U.S. Policy Toward Burma

U.S. Policy Toward Burma

Kurt M. Campbell
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs

Washington, DC

September 28, 2009

---

MR. CROWLEY: I don’t see any UNGA survivors here yet. They’re still up there. Good afternoon, and welcome to the Department of State. To kick us off this afternoon, we’ve invited down the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia Pacific region Kurt Campbell, who is going to kind of follow up on some comments that the Secretary made last night – or last week, I’m sorry – regarding Burma, but will obviously entertain broader questions on the region.
Kurt, you can just kick us off.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Thank you, P.J., and it’s great to see so many friends here. This is my first time in front of the podium, so I’m going to take a variety of questions, if that’s possible.
Let me first underscore that last week was a big week for us in the Asia Pacific region. I think all of you know the President and the Secretary had a series of meetings with our friends and allies in the Asia Pacific region. President Obama met both in Pittsburgh and in New York with President Hu, had a broad range of discussions on North Korea, on Iran, on climate change, on a variety of economic and trade-related issues. The President also met with new Japanese Prime Minister Hatoyama to discuss our vital, important partnership and the direction ahead. We also had strong meetings between the President – between the Secretary and her counterparts in several key countries in Asia.
The Secretary also, on Wednesday, had a meeting of the Friends of Burma, and at that meeting she rolled out some of our initial views concerning the Burma review, which is going to be fully discussed this week on Capitol Hill and also with other key players. There will be testimony before the Senate subcommittee on Wednesday; I will appear before that, before Senator Webb and the committee.
I’d like now, if possible, to read a relatively long statement. I apologize for the detail, but it will give you some context in terms of our overall review and what we’ve concluded over the course of these last seven months.
In terms of the background, the Administration launched a review of Burma policy seven months ago, recognizing that the conditions in Burma were deplorable and that neither isolation nor engagement, when implemented alone, had succeeded in improving those conditions. Throughout this review, the Administration consulted closely with Congress, the international community, and a wide range of stakeholders inside Burma, including the National League of Democracy.
For the first time in memory, the Burmese leadership has shown an interest in engaging with the United States, and we intend to explore that interest. In addition, concerns have emerged in recent days about Burma and North Korea’s relationship that require greater focus and dialogue.
What are the strategic goals and interests of this approach? We have reaffirmed our fundamental goals in Burma. We support a unified, peaceful, prosperous, and democratic Burma that respects the human rights of its citizens. To that end, we will continue to push for the immediate and unconditional release of Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners, an end to conflicts with ethnic minorities and gross human rights violations, and initiation of a credible internal political dialogue with the democratic opposition and ethnic minority leaders on elements of reconciliation and reform.
We will also press Burma to comply with its international obligations, including on nonproliferation, ending any prohibited military or proliferation-related cooperation with North Korea, and full compliance with United Nations 1874 and 1718.
If Burma makes meaningful progress towards these goals, it will be possible to improve the relationship with the United States in a step-by-step process. We recognize that this will likely be a long and difficult process, and we are prepared to sustain our efforts on this front.
Burma’s continued estrangement from the international community harms the country and has direct negative consequences beyond Burma’s borders. Burma’s engagement with the outside world has the potential to encourage new thinking, reform, and participation in the work of the international community.
In terms of engagement, we intend to begin a direct dialogue with Burmese authorities to lay out a path towards better relations. The dialogue will include specific discussion of democracy and human rights inside Burma, cooperation on international security issues such as nonproliferation and compliance with 1874 and 1718, and areas that could be of mutual benefit such as counternarcotics and recovery of World War II era remains.
In terms of sanctions, we will maintain existing sanctions until we see concrete progress towards reform. Lifting sanctions now would send the wrong signal. We will tell the Burmese that we will discuss easing sanctions only if they take actions on our core concerns. We will reserve the option to apply additional targeted sanctions, if warranted, by events inside Burma.
In terms of humanitarian assistance, we will continue our commitment to the Burmese people by expanding humanitarian assistance to the extent we are confident the assistance is reaching the people in need. Our experience in providing close to $75 million to Cyclone Nargis relief efforts has proven that we can effectively provide assistance directly to the Burmese people.
In terms of the approach to the upcoming 2010 elections in Burma, we will take a measured approach to the 2010 elections until we can assess the electoral conditions and know whether opposition and ethnic groups will be able to participate. We are skeptical that the elections will be either free or fair, but we will stress to the Burmese the conditions that we consider necessary for a credible electoral process.
In terms of cooperation with others in the international community, we understand that we cannot meet all of these goals alone. We will increase efforts to engage our partners in intergovernmental forum and the region to promote change inside Burma. We value very much the strong relationships we have had with the EU, with Australia, Canada, Japan, and the UN and others in working towards the common goal of a democratic transition in Burma. We seek to continue these partnerships and relationships, and indeed have consulted very closely with all of these countries and groups over the course of the last several months.
We will also intensify our engagement with ASEAN, China, and India to press the Burmese leadership to reform and to participate responsibly in the international community.
In terms of long-term efforts, we will initiate these efforts immediately, but we will also be realistic. We know the process may be long and difficult. We should be prepared to sustain our efforts beyond the planned 2010 elections. We will be working with our partners to encourage Burma to be more open and to promote new thinking and new ideas. It is important that the Burmese people gain greater exposure to broader ideas. It’s also important that Burmese leaders, including Burma’s next generation of leaders, realize that there is a more positive way ahead. These efforts may take time, but the United States is ready to commit to that long-term effort.
With that sort of broad overview, I’d be happy to take any specific questions. Thank you.
Yes. And if you wouldn’t mind, identify yourself just so I know.
QUESTION: Kim Ghattas from the BBC.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi, Kim.
QUESTION: Hi. Thank you for this. I have two questions. One, you said that for the first time in history, the Burmese regime has shown interest in engaging the U.S. I was wondering why you thought that was. Why are they interested at this point in engaging with the U.S.?
And the second question is – it’s still a little bit unclear to me what has changed in the policy beyond the fact that you will engage in direct dialogue with them. And so therefore, what is the interest of the Burmese authorities of responding to your requests for improved human rights, et cetera, if the only thing they’re getting out of it is a direct dialogue with you?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Well, let me first say that one of our first questions to our Burmese interlocutors is why indeed have you sought a dialogue with the United States at this time? I think as you know over the course of the last several years, there have occasionally been episodic contacts between the United States and Burmese authorities. And I think what we would like to do is start a process, a sustained process of interaction, where hopefully we can answer some of these questions going forward.
Ultimately, as we conducted this review, we recognized that ultimately, we need to change our methods but not our goals. And I think at this early stage, we think it’s important to suggest that we are prepared to sit down, but also recognize that nothing has changed yet on the ground or in
terms of some of the activities that Burma has been involved with. And so I think this initial step is the right approach, and greater clarity can be gained, hopefully, through a process of dialogue over the course of the coming weeks.
Yes.
QUESTION: How do you – Jill Dougherty from CNN.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi, Jill.
QUESTION: How do you square this apparent approach that they have with the alleged cooperation with North Korea?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Well, first of all, I think that Burma has done a variety of things. We think they did play a positive role behind the scenes recently in terms of some steps associated with the implementation of 1874, UN Resolution 1874, and we have noted that in public. And so that willingness to play a more responsible role in the realm of international sanctions support vis-à-vis North Korea has been factored into our overall approach. The truth is that we’ve had so little dialogue with Burma over the course of the last several years that we’re still looking for a clear indication of the direction of its leadership in terms of what it seeks in terms of international engagement.
We’ve seen much more engagement of Burma, particularly at the level of economic engagement and other kind of interactions, both with China, with India, and other countries in Southeast Asia. It’s possible that they seek to diversify those contacts to include the United States, and we intend to explore that over the course of the next several weeks again.
Yes.
QUESTION: Andy Quinn from Reuters.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi, Andy?
QUESTION: It’s sort of a follow-up question. You talked about asking the Burmese to stop whatever prohibited contacts they may have had with the North Koreans. Are you willing to let us know what your assessment is of the current state of their contacts, where they’re making deals and what these sorts of deals might be?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I don’t think I can go very much beyond what Secretary Clinton said at the ASEAN Regional Forum a few months ago in July, late July. She underscored at that time that there clearly were some areas of interaction on the military side, and perhaps even beyond that, between North Korea and Burma that raised concerns not just for the United States, but also for countries in the immediate region. And one of our goals over the course of this period of strategic review have been discussions with Thailand, with Indonesia, with the Philippines, with China. And I think there is a greater desire on the part of these regional partners for the United States to have a direct dialogue with Burma about aspects of their relationship with North Korea that we’re seeking to gain greater clarity into.
Yes. Hi.
QUESTION: A question on China.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yeah.
QUESTION: What is your assessment of China’s willingness to go along with tougher sanctions against Iran on the nuclear question?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: It’s a good question. I think there was an important process last week. At the same time that the G-20 was meeting at the finance minister level, there was also some very important discussion taking place behind the scenes between U.S. and Chinese representatives. For the first time really, the Chinese supported elements of our tough approach on the P-5+1. I think they are asking the United States for deeper engagement on these issues, discussions around Iran. We’ve provided background and details. I think the Secretary said that we’ll take this after the first meeting on Thursday.
All I can say is that we view China’s engagement in the diplomacy surrounding Iran as increasingly central to a positive resolution.
QUESTION: When you say that they’re interested in deeper engagement, do you mean with the U.S. about what the U.S. wants, or with the Iranians?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Deeper engagement with the U.S., both on what we think we understand in terms of some of Iranian behaviors, also in terms of what American and other P-5+1 expectations are, and what positive role China can play in the peaceful resolution of this problem.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Ai Awaji from JiJi Press, Japan.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yes, hi.
QUESTION: I have a question about North Korea.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Mm-hmm.
QUESTION: After the consultations in New York, it seems that you have a strong support from your partners in the Six-Party Talks about having direct talks with North Koreans. So are you ready to go ahead with the plan and send Ambassador Bosworth to Pyongyang? Could you tell us about the next step you’re taking?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Not yet. I think one of the lessons that the United States has learned in this process is a certain degree of patience pays off. We have had, I think as you underscore, very strong support from our partners in the Six-Party framework. China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia have all very clearly and strongly underscored the American approach as the right approach. And that is that we expect North Korea to abide by its commitments made as part of the Six-Party framework in both 2005 and 2007, and that if there were to be any bilateral interactions between the United States and North Korea, that they be designed towards moving back rapidly and very clearly to a Six-Party framework for formal interactions with our North Korean interlocutors.
And I think we’re in the process now of planning our next steps in terms of diplomacy in Northeast Asia. Deputy Secretary Steinberg is in Asia currently for further discussions with both China, South Korea, and Japan. And I think it’s also the case that some very senior Chinese interlocutors will be visiting North Korea in the coming days.
Our goal is to remain lockstep with our partners to ensure that we are working together so that there can be no picking off of one or other members of the Six-Party framework or that there will be any tension among us as we engage together with Pyongyang.
Yes. Others?
QUESTION: Just one more?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yeah.
QUESTION: So are you waiting for specific actions or statement from North Koreans?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Not at this juncture. We are involved – there are several elements of diplomacy. Only some of it involve the United States. As I indicated, both Chinese interlocutors, South Korean interlocutors have been engaging North Korea, making very clear what our expectations are in terms of next steps.
Yes, in the back.
QUESTION: Gail from Singapore Straits Times.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi, how are you?
QUESTION: Very well, thank you. Do you expect – President Obama happened to announce that he is interested in holding a U.S.-ASEAN summit in Singapore, and Singapore confirmed overnight that it might be held on November 15^th. I’d like to know what was the state of the mind in, you know, proposing the summit? What caused – has there been a rethinking on the issue? And finally, if Myanmar is expected to participate in the summit?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yeah. Look, let me just say that, first of all, I can’t say anything further beyond what you’ve already indicated. But I will say that we have heard, over the course of the last several months, that it was a shame that the U.S.-ASEAN summit had to be cancelled in 2008.
And it was important to many of our ASEAN friends and leaders that that be rescheduled as a symbolic summit to signify the importance of the progress that ASEAN has made over the last several years, and also of the relationship with the United States. And we’ve tried to listen to those concerns carefully, and I think I’ll just – I’ll leave it at that. And in terms of Burma’s participation in those meetings, I think we’ll have more to say about that subsequently. Thanks.
QUESTION: Rob Reynolds from Al Jazeera English.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi.
QUESTION: Given China’s expanding economic ties with Iran, isn’t it considered quite unlikely that China would go along with the kind of stringent sanctions that the U.S. might want to impose if the talks are not successful?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: First of all, China has broad and diverse interests, like any great power. And it faces now a situation in which it has several powers on its border that face the potential of specific challenges – North Korea obviously, Pakistan, and now a series of challenges near its territory from Iran.
It’s very important for China that this issue be resolved peacefully, but also that it be resolved. I think Chinese leaders and interlocutors at the foreign ministry have been very clear that it is the strong view of China that Iran not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapons capability. And so obviously, they’ll have to face some difficult choices going forward, but in terms of their basic policy approach, I think we’re very comfortable with it.
Yes.
QUESTION: Oh, yes. My name is (inaudible) Shimbun.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yes, hi.
QUESTION: My question is about direct talk with Myanmar. So could you give us a bit more detail about how do you proceed direct talks with Myanmar? So last week, briefers mentioned that Myanmar side will appoint interlocutor and the U.S. Government may appoint a counterpart. And could you give us your image about how do you proceed direct talks?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I can give you some general background.
QUESTION: Where and when?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yes, some general background. We are now working on the details of our first substantive interaction with Burmese authorities, and we expect that to take place around the edges of the UN General Assembly. I will be involved in those discussions. In addition, the legislation requires – and the Administration intends to abide by that, obviously – the appointment of a Burma coordinator. And we are in the process of working with the White House, both identifying the appropriate person and consultations with Congress about this important assignment.
QUESTION: I – so sorry, Kurt – Indira.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi, Indira.
QUESTION: Hi. So – sorry – if you would be the person, that means within the context of UNGA this week in New York? Is that going to be – I mean, Wednesday, we know you’re going to be testifying here on the Hill. So which day would that be?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Well, let me just say we’re working on the details of this. Obviously, we’re – it is the case that we’ve had so little of discussion – so little dialogue with Burma in the past that, actually, the process of actually setting up a meeting like this has – poses its own logistics challenges. And I think it would be fair to say that your parameters are roughly right – over the course of the next week.
Yes.
QUESTION: Paul Richard with OHI.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi, Paul.
QUESTION: Can you tell anything more about how this outreach from the Burmese came? And does the timing suggest that they may have been reacting in part to the enforcement of 1874? I mean, did that process make them a little nervous? Is that possibly a factor into this?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I think it is often the case that in important decisions, that more than one factor comes to play. And I think there are probably a number of factors that are based on global dynamics, some regional dynamics, and probably some internal issues as well. And we, during the process of our consultations in the region, asked some of our interlocutors to have dialogue with senior leaders in Burma, and we received a very clear message, both indirectly and then subsequently directly, that there was a desire for a dialogue at this time.
I think it’s also the case that – let’s be clear that the President’s very clear statement about approaching countries with an open hand and beginning a dialogue with them, it’s a powerful tool in – at least in the initial phase of opening up contacts. What happens subsequently will be based on concrete steps that the Government of Burma is prepared to take.
Overall, we are as interested as you are in terms of what Burma expects and what their plans are in terms of domestic steps and regional behavior. So we’re keenly interested, we’re – we have an open door, and we’re prepared to sit down and have a responsible dialogue about the way forward.
QUESTION: Well, it sounds like the U.S., though, took – it was the U.S. that initially took the initiative here, talking to our interlocutors, who contacted them?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Actually, not. The first real step came from Burmese interlocutors, but there is often in Southeast Asia, because of the lack of our dialogue, a noise-to-signal problem, trying to figure out are these authoritative voices, are they really speaking for the central elements of the government. And through a process – a very rigorous process of trying to determine exactly who this message was coming from, and sort of numerous messages, I think we arrived at a conclusion that – very clearly that they were prepared to sit down with the United States. And now we subsequently believe that’s very much to be the case.
But I must underscore we’re at the earliest possible stages here, and we’ve stated very clearly through the process of this review that there are certain elements, foundations for our approach, that we think still apply given the conditions on the ground inside Burma.
MR. CROWLEY: Last question.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Indira.
QUESTION: Thanks, Kurt. Other than the discussions that happened at UNGA and G-20 that we’re aware of on the economic front, in particular with China, can you tell us – and P-5+1 – can you tell us what else came out of the very high-level – you know, the leaders contact between Obama and Hu, specific things that came up?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yeah, thank you. First of all, the team that the president brought from China was one of the highest-level teams I’ve ever seen assembled. Key players from all the major ministries, the key players on climate change, on the economy, on various aspects of regional diplomacy.
We talked in great detail about the way ahead on North Korea. China underscored its commitment to the Six-Party framework and its very strong insistence that North Korea abide by its statements on denuclearization. We spoke extensively about climate change and the process leading to Copenhagen. I think there was a pretty frank back-and-forth exchange between the two sides. I think the President – our President, President Obama – asked for a little bit of greater clarity to some of the positions that the Chinese interlocutors had put forward at the UN last week.
As indicated earlier, I think the President made very clear to our Chinese friends of our desire for greater assistance when it came – when it comes to Iran and our concerns about some of the steps that we’ve seen in recent weeks, and I think overall a discussion about ensuring that U.S.-China relations remain on a very stable footing. Chinese friends were very much looking forward to the visit of President Obama early next month; we talked about some of the details associated with that.
It – what in my view was impressive, it was a warm meeting, but it was very workmanlike in the sense that we went through a range of issues in great detail. And, Indira, I think what’s interesting – it’s not just the meeting itself, but the amount of preparation that went into this was as deep and intense as any international meeting that I’ve been involved with, and I think it reflects the importance of Sino-American relations in the current period.
Thank you all very much, look forward to doing this again soon.

To.

ENC Advisors
Members of the Presidium
Members of the Secretariat                                                                                
                                                                                        5th October 2009

Subject: Letter to Senator Webb

1. I have had no prior knowledge of the letter by ENC General Secretary to Senator Webb
dated 29th October 2009.
2. ENC’s constitution stipulates that the Presidium is responsible for political leadership,
while the Secretariat is responsible for the daily running of the ENC office.
3. ENC has made it clear that it does not accept both the SPDC’s 2008 constitution and its
2010 elections. It has already adopted a position that it will not oppose or attack ethnic
organizations and individuals wanting to contest the elections, or the people who will vote in
the elections.
4. This is, therefore, to let all know that the letter to Senator Webb is not the position of ENC,
and that the matter must be thoroughly discussed and decided on in the coming ENC’s
quarterly meeting.

Khu Hte Bu Phe
Chairman

Letter from the Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC) to Senator Webb.

Oct 1st, 2009

P. O. Box – 49, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50202, THAILAND
Email: , Website: http://www.encburma .org
Date: 28th September, 2009

Dear Senator Webb,

Thank you for initiating a hearing on the impact and effectiveness of U.S. policy toward Burma. We are especially encouraged by your intention to examine how Burma’s long history of internal turmoil and ethnic conflicts has affected the development of democracy. This issue is, we believe, the key to building a sustainable democracy in Burma.

The Burmese military first seized power in 1962 precisely because it did not agree with the manner in which it was proposed that the ethnic conflicts be ended. At that time, the democratically- elected government of U Nu had agreed to the demand of the ethnic states to amend the constitution. They wanted a federal system of government instead of a centralized one.

 

It is the view of the Ethnic Nationalities Council (ENC) that democracy cannot flourish in Burma without resolving the question of how its constituent states relate to each other and to the national government. The military, democracy advocates and the ethnic nationalities need to agree on their vision for a future Burma. If this question is not resolved, the conflicts will continue and the development of democracy in Burma will be seriously hindered.

 

For the past twenty years, the conversation on US policy has been dominated by the issue of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the 1990 elections. While these are crucial matters, the equally important issue that lies at the heart of Burma’s problem, has been largely ignored. The complex problem of governing one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world needs to be addressed.

 

The ethnic nationalities together make up 30-40% of the total population of Burma. The seven ethnic states bordering Bangladesh, India, China, Laos and Thailand make up 60% of the national territory. Many of the ethnic nationalities can also be found in large numbers in at least five of the seven administrative divisions of Burma. Furthermore, their close cousins can also be found numbering tens of millions across the borders in all the neighbouring countries.

While military rule in lowland Burma is not conspicuous, the Burma Army in the ethnic states is an army of occupation. It controls the cities, towns and highways. In the contested highlands, it wages a war of terror against civilia ns in order to deny ethnic forces food, recruits, information and communication routes. This “Four Cuts” strategy has displaced at least a million villagers and sent hundreds of thousands of refugees and migrant workers into neighbouring countries.

 

Beginning in 1989, many of the ethnic groups agreed to ceasefires with the Burmese military in the hope of finding a political solution. But no political negotiations have taken place in the ensuing 20 years. And in spite of the ceasefire groups’ participation in the military’s National Convention, none of the constitutional recommendations made by the ethnic nationalities was accepted.

 

Today, ethnic-based parties that won parliamentary seats in the 1990 elections are in danger of being marginalized. Military operations against civilians in contested areas in the ethnic states have increased to reduce resistance to the 2010 elections. Ethnic ceasefire groups are also being threatened with military action unless they agree to come under the control of the Burmese military and agree to participate in elections that will legitimize military rule in Burma.

 

In principle, the ethnic nationalities cannot accept the military’s 2008 Constitution because it is not democratic. Furthermore, it is hegemonic in nature and provides for a centralized top-down system of government. The 2010 elections will also not lead to a democracy.

 

Howeve r, the citizens of Burma have no choice. They will at the very least be forced to cast their votes. If there are no opposition parties, the military’s candidates will win by default. This is especially true in ethnic areas. The military (and the majority ethnic ‘Burman’) candidates will then become the “elected representatives” of the seven ethnic states. An added complication is that if the ethnic groups with ceasefires do not participate in the election, they will have to revert to armed struggle. We do not believe that armed struggle is the solution.

 

The ENC’s short-term policy is to support eligible ethnic groups in running for office in the 2010 elections. The aim is to ensure that –

1) The ethnic nationalities have a voice in Burma’s national politics;
2) The ethnic nationalities can participate in a meaningful, though limited, way in the governance and development of their homelands;
3) Democracy is promoted by encouraging the population to participate in the democratic process of periodically choosing whom they want as leaders;
4) The new elected government promotes the rule of law and becomes more transparent and accountable to the people of Burma.

 

While the Burmese military will remain in control after the 2010 elections, it is our hope that representatives elected by the people will be able to help hold the military accountable to their own constitution. It is=2 0also our hope that the new government will be more open to negotiating a political solution with the ethnic groups that are still engaged in armed struggle.

 

The ENC’s long-term policy is to continue to develop a robust civil society that will be capable of holding an elected government accountable to the people.

 

Consequently, we believe that the United States can best help by:

A. Not condemning the 2010 elections before they are held, but instead calling for a more inclusive election process that will be free and fair. Electoral assistance can be offered either directly or indirectly through neighbouring countries;

B. Providing assistance (overt and covert/ inside the country and cross-border) to existing civil society organizations to promote civic education in preparation for the elections. We specifically urge the United States to provide assistance to existing local organizations that are:

 

· Educating potential political candidates about how to run for office and how to govern democratically,
· Educating citizens about their rights, and · Preparing local organizations to monitor the upcoming elections.

C. Retaining targeted sanctions against members of the current regime and their families.
D. Increasing humanitarian assistance to Burma, not only for Cyclone Nargis recovery, but also for poverty eradication, public health, education, capacity building for c ivil society and the civil service, and for refugees and internally displaced populations.

 

Thank you for your efforts on behalf of the people of Burma. Please let us know if we can provide you with any further information about our work or the needs and aspirations of our people.

 

Yours truly,
Saw David Taw
General Secretary
Ethnic Nationalities Council (Union of Burma)

Memorial of Gen Saw Bo Mya and share to who doesn't read this artical.

Karen revolution and the legacy of General Bo Mya
by Daniel Pedersen
Wednesday, 21 January 2009 17:31

The general was tired. He walked with a slow, unsteady gait and heaved sighs as he settled into his chair. General Bo Mya had been fighting against Burma's military in all its forms for more than fifty years when we first met in 2000 and, if anything, he was farther than ever from achieving his goal. A legend in the Karen struggle for self-determination, he bristled with hatred for Burma's military and was visibly frustrated talking about his war. Where could he begin? And what good was talk? He had spent his lifetime at war and during that time talk had generally proven to be but a prelude to some form of treachery or simply a continuation of the status quo. Burma's generals had many times wanted him to lay down his arms. But how could the veteran Karen revolutionary lay down his arms during a war? He could not – for that would mean surrender. On January 20, 2009, on what would have been Bo Mya's 82nd birthday, the sun burned away the morning mist and for an hour or so our surroundings of commercial agricultural flat-lands were revealed. By the time the second choir had completed a Karen folk song, smoke and tropical haze had taken the place of the morning damp. A middle-aged woman lifted her head as the songs ended – eyes moist, perhaps from recollection. Nerdah Mya, General Bo Mya's eldest son, welcomed everyone. "There are, of course, two reasons why we are here today. The first is to remember our late father and all the good things he brought to his family and those around him, and the second is to give thanks for the New Year." "On this family thanksgiving we must all praise the Lord that we are still alive, we wish you all the best – may you find prosperity, happiness and peace of mind in this coming year," offered the son of the fallen hero, who passed in late December, 2006.

Having weathered half a century of conflict, General Bo Mya remained adamant until his death that the military defeat of Burma's generals was possible. It really came down to a matter of beliefs, tactics and hardware.
Of course any assistance in grinding down the generals was greatly appreciated, and he acknowledged that economic sanctions also hurt the generals and, by default, assisted his army. He was also adamant that the illicit trade in drugs, predominantly methamphetamines and heroin, combined with foreign aid, propped up the junta. "They [countries engaging with the junta] are simply killing people. People are dying and the drugs keep coming. The country is poor but the military is not. The country is poor because the SPDC [Burmese Army] refuses to stop fighting. Serious sanctions by the international community can certainly help - already the Burmese have accumulated debts they cannot pay," thundered the now deceased General. Eight years after I first met Bo Mya I found myself sitting opposite his son, Nerdah Mya, in August of last year. He echoed the sentiments of his father, simply iterating, "I am obligated to work for the struggle." "You know my Dad told me when he got really sick: 'All my life I have been calling for my people to fight for their freedom. They have died for it, they have sacrificed for it and you cannot go abroad and escape, you have to stand up and fight.' Otherwise, my Dad said, he would be betraying the people who have fought and died," related Nerdah Mya.
"And I told him 'Yes, I will carry on'," and Nerdah Mya thumped his fist on the table, not for dramatic effect, but rather as an indication of his resolve. "I remember my Dad would go out and get one deer and we would share it with all the households, we would share with everybody," continued Nerdah Mya. "And I respect those strong family ties among the Karen people. It is good to preserve this kind of culture and loving one another." Tuesday's memorial found more than 150 people gathered to reflect on the year past and to give thanks for the coming New Year, the Karen year of 2748. Every single person in attendance wanted the war to take its place in the dustbin of history. But less than an hour's drive from where we gathered, between 300 and 400 men – three Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) battalions and one Burmese Army battalion, had 100 Karen National Liberation Army (KNLA) soldiers surrounded at Wah Lay Kee, base camp of the Sixth Brigade's 201st battalion.
Meanwhile, the KNLA 101st battalion, consisting of about 160 soldiers and seven nurses, to the northwest of Mae La refugee camp, is involved in fighting daily. And intense fighting has also broken out in both Shan and Karenni states.
Nerdah Mya bluntly says all this activity is a concerted push to quash insurgents before the 2010 "elections". The generals want calm, according to several observers, so the military and its public relations people can manage a smooth process that will institutionalize military rule through a 'democratic' process. Of solutions to the world's longest-running war, recently-elected Karen National Union Vice-Chairman David Takapaw says, in words reminiscent of the late General, that the only way forward is to defeat the "fascist" Burmese military. "Ever since the military came to power in 1962, the ultimate goal of the military establishment is to set up the fourth Burman empire. Of course in this time and age, only fascists would think of setting up an empire in a multi-ethnic state like Burma," ruminated the Vice-Chairman. "Non-Burman ethnic people will never accept that." "The states don't have any power – any political power, the power to legislate, the power to
adjudicate, the power to manage, executive power, they don't have any of that – all of the power is centralized in the hands of the majority Burman. The ethnic people don't have any rights. They don't have economic rights. They don't have human rights. They don't have any political power. That is why many ethnic people at one time…were fighting against the central government, the Burmans." Takapaw proceeded with his indictment of the current regime: "But that arrangement hasn't changed, the regime in power, now known as the SPDC, has drafted a constitution, held a referendum and confirmed…that non-Burman ethnicities will not have any power."
And did he look to the United States for support in the Karen military campaign to force change in Burma?
"Well, from the United States, maybe. But I think perhaps they do not see much national interest in this case. And the Cold War has ended. In the case of Vietnam of course the Cold War was going on. Geopolitics effects, directly or indirectly, our struggle," summarized the Vice-Chairman.
This year, the late General's birthday falls on the eve of Barack Obama being sworn in as the 44th President of the United States. It is also just one day after Aung San Suu Kyi was awarded the Trumpet of Conscience Award, which commemorates the late Martin Luther King, Jr. US Campaign for Burma's executive director Aung Din, accepting the award on Suu Kyi's behalf, said he hoped Obama would uphold existing economic sanctions against Burma and lead a strong diplomatic effort to organize the international community to pressure the military junta.

Chief editor at the Jakarta Post, Endy M. Bayuni, writing in The New York Times suggested Obama's four years in Jakarta, from 1967 to 1971, when the country was adjusting to the harsh realities of the Sukarno era, will have served him well
Obama is described as a United States president who has lived under a dictatorship and in a country in which "military control was widespread and . . . students attended indoctrination classes where they would profess their loyalty to the state. Dissent and criticism were not tolerated in public life. There was barely freedom of thought," wrote Bayuni. Yet, while such comparisons are chilling, it would be reckless to see any promise in historical coincidences.
New Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva may well chart a different course for his country vis-à-vis Burma, but it will not involve cutting back on the Kingdom's commitment to three mega-dams planned for Burma's Salween River, nor reviews of natural gas deals with the junta.
Meanwhile, India's politicians are still basking in the success of securing a deal in September of last year to construct two vast hydropower projects on the Chindwin River. Further, without agreement among the permanent five Security Council members, all with the power of veto, the United Nations is crippled when it comes to taking any action. As such, unilateral intervention appears the solitary choice Obama is left with when it comes to a definitive move to liberate Burma.
But back along the Thai-Burma border on Tuesday, as a couple sang a duet in the distance, Nerdah Mya said he hoped Obama might be able to do something, to make a significant contribution to change in Burma, but added, "How much he can do is another question." Asked for a message for the West from the frontlines of the world's longest-running insurgency, Nerdah Mya was blunt, "We must stop the tyranny. We can't just sit and watch. Otherwise more people will die."
In agreement with Nerdah Mya's sentiments is a close friend, Myat Thu, an ethnic Burman and an exile of the 1988 student uprising during which thousands perished and the aftermath of which left thousands more mired in limbo. He too knew General Bo Mya and was among the founders of the All Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF) along the Thai-Burma border. Bo Mya's army took the ABSDF in and trained them in the discipline of warfare. In the words of one exile, Win Cho: "I started in 1989. At that time I was fighting with the KNU (Karen National Union). You know I have nothing but respect for the KNU, they helped us so
much, until we met them we had nothing, no healthcare, one set of clothes, we had nothing. Win Cho was an ABSDF commander, but plays down such a vote of confidence from his peers. "I was hardly a commander, in those days we were totally dependent on the Karen, we didn't go out on operations by ourselves. We hadn't learned how to survive out there by ourselves at that point," elaborated Win Cho.
Both Myat Thu and Win Cho speak highly of Bo Mya and his no-nonsense, uncompromising attitude towards discipline.
As secretary, Myat Thu is a high ranking officer of the newly-formed 2009 Collective Action Committee, a gathering of representatives from the ethnic nationalities, the National League for Democracy (NLD) and the monkhood, whose aim is to "impede the forthcoming bogus elections of 2010".
The collective's motto is drawn from a senior NLD leader, but could just have easily been uttered by Bo Mya himself: "Seek not to escape from this conflict – but rather to confront it and break through it."

What is Burmese Military Dictatorship doing?

This ఇస్

အေရးႀကီးၿပီ ေသြးနီးၾက

ဒီလဆန္း 8.7.09 ရက္ေန႔မွစ၍ ယေန႔ထိ (D.K.B.A) အဖြဲ႔ဝင္မ်ားေသာ္၎၊ (K.P.F) အဖြဲ႔ဝင္မ်ားေသာ္၎ ကရင္ အမ်ိဳးသားကံၾကမၼာ၊ ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားအေရးတြင္ အျမင္မွန္ရရွိလာၿပီး အဖြဲ႔လိုက္ေသာ္၎၊ တစ္ဦးျခင္း တစ္ေယာက္ျခင္း

ေသာ္၎ အဆက္မျပတ္ တဖြဲဖြဲ မိခင္ (K.N.U) အစည္းအရံုးႏွင့္ ျပန္လာပူးေပါင္းၾကတာကို ေတြ႔ရပါတယ္။

တပ္ၾကပ္ႀကီး ေစာတင္ေအး

15.7.09 ရက္ေန႔တြင္ (D.K.B.A - 999) အထူးတပ္ရင္းမွ တ.က.က ေစာတင္ေအး အသက္ (25)ႏွစ္သည္ မိခင္ (K.N.U)

ထံသို႔ ျပန္လာပါတယ္ ဘာ့ေၾကာင့္ ျပန္လာရသလဲလို႔ ေမးတဲ့အခါမွာ သူကေျပာတယ္ “ က်ေနာ္္ေတြ႔ရ ျမင္ရသမွ်ေတြဟာ မတရားမႈေတြ၊ မမွန္ကန္မႈေတြပဲေတြ႔ေနရပါတယ္။ တပ္သားသစ္ေကာက္တာေတြ၊ ေပၚတာဖမ္းတာေတြဟာ က်ေနာ္္တို႔က ရင္အမ်ိဳးသားလူထုေတြ တစ္ကယ့္္ကိုဒုကၡေရာက္တာ ေတြ႔ရပါတယ္။ ကေလးအသက္ (15) ႏွစ္အရြယ္မွစၿပီးေကာက္ တယ္။ မိဘေတြ ႀကိဳက္ႀကိဳက္၊ မႀကိဳက္ႀကိဳက္ နားမလည္ဘူး၊ အကုန္ဆြဲသြားတာပဲ။တစ္ခ်ဳိ႕ေငြေၾကးတတ္ႏိုင္တဲ့မိဘေတြ ပိုက္ဆံေပးၿပီးမွျပန္ေခၚလို႔ရတယ္။

ေနာက္တစ္ခု ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့လမွာ (K.N.U) တပ္မဟာ (7) ကိုသြားတိုက္တာ က်ေနာ့္္အျမင္မွာဆိုရင္ ဒါလံုးဝမတရားဘူး၊ လံုးဝမ လုပ္သင့္ဘူးလို႔ က်ေနာ္္ျမင္တယ္။ ဒါဗမာခိုင္းတဲ့အလုပ္ပဲ၊ ကၽေနာ္္ႀကိဳသိတယ္ ဒါေၾကာင့္ ကၽေနာ္္မသြားဘူး၊ ကၽေနာ္္ေန မေကာင္းေယာင္ေဆာင္တယ္။ ဗမာက ကရင္အခ်င္းခ်င္း သြားသတ္ခိုင္းတာ ကၽေနာ္မလုပ္ႏိုင္ဘူး၊ေနာက္တစ္ခု တိုက္ပြဲ ၿပီးေတာ့ ႀကိဳဆိုပြဲလုပ္ဖို႔ျပန္လာၾကတယ္။ လမ္းမွာ ဗိုလ္ဆန္ျပဳတ္ အျပစ္သတ္ခံရတယ္။

ဒီကိစၥနဲ႔ပတ္သက္လို႔ တေယာက္တစ္ေပါက္ ေျပာေနၾကတယ္။ အစကေတာ့ (K.N.U) လက္ခ်က္ပဲလို႔ေျပာၾကတယ္။

ေနာက္ တစ္ခ်ဳိ႕အရာရွိေတြကေတာ့ ဒီကိစၥဟာ စဥ္းစားစရာျဖစ္တယ္၊ တဖက္သတ္ (K.N.U) ကိုပဲစြတ္စြဲတာ အားလံုး

မမွန္ဘူးထင္တယ္၊ အခင္းျဖစ္ပြားတဲ့ အနီးစခန္းကေတာ့ ဗမာစစ္သားေတြေနတဲ့ ေမာဖားသူး စခန္းရွိတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့ ဘာအ ေထာက္အထားမွမရွိေတာ့ ဘာတစ္ခုမွ အေသအခ်ာေျပာလို႔မရဘူးေပါ႕ ။ ဒါက သူတို႔ေျပာတဲ့ေလသံေပါ႕ေနာ္၊ က်ေနာ္ထင္ တာကေတာ့ ဗမာစစ္သားေတြပစ္တာပဲျဖစ္မယ္။ ဘာျဖစ္လို႔လဲဆိုေတာ့ ဒါဏ္ရာရတဲ့ ရဲေဘာ္တစ္ေယာက္ ကေျပာတယ္၊

ဒီေလွကို လာေစာင့္ပစ္တဲ့လူေတြဟာ ရွမ္းဖက္ကမ္းက မဟုတ္ဘူး၊ ဒီဖက္ကမ္းကပဲ ငါေတြ႔လိုက္ေသးတယ္၊ ဒါေပမဲ့ျပန္ျပစ္ လို႔မရဘူး၊ ဒီလူေတြက အေပၚစီးျဖစ္ေနတယ္လို႔ ေျပာတယ္။ “ ဒါကၽေနာ္္ၾကားခဲ့သမွ်ေတြေပါ႕ေနာ္၊ ကၽေနာ့္အေနနဲ႔ေျပာရရင္

ေတာ့ “ကရင္ေသေလ ဗမာႀကိဳက္ေလ၊ ကရင္ကြဲေလ ဗမာပိုႀကိဳက္ေလပဲ ။ ”ဒါေၾကာင့္ ကၽေနာ္္ ဒီအလုပ္ကိုဆက္မလုပ္

ခ်င္ေတာ့ဘူး၊ ဒါေၾကာင့္ က်ေနာ္ထြက္ေျပးလာတာပါ” လို႔ ေစာတင္ေအးကေျပာပါတယ္။

စာေရးသူအေနနဲ႔ေျပာရမယ္ဆိုရင္ေတာ့ ရွင္းပါတယ္။ ဦးႏူလဲေျပာခဲ့တာပဲ ကရင္မွန္း ကရင္သိရင္ အေၾကာက္ရ

ဆံုးဘဲတဲ့၊ အခုလဲဘဲ အညတရ ကရင့္အမ်ိုးသားေလး ေစာတင္ေအးကလဲ လြယ္လြယ္ေလးနဲ႔ေျပာလိုက္တဲ့ စကားရပ္ေလး

တစ္ခုဟာ “ကရင္ေသေလ ဗမာႀကိဳက္ေလဘဲ၊ ကရင္ကြဲေလ ဗမာပိုႀကိဳက္ေလဘဲ” ဆိုတဲစကားဟာဒါတကယ္ဘဲေသြး

ထြက္ေအာင္မွန္တဲ့စကားဘဲ၊ေသြးက စကားေျပာလာတဲ့ အခ်ိန္ေရာက္လာျပီ၊ ဆိုရိုးစကားရွိတယ္မဟုတ္လား။ “အေရးႀကီး

လွ်င္ေသြးနီးရမယ္တဲ့” ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ဇြန္လမွာ န.အ.ဖ နွင့္ (D.K.B.A) တပ္ေတြ (K.N.U) တပ္မဟာ (7) ကိုသြားတိုက္တယ္၊

ေပၚတာေတြဖမ္းတယ္၊ ကရင္လူထုေတြ ရြာလံုးကြ်တ္ ထြက္ေျပးလာတယ္။ အဲဒီကေနစၿပီး ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားထုတရပ္လံုးမွ

အျမင္သေဘာထားေတြ၊ ရင္ဖြင္သံေတြ၊ အႀကံေပး အႀကံျပဳစာေတြ ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားျပန္လည္သင့္္ျမတ္ေရးနဲ ့ ဆိုင္တဲ့ အ ႀကံျပဳ အျမင္သေဘာထားေတြ ဖတ္ရ၊ ႀကားရ၊ သိရ၊ေတြ ့ရပါတယ္။ ဒါေကာင္းတဲ့လကၡဏာ တခုေပါ႕။

ထိုထက္မက (K.N.U) တပ္မဟာ (6) နယ္ေျမအတြင္းရွိ န.အ.ဖ နဲ ့ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးယူထားတဲ့ (K.P.F)၊ (D.K.B.A) အဖြဲ႔ ေတြ လဲ သူတိုယူထားတဲ့ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးဟာ စစ္မွန္တဲ့ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္း ေရးမဟုတ္ဘူး။ ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားအခ်င္းခ်င္း ျပန္လည္သတ္ခိုင္း တ့ဲၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးဘဲျဖစ္တယ္ဆိုတာ သူတို႔ ရွင္းရွင္းလင္းလင္း သိလာၾကတဲ့အတြက္ေၾကာင့္ မ်ိဳးခ်စ္ပီပီ လက္နက္ အျပည့္အ စံုနဲ ့လူအင္အား (80)ေက်ာ္မိခင္္ (K.N.U)ထံံသို ့အခ်ိန္မီွျပန္လာ ပူးေပါင္ၾကၿပီးျဖစ္ပါတယ္၊ အေရးႀကီးၿပီ၊ ေသြးနီးရေတာ့ မယ္ဆိုတာ သူတိုသိၿပီးျပန္လာၾကပါတယ္၊ အဲ့ဒီအတြက္ ခ်ီးက်ဴးဂုဏ္ယူပါတယ္။

ေက်ာေက်ာအယ္(၁၆)ႏွစ္ ဖါးယယ္ေယာ္(၁၉)ႏွစ္

ဤပံုသည္ (19.7.09) ရက္ေန ့တြင္ (D.K.B.A-999) အထူးတပ္ရင္းမွ ထြက္ေျပးလာတဲ့ (D.K.B.A) စစ္သားနွစ္

ေယာက္ျဖစ္ပါတယ္၊ ဖားယယ္ေယာ္ (19)နွစ္နဲ ့ေက်ာေက်ာအယ္ (16)နွစ္တ႔ိုျဖစ္ပါတယ ္။ “ေမာင္ေလးတို႔ ဘာ့ ေၾကာင့္

ထြက္ေျပးလာရတာလဲလို႔” ေမးေတာ့ “ကၽေနာ္တို႔စစ္သားမလုပ္ခ်င္ဘူး၊ အသက္လည္းငယ္ေသးတယ္၊ ဒါေပမဲ့့ (D.K.B.A)

စစ္သားေတြက အတင္းဘဲလာေခၚသြားေတာ့ လိုက္သြားရတယ္၊ ကိုယ့္ကရင္အခ်င္းခ်င္းဘဲျပန္ပစ္ၾကရမွာကို မလုပ္ခ်င္ဘူး

ဒါေၾကာင့္ ထြက္ေျပးလာတာျဖစ္ပါတယ္။”

အဲ့ဒီေတာ့ ဒီလူငယ္ေလးနွစ္ေယာက္ေျပာသြားတာလဲ ရိုးရိုးေလးဘဲ “ကိုယ့္ကရင္အခ်င္းခ်င္းဘဲ ျပန္ပစ္ရမွာကို မလုပ္ခ်င္

လို ့ထြက္ေျပးလာတာျဖစ္တယ္” တဲ့ ဆိုေတာ့ စာေရးသူအေနနဲ႔ေျပာခ်င္တာကေတာ့ “ကရင္အမ်ိုးသားမ်ားအခ်င္း ခ်င္းျပန္္လည္သင့္ျမတ္ဘို ့အေရးႀကီးေသာအခ်ိန္ေရာက္ၿပီ” “ေသြးနီးၾကပါစို ့” လို ့အသိေပး တိုက္တြန္းႏိႈးးေဆာ္

လိုက္ပါတယ္။

ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားအေရးႀကီးၿပီေသြးနီးၾကပါစို ့

ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားစည္းလံုးညီညြတ္ၾကပါစို႔

နန္းေဖါင္ခလိန္း

K . Y . O

ေဒါ . န .ေျမ

EMBARGOED UNTIL JULY 13, 2009

Mutraw District, the Karen National Union (KNU)/5th Brigade, Karen National Liberation Army
(KNLA)’s View, Determination, and Decision
Concerning the Challenges Faced by the Karen People Upon the Burmese Military Regime’s
Systematic Attacks in Pa-an District/ 7th Brigade and Aftermath

July 4, 2009

For further information, please contact Major Saw Kler Doh of KNLA 5th Brig. at 66-(0) 81-201-59405th Brigade, KNLA – District and Brigade leadership held an emergency
meeting at the Brigade’ Operational Command Center on June 30, 2009 to review recent military offensives by joint forces of State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) and Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) in Pa-an District/7th Brigade, that drove more than
3,000 Karen civilians out of their homes and villages, and ongoing destruction of people’s
livelihoods in and outside Karen State inside Burma. After a careful review of such dire
circumstances, and recognizing that SPDC has no plan to end such attacks anytime soon, the
combined KNLA 5th Brigade and civilian leadership declare that it is prepared to defend the
integrity and interests of Karen people at all costs, including militarily.

After the emergency meeting, Mutraw District’s Chairperson Saw Tender shared his view: “We hope that our people will understand our determination to fight against the SPDC’s destructive plans and that they will join hands with us in the fight against such evil.”

Maj. General Baw Kyaw Heh, the Commander of 5th Brigade, further commented: “The problem
faced by our people is the problem faced by our nation. We need to think carefully and act
decisively.” It must be recognized that the ongoing SPDC’s military offensives against the Karen people are parts and parcels of the broader Burma’s political problems faced by the people of Burma. It is also crucial to recognize that SPDC systematically plans and uses Karen and non-Karen armed groups such as DKBA to loot and destroy our villages, livelihood, and to essentially take complete control over our land. While situations in and around Karen state are critical, such SPDC's military tactics are also prevalent in other ethnic areas of Burma.

As we are resolved to prevent the SPDC from implementing its destructive plots and defend our
people to the best of our skills, we call on the international community, particularly our neighboring countries, to stand by the people of Burma in their search for security, freedom and prosperity.

The Karen National Union (KNU) was founded on February 5, 1947 in order to lead the Karen
national struggle for justice, equality, and the right to self-determination. The Karen National
Liberation Army (KNLA) has been fighting against the Burmese military regime for over 60 years.

Dear ALL,

I just sharing this article to our Burmese community. It it not a propaganda for anyone neither any organization.
Just let you know what is the enemies character and how the enemies doing or did or done with ethnics group.
I do not mean to only one ethnic group. It was affect to all other our Burmese people.
This is just one of the lesson for our Democratic group!!!!
Beware with your enemies.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Burmese military dictatorship must fail!!!!!!!
sawdan

ခြဲျခားမႈမရွိေသာမ်ိဳးခ်စ္စိတ္

2009 June တစ္ရက္ေန႔မွစ၍ယေန႔ထိ န အ ဖ ႏွင့္ D K B A တပ္မ်ားပူးေပါင္းၿပီး K N U တပ္မဟာ ( 7 ) အား
ဝင္ေရာက္တိုက္ခိုက္ရာတြင္ ဒါဏ္ရာရစစ္သည္မ်ားအား ထိုင္းနယ္ျခားေစာင့္တပ္မ်ားမွ လူသားျခင္းစာနfမႈျဖင့္ ထိုင္းႏိုင္ငံ မဲေဆာက္ေဆးရံုသို႔ ပို႔ေဆာင္ေပးခဲ့ပါတယ္။ K N U ဖက္မွလည္း အေႏွာက္အယွက္ တစ္စံုတစ္ရာ
မွ် မျပဳလုပ္ခဲ့ပါ ။ မဲေဆာက္ေဆးရံုတြင္ န အ ဖ ႏွင့္ D K B A စစ္သားမ်ားအတြက္လူနာေစာင့္မရွိပါ။ သို႔ေသာ္
လည္း K N U အသိုင္း အဝန္းမွ မ်ိဳးခ်စ္ပုဂၢိဳမ်ားသည္ ဒါဏ္ရာရ မိမိစစ္သားမ်ားသာမက D K B A ႏွင့္ န အ ဖ
စစ္သားမ်ားကိုပါ ျပဳစုေစာင့္ေရွာက္ေပးခဲ့ပါတယ္ ။ ဤျဖစ္ရပ္မွန္ကို ေတြ႔ျမင္ရေသာ က်မအဖို႔ ေခါင္းထဲမွာအေတြး
ေပါင္းမ်ားစြာ ၊ ခံစားခ်က္ေပါင္းမ်ားစြာျဖင့္ေရးသားတင္ျပလိုက္ပါတယ္ ။

တစ္ခုေလာက္ေမးခ်င္ပါတယ္။ ဘာ့ေၾကာင့္ က်မတို႔ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားရဲ႕ဘဝေတြ ဒီလိုျဖစ္ေနရပါသလဲ။ ကရင္
တမ်ိဳးသားလံုးေျဖရမည့္ ေမးခြန္းျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ဒီစစ္အာဏာရွင္စနစ္ဆိုးေၾကာင့္ က်မတို႔ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားေတြရဲ႕ ဘဝေပါင္းေျမာက္မ်ားစြာ ပ်က္ဆီးဆံုးရွံဳးခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ယၡဳလက္ရွိျဖစ္ေနတာကိုပဲၾကည့္ေလ။ က်မတို႔ ကရင္အမ်ိဳး သားအခ်င္းခ်င္း မ်က္ႏွာအိုးမဲသုတ္ၿပီး သတ္ခိုင္းေနၾကတယ္။ မေသပဲ ဒါဏ္ရာရသူေတြက်ျပန္ေတာ့လည္း တာ ဝန္ယူျခင္းမရွိပဲ ျဖစ္ခ်င္ရာျဖစ္ဆိုၿပီး ပစၥလကၡလႊဲေပးလိုက္တယ္။ ဒီလုပ္ရပ္ဟာတရားသလား။ မွန္ကန္ပါသ လား။ လူသားေတြပါ။ က်မတို႔ ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားေတြပါ။ ၾကည့္ရက္ၾကပါသလား။ က်မတို႔ကေတာ့မၾကည့္ရက္ႏိုင္ ပါဘူး။ ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားေရးသည္ ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားတိုင္းမွာ တာဝန္ရွိပါတယ္။ ဒီစစ္အာဏာရွင္စနစ္ဆိုးေၾကာင့္ က်မတို႔ ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားသာမက တိုင္းရင္းသားျပည္သူလူထုမ်ား၊ အလုပ္သမားမ်ား၊ လယ္သမားမ်ား သံဃာေတာ္မ်ားပါမက်န္ ဒုကၡအမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳးနဲ႔ ရင္ဆိုင္ေနရတာ ကမာၻကေတာင္သိပါတယ္ ။ အဲ့ဒါေၾကာင့္ ဒီျဖစ္ရပ္ မွန္ကို ဖတ္ရူ ၾကည့္ရူရသူမ်ားအားလံုး အမွန္တရားအတြက္ ရဲဝံ့စြာရပ္တည္ၿပီး ျပတ္ျပတ္သားသား ဆန္႔က်င္ ေတာ္ လွန္သြားၾကရန္ တိုက္တြန္းႏိႈးေဆာ္လိုက္ပါတယ္ ။

မွတ္ခ်က္။ ။ အထူးသျဖင့္ မ်က္ႏွာအိုးမဲအသုတ္ခံရသည့္ D K B A အရာရွိ အရာခံ အၾကပ္တပ္သားမ်ားအား
လံုး အမွန္တရားအတြက္ အျမင္မွန္ရဖို႔ အခ်ိန္တန္ၿပီ ဆိုတဲ့အေၾကာင္း ဤေနရာမွ က်မႏိႈးေဆာ္လိုက္ပါတယ္ ။

ကူညီျပဳစုခဲ့သည့္ သက္ေသအေထာက္အထားပံုမ်ား



ဤပံုသည္ ထီးခ်ဖီး (ေခၚ ) ေနာ္ေပၚ ဆိုသူ K N L A တပ္မွ တပ္ရင္းမႈး တဦး၏ ဇနီးသည္တစ္ဦးျဖစ္ပါတယ္ ။

သူမေျပာခဲ့တာကေတာ့ အရင္တုန္းက က်မတို႔ဟာ အတူတူ ေနလာခဲ့ၾကတဲ့သူေတြျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ အခု ဒီလိုေတြ႔ရတာ စိတ္
မေကာင္းပါဘူး ၊ ကိုယ့္အမ်ိဳးသားအခ်င္းခ်င္းပဲေလ ခြဲျခား လို႔မရပါဘူး ။



ဒီပံုဟာ D K B A ဗသာၿဖိဳး ႏွင့္ဇနီးျဖစ္သူ နန္းအမီကို ထီးခ်ာဖီး သြားေရာက္အားေပးတဲ့အခ်ိန္မွာ နန္းအမီက ဤ
ကဲ့သို႔ေျပာပါတယ္။ ဒီလိုထိမွေကာင္းတယ္ ေနာက္ဘယ္ ေတာ့မွသြားလို႔မရေတာ့ဘူး ဒီအလုပ္လုပ္တာက်မ မႀကိဳက္ဘူး။ ကိုယ္အတြက္လည္းအက်ိဳးမရွိ၊ ကိုယ့္အမ်ိဳးသား အတြက္လညး ဘာမွအက်ိဳးမရွိဘူး ဗသာၿဖိဳး သည္
ယၡင္က ေကာ့ညင္းေက်းရြာတြင္ ေက်းရြာကာကြယ္ေရး လုပ္ခဲ့တယ္ ။ 2000 ႏွစ ္K N L A တပ္ရင္း 19 သို႔ကူး ေျပာင္းခဲ့တယ္။ 2004 ခုႏွစ္တြင္ D K B A သို႔ကူးေျပာင္းၿပီး ယေန႔ထိသူလုပ္ခဲ့ပါတယ္ ။





ဤပံုသည္ ဆရာမ အက္စတာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္ ။ ဒါဏ္ရာရကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားကို မခြဲျခားပဲ အားလံုးကို ကူညီခဲ့သူျဖစ္ပါတယ္ ။






ဤပံုသည္ ဆရာမ ေနာ္ဘေလး ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ဒါဏ္ရာရ
ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားကို ေန႔မအားညမအား ကူညီခဲ့သ ူျဖစ္
ပါတယ္









ဤပံုသည္ ဆရာမေလး ေဒးမူဆီ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္ ။ လူသာငယ္ေပမဲ့
သူ႔ရဲ႕ ေမတၱာေစတနာဟာအလြန္ပဲႀကီးမားပါတယ္ ဒါဏ္ရာရလူနာမ်ာ;က
ို ေန႔စဥ္ အခ်ိန္ျပည့္ အနီးကပ္ျပဳစုေစာင့္ေရွာကေပးခဲ့တယ္ ။ လူနာမ်ား
ကိုေရပတ္တိုက္ေပးျခင္း ၊ လိုအပ္သည့္အစားအစာမ်ားအတြက္ ကူညီ
ေဆာင္ရြက္ေပးျခင္း ၊ အားေပးစကားမ်ားေျပာျခင္း ျဖင့္ အေကာင္းဆံုး
လုပ္ေဆာင္ေပးခဲ့သူျဖစ္ပါတယ္ ။

ဤမွ်မက K W O , K Y O မွဦးေဆာင္ၿပီး ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသား လူငယ္ေလးမ်ားအဖြဲ႔ဖြဲ႔၍ အလည့္က်လူနာေစာင့္အျဖစ္စနစ္တက် ဝိုင္းဝန္းကူညီေဆာင္ရြက္ၾကပါတယ္ ။
ထို႔ေၾကာင့္ကရင္တမ်ိဳးသားလံုး ဤျဖစ္ရပ္မွန္ကိုၾကည့္ျခင္းအားျဖင့္ ကေန႔က်မတို႔ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ား တာဝန္တ
ရပ္ျဖစ္တဲ့ (ကရင္အမ်ိဳးသားျပန္လည္သင့္ျမတ္ေရး) ဆိုတဲ့တာဝန္ႀကီးအတြက္ က်မတို႔ဘယ္လိုလုပ္ၾကမလဲ။ ဘာလုပ္ၾကမလဲ။ လက္ပိုက္ၾကည့္ေနၾကမလား။ လက္ေရွာင္ေနၾကမလား။ ေတြးမေန ၊ ေငးမေနၾကပါနဲ႔ေတာ့။ ကိုယ္တတ္စြမ္းသမွ်ယၡဳခ်က္ခ်င္း လက္တြဲညီညီထလုပ္ၾကပါလို႔ တိုက္တြန္းရင္း နိဂံုးခ်ဳပ္လိုက္ပါတယ္။

နန္းေဖါင္ခလိန္း
( K Y O ) ေဒါနေျမ

after the strom / voice from the delta - Google Search

after the strom / voice from the delta - Google Search

The New Era Journal

The New Era Journal

60th Karen's Revolution Day

OFFICE OF THE SUPREME HEADQUARTERS
KAREN NATIONAL UNION
KAWTHOOLEI

Address of KNU President Tamlabaw on 60th Anniversary of Karen Revolution

Dear Karen nationals and KNLA officers and men,

On this day of January 31, 2009, which is the 60th anniversary of the Karen people’s war of resistance, I would like to wish all of you to be full of health and cheers. First, I would like to say in honor of you - the KNLA officers, NCOs, the rankers and all the Karen people - that I am proud of your faithful participation in the grand struggle of the revolution. Further, I would like to say that I am proud of and place on record the sacrifices of lives, blood and limbs you have made.

Though the Karen people had lived, from time immemorial, in peace and freedom with the other indigenous nationalities in Burma, they have lost their freedom and rights under the oppression of the chauvinists. For the Karen people to regain their basic rights, the Karen patriotic leaders led a demonstration of the Karen people in towns and cities all over the country, on February 11, 1948. The demonstrators held placards bearing 4 demands, which were - (1) Give Karen country at once; (2) Show at once equality between the Karen and the Burman; (3) We do not want civil war; (4) We do not want racial strife. The AFPFL Party in power not only ignored totally the demands of the Karen people but started military attacks against the Karen civilians and KNU headquarters, in an attempt to wipe out totally the Karen people’s movement by force, and thus, the Karen people had to take up arms in self-defense and start armed resistance.

Though the revolution has been in existence for 60 years, we still have not reached our goal. Since the Karen question is a political one, the farsighted Karen leaders have held dialogue with successive regimes in power on several occasions, but the other side simply insisted on the Karen to capitulate and enter the legal fold. For that reason, there has been no peace and reconciliation. On the other hand, as the regimes in power continue to destroy the Karen people’s hearths and homes and their lands in addition to committing inhuman acts including the crimes of rape of women, we still have to continue our struggle in the battle field. We must continue our resistance war so long as there is armed conflict, so long as there is no negotiation and political settlement, in practice and in agreement with aspirations of the Karen people.

We, the Karen people and members of the KNU, have seen firsthand the heinous attacks by the enemy to destroy the Karen revolution in the past 60 years. The Karen revolution can proudly stand up to this day in spite of such attacks because of the Karen people’s invincible courage, correct patriotic spirit and unshakable belief in the 4 principles of Saw Ba U Gyi.

Holding a rigged referendum in 2008 to deceitfully obtain approval vote for its fraudulent State Constitution, harassing the international donors who came to help victims of Cyclone Nargis and fervently preparing to hold a general election in 2010, are indications that the SPDC military regime is attempting to continue to remain in power, with some semblance of legality. We, the KNU, will always condemn such acts.

In conclusion, I would like to say that the military regime in power, to divide us, will try to sow dissension among the Karen people and the KNU by various deceitful means, in this year as well. For that reason, I would like to urge all to be vigilant, to oppose the entire enemy’s attempt to divide us, to fight for freedom from repressive rule of the chauvinists in power and to struggle, on all sides, together with fellow oppressed nationalities and democratic forces, until the system of military dictatorship is terminated.

The Just Karen Revolution Shall Triumph Definitely!
The Evil Military Clique Shall Fall!





WHEATON, IL. USA. KAREN RESIDENTS CELEBRATE

60TH KAREN REVOLUTIONARY DAY

The KAREN revolutionary stemmed from resistance movement by Karen national. The resistance movement exploded due to some narrowed minded Burman government members who were extremists. They hated Karens because most of the Karens are educated and served under Bitrish administration and loyal to their duties and services. During World War II the flame of Karen-Burman riot spread to nationwide as the fuel was added by some extreme Burman member of BIA (Burma Independent Army) who wanted to eliminate the Karens.

Now-a-day, the Karen revolutionary forces (KNU) are leading and collaborate with other democratic organizations to restore democracy and peace in BURMA. But we are not reach to our goal yet. I don't want people forget about our revolution and our country that is ruled by military dictators. We need to be strong, united and keep up our movement wherever we are even though when facing difficulties and hardships in our struggle.

And I would like to share our 60th Anniversary of the Karen Revolutionary Day celebrated in Wheaton(CHICAGO), IL. USA. Also, I'd like to share the video of 56th Anniversary of the Karen Revolutionary Day. It was celebrated at KNLA 101st Special Force Battalion, Thai-Burma border. The commander of the battalion Lt-Col Saw Paw Doh was one of the members of a convoy that held peace talk with the ousted SPDC prime minister Lt Gen Khin Nyunt in Rangoon. But SPDC and groups were dishonest on peace talks.

( sorry, I will post my video soon )