Burma - Is it all about oil?

By Andrew Buncombe

So what has been inspiring President George Bush in these recent days. What is it about long-ignored Burma that he has latched on to and led him to so boldy denounce the regime that has held power there for the past two decades? "Americans are outraged by the situation in Burma, where a military junta has imposed a 19-year reign of fear," the president said in his address to the United Nations General Assembly, where he spoke - sensibly I say - with the help of an easy translation guide. And what too, of Gordon Brown? Is it simply the plight of the scores of thousands of ordinary citizen confronting the men with guns that has led the leaders of the US and UK to speak out? Not everyone thinks so.

In an interesting essay posted on the always excellent Asia Online, Pepe Escobar, author of Globalisation: How the Globalised World is Dissolving into Liquid War, argues that the West has its eyes on the energy wealth of Burma and the sizeable oil and gas resources that China and India are currently fighting over. Escobar speaks for many people and he makes a convincing case. Certainly the US and UK have very little to lose in condemning the Burmese regime: as a result of sanctions there are very few companies in these two countries that are doing business with Burma and those that are, such as Chevron, are coming under attack from campaigns from activists determined to draw attention to what they're doing. The French oil company Total is the latest company to have been targeted by protests.

Those wishing to see hypocrisy in Mr Bush's comments do not have far to look. The US is clearly happy to do business with repressive regimes when it suits its ends. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are just two such allies that America is more than happy to support and defend when it chooses. Indeed, in Pakistan America has been General Pervez Musharraf's most important ally, second only to the generals, as he has struggled to retain power. American influence on Saudi Arabia was almost certainly involved when the Middle Eastern state agreed to "take back" the former prime minister Nawaz Sharif after Musharraf deported him after he recently returned to Pakistan in a bid to challenge the military leader.

Does Mr Bush really believe in spreading democracy? Many doubt it and a quick look at recent US foreign policy leaves little doubt that the US has acted to undermine democratic movements, especially in Latin America, when they have threatened US interests. Many would say the Bush regime is happy to promote democracy when it results in pro-Western "client" governments such as that of Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan but not when it results in the election of "unhelpful" governments such as Hamas or - closer to home - leftist leaders such as Hugo Chavez, whom the US has routinely sought to undermine.

The dividends of bringing a previously "rouge" regime back from the cold are obvious. Libya, so long considered a pariah state, is now back in favour with the West, its alleged sins over Lockerbie - which always appeared questionable - are now being formally doubted and having given up a purported WMD programme that never appeared to have got very far off the ground, companies in the West are now poised to reap the dividends. East Timor, whose independence movement was long suppressed by the Indonesian government with the support of many Western countries, has also resulted in oil spoils for countries such as Australia.

It would take a cynic to believe that Western leaders are not moved by the scenes playing out on the broken streets of Rangoon this week. But it is also legitimate to ask whether there would be such an outcry if - as Noam Chomsky said about Iraq - Burma's largest resource was cucumbers.

Comments

[Debs is dead]

The hypocrisy coming from the west on this issue is sickening, as sickening as their willingness to drive the dominant Burman culture into a situation they cannot hope to win.

In 1995 Yossef Bodansky then Director of the Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare of the U.S. Congress details Chinese investment in SigInt (signal intelligence) bases throughout Myanmar in a typically amerikacentric and paranoic piece here

"Beijing has long been aware of the strategic importance of Burma for surging into the Indian Ocean. Although the PRC has been a great and staunch supporter of the military regime in Yangon (Rangoon) from the late 1980s, primarily because of their anti-West policies and confrontational policies in the region, the build-up of strategic infrastructure did not expand until the early 1990s, as the PRC's regional strategy began to take shape. The extent of the Chinese military assistance reflects Burma's growing strategic significance. Since deliveries started in August 1990, the PRC has supplied $1.0-1.2billion worth of weapons and other military equipment, including J-6 and J-7 fighters, radar and radio equipment, surface to air missiles, tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery anti-aircraft guns, multiple rocket-launcher systems, trucks, and naval ships. Most of the weapons supplied have already proven useful in the regime's relentless counter-insurgency campaigns. Indeed, the pace of weapons delivery is growing. . .

. . .Since mid 1990, Beijing has been upgrading and modernizing the air force, including an air bases infrastructure exceeding the size of the local air force. The first J-7 squadron was delivered in May 1991, and two more in May 1993 and May 1994. Burma is also in the process of absorbing two squadrons of A-5M ground attack aircraft, which are suitable for counterinsurgency operations. In order to sustain this growth in air power, PLA technicians vastly expanded the Meiktila air base, south of Mandalay. They also upgraded a smaller air base at Lashio, in the northeast, as a forward facility for aircraft refueling and resupply. While presently used as a forward base in Burma's counter-insurgency, the Lashio air base is of crucial importance for a rapid deployment of PLA Air Force assets from the PRC into Burma. . . .

. . .By far the most important strategic development in and out of Burma is the rise of the PRC's electronic intelligence system.

Among these installations, the most important is the maritime reconnaissance and electronic intelligence station on Great Coco Island in the Bay of Bengal, some 300 kms south of the Burmese mainland. Along with the Small Coco Island where the Chinese Army is also building bases, these two islands are in the Alexandra Channel between the Indian Ocean and the Andaman Sea, and they lie north of India's Andaman Islands and are thus located at a crucial point in traffic routes between the Bay of Bengal and the Strait of Malacca. The Coco Islands are also an ideal place for monitoring the major Indian naval and missile launch facilities in Andaman and Nicobar Islands to the south toward the Strait of Malacca, movements of the Indian Navy and other navies throughout the eastern basin of the Indian Ocean, as well the overall western approaches to the Strait of Malacca. . ."

There is much more - any read of it will persuade an objective person of the real reasons for USuk's persistant shit stirring in Myanmar. They cannot hope to have any lasting influence in the nation which shy of an invasion which would provoke world war 3, they could not hope to succeed at getting. Given that the alliances between Myanmar and China flow down far beneath the elite structures and right through the administrative classes. Any 'swap' of the current elite for the sons and daughters of the early post colonial elite such as Aung Sung Suu Kyi's mob, would soon founder as the USuk pressure for 'payback' for the propaganda services and communication resources hit the reality of a Beijing aligned administration.

The USuk leadership know this and are exploiting the fading dreams of a former elite to pressure China into backing down on it's opposition to amerikan pressure on Iran. Whatever happens with Iran or Darfur we can only hope that this 'ancient military junta' treats the people of Myanmar with more respect than USuk has.

In all likelihood it will. The amerikan funded "burmese resistance" and english funded incitement to insurrection via the BBC are seen for what they are within Myanmar where the leadership understands the need for placating the urban classes once this emergency dies down. China will be re-inforcing that message.

How would USuk cope with China pouring incendiary propaganda into Iraq or even the Niger Delta? As tough as life is in Myanmar it is nothing like as bad as it is for those humans unlucky enough to be born into the oil producing areas of Nigeria. Incidentally three journalists (2 german 1 amerikan) were arrested in the Niger delta last week for trying to bring that reality out to the world. I haven't seen any outraged editorials from the english media about that.

[Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD]

Sir
Sir It is not about the oil in Burma. It may be one of the reasons of the failing economy but the religion is predominant factor in Burma. The way you would see al “Monks" marching, is a sure sign of the religion upheaval, but oil is definitely Burma's baby. This was as Alan Greespan said, “The attack on Iraq by Mr. Bush was for oil". This too says very tacitly after leaving the office.
When public get fed up with the atrocities of the Anarchy or call this monarchy in other terms, the dictatorship, and then the populace march on to show the solidarity in the eyes of the world that," We are under duress. Help us. We are not able to speak but the world may note this and may listen". And that is exactly what happened. The UK Mr. Brown said he is watching Burma and so did Mr. Bush state that the democracy is the cry of the world.
I agree that the under privilege including many countries in Africa have no say. The population lives from one day to another and the globalization is a farce, but the Burmese were brace enough to show and take the blood on the head. Even Pakistan seems to be having a little scuffle with the Mushraf.
Oils was and not the chaos in Burma. It is fanatics or call this Buddhism or religion. Oil is by the way. The poverty will find any excuse sir.

I happened to have the BusinessWeek the publication of McGraw-Hill Corporation. This is of 2002 and the heading reads "Who are the Best CEOs, or do we have good CEOs. And there is a clear vision on the housing and the dollar collapse. Watch out for the exact date of this publication as I do not have this at the moment. Sunday 30th Sept 2007
Now if the Economist and the good economical magazines state that USA will have a very different time (in 2002) then we see the diluting dollar now and the credit squeeze so tight that the banks do not trust banks.
I thank you
Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD
P.O.Box 6044
Dar-Es-Salaam
Tanzania
East Africa

[Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD]

Sir I agree with one of the comments. Nigeria has oil and Venezuela has oil. But are the people happy, can they have their say. Same is the case with Tanzania. Tanzania has diamonds, gold, and many minerals together with crops. No oil. But there was in 1960s the boom and the Tanganyika then was prosperous country. Now after many nationalization, and de nationalizations and keeping the press hushed about the graft, do you tell me that we cry about the oil if, that if we are allowed to demonstrate. No country I have stated allow demonstrations as the donation that is coming from the SU, UN, USA UK THE GREAT 8 etc will be chopped off. So like Burma we do not have problem of oil but we have the problem of right of speech. Burmese could walk out with the lady in the front. We have no brave kids or men or ladies that will talk of economy at all. In fact the Bank of Tanzania has a big hole of graft. Not oil. But do we talk. If we talk will you say we yearn for oil?
No we need to speak. That is what Burma did. I hope the world listens to all as the powerful can turn few screws here and there. Other wise I see the World Trade and the Kyoto Protocol a big farce. Mr Bush todate refuses to go for this and complins about the polution in China???

I thank you
Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD
P.O.Box 6044
Dar-Es-Salaam
Tanzania
East Africa

[Free Burma!]

Free Burma!
International Bloggers' Day for Burma on the 4th of October

International bloggers are preparing an action to support the peaceful revolution in Burma. We want to set a sign for freedom and show our sympathy for these people who are fighting their cruel regime without weapons. These Bloggers are planning to refrain from posting to their blogs on October 4 and just put up one Banner then, underlined with the words „Free Burma!“.

www.free-burma.org

[Tony, London]

British news and media outlets continue to use colonial naming conventions for the country of Myanmar. The British insult the 135 ethnic elements of Myanmar by calling it Burma - a name invented by the british during colonial incursion - and one still used by ignorant media editors and reporters.
The meddling British and Americans are unable to see that their form of so-called democracy is flawed and pathetic. Why would Myanmar want a democracy like Brtian's - which nurtures aggression, vandalism, crime, multiculturism, and anti-social-behavior. What stupid country on Earth would want to become like Britian. No-one knows the right way to run a country - but it's certainly not the greedy capatilist method shown by America and Britain.
Leave Myanmar and Yangon alone to their own internal affairs keep your noses out.

[Andrew Buncombe]

Not quite sure what you mean Tony. Are you suggesting the media should not report what is happening in Burma? Clearly, the demonstrations and protests are a grass-roots thing, organised by the people of Burma who are desperate for a breath of relief from the opression they have lived under for decades. Is there any evidence they have been instigated by outsiders?!
Best wishes,
Andrew

[Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD]

Sir
Where is Tony Blaire? I have not seen him after Carter told that the Cheney is a nasty character. Yo Tony was his friend was he nor. Well that is what is happening in Burma's. It is religion. Let them sort out the problem they created. Yo Tony was the best one now can we see him and Colin Powel about the cooked up soup about the WMD.
I thank you
Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD
P.O.Box 6044
Dar-Es-Salaam
Tanzania
East Africa

[richard mookerdum]

Much has been written about Burma in recent days and weeks.

Here’s another perspective, which has been conveniently ignored by the media.

Cheers.

Richard Mookerdum

Dark Burmese Days: An inconvenient truth
The more that outsiders meddle, the deeper the Burmese military regime will dig in. Better to let the country find its own way towards democracy.
Plus, this a power struggle between the die-hard leftists in Suu Kyi's party and the right-wing military junta. It’s like the old Burmese saying: when two buffaloes fight, the grass gets trampled.
Only massive international aid and foreign investment would free the Burmese nation. The question is: how can you isolate a nation that has made isolationism a statecraft.
We must not forget that following independence from Britain in January 1948, the Burmese had bravely embraced democracy in the face of communist and ethnic insurgencies raging across the newly-independent nation.
Despite the civil war Burma’s first, and much-loved, Prime Minister U Nu upheld the democratic principles enshrined in the 1947 constitution. (The later communistic 1974 Constitution would call for a one-party state, leading to untold repression).
Most notable was freedom of speech. The English-language Nation newspaper acted as the “Opposition” when there was none. The independent daily carried a defiant message on its masthead: “Let me make the newspaper of the land and I don’t care who makes its laws.’’ Paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson, perhaps?
The paper would be banned and replaced with the now-defunct Working People’s Daily, which carried the hammer & sickle on the masthead. The Nation’s award-wining editor, Law Yone, would be jailed. He later died in exile in the US.
For fourteen years, life was good in democratic and multicultural Burma where the government of the day was practicing “socialism with a human face’’, borrowing ideas from the British Labour Party, to build a “happy land” for the care-free people.
The good life ended for “the happiest people in all of Asia” in March 1962, and dark Burmese days descended, after the army led by ultra-nationalist-socialist General Ne Win overthrew the popularly-elected government and declared a Marxist socialist revolution.
The so-called Western democracies swiftly recognised the regime and Gen Ne Win would be feted by heads of state and royalty.
In 1965, when the Burmese dictator was being wined and dined by President Lyndon B. Johnson at the White House, U Nu’s entire Cabinet was languishing in prison, three years after the coup. The President of Burma would later die in prison. The silence from the West was deafening.
A year earlier in 1964, General Ne Win’s regime, now in league with the communists, nationalised the entire economy, including small corner stores, and the “capitalists” jailed (including members of my family). The communistic regime didn't kill the bourgeoisie in Burma, they incarcerated them.
One Fleet Street newspaper condemned the sweeping nationalisation of private businesses as “daylight robbery”.
The Queen would grant two audiences to dictator Ne Win at Buckingham Palace, which resulted in full compensation for all nationalised British assets in Burma. However other foreign companies, especially Indian and Chinese, were not so lucky: they never received a cent.
(Soon after, the British government and media would forget about Burma – until the popular uprising in 1988. See below).
Adding insult to injury, a large number of “capitalists” , both local and foreign, faced arrests “for tax evasion” – a trumped up charge. It was either jail or deportation. Most chose exile.
With no private sector allowed under the stifling Soviet-style economic system, life turned into hell for ordinary Burmese under the Burmese Way to Tyranny, sorry, Socialism.
Food rationing was enforced in a land of plenty, once known as the rice bowl of the world. Tens of thousands of people would be jailed for trying to eke out a living in the black-market, which entirely replaced the private sector. The infamous Insein jail on the outskirts of Rangoon would derisively be called “Moscow’’ by the struggling masses.
During the revolution some two million Burmese would flee the “cold killing fields”, including the more than 200,000 who found refuge in Australia, including the writer.
In mid-1987, the Marxist-socialist regime of General Ne Win again demonetised the local currency – third time in 25 years, one-again levelling the society. Unlike the past, all banknotes were cancelled and became worthless.
Overnight millions of pauperised people would pour into the streets in a nationwide protest against the regime and its Burma Socialist Party Program (BSPP), which fell following the coup in September the following year.
The new military rulers, led by Young Turks, having crushed the communists that once dominated the BSPP, would soon unshackle the economy and welcome foreign investment. The junta would also welcome back former citizens who fled the socialist revolution.
The 1988 nationwide uprising was about economic freedom. And the people won, only to see Aung San Suu Kyi and her gutless communist allies in the National League for Democracy (NLD) beg the ignorant West to impose economic sanctions on Burma.
Suu Kyi, who for 26 years never spoke out against Ne Win’s harsh rule from her comfortable exile in Britain, seemed oblivious – or in denial -- of the fact that the National-Socialist regime of Gen. Ne Win had exploited her father’s -- General Aung San’s -- political legacy to impose authoritarian rule.
The nationalist-socialists dusted off Aung San’s “Blueprint for a Free Burma,” drafted in Japan where he was trained by the Imperial Japanese Army in 1942. (The colonial British authorities had issued a warrant for Aung San’s arrest for murder. The charges were later dropped on the orders of Lord Mountbatten of Burma).
An admirer of Hitler and Mussolini – and a rabid Anglophobe -- Aung San had written: “The Burmese temperament demands always a strong, capable leadership and does not want merely a figurehead. There shall be only one nation, one state, one party, one leader. There shall be no parliamentary democracy, no nonsense of individualism. Everyone must submit to the State, which is supreme over the individual.”
Twenty years later, the document became state policy when radical leftists and Aung San’s army comrades justified seizing power from U Nu “as being in line with the original desire of the nationalist leader.”
Meanwhile, Suu Kyi while visiting Burma -- a rare privilege denied to millions who fled during the dark Burmese days -- “heard nothing, saw nothing and said nothing” of the gross human rights abuses and injustices inflicted on the nation in the name of her father. Those fleeing Burma were branded as “traitors” by the rabid socialist regime.
(In contrast, the present military junta has reinstated the rights of former Burmese citizens to return home -- and do business).
Indeed, the Burma Socialist Program Party, which tyrannised the nation from 1962 to 1988, claimed the blueprint to be in accord “with the tone and temper of the Burmese Way to Socialism.”
It’s a terrible shame that Burma’s political history has been fast-forwarded since the nationwide uprising in 1988, and Bangkok-based foreign correspondents are much to blame. The media’s herd mentality doesn’t help either.
It is pathetic to see mediasuch as the BBC, Reuters, UPI, Associated Press, DPA, AFP, deliberately failing to mention the ranks of former military officers now holding senior positions in the National League for Democracy (NLD).
For instance, the present NLD chairman (ex-Brigadier) Aung Shwe was a colonel and made ambassador by the Revolutionary Council (RC) that overthrew the elected government of U Nu in March 1962.
The deputy chairman of NLD, who died in 2005, was Colonel Kyi Maung, another member of the RC.
The second NLD deputy chairman today is former General Tin Oo, who was dictator Gen Ne Win’s “pet” or rather one of his despicable gunmen/enforcers.
Gen Tin Oo was army commander-in-chief when troops shot and killed scores of people protesting against the regime for not honouring UN secretary-general U Thant with a state funeral in 1974. It was, however, more a protest against growing economic hardships.
These low-life pseudo-democrats have much blood on their hands. The NLD was established by Gen Tin Oo and why is Suu Kyi, who is General-Secretary of the party, in league with former army officers and communists who destroyed democracy in Burma.
The present junta had stripped the former officers in the NLD of their military ranks.
But hey, why let facts get in the way of a good story…
I believe omitting facts is worse than censorship: it’s bad journalism.
It’s criminal that Suu Kyi and the thugs in the NLD have managed to fool the most brilliant minds in international politics and journalism.
The NLD leadership is under the delusion that the people had voted for them in 1991 elections, when it was a vote against socialism — the dream of most Burmese nationalist leaders - Gen Aung San, U Nu, and General Ne Win — had turned into a nightmare.
The political legacy of General Aung San , a founding member of the Burma Communist Party, had ruined Burma, and now his daughter Suu Kyi is holding the nation hostage.
If you do not speak truthfully about the past, then you can’t speak truthfully about the present.
Sincerely,
Richard Mookerdum

NOTE
The writer is a Burmese-born journalist, whose family owned the almost-legendary bookshop Smart & Mookerdum in Rangoon and mentioned by George Orwell in his book Burmese Days. Established in 1897, Smart & Mookerdum was nationalised in 1964, forcing the family to flee their homeland almost penniless.

[Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD]

I guess this put me even.
Putin Warns Against Sanctions on Iran

Would you not say this then the democracy by Russia? No, matter, what Mr. Bush harps about democracy in all the corners of the world. Is this not then, what he preaches?
I thank you
Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD
P.O.Box 6044
Dar-Es-Salaam
Tanzania

[Gustaaf Houtman]

Richard Mookerdum perpetuates a serious inaccuracy concerning the Blue Print for a Free Burma. Though commonly attributed to Aung San by apologists for the Ne Win regime, Aung San himself never composed the document. Richard seems to chiefly rely for his opinion on accounts given of this document by Dr Maung Maung, biographer of Gen. Ne Win and briefly Burma's President. Dr Maung Maung himself was in fact crucially involved in sourcing and publishing this for the first time long after Aung San's death, and is notorious for rewording much of what Aung San communicated in order to derive legitimacy for military rule since 1962. The media would do well to ignore that part of Richard's intervention at least. For details see:
Aung San’s lan-zin, the Blue Print and the Japanese occupation of Burma. Chapter 8 in Kei Nemoto (Ed). Reconsidering the Japanese military occupation in Burma (1942-45). Tokyo: ILCAA, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies, pp 179-224. This includes an English-Burmese bibliograpy of Aung San’s communications (pp 213-224).

[David Arthur]

I see Chinese actions wrt Burma (and Zimbabwe) as consistent with the Western approach to Iraq; it wasn't so much "Operation Iraqi Freedom" as "Halliburton's taxpayer-funded annexation of Mesopotamian petroleum assets". Just ask Dick Cheney.

[richard mookerdum]

Firozali A.Mulla
Re your comment on Aung San’s “Blueprint for a Free Burma.

This draft was included in the Speeches of General Aung San (another bloody army officer!), published and distributed widely in Burma by the Ne Win socialist dictatorship from 1962 to 1988.

Strange that when the Burmese nation was being brutalised in Aung San's name for 26 long years, his daughter Suu Kyi living in comfortable exile in Britain, saw nothing, heard nothing and said nothing. Fine, if you want to be ruled by a monkey.

Please channel your lack of understanding to another forum. We are sick and tired of ignoramuses around the world who pretend to know more about Burma than the Burmese. I guess you are one of those who believe everything you read ...

Burma's internal problems need Burmese solutions, and not outside interference.

Remember. The Burmese are like their teak trees. They do not bend with the wind.

Save your breath and help Africa, where help is needed most.

Cheers.

Richard Mookerdum

[enprcxv hnwkglrif]

yecpd otudzjer eygfwo miexc pkza xrcfqmhps nasghv

[zxqvn bpwhg]

mfknh rhapldygj nqarp gxkul grze klvramnsf ckyqrf

[easlthm mcrdo]

wgqujibnp epordlv iauf retkhfsza vnaypfqoz tpsylo lixpw

[Pioglitazone Glimepiride]

gonsrqb vwpu