The BBC is actively trying to get people from within Burma to talk about what is happening, but given that governments horrible Human Rights abuses it may prove next to impossible. Apparently there are some bloggers who are getting the word out, but obviously at the threat of death if they get caught. A curfew (rather strict) has been imposed and people are talking about dead monks and a lot of blood. The monks have asked civilians to not get involved so as to minimize violence.

quote:

---

This is a battle of wills between Burma's two most powerful institutions, the military and the monk-hood, and the outcome is still unclear, the BBC's South East Asia correspondent, Jonathan Head, reports.

Key locations of Rangoon democracy protests

Enlarge Map

Hospital sources in Rangoon told the BBC that at least one monk had been killed and that two others were in intensive care.

The monks were beaten with the back of rifles. Taxi drivers are transporting the injured to nearby medical facilities, said the source, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Other reports differ on the number killed with a monastery official telling Reuters news agency two monks had died while Burmese officials told AFP three monks had been killed.

Analysts fear a repeat of the violence in 1988, when troops opened fire on unarmed protesters, killing thousands.

---

More here: BBC News

I admit I don't know a whole lot about Burma, other than that country is under the tightest censor by the military than I have ever heard of.

quote:

---

I live in Yangon (Rangoon) and run a business here. We have over two hundred staff. I can only beg the West, please please do not put further economic sanctions. This hurts the people only and not the elite. When we were unable to bring in or send US dollars everyone resorted to the Hunde system. We found out later that the people we were using were military personnel. They were making so much money out of it. The top people send there children to American schools/Universities or have them at schools in Singapore.

---

Apparently the regime that is known for human rights violations did this years ago to start a bloody riot.

Here that Canada..re Montebello

I'd like to help, Scooter, but I don't know how. Suggestions?

[ 27 September 2007: Message edited by: Briguy ]

Of course, India won't like that, but having Pakistan one on side already tense, having a second large nuclear neighbour in a pissing match with them wouldn't be to their advantage.

And given China's suppression of democratic demands at home how can anyone expect them to help deliver democracy in Burma? If they do it only raises expectations among their own people. If they don't they will rapidly be seen as an occupation force both by the Burmese and the international community and the last thing Beijing needs is their own Afghanistan.

Not going to happen. Beijing may ask the Burmese generals to be restrained and, in a pinch, they would offer the junta and its supporters asylum but Chinese forces will not be crossing into Burma.

[ 27 September 2007: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ceti:
I could see a wave, like the Nepalese democracy demonstrations this spring that forced the king to fold.

SLORC or whatever they call themselves, will be much more difficult to defeat, but it is possible if there is a mass uprising.

---

As with many similar situations in the past, it'll come down to whether or not rank and file soldiers will follow orders to suppress the uprising. If significant numbers of soldiers refuse to fire and/or if mid-ranking officers start turning against the government and siding with the people then it's all over. If the military stays loyal then it's a different story.

[ 27 September 2007: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by quelar:
I totally could be off base with my thoughts, but with the olympics looming, they want to make a good global impression. They already have Taiwan and Tibet as two big 'issues' floating around, but Burma they could go in quickly, remove the military government and set up a 'reasonable civilian' government, much like their own, and then they look like good guys, not like invaders

---

quote:

---

Up until very recently China was Robert Mugabe's biggest benefactor as well. China seems to be making a name for itself these days in backing the most horrible dictatorships in the world. china was Pol Pot's biggest ally too.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

So we boycott China and its proxy regimes and we boycott the USA and its proxy regimes and every other nation that routinely violates human rights. We will have very few "trading partners" remaining, but I'm willing to live with that.

---

Are we boycotting Canada as well?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
The only thing keeping the junta in power in Burma is support from China. Why doesn't the entire western world threaten to boycott the Beijing Olympics unless China slams the door shut on their deadbeat friends in Burma. I think the chinese would freak out at the thought of their precious Olympics being destroyed and they'd pull the plug on their thuggish allies.

---

Stolkholm has influence in Europe, it seems:

quote:

---

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European Union countries should boycott the 2008 Beijing Olympics unless China intervenes in Myanmar, an EU lawmaker said on Thursday.

The vice president of the European Parliament Edward McMillan-Scott will write to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and the EU's Portuguese presidency asking them to discuss whether athletes should oppose the Beijing games.

The British Conservative MEP is backed by the assembly's largest political group -- the centre-right European People's Party, which includes the government parties of France and Germany -- and the Liberal grouping within the EU legislature.

"The consensus around the European Parliament is that China is the key. China is the puppet master of Burma," McMillan-Scott told Reuters in a telephone interview.

---

[ 28 September 2007: Message edited by: Stephen Gordon ]

The Cold War deepened, launching a new spiral of arms race and readying the advent of Pres Raygun, his Star Wars and Reaganomics.

oh no.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
So Jimmy Carter won the Cold War? Who knew?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
Up until very recently China was Robert Mugabe's biggest benefactor as well. China seems to be making a name for itself these days in backing the most horrible dictatorships in the world. china was Pol Pot's biggest ally too.

---

quote:

---

Zbigniew Brzezinski has admitted, "I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot. . . . Pol Pot was an abomination. We could never support him but China could." But the U.S. did support Pol Pot covertly, including whitewashing his crimes. As Ben Kiernan points out in an indispensable Yale University Law School monograph entitled "Genocide and Democracy in Cambodia," the CIA in May of 1980 "denied that there had been any executions in the last two years of the Pol Pot regime." In fact, half a million innocent people were killed during that period. Even well after the "killing fields" were unearthed, the U.S. continued to legitimize the Khmer Rouge, voting at the U.N. Geneva Conference in 1981 to defeat an ASEAN proposal that the Khmer Rouge be disarmed.

---

The NVA captured weapons from Khmer Rouge which were American, French, Swedish and German in origin. Khmer Rouge went to New York to win political support and talking Liberal capitalism at the UN. Maggie and Ronny lapped it up.

So the doctor and the madman murdered 600, 000 Cambodians leading up the Pol Pot's regime, and then they tried to cover up his mass murder over the last two years of Pol Pot's rule. And then after the NVA tookover "Democratic Kampuchea", the west continued supplying Khmer Rouge with covert training and weapons while in exile in Thailand and hiding out in the jungles of Cambodia and Viet Nam.

The west aided and abetted the worst mass murderer since Adolf Hitler.

[ 28 September 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Email Burma October 1

quote:

---

OK everyone who wants to DO something to help, here is an idea that a few of us have discussed [...]

We think it's a good idea to focus protest on what we see as the strongest leveraging power (China), on their weakest point (Beijing 2008 Olympics).

So, on Monday, 1 October, at 1200 your local time, please send emails of protest to these email addresses listed on the Beijing Olympics Contact Us website (http://en.beijing2008.cn/bocog/contactus/):

[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

They are the email adds for: General Office, International Relations, Media and Communications, Marketing, Media Operations, and the Ticketing Centre.

And let's take our cue from the protesters in Beijing. We want China to use its influence to:

a) Pressure the junta not to use force on the demonstrators
b) Pressure the junta to agree to talks on reconciliation

Make sure they can't filter out your message by subject line by using something straightforward like the word 'tickets' in it.

If you want to do more, please also email or write to the following people:

Russian President Vladimir Putin at website:
http://www.kremlin.ru/eng/articles/send_letter_adm.shtml

or address (apparently if you want a personal response):
4, Staraya Square, Moscow, 103132

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh at website:
http://pmindia.nic.in/write.htm

ASEAN Secretariat and Office of Secretary-General emails:
[email protected] , [email protected]

---

There are more details on the Facebook page for this linked to above.

[ 28 September 2007: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
So did "the east" according to you.

---

Okay, so it must've been some person with a name like Zbigniew Brzchungski, a permanent shadow guvmint guy in Beijing who corrupted the Americans and British into supporting Pol Pot and the bloody Khmer Rouge. They were following orders from Beijing. Ya, that's tha ticket, ssssssure.

I also mentioned that the Chinese amassed a million man army on the Vietnam's border and bagan attacking in 1980-81 or so. The NVA repelled them.

Our western jackals would love to get their blood-soaked mits on Burma's oil. A bit close to China, no?

[ 28 September 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

The international media has highlighted the role of Buddhist monks in the current protests. Their prominence, however, is a function of the timidity and conservatism of Suu Kyi and other NLD leaders, who appear to have been caught off guard by the demonstrations. Far from seeking to challenge the junta, the NLD is seeking to limit the protests and exploit them as a bargaining chip to establish negotiations with the generals....

NLD leader Sann Aung told the Times: “There should be no agitation to topple the military regime. It will make people much more wary of a military response and people will become reluctant to join the movement.” The newspaper also pointed to the limited character of the demands made by senior monks: an apology for abuse by the regime, a reduction in fuel prices, the release of political prisoners and political dialogue with the junta.

These appeals for restraint are, however, opening the door for further military repression. By confining the anger of ordinary working people, the opposition leaders will only embolden the generals to go on the offensive against the protests. That is the central political lesson of the events of 1988, when Suu Kyi and the NLD struck a deal with the junta to hold elections and shut down the protest movement. The junta seized the deal with both hands, stabilised their rule and then ignored the outcome of the 1990 poll, in which the NLD won an overwhelming majority.

For nearly two decades, the NLD’s perspective has been confined to using the pressure of sanctions imposed by the major powers to reach a compromise with the junta. As for its professions of concern for the Burmese population, the NLD supports the IMF and World Bank’s free market policies of opening up the country to foreign investors. The social consequences are evident in the junta’s slashing of fuel subsidies last month, entirely in line with this agenda.

---

I think this is key:

quote:

---

As for its professions of concern for the Burmese population, the NLD supports the IMF and World Bank’s free market policies of opening up the country to foreign investors. The social consequences are evident in the junta’s slashing of fuel subsidies last month, entirely in line with this agenda.

---

quote:

---

Although allegations of a secret military partnership between Myanmar and
Israel continue to be denied
by both sides, reports suggest that Israel is aiding Myanmar's military
modernisation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by M. Spector:
Source

---

And there is no reason to assume that the junta will put up any more resistance to the IMF than the opposition.

What a lot of us have been saying is that invading a country who doesn't ask for help, killing their civilians to bring them 'peace' and then proping up governments who sell out their own peoples interests to foreign corporation is the WRONG way to do it.

This case, on the other hand, we see a population standing up to the oppressors and demanding democracy. In this case, helping them isn't necessarily wrong, because they're asking for it themselves and trying to take the power into their own hands.

On the other side, we see reports of food shortages but no mention of protesting.

It goes without saying that no government the U.S. would put in place in Zimbabwe could be an improvement.

Unconfirmed but potentially horrific news:

Daily Mail

quote:

---

Burma: Thousands dead in massacre of the monks dumped in the jungle

Thousands of protesters are dead and the bodies of hundreds of executed monks have been dumped in the jungle, a former intelligence officer for Burma's ruling junta has revealed.

The most senior official to defect so far, Hla Win, said: "Many more people have been killed in recent days than you've heard about. The bodies can be counted in several thousand."

Mr Win, who spoke out as a Swedish diplomat predicted that the revolt has failed, said he fled when he was ordered to take part in a massacre of holy men. He has now reached the border with Thailand.

---

Burma Online News portal:
http://www.bnionline.net/

[ 01 October 2007: Message edited by: Paul Gross ]

quote:

---

Stockholm, everybody here on Babble has agreed that Mugabe is a bad leader and should go. What more can you ask?

It goes without saying that no government the U.S. would put in place in Zimbabwe could be an improvement.

---

Why is it "red-baiting" to condemn Mugabe??? I was not under the impression that that murderous hateful thug had a socialist bone in his body. He is just a garden variety fascistic dictator.

I'm not so sure that "everybody" on babble thinks Mugabe is so bad. Whenever he gets condemned someone always tries to make excuses for him and to romanticize him as some sort of great revolutionary leader instead of condemning as the murderous kleptocrat that he is.

Who said anything about the US putting a government in place in Zimbabwe? All I want is a free election there with none of the massive electoral fraud and beatings of anti-government politicians that have characterized the last "elections" in Zimbabwe.

quote:

---

The government of Burma is just as bad if not worse - and they are largely backed by China and India.

---

quote:

---

FM: The government of Burma is just as bad if not worse - and they are largely backed by China and India.

---

China, yes. India, not so much. China militarily supports both Burma and Pakistan and it is not a coincidence that those 2 countries, together with China itself, "surround" India.

[ 01 October 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:

China, yes. India, not so much. China militarily supports both Burma and Pakistan and it is not a coincidence that those 2 countries, together with China itself, "surround" India.

---

India is trying to play catch-up and woo Burma from Chinese influence. The generals are coyly playing India and China against each other for favourable trade and development deals.

See this excellent article by Sonya Fatah:

India's about-face on junta

quote:

---

Partnerships with the Burmese military, geopolitical agendas and stakes in the region for India's big and upcoming businesses have shifted India's allegiances away from those advocating democracy for its military-run neighbour.

---

quote:

---

This week, the Indian government finally commented on the junta's violent suppression of monk-led anti-government protests, calling for political reform but at the same time suggesting it was an internal Burmese problem.

Moreover, high-level Indian officials were in Burma, also known as Myanmar, this week discussing bilateral relations, suggesting India's friendship with the generals isn't on the wane.

"India has a big economic stake in Burma ...," says Tapan Bose, secretary general of the South Asia Forum for Human Rights.

"The petroleum minister has run off to Myanmar. That would indicate that we are certainly quite deeply involved."

India's close relations with pro-democracy leaders started to change in the early 1990s as China's influence in the region began to surge. India began to look for regional partnerships to boost its own influence.

The new policy was called "engagement with the regime."

"This was part of India's `Look East' policy, and it was meant to increase border trade, exchange of visitors, and military aid," says Tint Swe, a member of the parliament in the exiled National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma.

---

quote:

---

Today, business ties provide much of the glue bonding the two nations. Last year, India's trade surplus with Burma reached $400 million.

Oil, a rich and mostly untapped resource in Burma, is fuelling a new Indo-Sino rivalry as China plans a pipeline in Burma and is leading the race to sign a contract for natural gas from a soon-to-be-developed offshore field in Sittwe, in the Arakan region.

India wants the gas to help develop its troublesome northeastern region and Burmese democracy isn't needed for that, as witnessed by India's visit to sign offshore agreements last week.

Critics say that India's cozying up is not only a betrayal of former friends in the pro-democracy movement, it's also a futile effort to catch up with China.

Several months ago, Burma sold gas from two fields to China, shutting out Indian firms who had a 30 per cent stake in the deal.

"India is too far behind," says Swe. "Mandalay is overrun by the Chinese. There is a lot of Chinese influence in Burma. And the military is just playing the Indians and the Chinese against each other."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken Burch:

It goes without saying that no government the U.S. would put in place in Zimbabwe could be an improvement.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:

Why is it "red-baiting" to condemn Mugabe??? I was not under the impression that that murderous hateful thug had a socialist bone in his body. He is just a garden variety fascistic dictator.

I'm not so sure that "everybody" on babble thinks Mugabe is so bad. Whenever he gets condemned someone always tries to make excuses for him and to romanticize him as some sort of great revolutionary leader instead of condemning as the murderous kleptocrat that he is.

Who said anything about the US putting a government in place in Zimbabwe? All I want is a free election there with none of the massive electoral fraud and beatings of anti-government politicians that have characterized the last "elections" in Zimbabwe.

The government of Burma is just as bad if not worse - and they are largely backed by China and India.

---

I wasn't saying it was redbaiting to criticize Mugabe. If you've read my posts on Zimbabwe, I've criticized him as much as you have.

The redbaiting was in your implication that real debate on Zimbabwe here on Babble is blocked by some sort of Leninist cabal.

You aren't the only poster here who dares to criticize Mugabe, so stop implying otherwise.

And the Burmese generals need to go, and it needs to be accepted that nobody here defends them as protectors of socialism. It isn't being apologists for the regime to point out the the opposition is wrong to accept western demands for austerity. I assumed even YOU were opposed to the IMF.

quote:

---

quote:FM: The government of Burma is just as bad if not worse - and they are largely backed by China and India.

China, yes. India, not so much. China militarily supports both Burma and Pakistan and it is not a coincidence that those 2 countries, together with China itself, "surround" India.

---

But, you know, who is selling weapons to the Burmese generals. Britain is:

quote:

---

BRITAIN is selling arms and technology which can be used by the military to 19 of the 20 nations which the UK's own Foreign Office lists as "countries of major concern" in its human rights annual report.

The only "country of major concern" not in receipt of military know-how from the UK is North Korea. The listed countries getting shipments include:

Belarus, Burma ...

Burma was allowed by buy GBP100,000 worth of dual use chemicals in July-September 2005.

---

Russia does:

quote:

---

Russia also has a much smaller client base than the United States. Aside from China, Russia shipped weapons to 10 states. This group included a few purchasers from which Western suppliers have recently shied away: Myanmar (100 artillery pieces), Sudan (four attack helicopters), and Venezuela (four combat aircraft and 14 attack helicopters).

---

And there is this:

quote:

---

Loopholes and weaknesses in arms export controls across G8 countries undermine their commitments to poverty reduction, stability and human rights; irresponsible exports by some G8 countries went to such poor and conflict-ridden countries as Sudan, Myanmar (Burma), the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Colombia and the Philippines. Arms transfers by these major powers are supplemented by exports from China and medium-sized, arms-producing states such as Brazil, Israel, the Netherlands, Singapore, North Korea, South Africa, all competing for markets.

---

And here is a series of videos that says genocide in Burma is supported by the US, UK, and France:
brasschecktv

And then the Israeli Hebrew media has one report translated as follows:

quote:

---

The riots in Burma whose name was changed by the junta to Myanmar are slowly but surely exposing Israel’s involvement and its close ties with the dictatorial regime. Once again it becomes evident that Israel is one of the world largest traders in death and weaponry. The Israeli government does not have any compunction as to identity of its customers. Since the monks uprising commenced several hundred people have been killed and thousands have been arrested. The ruling junta utilises sharpshooters in a similar manner that the IDF uses against armed Palestinian militants on the West Bank in Gaza.”

---

Apparently the only country not dealing with the Burmese generals are the Americans. But they are not missing out. As reported today, the US retains the position of top sales for small arms to developing nations.

[ 01 October 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

I'm not so sure, actually. The bread does seem to get to the shops in Iraq, after all, even if the shops themselves have a bad habit of exploding.

---

Ya but Iraqi opinon polls say the torture is worse now than under Saddam.

The name Burma came from the fact that the largest ethnic group in Burma are the Birmans who are about 65% of the country. The generals (FWIW) claimed that the name Burma was exclusionary to the 35% of the country that belong to various other ethnic minorities.

Of course the generals followed this kind gesture towards ethnic minorities by launching genocidal military action in border regions where the minorities tend to live.

The general thrust of the piece is that business is business, whatever capitalist country we discuss, and, therefore, since profits are more important than principles, nothing substantial will be done to help the people of Burma.

U.S. (Chevron), French (Total), Malaysian (Petronas), South Korean (Daewoo), British (between 1988 and 2004 companies based out of British territories invested over £1.2bn in Burma), Chinese (oil and gas, e.g.) and even Indian corporations are milking profits from Burma. Why stop now over dead monks and citizens?

The policy of "constructive engagament" that was so zealously defended by British PM Thatcher and US President Reagan in relation to Apartheid South Africa is here trotted out again in the ASEAN forum.

quote:

---

Shortly before the election in 2000, Dick Cheney admitted on the Larry King Live! show that Halliburton had done contract work in Burma. Cheney defended the project by saying that Halliburton had not broken the U.S. law imposing sanctions on Burma, which forbids new investments in the country. "You have to operate in some very difficult places and oftentimes in countries that are governed in a manner that's not consistent with our principles here in the United States," Cheney told Larry King. "But the world's not made up only of democracies."

---

quote:

---

The Canadian government’s initial response to the Burmese government’s repression was to condemn the arrest of pro-democracy activists, to request their immediate release, and to call on the Burmese government “to respect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of the protestors” and “to engage in genuine dialogue with the members of the democratic opposition.”

A few days later, when Burma’s narco-dictatorship resorted to deadly force against the pro-democracy demonstrators, they were again condemned by the Canadian government, who reminded the Burmese regime of their “obligation to promote and protect the human rights and fundamental freedoms of its people… as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
….

After the military’s last crackdown left thousands dead in 1988, Canada banned the export of arms to Burma. Today, the Canadian government could ask its trading partner Israel to cease its current military and intelligence support to the Burmese junta, but it chooses not to.
….

But how did the Canadian government and the media handle similar attacks on pro-democracy demonstrations in Haiti throughout 2004 and 2005?
….

Leaving aside the carnage that immediately followed the Canadian-backed February 2004 coup, numerous opportunities to defend democracy and human rights in Haiti passed with silence, or worse. Demonstrations for the return of ousted President Aristide by Haiti’s poor majority were violently suppressed, not unlike the pro-democracy demonstrations in Burma our government and media are so vocal about.

The CBC reported in mid-May 2004: “Police used tear gas and fired assault rifles to break up a massive rally in support of Haiti’s ousted president Jean-Bertrand Aristide.” US marines helped the Haitian police disperse the crowds; at least one protestor was killed. Canada’s leading daily, the Globe and Mail, did not report this political repression. The Canadian government had nothing to say and chose to do nothing despite having hundreds of troops on the ground in Haiti.
….

One Associated Press report, chosen at random, is illustrative of the quality of reporting on Burma. It cites Human Rights Watch in the third paragraph, followed by the US Campaign for Burma (a Washington-based pro-democracy group), the Democratic Voice of Burma (a Norway-based dissident news organization), the 88 Student Generation (a pro-democracy group operating inside Burma), and the National League for Democracy-Liberated Area (another dissident group).

Much more evidence of the repression being carried out by the Western-backed coup regime in Haiti could have been uncovered if the media had talked to the same sort of groups cited when it came to Burma – but such sources were ignored when it came to Haiti.
….

So there are some seeming contradictions in the Canadian government’s response to the repression of pro-democracy demonstrations. In Burma, we find rhetoric but no action with extensive media coverage, while in Haiti we find official silence and much destructive action with a virtual media blackout. All this raises serious questions about the role of the media and suggests there is something rather different than democracy and human rights driving Canadian foreign policy. Canadians should make it their business to find out what makes their media and foreign policy tick.

---