Comments

р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕гр╕▒р╕Кр╕Чр╕▓р╕вр╕▓р╕Чр╕Чр╕╕р╕Бр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕нр╕Зр╕Др╣Мр╕Чр╕гр╕Зр╕гр╕▒р╕Бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Кр╕Щр╕нр╕вр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╣Ар╕Чр╣Ир╕▓р╣Ар╕Чр╕╡р╕вр╕бр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣Ир╣Ар╕лр╕Щр╕╖р╕нр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Вр╕▒р╕Фр╣Бр╕вр╣Йр╕Зр╕Чр╕▓р╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕▓р╕Чр╕кр╕бр╣Ар╕Фр╣Зр╕Ир╕Юр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Ир╣Йр╕▓р╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣Ир╕лр╕▒р╕зр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Чр╕Юр╕п р╕Чр╕гр╕Зр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕ер╕▓р╕Зр╕Чр╕▓р╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Вр╕Юр╕кр╕Хр╣Мр╕Вр╣Йр╕нр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Яр╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕Ир╕░р╕Бр╣Ир╕нр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╣Ар╕Бр╕┤р╕Фр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╣Бр╕Хр╕Бр╣Бр╕вр╕Бр╣Гр╕Щр╕Чр╕▓р╕Зр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╕Чр╕зр╕╡р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕гр╕╕р╕Щр╣Бр╕гр╕Зр╕бр╕▓р╕Бр╕Вр╕╢р╣Йр╕Щ р╕нр╕▒р╕Щр╕нр╕▓р╕Ир╕Бр╕гр╕░р╕Чр╕Ър╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕бр╕▒р╣Ир╕Щр╕Др╕Зр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕гр╕▒р╕Рр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕кр╕Зр╕Ър╕кр╕╕р╕Вр╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕Кр╕▓р╕Кр╕Щр╣Вр╕Фр╕вр╕гр╕зр╕б
This message is from the Criminal Court on Tuesday sentenced Khatha, a former employee in the trading a securities trading firm KT Zmico Securities.

who is a big liar or we all like to be a liar? Hope New Mandala will not disclose my IP number to “Royal Thai Police or Counrt”.

20th December 2012

Madam Phavanh Nuanthasing
Director General
Department of International Organizations
Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Subject: Expression of Concern: Disappearance of Mr. Sombath Somphone

Dear Madam Phavanh Nuanthasing,

We have learned that Mr. Sombath Somphone, founder of the Participatory Development Training Centre (PADETC), disappeared last Saturday, 15th December 2012, 18:00 in the center of Vientiane.

We know Mr. Somphone as being highly committed to the development of the people of the Lao PDR, and he is very respected in the Lao and International development communities. His family has reported him missing to the Ministry of Public Security, but has received no news about his whereabouts.

We are very concerned about Mr. Somphone’s safety, and we urge the Lao authorities to use its resources to locate him and bring him home safely.

We stand ready to support in any way we can.
We hope to welcome him back safely very soon.

Yours sincerely,

Apheda
Afesip
Care International
Cesvi
ChildFund Australia
Community Learning International
Cord
CUSO/VSO
WeltHungerHilfe WHH/GAA
GAPE
GRET
Handicap International
Helvetas Laos
Mines Advisory Group -MAG
Médecins du Monde – MDM
Médecins Sans Frontières – MSF
Save the Children International
SNV
Swiss Red Cross
WaterAid Australia
World Renew
World Vision

December 25, 2012

Minister of The Prime Minister’s Office
President of The National Assembly
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Minister of Interior
Governor, Vientiane Prefecture
Vientiane, Lao Peoples Democratic Republic

CC:
Dr. Surin Pitsuwan, Secretary General of ASEAN
Embassies/consulates of Australia, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, Thailand, USA

Re: Request disclosure of status of investigation into the disappearance of Mr. Sombath Somphone

Dear Madams and Sirs:

It has been ten days since the disappearance of Mr. Sombath Somphone, the founder and former Director of PADETC. A statement released in the KPL on December 19 by the Lao Government said, “the authorities concerned are currently and seriously investigating the incidence in order to find out the truth and whereabouts of Mr. Sombath.” We request information on the findings of this investigation.

Mr. Somphone’s disappearance has raised alarm across the world. Parliamentarians, government representatives, international diplomats, scholars, donors and civil society have joined in urging the Lao Government to urgently investigate the matter and ensure Mr. Somphone’s safety. Mr. Somphone’s wife has appealed to the Ministry of Public Security and other authorities in the Lao Government, to investigate Mr. Somphone’s disappearance and ensure his safety. On December 21, the spokesperson for the UN High Commission for Human Rights expressed concern about the “enforced disappearance of Mr. Sombath Somphone,” believing that his abduction may be related to his human rights work.

Since his disappearance on December 15, Mr. Somphone’s family, friends and colleagues have not received any updates from the official investigation into his abduction, nor of his possible whereabouts.

We again urge the Lao Government to act with immediacy on this matter, and disclose the progress of the investigation to date, so that we can all cooperate in locating Mr. Somphone and ensure his safe return to his family and community. Swift actions by the Lao Government on this enforced disappearance and the safe return of Mr. Somphone will surely bring credit to the country.

Respectfully,

1. Aksone Saysana, Lao PDR
2. Alec Bamford, Thailand
3. Andrew Bartlett, United Kingdom
4. Andrew Nette, Australia
5. Angela Savage, Australia
6. ASEAN WATCH-Thailand
7. Asian Public Intellectuals (API) Community
8. Bank Information Centre (BIC)
9. Ms. Binh Hoang, Mekong Program Coordinator, GreenID Innovation and Development Center, Vietnam
10. Both ENDS, Netherlands
11. Bruce Shoemaker, USA
12. Dr. Carl Middleton, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand
13. Chanida Bamford, Thailand
14. Mr. Chris Greacen
15. Ms. Chunchom Sangarasri Greacen
16. Center for Water Resources Conservation and Development.
17. Chunshan Zhang
18. Do Hai Linh, Vietnam
19. EOM Eunhui, National University Asia Center, South Korea
20. The Finnish NGO platform Kepa, Finland
21. Focus on the Global South, Asia
22. Fu Tao, China
23. German East Timor Association (DOTG e.V.)
24. Global Association for People and the Environment
25. Grainne Ryder, Canada
26. Green Innovation and Development Centre, Vietnam
27. Hoang Duong Thien, Vietnam
28. Indian Social Action Forum, India
29. The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
30. International Rivers, USA
31. Ith Mathoura, Samreth Law Group, Cambodia
32. Jim Enright, Mangrove Action Project – Asia (Thailand)
33. Dr. Keith D. Barney, Lecturer, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Australia.
34. Ken Kampe, Office of Retired Developers, Thailand
35. Khiev Kanal, Cambodia
36. Lam Thi Thu Suu, Vietnam Rivers Network (VRN)
37. La Via Campesina
38. Le Kim Nhien, Vietnam
39. Man Vuthy, Community Legal Education Center (CLEC), Cambodia
40. Margie Law, Mekong Monitor, Tasmania
41. Mean Meach, 3SPN, Cambodia
42. Mekong Energy and Ecology Network (MEENet)
43. Mekong Watch, Japan
44. Mongkhon Duangkhiew, Thailand
45. Mueda Nawanat, Thailand
46. NGO Forum on Cambodia
47. Nguyen Thi Kim Cuc , Mekong Alumni Network ,Vietnam
48. Patricia DeBoer, American Friends Service Committee
49. Dr. Philip Hirsch, Mekong Research Group (AMRC)тАи School of Geosciences, the University of Sydney
50. Phokham, Thailand
51. Randall Arnst, Thailand
52. Sangthorng La, Mekong Allumni
53. Dr. Satoru Matsumoto, Faculty of Intercultural Communication, Hosei University, Japan
54. School of Democratic Economics, Indonesia
55. Shining Som, Burma/Myanmar
56. Tanasak Phosrikun
57. Thai NGO coordinating Committee on development (NGO-COD)
58. Tipakson Manpati, Thailand
59. The Cornerhouse, United Kingdom
60. Thou, Cambodia
61. Towards Ecological Recovery and Regional Alliance (TERRA)
62. Toukta, Lao PDR
63. Trinh Le Nguyen, Vietnam
64. WARECOD, Vietnam
65. World Rainforest Movement
66. Zuo Tao, China

No need to be sorry of course. Thanks for this important topic.
Some contemptuousness for being elitist for “romanticising poverty” may still be too mild an epitaph compared to the regime’s line, which Thant Myint-U has himself repeated, of being “Radical, Agitator and (that perpetually recycled word) Communist”. Unfortunately one will see repeated description of these words “Radicals, Agitators and Communists” in comments from the Bamar Government , its protectors and apologists.
Back to your argument, which is totally main stream. For example this website itself is meeting point for and maintained by mainstream thinkers. That itself is a worry for the future.
There are general points and points specific to Burma.
For the world, there should at least be no dispute that current system, which cannot even be called a “Capitalist System” but “Total Exploitation System” is increasing the have’s and havenot’s difference to record gap and accelerating. That does make it unstable like walking on stilts at greater and greater heights.
The technological advances enable a CEO to micro-manage every single employee for single aim- return for the share holders. But it does not make the worker’s life better or more enjoyable or hopeful. (Minimum wage is now less than in the 80’s.) By nature, all CEO’s would do that (increase return) “externalizing” their own personal beliefs or concern. It then creates an angry, explosive underclass biding the time, all over the world. And fear is now palpable across the board- hoarding, collecting guns and ammunition, fortresses, and so on.
That system is not only unsustainable but unconscionable. For example a lot of deaths, rapes and poisoning of the earth are required in the current selfish, uncaring system for the Col-tan for each cell phone and computer, the very one you are using now. Even by the act of justifying the wonderful humanitarian use of these computers containing blood stained Col-tan, people become sub-human of insecure and unworthy nature.
Besides, for all the apparent opulence and education, the “free” people, a proportion of whom on various psychotropic drugs of prescription and non-prescription in nature, are so deliciously imprisoned in the ever tightening circle of Supermarkets, TV ads, Hollywood productions and Justin Bieber. And more importantly people are finding more and more solace in obeying the “authority”. Like synchronized panicking for totally non-existent “pandemic flu” , for example. Or taking pride in “Democracy” of free choice between one of the two Rothschilds candidates by the most educated and “free” populace in the world in the United States. Or totally void of opinion regarding blatant unjust acts like fomenting civil war in Syria. Main difference between the war on Iraq and Syria is that there was a need for the government and the loyal media to invent a WMD story to start the former along with Trade centre attacks to justify it while the latter requires no reason or excuse at all. First one was supposed to fight the nebulous “Al Qaeda” while the second and current one is to support that very so-called “Al Qaeda”. Even Orwell would get dizzy. If one is keen for the Australian perspective, they simply follow the Yanks hoping to be real Deputy Sheriff in Asia and feel envious of the Pom’s who are the favourite “Children”.
To feel delighted to be somehow connected to such system and call it “Development” is a bit of a shame. Even for that electricity and jobs. Electricity and jobs. Electricity and jobs. Electricity and jobs. Easy sale. Pretty familiar refrain. And will be repeated a billion times.
Specifically for Burma at the moment, it is getting harder for the players to explain the current schizophrenic arrangement of all the seemingly good things are done by the “new” reformed “Good Guy Thein Sein” government ( here Thein Sein’s status change from “them” to “us” took only split second) and all the bad things are either by the bogey man “Old or previous government” or the “hardliners” in the military and yes! the Radicals, Agitators and the Communists. While it is patently clear Thein Sein is simply a pantomime actor with written (liberal sounding catchword full) scripts acting in the very same system to make it look palatable for the share holders in the home countries for their little conscience before rape and pillage of the yet another (may be last) virgin land to be destroyed soon.
Even though Chinese have literally driven the Burma animal in the path of the American ( loose term for the “west”) gun men ( for the loot to be shared), the very desirability of Burma with its mostly uniform uniformed deliciously totalitarian administration whole hearted supported by the “People’s Champion” is a too good a prize for the American Military to let pass. It would now want to get really together in preference to that fractious Thai’s. Hence that thorough on the ground work by the Americans in all contentious internal issues of Burma and their easy right at home movements in previously hostile land. This can only lead to disaster on both sides.
In short though, it is far, far preferable to stay peaceful and cohesive in the dark rather than destroy the millennia old society, poison the land, destroy the rivers and all for one dollar a day jobs in Chinese, Korean, Japanese run factories making soap and socks enduring work/ strike cycles while living in disease, crime infested ghettoes mindlessly “enjoying” reruns of Friends and Simon Cowell on flat screen TV and texting on iPAD’s.
Real need for the man is nice, quiet, peaceful lives with enough food, shelter and clothing. How many percentage of people in the “advanced rich” countries enjoy those?
To make Burmese rich, what is required is to get the military budget diverted for the people’s benefit and stop the destructive wars. Not to make more wars and spend more on the killing implements as this new prosperity plans of Thein Sein/ Aung San suu Kyi crowd is working on. Incidentally same goes for the Great United States of biggest debt in the world.

It is with a most abject feeling of embarrassment that I ask … could you maybe please note the names? And thank you for New Mandala.

Simon and Keith,

Thanks for starting up this discussion with your provocative posting. I too am very concerned with the situation in Laos, and especially the safety of Sombath Somphone. Those who know him will recognise that he is far from radical, and is certainly not someone who deserve to be ‘disappeared’.

However, this being said, I wonder if recent events really are signaling a return to the “bad old days”, or if what has happened simply represents a continuation of what has long been occurring in Laos? To me, the main reasons why this series of events probably seem different are that three out of the four examples provided relate directly to foreign civil society activities in Laos; and the fourth, Khampheuy, became well known due to the filming of his statements in the National Assembly, and their distribution widely and internationally on the internet. He was also in charge of an important Social Science research institution, one with some foreign involvement.

In the past, similarly nasty incidences, or even more so, have occurred in Laos, and not so long ago either. However, news travels unevenly, and with uneven impact, and in many of those cases I am thinking about, largely out of the view of foreigners, for both geographical and other reasons.

For example, dozens of Lao refugees (maybe well over 100) with anti-Lao government sentiments living in Thailand near the Lao border were assassinated between the early 2000s and the last year or two. Many believe that they were killed with Lao government involvement, either by assassins from Laos, or by Thai assassins hired by the Lao government. But for the most part, the international media hasn’t picked up on the story. The networks of those killed were much weaker in terms of gaining international exposure.

There have also been plenty of Hmong disappearances and deaths over the years, including Hmong Lao citizens and Hmong from the USA. I know of one killing that occurred near Km 52 last year. Again, these are well-known amongst the Hmong community, but they have not received as much interest or attention within the academic and international civil society communities.

Even this last July, the jail in Phonsavanh, Xieng Khouang was full of Hmong (at least 50) arrested for allegedly being connected to the last remnants of the Hmong resistance in the forests near Phou Bia Mountain. But it was out of sight, and so the international media did not pick up on it.

I am certainly not bringing up these examples to belittle what has happened in Laos this year. These events are certainly important, and deserve the attention they are receiving, but I don’t think that what has recently happened indicates any particular change in Laos, it is just visible to international academics and civil society in ways that other nasty events have not been. That is, I believe, at least part of the story. Maybe the story is that the Lao government has become more willing to openly target international civil society in Laos?

In any case, thanks for getting the discussion going.

From the same newspaper August 9, 1999

“A centuries-old war path between Thailand and Burma will be transformed into a friendly trade route when a 120km highway linking Kanchanaburi province with the Burmese coastal city of Tavoy is completed in 2001….

The new route through Kanchanaburi will be a major short cut. The Federation of Kanchanaburi Industries-through its Kanchanaburi Dawei and Development Co, which is a Thai-Burmese joint venture-has been campaigning for the road for five years.

The Burmese government has just recently given permission for the company to begin construction of the new route. “The construction of the Thai-Burmese highway should begin later this year,” said Mr Sompop who is also the vice-chairman of the company.

The 1.2-billion-baht route is planned as a two-lane asphalt highway. It will stretch 120km from Kanchanaburi to Tavoy, a coastal city in southern Burma. Labour will be drawn from the Karen people, who still occupy much of the area where the route will pass.

It is expected that on its completion the road will lead to the development of bordering industrial estates in Kanchanaburi, a deep-sea port in Tavoy and an active tourism business between Thailand and Burma.

It is also expected to slow the influx of Burmese and Karen immigrants into Thailand because they will find work in their homeland with the then new industries that will emerge, said Mr Sompop.

It is notable that in the leadup to the Asia-Europe People’s Forum, and the ASEM Summit in Vientiane, Sombath Somphone was a co-author of a opinion piece entitled “Listening to the People’s Voice”.

Under pressure from persons in the Government of Laos, both authors were forced to issue a retraction of the statement. The authors issued a statement saying that it was a draft document.

Below is the original ‘draft’ document.

––––

“Listening to the People’s Voice”

By Minh H. Pham and Sombath Somphone

October 8th, 2012

In one week, Vientiane will host a key forum as part of the run-up to next month’s Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) in Lao PDR, where leaders of 48 nations will work to strengthen their relationship on development issues of common interest. This crucial preliminary event, from 16 to 19 October, is the 9th Asia-Europe People’s Forum (AEPF), with a theme
of “People’s Solidarity Against Poverty and for Sustainable
Development.”

This theme is especially fitting for Lao PDR. In many parts of the country, the struggle against poverty and the pursuit of sustainable and dignified livelihoods continue to be major challenges despite steady national economic growth during the last decade.

To contribute to the overall “people’s visions” expected to emerge from the AEPF, a series of extraordinary grassroots consultations has been undertaken in Lao PDR to gauge the “pulse” of public sentiment on how the country is moving forward.

These grassroots consultations did not measure income or material poverty. Instead, they adopted an innovative approach focused on clear concepts that are easily understandable by all: “happiness” (khouam souk in Lao) and “suffering” (khouam thuk). This first-of-its-kind exercise produced very interesting results.

Across all 16 provinces, highly diverse groups were asked to identify issues that affect their own personal “happiness” or “well-being” as well as their “suffering” or “poverty.” These included not only ordinary villagers and workers, women’s representatives, and local Government officials, but also business owners, monks, people with disabilities, HIV-positive people, and young people.

Building on a consensus at the personal level, the groups then explored issues of “happiness” and “suffering” at the societal level by relating these to four pillars of development – economy, culture, nature and spirituality – and further ranking the three top issues under each pillar.

Full data from the consultations are still being consolidated and analyzed, but preliminary findings can be grouped into four major themes that emerged as contributing most to the people’s “happiness” or “suffering”:

a) Good governance. Across all social groups, the people strongly emphasized the need for wise leadership and good governance as the fundamental basis for influencing happiness in multiple domains. In particular, they repeatedly stressed the need to consistently enforce laws and ensure social justice as precursors to social equity. This would indicate a keen interest in strengthened public service
delivery, transparency and a role for the nascent civil society to contribute to inclusive development.

b) Improved sustainable livelihoods and social protection. Most people also were concerned with having an adequate income to provide a decent standard of living and financial security, as well as with having a range of economic opportunities. Continued strong policies will be needed to proactively improve the enabling environment for a
job-creating private sector, including in manufacturing, tourism, and higher-value-added agriculture.

c) Good health and adequate education. People highly valued
accessibility to and establishment of good schools, with good teachers and spacious classrooms. Their overall satisfaction with their health reflected not only their actual physical condition, but also their emotional and psychological well-being. If health and education are strong components of “happiness,” then there is every reason for their continued enhancement to be policy priorities of the state.

d) Protection of natural resources. Natural resource-based
economic growth, underpinned by expanding Foreign Direct Investment, is pressuring traditional livelihoods and valuable environmental assets. In turn, the findings showed, this is leading to widespread “suffering.” Many rural Lao families and communities retain serious concerns about land security. At the same time, deforestation is severe and non-sustainable land and water use are rising. People want
policies that will ensure sustainable natural resource management and effective adaptation to climate change.

Now, how do we use these clear public messages to inform where the country is heading at this crucial time? How do we integrate them into national debates and planning or budgeting mechanisms?

The Government has one critical opportunity during the 2013 mid-term review of implementation of the 7th National Socio-Economic Development Plan (NSEDP), when such observations could be used to help fine-tune some of the Plan’s valuable goals. Another key opportunity could emerge if the National Assembly holds a special session in the
coming months todiscuss and debate the people’s observations.

Looking further ahead, the results also could help to influence the formulation of the next NSEDP in 2014, helping to ensure that Lao PDR achieves the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) the following year and graduates from Least Developed Country status by 2020. Lastly, all this could be profitably integrated into the objectives of the post-
MDG global development paradigm, as well as into the shaping of Lao PDR’s future Vision 2030.

The people have spoken. We encourage the Government to make a substantive response, so that this becomes a true national dialogue on common development concerns and interests as Lao PDR moves forward.

–

Minh H. Pham is the Resident Coordinator of the United Nations in Lao PDR and the Resident Representative of the United Nations Development Programme.

Sombath Somphone, founder of Participatory Development
Training Center (or PADETC), Magsaysay laureate, and Co-chair of the National Organizing Committee for AEPF9.
For more news about the AEPF9, visit http://www.aepf9.info

=============

Thanks for the great write up Simon and Keith. I hope these developments find their way into Asian Survey’s ‘Laos in 2012’ write up, presuming there is one for this next year.

There is indeed such a long-term perspective, contained in the numerous papers of Dr Thayer Scudder, who describes himself as a “social and cultural anthropologist”. He has been doing longitudinal studies of the impacts of dams (and some other large-scale infrastructure projects) on local people in Africa (e.g. Kariba and Aswan high Dam), India, Sri Lanka, and most recently, the Nam Theun 2 dam in Laos. Much of his experiences and lessons are contained in his book:
SCUDDER, T. (2005) The Future of Large Dams: dealing with social, environmental, institutional and political costs, London, Earthscan.

I am eagerly awaiting him publishing his findings from the NT2 dam in due course, a project he was rather inexplicably optimistic would buck the trend elsewhere in the developing world of overall failure in resettlement experiences from large dams and he was instrumental and vocal in supporting its construction and funding by the World Bank, as a member of the three person Panel of Experts team.

An interesting insight into his current opinions on large dams (and many other topics besides) can be found in the following public lecture at the University of the Pacific:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWYiKzMj_Qg

I wonder what Oveson’s findings and reflections would have been, if he had not been in the employment of the project developer’s. This fact surely clouded his views on local social and ecological conditions more than the fact his study was conducted in less than 3 weeks? Or is this one of the “epistemological constraints” you refer to, in which case it would be good if you could be more explicit about what these constraints might entail for anthropologists working for dam project consultancies and how they might be overcome to minimise pro-developer interest bias in subsequent publications? Or perhaps Oveson genuinely believed that the THHP project would have minimum impacts on the indigenous people and environment and he was correct to endorse drastic social and ecological engineering across several river basins, as highlighted by Keith?