Jim Carrey asks UN Security Council for arms embargo against Myanmar
October 06 ,
NEW YORK - Actor Jim Carrey said Friday the international community is contributing to the brutal crackdown on peaceful demonstrators in Myanmar by failing to take firm action against the military junta that runs the country.
At a news conference near UN headquarters, Carrey urged the UN Security Council to pass a resolution authorizing an arms embargo against the reclusive Southeast Asian nation, saying "this is a government that uses its weapons not in self-defence but against its own citizens."
The United States has threatened to introduce a UN resolution seeking sanctions against Myanmar, including an arms embargo, but China and Russia remain opposed to council action.
The Canadian-born comic is one of numerous celebrities who have signed a letter calling on Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to help win the freedom of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
The U.S. Campaign for Burma, which organized the letter campaign, is also sponsoring a day of action in support of the Myanmar protesters, which organizers say will include marches in 30 countries on Saturday.
Carrey said China, India and Russia need to take a leading role in pressuring the Myanmar junta. All three countries are jostling for a chance to get at Myanmar's bountiful and largely untapped natural resources, especially its oil and gas.
"We must start putting human lives above the bottom line," Carrey told reporters. "We cannot afford to lock our doors and windows and ignore the desperate pleas of our neighbours because the bully who abuses them has something we want."
"We have the power to bring the bully to reason without violence, and if we don't use that power to condemn his outrageous behaviour, we are in fact, sanctioning mass relocation, sanctioning forced labour, sanctioning rape, sanctioning murder, sanctioning the recruiting of child soldiers and encouraging the heroin trade."
October 06 ,
NEW YORK - Actor Jim Carrey said Friday the international community is contributing to the brutal crackdown on peaceful demonstrators in Myanmar by failing to take firm action against the military junta that runs the country.
At a news conference near UN headquarters, Carrey urged the UN Security Council to pass a resolution authorizing an arms embargo against the reclusive Southeast Asian nation, saying "this is a government that uses its weapons not in self-defence but against its own citizens."
The United States has threatened to introduce a UN resolution seeking sanctions against Myanmar, including an arms embargo, but China and Russia remain opposed to council action.
The Canadian-born comic is one of numerous celebrities who have signed a letter calling on Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to help win the freedom of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
The U.S. Campaign for Burma, which organized the letter campaign, is also sponsoring a day of action in support of the Myanmar protesters, which organizers say will include marches in 30 countries on Saturday.
Carrey said China, India and Russia need to take a leading role in pressuring the Myanmar junta. All three countries are jostling for a chance to get at Myanmar's bountiful and largely untapped natural resources, especially its oil and gas.
"We must start putting human lives above the bottom line," Carrey told reporters. "We cannot afford to lock our doors and windows and ignore the desperate pleas of our neighbours because the bully who abuses them has something we want."
"We have the power to bring the bully to reason without violence, and if we don't use that power to condemn his outrageous behaviour, we are in fact, sanctioning mass relocation, sanctioning forced labour, sanctioning rape, sanctioning murder, sanctioning the recruiting of child soldiers and encouraging the heroin trade."
Don't blame China for Myanmar
Neither China nor any other nation has much sway over the ruling junta.
By Kerry Howley October 6, 2007
These are supposed to be humbling times for foreign policy analysts -- chaos in Iraq having made it harder to cast the United States as omnipotent, omniscient and self-actualizing. But judging by the reactions to the recent protests in Myanmar, also known as Burma, the commentariat hasn't stopped ascribing otherworldly powers to ambitious governments. It's just that they're choosing different governments. The "shame and misery of the Burmese junta," claimed Christopher Hitchens in Slate, will endure just "as long as the embrace of China persists." Hitchens isn't the only pundit casting China as puppeteer to the junta. "China must use its 'special relationship' with the junta," explained Nobel Peace Prize winner Jody Williams in the Wall Street Journal, "to arrange the release of Ms. [Aung San] Suu Kyi and hundreds -- if not thousands -- of other political prisoners." Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) has expressed similar sentiments, and various human rights groups are calling for the United States and Europe to boycott the Summer Olympics in Beijing. But how much sway do Chinese leaders actually hold over Myanmar's famously intransigent, xenophobic military?"They actually have very limited leverage, as all foreigners do," said William Overholt, who advised the pro-democracy coalition of 21 tribal groups that created the Provisional Revolutionary Government in Burma in 1989 and is now director of Rand's Center for Asia Pacific Policy. "The whole theory of this government is to cut itself off from the world so no one can influence it." That certainly comes through in the propaganda, which I saw much of during the year and a half I spent living and working in Yangon. Under Burmese law, all printed material must contain a government statement of Burmese nationalist principles under the heading "people's desire." Principle No. 1? "Oppose those relying on external elements, acting as stooges, holding negative views." That message applies to China too: Stooges come in many stripes.John H. Badgley, a retired Cornell University professor who has studied Myanmar for 50 years, says its rulers are best understood as a nationalist party not easily influenced or bought off. "The notion that some external group can come bludgeon them into behavior modification is just false," he said. The truth is that no one really understands what makes Myanmar tick. It is an information vacuum, characterized by a surreptitious, paranoid political culture suspicious of all things foreign. The world is watching footage of Myanmar's protests in a way that would have been impossible in 1988, but it's not as if C-SPAN can set up shop in the Ministry of Home Affairs. The generals' decision-making process remains a mystery, and pundits fill the void with their a priori commitments. Exiles push sanctions; isolationists advocate restraint; China hawks blame China. But China is not the cause of Myanmar's backwardness. It may not even be much of an accomplice. In the late 1960s, China began openly supporting the Communist Party of Burma, contributing to a long and bloody civil war. "Burmese generals remember the bitter civil war, with China on the other side, and China doesn't really trust those erratic guys," said Bertil Lintner, a former correspondent for the Far Eastern Economic Review and a Myanmar expert who has been blacklisted by the government. "They are new allies."Despite, or maybe because of, this fragile alliance, China has stood by Myanmar recently, vetoing a U.N. Security Council resolution in January (as did Russia). But although it makes sense to pressure Beijing in areas in which it clearly has control, such as its own veto power, most of the anti-China arguments are not political but economic. Here China hawks have lost a clear sense of how much influence Beijing really has. China is not Myanmar's biggest trading partner; Thailand is. "You keep seeing these references to Chinese oil and gas assets in Burma," Overholt said. "The reality is that they're trivial. China's attitude toward Burmese gas is that the Thais have already signed up for most of it and the Indians want the rest." China is building an oil and gas pipeline -- but the gas it will carry will flow to the Middle East. This is weak stuff to hang a boycott on; Overholt calls the idea "nutty."So why all the focus on Beijing? The West has been repeatedly frustrated in its attempts to influence a small group of secretive generals; a decade of sanctions has not brought Myanmar closer to democracy. It may be that leaning on China -- a country we expect to respond rationally to incentives -- channels the need to "do something" in the same way embassy protests, candlelight vigils and online petitions do. It may also be that China is a locus of negativity already, ripe for scapegoating. Western companies with valuable oil holdings in Myanmar have attracted less attention than has China. The point isn't that wealthy nations have no role to play in coaxing Myanmar forward, or that applying pressure is futile. But casting the world in terms of all-powerful actors and weak client states is no more likely to lead to smart policymaking than casting it in terms of good and evil. A smart assessment of Myanmar starts with acknowledging how little we know, and how powerless we -- and even China -- may well be.
Neither China nor any other nation has much sway over the ruling junta.
By Kerry Howley October 6, 2007
These are supposed to be humbling times for foreign policy analysts -- chaos in Iraq having made it harder to cast the United States as omnipotent, omniscient and self-actualizing. But judging by the reactions to the recent protests in Myanmar, also known as Burma, the commentariat hasn't stopped ascribing otherworldly powers to ambitious governments. It's just that they're choosing different governments. The "shame and misery of the Burmese junta," claimed Christopher Hitchens in Slate, will endure just "as long as the embrace of China persists." Hitchens isn't the only pundit casting China as puppeteer to the junta. "China must use its 'special relationship' with the junta," explained Nobel Peace Prize winner Jody Williams in the Wall Street Journal, "to arrange the release of Ms. [Aung San] Suu Kyi and hundreds -- if not thousands -- of other political prisoners." Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) has expressed similar sentiments, and various human rights groups are calling for the United States and Europe to boycott the Summer Olympics in Beijing. But how much sway do Chinese leaders actually hold over Myanmar's famously intransigent, xenophobic military?"They actually have very limited leverage, as all foreigners do," said William Overholt, who advised the pro-democracy coalition of 21 tribal groups that created the Provisional Revolutionary Government in Burma in 1989 and is now director of Rand's Center for Asia Pacific Policy. "The whole theory of this government is to cut itself off from the world so no one can influence it." That certainly comes through in the propaganda, which I saw much of during the year and a half I spent living and working in Yangon. Under Burmese law, all printed material must contain a government statement of Burmese nationalist principles under the heading "people's desire." Principle No. 1? "Oppose those relying on external elements, acting as stooges, holding negative views." That message applies to China too: Stooges come in many stripes.John H. Badgley, a retired Cornell University professor who has studied Myanmar for 50 years, says its rulers are best understood as a nationalist party not easily influenced or bought off. "The notion that some external group can come bludgeon them into behavior modification is just false," he said. The truth is that no one really understands what makes Myanmar tick. It is an information vacuum, characterized by a surreptitious, paranoid political culture suspicious of all things foreign. The world is watching footage of Myanmar's protests in a way that would have been impossible in 1988, but it's not as if C-SPAN can set up shop in the Ministry of Home Affairs. The generals' decision-making process remains a mystery, and pundits fill the void with their a priori commitments. Exiles push sanctions; isolationists advocate restraint; China hawks blame China. But China is not the cause of Myanmar's backwardness. It may not even be much of an accomplice. In the late 1960s, China began openly supporting the Communist Party of Burma, contributing to a long and bloody civil war. "Burmese generals remember the bitter civil war, with China on the other side, and China doesn't really trust those erratic guys," said Bertil Lintner, a former correspondent for the Far Eastern Economic Review and a Myanmar expert who has been blacklisted by the government. "They are new allies."Despite, or maybe because of, this fragile alliance, China has stood by Myanmar recently, vetoing a U.N. Security Council resolution in January (as did Russia). But although it makes sense to pressure Beijing in areas in which it clearly has control, such as its own veto power, most of the anti-China arguments are not political but economic. Here China hawks have lost a clear sense of how much influence Beijing really has. China is not Myanmar's biggest trading partner; Thailand is. "You keep seeing these references to Chinese oil and gas assets in Burma," Overholt said. "The reality is that they're trivial. China's attitude toward Burmese gas is that the Thais have already signed up for most of it and the Indians want the rest." China is building an oil and gas pipeline -- but the gas it will carry will flow to the Middle East. This is weak stuff to hang a boycott on; Overholt calls the idea "nutty."So why all the focus on Beijing? The West has been repeatedly frustrated in its attempts to influence a small group of secretive generals; a decade of sanctions has not brought Myanmar closer to democracy. It may be that leaning on China -- a country we expect to respond rationally to incentives -- channels the need to "do something" in the same way embassy protests, candlelight vigils and online petitions do. It may also be that China is a locus of negativity already, ripe for scapegoating. Western companies with valuable oil holdings in Myanmar have attracted less attention than has China. The point isn't that wealthy nations have no role to play in coaxing Myanmar forward, or that applying pressure is futile. But casting the world in terms of all-powerful actors and weak client states is no more likely to lead to smart policymaking than casting it in terms of good and evil. A smart assessment of Myanmar starts with acknowledging how little we know, and how powerless we -- and even China -- may well be.
Is Than Shwe serious about talks with Suu Kyi?
MungpiMizzima News (www.mizzima.com)October 5, 2007 - Burmese military chief Senior General Than Shwe's offer to hold a dialogue with opposition leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, under a set of pre-conditions, seems to be a soothing move after a heavy blow, but critics see the junta's voice as valueless.
The Burmese state-run media on Thursday announced that military chief Than Shwe is willing to meet detained Nobel Peace Laureate under pre-conditions that she abandon "Confrontation", give-up "obstructive measures" and the support for "sanction" and "utter devastation", a phrase it fails to explain.
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi led, Burma's largest opposition party National League for Democracy on Friday said the junta's offer does not carry any weight and the sets of precondition only proves that the generals are not serious about any dialogue or talks.
"All the preconditions [that the junta mentioned] have never been her [Suu Kyi] efforts and the government is charging her with what she has not done," the NLD spokesperson told Mizzima.
Nyan Win said, by setting such preconditions it only shows that the junta is not serious about any talks or negotiation with the opposition and urged the government to allow Suu Kyi to respond to the offer publicly.
"If they are serious they should allow her [Suu Kyi] to respond publicly," Nyan Win said.
However, a Thailand based Burmese independent analyst, Aung Naing Oo, said the junta's preconditions could be a message for the west, which has imposed economic sanctions on the ruling junta.
As the detained pro-democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her party, NLD, despite having certain leverage, has no decision on the sanctions imposed by the west.
"So, the junta's preconditions could be a message to the west that if they are serious about changes in Burma, they should start talking and negotiating with the junta and lift sanctions," Aung Naing Oo said.
The Burmese state-television said Than Shwe mentioned his sets of preconditions for direct talks with opposition leader to the visiting UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari, on Tuesday before ending his four-day visit to the country.
Gambari, who briefed the UN chief on his visit to Burma on Thursday, will brief the UN Security Council in an open session on Friday and follow up in a close session, the UN said in a statement release on Thursday.
Win Min, another Burmese analyst said, "It's better to wait and see what Gambari will brief the UNSC since it's likely that he has passed that message to her [Suu Kyi], if not during the first meeting, then in their second meeting."
While keeping aside the pain and anger of the people over the recent brutal crackdown on protesters, the opposition should try to grab the opportunity for negotiating with the junta, Aung Naing Oo said.
"In the past there has been such sparkling chances that the opposition failed to grab," Aung Naing Oo said.
"Following the brutal crackdown on the 1988 uprising, the junta held a general elections and offered chances of negotiation but it failed to be translated into any meaningful dialogue," added Aung Naing Oo.
"So, may be this time, the junta is offering such chances once again, and it is important to be translated into meaningful dialogue," he added.
However, Aung Naing Oo does not rule out the possibility that the junta might be just tossing around to reduce international pressure and divert attention to what had happened last month.
Last month, soldiers on Rangoon Street opened fire on protesting crowds and killed several people including a Japanese photo journalist. The junta officially admits that it killed 10 people, but diplomats and activists said more than 200 people have been killed and at least 6,000 including 2000 monks have been arrested.
Sources in Rangoon told Mizzima, several bodies of monks bearing evidence of being beaten to death surfaced on the Rangoon river, a sign that many believe the junta is killing the monks secretly and throwing the bodies into the water.
Win Min said the junta's surprise offer could be a step to show the world that it is taking the initiative before the UNSC can announce its next course of action and to paint an ugly picture of Suu Kyi by blaming her of masterminding demonstrations and calling for sanctions.
Win Min said if by confrontation the junta means demonstrations, it will be difficult for Suu Kyi to give up her non-violent weapon including economic sanctions just for meeting Than Shwe, rather than for reaching a settlement.
"I think revoking sanctions may be determined by the results of the negotiation, rather than state of the negotiation that nobody is sure whether it will lead to positive outcome," added Win Min.
However, Win Min said the decision lies with the countries imposing sanctions on Burma, and not on Suu Kyi and it will greatly depend upon the conditions set by each country to revoke the sanction.
"Sanctions have conditions which need to be met to revoke," Win Min said.
But the best would be to revoke piece by piece the restrictions included in the sanction according to progress made in the process of negotiation, added Win Min.
"But, there should be conditions of reinstating of sanctions automatically, if the one-step progress made, goes one step backward later," added Win Min.
Meanwhile, the US state department on Thursday said, it renewed calls for the junta to hold talks with Suu Kyi and opposition party through its Charge d'affaires Shari Villarosa, who was called by the junta to its new jungle capital Naypyitaw on Friday.
However, the junta's surprise offer seems to have no meaning as Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace Laureate, continues to remain under detention and a chance of freeing her to express her response seems far from the junta's way of doing things.
MungpiMizzima News (www.mizzima.com)October 5, 2007 - Burmese military chief Senior General Than Shwe's offer to hold a dialogue with opposition leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, under a set of pre-conditions, seems to be a soothing move after a heavy blow, but critics see the junta's voice as valueless.
The Burmese state-run media on Thursday announced that military chief Than Shwe is willing to meet detained Nobel Peace Laureate under pre-conditions that she abandon "Confrontation", give-up "obstructive measures" and the support for "sanction" and "utter devastation", a phrase it fails to explain.
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi led, Burma's largest opposition party National League for Democracy on Friday said the junta's offer does not carry any weight and the sets of precondition only proves that the generals are not serious about any dialogue or talks.
"All the preconditions [that the junta mentioned] have never been her [Suu Kyi] efforts and the government is charging her with what she has not done," the NLD spokesperson told Mizzima.
Nyan Win said, by setting such preconditions it only shows that the junta is not serious about any talks or negotiation with the opposition and urged the government to allow Suu Kyi to respond to the offer publicly.
"If they are serious they should allow her [Suu Kyi] to respond publicly," Nyan Win said.
However, a Thailand based Burmese independent analyst, Aung Naing Oo, said the junta's preconditions could be a message for the west, which has imposed economic sanctions on the ruling junta.
As the detained pro-democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her party, NLD, despite having certain leverage, has no decision on the sanctions imposed by the west.
"So, the junta's preconditions could be a message to the west that if they are serious about changes in Burma, they should start talking and negotiating with the junta and lift sanctions," Aung Naing Oo said.
The Burmese state-television said Than Shwe mentioned his sets of preconditions for direct talks with opposition leader to the visiting UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari, on Tuesday before ending his four-day visit to the country.
Gambari, who briefed the UN chief on his visit to Burma on Thursday, will brief the UN Security Council in an open session on Friday and follow up in a close session, the UN said in a statement release on Thursday.
Win Min, another Burmese analyst said, "It's better to wait and see what Gambari will brief the UNSC since it's likely that he has passed that message to her [Suu Kyi], if not during the first meeting, then in their second meeting."
While keeping aside the pain and anger of the people over the recent brutal crackdown on protesters, the opposition should try to grab the opportunity for negotiating with the junta, Aung Naing Oo said.
"In the past there has been such sparkling chances that the opposition failed to grab," Aung Naing Oo said.
"Following the brutal crackdown on the 1988 uprising, the junta held a general elections and offered chances of negotiation but it failed to be translated into any meaningful dialogue," added Aung Naing Oo.
"So, may be this time, the junta is offering such chances once again, and it is important to be translated into meaningful dialogue," he added.
However, Aung Naing Oo does not rule out the possibility that the junta might be just tossing around to reduce international pressure and divert attention to what had happened last month.
Last month, soldiers on Rangoon Street opened fire on protesting crowds and killed several people including a Japanese photo journalist. The junta officially admits that it killed 10 people, but diplomats and activists said more than 200 people have been killed and at least 6,000 including 2000 monks have been arrested.
Sources in Rangoon told Mizzima, several bodies of monks bearing evidence of being beaten to death surfaced on the Rangoon river, a sign that many believe the junta is killing the monks secretly and throwing the bodies into the water.
Win Min said the junta's surprise offer could be a step to show the world that it is taking the initiative before the UNSC can announce its next course of action and to paint an ugly picture of Suu Kyi by blaming her of masterminding demonstrations and calling for sanctions.
Win Min said if by confrontation the junta means demonstrations, it will be difficult for Suu Kyi to give up her non-violent weapon including economic sanctions just for meeting Than Shwe, rather than for reaching a settlement.
"I think revoking sanctions may be determined by the results of the negotiation, rather than state of the negotiation that nobody is sure whether it will lead to positive outcome," added Win Min.
However, Win Min said the decision lies with the countries imposing sanctions on Burma, and not on Suu Kyi and it will greatly depend upon the conditions set by each country to revoke the sanction.
"Sanctions have conditions which need to be met to revoke," Win Min said.
But the best would be to revoke piece by piece the restrictions included in the sanction according to progress made in the process of negotiation, added Win Min.
"But, there should be conditions of reinstating of sanctions automatically, if the one-step progress made, goes one step backward later," added Win Min.
Meanwhile, the US state department on Thursday said, it renewed calls for the junta to hold talks with Suu Kyi and opposition party through its Charge d'affaires Shari Villarosa, who was called by the junta to its new jungle capital Naypyitaw on Friday.
However, the junta's surprise offer seems to have no meaning as Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace Laureate, continues to remain under detention and a chance of freeing her to express her response seems far from the junta's way of doing things.
No comments:
Post a Comment