishes to all,
Nich
More on Burmese nukes
Charlie, no offense, but referring to an article that mentions something highly significant ‘in passing’ is hardly convincing.
… I wonder whether nuclear ambitions will add further glue and urgency to the formation of a united front?