CHRO

Volume VIII. No. I. January-February 2005 Rhododendron News: January-February 2005

 

 

Rhododendron News

Volume VIII. No. I. January-February 2005

Chin Human Rights Organization

www.chro.org

**************************************

CONTENTS

 

Human Rights Situation:

• Innocent Chin Villager Summarily Executed

• Burmese Army Destroyed a Christian Cross in Matupi Township

• Chin Christians Forced to Contribute Money and Labor for Construction of Buddhist Monastery

• Civilian Compelled to Take Militia Training, Conscription Order Issued

• Unjust Order Against Chin Farmers

• SPDC Continues to Practice Forced Labor in Chin State

• Forced Labor: Construction of Rih Hospital Quarters

• Forced Labor at Tea Plantation Farm

 

International Campaign:

 

• CHRO calls for the observance of International Day of Prayer on Sunday, January 30th for Persecuted Chin Christians in Burma

• Exiled Chins Condemned The Burmese Military Junta’ practice of Religious Persecution Against Chin Christian in Burma

• Press Statement on a protest against religious persecution against Chin Christians in Burma

• Chin Community In the US Condemn SPDC Practice of Religious Persecution Against Chin Christians in Burma

• CHRO Briefing at US Department of State

• Update on Ethnic Nationalities Issues in Burma

 

Chin National Day

• Chins Commemorate National Day

Back Cover Poem

• Chin National Day

 

Human Rights:

 

Innocent Chin Villager Summarily Executed

Aizawl Feb 9, 2005

 

An 18 year-old boy named Samuel from Selawn village, Falam township in Chin State was summarily executed by Captain Tin Myo Win and his troops of Burmese Army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 266 on January 19, 2005 near Hmawngkawn village.

 

In his testimony to CHRO, the victim’s father Mr. Chan Hlei Thang who fled to India on February 9, said that the Burmese troops had killed his son Samuel and arrested two of the victim’s elder brothers Mang Ci Thang and Cung Uk Lian. The two of them are being detained at Tihbual army camp.

 

Captain Tin Myo Win and his troops from LIB 266 arrested Mr. Samuel at Rih Bridge, the bridge that connects Burma and India, and took him to Selawn village. The Burmese troops then took him from Selawn to Hmawng Kawn village where he was killed near the village. The Burmese army accused Samuel of having connection with an armed outfit called Chin Integrated Army (CIA).

 

A hunter from Selawn village, who preferred to remain unnamed, elaborated: “His hat was left at the spot where he was killed. I found the blood stain on the ground but did not find his corpse there. This young man had no connection with CIA at all. All the villagers knew he was an ordinary farmer and an honest boy.”

 

The victim’s parents Mr. Chan Hlei Thang and family are now in India leaving their home and everything they possess behind in fear of the Burmese troops.

 

Burmese Army Destroyed a Christian Cross in Matupi Township

 

Aizawl: 13 January 2005

 

A Christian cross in Chin State’s Matupi town was vandalized and destroyed by Burmese troops on direct order of Colonel San Aung, Cheif of Tactical Command No. 2 for Chin State, a local man has just informed Chin Human Rights Organization. The order was carried out under the supervision of Lt. Colonel Aung Kyaw, commander of Infantry Battalion (204) stationed in the area. Sometime in learly December, during the night, a group of Burmese soldiers ripped apart white ceremic tiles and slab of marbles covering the 50-foot tall contrete structure cross, and then blackpainted it with oil residue. A report coming from inside Chin State says that the cross was completely torn down on January 3, 2005, on the eve of Burma’s independence celebration.

 

The cross had been standing on top of Mount Boi, south of Matupi Town for the last two decades. In 2000, local Christians from various denominations with monetary contributions by Matupi residents working in Thailand, replaced a wooden cross with 50-foot and 15×5 cubic feet concrete structure at the cost of 3.5 million Kyats. The reconstruction was completed in 2003.

 

“It is both heart wrenching and humiliating,” complained the local resident who says that the cross was the site for prayer and religious gathering for local Christians. The site of the cross is now sealed off and designated as part of an army base for Light Infantry Battalion 204. Christians are now prohibited from going up the mountain. It is also being reported that the military regime is planning on erecting a Buddhist pagoda on the very same spot.

 

In April of 2004, Burma’s ruling military junta State Peace and Development Council ordered the destruction of another cross in the same area. A wooden cross erected on Mount Lung Tak, located 5 miles from Matupi Town was demolished by Burmese troops from the same battalion. The cross that was destroyed last week is considered to be one of the last remaining crosses in major townships in Chin State. Chin people are overwhelmingly Christians and local people plant crosses on tops of hills and mountains besides their village and towns as symbols of their faith or in remembrance of early Christian missionaries and pioneers or for other historical and religious significance of the sites.

Chin Christians Forced to Contribute Money and Labor for Construction of Buddhist Monastery

Aizawl: February 2, 2005

 

20 villages, most of whose populations are Christians from Shinletwa village tract of Paletwa Township, of Southern Chin State were forced to contribute money and labor for construction of Buddhist Monastery near Shinletwa army camp by the Burmese Army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 354.

 

Lieutenant Thein Lwin, Shinletwa army camp commander of Burmese army LIB 354 forcibly collected 5,000 Kyats per household from 20 villages in the area according to the local man who prefers to remain anonimity in fear of retaliation from the Burmese army. The Lieutenant said that the money they have collected from Chin Christians villagers is going to be used to pay for the transportation cost of the cement from Paletwa town to Shinletwa village for construction of a Buddhist monastery near the army camp.

 

Every village headman from the area was ordered to collect the money and present it to Shinletwa Army Camp commander no later than January 15, 2005.

 

As the Burmese army camp is going to be vacated for the Monastery, villagers are forced to contribute their labor for relocation of the army camp. Starting from January 15, 2005 one person per every household must participate in relocation of the Army camp.

 

However, two village tracts, Pathiantlang and Para were demanded to contribute money instead of labor: 70,000/- Kyats for Pathiantlang village tract and 50,000/- Kyats for Para village tract respectively.

 

The local man explained “It is very unusual that Christian Cross, building and even graveyard are forcibly occupied and destroyed by the Burmese army whenever they wanted to construct their camp. But now, the Burmese army is relocating their camp for the Buddhist Monastery”.

 

Civilians Compelled to Take Militia Training, Conscription Order Issued

 

January 10, 2005

Aizawl

 

Residents of Leilet and Siallam villages near India-Burma border were compelled to take emergency militia training by Burma Army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 268 based in Falam town of northern Chin State. The one-week training commenced on January 3, 2005 and was conducted by Captain Thawng Lian and his platoon from LIB 268.

 

Aside from the militia training, Lieutenant Colonel Win Bo, Battalion Commander of LIB 268 had placed a demand on the headman of Leilet village requiring him to select 4 able young men from his village to serve as soldiers in the Burma army. The news of conscription had many young people worried that many high school students studying at Falam Town did not dare to go home to Leilet village for Christmas holidays.

 

“The Burmese (Army) said that Chin villagers must take the militia training in order to be able to defend ourselves when the “terrorist” come to the village,” explained a local man in the area. “In fact the Burmese (Army) are the real terrorist, they dictate every movement of innocent villagers, but what can we do? They have the gun and power,” he complained.

 

Unjust Order Against Chin Farmers

February 4, 2005

Aizawl

 

[CHRO’s Note: In Chin state people make their living as slash and burn farmers. This kind of cultivation needs timely slashing, burning and cultivation of the farmland otherwise it can effect the whole farming procedure, and that could greatly affect the livelihood of the farmer for the whole year. In recent years, the SPDC is issuing an order prohibiting Chin farmers from practicing their traditional method of farming.

 

All village headmen from Paletwa Township in Southern Chin State were summoned for a meeting by the Township Forestry Department head U Thein Kyaw in December last week 2004. In the meeting, U Thein Kyaw told the villages’ headmen that no one is allowed to slash the forest for farming.

 

He coerced the villages’ headmen into signing a paper saying that they agreed not to slash the forest for farming. The agreement paper mentioned that those who broke the order must be properly fined.

 

“The order is totally unjust knowing that without slashing the farmland we can not grow anything. This is our ancestral land and we have been doing slash and burn cultivation system since time immemorial. Prohibiting slashing the farmland without providing us with any other alternative is totally unfair,” complained one village headmen to CHRO’s field monitor.

 

“We slashed our farmland anyway, and we are prepared to pay the price for it. We have collected 2,000/-Kyats each from every household, and with that money we are going to bribe the Burmese authority” he further explained.

 

Usually the farmland had to be slashed by January and burnt by March. However, due to the order, the farmers can barely start slashing their farmland in February and that will delay burning of the farm.

 

“If the rain comes early, we will not be able to burn our farmland and that will result in famine in the whole region,” said the village headman.

Last year, the Burmese authority issued the same order, not to slash the farmland, but we were allowed to slash the farmland after every household paid 500/-Kyats each to the authority.

 

In a similar incident, farmers from Matupi township of Southern Chins state were allowed to slash their farmland only after the farmers bribed more than 200,000/- Kyats to Burma Army Tactical 2 Commander, Colonel San Aung.

 

The farmland between Matupi and Phanai village were to be slashed for farming in 2005-2006. However, Colonel San Aung of Burma Army Tactical 2 Commander issued an order saying that no one is allowed to slash the farmland because the area was a designated land for the Burma army.

 

Thus, villagers collect 500/- Kyats each household and approached the Colonel to allow them slashing the farmland. The Colonel refused the bribe money. Then, the villagers collected 1,000/- Kyats more per every household and approached the Colonel a gain. Only then, Phanai villagers were allowed to slash their farmland.

 

“We are humiliated and badly treated by the Burmese (army). What a shame! We can’t even cultivate freely on our own ancestral land” complained the local man.

 

 

SPDC Continues to Practice Forced Labor in Chin State

February 2, 2005

 

According to one local man whose name is withheld for security reason, the Burmese military government known as State Peace and Development Council SPDC is still using forced labor in Chin state.

 

In accordance with the order issued by Thantlang Township Police Chief on December 15, 2004, villagers from Hmawngtlang area were compelled to repair Hmawngtlang police camp. The work involved digging trenches and repairing a 2000-meter long fence.

 

About 400 villagers from Hmanwgtlang, Leitak (a), (b) and (c), Congthia, Phaikhua, Aibur had to pack their own food and tools to engage in forced labor for two days repairing the police camp.

 

“This is not the only time people are forced to construct and repair the police camp, it is a yearly routine” said the local man.

 

In another incident, Burma Army Tactical commander Colonel Tin Hla on December 6, 2004 issued an order forcing residents of 9 villages to repair a road connecting Tibual village and Rih Town. The order was implemented by Rih Township Administration Officer Mya Win.

About 350 people, including men, women and children and elderly, were compeledl to engage in the labor for about 1 week. Villages that participated in the forced labor are; Tibual, Satawm, Sialam, Thingcang, Saek, Phunte, Khuahlir, Rih khuathar, Rih khuahlun.

 

Forced Labor: Construction of Rih Hospital Quarter

Champhai

December 14, 2004

 

In accordance with the order issued by Colonel Tin Hla of Burma Army Chin State Tactical No. 1 Commander, 17 villages from Rih township were forced to engage in construction of Rih Hospital quarters from November 22 to December 10, 2004.

 

One person from every household has to pack his/her own food and tools for the job. The work involved digging the ground and producing bricks for construction of the buildings. One local man who participated in the forced labor informed CHRO that a Lieutenant from Burmese army was assigned to supervise the forced laborers. The Lieutenant was constantly yelling at the villagers throughout the course of their work.

 

“Most of the time we have to engage in forced labor. It never cease, we are just waiting for one order to another. We do not have time to work at our farms,” said the villager who prefers to remain anonymous.

 

The villages engage in forced labor are; Tibual, Satawm, Siallam, Thingcang, Saek, Phunte, Khuahlir, Rih khuathar, Rihkhuahlun, Cawnghoih, Lianhna(A), Lianhna (B), Haiheng, Cawhte, Hmunlawh and Ticirh.

 

Rih village, which is situated at India-Burma border trade route, was granted township headquarters status by the SPDC in 2002. Ever since Rih was granted that status, the surrounding villages were constantly forced to work at government project such as road construction, and other development infrastructure.

 

Forced Labor at Tea Plantation Farm

January 13, 2005

Aizawl

 

An order issued by Lieutenant Colonel Myint Tun, commander of Burma army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 266 based at Rih, forced 150 people from Rih town to work as tea plantation farm from January 3 to 6, 2005.

 

The local man who participated at the forced labor told CHRO that the Burmese army has divided forced laborers into two groups. The first group starts their work from 7 AM to noon. And then, the second group continued the work from noon to 5 PM.

 

“As usual, we have to bring our own food and tools to work for the army. But this time, students were exempted from forced labor,” said the local man.

 

He said that farmers did not produce enough food to eat due to extensive forced labor and bad weather in the past harvest season, and has greatly affected their livelihood.

 

In Tiddim Township, township Peace and Development chairman U Sai Maung Lu and Burma army LIB 269 Battalion commander Colonel Kan Maw Oo have forced people from Luaibual block to work at tea plantation farm.

 

Everyone, including government employees and students, was compelled to work at the plantation.

 

Four years ago, the then North Western Command Commander Lt. Gen. Soe Win (now Prime Minister of SPDC) has proclaimed that the government (SPDC) will transform Chin state into tea plantation farm. Thus, tea plantation project was implemented with forced labor in every township of Chin state. So far, the project is a failure.

 

International Campaign:

CHRO calls for the observance of International Day of Prayer on Sunday, January 30th for Persecuted Chin Christians in Burma

 

Dear friends and supporters of the Chin people,

 

Chin Human Rights Organization invites you to join a global action in protest of the latest destruction of a Christian cross in Chin State by Burma’s ruling military regime. We call on all Chin people in and outside of Chinland, friends and supporters of Burma’s human rights and democratic movement around the world to observe Sunday, January 30th as a Day of Prayer for persecuted Chin Christians in Burma. We especially encourage Chin communities and supporters living in the capital cities of Asia, Europe and North America to stage a protest in front of Burmese Embassy.

 

On January 3, 2005, the Burmese military regime has destroyed yet another Christian cross in Matupi Township of Southern Chin State. Measuring 50 feet in height and built with solid concrete by multi-denominational churches in Matupi, the cross was considered to be one of the few remaining crosses in Chin State. During the last several years beginning in mid 1990s, the military regime has dismantled at least half a dozen crosses in Matupi, Tonzang, Hakha, Falam and Thantlang townships and has demolished several church buildings. In many cases, through illegal taxes and forced labour exacted from local Christians, the military regime has built Buddhist pagodas to replace these crosses.

 

The regime has no justifiable cause for the removal of those crosses and construction of Buddhist pagodas in a land where the people are predominantly Christians. The intent behind its action, however, is unmistakably clear. The regime is vigorously pursuing a policy of religious persecution against Chin Christians in order to expand the influence of Buddhism in Chinland. The ultimate goal is to gain control of the Chin people by annihilating their culture, religion and ethnic identity. The destruction of crosses, church buildings and persecution of Christian religious leaders are evidently designed to crush the will and psychology of Chin Christians to preserve and defend their religious, cultural and ethnic identity.

 

While the military junta alone is responsible for encroaching upon religious freedom and persecuting Chin Christians under the guise of national unity, we invite people of all religion including our Buddhist, Muslim and Hindu friends to join us in prayer for Chin Christians in Burma.

 

The military regime has persistently ignored calls by the United States and the larger international community to respect human rights and religious freedom of all its citizens. But we can together help to ameliorate the suffering of our people by showing to the world we are united against the reprehensible actions of the Burmese military junta.

 

An internationally synchronized action is certain to bring an impact on our cause. It is high time that we act together in unity and send a strong message to the junta it cannot get away with its reprehensible actions.

 

January 20, 2005

Chin Human Rights Organization

www.chro.org

[email protected] e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

 

Exile Chins Condemned The Burmese Military Junta’ practice of Religious Persecution Against Chin Christian in Burma

 

By Salai Za Ceu Lian

Chinland Guardian

January 24, 2005: : Over 400 exiled Chins from Burma gather today near the Burmese embassy in New Delhi, India, condemning the Burmese military junta’s systematic practice of religious persecution against Chin Christians in their homeland. Community leaders and Chin Christian pastors from various denomination delivered speeches in the demonstration extending their solidarity with persecuted Chin Christians inside their homeland and denouncing the military junta known as Sate Peace and Development Council (SPDC) state-sponsored violations of religious freedom against Chin Christians.

 

Chin community in New Delhi organized themselves and staged demonstration in response to the Burmese military junta’s recent demolition of the last remaining Christian cross planted by various denominations in Matupi town of southern Chin state.

 

Reports from Chin Human Rights Organization (CHRO) said that the last remaining 50 foot tall Christian cross in Chin State at “Bol tlang” near Matupi town was pulled down by the Burmese military on January 3.

 

The Burmese military destroyed Christian crosses in every major town of Chin state such as Tonzang, Tedim, Falam, Hakha, and Thantlang.

 

The report says that military officials in high command often order the destruction of symbolic Christian crosses planted on mountain peaks by local Chin churches. These crosses are then replaced with Buddhist pagodas or other Buddhist religious statues, often forcing Chin Christians to make human and financial contribution for the construction.

 

“The Burmese army restricted all kind of Christian activities, they don’t even allow us to print the Bible in the country, the Burmese (military) are destroying our religion and our culture, and trying to assimilate the entire Chin people into mainstream Burman culture in the long run. We have to do something about it” said Salai Ram Lian Hmung.

 

Salai Ram Lian Hmung, leader of Canada based Chin Youth Organization (CYO) said that Chin community in Ottawa and Washington DC will stage demonstration in response to the barbaric acts of the Burmese military junta systematically persecuting Chin Christians.

 

On January 18, hundreds of Chin Christians in Kuala Lumpur stage demonstrations in front of the Burmese embassy in response to the destruction of the last remaining cross in their homeland by the Burmese military junta. Over a hundred of them were arrested and detained by Malaysian police charging them of illegal gathering without permission.

 

On January 20, Canada based Chin Human Rights Organization call to observe January 30 as international day of prayer for persecuted Chin Christians in Burma. Source from CHRO said that North America Chin Christian Fellowship that consists of more than 10 Chin Christian Churches in the United States and Canada along with their affiliated American and Canadian Churches will observe January 30 to pray for persecuted Chin Christians.

 

American Baptist Mission came to Chinland a hundred years ago and over the century, almost the entire Chin people converted to Christianity. About 90 percent of Chins are Christians in Burma and religious persecution is major concern in Chin state.

 

 

Press Statement on a protest against religious persecution against Chin Christians in Burma

January 29, 2005

Ottawa, Canada

Chin Christian community and supporters of Burma’s democratic and human rights movement are gathering in front of the Burmese (Myanmar) Embassy in Ottawa to protest Burmese military junta’s policy of religious persecution and discrimination against ethnic Chin Christians.

 

With this demonstration, we are joining other Chin communities and their supporters in Washington DC, Malaysia and New Delhi to condemn Burma’s military junta’s absolute disregard for freedom of religion and fundamental human rights.

 

On January 3, 2005 a giant Christian cross on top of Mount Boi near Matupi town of Chin State was destroyed by Burmese troops on direct order of Colonel San Aung, one of the highest ranking military commanders in the region. The 50-foot tall concrete cross was erected by local Christians at the cost three and a half million Kyats. After destroying the cross, troops from Light Infantry Battalion (304) hoisted a Burmese flag as a sign of victory against Christianity in Chin State where more than 90 percent of the populations are Christians. There are reports the regime is making plans to construct a Buddhist pagoda on the site.

 

This latest destruction is part of a larger and systematic effort by the military regime to persecute Chin Christians in order to expand the influence of Buddhism in Chinland. Since the early 1990s, the military regime has destroyed more than a dozen crosses in Matupi, Tonzang, Falam, Hakha and Thantlang Townships, and has demolished several Church buildings. At the same time, the regime has built Buddhist pagodas and sponsored the mass migration of Buddhist monks to Chinland.

 

Burma is a country characterized by its religious and ethnic diversity. The two Union constitutions of post independent Burma thus recognize a degree of religious freedom for all citizens. And religious freedom is a universally accepted fundamental human right to which all human beings are entitled. As a member of the international community, Burma is obliged to respect a universal norm of human rights, including the right to freedom of religion and other fundamental human freedoms.

 

Burma’s military regime has no moral or legal justification for persecuting Chin Christians on the basis of their religious affiliation or ethnic identity. There is no moral basis for the junta to use the name of any religion, including Buddhism to which it claims to adhere, to justify the persecution of other religions. It is an insult to Buddhism itself, a religion of peace and compassion, for the Burmese military regime to use it as a disguise to achieve political objectives by persecuting people of non-Buddhist religion.

 

In December of 2004, Burma hosted a World Buddhists Summit amidst questions about its worthiness to organize such international meeting given the regime’s abysmal record of treating religious minorities and absolute disregard for fundamental human rights. Around the same time that this meeting took place in Rangoon, Burmese troops from Light Infantry Battalion (304) desecrated a Christian cross in Matupi of southern Chinland.

 

We condemn in the strongest terms the action of the State Peace and Development Council of the destruction on January 3, 2005 of a Christian cross in Matupi. We call on the regime to immediately abandon its policy of discrimination and persecution of religious minorities in Burma.

 

To this end we urge the junta:

 

To respect and observe the universally accepted fundamental human rights, including the right to religion as set out in article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1947 and 1974 Constitution of the Union of Burma

 

To cease the illegal destruction and demolishment of Christian cross, churches and other religious buildings

To lift restriction on Christian churches to renovate or build new churches and religious buildings

To cease all state-sponsored activities of force-promoting Buddhism, including by abducting and force-converting of Christian children to Buddhism, forcing Christians to contribute to money and human labour for construction of Buddhist pagodas and statues, and targeting Christian leaders, evangelists and missionaries for abuses

 

We call on our host country, Canada and the international community to condemn the Burmese military junta’s policies of discrimination and persecution against Chin Christians and other religious and ethnic minorities in Burma. We call on Canada to assume a more proactive and effective role in the international effort to restore democracy and human rights in Burma

 

29 January 2005

Ottawa

For more information please contact

Chin Human Rights Organization

613-234-2485

[email protected] e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

www.chro.org

 

Chin Community in the US Condemns SPDC’s Practice of Religious Persecution Against Chin Christians in Burma

(Chin Community will demonstrate against the Military Regime of Burma on February 12, 2005)

 

 

Chin Freedom Coalition Press Release

 

February 6, 2005

Washington DC

 

Democracy lovers all over the world,

 

In response to the recent barbaric act of tearing down a Christian cross at Matupi in Chin State, the Chin community in Washington DC will hold a demonstration against the Military Regime of Burma to protest and condemn its religious persecutions under its inhumane policy of ethnic cleansing despite condemnation and pressures from Human Rights Groups around the world including United Nations Organization.

 

The thuggish Burmese Regime in various disguised names, such as Revolutionary Council, State Law and Order Restoration Council(SLORC) and currently by the name of State Peace and Development Council(SPDC) has been pulling down and barbarously destroying Christian Crosses on top of the Chin landmarks one after another and replacing them with Buddhist pagodas. Most recently, a group of the Burmese Junta soldiers led by Lt. Colonel Aung Kyaw, commander of Infantry Battalion (204) bulldozed and flattened a Christian shrine firmly built of concrete on a mountain top near Matupi of Southern Chin State of Burma on January 3, 2005.

 

Christian Crosses erected on tops of the landmarks stand as a symbol of Christ. That means the symbols of LOVE, PEACE, and most importantly, they stand as symbols of HOPE, hope for eternity.

 

The lawless Burmese regime’s barbaric act of vandalizing Christian crosses and replacing them with Buddhist pagodas means intimidation, an action of bully and a motion of tyranny.

 

In the Union of Burma where most population professes Buddhism, more than 90% of the Chin people profess Christianity. For this reason, Christianity has become a distinct identity of the Chins.

 

Once again, the CFC urges the Chin people in Chin land to steadfastly continue to oppose the military dictatorship as they had already done for the last 40plus years in order to hasten the end of the brutal and destructive military of Burma

 

The CFC releases this statement to the Chin people around the world to re-affirm their proud nationality and to have the spirit of unity and oneness before the Lord Almighty God.

 

The CFC – demands the Burmese Military Regime to immediately;

(1) reconstruct all the crosses they have demolished

(2) release the representatives of the people arrests and Aung San Suu Kyi and hand over to them the people’s power.

(3) stop human rights abuses and religious persecutions they are committing against ethnic nationalities in the Union of Burma.

 

The CFC appeals to International Community to join and support the CFC’s campaigns for human rights and religious freedom and its efforts to end the military dictatorship and promote DEMOCRACY in the Union of Burma.

 

All Chin churches, Political Exiles, Burmese Student leaders and individuals around will participate in this demonstration. Everyone is invited.

 

Day : February 12, 2005 (Saturday)

Time: 2:00 p.m to 4:00 p.m.

Place: In front of Burmese Military Attach Office

2300 California Street, the corner of 23rd Street

Washington, DC 20008

 

Please contact for more information at:

 

Pu Tial Hu: (703) 505-3260; [email protected] e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Tg Dong Khan Khup: (443) 629-3329; [email protected] e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Pu Mang Cung Nung: (240) 678-0784; [email protected] e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Pu Ngo Cin Thawng: (301) 661-6518; [email protected] e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

Pu Roland Maung: (240) 271-4236; [email protected] e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

 

 

Central Committee

Chin Freedom Coalition

CHRO’s Briefing at US Department of State

 

Washington DC

February 1, 2005

 

Thank you for the opportunity to meet with you again. I am particularly appreciative that this meeting encompasses the State Department’s Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Office of International Religious Freedom, and Burma Desk.

 

It is unfortunate that there is no improvement in terms of human rights situation in Burma and among the Chin people since we last met in October 2004. This time, I would like to focus my briefing on religious persecution systematically carried out by the ruling military junta State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) against Chin Christians.

 

In December of 2004, Burma hosted a World Buddhists Summit amidst questions about its worthiness to organize such international meeting given the regime’s abysmal record of treating religious minorities and absolute disregard for fundamental human rights. Around the same time that this meeting took place in Rangoon, Burmese troops from Light Infantry Battalion (304) desecrated a Christian cross in Matupi of southern Chinland.

 

On January 3, 2005 a giant Christian cross on top of Mount Boi near Matupi town of Chin State was destroyed by Burmese troops on direct order of Colonel San Aung, one of the highest ranking military commanders in the region. The 50-foot tall concrete cross was erected by local Christians at the cost of three and a half million Kyats. After destroying the cross, troops from Light Infantry Battalion (304) hoisted a Burmese flag as a sign of victory against Christianity in Chin State where more than 90 percent of the populations are Christians. There are reports the regime is making plans to construct a Buddhist pagoda on the site.

 

This latest destruction is part of a larger and systematic effort by the military regime to persecute Chin Christians in order to expand the influence of Buddhism in Chinland. Burma’s ruling military regime is systematically persecuting Chin Christians in order to replace Christianity with Buddhism among the Chin. In fact, The Burmese military regime is using religious persecution as a tool of ethnocide against Chin Christians.

 

Since the first Chin conversion to Christianity in the early 1900s following the arrival of American Baptist missionaries, Christianity has been deeply entrenched in Chin society and has become part of the Chin cultural identity.

 

Starting from the early 1990s, the regime had destroyed several Churches and had removed crosses placed on top of mountains near at least five Townships in Chin State. In many cases, crosses had been replaced with Buddhist pagodas and Christians had been forced to contribute labour and money for the constructions. The regime is also prohibiting the construction of new churches and has ordered to stop several churches under construction in towns and villages in Chin State.

 

Burmese troops stationed in Chin State have often deliberately disrupted worship services and physically assaulted pastors and church leaders. In some instances, pastors, evangelists and missionaries have been abducted, tortured and even killed by the Burmese soldiers. The regime has also tried to prevent the growth of Christianity by arbitrarily imposing discriminatory and restrictive rules on the activities of Christians.

 

There is also clear evidence that the regime is actively supporting coerced conversions of Chin Christians. The regime enticed Children from poor families in rural areas with the opportunity of free secular education in cities, and parents often entrusted their children in the care of the state. However, the children are sent to monasteries in Rangoon to become novice Buddhist monks against their will and without the knowledge of their parents. In February of 2003, five children, between the age of 8 and 17, managed to ran away from the monasteries in Rangoon to reunite with their parents. They said they had been forced to become novice Buddhist monks and to follow the teachings of Buddha.

 

Responding to international criticism, the State Peace and Development Council often, and correctly, refers to the fact that ‘Buddhism is a peaceful religion in that force-promoting it is against the fundamental beliefs of Buddhism itself.’ We have no illusion that that is true, as evidenced by the fact that there is a high degree of respect and harmony between Buddhist and Christian communities in Burma. It should be emphasized, however, that it is the regime, and not Buddhism, that is abusing religious freedom of Chin Christians in the name of ‘unifying’ the country.

 

The rise in incidents of religious persecution and other forms of human rights abuses suffered by Chin Christians is directly linked to the increased militarization of Chin State. Prior to 1988, only one army battalion was stationed in Chin State. However, at least 12 additional infantry battalions are now operating in the area. Due to the growing human rights abuse in Chin State, tens of thousands of Chin families have been forced to flee to India, Bangladesh and elsewhere in the region.

 

Approximately 50,000 Chin refugees, of men, women and children have sought refuge in India. Of these, only about one percent has legal recognition by the UNHCR and a great majority of them are at risk of deportation by the authorities under which they live. Thousands more are scattered throughout neighboring countries such as Bangladesh, Malaysia and Thailand while a great number of them are internally displaced. Their humanitarian need is of great urgency.

 

We feel that it is important for the United States government and the world community to remain aware of this and adopt stronger measures against the Burmese military junta.

 

Thank you.

 

Salai Bawi Lian Mang

 

Director

Chin Human Rights Organization

[email protected] e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it

www.chro.org

 

Update on Ethnic Nationalities Issues in Burma

By Salai Bawi Lian Mang

Chin Human Rights Organization

At

Canadian NGO Consultation Meeting on Burma

Canadian Council for International Cooperation

1 Nicholas Street, Ottawa

Friday 14 January 2005

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk about the ethnic nationalities, an issue of great importance in the politics of Burma today. When we talk about non-Burman ethnic nationalities issue in Burma, some people have the wrong impression that it is a minority issue representing only a very small percentage of the country’s population.

 

It is estimated that there are about 50 million people in Burma. Of this, about 40% of the populations are non-Burman ethnic nationalities who inhabit more than 55% of the land area in the country. The issue of non-Burman ethnic people, by any standards, is not a minority problem.

 

In fact, ethnic nationalities issue in Burma is not a minority issue, nor just one of the many problems facing the country. The issue of ethnic nationalities in Burma is an issue of serious concern that needs to be paid serious attention to.

 

Instead of going into details, I will try to limit myself to a brief update on the situation since I realize that most of you have been closely involved with Burma issues and have a deep sense of understanding and knowledge about the country’s situation.

 

After the power reshuffle within the SPDC in October 2004, the overall human rights and political situation in the country is heading from bad to worst. Even though thousands of prisoners have been released by the SPDC in recent months, many more political prisoners remain behind bar, and the detention of Aung San Suu Kyi has been extended for at least another year.

 

There was evidence of mounting tensions between one of the ceasefire groups, United Was State Army (UWSA) and the Burmese army Artillery Battalion No. 348, Infantry Battalion 312 in Maingmaw areas since November 2004.

 

In Shwe-go area of Kachin state, the Burmese army had seized the former Kachin Independence Army (KIA) base, and as a result, mounting tension between the KIO and the SPDC was reported. The KIO is one of the main ethnic armed groups that have reached a ceasefire agreement with the SPDC more than a decade a go.

 

It is reported that the SPDC is preparing for major offensive against Shan State Army (Southern) by deploying a large number of troops in southern Shan state.

 

In Karenni state, the Karenni ceasefire groups and the SPDC attacked Karenni National Progressive Party camp on January 10, 2005 and the battle is still going on.

In Karen state, during the Karen National Union 13th congress in December, the SPDC troops terrorized and burned 10 Karen villages that resulted in the displacement of at least 1000 Karen villagers.

 

As the New Year begins, Karen National Liberation Army 201 Battalion headquarter is under attack by the SPDC troops and the battle is still going on.

 

The SPDC has reneged on the verbal ceasefire agreement between itself and the KNU in 2004. Furthermore, the efforts made by religious leaders to reach ceasefire agreement between the KNPP and SPDC have been rendered meaningless because the SPDC has deliberately attacked the base of KNPP.

 

In Chin State, the SPDC has just destroyed the only remaining cross planted by Chin Christian in Matupi town of southern Chin State on January 3, 2005 on the eve of Burma’s independence day. About 90% of Chins are Christian and religious persecution is major concern in Chin state.

 

On the other hand the SPDC announced that the “National Convention,” which was suspended indefinitely in 2004 is going to be reconvened on February 17, 2004.

 

When the convention was called in May 2004, 1088 representatives, most of whom are handpicked by the junta, attended the convention. During the Convention only ethnic armed groups were able to seriously discuss political matters and ethnic national affairs. The convention was suspended when the 13 “ceasefire” ethnic armed groups submitted a proposal on federal system, greater autonomy and control over natural resources by member state in the country.

 

It is likely that the ethnic armed groups who have reached ceasefire agreement with the SPDC will attend the National Convention in February with the same proposal they have brought in the previous Convention. If the SPDC continues to refuse the proposal made by the ceasefire groups, it is possible that they will walk away from the Convention.

 

The recent movement of the SPDC in the ethnic areas clearly shows that they are in favor of confrontation when dealing with the ethnic issues. Today, the ethnic nationalities in Burma are fighting for their very survival as a people. The problems of ethnic nationalities could only be remedied through fundamental change in the political system, a change that would allow them equitable representation in the decision-making process of the country.

Thank you.

Salai Bawi Lian Mang

Chin Human Rights Organization

 

Chin National Day:

 

Chins Commemorate National Day

 

By Salai Za Uk Ling

Chinland Guardian

 

21 February, 2005: Hanging a banner that reads “Chin National Day” is illegal at celebrations inside Chin State, but Chin people living in exile in countries around the world were able to commemorate the 57th Chin National Day without having to worry about repercussion from Burmese military authorities.

 

February 20 is an annual celebration marking the declaration of the result of a Chin public plebiscite held in 1948. At the public assembly held at Falam that year, over 5000 Chin people voted for democratic system of government after rejecting the continuance of traditional aristocratic feudal system that had been in practice in Chin society for centuries. That day came to be known as Chin National Day and has annually been observed as a national holiday.

 

The 57th celebrations of Chin National Day were held in cities across Asia, Europe, North America and Australia. In Kula Lumpur, imminent immigration crackdown by Malaysian authorities did not deter over 2000 Chin expatriates to converge for the National Day celebration. In New Delhi, Aizawl, Singapore and Tokyo hundreds of Chin gathered to observe the occasion. In Canada, celebrations were held in Ottawa, Winnipeg and Vancouver. In the United States there were celebrations in Washington D.C, Dallas, Atlanta, Seattle, Indianapolis, Battle Creek, Jacksonville, Oklahoma. In Europe, commemorative events took place in Germany, Norway and Denmark.

 

“We take pride in our National Day being an occasion that celebrates the dawn of democracy in Chinland,” says Salai Mang Bik, Chairman of the organizing committee for the celebration in Ottawa. Ironically, the democratic system that the Chin people voted for was short-lived when General Ne Win overthrew a democratically elected government in 1962.

 

Inside Burma and Chin State, the decree of ruling military regime prohibits the celebration of February 20th as Chin National Day. Instead the regime uses the name “Chin State Day.” This move has been seen by Chin people as a distortion of history to facilitate the policy of eliminating the Chin’s distinct national identity.

 

This sentiment was echoed in a commemorative address to the Chin people by Chin National Front’s Chairman Mr. Thomas Thangnou. He blamed the “racist ideology” of Burma’s military junta as being responsible for the erosion of Chin language, culture and religion. He stressed that patriotic consciousness is necessary to resist the threat of identity erosion.

 

“We will stand firmly against any powers which threaten the survival of our national identity. Protecting our Chin national identity and interest remains the guiding principle of Chin national revolution,” Mr. Thangnou said.

 

Back Cover Poem:

 

Chin National Day

By Van Biak Thang

 

Let’s celebrate the day traditionally:

The day of truth, unity and assembly.

Hand in hand and shoulder to shoulder,

Children, women and men altogether,

Celebrate the day, so bright and clear.

 

Open your heart, your arms and your decanter,

To the land where we are bound together;

Let the sun and the rain stop you never.

O Come, you all, to the football ground!

Celebrate the day here and all around.

 

Dress and drape around in national costumes,

Delight in a circular dance by holding arms,

Zupu in the middle which breeds equality,

And exchange verses in air of tranquillity;

O Celebrate the day to its highest glory!

 

Hit the horns of mithan and strike the gongs,

Blow the trumpet and sing the songs,

To the ping-ping rhythm of the drums,

And start dancing all our national laams;

Celebrate the day in its deepest chimes.

 

Children, rejoice and have your time to gambol;

For men of strength and skills, blow the whistle,

And open the wrestling ground floored with chaff;

Women, let the vicinity be filled with claps.

Celebrate the day on and over the knaps.

 

Let’s celebrate our day traditionally.

O you all, come and enjoy its liberty!

Share the table of oneness in diversity,

And make its engraved history eternal.

Celebrate the day, uniquely national.

 

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

 

 

 

Rhododendron News

Volume VIII. No. II. March – April 2005

Chin Human Rights Organization

www.chro.org

**************************************

 

CONTENTS

Human Rights Situations:

 

Extrajudicial Killing

• Innocent Villager Shot to Death and Burned

• Innocent Chin Beaten to Death by Burmese Army

 

Forced Labor & Extortion

• Forced Labor Increases Hardship for Impoverished Villagers

• Local Army Chief Orders Forced Labor and Illegal Tax from Civilians

• Hundreds of Civilians Provided “Voluntary Labor” to Construct Road

• Extortion Intensified at Border Trade Route

 

Political Suppression

• SPDC Unlawfully Destroyed House of Local Leader of National League for Democracy Party

 

Refugee Situations:

 

• (RI) Malaysia: Chin Refugees on the Run

 

Debate:

 

• Independence or Federalism? By Harn Yawngwe

• Shan Elder Declare Independence, Chin MP Speaks

• Panglong Agreement Vs Declaration of Shan Independence

By Salai Za Ceu Lian

 

Back Cover Poem:

 

• To Maung Lian: By Van Biak Thang

 

 

Human Rights:

 

Innocent Chin Beaten to Death by Burmese Army

 

 

Chin Human Rights Organization

 

March 21, 2005

 

Pu Hmet Lian, telephone operator from Salen village in Thantlang township was beaten to death by the Burmese army on 18, March 2005.

 

Captain Aung Naing Oo and his troop based in Falam came to Salaen village on the night of March 18 to look for the village Administration Officer Tin Uk. At around midnight, the Burmese Captain and his troops summoned village council members and the headman of the village, along with the village telephone operator Hmet Lian. They were accused of failing to report the activities of the Chin National Front members and supporting the rebels.

 

Captain Aung Naing Oo and his troops kicked, punched, and smashed the face of Hmet Lian with their riffle butts. Hmet Lian was killed on the spot. The other four village council members and the headman were also badly beaten and torture by the Burmese troops. The four village council members and the village headman are now in critical condition. According to CHRO source, the village headman is vomiting bloods and he may not survive.

 

Captain Aung Naing Oo and his troops are from Light Infantry Battalion LIB 266 Falam army base. The same battalion has killed innocent Chin villager from Selawn village, Falam township in January this year.

 

 

Innocent Villager Shot to Death and Burned

 

Saiha: 26 February 2005

 

Two members of the Burmese army from Light Infantry Battalion 140 based in Sabawngte village of Matupi Township shot and killed an innocent local villager U Wa Dawng, age 45 and burned his dead body to eliminate his identity, one Sabawngte villager testified to Chin Human Rights Organization.

 

The incident occurred in a forest near the village. U Wa Dawng went missing after departing from his friends while searching for his mithun (livestock) in the forest. Villagers conducted a search for U Wa Dawng and found his charred body the next day lying deep in the forest. The victim body was almost completely burned and bore gun shot wounds in the body. Only a close relative was able to identify the victim from his feet that was not burned.

 

Villagers said they heard the sounds of gunfire in the forest the night before the victim body was found. Two Burmese soldiers were seen entering the forest and villagers said they suspected the soldiers were responsible for the killing of U Wa Dawng.

 

Shortly after the body of the victim was discovered, the army came forward claiming that the forest where U Oo Dawng was found dead was a hotbed for rebel activities and that, villagers had been warned not to go in the forest wearing clothes resembling military uniforms.

 

U Wa Dawng body was buried on February 13, 2005 and no action has been taken against the killers.

 

 

Forced Labor Increases Hardship for Impoverished Villagers

 

Aizawl, 16 March 2005:

 

Seven villages in Matupi Township of Southern Chin State were involved in a forced labor to construct a road between Matupi-Answe-Madu. The forced labor order came from U Soe Nyuntt, Chairman of Matupi Township Peace and Development Council. The work began in the first week of January and civilians from Answe, Madu, Saton, Pantui, Lungpan, Lingtui, Rung and Rohtlang villages were involved in the unpaid labor.

 

Pu Palai (name changed), one of the forced laborers from Lungpan village said his community tremendously suffered as a result of the forced labor.

 

“Nine villages, including ours received the order for forced labor on December 15, 2004. Since December is the month of harvesting crops, we pleaded with the local SPDC Chairman to allow us to harvest our crops first. But he told us that it was beyond his power to alter the order and referred us to Lieutenant Colonel San Aung. Only after we gave 100,000 Kyats in bribe, did the Lt. Colonel agreed to harvest our crops and postponed the road construction to the first week of January 2005,” Pu Palai explained.

 

A budget of 8 million Kyats was sanctioned on paper for the road construction but it was never used. Instead, villagers in surrounding areas were forced to construct the road without pay.

 

Supervised by Deputy Commander of Infantry Battalion 305 based in Matupi, the work started on January 5, 2005 and lasted until January 26. Pu Palai said there were 59 people from his village tract alone, including four girls under the age of 18. Ten families were unable to send laborers and they were forced to pay money to cover some of the cost for foods and other things.

 

“We were divided into groups and some of the groups did not have enough food supplies during the work, which lasted more than three weeks. Each group had to dig one third of a mile long of land and everybody had to supply themselves with food and rations during the work,” Pu Palai explained.

 

Local Army Chief Orders Forced Labor and Illegal Tax from Civilians

 

Aizawl: 14 March 2005

 

Lieutenant Colonel San Aung, Chief of Tactical Command No. 2 based in Matupi town of southern Chin State ordered Matupi residents to “donate” 70 tins of gravel per household for building roads in the town.

 

In addition, to build a highway between Matupi and Madu, Lt. Colonel San Aung demanded 4500 Kyats from every household, a local resident told Chin Human Rights Organization.

 

The order to “donate” 70 tins of gravel did not exempt even widows, elderly and handicapped people. Since it is difficult to find enough rocks to make gravels, the entire town, about 800 households, is working day and night to meet their quotas.

 

 

Hundreds of Civilians Provided “Voluntary Labor” to Construct Road

 

A massive forced labor was used to construct a 7-mile road between Congthia and Hmawng Tlang villages of Thantlang Township, northern Chin State beginning in mid January of 2005. An order released by the Township authorities in Thantlang compelled 250 civilians to engage in what the authorities stated was the provision of “voluntary labor for a self-support development project.”

 

A memo submitted by local authorities to Colonel Tin Hla, Chief of Tactical Command No. 1 for Chin State based in Hakha, indicated that 10 million Kyats was officially sanctioned for the road construction through the Public Work Department.

 

However, the money was never used for the purpose and civilians were forced to engage in “voluntary labor” for construction of the road.

 

One person per household from Hmawngtlang, Phai Khua, Letak(A), Letak(B), Leitak(C) and Aibur villages were ordered to participate in the work starting from the second week of January, 2005. Each person was assigned to dig 20 feet of land and 20 women were among 250 laborers. The women served as cooks for other laborers and foods and rations had to be supplied entirely by local churches.

 

Extortion Intensified at India-Burma Border Trade Route

 

Aizawl: 12 April 2005

 

Burmese soldiers and police patrols in Chin State are routinely involved in extortion of money from cross-border traders, one cattle trader told Chin Human Rights Organization. On March 18, 2005, four policemen extorted 100,000 Kyats from a trader who was trying to sell 30 cows to Mizoram of India. The same policemen also collected 80,000 Kyats in illegal tax from another cattle trader for 11 cows. The victim was from Daidin village of Gangaw Township, Magwe Division.

 

On March 20, 2005, a platoon consisting of twelve Burmese soldiers from Light Infantry Battalion 268 collected 400,000 Kyats in illegal tax from another trader shipping 90 cows to India.

 

One trader who recently had his money squeezed by the Burmese army on his way to India explained his situations.

 

“Even though a cattle trading is not profitable as before, there is no job at home and we have to continue this business under numerous difficulties hoping to gain a meager profit. Since the government asked too many taxes from us, sometimes we did not even gain Ks.50 000. If we calculate our daily wage, it ranges between Ks. 400-500 per day. This sum of money can only buy one bottle of cooking oil. It takes one and a half month for one round of business. We pay a cow from Ks. 100000 to Ks. 200000, as the price is so high now. We get around Rs. 8000 – 9000 per cow in India as the price of cow is not good. We have to report ourselves to a police station in order to buy a cow and we can only buy after obtaining their permission. We have to pay Ks. 1000 tax per head. We buy our cattle mostly from Tilin, Pale, Mait, Kyawtoo, and Saw which are situated in Gangaw Township, Magwe Division. When we shift cattle to Mizoram, we hire 4-5 workers who are paid Ks. 30,000 per person. If we meet soldiers or police on the way to Mizoram, we have to pay Ks. 1000-5000 per cow.”

 

Extortion of cross-border traders by Burmese soldiers has steadily intensified since 1995. On March 15, 2005, Colonel Tin Hla, Chief of Tactical Command No. 1 issued a decree criminalizing the selling of cattle to India. The penalty includes incarceration and time at hard labor camp.

 

 

SPDC Unlawfully Destroyed House of Local Leader of National League for Democracy Party

 

Aizawl 10 March 2005

 

Lieutenant Colonel San Aung, Chief of Tactical Command No. 2 based in Matupi town of southern Chin State unlawfully seized and destroyed the house of Pa Lian Thang and Daw Hlan Zing. Pa Lian Thang is the Assistant Secretary of the National League for Democracy (NLD) for Matupi Township.

 

The local NLD leader, now joined in India by his family, fled his native town Matupi to escape arrest by military authorities in July of 2003. After Pa Lian Thang’s escape to India, his family was constantly harassed, interrogated and intimidated by Burmese soldiers. His family home was demolished by order of Lt. Colonel San Aung, leaving Pa Lian Thang’s wife and children homeless.

 

Pa Lian Thang’s wife testified to Chin Human Rights Organization that their demolished home and its compound had been confiscated by the army. According to her, their two-storied home was worth 8 million Kyats in current market rate. She said half of their home compound was taken for a military intelligence office and another half for a Buddhist monastery.

 

Pa Lian Thang and the entire local NLD leadership were sought for arrest by military intelligence for their active role in welcoming Aung San Suu Kyi in their town in April of 2003. More than a dozen NLD members fled to India and at least two people were arrested and sentenced for 11 years with hard labor.

 

 

Refugees:

 

Malaysia: Chin Refugees on the Run

 

 

Refugee International

March 28, 2005

Washington DC

 

On March 1, 2005, the government of Malaysia initiated a nation-wide operation to crackdown on undocumented migrants living and working in the country. The operation is likely to have a negative impact on refugees and asylum seekers from Burma and the Aceh region of Indonesia. Chin refugees from Burma are especially vulnerable.

 

The Chin Refugee Committee (CRC) estimates that 12,000 Chin live in Malaysia, of which more than 9,000 are registered with the CRC. More than 2,500 Chin have applied for registration as asylum seekers with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and have been provided with documentation that identifies them to Malaysian authorities. Nearly all of the Chin in Malaysia are males. A few of the Chin — probably more than 200 — are unaccompanied minors, under 18 years old.

 

On a recent visit to Malaysia Refugees International met with several hundred Chin in Kuala Lumpur, the jungles where they were living near the new administrative center of Putrajaya, and the Cameron Highlands. Most of the Chin in Kuala Lumpur and other urban areas are employed as construction workers and those in rural areas work on plantations and farms. Many of them have been in Malaysia for several years, but few speak Malay or are integrated into the country. They are on the run, taking shelter where they can, finding employment — and often exploited — as day laborers, attempting to evade the police and immigration authorities, and often being subjected to detention and deportation.

 

RI met with one group of Chin in a high rise apartment in which 40 of them, including 2 women, live. However, most of them, fearing police raids, go to a nearby wooded area to sleep at night. In the jungles near Putrajaya, a group of 300 men live in crude huts with roofs of plastic sheeting. The settlement has been there for seven years and has been burned down four times by the police, but the Chin rebuild each time. They are fortunate to have water. A local charitable organization dug a well and occasionally a mobile health clinic comes to the settlement. In the high, cool, Cameron Highlands, where vegetables and tea are grown, Chin live in warehouses and sheds on plantations, staying out of sight of local authorities. Malaysia is a middle income country, but the conditions under which the Chin are living are often deplorable.

 

The Chin told RI that they came to Malaysia to escape persecution by the army and police of Burma. They told of being arrested, imprisoned, and tortured for alleged ties to the Chin National Front, an organization resisting the Burmese government, of being subjected to forced recruitment as laborers, and of being persecuted for being Christians. Most of the Chin are Baptists, but with a sprinkling of Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, and Assembly of God members. The Chin refugees left families behind and paid “agents” to assist them to escape from Burma, passing through Thailand en route to Malaysia, while often being forced to work on Thai fishing boats to pay off debts to their agents. RI did not encounter any Chin who had returned to Burma for a visit. All said it would be too dangerous. Thus, they have often been separated from their families for several years.

 

The Chin do not have an easy life in Malaysia. They are working illegally, jobs are irregular, bribes must be paid to local authorities and police, and there is always the fear of detention and deportation. About 120 Chin are presently in squalid detention centers in which they may languish for months or even years while their cases are being decided. Many more Chin reported to us that they had been informally deported by being dumped across the border into Thailand from where they made their way back to Malaysia. The Chin were unanimous in saying that what they most needed in Malaysia was legal protection which would prevent them from being arrested and deported and allow them to work. Their second greatest need was access to medical care.

 

UNHCR has built up an impressive and important presence in Malaysia and is doing an excellent job interceding with the Malaysian government to register and protect refugees from detention, deportation, and other abuses. The Malaysian government on its part has been less harsh in this most recent refugee roundup than it was in years past. But refugees still complain that the UNHCR registration process is too slow. Chin in locations distant from the UNHCR office in Kuala Lumpur, such as the Cameron Highlands, are mostly unregistered because of the cost and the risk of going to UNHCR to register. Also, UNHCR registration cards and letters are not always respected by local authorities.

 

The Malaysian crackdown on undocumented migrants has demonstrated that the country is heavily dependent upon migrants for labor. Many construction sites were closed down because of shortages of labor during RI’s visit. It would make sense for the Malaysian government to afford protection to the refugees and asylum seekers in its country while making it possible for them to be employed legally. Both the country and the refugees would benefit.

 

Refugees International, therefore, recommends that:

 

UNHCR continue its work protecting and assisting refugees in Malaysia and speed up the registration process for refugees and asylum seekers, especially in outlying areas where refugees are mostly unregistered.

 

International and local NGOs and aid agencies provide humanitarian assistance to the Chin refugees in Malaysia, especially for health care. Very few international NGOs work in Malaysia and the Chin, along with other refugees, suffer from lack of access to most social services and decent housing.

 

The government of Malaysia respect the rights of those registered with UNHCR as refugees and asylum seekers and potential refugees who have not yet had the opportunity to register. The government should also adopt regulations that make it possible for refugees to be employed legally. Malaysia needs the workers; the refugees need the jobs.

 

The government of the United States and others — possibly Canada, Australia, or Sweden — consider the possibility of resettling the Chin who are unable to return to their home country soon because of the extreme danger of doing so.

 

Debate On Shan Independence:

 

Independence or Federalism?

By Harn Yawnghwe

 

 

The S.H.A.N. news article on 29 March 2005 reported the resurrection of the Shan Independence cause and a rejection of federalism, especially the ‘tripartite dialogue’ advocated by my late brother Chao Tzang and myself. This is an issue that Shan leaders have grappled with for decades. It is not really about ‘Independence’ versus ‘Federalism’. Who does not want to be free or independent? We all do. The question is more about what is best for the people of Shan State. What will end their suffering at the hands of the Burma Army? If federalism will, we should go for it. If independence is the only way to achieve it, we should go for it. Both independence and federalism are means to an end – the welfare of the people of Shan State.

 

But a nation’s freedom depends on many factors – the cohesion of the people, the economic might of the nation, the military strength of its army, the vision of its leaders, and, more importantly, historical circumstances. We have only to look at the fact that Thailand and Laos are part of the Shan or Tai family and that there are Shans, Dais, or Tais living in India, China and Vietnam to see that historical circumstances and world politics play a major part in deciding our destiny. It is not sufficient to argue that we should be independent today just because Shan kings ruled Burma from the 13th to the 16th century and we were independent before the British came in 1886.

 

World politics after the Second World War pushed the Federated Shan States into the Union of Burma. Our leaders had no choice. China was in the throes of a civil war. Thailand had sided with Japan during the war and was not looked upon with favour by the Allies, whereas Aung San had helped the Allies although he had been originally trained by the Japanese to overthrow the British. Knowing that they could no longer remain independent but had to join somebody, the ruling Saophas decided to join Burma and tried to make the best of a bad deal with the Panglong Agreement and the 10-year secession clause for the Shan State in the 1947 Constitution.

 

Critics of the Panglong Agreement have said that the Saophas wanted to protect their privileges and that my father wanted to become the president of the Union of Burma. These allegations are not based on facts. The question of who should be president was never part of the agenda. In fact, Aung San almost walked out of the Panglong Conference because he was so infuriated by my father’s insistence on the rights of the ethnic nationalities. The Saophas were, on the whole, not self-seeking feudal lords. They were definitely not protecting their privileges at Panglong. Since the 1930’s they had been training young men to take over the leadership. They were in favour of democratization and in 1959 they gave up all their rights to rule to the Shan State Government.

 

Whether at Panglong or today, the key question has always been what is best for the people of Shan State? Any decision we make will have consequences and we will be judged by generations to come as to whether or not we were correct. I am not against those who want to seek independence. Who wants to be oppressed, have one’s womenfolk raped, one’s children and parents forced to work under appalling conditions, and be arrested or shot just because one does not obey an arbitrary order given by the Burma Army? Ask the Burmans. They do not want to be oppressed either. That is why so many have fled Burma. They cannot fight for independence because the Army is within their midst. But they can fight to change the system.

 

My questions to those seeking independence are these: Will we have more chances of success if we seek independence? Which country will recognize an independent Shan State? How will the government support itself? Will the new Shan State government be able to drive the Burma Army out of the Shan State? If yes, I will support it. I am also curious to know how the Burma Army can be defeated without bloodshed.

 

Of course, we are all outraged by the arrests of Hkun Htun Oo, Sao Hso Hten and others. And of course, I am outraged by the continued killing of our people and the raping of our women by the Burma Army. It is very painful to see our people suffering. But the future of the people of the Shan State is too important for us to allow our emotions to cloud our thinking. We need to think clearly and evaluate our options realistically. The question we should be asking is why the Burma Army arrested Hkun Htun Oo and Sao Hso Hten? Did they arrest Sao Hso Hten when he was leading the Shan State Army (North) or heading the Shan State Peace Council? No. Why not? Did they arrest Hkun Htun Oo when he was leading the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy and contested the 1990 election? No. Why not? Why were they arrested in February?

 

The generals are not afraid of wars of independence. They have perfected their technique of destroying the land and terrorizing the people to get at the armed few. They have also been amassing new weapons since 1989 to hit the remaining pockets of resistance. They are just waiting for the right time and the right excuse to put their plan to annihilate the opposition into action and win the praise of the world for eradicating drugs and terrorism. The generals, however, are very much afraid of politics. They know they cannot win in this field if people are free to really express their will. Just look at the 1990 elections. That is why they nullified its results. The generals are also very afraid when people unite. Their strategy has always been to divide and rule. Look at the KNU and the DKBA. Look at the KNPP and the KNPLA. Look at the KIO and the recently formed KSC.

 

Hkun Htun Oo and Sao Hso Hten’s greatest crime in the eyes of the generals was that they tried not only to unite the Shans, but all the ethnic nationalities; not only the ethnic political parties, but also the ceasefire armies; not only the ethnic nationalities, but also the political opposition parties – including Burman leaders. This was something the generals could not tolerate. This shows that by working with all the peoples of Burma we are on the right path. We are hitting the generals at their weakest spot.

 

Another point to consider is that, after five decades of struggle, the United Nations for the first time acknowledged our status in 1994 by adopting a resolution calling for a ‘tripartite dialogue’ – the military, democracy advocates, and the ethnic nationalities. Prior to this, ethnic rights were not recognized. We were just rebels. But since then, our demands to have an equal say in Burma’s future have been recognized as legitimate. Even Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations has said so. The arrests have also shown to the international community that the ethnic nationalities are reasonable and willing to have a dialogue but that the generals are the main obstacle to solving Burma’s problems.

 

So are we in our frustration going to throw away everything we have achieved? Do not forget, our efforts have also thrown the Burma Army into disarray. Did they not just turn on each other? Was Khin Nyunt not arrested? Are Than Shwe and Maung Aye not distrustful of each other? Is there not confusion in the Burma Army ranks? This has never happened before in Burma’s history. So, are we losing or are we winning? The question before us then, is this. Do we fight the generals in the battlefield where they have superior military strength and ability or do we fight them politically where we have the superiority? Do we Shans fight the Burma Army alone or do we fight them side by side with others?

 

[CG Note: Harn Yawnghwe is the son of the first President of Union of Burma and prince of Yanwnghwe. At present, he serves as director of Euro Burma office based in Brussels. This article is taken from Shan Herald March 31, 2005]

 

Shan elders declare independence, Chin MP Speaks

 

 

[CG Note: A Chin MP Pu Lian Uk, a lawyer and former political prisoner, expressed his opinion regarding the declaration of independence by Shan elders. He is an independent elected MP from Haka, the capital of Chin state during the 1990 general elections in Burma. He is now exile in the United States of America]

 

Chinland Guardian

April 23, 2005

 

There is a saying that no country is an island. So no country can free themselves without international intervention. The United Nations is also an organization of existing nations who all want the integrity of their respective present international boundaries and they support each other not to disintegrate their respective existing boundaries. Thus the UN at least in principle is always in favor of not to increase the number of independent nations.

 

Actually, for the territories of the States of Chin, Kachin and Shan, they had never been under the Burmese kings or were they neither been parts of Burma in the history. They found together with the Burmese kingdom a new country known as the Union of Burma under Panglong Agreement since 1948 just only over fifty years ago.

 

The Burmese kings annexed the kingdoms of Arakan and Mon against the will of the people with the force of arms and they have every right to establish their own sovereign independent countries in modern time if their population wish to be so.

 

That was the reason why the representatives of the territories of present day Arakan State and Mon State in the Union Parliament also rectified the Panglong Agreement in their free will consent to form Arakan Affairs Council and Mon Affairs council like the Chin Affairs Council in the Union Parliament in 1961-62 to become the constituent unit states of the federal Union of Burma like the Chin State.

 

For Karens, the State of Karen has its clear cut boundary from Burma proper. More over, a very wide area of the Karen settlement in delta region of Irrawaddy is mix ed with the Burmese settlement though they can claim that the present Karen and Karenni States had never been under the Burmese kings. But the territories of present day Karen State and Karenni-Kaya State had rectified also Panglong Agreement by joining the Union in the constitution of the Union of Burma 1947 which was based on the Panglong Agreement. Thus Panglong Agreement had a great meaning equally for all the different territories of Arakan, Burmese, Chin, Kachin, Karen, Karenni -Kaya, Mon, and Shan today.

 

The military regime has discarded Panglong Agreement with the Constitution of the Union of Burma 1947 since 1962 . As a matter of fact, the Burman or Burmese military regime has over thrown the constitutional government of the Union and established a unitary form of government under the complete domination of the Burmese military regime formed of only the Burmese generals against the will of the population in the country making all the non Burman territories – Arakan, Chin, Kachin, Karen, Karenni -Kaya, Mon, and Shan today as non self governing territories.

 

It was these two documents Panglong Agreement and the Constitution of the Union of Burma 1947 which joined the Burmese territory and the Panglong agreement signatory territories in the Union to be a nation. Therefore in the absence of these two documents, all the Panglong Agreement signatory territories are now in their status quo as independent territories as they were before the British annexation.

 

The reason the territories of the Panglong signatory territories are in the Union of Burma today is just because, the Burmese military regime has occupied their territories against their will with the force of arms. Thus every territory in the Union now has every right to proclaim independence of their respective territories.

 

Thus according to the decolonization doctrine of the United Nations, member nations of the United Nations and the UN itself are now to recognize the proclamation of independence by the Federated Shan States.

 

But whether the independence of Federated Shan States drive out the occupying Army of the Burmese military regime from their territory is a big question for them. The Burmese Military regime pose now as the defec to ruler as a colonizer of the federated Shan States and oter nonself governing territories of the Union.

 

But the demand of forming the Union of Burma in genuine federal Union by Ethnic National Council(ENC), with all the constituent territories of the Union of Burma including Burma proper as a unit of the federal Union, is supported also by the democratic forces of the Burmans or Burmese. All the separate territories in the Union in united strength, could only have possible enough strength by all means to remove the Burmese military regime from their grip control of all the territories in the Union. And this is one of the reasons why we all the different territories in the Union should not proclaim separate independence at this time.

 

But we have to have in mind that the Shan group who has proclaimed Independence of the Federated Shan States are still to support the ENC cause of federalism and can join again the federal Union of Burma when the federal Constitution is drafted after restoring peace and democracy is restored in the Union. Their proclamation of independence may be in some way more helpful to the cause of federalism like former members of UNPO are supporting UNPO cause even after they have become members of the United Nations. Thanks.

 

Lian Uk

 

The Meaning of Panglong Agreement versus the Shan’s declaration of breaking up from the Union

 

By Salai Za Ceu Lian

Chinland Guardian

20 April 2004

 

Noticeably, the recent declaration of Shan’ independence is shaking the whole pro-democracy movement of the day in the conflict-ridden Union of Burma. The Union of Burma or its conventional name “Burma” has been plagued by the internal conflicts especially since its independence from the British in 1948. While dealing with the conflict of Burma, it is so important to have a clear understanding of how the Union of Burma was founded.

 

Therefore, the founding of the Union of Burma needs to be recalled in brief. We recall and study history not just to blame ourselves for the mistakes we might have made in the past, but in order to avoid and not to repeat those past mistakes in the future.

 

Based on the historical facts, the Union of Burma came into existence through the Panglong agreement, the historic accord that was signed on February 12, 1947, in Panglong, Shan State by those legitimate representatives from the pre-colonial independent countries: the Shan, the Kachin, the Chin and that of the Ministerial Burma also known as the Burma Proper. To better put it, the independent Chin, the Shan, and the Kachin nationals co-founded the Union on an equal footing with a vision of founding the stable Union.

 

Today, the Panglong accord, which was signed on the equal footing, stands as the fundamental foundation and the legal cornerstone of the Union itself, and as a result, the signing date of Panglong accord is observed as the national holiday, the Union Day. We must stress the fact that the term “equality” or “equal footing” fully signified and recognized the equal status of those founding members of the Union. Meaning, regardless of the size of the population of each region joining the Union, no single signatory nation of the agreement is superior or inferior to the rest of the other co-founding members of the Union.

 

As a matter of fact, in the pre-colonial period, these nations were historically independent, living side by side with the political administrative system of their own under their respective legitimate leaders. The historical fact should be noted once again that no King of Burma had ever rule or conquered these nations. Only the British expansionist conquered them separately from Burma – Burma Proper.

A clear interpretation and essence of the Panglong Agreement was made very clear by a native Chin scholar and the leading politician, Dr. Lian Hmung Sakhong in the follwoing. He eloquently put it, “The essence of the Panglong agreement- the Panglong Spirit- was that the Chin, Kachin, and the Shan did not surrender their rights of self-determination and sovereignty to the Burman. The Chin, Kachin, and the Shan signed the Panglong agreement as a means to speed up their own search for freedom together with the Burman and other nationalities in what became the Union of Burma [1*]. The preamble of Panglong agreement also declares; “Believing that freedom will be more speedily achieved by the Shans, the Kachins, and the Chins by their immediate co-operation with the interim Burmese government”.

On a similar question, a native Shan scholar, a political scientist, Late Dr. Choa Tzang explained, “The meaning of Panglong is clear, made clear by U Aung San (formerly Bogyoke) and leaders of the ruling AFPFL (Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League) party. The meaning is none other than that the Shan, Kachin, Chin and other nationalities agreed — jointly and unitedly. Here again, the implication is that the Pyidaungzu (the Union) that came into being in 1948 is made up of co-independent and equal states ” [2*]. To have a clear picture of the creation and joining of the Union by the non-Burman ethnic groups, we have to understand that the non-Burman national ethnic groups did not relinquish their national sovereignty.

 

Rather, strict interpretation of the terms of the agreement, the true essence of the Panglong accords emphatically expressed the mutual recognitions of national sovereignty, their national right of self-determination, and equal status among those founding members of the Union. Therefore, the essence and true spirit of Panglong is to be interpreted as the treaty that fully recognized the equal status and distinct national identity among the Kachin, Karrenni, Karen, Chin, Mon, Burman, and Arakans. Given the fact that Burma is a multi-ethnic country, in order to bring the deeply rooted crisis of Burma to an end, it is necessary that each region’s leaders mutually accept the principles of national equality, and the sovereignty of each region. This would enable the Union of Burma to achieve a prosperous, peaceful and democratic country under the proposed system of federalism if we choose to establish a stable Union.

 

The Shan’s declaration of Independence: : Whenever we make an arguments about the political issues of Burma, we repeatedly stress the crucial importance of the Panglong agreement and the necessity of respecting the true spirit of the birth of Panglong Agreement because this historic accord between the founding fathers of the Union of Burma only is the legal entity/contract that binds the nation together. What we need to note here also was that the signing of Panglong agreement was totally voluntary, which means any region joining the Union can secede from the Union and be a sovereign nation.

 

It is totally up to the people of the joining region to have an ultimate say for their own destination. No other member of Union has any authority to determine the future of the seceded State from the Union. That is the very reason, in our modern time, political thinkers and advocates of the model of democracy are putting their full emphasis on the question of self-determination and the need to understand what the term ” legitimacy and mandate” means. With regards to the recent declaration of Shan independence, the ultimate decision is and has to be made by the Shan themselves alone and nobody else. No foreigners should have a say in this matter.

 

During the revolutionary period and pro-democracy movement like today, it is understandable that there are diverse ideological confrontations over the very question of Shan declaring independence. Not only among the pro-democratic forces of Burma, but even within the inner circle of the intra-ethnic Shans themselves, there could be an ideological differences and diverse political standpoints. It is totally acceptable. We can see a clear example like the un-identical political viewpoints and ideological split-up between the Burma Communist Party and Anti-fascist People’s Freedom League over the question of how to attain independence from British during the struggle for Burma’s independence. The point is that we should not be surprised even if there are different opinions over the current example of the Shan.

 

In fact, there are crucial political realities that associate with the Shan’s declaration of being free nation at this point for which we have to full understand and respect the wills of the Shan people. In doing so, any critic of the Shan’s movement should refrain from being too judgmental and intrusive for the internal matters exclusively related to the Shan. Likewise, one should also be very careful to avoid using the phrase like “the Shan demands Independence”.

 

They declare independence by means of exercising their inherent national rights – Right of Self-Determination and no need to demand for it.

Why should the Shan have to demand?

From whom?

From NLD or SPDC? Under what conditions and circumstances, the Shan has to do so?

Whether the National League for Democracy (NLD) led by Daw Suu or State Peace and Development Coucil (SPDC) has no right or authority to judge the destiny of the Shan peoples.

 

In real sense, they are foreigners. Quite shockingly, the recent statement of NLD in opposing the Shan’s movement was a bizarre example, which indeed was totally unacceptable. So was the SPDC’s condemnation on the Shan initiatives.

A foreigner should stay away from the internal affairs of the sovereign nation- who has every legitimate reasons, supreme power, and full mandate to determine their own future- for particular questions like such as the Shan.

 

Let us be very clear about that. The Shan peoples have absolute rights to materialize any policy they see fit and take whatever actions they deem relevant and necessary with regards to the political fate of their own future.

 

To simplify it, they can do whatever they like, but cannot make man a woman. We must fully acknowledge and respect their divine rights of national sovereignty and their self-determination.

 

Wishfully speaking, if there could be a plebiscite or national referendum for all the Shan peoples to assemble and vote over the question of such kind – declaring the Independence for the Shan or joining the Union of Burma under the proposed system of federalism – that would be so desirable. Unfortunately, such arrangement seems unlikely to take place under the current military regime.

 

[1][1*] Lian Hmung Sakhong. Democracy movement towards federal union: the role of UNLD in the struggle for democracy and federalism in Burma. Thailand: UNLD Press, May, 2001

 

[2][2*]Yawnghwe, Chao-Tzang. “Federalism: Putting Burma Back Together Again,” Legal Issues on Burma Journal No. 10 (Burma Lawyers’ Council), May 1999.

 

Salai Za Ceu Lian -A student at the University of Winnipeg, Manitoba, is currently Secretary of Burmese Community Organization of Manitoba. He is also an assistant General Secretary for the Chin National League for Democracy (Exile), a political party that won 3 Parliamentary seats in Chin State during the 1990 general elections in Burma. He was a former Chin Youth representative at the United Nationalities Youth League (UNYL), multi-ethnic youth alliance based in Thailand, a former General Secretary of Chin Students’ Union, and was a former Assistant General Secretary of the Committee for Non-violent Action for Burma (CNAB) based in India. He also works as Associate Editor for Chinland Guardian and Rhododendron News, a bi-monthly human rights newsletter published by Chin Human Rights Organization.

 

Back Cover Poem:

 

 

To Pa Mawng Lian

By: Van Biak Thang

 

Down the road near my little cottage,

At about the length of a hamster’s tail,

There lived a widow in a village

With her loved son, mentally fragile.

 

His mother, a septuagenarian,

Faint and feeble but warm and cordial,

Tilled, hoed and sowed for her son, Mawng Lian,

From dawn to dusk, dirty yet manual.

 

Mawng Lian, called Pa Mawng, in his twenties,

Known to each one as a jolly face,

Half adult, talked to himself in peace,

And laughed to a single thing in space

 

In times of Christmas, New Year, weddings,

Services and social gatherings,

Like a tadpole in shallow water,

He’s a Mr. Bean to each villager.

 

So much He loved sweets and jaggery,

So much he treasured new finery,

Liked hopping and dancing in rejoice,

And would help anyone without choice.

 

Knowing that his mom’s in her dotage,

Again he volunteered to carry,

In fear of orders and penalty;

That was his last page in the village.

 

Eyes shed no tears upon this vile face;

Hearts inhume its grief under its roof;

Still lies sorrow awake in its hoof.

But his name is always at his place.

 

[Rhododendron Note: A mentally challenged man Pa Mawng from Thantlang was summarily killed by the Burmese soldiers]

 

 

 

 

 

Rhododendron News Volume VIII. No. II. March – April 2005

Rhododendron News
Volume VIII. No. II. March – April 2005
Chin Human Rights Organization
www.chro.org
**************************************

CONTENTS
Human Rights Situations:

Extrajudicial Killing
• Innocent Villager Shot to Death and Burned
• Innocent Chin Beaten to Death by Burmese Army

Forced Labor & Extortion
• Forced Labor Increases Hardship for Impoverished Villagers
• Local Army Chief Orders Forced Labor and Illegal Tax from Civilians
• Hundreds of Civilians Provided “Voluntary Labor” to Construct Road
• Extortion Intensified at Border Trade Route

Political Suppression
• SPDC Unlawfully Destroyed House of Local Leader of National League for Democracy Party

Refugee Situations:

• (RI) Malaysia: Chin Refugees on the Run

Debate:

• Independence or Federalism? By Harn Yawngwe
• Shan Elder Declare Independence, Chin MP Speaks
• Panglong Agreement Vs Declaration of Shan Independence
By Salai Za Ceu Lian

Back Cover Poem:

• To Maung Lian: By Van Biak Thang

Human Rights:

Innocent Chin Beaten to Death by Burmese Army

Chin Human Rights Organization

March 21, 2005

Pu Hmet Lian, telephone operator from Salen village in Thantlang township was beaten to death by the Burmese army on 18, March 2005.

Captain Aung Naing Oo and his troop based in Falam came to Salaen village on the night of March 18 to look for the village Administration Officer Tin Uk. At around midnight, the Burmese Captain and his troops summoned village council members and the headman of the village, along with the village telephone operator Hmet Lian. They were accused of failing to report the activities of the Chin National Front members and supporting the rebels.

Captain Aung Naing Oo and his troops kicked, punched, and smashed the face of Hmet Lian with their riffle butts. Hmet Lian was killed on the spot.  The other four village council members and the headman were also badly beaten and torture by the Burmese troops. The four village council members and the village headman are now in critical condition. According to CHRO source, the village headman is vomiting bloods and he may not survive.

Captain Aung Naing Oo and his troops are from Light Infantry Battalion LIB 266 Falam army base. The same battalion has killed innocent Chin villager from Selawn village, Falam township in January this year.

Innocent Villager Shot to Death and Burned

Saiha:  26 February 2005

Two members of the Burmese army from Light Infantry Battalion 140 based in Sabawngte village of Matupi Township shot and killed an innocent local villager U Wa Dawng, age 45 and burned his dead body to eliminate his identity, one Sabawngte villager testified to Chin Human Rights Organization.

The incident occurred in a forest near the village. U Wa Dawng went missing after departing from his friends while searching for his mithun (livestock) in the forest. Villagers conducted a search for U Wa Dawng and found his charred body the next day lying deep in the forest. The victim body was almost completely burned and bore gun shot wounds in the body. Only a close relative was able to identify the victim from his feet that was not burned.

Villagers said they heard the sounds of gunfire in the forest the night before the victim body was found. Two Burmese soldiers were seen entering the forest and villagers said they suspected the soldiers were responsible for the killing of U Wa Dawng.

Shortly after the body of the victim was discovered, the army came forward claiming that the forest where U Oo Dawng was found dead was a hotbed for rebel activities and that, villagers had been warned not to go in the forest wearing clothes resembling military uniforms.

U Wa Dawng body was buried on February 13, 2005 and no action has been taken against the killers.

Forced Labor Increases Hardship for Impoverished Villagers

Aizawl, 16 March 2005:

Seven villages in Matupi Township of Southern Chin State were involved in a forced labor to construct a road between Matupi-Answe-Madu. The forced labor order came from U Soe Nyuntt, Chairman of Matupi Township Peace and Development Council. The work began in the first week of January and civilians from Answe, Madu, Saton, Pantui, Lungpan, Lingtui, Rung and Rohtlang villages were involved in the unpaid labor.

Pu Palai (name changed), one of the forced laborers from Lungpan village said his community tremendously suffered as a result of the forced labor.

“Nine villages, including ours received the order for forced labor on December 15, 2004. Since December is the month of harvesting crops, we pleaded with the local SPDC Chairman to allow us to harvest our crops first. But he told us that it was beyond his power to alter the order and referred us to Lieutenant Colonel San Aung. Only after we gave 100,000 Kyats in bribe, did the Lt. Colonel agreed to harvest our crops and postponed the road construction to the first week of January 2005,” Pu Palai explained.

A budget of 8 million Kyats was sanctioned on paper for the road construction but it was never used. Instead, villagers in surrounding areas were forced to construct the road without pay.

Supervised by Deputy Commander of Infantry Battalion 305 based in Matupi, the work started on January 5, 2005 and lasted until January 26. Pu Palai said there were 59 people from his village tract alone, including four girls under the age of 18. Ten families were unable to send laborers and they were forced to pay money to cover some of the cost for foods and other things.

“We were divided into groups and some of the groups did not have enough food supplies during the work, which lasted more than three weeks. Each group had to dig one third of a mile long of land and everybody had to supply themselves with food and rations during the work,” Pu Palai explained.

Local Army Chief Orders Forced Labor and Illegal Tax from Civilians

Aizawl: 14 March 2005

Lieutenant Colonel San Aung, Chief of Tactical Command No. 2 based in Matupi town of southern Chin State ordered Matupi residents to “donate” 70 tins of gravel per household for building roads in the town.

In addition, to build a highway between Matupi and Madu, Lt. Colonel San Aung demanded 4500 Kyats from every household, a local resident told Chin Human Rights Organization.

The order to “donate” 70 tins of gravel did not exempt even widows, elderly and handicapped people. Since it is difficult to find enough rocks to make gravels, the entire town, about 800 households, is working day and night to meet their quotas.

Hundreds of Civilians Provided “Voluntary Labor” to Construct Road

A massive forced labor was used to construct a 7-mile road between Congthia and Hmawng Tlang villages of Thantlang Township, northern Chin State beginning in mid January of 2005. An order released by the Township authorities in Thantlang compelled 250 civilians to engage in what the authorities stated was the provision of “voluntary labor for a self-support development project.”

A memo submitted by local authorities to Colonel Tin Hla, Chief of Tactical Command No. 1 for Chin State based in Hakha, indicated that 10 million Kyats was officially sanctioned for the road construction through the Public Work Department.

However, the money was never used for the purpose and civilians were forced to engage in “voluntary labor” for construction of the road.

One person per household from Hmawngtlang, Phai Khua, Letak(A), Letak(B), Leitak(C) and Aibur villages were ordered to participate in the work starting from the second week of January, 2005. Each person was assigned to dig 20 feet of land and 20 women were among 250 laborers. The women served as cooks for other laborers and foods and rations had to be supplied entirely by local churches.

Extortion Intensified at India-Burma Border Trade Route

Aizawl: 12 April 2005

Burmese soldiers and police patrols in Chin State are routinely involved in extortion of money from cross-border traders, one cattle trader told Chin Human Rights Organization. On March 18, 2005, four policemen extorted 100,000 Kyats from a trader who was trying to sell 30 cows to Mizoram of India. The same policemen also collected 80,000 Kyats in illegal tax from another cattle trader for 11 cows. The victim was from Daidin village of Gangaw Township, Magwe Division.

On March 20, 2005, a platoon consisting of twelve Burmese soldiers from Light Infantry Battalion 268 collected 400,000 Kyats in illegal tax from another trader shipping 90 cows to India.

One trader who recently had his money squeezed by the Burmese army on his way to India explained his situations.

“Even though a cattle trading is not profitable as before, there is no job at home and we have to continue this business under numerous difficulties hoping to gain a meager profit. Since the government asked too many taxes from us, sometimes we did not even gain Ks.50 000. If we calculate our daily wage, it ranges between Ks. 400-500 per day.  This sum of money can only buy one bottle of cooking oil. It takes one and a half month for one round of business. We pay a cow from Ks. 100000 to Ks. 200000, as the price is so high now. We get around Rs. 8000 – 9000 per cow in India as the price of cow is not good. We have to report ourselves to a police station in order to buy a cow and we can only buy after obtaining their permission. We have to pay Ks. 1000 tax per head. We buy our cattle mostly from Tilin, Pale, Mait, Kyawtoo, and Saw which are situated in Gangaw Township, Magwe Division. When we shift cattle to Mizoram, we hire 4-5 workers who are paid Ks. 30,000 per person. If we meet soldiers or police on the way to Mizoram, we have to pay Ks. 1000-5000 per cow.”

Extortion of cross-border traders by Burmese soldiers has steadily intensified since 1995. On March 15, 2005, Colonel Tin Hla, Chief of Tactical Command No. 1 issued a decree criminalizing the selling of cattle to India. The penalty includes incarceration and time at hard labor camp.

SPDC Unlawfully Destroyed House of Local Leader of National League for Democracy Party

Aizawl 10 March 2005

Lieutenant Colonel San Aung, Chief of Tactical Command No. 2 based in Matupi town of southern Chin State unlawfully seized and destroyed the house of Pa Lian Thang and Daw Hlan Zing. Pa Lian Thang is the Assistant Secretary of the National League for Democracy (NLD) for Matupi Township.

The local NLD leader, now joined in India by his family, fled his native town Matupi to escape arrest by military authorities in July of 2003. After Pa Lian Thang’s escape to India, his family was constantly harassed, interrogated and intimidated by Burmese soldiers. His family home was demolished by order of Lt. Colonel San Aung, leaving Pa Lian Thang’s wife and children homeless.

Pa Lian Thang’s wife testified to Chin Human Rights Organization that their demolished home and its compound had been confiscated by the army. According to her, their two-storied home was worth 8 million Kyats in current market rate. She said half of their home compound was taken for a military intelligence office and another half for a Buddhist monastery.

Pa Lian Thang and the entire local NLD leadership were sought for arrest by military intelligence for their active role in welcoming Aung San Suu Kyi in their town in April of 2003. More than a dozen NLD members fled to India and at least two people were arrested and sentenced for 11 years with hard labor.

Refugees:

Malaysia: Chin Refugees on the Run

Refugee International
March 28, 2005
Washington DC

On March 1, 2005, the government of Malaysia initiated a nation-wide operation to crackdown on undocumented migrants living and working in the country. The operation is likely to have a negative impact on refugees and asylum seekers from Burma and the Aceh region of Indonesia.  Chin refugees from Burma are especially vulnerable.

The Chin Refugee Committee (CRC) estimates that 12,000 Chin live in Malaysia, of which more than 9,000 are registered with the CRC.  More than 2,500 Chin have applied for registration as asylum seekers with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and have been provided with documentation that identifies them to Malaysian authorities. Nearly all of the Chin in Malaysia are males. A few of the Chin — probably more than 200 — are unaccompanied minors, under 18 years old.

On a recent visit to Malaysia Refugees International met with several hundred Chin in Kuala Lumpur, the jungles where they were living near the new administrative center of Putrajaya, and the Cameron Highlands.  Most of the Chin in Kuala Lumpur and other urban areas are employed as construction workers and those in rural areas work on plantations and farms.   Many of them have been in Malaysia for several years, but few speak Malay or are integrated into the country.  They are on the run, taking shelter where they can, finding employment — and often exploited — as day laborers, attempting to evade the police and immigration authorities, and often being subjected to detention and deportation.

RI met with one group of Chin in a high rise apartment in which 40 of them, including 2 women, live.  However, most of them, fearing police raids, go to a nearby wooded area to sleep at night.  In the jungles near Putrajaya, a group of 300 men live in crude huts with roofs of plastic sheeting.  The settlement has been there for seven years and has been burned down four times by the police, but the Chin rebuild each time. They are fortunate to have water.  A local charitable organization dug a well and occasionally a mobile health clinic comes to the settlement. In the high, cool, Cameron Highlands, where vegetables and tea are grown, Chin live in warehouses and sheds on plantations, staying out of sight of local authorities. Malaysia is a middle income country, but the conditions under which the Chin are living are often deplorable.    

The Chin told RI that they came to Malaysia to escape persecution by the army and police of Burma.  They told of being arrested, imprisoned, and tortured for alleged ties to the Chin National Front, an organization resisting the Burmese government, of being subjected to forced recruitment as laborers, and of being persecuted for being Christians.  Most of the Chin are Baptists, but with a sprinkling of Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, and Assembly of God members. The Chin refugees left families behind and paid “agents” to assist them to escape from Burma, passing through Thailand en route to Malaysia, while often being forced to work on Thai fishing boats to pay off debts to their agents. RI did not encounter any Chin who had returned to Burma for a visit. All said it would be too dangerous.  Thus, they have often been separated from their families for several years.           

The Chin do not have an easy life in Malaysia.  They are working illegally, jobs are irregular, bribes must be paid to local authorities and police, and there is always the fear of detention and deportation. About 120 Chin are presently in squalid detention centers in which they may languish for months or even years while their cases are being decided.  Many more Chin reported to us that they had been informally deported by being dumped across the border into Thailand from where they made their way back to Malaysia.  The Chin were unanimous in saying that what they most needed in Malaysia was legal protection which would prevent them from being arrested and deported and allow them to work. Their second greatest need was access to medical care. 

UNHCR has built up an impressive and important presence in Malaysia and is doing an excellent job interceding with the Malaysian government to register and protect refugees from detention, deportation, and other abuses.  The Malaysian government on its part has been less harsh in this most recent refugee roundup than it was in years past.  But refugees still complain that the UNHCR registration process is too slow.  Chin in locations distant from the UNHCR office in Kuala Lumpur, such as the Cameron Highlands, are mostly unregistered because of the cost and the risk of going to UNHCR to register.   Also, UNHCR registration cards and letters are not always respected by local authorities.     

The Malaysian crackdown on undocumented migrants has demonstrated that the country is heavily dependent upon migrants for labor.  Many construction sites were closed down because of shortages of labor during RI’s visit.  It would make sense for the Malaysian government to afford protection to the refugees and asylum seekers in its country while making it possible for them to be employed legally. Both the country and the refugees would benefit.         

Refugees International, therefore, recommends that:

UNHCR continue its work protecting and assisting refugees in Malaysia and speed up the registration process for refugees and asylum seekers, especially in outlying areas where refugees are mostly unregistered.

International and local NGOs and aid agencies provide humanitarian assistance to the Chin refugees in Malaysia, especially for health care. Very few international NGOs work in Malaysia and the Chin, along with other refugees, suffer from lack of access to most social services and decent housing.

The government of Malaysia respect the rights of those registered with UNHCR as refugees and asylum seekers and potential refugees who have not yet had the opportunity to register.  The government should also adopt regulations that make it possible for refugees to be employed legally.  Malaysia needs the workers; the refugees need the jobs.

The government of the United States and others — possibly Canada, Australia, or Sweden — consider the possibility of resettling the Chin who are unable to return to their home country soon because of the extreme danger of doing so.

Debate On Shan Independence:

Independence or Federalism?
By Harn Yawnghwe

The S.H.A.N. news article on 29 March 2005 reported the resurrection of the Shan Independence cause and a rejection of federalism, especially the ‘tripartite dialogue’ advocated by my late brother Chao Tzang and myself.  This is an issue that Shan leaders have grappled with for decades. It is not really about ‘Independence’ versus ‘Federalism’. Who does not want to be free or independent? We all do. The question is more about what is best for the people of Shan State. What will end their suffering at the hands of the Burma Army? If federalism will, we should go for it. If independence is the only way to achieve it, we should go for it. Both independence and federalism are means to an end – the welfare of the people of Shan State.

But a nation’s freedom depends on many factors – the cohesion of the people, the economic might of the nation, the military strength of its army, the vision of its leaders, and, more importantly, historical circumstances.  We have only to look at the fact that Thailand and Laos are part of the Shan or Tai family and that there are Shans, Dais, or Tais living in India, China and Vietnam to see that historical circumstances and world politics play a major part in deciding our destiny. It is not sufficient to argue that we should be independent today just because Shan kings ruled Burma from the 13th to the 16th century and we were independent before the British came in 1886.

World politics after the Second World War pushed the Federated Shan States into the Union of Burma. Our leaders had no choice. China was in the throes of a civil war. Thailand had sided with Japan during the war and was not looked upon with favour by the Allies, whereas Aung San had helped the Allies although he had been originally trained by the Japanese to overthrow the British. Knowing that they could no longer remain independent but had to join somebody, the ruling Saophas decided to join Burma and tried to make the best of a bad deal with the Panglong Agreement and the 10-year secession clause for the Shan State in the 1947 Constitution.

Critics of the Panglong Agreement have said that the Saophas wanted to protect their privileges and that my father wanted to become the president of the Union of Burma. These allegations are not based on facts.  The question of who should be president was never part of the agenda. In fact, Aung San almost walked out of the Panglong Conference because he was so infuriated by my father’s insistence on the rights of the ethnic nationalities. The Saophas were, on the whole, not self-seeking feudal lords. They were definitely not protecting their privileges at Panglong. Since the 1930’s they had been training young men to take over the leadership. They were in favour of democratization and in 1959 they gave up all their rights to rule to the Shan State Government.

Whether at Panglong or today, the key question has always been what is best for the people of Shan State? Any decision we make will have consequences and we will be judged by generations to come as to whether or not we were correct.   I am not against those who want to seek independence. Who wants to be oppressed, have one’s womenfolk raped, one’s children and parents forced to work under appalling conditions, and be arrested or shot just because one does not obey an arbitrary order given by the Burma Army? Ask the Burmans. They do not want to be oppressed either. That is why so many have fled Burma. They cannot fight for independence because the Army is within their midst. But they can fight to change the system.

My questions to those seeking independence are these: Will we have more chances of success if we seek independence? Which country will recognize an independent Shan State? How will the government support itself? Will the new Shan State government be able to drive the Burma Army out of the Shan State? If yes, I will support it. I am also curious to know how the Burma Army can be defeated without bloodshed.

Of course, we are all outraged by the arrests of Hkun Htun Oo, Sao Hso Hten and others. And of course, I am outraged by the continued killing of our people and the raping of our women by the Burma Army. It is very painful to see our people suffering. But the future of the people of the Shan State is too important for us to allow our emotions to cloud our thinking. We need to think clearly and evaluate our options realistically. The question we should be asking is why the Burma Army arrested Hkun Htun Oo and Sao Hso Hten? Did they arrest Sao Hso Hten when he was leading the Shan State Army (North) or heading the Shan State Peace Council? No. Why not? Did they arrest Hkun Htun Oo when he was leading the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy and contested the 1990 election? No. Why not? Why were they arrested in February?

The generals are not afraid of wars of independence. They have perfected their technique of destroying the land and terrorizing the people to get at the armed few. They have also been amassing new weapons since 1989 to hit the remaining pockets of resistance. They are just waiting for the right time and the right excuse to put their plan to annihilate the opposition into action and win the praise of the world for eradicating drugs and terrorism. The generals, however, are very much afraid of politics. They know they cannot win in this field if people are free to really express their will. Just look at the 1990 elections. That is why they nullified its results. The generals are also very afraid when people unite. Their strategy has always been to divide and rule. Look at the KNU and the DKBA. Look at the KNPP and the KNPLA. Look at the KIO and the recently formed KSC.

Hkun Htun Oo and Sao Hso Hten’s greatest crime in the eyes of the generals was that they tried not only to unite the Shans, but all the ethnic nationalities; not only the ethnic political parties, but also the ceasefire armies; not only the ethnic nationalities, but also the political opposition parties – including Burman leaders. This was something the generals could not tolerate. This shows that by working with all the peoples of Burma we are on the right path. We are hitting the generals at their weakest spot.

Another point to consider is that, after five decades of struggle, the United Nations for the first time acknowledged our status in 1994 by adopting a resolution calling for a ‘tripartite dialogue’ – the military, democracy advocates, and the ethnic nationalities. Prior to this, ethnic rights were not recognized. We were just rebels. But since then, our demands to have an equal say in Burma’s future have been recognized as legitimate. Even Kofi Annan, Secretary-General of the United Nations has said so. The arrests have also shown to the international community that the ethnic nationalities are reasonable and willing to have a dialogue but that the generals are the main obstacle to solving Burma’s problems.

So are we in our frustration going to throw away everything we have achieved? Do not forget, our efforts have also thrown the Burma Army into disarray. Did they not just turn on each other? Was Khin Nyunt not arrested? Are Than Shwe and Maung Aye not distrustful of each other? Is there not confusion in the Burma Army ranks? This has never happened before in Burma’s history. So, are we losing or are we winning?  The question before us then, is this. Do we fight the generals in the battlefield where they have superior military strength and ability or do we fight them politically where we have the superiority? Do we Shans fight the Burma Army alone or do we fight them side by side with others?

[CG Note: Harn Yawnghwe is the son of the first President of Union of Burma and prince of Yanwnghwe. At present, he serves as director of Euro Burma office based in Brussels. This article is taken from Shan Herald March 31, 2005]

Shan elders declare independence, Chin MP Speaks

[CG Note: A Chin MP Pu Lian Uk, a lawyer and former political prisoner, expressed his opinion regarding the declaration of independence by Shan elders. He is an independent elected MP from Haka, the capital of Chin state during the 1990 general elections in Burma. He is now exile in the United States of America]

Chinland Guardian
April 23, 2005

There is a saying that no country is an island. So no country can free themselves without international intervention. The United Nations is also an organization of existing nations who all want the integrity of their respective present international boundaries and they support each other  not to disintegrate their respective existing boundaries. Thus the UN at least in principle  is always in favor of not to increase the number of independent nations.

Actually, for the territories of the States of Chin, Kachin and Shan,   they had never been under the Burmese kings or were they neither been   parts of Burma in the history.  They  found together with the Burmese kingdom a new  country known as the Union of Burma under Panglong Agreement since  1948 just only over fifty years ago.

The Burmese kings annexed the kingdoms of Arakan and Mon against the will of the people with the force of arms and they have every right to establish their own sovereign independent countries  in modern time if their population wish to be so.

That was the reason why the representatives of the territories of present day Arakan State and Mon  State in the Union Parliament also rectified the Panglong Agreement in their free will consent to form Arakan Affairs Council and Mon Affairs council like the Chin Affairs Council in the Union Parliament in 1961-62 to become the constituent unit states of the federal Union of Burma like  the Chin State.

For Karens,  the State of Karen has its clear cut boundary from Burma proper. More over,  a very wide area of the Karen settlement in delta region of Irrawaddy is mix ed with the Burmese settlement though they can claim that the present Karen and Karenni States had never been under the Burmese kings. But  the territories of present day Karen State and  Karenni-Kaya State  had rectified also  Panglong Agreement by joining the Union in the constitution of the Union of Burma 1947 which was based on the Panglong Agreement. Thus Panglong Agreement had a great meaning equally for all the different  territories  of  Arakan, Burmese, Chin, Kachin, Karen, Karenni -Kaya, Mon, and Shan today.

The military regime has discarded Panglong Agreement with the Constitution of the Union of Burma 1947 since 1962 .  As a matter of fact, the Burman or Burmese military regime has over thrown the constitutional government of the Union  and  established a  unitary form of government  under the complete domination of the Burmese military regime formed  of only the Burmese generals against the will of the population in the country making all the non Burman territories – Arakan, Chin, Kachin, Karen, Karenni -Kaya, Mon, and Shan today as non self governing territories. 

It was these two documents Panglong Agreement and the Constitution of the Union of Burma 1947 which joined the Burmese territory and the Panglong agreement signatory territories in the Union to be a nation. Therefore in the absence of these two documents,  all the Panglong Agreement signatory territories  are now in their status quo as independent territories as they were before the British annexation.

The reason the territories of the Panglong signatory territories are in the Union of Burma today is just because, the Burmese military regime has occupied their territories against their will with the force of arms. Thus every territory in the Union now has every  right to proclaim independence of their respective territories.

Thus according to the decolonization doctrine of the United Nations, member nations of the United Nations and the UN itself are now to recognize the proclamation of independence by the Federated Shan States. 

But whether the independence of Federated Shan States drive  out the occupying Army of the Burmese military regime from their territory is a big question for them. The Burmese Military regime pose now as the defec to ruler as a colonizer of the federated Shan States and oter nonself governing territories of the Union.

But the demand of forming the Union of Burma in genuine federal Union by Ethnic National Council(ENC),  with all the constituent territories of the Union of Burma including Burma proper as a unit of the federal Union,  is supported also  by the democratic forces of the Burmans or Burmese. All the separate territories in the Union in united strength, could only have possible enough strength  by all means to remove the Burmese military regime from their grip control of all the territories in the Union.  And this is one of the reasons why we all the different territories in the Union should not proclaim separate independence  at this time.

But we have to have in mind that the Shan group who has proclaimed  Independence of the Federated Shan States  are still to support the ENC cause of federalism and can join again the federal Union of Burma when the federal Constitution is drafted after restoring peace and democracy  is restored in the Union. Their  proclamation of independence may be  in some way more helpful  to the cause of federalism like former members of UNPO are supporting UNPO cause even after they have become members of the United Nations. Thanks.

Lian Uk

The Meaning of Panglong Agreement versus the Shan’s declaration of breaking up from the Union

By Salai Za Ceu Lian
Chinland Guardian
20 April 2004

Noticeably, the recent declaration of Shan’ independence is shaking the whole pro-democracy movement of the day in the conflict-ridden Union of Burma. The Union of Burma or its conventional name “Burma” has been plagued by the internal conflicts especially since its independence from the British in 1948. While dealing with the conflict of Burma, it is so important to have a clear understanding of how the Union of Burma was founded.

Therefore, the founding of the Union of Burma needs to be recalled in brief. We recall and study history not just to blame ourselves for the mistakes we might have made in the past, but in order to avoid and not to repeat those past mistakes in the future.

Based on the historical facts, the Union of Burma came into existence through the Panglong agreement, the historic accord that was signed on February 12, 1947, in Panglong, Shan State by those legitimate representatives from the pre-colonial independent countries: the Shan, the Kachin, the Chin and that of the Ministerial Burma also known as the Burma Proper. To better put it, the independent Chin, the Shan, and the Kachin nationals co-founded the Union on an equal footing with a vision of founding the stable Union.

Today, the Panglong accord, which was signed on the equal footing, stands as the fundamental foundation and the legal cornerstone of the Union itself, and as a result, the signing date of Panglong accord is observed as the national holiday, the Union Day. We must stress the fact that the term “equality” or “equal footing” fully signified and recognized the equal status of those founding members of the Union. Meaning, regardless of the size of the population of each region joining the Union, no single signatory nation of the agreement is superior or inferior to the rest of the other co-founding members of the Union.

As a matter of fact, in the pre-colonial period, these nations were historically independent, living side by side with the political administrative system of their own under their respective legitimate leaders. The historical fact should be noted once again that no King of Burma had ever rule or conquered these nations. Only the British expansionist conquered them separately from Burma – Burma Proper.
A clear interpretation and essence of the Panglong Agreement was made very clear by a native Chin scholar and the leading politician, Dr. Lian Hmung Sakhong in the follwoing. He eloquently put it, “The essence of the Panglong agreement- the Panglong Spirit- was that the Chin, Kachin, and the Shan did not surrender their rights of self-determination and sovereignty to the Burman. The Chin, Kachin, and the Shan signed the Panglong agreement as a means to speed up their own search for freedom together with the Burman and other nationalities in what became the Union of Burma [1*]. The preamble of Panglong agreement also declares; “Believing that freedom will be more speedily achieved by the Shans, the Kachins, and the Chins by their immediate co-operation with the interim Burmese government”.
On a similar question, a native Shan scholar, a political scientist, Late Dr. Choa Tzang explained, “The meaning of Panglong is clear, made clear by U Aung San (formerly Bogyoke) and leaders of the ruling AFPFL (Anti-Fascist People’s Freedom League) party. The meaning is none other than that the Shan, Kachin, Chin and other nationalities agreed — jointly and unitedly. Here again, the implication is that the Pyidaungzu (the Union) that came into being in 1948 is made up of co-independent and equal states ” [2*]. To have a clear picture of the creation and joining of the Union by the non-Burman ethnic groups, we have to understand that the non-Burman national ethnic groups did not relinquish their national sovereignty.

Rather, strict interpretation of the terms of the agreement, the true essence of the Panglong accords emphatically expressed the mutual recognitions of national sovereignty, their national right of self-determination, and equal status among those founding members of the Union. Therefore, the essence and true spirit of Panglong is to be interpreted as the treaty that fully recognized the equal status and distinct national identity among the Kachin, Karrenni, Karen, Chin, Mon, Burman, and Arakans. Given the fact that Burma is a multi-ethnic country, in order to bring the deeply rooted crisis of Burma to an end, it is necessary that each region’s leaders mutually accept the principles of national equality, and the sovereignty of each region. This would enable the Union of Burma to achieve a prosperous, peaceful and democratic country under the proposed system of federalism if we choose to establish a stable Union.

The Shan’s declaration of Independence: : Whenever we make an arguments about the political issues of Burma, we repeatedly stress the crucial importance of the Panglong agreement and the necessity of respecting the true spirit of the birth of Panglong Agreement because this historic accord between the founding fathers of the Union of Burma only is the legal entity/contract that binds the nation together. What we need to note here also was that the signing of Panglong agreement was totally voluntary, which means any region joining the Union can secede from the Union and be a sovereign nation.

It is totally up to the people of the joining region to have an ultimate say for their own destination. No other member of Union has any authority to determine the future of the seceded State from the Union. That is the very reason, in our modern time, political thinkers and advocates of the model of democracy are putting their full emphasis on the question of self-determination and the need to understand what the term ” legitimacy and mandate” means. With regards to the recent declaration of Shan independence, the ultimate decision is and has to be made by the Shan themselves alone and nobody else. No foreigners should have a say in this matter.

During the revolutionary period and pro-democracy movement like today, it is understandable that there are diverse ideological confrontations over the very question of Shan declaring independence. Not only among the pro-democratic forces of Burma, but even within the inner circle of the intra-ethnic Shans themselves, there could be an ideological differences and diverse political standpoints. It is totally acceptable. We can see a clear example like the un-identical political viewpoints and ideological split-up between the Burma Communist Party and Anti-fascist People’s Freedom League over the question of how to attain independence from British during the struggle for Burma’s independence. The point is that we should not be surprised even if there are different opinions over the current example of the Shan.

In fact, there are crucial political realities that associate with the Shan’s declaration of being free nation at this point for which we have to full understand and respect the wills of the Shan people. In doing so, any critic of the Shan’s movement should refrain from being too judgmental and intrusive for the internal matters exclusively related to the Shan. Likewise, one should also be very careful to avoid using the phrase like “the Shan demands Independence”.

They declare independence by means of exercising their inherent national rights – Right of Self-Determination and no need to demand for it.
Why should the Shan have to demand?
From whom?
From NLD or SPDC? Under what conditions and circumstances, the Shan has to do so?
Whether the National League for Democracy (NLD) led by Daw Suu or State Peace and Development Coucil (SPDC) has no right or authority to judge the destiny of the Shan peoples.

In real sense, they are foreigners. Quite shockingly, the recent statement of NLD in opposing the Shan’s movement was a bizarre example, which indeed was totally unacceptable. So was the SPDC’s condemnation on the Shan initiatives.
A foreigner should stay away from the internal affairs of the sovereign nation- who has every legitimate reasons, supreme power, and full mandate to determine their own future- for particular questions like such as the Shan.

Let us be very clear about that. The Shan peoples have absolute rights to materialize any policy they see fit and take whatever actions they deem relevant and necessary with regards to the political fate of their own future.

To simplify it, they can do whatever they like, but cannot make man a woman. We must fully acknowledge and respect their divine rights of national sovereignty and their self-determination.

Wishfully speaking, if there could be a plebiscite or national referendum for all the Shan peoples to assemble and vote over the question of such kind – declaring the Independence for the Shan or joining the Union of Burma under the proposed system of federalism – that would be so desirable. Unfortunately, such arrangement seems unlikely to take place under the current military regime.

[1][1*] Lian Hmung Sakhong. Democracy movement towards federal union: the role of UNLD in the struggle for democracy and federalism in Burma. Thailand: UNLD Press, May, 2001

[2][2*]Yawnghwe, Chao-Tzang. “Federalism: Putting Burma Back Together Again,” Legal Issues on Burma Journal No. 10 (Burma Lawyers’ Council), May 1999.

Salai Za Ceu Lian -A student at the University of Winnipeg, Manitoba, is currently Secretary of Burmese Community Organization of Manitoba. He is also an assistant General Secretary for the Chin National League for Democracy (Exile), a political party that won 3 Parliamentary seats in Chin State during the 1990 general elections in Burma. He was a former Chin Youth representative at the United Nationalities Youth League (UNYL), multi-ethnic youth alliance based in Thailand, a former General Secretary of Chin Students’ Union, and was a former Assistant General Secretary of the Committee for Non-violent Action for Burma (CNAB) based in India. He also works as Associate Editor for Chinland Guardian and Rhododendron News, a bi-monthly human rights newsletter published by Chin Human Rights Organization.

Back Cover Poem:

To Pa Mawng Lian
By: Van Biak Thang

Down the road near my little cottage,
At about the length of a hamster’s tail,
There lived a widow in a village
With her loved son, mentally fragile.

His mother, a septuagenarian,
Faint and feeble but warm and cordial,
Tilled, hoed and sowed for her son, Mawng Lian,
From dawn to dusk, dirty yet manual.

Mawng Lian, called Pa Mawng, in his twenties,
Known to each one as a jolly face,
Half adult, talked to himself in peace,
And laughed to a single thing in space

In times of Christmas, New Year, weddings,
Services and social gatherings,
Like a tadpole in shallow water,
He’s a Mr. Bean to each villager.

So much He loved sweets and jaggery,
So much he treasured new finery,
Liked hopping and dancing in rejoice,
And would help anyone without choice.

Knowing that his mom’s in her dotage,
Again he volunteered to carry,
In fear of orders and penalty;
That was his last page in the village.

Eyes shed no tears upon this vile face;
Hearts inhume its grief under its roof;
Still lies sorrow awake in its hoof.
But his name is always at his place.

[Rhododendron Note: A mentally challenged man Pa Mawng from Thantlang was summarily killed by the Burmese soldiers]

Rhododendron News

Volume VIII. No. III. May-June 2005

Chin Human Rights Organization

www.chro.org

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

General Human Rights Violations:

• Army Officer Abducts Village Headman for Ransom

• Villagers Flee to India to Escape Army Brutalities

• Youth Organization Abolished and The Leader Arrested

• SPDC Commander Justify His Barbaric Action

• Compulsory: You Must Buy USDA Calendar

 

Forced Labor:

• New High School Being Constructed with Forced Labor

• New Military Camps: Anguish For The People

• SPDC Use Prisoners for Construction of Hospital

• SPDC Forced 600 Villagers to Engage in Road Construction

 

Religious Persecution:

• Chin Christians Forced to Supply Construction Materials for New Buddhist Monastery

 

International Campaign:

• Canadian Parliament Passed Burma Motion

 

Refugee:

• Indian NGO Expressed Concern Over UNHCR Handling of Refugees from Burma in New Delhi

 

Facts & Arguments:

Persecution of Chin Christian in Burma (By Salai Bawi Lian Mang)

 

Back Cover Poem:

 

A letter to My Mother (By Van Biak Thang)

 

Army Officer Abducts Village Headman for Ransom

 

 

15 May 005

Aizawl: Lieutenant Aung Naing from Light Infantry Battalion 268 and commanding in charge of Tihbual army camp is holding U Chan Kung, headman of Tlaungkhua Village of Thangtlang Township for money ransom, after arresting him for failure to report the activities of Chin National Army. The victim has been ordered to pay 500,000 Kyats in monetary fine, a villager of Tlangkhua village reported.

 

Lt. Aung Niang and his troops forcibly took away U Chan Kung and another person working as a clerk at Tiahdai village for military patrol along India-Burma borders for nearly one month. The two victims were brought back to Tlangkhua village in the first week of May, 2005.

 

Tlangkhua villagers sacrificed a cow (a Chin customary practice to ask for one’s forgiveness) in order to plead with the Lieutenant for U Chan Kung’s freedom but was not accepted. Instead, Lt. Aung Naing ordered the villagers to come up with ransom money to buy their headman’s freedom.

 

“We don’t know how we are going to get that kind of money. It will be very difficult to come up with even half the amount he’s demanded. We’ll have to borrow the money with interest from moneylenders,” explained one villager.

 

Although a village clerk of Tiahdai village was set free and sent back, Lieutenant Aung Naing collected money from Tiahdai Village too.

Since Lieutenant Aung Naing was posted as camp commander at Tihbual military camp, he has regularly extorted money and confiscates livestock from cattle traders trying to sell their cattle to Mizoram of India.

 

All the headmen of every village in Chin State have been ordered to make reports on the activities of Chin National Army twice a month to the nearest military station and the villages were demanded a huge amounts of money if the reports have not been submitted before a given deadline.

 

Villagers Flee to India to Escape Army Brutalities

 

5 May 2005

Aizawl: Several villagers of Salen village, Thantlang Township, northern Chin state have been forced to flee to India’s Mizoram State to escape torture, brutalities and oppression by Burmese troops operating in the area.

 

Mr. Kham Peng Lian, one of the villagers who fled to India told Chin Human Rights Organization about his experience:

 

“Since a clash took place between Burmese army and Chin National Army near Old Hriphi village, Burmese troops from Light Infantry Battalion 266 stationed in Hakha and LIB 268 stationed in Falam town have been coming to our village almost on a daily basis. At any given day, at least one army unit would always be stationing in the village. The soldiers interrogate and torture civilians so badly and some people are so frightened they went into hiding in the jungle. The army accused Village Chief Cia Hmung and village councilor Ceu Cung of supporting the Chin rebels and beat them so badly that both had to be sent to Thantlang Hospital. They were later sent to Hakha because their injuries were so serious they could not be treated in Thantlang. They were released from hospital only in April. One of our friends, Pu Hmet Lian was killed because the army accused him of being a staunch supporter of Chin National Army. We were also accused of the same offence since the army was aware that we provided held to CNF activists when they came to our village. We would have faced the same fate had we not flee before they could catch us. The army has all our names as rebel supporters and that’s why our group decided to flee to Mizoram to avoid death,” Kham Peng Lian said.

 

He added that Rev. Tial Hre, Baptist Church Pastor, Saya Tlaung, a Minister at United Pentecostal Church and one civilian by the name of Hrang Kem were arrested currently held by the army at Hakha prison.

 

Kham Peng Lian and his group escaped to India on 18 April 2005. His group includes Tluang Hei Thang, Peng Bik, Ram Uk, Lal Cung and his wife.

 

Youth Organization Abolished and The Leader Arrested

 

12th June 2005

 

Aizawl: Mr. Ram Kung, youth leader of Lungngo from Matupi township was arrested along with two other villagers on March 13, 2005. The local SPDC authority accused that the youth organization has links with the Chin National Front (CNF), and the organization called “Lungngo Mino Bu” (Lungngo Youth Organization) was abolished.

 

On March 12, there was a brawl between the CNF operative and Burmese police where one policeman had been killed and two injured seriously. As Mr. Ram Kung and his two friends Pau Za Mang and Maung Thang happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time where incident was taking place, the three of them were arrested and taken to Matupi town on the next day.

 

Reports said that the youth leader Mr. Ram Kung was sent to undisclosed place by the local SPDC to face long term jail sentence charging him of unlawful association with the rebel. When relatives of the victims made inquiry to Colonel San Aung the where about of Mr. Ram Kung, the colonel yelled them back that it is not their business to inquiry where he sent Mr. Ram Kung.

 

The colonel then issued an order to abolish the youth organization “Lungngo Mino Bu” effective the end of May. Commander of Burma army Light Infantry Battalion (140) Lt. Colonel Ye Lwin declare the elimination of the youth organization to the local people.

 

The Youth Organization used to be very active in social activities and ensuring harmony and peace in the village. The organization reportedly prohibit public nuisance due to drunkenness and selling of liquors in the village. It guards the village against robbery and theft. Besides being the precursor of the village, it is a goodhearted organization aiding the people in need- such as transporting the sick to the hospital. Pilfers and liquor hawkers dare not operate in the village.

 

The SPDC authority said that since there are police and army are station in the village, there is no need to form youth organization.

 

“In fact, these policemen and army personals are the one who create public nuisance” said the local man who report the incident to the CHRO.

 

SPDC Commander Justify His Barbaric Action

 

18 June 2005

Aizawl: During the public meeting called by the Burmese military authority in Matupi town, Colonel San Aung, the commander of Burmese army tactical II announced that he has the authority to abolish any symbols, building, monuments including Christian symbol in public. The meeting was attended by various government departments and several village headmen.

 

Colonel San Aung called this meeting to justify what he has done to the Chin Christians in Matupi town. He is responsible for ordering the dismantling of two Christian cross in Matupi and confiscation and razing dawn of at least 20 houses without compensation in Matupi.

 

A person (name withheld for security reason) who participate in the meeting report to CHRO that the colonel was furious about the radio reports of his action, especially dismantling of a giant Christian cross at Boltlang, by Washington DC based Radio Free Asia and the Voice of America, along with Oslo based Democratic Voice of Burma which was broadcast in Burmese. The colonel has reportedly said that “I have the power to destroy any symbols and monuments except General Aung San, for the betterment of the people”.

 

When the Colonel ordered to dismantle a giant Christian cross in Boltlang of Matupi town in January 3, the Chin people around the world have fiercely condemned by staging demonstration in various SPDC embassy around the world including the demonstration in front of the SPDC embassy in Kuala Lumpur that results in the arrest of several demonstrators by the Malaysian authority.

 

Chin Christians around the world and have also observed international day of prayer for persecution of Chin Christians by the Burmese military regime. These incidents were covered by several international news agency including the Voice of America, Radio Free Asia and Democratic Voice of Burma.

 

A person who reports the incident to CHRO added that this is the SPDC way of justifying what they have miserably done to the people.

 

Compulsory: You Must Buy USDA Calendar

 

20 May 2005

 

Aizawl: Colonel Tin Hla, commander of Burmese army tactical no. 1 from Haka, the Capital of Chin state have obligate every government employee to buy the calendar published by the Union Solidarity and Development Association, the youth wing created by the ruling military regime State Peace and Development Council.

 

According to a female government servant who prefers to remain anonymous, the government employees were charge according to their rank and salary for the calendar. The Upper Division Clerks (UDC) were charged 500/-Kyats each while the Lower Division Clerks (LDC) were charged 300/- Kyats each for the calendar.

 

“We know it is not fair, but you simply do not have a choice, the authority just cut your salary for the calendar” said the woman.

 

The SPDC commander also encouraged all the government employees to join Union Solidarity and Development Association.

 

“When the commander ‘encourage’ that’s mean compulsory”. Added the woman; “no one dares to ignore the commander’s ‘encouragement’ to join the USDA. After joining the USDA, it is compulsory to buy the uniform which cost 3500/-kyats, the equivalent of half a month of salary for the Lower Division Clerk.

 

New High School Being Constructed with Forced Labor

 

 

20 May 2005

Aizawl: Residents of Hakha town, Chin State’s capital were forced to construct a new government high school, Basic Education High School No. 3, by Colonel Tin Hla, Chief of Tactical Command No.1, the highest ranking military officer stationed in Chin State. Local residents had to contribute free labor starting from February 2005, despite the fact that there is a 400 million Kyat allocated for the construction project.

 

Every household from all localities were compelled to carry construction materials such as sand, bricks and woods, with an outstanding order of a one thousand Kyat fine for households that couldn’t afford to participate in the forced labor.

 

An unnamed resident affected by the forced labor program explained, “Laborers were divided according to their skills and abilities: Those skilled in carpentry, for example, had to work as carpenters while all other unskilled workers were forced to transport sand, bricks and woods to the work site from different places.”

 

Local headman of Pyidawtha block U Kyi Han and one sergeant from Light Infantry Battalion 266 supervised the construction project.

 

The local resident complained of the work conditions: “We were forced to start the work from 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM and now only one building has been completed, with three more buildings left to be constructed. It is hard to know how many times we were going to be forced to work. My family were called to work for four times and paid 4000 Kyats to the authorities. Some people from other blocks were forced to work for more than ten times already because it depended on the demands of the work. Students from kindergarten to fifth class attend in the morning and students from fifth to tenth classes attend in the evening alternately because the construction is still ongoing.”

 

A local construction engineer by the name of Sui Kio was appointed for the construction of the school but till today he and laborers were not paid for their services properly by Colonel Tin Hla.

 

New Military Camps: Anguish For The People

 

 

15 May 2005

Aizawl : The residents of Satu village, Matupi Township, Southern Chin state were forced to carry supplies/rations for the construction of a new military camp in Satu village.

 

“We seldom experienced this kind of forced labor in our village but since we heard about the new military camp coming to our village we experience such sort of labor everyday,” said a villager from Satu village.

 

The village headmen never informed Satu villagers for the duration of the labor or the quantity of rice to be provided or transport to the army. Furthermore, one person from every household have to carry supplies for a distance of 20 miles from Bawi Ring village to Satu village, our source reports.

 

“We, the residences of Satu village, were ordered to provide 38 tins of rice to the army with a promise to be excused from transporting the military ration. Our village provided the 38 tins of rice but the army failed in keeping their promise,” complained a villager of Satu.

 

Second warrant officer, Kyaw Sein, posted as Chief In-charge of Lailenpi village from Light Infantry Battalion-140 allegedly forced the Satu villagers to transport rations, being supplied from Matupi town.

“The supplies are collected from Hnawte village and passes through Dai Hnan village, Bawi Ring village and finally to Satu village. All the supplies/rations have been collected in Satu village but it is not known, when the construction of military stations will be initiated,” said a trader who is currently at the border area.

 

Meanwhile, the villagers of Lei Sin village are occasionally engaged in this forced labor of military supplies transportation and in the construction of the new military camps, our source reports.

 

Since 2003, besides the expansion of Light Infantry Battalions-140 and 204 stations in Matupi town, and Light Infantry Battalion-89 of Falam town, construction of various new military stations have been initiated in the villages along the Indo-Burma border.

 

SPDC Use Prisoners for Construction of Hospital

 

23 May 2005

 

SPDC authority in Chin state capital have been using prisoners from two hard-labor camps from Haka township for construction of Civil hospital in Haka the capital of Chin state. About 100 hard labor prisoners from Khuathar block of Haka town and 120 prisoners from Zokhua hard-labor prisoner camp have been deploy by the SPDC in the construction since January 2005.

 

The prisoners have to work from 8 AM to 5 PM daily. Since the authority does not feed them well, some prisoners run away from the labor site and steal from the town residents. In April of 2005, a woman from Haka town was killed and looted her jewelry such as necklace, earring and rings. Even though the authority could not make any arrest on the culprit of the crime, the town people believes that the crime must be committed by the runaway hard-labor prisoners.

 

Reports said that construction of the 400 bed civil hospital is part of government project implemented by the ruling military junta called State Peace and Development Council. The project of the hospital building seems well funded by the government. However, Colonel Tin Hla, commander of Burmese army tactical one commander has demanded every family from Haka town to contribute 800/-Kyats for the construction.

 

SPDC Forced 600 Villagers to Engage in Road Construction

 

8 June 2005

 

Aizawl: About 600 people from 20 villages from southern Chin state were forced to construct a motor road connecting Lungngo – Lotaw, Lungngo – Tingsi village. The forced labor is carried out accordance with the direct order from Colonel San Aung, commander of Burma army tactical II based at Matupi.

 

Lungngo and Lotaw is 20 miles in distance and Lungngo and Tingsi is about 19 miles.

 

The forced labor started during the first week of May, and is still continue on the day of this report. Forced laborers were strictly guarded by Captain Htun Myint Maung and his company from Burma army Light Infantry Battalion 140.

 

According to one of the villagers who witness the working condition report to CHRO that; “the working condition was miserable. They were not even allowed for a day off on Sunday to conduct worship service. As all of the forced laborers are Christians, they expect to get a day off on Sunday, but the Burmese army would not allow them”.

 

The army compels the forced laborers to complete at least 200 feet per day. Even though the army provided one bulldozer for the construction, it never was working because there was no diesel to run the machine.

 

The forced laborers have to bring their own food, tools and medicine at the work site.

 

CHRO source added “The forced laborers manage their own food and tools. Donations were collected from the government servants and the Christian pastors and mission workers, who were exempted from the road construction, in that way vegetable and food were bought with the donation.

 

“It is weird that the Burmese soldiers who guarded us have demanded food and vegetable from the laborers” said the villager.

 

Villages who are engage in construction of Lungngo and Lotaw are; Lungngo, Senpi, Balei, Voti, Kelong, Tuphei, Lawngdaw, Nabung, Ranti, Darcung, Khuaboi, Cangceh (Sancet), Suitawng, Daidin, Dinkhua villages while the road between Lungngo and Tingsi is constructed by Tingsi, Tilat, Longka, Theisi, Lungring villages.

 

Chin Christians Forced to Supply Construction Materials for New Buddhist Monastery

 

5 May 2005

 

Aizawl : Deputy Battalion Commander Major Hla Myint of Burma Army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 140 stationed at Sabawngte village, Matupi Township, Southern Chin State issued an order demanding every household in the village and surrounding areas to “contribute” one tin of sand for construction of a new Buddhist monastery, a local resident reported.

 

The monastery is set to be built inside the compound of army camp and a Buddhist monk has already arrived at the camp to occupy the monastery once completed. The order to demand sand from villagers came out as soon as the monk arrived at Sabawngte village, the villager said.

 

“As of now villagers are busy gathering sand from riverbanks and nearby streams to have one tin of sand ready for every household to give to the army. But for residents of Hlung Mang village, they have been asked to ‘donate’ 25 bags of cement since they are closest to Mizoram of India,” he explained.

 

Buddhist monasteries and shrines are increasing throughout State while the SPDC is prohibiting the construction of Christian Churches and unlawfully destroying Chins Christian crosses erected on different top of the mountains and hills. Moreover, the people of Chin state are still being forced to contribute money and labor for the construction of Buddhist monasteries and shrines.

 

Canadian Parliament Passed Burma Motion

 

[The Canadian House of Commons has passed the Burma Motion by a vote 158 to 123 on 18 May 2005 calling on the Canadian Government to condemn more forcefully the repeated and systematic human rights violations committed by the military junta in power in Burma.]

 

House of Commons

Chambre des Communes

Ottawa, Canada

38th Parliament, 1st Session

The Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade has the honour to present its

 

SECOND REPORT

In accordance with its mandate under Standing Order 108 (2) and the motion adopted on October 14, 2004 by the Committee, its Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Development has considered the issue of Human Rights in Burma and recommends the following:

 

That the Committee is of the opinion that the government must:

 

a) condemn more forcefully the repeated and systematic human rights violations committed by the military junta in power in Burma, particularly those involving certain minority groups, including arrests and imprisonment without trial, summary and arbitrary executions, torture, rape, kidnappings of women, men and children, forced labor, denial of fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of assembly, association and _expression, the recruitment of child soldiers and massive relocations of civilian populations;

 

b) urge the authorities in Burma to release immediately and unconditionally all political prisoners, in particular Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD), to end their harassment of them, to abolish all repressive laws and measures contravening international human rights conventions, and to take action to end the appalling humanitarian crisis facing hundreds of thousands of displaced people and refugees at Burma’s borders (with China, India, Bangladesh and Thailand);

 

c) provide tangible support to the legitimate authorities in Burma, specifically the government in exile (the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma) and the Committee Representing the People’s Parliament;

 

d) impose more comprehensive economic measures on Burma, and in particular:

 

– review the effectiveness of the Export and Import Permits Act;

– review the feasibility of fully invoking the Special Economic Measure Act; and

– impose a legal ban on further investment in Burma

e) bring pressure to bear on the United Nations Secretary General and the international community, in order to establish a framework, primarily though ensuring the spread of embargo, to bring the military junta to negotiate a peaceful transition toward democracy, in cooperation with the NLD and representatives of ethnic minority groups, as set out in all the resolutions of the United Nations on Burma since 1994;

f) call upon the authorities in Burma to include the National League for Democracy (NLD) and other political parties in the on-going process of the National Convention, and warn that any outcome from the convention without the participation of the NLD and other parties will not be recognized.

 

Indian NGO Expressed Concern Over UNHCR

Handling of Refugees from Burma

 

LETTER TO UNHCR CHIEF OF MISSION, NEW Delhi

 

May 17, 2005

To: Mr. Lennart Kostalainen

Chief of Mission

Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees

14 Jorbagh

New Delhi

 

Dear Mr. Lennart Kostalainen,

 

We are writing this letter concerning the Burmese Refugees in India especially those who are in Delhi and are increasingly under pressure to survive with dignity. Those in the border areas of India’s northeast are no better off. They face threats of insecurity, unemployment and eviction from places of refuge.

 

But more disturbing are the changing policies and attitudes of UNHCR towards refugees. The UNHCR’s functioning and attitude in the last four years has worsened as most of the policies have been detrimental to the survival interests of refugees. Your programs and your practices have flouted the basic and fundamental philosophy of humanitarian concern on which UNHCR stands. All the new policies and practices since you have assumed responsibility of the New Delhi office seems to indicate an all-out effort to stop all humanitarian programmes of providing legal protection and subsistence allowance to the refugees. The UNHCR has specific mandate with regard to legal protection and survival of refugees with human dignity. On the contrary the policies and programmes of the last four years have created more problems for the refugees and now their very physical survival is under enormous pressure in India.

 

The policies and programmes, which have been promoted by UNHCR under the pretence of Self-reliance and integration of the Burmese refugees into the Indian society have been failures. There are several flaws in this approach.

 

The predetermined decision to discontinue the Subsistence Allowance by UNHCR may have been due to resource crunch within UNHCR but is not based on any imperatives of real life situation of refugees in India. The programme of self-reliance promoted by UNHCR was an excuse to hoodwink the refugees into believing that they can get employment in India if they are trained in one or two skills and there was no preparation what so ever in making people self-reliant. Self Reliance programme was promoted basically to withdraw SA as there was steep budget cut within UNHCR. The UNHCR did not do any appropriate study and survey to find out or identify the existing skills of the refugees or the potential they have, which could have been strengthened or upgraded towards equipping people to survive in India with their skills. This was not done. Ad-hoc training programs suited for certain jobs were started. But sadly, the labor market for such jobs was already saturated. The self-reliance program cost the refugees dearly and has now actually turned out to be counter productive and an utter failure! This is evident by the way the ‘New Salary Scheme’ has been floated. This is like covering up one mistake with another!!

 

Launching of the New Salary Scheme from this month is another strategy to hood wink people in to believing that they will be employed. Please look at your own circular with regard to this; it is not only a shoddily conceived program but also full of holes. The proposal cannot stand any scientific scrutiny. There is no guarantee of employment or of regular salary to all the refugees recognized by you. The scheme is very pretentious of getting employment with private agencies as if they have any obligations to you or to refugees. Even here the options are very limited in terms of the kind of employment the people will be provided with. The scheme will be implemented only if the funds are available and it is only for 6 months! There is no guarantee that all the refugees will be covered by the salary scheme. Would this scheme be sustainable? There are no answers.

 

The most important question for us in The Other Media is the issue of refugee policy of the Indian State including the right to work in this country. UNHCR seems to have abrogated for itself the right to provide work permit to the refugees in India. At least this is the underlying impression that is given to us! The work permit for the refugees is an area that would have to be taken up with the Indian state, whereas the Indian State is pretty quiet on this issue. There is no policy of the Indian State on the issue of work permit for foreigners especially the Burmese refugees. UNHCR’s primary responsibility is to campaign and advocate with the Indian State to come out with a refugee policy. UNHCR has failed time and time again on this front. UNHCR has the mandate to create an environment for refugees to live in India with dignity and honor. This is not being done. On the contrary UNHCR seems to be preoccupied with evolving strategies and tactics to avoid its primary responsibility of protection and care of the refugees.

 

UNHCR should realize from its own history of involvement with refugees that when refugees are made to work without any work permit or without any policy in India or in any country, they are made to work for very low wages, in most hazardous working conditions and for long hours without any protection and in very dehumanising conditions. Refugee’s rights, their survival, dignity and honour are at stake and UNHCR would be responsible for violation of all these rights if it does not think through its programme that it is promoting.

 

The other most important aspect of concern that we have is the new working or non-working relationship you have with Indian NGOs. Of course you call them as implementing partners! The implementing partners are provided with financial resources to carry out UNHCR’s programme. In other words UNHCR is sub contracting/palming off its responsibility to the Indian NGOs who are involved in this work because funds are available from UNHCR. If tomorrow UNHCR stops the funds will these organizations continue the work with refugee concerns? Isn’t it another way that UNHCR is avoiding direct responsibility for the refugees?

 

The subsistence allowance to the refugees is the only way of survival in India till such time that the Indian State comes out a refugee policy or till such time UNHCR comes out with a fool proof policy and programme of protection, survival support, employment for the refugees or third country resettlement. But this is being either discontinued or stopped completely, without any alternative for the refugees. The refugees are under threat from UNHCR.

 

All these issues, however, have been raised time and again both by The Other Media and the refugee community themselves. The UNHCR has never bothered, especially since you took over as the Chief of Mission, to address these concerns. Amidst this and with an history of turning a blind eye to the plight of refugees the UNHCR Survey on Myanmarese Refugees has been launched. What purpose will the study serve? In the absence of any clear logic and with an history of transferring responsibilities the study proposal comes out as a ploy to add insult to the injury of the Burmese refugees. The motives of the UNHCR in taking up this study are under doubt. It is being launched to justify the existing policies, programs and practices of the UNHCR. You seem to be promoting this study to establish support to your argument that a majority of Burmese refugees are economic migrants. This will help UNHCR in extending the argument in either discontinuing or stopping SA and Legal protection of refugees.

 

Therefore we urge to you rethink on all the attitudes, policies, programs and practices of UNHCR urgently and then take appropriate measures. In a situation otherwise it will not be possible for The Other Media to cooperate with any of UNHCR’s activities.

 

 

 

Your Sincerely,

 

E. Deenadayalan Ravi Hemadri Achan Mungleng

 

General Secretary Executive Director Coordinator, Refugee Desk

The Other Media

 

PERSECUTION OF CHIN CHRISTIANS IN BURMA

A SPEECH DELIVERED

BY

SALAI BAWI LIAN MANG

OF

CHIN HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION

AT

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PERSECUTED CHURCHES

COLUMBIA, APRIL 15-16, 2005

 

 

Introduction:

 

First of all, I would like to express my gratitude and heartfelt thanks to the conference organizers for inviting me to this important gathering of good Christians here in the city of Columbia. I am particularly appreciative that I have the opportunity to speak about persecuted Chin Christians from Burma, who can not speak for themselves, who have been suffering so long under the most brutal and ruthless military regime in the world.

 

I have come to this conference with the aim of bringing light to the decades-long systematic denial and violation of religious rights of Chin Christians who inhabit Burma’s western territory of Chin State or Chinland by the country’s ruling military junta known as the State Peace and Development Council.

 

My name is Salai Bawi Lian Mang, from Chin Human Rights Organization (CHRO). I am an ethnic Chin from Burma.

 

The Chin people are one of the major ethnic groups in Burma. A South-East Asian Nation with the population of 54 million, Burma is composed with 8 major ethnic groups; Arakan, Burmese, Chin, Kachin, Karen, Karenni, Mon and Shan, and Burmese are majority with about 60% of the country population.

 

I will briefly talk about overall human rights situation in Burma and then my presentation will focus on persecution of Chin Christians by the ruling Burmese military regime.

 

At present, Burma is ruled by military junta called State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) one of the most repressive regimes in the world. Since the Burmese military took state power by killing thousands of innocent people in 1988, gross violations of human rights is committed by the military regime including political suppression, arbitrary detention, torture, rape, disappearances, extra-judicial killings, oppression of ethnic and religious minorities, and use of forced labor.

 

There are more than one thousand political prisoners including Aung San Suu Kyi, the 1991 Noble Peace Price winner.

 

Burma is the second largest opium producing country in the world and the ruling military regime is directly links with the drug trade as political crisis, civil war and abuse of power is related with notorious drug trade.

 

In addition to drugs, the spread of HIV/AIDS is of great concern that can affect regional stability in the near future. Burma after India and Thailand has the highest rate of HIV/AIDS in Asia. HIV/AIDS epidemic is mainly caused by drug addiction and lack of knowledge and prevention program in the country.

 

There is a report made by Shan Women Action Networks that the Burmese military regime is using rape as weapon of wars against ethnic Shan. The report details 173 incidents of rape and other forms of sexual violence, involving 625 girls and women, committed by Burmese soldiers in Shan State, between 1996 and 2001.

 

The military regime in Burma has violated the right to education by closing universities and colleges in the country for about 9 years within the past 16 years because the military regime views students as a threat to their dictatorial rule as students are the only vocal group that have been standing fearlessly against the military regime.

 

The use of forced labor is so widespread that the International Labor Organization (ILO) has expelled Burma from the ILO for the regime’s widespread use of forced labor.

 

Since 1991, the United Nations General Assembly and the United Nations Commission on Human Rights have for 14 consecutive years adopted consensus resolutions condemning the Burmese military junta’s systematic violations of human rights.

 

In 2003, President Bush enacted Burma Freedom and Democracy Act in response to the continued and systematic violations of human rights by the Burmese military junta.

 

Starting from 1999 the US Department of State, Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor annual report on international religious freedom report has branded Burma as country of particular concern for its widespread practice of religious persecution against minority religion such as Christians. In Burma more than 80% are Buddhist and Christians made only 4% in the country while in Chin state, Christians made about 90% of the population and religious persecution is a major concern in Chin state and among Chin Christians.

 

The military junta which made its way to power through a bloody coup in 1988 has ruled the country at gunpoint. Preoccupied by the idea of “national unity or unifying the country,” Burma’s military regime has embarked on a policy of creating a single national identity based on the policy of “Amyo, Batha, Thatana” or One race, One Language, One Religion” in other words “to be a Burman is to be a Buddhist” through assimilating all identifiable ethnic minority groups into the mainstream Burman society, a dominant ethnic group with which the regime identifies itself.

 

Introduction to the Chin People

 

Chin indigenous people inhabited the land bordering with India from the west, Bangladesh from the South-West, Arakan from the South and Burma from the east. It is estimated that the Chin, in a general sense including outside and inside of Chinland, number as many as two million, with the largest and noticeable number concentrated in the Chin State. The Chins were living as independent nation till the British invaded their land in the late 19th century and annexed all their territory into British Empire in the early 20th century.

 

After the second World Wars, as Burma’s independence movement grew, the Chin decided to participate with Burmese and other ethnic groups in a constitutional process towards the development of a federal union. Thus, the Chins are co-founder of today Union of Burma by participating in a multi-ethnic conference concluded on February 12, 1947, which led to the creation of an independent federal Union of Burma on January 4, 1948. However, a military coup led by General Ne Win in 1962 effectively ended the Chin’s special political status within the Union of Burma as one of its primary constituent member. Today Chin people in Burma are not represented in any form of political decision-making in the national, state or local administration.

 

Christianity and Chin People:

In 1899, American Baptist Missionary Rev. Arthur Carson and his wife from American Baptist Mission come to Chinland, present Chin state in Burma, and founded mission station at Haka present capital town of Chin state. Following the arrival of American missionaries, the two Chin couples converted to Christianity in 1904. Over the century almost the whole population in Chin state converted to Christianity and it is estimated that about 90 percent of Chins in Chin state are Christians at present.

In 1953 Baptist Chins organized themselves as Zomi (Chin) Baptist Convention. The majority of Chin Christians are Baptist and there are around 1,000 local small churches in all over Chin state and several associations.

 

Today, the impact of Christianity was not only confined within the spiritual and cultural contexts of the Chin people, it manifested itself as a uniting force for different Chin communities. With their conversion to Christianity, the Chins embraced one another as members of a community of faith in Christ. At the same time, there developed a new self-consciousness and political awareness of Chin cultural homogeneity, thus providing a new framework for Chin nationalism.

 

Since the first Chin conversion to Christianity in the early 1900s following the arrival of American missionaries, Christianity has been deeply entrenched in Chin society and has become part of the Chin cultural identity. Burma’s ruling military regime is systematically persecuting Chin Christians in order to replace Christianity with Buddhism and assimilated them into mainstream Burman culture. Evidence demonstrates that the military regime is using religious persecution as a tool of ethnocide against Chin Christians.

 

Persecution of Chin Christian

 

As Chin State has the largest concentration of Christians in the whole of Burma in terms percentage, it was not only a large number of Burmese soldiers that was brought into by the Burmese regime, in the name of “Hill Regions Buddhist Mission”, the junta brought in an army of Buddhist monks who were then dispatched to various towns and villages across Chin State. Protected by the soldiers, these Buddhist monks have considerable powers over the Chin population. In many cases, local people have pointed out that the monks are military intelligence operatives who are more powerful than local army commanders. The Chin Human Rights Organization reported about the monks stationed around Matupi Township as follow:

 

The monks who live at Zakam, Rezua, Leisen, Vangvai and Tinsi villages rule the communities. Anyone who doesn’t abide by the monks orders is reported to the SLORC/SPDC army and he/she is punished by the army. The monks give judgment on all cases. For those who become Buddhist, they are free from any persecution such as forced labour, portering, extortion of money, etc. Whenever and wherever a monk visits, he is accompanied by the army and they arrange a porter to carry the monk’s particulars. The villagers were forced to build a Buddhist monastery and temple. But they refused, insisting “we are Christians”. Even though the army threatened action against them, they didn’t build it yet. Now the monks and army are holding a meeting to discuss this. Nobody knows what will happen.

 

A 40-year-old Chin Christian from Matupi Township recounted how he was converted to Buddhism, recruited and trained to be part of a campaign against Christians;

 

“I was invited to attend social welfare training by the [SLORC (now SPDC)] authority from Matupi on 27/2/95. When I arrived at the place, the authority told us that it is to attend Buddhist hill tract missionary training run by a Buddhist monk named U Razinn at Mindat. As we are Christian, we said we didn’t want to go. But the monk persuaded us saying, ‘it is no problem if you are Christian, it is just religious training’. So 5 other persons and I took part in the 10 day training. In the training, we were taught the 17 facts of how to attack and disfigure Christians.”

 

The 17 points to attack Christians by the regime is as follows:

 

1. To attack Christian families and the progress of Christians.

2. To criticize against the sermons which are broadcast from Manila, Philippines.

3. To criticize God as narrow-minded and egotistical who himself claimed that “There is no god except eternal God”.

4. To criticize Christian ways of life as corrupted and inappropriate culture in Burma.

5. To criticize the preaching of Christians wherever it has penetrated.

6. To criticize Christianity by means of pointing out its delicacy and weakness.

7. To stop the spread of the Christian movement in rural areas.

8. To criticize by means of pointing out “there is no salvation without purchased by the blood of Christ”.

9. To counterattack by means of pointing out Christianity’s weakness and overcome this with Buddhism.

10. To counter the Bible after thorough study.

11. To criticize that “God loves only Israel but not all the races”.

12. To point out ambiguity between the two testaments.

13. To criticize on the point that Christianity is partisan religion.

14. To criticize Christianity’s concept of the Creator and compare it with the scientific concept.

15. To study and access the amount given in offerings.

16. To criticize the Holy Bible after thorough study.

17. To attack Christians by means of both non-violence and violence.

 

 

 

Targeting Clergy

 

Christian pastors and ministers secure high reverence and respect among the Chin people. They are highly respected as intermediaries between God and the congregations. Even outside of the Church, they play significant leadership role on occasions such as death, birth or marriage in the community. Also, because there are no Chin people represented in the local or state administration under the Burmese military regime, even in a secular setting, they receive high degrees of respect as leaders of the community. Today, their dignitary position has attracted the attention and jealousy of the ruling military regime, making them the first targets in the regime’s campaign against Christianity and Chin people.

 

During the past decade, according to Chin Human Rights Organization reports, the Burmese military regime, detained at length, killed or physically abused many Chin Christians.

 

The following incidents is one grave example how they treated pastors;

 

In August 1993, the Burmese troop arrested and they (the Burmese Army) interrogated Pastor Zang Kho Let. When the Pastor’s answers did not pleased the interrogators, the army personnel beat him with rifle butts or sticks that eventually broke almost all of his bones after two days of interrogation. They cut open his mouth to the neck and told him “We cut open your mouth so that you will no longer preach”. In the two days that they tortured him, Pastor Zang Kho Let never admitted to using the church fund to help the resistance movement or that he was involved in helping the armed resistance. The soldiers, Non Commissioner Officer NCO’s, and officers tortured the pastor with the intent to kill but he was still alive after two days of their inhuman brutality. When the torturers reported to their Commanding officer, Colonel Thura Sein Win, on the condition of the pastor, the colonel ordered them to tighten a plastic bag over his head. (Thura is an award given for bravery, like the torture of the preacher.)

 

After Pastor Zang Kho Let died, they dragged his lifeless body out of the school building and shot him. With a bullet wound in his body, the Burmese army unit claimed that they shot the pastor because he was trying to escape. The soldiers brought the dead body of Pastor Zang Kho Let back in the school building and placed together with the leaders of the village community, who were arrested to witness the gruesome state of the body. They were told to feel the bones, which were all broken. They were told, “If you do not tell us the truth and if you do not admit that you helped the rebel, you will face the same fate.”

 

The headman of the village, Zang Kho Ngam, farmers Ngam Khai, and Thawng Kho Lun admitted to helping the resistance movement in order to escape torture and death. Nonetheless, they were tortured. It took seven days for the three of them to die; they died a slow death. The soldiers cut and burned their skin. They poured salt directly into their open sores. The soldiers zealously repeated the torture that they had just meted out to Pastor Zang Kho Let. When the two farmers died, the soldiers again dragged the bodies outside of the school building and shot. The Burmese Army buried the headman Zang Kho Ngam alive.

 

 

Prohibition of Construction of Churchs and Desecration of Crosses

 

Several Chin Christian churches and infrastructure under construction in the 1990s were forced to stop by the military authority. Those who persisted in constructing their church building had been threatened or punished by the army. CHRO reports that; when the Burmese army ordered to stop construction of Salvation Army Church in Khampat, the pastor of the church ignored the order by resuming construction of the church. He was humiliated and badly beaten up by the army that he was hospitalized for several days.

 

The military regime reportedly ordered to stop construction of the following churches and Christian infrastructure; Chin Christian centenary building in Hakha – the capital of Chin State; United Pentecostal Church in Hakha; Zomi Theological dining hall in Falam; Church of Jesus Christ in Falam; hostels (both men and women) for Chin Christian College in Haka, Baptist Church in Farhual, Salvation Army church in Khampat, and the Assembly of God’s Church in Kalaymyo, Evangelical Baptist Church in Myoma Quarter, Faith Bible Theological Seminary in Lawibual Quarter, Sakollam Baptist Church, and Lawibual Baptist Church, Lai Baptist Church in Rangoon were prohibited by the authority.

 

Evidence shows that the Burmese military regime has actively targeted Christian symbols in its campaign of Burmanization and ethnocide against various ethnic groups in the country. Christian crosses erected on the tops of hills throughout Chin State have been destroyed. Many of them replaced with Buddhist pagodas and statue of Buddhist monks. Since the early 1980s, Chin communities in various villages and towns have erected wooden crosses on mounts and hill tops beside their villages and towns to symbolize their faith in Christianity, and to remind themselves of the fact that Christianity has played an important role in shaping their modern society and culture. In some cases, however, the erection of these crosses were in response to what the Chin regarded was the State-sponsored importation of Buddhism into Chin State with the construction of pagodas and temples in certain urban centers which began in the 1970s.

 

Destruction of crosses started around the early 1990s with the rapid increase in army battalions established across Chin State. Since then, almost every cross in all the nine townships in Chin State had been destroyed by the regime. Destruction of crosses is usually ordered by the township authorities or by army battalion commanders. After an order is issued, the church or community responsible for erecting the cross is given a timeframe during which they must dismantle the cross. Failure to do so within the given period often means that the cross is destroyed by the authorities and that Church leaders are arrested for defiance of orders.

 

As recently as January 3, 2005 a giant Christian cross on top of Mount Boi near Matupi town of Chin State was destroyed by Burmese troops on direct order of Colonel San Aung, one of the highest ranking military commanders in the region. The 50-foot tall concrete cross was erected by local Christians at the cost three and a half million Kyats. After destroying the cross, troops from Light Infantry Battalion (304) hoisted a Burmese flag as a sign of victory against Christianity in Chin State where more than 90 percent of the populations are Christians. There are reports the regime is making plans to construct a Buddhist pagoda on the site.

 

Since Chin Christians from inside Burma can not do anything in response to this barbaric act, exiled Chin Christians in Malaysia, India, Canada and the US has responded with protest in front of the Burmese embassies.

 

I would like to share you what was happening in my home town of Thantlang.

 

The year 1999 marked one hundredth year of the arrival of Christian gospel among the Chins. The centennial celebration was originally planned for March 15 in Haka, the Capital of Chin state where the first Ameriacan missionaries established their first mission center in 1899. Before the official celebration in Haka, advance celebrations were held locally in various townships under the leadership of local churches. In Thantlang town, the celebration was organized jointly by all denominations in the town from January 1-3 1999.

 

On January 5, when the celebration was over, the organizers erected a Centenneial Memorial Cross on a hilltop on Vuichip ridge, located west of the town. Though primarily in remembrance of the early American missionaries, selection of the location for the cross had other significance. In addition to its good view from town, the spot has spiritual and religious dimension to it. Before the advent of Christianity, Thantlang residents had traditionally believed that Vuichip ridge was the dwelling place of evil spirits and there had been legends surrounding the spirits roaming the ridge. The erection of the cross on that particular location was to signify that evil spirits have been defeated by the crucifixion Jesus Christ on the cross.

 

The cross was decorated with looking glasses so that it would be more recognizable when it glows with the reflection from the sun.

 

On the very night of the cross was erected, the township peace and development council ordered the destruction of the cross, compelling the very people who had erected the cross to destroy it. When the people refused, a section of local police were sent to destroy the cross. Six Christian pastors responsible for organizing the Centennial Celebration and the erection of the Memorial cross were arrested and interrogated by the authority.

 

In response on January 6, the whole town stage a silent protest by closing down their businesses and refusing to go to work, and by observing 24 hour fast and prayer vigil in their local churches and homes. Fearing the news of protest might spread to other towns; the authorities shutdown telephone connection of the town and arrested 20 more Church leaders. Nevertheless, on January 9, Churches in the Chin state capital, Haka joined the protest, prompting Chairman of the Chin State Peace and Development Council to go to Thantlang to end the strike by threatening and intimidating them.

 

Restriction on Freedom of Assembly and Worship

 

Like all other freedoms, freedom of assembly is subject to severe restriction in Burma. This restriction does not exempt freedom of assembly in religious contexts.

 

All gatherings and conferences, including celebrations of religious festivals, require prior authorization by the military regime. However, it is usually extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain such authorization for occasions with potentially large turnout. Citing the risk of security associated with such events, the regime arbitrarily limits the number of people who can attend an event. Moreover, organizations must apply directly to the Ministry of Home and Religious Affairs in Rangoon for permission, a process which involves a long waiting period. This time-consuming bureaucratic procedure creates uncertainties, and it often results in the event having to be cancelled or postponed. People suspect such kind of procedure is deliberately used to prevent Christians from conducting their religious affairs.

 

In rural areas, local army commanders often issue direct orders forbidding worship services, as well as Christmas and New Year celebrations. The following is transcript of radio broadcast by the Oslo-based Democratic Voice of Burma on December 23, 2002.

 

“The SPDC frontline troops summoned people from Haka and Thangtlang Townships in Chin State and told them they were not allowed to hold any Christmas ceremonies and prayer meetings. They went from village to village and told them if they wanted to hold any ceremony they were to hold it in a simple and discrete manner at their homes. Although the chairmen of the village Peace and Development Councils and pastors argued that Christmas is a very auspicious feast for Christians and requested them to allow Christmas celebrations, the column commander of the SPDC forces refused. He also said that if the chairmen and pastors deliberately held any such Christmas feast in defiance of the order, the village chairmen and pastors would all be arrested and recruited as porters. They also threatened to dislocate people.”

 

Censorship on Christian Literature and Publication

 

Since the military government came to power in 1962, the Christians in Burma, especially non-Burman nationalities have mostly been unable to print the Holy Bible in their own language inside Burma. Chin Christians, for instance, printed the Bile in the Chin language in India, and smuggled it into Burma in the 1970s and 1980s. Even the Holy Bible in Burmese, which was translated by Rev. Judson in the 1820s, never received permission to be reprinted from the Censor Board of the Burmese government, or at least the Old Testament never did. Only the New Testament, together with Psalms and Proverbs, once received permission to be printed during the entire period of the Burmese military regime, that is, from 1962 to present.

 

The CHRO received a report in the year 2000 that, in the month of June 2000, the SPDC officials in Tamu ordered 16,000 copies of the Bible to be burned in Tamu, Sagaing Division that borders India. These Bibles, which were seized in 1999 by the Burmese Army, are in Chin, Karen and other ethnic languages.

 

Discrimination Based on Ethnicity and Religion

 

Under successive Burmese governments, people of non-Burman ethnic and non-Buddhist background find themselves discriminated against their Burman Buddhist counterparts in education, employment and various levels of civil service. Even those in the army and police serving successive governments were systematically denied promotions in rank on the sole basis of their ethnicity and religion.

Since the 1980s, the new Burmese citizenship law required that every citizen of Union of Burma register for a national identity card on which all particulars including the bearer’s ethnic and religious backgrounds should be provided. Although the initial intention was to exclude “foreigners” such as Indian and Chinese immigrants from citizenship, the introduction of the identity card has had a far-reaching impact on ethnic and religious minority groups. Because the card is essential for travel, employment, health care and higher education, people of non-Burman and non-Buddhist background could be easily denied for employment as well as promotion in civil service on the basis of the particulars provided on the national identity card. In many instances, for Christians and other religious minorities, promotion in civil service is conditioned by their conversion into Buddhism. Many Christian civil servants with outstanding service records have been blatantly denied promotion while their Buddhist peers with less qualification and less seniority quickly rose to high ranking positions. Even a few exceptional non-Buddhist individuals securing high ranking positions were sacked or forced to retire from their positions.

Biak To, a Chin Christian who had served in the Burmese army from 1973 to 1990 as a Captain and later became a Lieutenant Colonel in the police explains how he was sacked for no apparent reasons in 2000:

“At the time of my dismissal, I was the only person holding a B.A degree among officers of my rank in the entire nine Police Regiments in Burma. In fact, I should have been the first one to be considered for promotions. Obviously, the authorities did not want to see a Chin Christian holding high position that they made a pre-emptive move to dismiss me without any apparent charges.”

 

Major Thawng Za Lian, who has an excellent record in his military service in the Burmese army until leaving the service in 1997, recounts his experience during his career as an officer with a background of minority religious and ethnic identity in Burma that;

 

“In the army, A, B and C are categories designated for those who can not be promoted in rank. A stands for AIDS symptom, B stands for Hepatitis B and C stands for Christians. Under these categories, those who are carrying AIDS disease are discharged from the military and those who have Hepatitis B are transferred to civil service. And all those belonging to category C (Christians) are not given promotion.”

 

Major Lian eventually left the army when he was asked to abandon his Christian faith and converted to Buddhism by his superior in order to be promoted.

 

Selective Forced Labor

 

Although most Chin families have been equally affected by the army’s use of forced labor, in many cases, forced labor is specifically directed against Christians in order to coerce them into converting to Buddhism. There are ample evidences that the Burmese military regime is using forced labor as part of its Burmanization program. The apparent theory is that by converting Chin Christians to Buddhism, an important Chin identity will be stripped away, thereby eventually assimilating them into Burman identity. Forced labor has also been used to discourage people from going to church by compelling them to work on Sundays and other Christian religious holidays.

 

State Sponsored Expansion Of Buddhism In Chin State

 

Since 1990 the military government authorities and security forces have promoted Buddhism over Christianity among the Chin. Until 1990 the Chin generally practiced either Christianity or traditional indigenous religions. The Chins were the only major ethnic minority in the country that did not largely support any significant armed organization in active rebellion against the Government or in an armed cease-fire with the Government. Since 1990 government authorities and security forces, with assistance from monks of the Hill Regions Buddhist Missions, coercively have sought to induce Chins to convert to Theravada Buddhism and to prevent Christian Chins from proselytizing Chins who practice traditional indigenous religions. This campaign, reportedly accompanied by other efforts to “Burmanize” the Chin, has involved a large increase in military units stationed in Chin State and other predominately Chin areas, state-sponsored immigration of Buddhist Burman monks from other regions, and construction of Buddhist monasteries and shrines in Chin communities with few or no Buddhists, often by means of forced “donations” of money or labor.

 

Along with other methods to Burmanize the Chin, the Burmese military government has vonverted many Chin Christian families through coercion. The government rewards people who convert to Buddhism by exempting them from forced labor, fiving them ration and monthly allowance. The government also entice Chin Christian children by offering them government scholarship as part of the border area development program. Parents often entrust their children and enrolled them in the program. However, chindlren are later found to be in Buddhist monasteries with their head shaven to become vonice Buddhist monks.

 

A People and Culture at Stake

 

The SPDC’s campaign of ethnocide against Chin people has had serious effect on the lives of the people of Chin State. The physiological dimension is rather profound. Many Chin Christians are convinced that their religious faith is making them targets for abuse, and conversion to Buddhism not only provides them a sense of security but also eases their economic hardships. Yet, there are also people who think that persecution because of their faiths makes their spiritual commitments even stronger.

 

However, it is already apparent that the ethnocide campaign is taking a toll on the Chin society. Families are increasingly separated and more people are feeling the Chinland to seek safety elsewhere. About 60,000 Chin refugees have fled to India about 12 thousands more are now taking refuge in Malaysia since the 1990s when the military junta began sending thousands of troops to Chinland.

 

 

 

 

 

Rhododendron News

Volume VIII. No. IV. July-August 2005

Chin Human Rights Organization

www.chro.org

 

CONTENTS

 

Editorial:

The Forced Labor Pandemic

 

Human Rights Situations:

 

Abuse of Religious Freedom

• Local Christians Forced to Attend Opening Ceremony of Buddhist Pagoda

 

Extortion

• Burmese Troops Extort Money from Villagers

• Army Officer Sells off 1000 Round Bamboos Forcibly Collected from Civilians for Personal Profit

 

Forced Labor

• Mass Forced Labor Exacted to Construct New Military Camp

• Villagers Forced to Renovate Army Camp

• Military Authorities Compel Civilians to Supply Wood Planks for Construction of Hospital

• SPDC Forced Primary School Children to Porter

• Army Officer Sells off 1000 Round Bamboos Forcibly Collected from Civilians for Personal Profit

• 30 Villages Forced to Contribute Sand to Renovate Army Camp

• SPDC Forced School Children and Civilians to Labor at Government’s Tea Plantation

Opinion: Indo-Burma Relations

A Cause Betrayed

Has the World’s Largest Democracy Turned Its Back on the Cause of Democracy in Burma? (Chinland Guardian)

 

Environmental Issue:

 

• MITHUNS SACRIFICED TO GREED

The Forest Ox of Burma’s Chins

 

 

Editorial

 

The Forced Labor Pandemic

 

Forced labor is still a pandemic plaguing Burma’s impoverished communities, in spite of repeated claims by the military regime that the practice no longer exists.

 

In western Burma’s Chin State alone, no less than 40 cases of forced labor have been documented since the beginning of this year. Thousands of civilians from mostly rural communities participated in forced labor requisitioned by military officers from local army units stationed at villages to the highest chain of commands, Tactical Command I and II, responsible for the administration of the whole Chin State under Northwestern Divisional Command.

 

At the conclusion of the meeting of the International Labor Organization Governing Body in March of 2005, the agency monitoring the situations of forced labor in Burma noted “grave concern” and concluded that Burma’s ruling military regime still lacks a serious political will to address the issues of forced labor in the country.

 

A major impediment to ‘eradicating’ the use of forced labor in Burma is the culture of impunity with which military commanders and personnel operate, especially in militarized zones. In Chin State, a region that has been increasingly militarized during the last few years, government troops regularly requisition forced labor from civilians in their areas to construct or renovate military camps and outposts and forced people as young as those in primary schools to carry army rations and supplies.

 

Requisitions for forced labor are not just the case of junior officers and army unit commanders exercising power in violation of directives from the top prohibiting the use of forced labor by army personnel, nor are they isolated incidents as has been portrayed by the military regime. Many of the forced labor incidents involving mass civilian populations are a result of direct requisition orders by Tactical Command No. 1 and No. 2, the highest military authorities in Chin State.

 

Reported incidents of forced labor in Chin State have gone up in the past year and increased militarization is one key factor. The expansion of army presence in southern Chin State with the establishment of Tactical Command II is largely responsible for increased use of forced labor by the army. The ongoing construction of trans-national highway between India and Burma is also responsible for significant portion of reported forced labor incidents. Many incidents of forced labor can be attributed to infrastructural development projects associated with the naming of two new Townships in Chin State, Rih Township and Ruazua Township. Another major source of forced labor requisition is the regime’s Tea Plantation Project. Hundreds of acres of private lands have been confiscated and tens of thousands of civilian populations are being regularly forced to work at the ‘tea plantations.’

 

The regime’s purported criminalization of the use of forced labor has not been paralleled by realities documented on the ground. In fact, forced labor has become a pandemic that is ravaging the livelihood of already impoverished communities in Chin State. The fact that forced labor is regularly requisitioned by the highest authorities clearly indicates that not only is the use and practice of forced labor still condoned but those responsibly for exacting compulsory labor do so with impunity.

 

Exposing the practice of forced labor in wherever, whenever and whatever form they occur in Burma is what will keep the regime in check. Chin Human Rights Organization is committed to providing reliable information of human rights situations in western Burma regions. We are thankful for the continued supports we receive from concerned individuals, groups and organizations around the world. CHRO is particularly grateful to the National Endowment for Democracy for supporting the works of CHRO for the last several years.

 

 

Human Rights Situations

 

Local Christians Forced to Attend Opening Ceremony of Buddhist Pagoda

 

5 July 2005, Aizawl:

 

On 8 June, 2005, Colonel San Aung, Chief of Chin State’s Tactical Command No. 2 based in Matupi town of southern Chin State forced more than 300 local Christians to attend the opening ceremony of a new Buddhist pagoda in the area.

 

The pagoda, named Maha Thandi Thuta Aung in Burmese, was erected on Tingvil hill just outside of Matupi Town where the Burma Army Tactical Command No. 2 is stationed. Construction of the pagoda was started in May and civilians in the area were prohibited from going near the site during the construction.

 

“Invitations” to attend the opening ceremony were sent out to all government employees from various departments and community leaders, with Colonel San Aung and his wife Daw Htay Htay Lwin acting as hosts of the event.

 

A local resident told Chin Human Rights Organization that military authorities are also planning to construct another Buddhist pagoda on top of mount Bol where a giant Christian cross was demolished earlier this year by direct orders of Colonel San Aung.

 

Burmese Troops Extort Money from Villagers

 

20 August 2005, Aizawl:

 

Company commander 2nd Lt. Aung Kyaw Than from Light Infantry Battalion 268 (based in Falam) is demanding Kyats 5,000 from each village in the vicinity of Vuangtu village of Thantlang township. The officer is commanding in charge of an army camp based out of Vuangtu village and the money was meant to pay for renovation of his camp.

 

The order came into effect on August 4, 2005 and 11 villages were required to bring in the money by August 15. These villages were warned of severe punishment if they failed to come up with the money by the deadline. Some villages had to borrow the required cash from well-to-do businessmen in their community, while others simply divided up the required amount among all the households in their villages. Some villages are having a hard time coming up with the money and are yet to send in the money, said Chairman of the Village Peace and Development Council from XXX village, whose community was affected by the army officer’s order.

 

Money was extorted from the following villages of Thantlang Township, northern Chin State.

 

Tluangram (A), Tluangram (B), Belhar, Lulpilung, Vomkua, Salen, Tikir (A), Tikir (B), Hmun Halh, Sialam and Banawh Tlang villages.

 

 

Army Officer Sells off 1000 Round Bamboos Forcibly Collected from Civilians for Personal Profit

 

5 July, 2005, Aizawl:

 

On 10 June, 2005, Company commander Captain Myo Nwe from Burma Army Light Infantry Battalion 289 stationed at Shinletwa Village of Paletwa Township, southern Chin State sold off more than 10,000 round bamboos he collected from 9 villages in the area to buyers in Sittwe (Ayekyap). All proceeds were kept for his personal benefit.

 

During the last week of May, Capt. Myo Nwe summoned a meeting of Village PDC Chairmen from the 9 villages at Shinletwa army camp where he ordered each village to bring him designated amount of round bamboos at the latest by June 5, 2005.

 

One village PDC Chairman, whose community was affected by the Captain’s order complained, “Forcing us to cut the bamboos for his personal benefit seems to be meant only to deliberately afflict our community. He said the bamboos were for renovation of the army camp.”

 

The following is the quotas of round bamboos for each village to contribute:

 

Salaipi Village = 1,000, Ma U Village =1,500, Saiha Village = 1,800, Pamu Village = 2,000, Da Thwe Village = 1,500, Khung Ywa Village = 1,000, Shwe Letwa Village = 1,500, Mara Hla Village = 2,000 and Pa Thein Village = 1,500 round bamboos.

 

 

 

Mass Forced Labor Exacted to Construct New Military Camp

 

August 2, 2005, Aizawl:

 

Major Tin Moe, patrol column commander from Burma Army Infantry Battalion 304 (under Chin State’s Tactical Command No. 2 based in Matupi) temporarily stationed at Dar Ling village of southern Chin State’s Matupi Township requisitioned compulsory labor to build a new military post at Dar Ling village. More than one thousands civilians from 20 villages in the area have been working at the site since the first week of July, 2005.

 

The forced labor incident was reported to Chin Human Rights Organization by Mr. XXX, Chairman of the Village Peace and Development Council, XXX village of Thantlang Township.

 

Starting form 11 to16 July 2005, the village headman and 50 of his villagers were forced to dig a 150-feet long drainage measuring 3 feet in width and 4 feet in depth.

 

Another 50 civilians and members of the Village PDC from Khuapi village were forced to supply 4,000 round bamboos. Each stick of the 4000 bamboos has to be 10 feet in length. The work to collect the bamboos lasted from 9 to 16 July, 2005.

 

From 16 to 21 July 2005, for a total of 5 days, 50 civilians and members of the Village PDC from Hlung Mang village (Matupi Township) were forced to dig trenches and bunkers for the army camp.

 

Civilians from Fartlang village (Thantlang Township) were compelled to supply 50 sticks of wood measuring 10 feet in length. Civilians from other villages engaged in other works such as fencing and building barracks, digging trenches and bunkers, and collecting woods and bamboos.

 

The work occurs on a daily basis and all workers are required to supply themselves with food and tools for the job. The work starts at 5:00 am in the morning and lasts until 6:30 in the evening. Workers are given breakfast break at 11:00 am and dinner at 7:00 p.m. The work was projected for completion in the month of July and workers are not exempt from working on Sundays, said xxx, Chairman of the Village PDC from XXX village, Thantlang Township.

 

“The expansion of military establishment in our areas only brought hardship to the local people who rely on farming for our survival. Now that the new army camp is only 5 miles away from our village, it is predictable the kinds of hardship we will have to keep up with,” complained the Chairman of PDC from XXX village.

 

“The patrol column commander has already ordered us to raise chickens, pigs and other livestock. He might even call us for another round of forced labor. He said that we cannot ignore his order because it is our civic duty to comply with army orders. Many people from our village are already fed up with the perpetual forced labor and are contemplating to escape to Mizoram across the border,” he added.

 

Villagers Forced to Renovate Army Camp

 

5 August 2005, Aizawl:

 

Platoon Commander 2nd Lieutenant Win Zaw Oo from Light Infantry Battalion 289 based in the town of Paletwa in southern Chin State exacted forced labor from civilians living in an around Shinletwa village to renovate army camp stationed at the village. The work started on 16 July, 2005 and lasted until 19 July.

 

90 civilians from Salanpi, Saiha and Ma U villages were ordered to report themselves at the army camp one day prior to the day the work was to begin. All the forced laborers were ordered to bring with them their own tools and enough rations for five days. Workers were made to gather twigs and round bamboos needed to fence the army camp.

 

Lt. Win Zaw Oo, in his requisition warned severe punishment for non-compliance with the order.

 

 

Military Authorities Compel Civilians to Supply Wood Planks for Construction of Hospital

 

17 August 2005

 

On 10 July, 2005, Battalion Commander Lt. Colonel Kan Maw Oo of the Burma Army Light Infantry Battalion 269 based in Tiddim Town of northern Chin State ordered residents living in villages across the Township to supply wood planks to construct a new Civil Hospital in the area.

 

Laitui village has more than 500 households. Each household was forced to supply 2 wood planks of 8’x6″x2″ cubic feet. The planks are to be brought to the site of the new hospital by the first week of September. “Our family had to buy the mandatory 2 planks for 2500 Kyats out of our pocket,” explained a villager of Laitui.

 

Burma’s military junta started the construction of the new hospital in Tiddim early this year. The hospital is to accommodate 50 beds and two buildings are to be constructed. Civilian residents in the areas have been adversely affected by extortion of money and demands of wood planks as a result of the new hospital. Prisoners from hard labor camp in the area have also been extensively used for the hospital construction.

 

SPDC Forced Primary School Children to Porter

 

8 August 2005, Aizawl:

 

On 15 July 2005, commander of Lailenpi army camp Sergeant Tin Soe from Burma Army Infantry Battalion 305 based in Matupi, southern Chin State, forced underage primary school children to carry army rations and supplies.

 

The army rations were on their way to Laienpi camp from Sabawngte army camp. Civilians from villages along the route were forced to carry the rations from one village to the next. But when the supplies reached the village of Mala, most villagers were out working in their farms and the supplies had to be left there overnight because there were no adult persons in the village to carry the loads on to the next village.

 

Arriving in the village the next day, Sergeant Tin Soe and his troops immediately summoned U Hla Oo, Secretary of the Village PDC and demanded explanations why the rations were still in the village. Sergeant Tin Soe punched him in the face and demanded that U Hla Oo arrange for 18 persons to carry the supply loads within one hour.

 

The Sergeant dismissed U Hla Oo’s explanation and pleas to have the supplies transported as soon as the villagers arrived back in the village from their farms. Unsatisfied, Sergeant Tin Soe slapped him in the face and said that he will find people to carry the loads himself. Searching for people, he found 10 primary children and 5 government servants and forced them to carry the supplies.

 

Half way through the journey, two of the youngest children became too exhausted to carry on any longer. Fortunately, they met with 5 Lailenpi villagers making their way back from Mizoram to buy household goods. The five villagers then had to substitute the 10 boys.

 

The ration loads carried by the ten boys included 10 tins of rice, 10 bottles of cooking oil, 10 viss (15 kgs) of fish paste and 5 viss of dried chili. They traveled a 12-mile distance before being substituted by the 5 villagers.

 

 

30 Villages Forced to Contribute Sand to Renovate Army Camp

 

8 July, 2005, Aizawl:

 

Company Commander Major Myo Win, stationed at Tibual camp from Burma Army Light Infantry Battalion 268 (Battalion based in Falam Town) requisitioned sands from 30 villages in Falam Township to renovate an army camp at Tibual village. Beginning in the first week of June, 2005, each of the 30 villages was ordered to send in 10 tins of sand.

 

In his order, Major Myo Win set the deadline for each village to bring in the sand at the end of July and warned that any village that didn’t meet the deadline would face severe penalty. As a result, some villages were compelled to gather sands from Tio river (A river dividing international boundary between India and Burma), a distance of three days travel by walking. Civilians from these villagers had to transport the sands on horseback. Villages whose communities were too far off from Tio river had to buy the sand for 1000 Kyats per tin from communities that are closer to the sandbank at Tio river.

 

In a similar incident, on May 5, 2005, Chin villagers were forced to contribute 1 tin of sand per household to construct a Buddhist pagoda at Sabawngte village.

 

The 30 villages whose communities were forced to contribute sands were;

(1)Tah Tlang, (2)Thing Hual, (3)Tikhuang tum, (4)Tlangkhua, (5)Aibuk, (6)Leilet, (7)Sing Ai, (8)Zawngte, (9)Thing Cang, (10)Phung Zung, (11)Khaw Lung, (12)Bawm Ba, (13)Tiah Dai, (14)Lung Tan, (15)Zan Mual, (16)Da te ti, (17) Hmawng kawn, (18)Khaw Thlir, (19)Phun te, (20)Sa ek, (21)Sial lam, (22)cawng hawih, (23)Khua mual, (24)Hmun luah, (25)cawh te, (26)Lian hna thar, (27)Lian hna hlun, (28)Hai heng, (29)Khuang Lung, (30)Lung Dar Village.

 

SPDC Forced School Children and Civilians to Labor at Government’s Tea Plantation

 

25 July, 2005, Aizawl:

 

U Sai Maung, Chairman of the Township Peace and Development Council for Tiddim Township issued an order requiring Tiddim residents to participate in compulsory labor to work at government’s tea plantation. Workers included ordinary civilians, students and government servants. They are expected to contribute labor for government’s tea plantation once every month beginning early this year.

 

Each governmental department in Tiddim administrative center was assigned one acre of tea plantation. Government employees from these departments are required to plant tea, pluck off weeds, gather twigs, and roof plantation beds. Supervised by local village PDC Chairmen, those failing to show up for work were fined 500 Kyats for each absence.

 

On paper, Light Infantry Battalion 268 based in the town was also expected to work at the plantation. However, the Battalion warded off responsibility by forcing civilians to work on their behalf. A civilian who was forced to burden off the army’s work testified to Chin Human Rights Organization.

 

The Township authorities gave orders to teachers working at schools in Tiddim to instruct their students to collect manures. According to the order, each student is required to bring in one Viss of manure (about 1 ½ Kgs) to the Township PDC office on a designated deadline each month.

 

The State Peace and Development Council arbitrarily designated Chin State as a tea plantation area in 2002. With the slogan of “Chin State Shall Become a State of Tea Abundance,” the military regime has been forcing local people to work in the project. The tea plantation in this area is located at two miles from Tiddim Town.

 

 

Opinion: Indo-Burma Relations

 

A Cause Betrayed

Has the World’s Largest Democracy Turned Its Back on the Cause of Democracy in Burma?

 

Ram Uk Thang

Chinland Guardian

 

( CG Editor’s Note: In the wake of India’s renewed offensive against Burma’s pro-democracy opposition groups, notably the Chin National Front sine July 2005, many activists based in India are increasingly frustrated and are helplessly feeling that their cause has been betrayed by the world’s largest democracy, a country they have always looked to for support. The uncertainty and disappointment brought about by the storming of Camp Victoria, CNF’s military headquarters by the Mizoram Armed Police on July 21, has many Chins raised though questions. Mizos and Chins consider themselves ethnically and culturally closely related. The following article takes on a unique angle on Indo-Burma relations in the wake of India’s recent military operations against the Chin National Front.)

 

 

India prides itself on being the world’s largest democracy, a country of diverse cultures and civilization. With such a prestige, India stands on the side of those supporting the promotion of democracy and human rights around the world. As a regional and emerging world power, India has a unique responsibility to support democracy and freedom movement in countries across the regions of Asia.

 

From the time of the first government of independent India under Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru through the era of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, successive governments of the Congress Party of India has taken a principled stand to support freedom movement in Asia and around the world. It was through this noble foreign policy that India quickly threw its support behind the movement for democracy in Burma in 1988 when thousands of unarmed pro-democracy demonstrators were butchered and exiled by Burmese Armed Forces. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of the Congress Party of India wholeheartedly and unreservedly supported those working to restore the respect for human rights, dignity and democracy in one of India’s most important neighboring countries. India showed its continued support for the cause of freedom and democracy in Burma by awarding the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding to Burma’s pro-democracy leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi in 1995 and Rajiv Shmirti Parashka award in 1996.

 

However, it is very unfortunate that the current administration of the Congress party led by Sonia Gandhi has chosen to foster economic and security engagement with Burma’s military junta at the expense of those working to restore fundamental freedom, human rights and democratic governance in Burma, a stance that has completely diverted from the legacy of the predecessor Congress government. Concerned by China’s growing economic and military influence in its neighbor and simmering insurgencies in the North East, India has signed the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Burma, a bilateral agreement that would increase trade and security cooperation between the two countries. What does this mean in practical terms? India has essentially chosen to embrace a pariah state in pursuit of short-term economic interests, thus effectively walking away from its longstanding traditional policy of putting principle above all other considerations.

 

In this context, it is inconceivable that the world’s largest democratic country has turned its back on the movement for freedom and democracy in Burma. The recent attack on the headquarters of Chin National Front, a major opposition force in Burma’s democratic movement has brought deep disappointment and frustration to those still struggling for the reinstatement of a civilian democratic government in Rangoon. India should be mindful of the fact that in choosing to side with the military junta, it is dealing with an illegitimate regime that is responsible for displacing nearly half a million of its citizens to Thailand, India and Bangladesh and internally displacing more than a million people inside the country. Burma’s military regime still imprisons more than 1300 political prisoners including the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi and leaders of opposition parties. For more than one decade, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and the International Labor Organization have repeatedly condemned the regime’s systematic practice of forced labor and violations of fundamental human rights. The UN General Assembly, proposing a Tripartite Dialogue, has passed resolutions after resolution urging the Burmese military regime to enter into a political dialogue with pro-democracy oppositions led by the National League for Democracy and representatives of Burma’s ethnic groups. To this end, Secretary General Kofi Anan under the power mandated by the General Assembly has been endeavoring to restore human rights and civilian democratic rule in Burma through his Special Envoy Razali Ismail and Special Human Rapportuer Mr. Paul Sergio Pinheiro. The growing friendly relations with Burma’s military junta and India’s recent attacks on Chin National Front, a major player in Burma’s democratic movement, is seriously undermining the international effort to bring about democracy and respect for human rights in Burma.

 

Where are the ideals of human rights and dignity that are affirmed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Where is the principle and visions of democracy? And where are the security and safety of the oppressed people? Does might still determine right? These are the questions that immediately come to mind in light of India’s unprincipled actions.

 

Mizos and Chins are blood brothers. It was only in 1947 that we became separated into two different countries. The only difference that lies between us is the fact that those integrated into India call themselves Mizos while those concentrated in Burma call themselves Chins. We share the same ancestry, history and culture. It is said that blood is thicker than water. And because we are bound by our blood no one can set us apart.

 

On June 21 this year, amidst pressure from the Central Government, the Mizoram Armed Police stormed and destroyed the Headquarters of Chin National Front, a group that has been fighting against Burma’s military dictatorship for the rights of Chin people and restoration of democracy in Burma. This was very unfortunate! If only people would realize the sad fate of the Chin people who have been victims of oppression and ethnic cleansing at the hands of the Burma Army. The suffering of Chin people is the suffering of Mizo people because we are one and the same people. The movement of the Chin people today is a movement for democracy and human rights. And it is in India’s long-term interest to have a democratic country in its neighbor as well as in the regions of Asia. On the contrary, it was very unfortunate that the government of Mizoram had ordered that attacks on Chin National Front. It is troubling to think that this incident might leave a black spot in our history.

 

For 20 years from 1966 to 1986 the Mizo National Front had led an armed struggle for Mizoram statehood and liberation of the Mizo people. During these years, it is common knowledge as to how staunchly and wholeheartedly the movement was supported by Chin people living in Burma and Bawm people living in Bangladesh. The mere fact that we are separated by artificially created international boundaries did not deter us from standing together in times of importance and hardship. Rather, we were reminded of how intimately close people we were!

 

Many people were elated and encouraged when the MNF was elected to lead the Mizoram Government. For those in hardship, the election of the MNF was greeted with a deep sense of optimism. And it is a fact that in the minds of our people the international boundaries do not exist between us. We’ve always counted on the fact that as brothers we will stand by each other’s side in times of joy and hardship. We are to feed each other when one is hungry and provide shelter when another is in need of refuge. That is what family is all about. Unless we take care of each other in times of need and hardship, the only thing we can accomplish would be distrust, frustration and disappointment.

 

It is high time we reevaluate how we treat each other as family members. We have to take a hard look at ourselves and ask whether driving away those in need of our help is really consistent with our tradition and values that we dearly hold close to hearts. Are we to be satisfied that people in need of our help are left to die? Blood brothers risk their lives for each other and help one another in time of hardship. It is upon us to be able to notice the kinds of divisive strategy employed against us and be aware of how that would affect us negatively for our collective interest. Let’s act together and help each other. For we are a people characterized by our love for peace, a people who can show to the world we are for peace.

 

Environmental Issue

 

MITHUNS SACRIFICED TO GREED

The Forest Ox of Burma’s Chins

 

A Report By Project Maje

 

Introduction

 

This report is a brief summary of information about the mithun, a type of domesticated bovine found in the Himalayan foothills of South/Southeast Asia, particularly addressing its situation in the Chin State of Burma. The spelling “mithun” (accurate in terms of pronunciation) is used here for the bovine species Bos frontalis, although “mithan” is also a common spelling, and “mythun” is another spelling in use. This name probably came from Assamese dialects. The Chin people, one of the Zo ethnic groups, who live in western Burma, call these animals “sia.” Mithuns are also known as “gayals” in India.

 

This report is by no means a comprehensive or scientific document on mithuns. It is inspired by accounts of mithun confiscation and commercialization of mithun raising in the Chin State. It is intended as an alert about the present situation of this particular mammal in this particular area. Under Burma’s military dictatorship, the Chin people have been subjected to numerous human rights violations, including religious persecution. Most Chins are Christians, with Animist traditions. Their relationship to the mithun has strong elements of remaining Animist culture. The Chins’ mountain forest environment has been in jeopardy in recent years, as Burma’s military regime carries out logging and unsustainable harvest of forest products, and promotes plantation agriculture.

 

What is a Mithun?

 

The mithun is generally understood to be a domesticated, smaller version of the gaur. Mithuns and gaurs are related to other great Asian bovines: the banteng of Indonesia and the elusive kouprey of Cambodia. Gaurs are found in remaining forest areas of South and Southeast Asia, from India to Vietnam. The much more limited area of mithun habitat has included Bangladesh’s Chittagong/Bandarban Hill Tracts, Burma’s Arakan and Chin States, Northeast India, and Bhutan. Mithuns are normally found at elevations from 2,000 to 9,000 feet, in forested areas. Of course, the forest habitat for gaurs and mithuns has been disappearing rapidly in recent decades.

 

Looming as high as 7 feet tall at the shoulder, gaurs usually have dark bodies, white legs, and curved horns. Gaurs feed on forest leaves, young plants and grasses. The entire gaur population of the world was estimated at 13,000 to 30,000 in 2000, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Species (IUCN) which rates the gaur as “vulnerable” on its Red List of Threatened Species; the US Government classifies the gaur as “endangered.” A gaur calf was cloned in 2001 but died soon after birth.

 

A mere 50,000 mithuns were found in India in a 1983 survey; the Burma mithun population was probably similar; both populations may be decreased significantly since then. Mithuns average about 5 feet tall at the shoulder, and have similar coloring to the gaur, but less curved horns. Both gaurs and mithun’s have a distinctive ridge along their backs. Mithuns are normally browsers rather than grazers, eating forest leaves and young plants, instead of requiring pasture land like other bovines. In a kind of part-time domestication, mithuns have usually been “kept” by releasing them into forests for feeding during the day (with or without human supervision.) While some mithuns become feral and stay in the forest full-time, most communities would bring them back to the village for the night. Traditionally, Chin mithun owners would keep the animals beneath their stilt-houses at night.

 

Unlike the rather fierce gaur, which can fight off tigers and avoid humans, mithuns are extremely docile and appear to seek human contact, particularly if salt is involved. According to Chin statesman Pu Lian UK, whose family had kept mithuns:

“They like salt very much and that makes them very easy to rear. They know their master’s voice. If their master makes a usual way of shouting loud to call them to come to him, all of the herds will run to the voice. They will graze in some thick forest and will all get together to one spot where they are usually fed salt regularly like in the evening.”

 

Mithuns in Traditional Chin culture

 

The mithun has played an important cultural role for the tribal peoples of the India/Burma frontier mountains, including the Chins and Nagas. For the Chins, the mithun is a totem or icon of ethnic identity. The Chins use the expression “As gentle as a mithun,” and according to Frederick J. Simoons in “A Ceremonial Ox of India” the definitive work on the traditional role of the mithun, Chins also have mithun metaphors for beauty and strength.

 

Mithuns have not been used for plowing, as upland hill cultivation traditionally did not use draft animals. In recent years buffaloes have been introduced to Chin State for plowing in valley wet-rice growing areas. Mithuns also have not been used by the Chins for dairy purposes, although their milk is rich in butterfat content. The only Chin utilization of mithuns has been for meat. In particular, the mithun was of great importance in traditional Chin life (and for neighboring Naga and other tribal societies) as a sacrificial animal.

 

Mithuns, especially those with the most purebred gaur-like dark coats, were traditionally the ultimate sacrificial animal, required for a series of Feasts of Merit. Mithuns were sacrificed for the most important spiritual/medical needs, or to celebrate slaying of important wild beasts or human enemies. Following its ritual killing, the meat of a sacrificed mithun would be shared in the village. Mithuns were also slaughtered for meat outside of sacrificial use, and have continued to be used this way following the conversion of most Chins to Christianity. Mithun meat is still an important feature of Chin weddings and Christmas celebrations. It is said to be the most delicious form of beef, with a marbled texture.

 

Mithuns have traditionally been a form of currency among the mountain people, exchanged for goods, friendship or alliances, and used to pay fines, ransoms, tributes, and bride-prices. Sworn oaths were sealed in mithun blood. A herd of mithuns was a traditional sign of personal or village wealth. Frederick J. Simoons wrote of the Central Chins in mid-20th Century:

 

“No matter what other animals a man may own, his wealth is judged by the number of his mithan… Mithan must be sacrificed by a man to attain the highest social status. The birth of a mithan is celebrated as is the birth of a child… The theft and slaughter of a mithan are among the most serious of crimes…”

 

Mithuns Today

 

In present-day Chin society, even with its Christian influence and growth of towns, the mithun continues to be of importance. According to Pu Lian Uk:

“They are mostly kept in rural villages, not much in the town. But town people are starting now rearing the mythuns in herds outside the town like in Thantlang, Mindat and Matupi towns. Mr. X. from X. is an example. He made a fencing area in which the mythun could take shelter at night outside the town. The herds of their mythuns know the voices of him and his wife. He gave them proper names like “Black” or “White” or any name. If one of the mythuns’ name is called shouting loud, all the herds run to the voice as the mythuns know that the voice will be for serving salts. It seems not so difficult to keep them in herds in this way.”

 

“Mythun ownership once was very common for any ordinary people. But since its usefulness is just only for meat, people where wet rice fields are cultivated keep buffaloes rather than mythuns as buffaloes could be used for plowing the wet rice field… At the same time mythuns could destroy crops in the agriculture land, for which the owner is to be fined for t he cost of the crops being destroyed by his mythuns. So, its keeping has no longer been as common as before. But still many villages keep mythuns. We should say that it still is kept quite common enough in many of the villages throughout the Chin State. Any ordinary person could rear it as they wish.”

 

Traditional mithun-keeping has apparently been mostly sustainable with less damage to forests than could be caused by herds of goats, sheep or cattle. As long as the numbers of mithuns and the amount of forest have remained in balance, the effects appear preferable to those of livestock which require clearing of pasture land. The mithuns were a reason to preserve the forests. For the Chins, mithuns have been a beneficial link between the forest wilderness and the village settlement. A Chin veterinarian writes:

“My opinion about Mithun raising in traditional method is it will not cause significant damage on the forest. The traditional raising method with normal scale (not too many Mithun) is actually beneficial to environmental conservation.”

 

Confiscation

 

Unfortunately, the possession of this one limited form of wealth by the Chins, an impoverished people, has not gone unnoticed by Burma’s military regime. The Chin State is one of the most remote, isolated regions of Burma, and access to data on the status of Chin-owned mithuns is very limited. Still, there has been at least one report of widespread confiscation of mithuns by Burma’s military forces in Chin State, which is consistent with the pattern of livestock confiscation in other regions in Burma.

 

The confiscation of cattle, buffalo, and other livestock by the troops of Burma’s regime is a widespread practice, intended either for the immediate feeding of undersupplied troops, or for commercial gain by the military establishment. The US Department of State’s “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices,” notes that the Burma regime’s military units “routinely have confiscated livestock.” A commentary by the Shan Human Rights Foundation (SHRF Monthly Report, November 2003) states:

“Roaming Burmese soldiers taking a few chickens, killing a few pigs and shooting a few head of cattle here and there in the rural areas of Shan State may not seem very important compared to the other more severe kinds of human rights violations such as killing, rape, torture and forced labour, etc. However, if it happens frequently, it does cause a lot of trouble for the villagers and in many cases even badly affects their very livelihood.”

Pu Lian Uk writes about this abuse:

“Confiscating cattles in herds has been a routine work of Burmese military armed forces and police and it seems as if there is no place to make complaint as the military regime is betray fing the citizens. There is no way to correct things if the watcher and caretaker violates what it watches and take care of. People just suffer their losses silently with tears being left with nothing. Of course those cattle confiscated are usually accused of being smuggled out of the country.”

 

Pu Lian Uk comments about confiscation of mithuns under the guise of anti-smuggling enforcement:

“They confiscate when mythuns are likely to be sold out to foreign land. It is confiscated under the law of custom and duty to prevent exporting without giving duties. They are not confiscated if they are not sold to foreign countries which mostly is from Western Chin State, to Mizoram in India. It is also much valued there as it is valued by the Chins on Burma side. But the worse thing under the military regime is the mythuns are just confiscate with hout proper trial. They just confiscate all the animals without allowing the victim to pay the fine for the worth of his case according to judicial procedure.”

 

It is within the context of widespread livestock confiscation by Burma’s military that the following account by Pastor Satin Lal from Falam, Chin State (recorded in the Project Maje report Ashes and Tears) is of particular concern:

“About the livestock in Chin State. One of the unique animals that we can see in the Chin State is the mithun. From one mithun we can get 200 viss of meat. About 300 kilograms. All the mithuns were bought by the military and they sold them into the foreign country. If our own Chin people sold these animals into the border area, into India, we would be arrested and put into the jail for five to six years. Because they sold those animals, those who had connection with the [government] military, sold all those mithuns to another country, now there are hardly any left, and almost extinct. Each household used to raise the mithun. It was one of the symbols of the Chin people, and one of our wealths. We killed that animal only when we celebrate a big ceremony, as in ancient times.”

 

Control and commercialization

 

Some cross-border or interethnic trade of mithuns has existed for several decades; according to Simoons, back in 1966 the Chin-related Baums of Bangladesh were raising mithuns in order to sell the meat to Muslim Bengalis of Bangladesh. However, this trade was always quite limited, with most mithuns raised only for village consumption. Commercialization of mithun raising for trade in meat is mainly a recent development. Beef-eating Northeast Indian Christian or Buddhist ethnic groups or Buddhist Burmese are potential markets; mithun meat could be canned or dried meat for further overseas export. Such ventures would require a major departure from the traditional scale and method of mithun-raising, but Burma’s military regime appears to be promoting this type of commercialization in Chin State.

 

A report from the regime’s Myanmar Information Committee, “Information Sheet 28 July 2003: Development of Agriculture, Livestock Breeding in Chin State” shows the regime’s interest in commercialization of mithun raising (its mithun population figures are of questionable veracity):

“Raising of domesticated wild ox: So far, there are 32,491 domesticated wild oxen. Over 58,000 domesticated wild oxen will be raised under a three-year plan from 2003-2004 to 2005-2006. The State has made arrangements to render assistance in loans and prevention and treatment of disease.”

 

A visit by Burma’s Prime Minister, General Khin Nyunt, to Chin State in 2003, has heightened concerns about the commercialization of mithuns. From reports in the regime’s “New Light of Myanmar,” November 27, 2003, “Prime Minister inspects development projects in Chin State”:

“Chairman of [Tonzang] Township Peace and Development Council U Khin Maung Oo reported on regional development projects including education, health and transport sectors of the region, arrangements for growing 840 acres of tea and breeding of domestic wild oxen and requirements.”

“[In Tonzang, Khin Nyunt stated that] domesticated wild oxen thrive well in Chin State and thus the government is providing loans for the region.”

“Chairman of [Tiddim] Township Peace and Development Council U Sai Maung Lu reported on location and area of the township, population, national races living in the region, agriculture, the raising of domesticated wild ox, education, health, communication and generating of hydroelectric power. Chairman of Chin State Peace and Development Council Col. Tin Hla gave a supplementary report.”

 

“[In Tiddim, Khin Nyunt] said due to transport difficulty in Chin State, the government has spent a large sum of money on development of roads linking townships in Chin State and plain regions, growing of tea and raising of domesticated wild oxen. He said local people are to cooperate with local authorities, social organizations, and departmental officials for successful implementation of the tasks… The Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries has already made arrangements for raising of domesticated wild oxen and other livestock breeding tasks which are marketable in neighbouring countries. Therefore, local people are to change livestock breeding on manageable scale to commercial one gradually.”

 

It seems significant that these reports from Burma’s regime avoid using the name “mithun,” perhaps because it is an ethnic term rather than a word from the Burmese (dominant) language. Instead they refer to “domesticated wild” livestock, something of an awkward oxymoron. This may be part of a plan to separate an ethnic people from a “resource” as is common in many areas of Burma under the military regime, which has also replaced indigenous place names, substituting new Burmese-sounding versions of towns and rivers.

 

Concerns

 

The Chin veterinarian comments: “I think it is almost impossible to raise Mithun for commercial scale by traditional way. That is not only because of possible damages to environment, but also because of the profit return and the investment (money, time, market, transportation, etc.) are not balanced.” The Burma regime appears to be promoting a large-scale shift from small, family-owned forest-ranging herds of mithuns for local use, to commercialized herds for export use.

 

The Burma regime’s emphasis on a scheme for changing a traditional, sustainable way of raising mithuns to a government-controlled, commercialized, export-oriented system is of concern due to the regime’s proven disregard for the rights of indigenous peoples, lack of environmental protection, and short-term profit obsessions. Current regime efforts to convert forest hillsides to tea plantations in Chin State give rise to similar concerns. While mithun raising may be undertaken on a commercial or export basis in the future, it is doubtful that given existing conditions in Burma, it will be much more than the Burma army’s confiscation of one of the local people’s few sources of wealth for trade to neighboring countries or the lowlands. Additionally, this commercialization of mithun raising by the non-Chin central Burma regime may be viewed as at best an interference, and at worst a severe cultural humiliation.

 

It is also possible that incompetent tampering with the breeding of mithuns may place them at risk. Some previous efforts to breed mithuns for commercial purposes have lacked success, according to the Chin veterinarian:

“I would like to share some information from a Vet.’s point of view. Since from 1996, the regime ordered local livestock and breeding department to raise wild Mithuns in the herds. Then, they brought some Mithuns (approx. 30) from Chin State to Yangon [Rangoon, Burma’s capital] to perform research on Artificial Insemination (A.I.) and Embryo Transfer (E.T.) in order to achieve, the final target, foreign currency. Unfortunately, it didn’t happen the way they expected. When they did A.I. to female Mithun with the semen of domestic or imported dairy bull, conception was failure all the time. And again, abortion was occurred when they tried E.T. to female Mithun.”

 

The danger of changing forest-browsing free-range mithuns into a type of artificially bred, artificially medicated, feedlot-raised super-cattle can be seen in the global epidemics of “mad cow” bovine spongiform encephalopathy and other food-animal diseases. Mithuns have proven especially susceptible to contagious foot and mouth disease. Such commercialization efforts may cancel out the natural advantages of the forest-ranging mithuns. As scientists from India’s National Research Center on Mithun have written:

“Since mithuns are free-ranging bovines and graze in isolation in the open forests, they are naturally quarantined from some of the contagious diseases. However, th bey may be affected by many of the diseases of domestic as well as wild ruminants, in the grazing-browsing areas. Such incidences have become more frequent with increased deforestation and more and more land coming under crop cultivation and human habitation.”

 

Rampant logging and encroaching tea plantations are now threatening the normal forest home of the mithuns, showing how fragile is the ecological relationship between humans, animals, and remaining forest in Chin State. In the regime’s new order, mithuns can be removed from the forest, and the forest cut down, just as villagers can be relocated from their ancestral homelands.

 

Combining health/breeding risks with the possibility of excessive export for slaughter, and natural habitat destruction, the regime’s commercialization schemes may actually endanger the mithuns rather than (as claimed iby Khin Nyunt) increasing these numbers. One need only look to the dwindling teak groves of Burma to see how decimation has happened to a once mighty and thriving tree species.

 

In his best-selling history book, Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies Jared Diamond lists the fourteen large mammals domesticated by humans. The mithun is one of the fourteen, and is the rarest of them, being counted in the tens of thousands rather than in the millions like all the others. Although the mithun population on the India side of the India/Burma frontier may be stable or even increasing, those on Burma side appear to be at some degree of risk. In the worst-case scenario, the mithun could be eligible for being the first large domesticated animal to face extinction.

 

At present, science has to resort to attempting to clone a gaur in hopes of species survival. Will the gaur-related mithuns of Burma suffer that fate as well? And with their mithuns gone, how effectively will the Chins survive as a culture? There may be other kinds of meat, but when a people’s relationship with nature is destroyed, much of its identity is irrevocably lost.

 

Recommendations

 

1. The international community must raise its awareness of issues relating to the threatened Chin people of Burma, particularly natural resource extraction/destruction and human rights violations. The proposed Western Burma to India gas pipeline (of corporations Daewoo and ONGC) poses a special peril to the Chins and their land, as a possible pipeline route may be secured by the Burma military. Chin refugees in precarious situations in India and Malaysia need international support. The little-known situation of the Naga people of Burma also requires increased research and publicity. The Chins and Nagas have important cultures which are under grave pressure from Burma’s military regime, including imposition of changes to sustainable mithun raising.

 

2. A complete end to abuse of ethnic nationality people of Burma must be an unwavering condition of any political process in Burma. These abuses include a wide array of human rights violations, with confiscation of livestock a serious crime against civilians throughout Burma.

3. Commercial schemes for raising mithuns must not be undertaken without the full, informed, equitable and democratic assent and participation of the local people who have traditionally raised mithuns. To do otherwise may endanger mithun survival and is a cultural crime against the Chin and Naga peoples of Burma.

 

4. The preservation of forests remaining in northwest Burma, and particularly those in Chin State, which are habitats for mithuns, must be an urgent priority for the international community. Wood and wildlife products from Bu ârma should not be imported by any other countries. Environmental preservation in partnership with local people must be an intrinsic part of Burma’s political process, and the present unsustainable military/commercial resource extraction must cease.

 

Project Maje

3610 NE 70th Ave

Portland OR 97213 USA

February 2004

Thank you to Pu Lian Uk, Salai Kipp Kho Lian, “Chin veterinarian,” and the Chin Forum Information Service: www.chinforum.org.

 

Sources:

 

Board on Science and Technology for International Development, National Research Council, “Little-Known Asian Animals with a Promising Economic Future” National Academy Press, Washington DC 1983.

Diamond, Jared, “Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies” W.W. Norton, New York 1999.

International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species, 2003. www.redlist.org

Lehman, Frederick K., “The Structure of Chin Society” University of Illinois Press, Urbana IL, 1963.

Myanmar Information Committee, “Information Sheet 28 July 2003: Development of Agriculture, Livestock Breeding in Chin State”

New Light of Myanmar, On Line Edition, November 27, 2003 “Prime Minister Inspects Development Projects in Chin State”

Project Maje, “Ashes and Tears: Interviews with Refugees from Burma on Guam” 2001. www.projectmaje.org

Rajkhowa, S., Rajkhowa, J., Bujarbaruah, K.M. “Diseases of Mithun (Bos frontalis): A Review” Veterinary Bulletin, April 2003. www.animalscience.com

Shan Human Rights Foundation Monthly Report, November 2003. www.shanland.org

Simoons, Frederick J., with Simoons, Elizabeth S., “A Ceremonial Ox of India: The Mithan in Nature, Culture, and History” University of Wisconsin Press, Madison WI 1968.

United States Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, 2003. www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2003/27765.htm

Vumson, “Zo History” Mizoram, India 1987.

 

 

 

 

 

Rhododendron News

Volume VIII. No. V. September-October 2005

Chin Human Rights Organization

www.chro.org

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Women Rights:

• A Chin Girl Raped by Burmese Soldier

• 5 Teenaged Girls Among 18 Porters Forced to Carry Army Supplies

• Chin Women Compel to Join MWAF by Junta

 

Forced Labour:

• SPDC Takes Credits for New Bridge Built with Forced Labor

• Chin Villagers Fined for Failure to Provide Forced Labor

• Villagers Ordered to Cut Bamboo for Army Camp

• 12 Villages Exacted for Forced Labor at New Army Camp

 

Extortion & Power Abuse:

• Army Officer Demands Deer Skins and Chicken from Chin Villagers

• Township Authorities Collect Illegal Tax from Students

• Burmese Army Robbed from Cross Border Traders

• Burmese Troop Robbed 300,000 Kyats From Cattle Traders

• Five Civilians Hospitalized As Burmese Army Rage over Loss of Football Match with Civilians

 

Interview:

• Online Interview: Talking About Human Rights

 

Opinion & Commentary:

• The Dragon is Looking Askance : Chinese Policy and the Moral Authority of the Security Council (By Kanbawza Win)

 

Statement:

• Statement of Condolence on the Death of Dr. Vumson Suantak

 

Back Cover Poem:

• A Boring Worm (By Van Biak Thang)

 

 

A Chin Girl Raped by Burmese Soldier

 

12 October, 2005

Aizawl: A Burmese soldier from Light Infantry Battalion 395 stationed at Kyauk Daw, Arakan State raped a Chin girl on 18 September 2005. The victim is a resident of Daungmi Kala Village. She was accosted on her way home from a night Church service and sexually assaulted at gunpoint by the soldier, a local villager testified to Chin Human Rights Organization.

 

The assailant soldier was identified as private Soe Aung from amy patrol unit commanded by Captain Myint Naing Oo.

 

On 18 September, Captain Myint Naing Oo and 15 of his men arrived at Daungmi Kala village to spend the night. Private Soe Aung was assigned for sentry duty at the house of U Ling Phai, the victim’s father, located at the outskirts of the village. At around 10:00 p.m, the girl walked home from a church where she attended a night service. But when private Soe Aung saw the girl approaching home alone, he sexually assaulted her at gunpoint.

 

“It’s very sad because people will see her as no longer impure and no body would want to marry such a girl and she will be stigmatized,” said Maung Thein Aye, a local villager. “She is so ashamed to go out and has been crying inside her house,” he said.

 

U Ling Phai, the victim’s father reported the matter to Captain Myint Naing Oo, the assailant’s commanding officer, but he was told to take the matter to court. Kyauk Daw Township Court released private Soe Aung after ordering him to pay 30,000 Kyats ($30 US) in compensation to the victim.

 

5 Teenaged Girls Among 18 Porters Forced to Carry Army Supplies

 

9 October, 2005

Aizawl: 5 girls under the age of 15 were among 18 civilian porters forced to carry army supplies in Matupi Township, a local villager told Chin Human Rights Organization. On 2 August, 2005, Sergeant Thein Win, commander of Sabawngte army outpost from Matupi-based Light Infantry Battalion (304) ordered 18 Sabawngte villagers including 5 teenaged girls to transport army goods.

 

On 12 August, the same officer ordered another 3 teenaged girls and 7 civilian men to transport goods from Sabawngte army camp to Sabawngpi village. The porters carried 30 Viss (45 Kgs) of dried pork meat, 27 chickens, 2 tins of sticky rice, 20 Viss of chilli, 150 lemons and 100 mangoes. The goods are gifts from the Sergeant to Major Tin Aung, Commander of Light Infantry Battalion 304 based in Matupi.

 

“Each person, including the girls, was given about 15 Viss to carry. The load was already heavy enough even for men so eveybody had to take a little extra off of the girls. There was no way the girls could’ve travelled 12 miles with such heavy loads on their backs,” explained.

 

Chin Women Compel to Join MWAF by Junta

 

 

27 September, 2005.

Colonel San Aung, commander of Burma army tactical II from Matupi, Chin state issued an order to all members of village council in Matupi township to distribute membership form of Myanmar Women Affairs Federation (MWAF) on August 9. According to the order, every woman over the age of 18 have to join the Federation with 320 Kyats membership fee.

 

“When I went to Matupi town to draw my monthly salary at Township Peace and Development Council (TPDC) office, Colonel San Aung asked me to pass 400 sheets of MWAF membership form to each members of our village council for sale,” reported a clerk of the Village Council in Matupi, who prefer to remain anonymous in fear of reprisal from the army.

 

He continued, “as soon as I reach my village on August 11, I hand over the membership forms to the head of the VC; but so far even a single copy had not been sold as most of the women in the village could not afford.”

 

All Women over 18 years old are compelled to buy the forms that conscript them to be the member of MWAF which cost Three hundred and twenty kyats per copy.

 

MWAF was formed in July 3, 1996, with a former name ‘Myanmar National Committee for Women’s Affair’, which was reconstituted as the MWAF on December 20, 2003. The Federation reportedly has about 1.5 million members.

 

Daw Than Than Nwe is head of MWAF. The other top positions of the organization at the township and village level are occupied by the wives of the military authorities.

 

Similar drive for enlisting membership of MWAF is reportedly conducted through out Chin state.

 

Meanwhile, most of village heads are nerve-racked for the possible action against them for failure to sell the membership form.

 

SPDC Takes Credits for New Bridge Built with Forced Labour

 

September 26, 2005

Aizawl: A sign posted on a river crossing bridge which was recently built with forced labor had offended local villagers who contributed free labor for the construction. The sign reads: “This bridge was built with a 1.8 million Kyats donated by General Tha Aye, Commander of Northwestern Command.” The suspension bridge was built over Sarawng river, located between Sumsen and Tangku villages of Matupi Township.

 

More than 300 households from 8 villages were compelled to donate 500 Kyats per each household in November 2004 under a requisition order issued by Colonel San Aung, Commander of Tactical Command II based in southern Chin State. Additionally, the order required each household to saw designated amount of wood planks for the construction of the bridge.

 

“Villagers put in everything from the money and materials to human labor for the construction. All the government contributed was steel cables,” complained U Pum Za Mang, Chairman of the Village Peace and Development Council of XXX village. “Claiming that the budget sanctioned for the bridge was in deficit, the authorities are charging 50 Kyats from people passing through the bridge so they can repay the ‘debts’,” he said.

 

“We weren’t even aware of there being a government budget for the bridge until they put up the sign,” complained another local villager who participated in the construction.

 

Started in December of 2004, the suspension bridge measures 580 feet in length and 6 feet in width. The following villages were forced to contribute money and free labor for the building of the bridge.

 

(1) Tanku Village (62 households)

(2) Reng Khen Village (40 households)

(3) Am Lai Village (30 households)

(4) Pa Khen Village (32 households)

(5) Sumsen Village (60 households)

(6) Ti Nam Village (34 households)

(7) Tisi Village (64 households)

(8) Tawngla Village (20 households)

 

Chin Villagers Fined for Failure to Provide Forced Labour

 

On 20 September, 2005, ten villages in Paletwa Township of southern Chin State were fined 3000 Kyats per village for failure to collect round bamboos for the Burmese army, according to information received from Chairman of Village Peace and Development Council from XXX village.

 

On 16 September, 2005, Major Myint Aung, Deputy Commander of Light Infanty Battalion 374 ordered 20 villages in Paletwa Township to provide round bamboos. Each village was required to provide 1000 sticks of round bamboo but 10 of the 20 villages were not able to provide them. The affected villages were:

 

(1) Mara Hlan (2) Kho Ywa (3) Auh Ywa (4) Shwe Letwa (5) Shwe Oo Wa (6)Ma U (7) Ywa U (8) Heema Thee (9) Pai De and (10) Saiha.

 

Major Myint Aung was reported to have sold the bamboos he forcibly collected from the villages for his personal profit. The bamboos are made into rafts and floated down Kaladan River to Sittwe of Arakan where each stick was sold for 35 Kyats.

 

Villagers Ordered to Cut Bamboo for Army Camp

 

September 15, 2005

Aizawl: Lieutenant Saw Lwin Win, company commander of Burmese army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 289 based in Sinletwa, Paletwa township ordered 30 villagers from Salangpi village to cut 3,000 rounds of Bamboo pole for the army camp. The Lieutenant further ordered the forced laborers that the bamboo pole has to be 15 feet long and the job had to be completed within four days. The forced laborers began their work on August 3, 2005.

 

“We cut the bamboo without rest for three days and we were ordered to transport the bamboo we cut from the forest to the army camp on the fourth day which is about one and a half mile away” said one of the forced laborers.

 

“One of the forced laborers was bitten by a snake while performing the job. When we took him to the platoon medic for treatment, we were told that all the medicines and the army medic are not for civilians. Thus we had to go to civilian clinic with our own expense.

 

The forced laborers had to bring their own food and tools to work.

 

At the end of the work, we were called by the platoon commander and told us that

1) any one who wants to cross the border have to pay 500 Kyats to the camp for permission

2) The villagers must sent at least a viss of Chicken to the camp without fail. 2000 Kyats will be fined upon failure to deliver a viss of Chinken

3) The villagers must report any CNF activities around the area, failure to do so will result in 200,000 Kyats fine and severe punishment.

 

12 Villages Exacted for Forced Labor at New Army Camp

 

September 20, 2005

Aizawl: Hundreds of villagers from Darling village and surrounding 12 villages were forced to construct a new army camp at Darling village by Captain Than Htun Soe of Burma army Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 304 based in Matupi town.

 

The forced labor situation was reported to CHRO by xxxxx village headman.

 

Hundreds of villagers were forced to engage in construction of the new army camp starting from July and still going on at the time of this report. The villagers are forced to construct four barracks which is 15 X 10 in size. Besides the construction of the barracks, the villagers are forced to dig bunkers and trenches for the entire camp with.

 

The villagers have to bring their own tools and food at the forced labor site.

 

The village headman complained that; the Burmese army is pushing the Chin people into poverty and untold sufferings. The villagers have no time to work for themselves in their farm. The army is on the rampage to shot and eat any domestic they found in the village without compensation.

 

Besides the forced labor they have performed in the army camp, the following villagers were forced to transport construction material such as zinc, nail etc from Saiha town of Mizoram state which is three days walks from Darling army camp.

The villages those who are forced to transport construction materials are;

 

Ngaphaipi, Sabawngpi, Hlungmang, Fartlang, Lungcawi, Tisih, Mala, Sabaw, Thawnglalung, and Khuapilu, Pintia, and Darling.

 

Army Officer Demands Deer Skins and Chicken from Chin Villagers

 

4 October, 2005

Aizawl: On 19 August, 2005, Captain Thein Hteik Soe, Patrol Column Commander from Matupi-based Light Infantry Battalion 304, forcibly demanded deer skins and chickens from residents of 14 villages in Matupi Township. The villages were recently included in the jurisdictional area of a new army camp at Dar Ling village, which is commanded by the officer.

 

U Bisa, Chairman of the Village Peace and Development Council from XXX village explained, “We received a written order on August 19, 2005 demanding that our village deliver 2 deer skins within 6 days. Each household in our village has to chip in 1800 Kyats to buy the deer skins for the officer. I had to personally deliver the goods to the Captain.”

 

Hlung Mang village also received a similar order on August 27 along with a summons to attend a meeting at Dar Ling army camp to discuss ‘important troop matters.’ The village headman made a delivery of 2 chickens and 2 deer skins at the army camp on August 29, 2005.

 

Since Captain Thein Hteik Soe took command of the area in July of 2005, residents of the 14 villages have been forced to work in various forced labor programs virtually every day of the week. The forced labor includes digging trenches and bunkers, fencing the army camps, carrying roofing materials and sawing woods.

 

Township Authorities Collect Illegal Tax from Students

 

10 October, 2005

Aizawl: During the first week of September 2005, students in middle and high schools in Thantlang Town of northern Chin State were compelled to ‘donate’ 500 Kyats per person to support the cost of providing hospitality to visting senior military official.

 

According to a retired public servant, the Township Peace and Development Council Chairman U Shwe Soe collected ‘donations’ from students to pay for the cost of entertaining General Tha Aye, Commander of North Western Command who was visiting the town in October, 2005.

 

“I have three children who are in school and I had to pay 1500 Kyats. We can barely make ends meet and it is absolutely ridiculous that we had to pay for entertaining the General,” complained the former bureaucrat.

 

There are about 6000 students in both middle school and high school in Thantlang.

 

Burmese Soldiers Robbed from Cross Border Traders

 

August 26, 2005

Aizawl: A platoon of the Burmese army led by a captain (name unknown) from Light Infantry Battalion (LIB) 266 robbed 100,000 Kyats from a woman cross border trader at a teashop near Sialam village in Thantlang township on August 18, 2005. The incident was reported to the CHRO by the victim named Pi Mami herself.

 

Pi Mami 45 years old is residence of Tahan, Sagaing division. Pi Mami and her son in law were on their way to sell clothes to Mizoram when they met with a platoon of Burmese army at a teashop near Sialam village.

 

Pi Mami inform the CHRO that; “The Burmese (army) captain stop us at the teashop and inquiry the value of the goods and demanded vouchers. I showed them all the vouchers I have. Then the captain and his troops demanded 100,000 kyats. All the money I have was only 52,000 kyats at that time. So I beg the captain and his troops to mercy on me and accept all the money I have 52,000 kyats as I am just a woman making a living by selling small goods to Mizoram. The captain told me to shut up and said that he wants 100,000 kyats. I was so terrified and at last borrowed money with a big interest from the teashop and give it to the captain.”

 

On the next day on August 19, 2005 another group of cross border traders were robbed by the same Burmese captain and his troops at the same place.

 

Pu Lian Kio and his friends with three horses were on their way to sell good to Mizoram. When they reach near Sialam village at a teashop, the Burmese captain stoped them and demanded 100,000 kyats from them. Pu Lian Kio and his friends have only 19,000 kyats at that time and they beg the captain to accept all the money they have which is 19,000 kyats. However, the captain said that he will arrest them all if they refuse to pay 100,000 kyats. Thus Pu Lian Kio had to borrow money to pay the captain from Humhalh village which is 3 miles away.

 

The local residence inform the CHRO field workers that the captain and his troops have been in the same teashop since the first week of August and they robbed from many cross border traders.

 

Burmese Troop Robbed 300,000 Kyats From Cattle Traders

 

September 1, 2005

Aizawl: A Captain of Burmese army and his troops from LIB 268 Falam based battalion has robbed more than 300,000 kyats from cross border cattle traders. The incident was reported to CHRO field workers by one of the victims who prefer to remain anonymous.

 

The cattle traders were stopped by the Burmese troops between Selawn and Leilet village. The Burmese troop demanded 600,000 Kyats saying that all the three cattle traders will be arrested and sent to hard labor camp and confiscated all their cattle if they fail to pay 600,000 kyats.

 

The victim said that; since we have only 20,000 Kyats, we beg the Captain and his troops to have mercy on us as we are so poor and trying to make a living by selling piglets to Mizoram.

 

At last, I went to Leilet village to borrow money to pay the Burmese army. All I can borrow was only 300,000 kyats. So, I come back to the army and beg them to accept all the money I could manage. The captain and his troop come to realize that we could not borrow the money they demanded and took all the money we could manage which is 320,000 Kyats. (300,000 Kyats we borrowed and 20,000 Kyats we have). We were release only after that.

 

“It really is very difficult to make a living now. I do not know how are we going to live in a situation like this” said the trader.

 

Five Civilians Injure, Some Hospitalized As Burmese Army Rage over Loss of Football Match with Civilians

 

25 September 2005: Five civilians hospitalized as the army went frenzy over their loss to a civilian team, and not receiving supports from the on lookers at a football match with civilian team in Matupi, southern Chin state.

 

A man from Matupi town informed our reporter that the Burmese soldiers were out of control on 9th September, when the public gave more support to civilian team in the “Tactical Commander Cup” football tournament semi final match with Burma’s Infantry Battalion (IB) 304 team. The tournament was organized by Colonel San Aung, commander of Burma army tactical II.

 

The Burmese army badly beaten up the civilian on lookers that five people have to be hospitalized. One young man named Salai Phone Ta 25 of Ka Ce village was beaten up by the Burmese soldiers with the bud of their service rifles and badly injured. His eyes and face was severely wounded, probably damage. He was hospitalized in Matupi Civil Hospital.

 

The man from Matupi said; “The commander of Tactical II was also there when the incident occurred. He made no reaction neither prevented his men.

 

The final match was played on 12th September. There was reportedly less crowd to watch the match.

 

Several civil servants, youth and civilians along with the Burmese army Battalion 304 based in Matupi participated in the annual monsoon football season.

 

Online Interview: Talking About Human Rights

 

September 21, 2005

 

[Rhododendron Note: The following online interview is conducted by a group of students from Department of Social Sciences, College of Arts and Sciences, University of the Philippines Manila to Salai Bawi Lian Mang of Chin Human Rights Organization regarding present human rights situation in Burma]

 

Question 1: What is the current situation in Myanmar regarding human rights violations? Is the human rights situation getting better or worse?

 

Salai Bawi Lian Mang: In terms of human rights situation in Burma (I prefer to use the term Burma instead of Myanmar), as you may have been aware of, Burma is currently ruled by military junta called State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), one of the most repressive regimes in the world. Since the Burmese military took the state power after killing thousands of innocent people in 1988, gross violation of human rights is rampantly committed by the military regime including political suppression, arbitrary detention, torture, rape, disappearances, extra-judicial killings, oppression of ethnic and religious minorities, and use of forced labor.

 

At present, there are more than one thousand political prisoners still detained in Jail. The country’s pro-democracy leader, and the 1991 Noble Peace Price winner Aung San Suu Kyi is still under house arrest.

 

Today, Burma ranks the second largest opium producing country in the world. As such, the ruling military regime is directly involved in trading an illicit drugs that also further intensified the deteriorating conditions of the political crisis, civil war, and human rights.

 

In addition to drugs, the spread of HIV/AIDS is of great concern that can affect the regional stability in the near future. Burma after India and Thailand has the highest rate of HIV/AIDS infection cases in Asia. HIV/AIDS epidemic is mainly caused by drug addiction, lack of knowledge and prevention program in the country.

 

There is a report made by Shan Women Action Networks that the Burmese military regime is using rape as weapon of wars against an ethnic Shan. The report details 173 incidents of rape and other forms of sexual violence, involving 625 girls and women, committed by Burmese soldiers in Shan State, between 1996 and 2001.

 

In terms of University education, the military regime in Burma has blatantly denied and violated the right to education by constantly closing the universities and colleges across the country for about 9 years within the past 17 years. The main reason behind the Junta’s closure of Universities and Colleges in the country is solely because of the fact that the military regime views students as a potential threat to their dictatorial rule as in the past, students are the only vocal group that have been standing fearlessly against the military regime.

 

Besides, the use of forced labor is so widespread that the International Labor Organization (ILO) has even expelled Burma from the ILO for the regime’s widespread use of forced labor.

 

Hundred of thousands of refugees are taking refuge in neighboring countries. And they all claim that they have fled their homeland due to unbearable human rights violations committed by the Burmese military regime.

 

These facts are a very brief human rights situation in Burma and we can say that there is no tangible improvement in terms of human rights situation in Burma.

 

 

Question 2: How does the current Myanmar government treat ethnic minorities at present?

 

Salai Bawi Lian Mang: The present Burmese military junta which made its way to power through a bloody coup in 1988 has ruled the country at gunpoint. Preoccupied by the idea of “national unity or unifying the country,” Burma’s military regime has embarked on a policy of creating a single national identity based on the policy of “Amyo, Batha, Thatana” or One race, One Language, One Religion” in other words “to be a Burman is to be a Buddhist” through assimilating all identifiable ethnic minority groups into the mainstream Burman society, a dominant ethnic group with which the regime identifies itself.

 

Even though an overall human rights situation in Burma as a whole is at a very deplorable situation, the fact that the non-Burman ethnic nationalities “ethnic minorities groups” are the ones who suffer the most at the hand of xenophobic Burmese military regime.

 

The Burmese military regime is using every method to eliminate the identifiable ethnic identities of the ethnic minorities in the country. In Shan state they use rape as weapons of wars against the ethnic Shan (please see Shan Women Action Network website at

www.shanwomen.org), while in Chin state, they use religious persecutions as a tools of ethnocide against Chin Christians (Please see, www.chro.org), and in Mon, Karen and Karenni state, they used mass relocation, confiscation of land and other forms of human rights violations that it is impossible or very difficult to survive as a people for the non-Burman ethnic nationalities groups in Burma.

 

As a result of all these atrocities, there are hundreds of thousands of refugees, most if not all of them, are non-Burman ethnic nationalities taking refuge in neighboring countries, such as, Thailand, India, Malaysia and Bangladesh.

 

Question 3: What are the actions taken by local organizations and student unions regarding the human rights violations?

 

Salai Bawi Lian Mang: Well, if you look at the modern history of Burma in terms of student movements as I briefly alluded to, students have always been at the forefront of political movement. Indeed, the present military regime fully understands the critical role of students and that is the very reason why the junta closed universities and colleges in the country for about 9 years within the past 16 years. The military regime views students as a threat to their dictatorial rule. As a result, students are under constant scrutiny of military intelligence apparatus. Forming students union is illegal in Burma. However, despite such scrutiny and restrictions, students are also the most energetic and vocal group that have been working fearlessly against the military regime.

 

Question 4: Do you think Myanmar’s relationship with ASEAN countries had been significantly affected by the country’s human rights issues? How?

 

Salai Bawi Lian Mang: Yes, in deed, Burma’s human rights record and practice has been a major concern since the beginning or even before allowing Burma to join the club of ASEAN. In the beginning, leaders of ASEAN have insisted that the notion of constructive engagement will improve human rights situation in Burma which will eventually lead Burma into democratization.

 

However, after almost a decade of admitting Burma into the club, ASEAN leaders come to realize that their so-called “constructive engagement” is not working or even failing in terms of promoting human rights and democracy in Burma. As you are aware, Burma had postponed the seat of its rotating chairmanship of ASEAN which was supposed to be in effect in July 2006. I would like to quote the latest Amnesty International report on this regards; “During the ASEAN(1) Ministerial meeting in Vientiane, Laos in July 2005, the SPDC Foreign Minister announced that Myanmar would postpone chairing ASEAN, which the country was due to assume in July 2006, amid reports that the SPDC had delayed the move to avoid further EU and US Government censure and potential conflict within ASEAN itself.”

 

In recent years, we have seen some ASEAN leaders voicing their concern about human rights situation in Burma and in supports of democratization in the country. It is encouraging and a positive sign.

 

Question 5: Has the current government in Myanmar received any sanctions from the international community regarding human rights violations?

 

Salai Bawi Lian Mang: Yes, there are some countries and especially from the West, who are imposing sanctions against the Burmese military regime. The European Union, the United States and Canada have been in the forefront of imposing sanctions against the Burmese junta.

 

In 2003, President Bush enacted Burma Freedom and Democracy Act in response to the continued and systematic violations of human rights by the Burmese military junta.

 

The Canadian House of Commons has passed the Burma Motion in May 2005 calling on the Canadian Government to condemn more forcefully the repeated and systematic human rights violations committed by the military junta in power in Burma.

 

Since 1991, the United Nations General Assembly and the United Nations Commission on Human Rights have for 14 consecutive years adopted consensus resolutions condemning the Burmese military junta’s systematic violations of human rights.

 

Starting from 1999, the US Department of State, Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor annual report on international religious freedom report has branded Burma as country of particular concern for its widespread practice of religious persecution against minority religions such as Christians.

 

The International Labor Organization (ILO) has expelled Burma from the ILO for the regime’s notorious records of its widespread use of forced labor.

 

These are some of the actions taken by international communities regarding Burma’s human rights practice.

 

Question 6: In your opinion, what should be the role of the international community in addressing the human rights violations in Myanmar?

 

Salai Bawi Lian Mang: International community plays an important role in support of promoting human rights situation and democratization in Burma. As you may be aware of, the root cause of human rights violations and all atrocities happening in Burma is due to the political conflict/crisis- it is rooted in political reason. Thus, in order to promote human rights situation in Burma, we must solve political conflict first. In terms of solving political conflict in Burma, there is a strategy first called for by the United Nations that is called “tripartite dialogue” which means since the root cause of human rights violations and conflict is political, this should be solved by political means by having a political dialogue between three main political stake holders in Burma; that includes present military regime who are in power, and National League for Democracy (NLD) who won 1990 election and the collective forces of non-Burman Ethnic Nationalities in the country. And this “tripartite dialogue” is endorsed by two major political stake holders both Ethnic Nationalities Council and National League for Democracy.

 

Thus, to sum up the situation, it is very important for the international community especially ASEAN countries to support the emergence of tripartite dialogue that will be the beginning of solving the country’s political crisis by political means.

 

At present, two noble peace laureate South African archbishop Desmond Tutu and former Czech president Vaclav Havel are calling the UN Security Council to tackle Burma issue. It will be great if your government the government of Philippines endorse this proposal as one of the present elected UN Security Council members.

 

Opinion & Commentary:

 

 

The Dragon is Looking Askance

Chinese Policy and the Moral Authority of the Security Council

 

By Kanbawza Win

September 29, 2005

 

America, a good friend of the Burmese people, if not the world, has decided again to put Burma on the agenda of the Security Council. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Eric G. John told the House of Representatives Sub-committee on Asia and the Pacific that the US remained “deeply concerned about the safety and welfare of Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners,” in a new bid following a joint call by former Czech President Vaclav Havel and Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa, for immediate action. This welcoming news initiated by the two Nobel Peace laureates’ rings like New Year bells to the entire people of Burma, in spite of the blocking by Russia and China last June. At least there is a flickering light of hope at the end of a long tunnel of a half-century under military boots.

 

But will that flickering light be blown out when the two permanent members, which have a long recorded history of dictatorial rule, say “Nay” and indirectly support the Junta to continue in power. That is everybody’s question. Will the moral authority of these two Nobel Laureates who represent billions of people be able to sway the stone hearts of the leaders of Russia and China will soon be known in the coming October meeting of the United Nations Security Council?

 

Chinese Policy and the Moral Authority of the Security Council

 

Burma has 2,185 km of common border with China and the shadow of China is always keenly felt in Burma. An old fable says that if China spits Burma will drown. It seems that what Napoleon said has come to be true “Let the sleeping dragon lie if it awakens the world will be sorry.” But let us see what China aspires to be. The outside world watches China with amazement, and often enough, too, with twinges of discomfort China has just launched a joint war games with its long time adversary Russia, in a show of military might that makes Uncle Sam nervous. The very basic, yet unanswered, questions are still to be answered. No matter how fast its economy grows, can a country make a successful transition to great-power status without real friendships, without associating itself meaningfully with any global ideal, or without bearing a more generous share of humanity’s burdens?

 

Today, no nation of any import seems likely to copy China’s model of government, despite its many successes. But that doesn’t mean that any bid by Beijing for a larger mission in the world is merely a waste of time, much less that it is doomed to failure. At its most influential time, China has always represented an alternative to the West. Under Chairman Mao, many poor nations eagerly drew inspiration from this country based on a naïve appreciation of Chinese realities, but also because China was perceived as being on their side in their struggles against colonial rule and in their struggles for development in a global economy that appeared meanly skewed against the poor. Unless one is talking trade, with rare exception, China is absent from the lives of these countries today. The global rush, amid intense press scrutiny, to aid the victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami seemed to prod Beijing to action, perhaps not wanting to be absent from the lists of major countries making large donations. But if proof were needed that there has been no change in outlook, no new internationalist reflex formed, China has been largely invisible amid reports of famine that are devastating and threatening several other countries in West Africa. Previously, the Chinese construed that Africa is far away and shouldn’t rank as a serious concern. Today, however, China’s state companies are scouring the continent for business as they never have before, including Sudan in the midst of genocide, and if Africa looms large on the map for oil or trading profits, it stands to reason it should also count for something in more human terms.

 

Ultimately, the critical question in assessing China as a great power is how she behaves. What matters most is not so much the growth of Chinese power but how and for what purposes a rising China will actually wield its putative or actual power in the conduct of its international relations. Despite “realpolitik” in global institutions, a policy of multilateral integration coupled with multilateral containment is a more feasible and desirable option than a policy of bilateral engagement. Enmeshing China more fully in a global network of mutually interactive and beneficial multilateral regimes could more easily contain and even possibly transform from within China’s unilateral free-riding or defective behavior

 

The failure of Chinese leaders vision in such moments not only hurts the world’s other weak nations but it also weakens the global system itself. It is also a proof that the Chinese do not attach any importance to international friendships. Whether at the individual level, or for the nation as a whole, getting rich quick, it seems, is all that matters. Perhaps that is why the Burmese named them Ta Yoke; directly translated means Mr. Mean. China is getting closer to and is opting for superpower status, but its rhetoric of “peaceful rise,” and “harmonious society,” seems to be just an empty-sounding slogan, “If things continue like this into the future, with no change, I don’t think China will be able to become a real power, ” commented Prof. Shi Yinghong from the Faculty of International Relations of the People’s University of Beijing, “because its ideological and moral influence in the world will be quite limited.”

 

The UN Security Council

 

Although the engagement of the ethno-democratic groups for stronger UN measures is nothing new, prominent figures have joined the cause thereby indicating the seriousness of the UN. In the meantime, the US is losing patience with the generals in Rangoon. The people of Burma do not harbor a single doubt over the good intentions of UN actions in the past, but from now on more effective and consistent planning and action are necessary. This time the onus has fallen on the UN Security Council. For the past one and half decade the UN have failed to bring reform to Burma. Two UN envoys on Burma, Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Paulo Sergio Pinheiro and the Secretary General’s own special envoy, Razali Ismail, have been effectively barred from visiting the country. Compared to the global poverty problem, the conflict in Western Darfur and North Korea’s nuclear threat, the Burma issue occupies only a sub-folder in world politics. That may be one of the reasons why the Russian Ambassador to the UN made the comment that Burma is a trivial matter to be put on the Security Council agenda as the Council was occupied with “matters of international peace and security”.

 

Now the Nobel Laureates had unraveled the hypocrisy of the UN Security Council. They have fortified that the problem of Burma is “far worse” than in countries where the Council had previously intervened. The whole world including the people of Burma as represented by the NLD and even the ASEAN Parliamentarian, has agreed that the country is a serious threat to international peace and security. We are wondering what lame excuses the representatives of the two dictatorial countries will give at the Council. We hope and pray that the scenario of the Korea crisis of the 50s will not be repeated, when the Russian ambassador withdrew from the Security Council paving the way for the Korean War. But again here nobody can under estimate the fraternity of the dictatorial regimes especially at a time when the dictatorial regimes of the world are dying one by one? This is the third time that democratic countries have tried to put Burma on the agenda and to every body’s knowledge, the five factors for the UN Security Council’s criteria to take actions are already in place. They are: –

• the overthrow of the democratically elected government,

• conflict among government bodies and insurgent armies or armed ethnic groups,

• widespread internal humanitarian or human rights violations,

• substantial overflow of refugees, and

• cross border problems such as drugs and human trafficking etc.

 

The short history of the Security Council indicates that in 1997 it took actions when Sierra Leone committed four offences (1 to 4), Afghanistan in 1996 for four beastly acts (2 to 4), Haiti, in 1993 for the breach of two only (2 & 3), in 1993, Rwanda for three bloody counts (2 to 5), Liberia in 1992 for two counts (2&4) and Cambodia one count only. But in the case of Burma all the above five factors are present viz. the overthrow of the democratically elected government was done in 1962 and again in 1990 when election results were not honoured. Conflict with the government and ethnic factions; has been going on for half a century with non-binding ceasefires and consistent fighting. Widespread Human Rights Violations are evident, such as destruction of villages, massive forced relocations, systematic rape, ethnic cleansing, forced labour and over 70,000 child soldiers breaking the records of any other countries. Outflow of refugees; can be clearly seen in the neighbouring countries. Officially there are 800,000 refugees while another 2 to 3 million are Internally Displaced Persons and numerous migrant workers in Thailand, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Laos and China. Drug Production, Human Trafficking and HIV/AIDs; are all well known. Next to Afghanistan, Burma is the biggest heroin and amphetamine stimulants producing country in the world.

 

The severity of these factors, compounded with the spread of HIV/AIDS and the failure of the regime to implement any reform or enable outside organizations to facilitate progress, makes the overall magnitude of the crises more threatening to international peace. Hence it has become a clear historical duty for the UN Security Council to restore Peace, Promote National Reconciliation and facilitate the return of Federal Democratic rule. Since Burma is one of the worst of all the problems ever tackled by the Security Council it would be inhuman for any permanent member to veto the UNSC resolution.

 

Position of Strength

 

The excesses of the Burmese army over its own population have appalled human rights activists around the world. Many moral and responsible political leaders cannot understand how the situation in Burma has been allowed to deteriorate to such an extent for one and half decades. It is only now that there is some possibility of raising the issue at the Security Council and even then success depends on the whims and fancies of the representatives of China and Russia.

 

The international community has called for change in Burma and morally and financially supported the Burmese democracy movement. They have worked to change conditions in Burma through sanctions, and have embarked in international forums including the United Nations, ASEM, ASEAN, and networks of parliamentarians, politicians, and non-government organizations.

 

The current Burmese Junta has adopted a policy of betraying the very concept of truth not only to the people of Burma but also to the world. It will never negotiate unless from the position of strength with their adversaries. This has been clearly evident in their negotiations with the ethnic armed forces and most of the ceasefire groups, which were compelled to surrender or to become impotent. However, in the case of the democracy movement it has been different, for when the Junta realize that they are having an upper hand they would released Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to ease the international pressure but when they discovered that they are losing ground and that the mass of the people were following Daw Aung San Suu Kyi (NLD), they resorted to violence and assassinations as the “Depayin” episodes indicates.

 

So if the UN Security Council dealt the Burmese problem, there is every possibility that the Junta will seriously come to the negotiating table, for the UNSC is the only UN organization that has “teeth” with the ability to bite as the past history demonstrates.

 

Nowadays, any major international decisions are made by consensus. Unilateral decisions taken by any individual country, even if it is a super power are usually frowned upon. The classic examples are the American decision on Afghanistan and Iraq. Passing the UNSC resolutions means achieving the consensus. We are quite positive that the Burmese Junta will come to the negotiating table. Otherwise, it will have to suffer the consequences by being forcibly removed through international intervention or armed struggle from within with the help of the UN. In other words, the UN intervention is urgently needed in the Burmese case.

 

To most people, ‘intervention’ implies ‘physical intervention by armed force’. Some Burmese have called for the USA to intervene in Burma a la Iraq. Others want a U.N. peacekeeping force. But the Burmese ethno-democrats, in general, want political intervention. They are not so much in favour of military intervention. The experience of external military intervention in the Asia region in recent times has not been good – Tibet (China), Korea (UN), Vietnam (USA), East Timor & Papua (Indonesia), Cambodia (Vietnam, USA & UN), Bangladesh (India), Sri Lanka (India), Afghanistan (USA), and Iraq (USA) – to name a few.

 

If possible the Burmese ethno-democracy movement realize that military intervention by any external power should be avoided at all costs because it will undermine Burma as a nation and be detrimental to the people of Burma. The territorial integrity of Burma and its sovereignty must be upheld. Political intervention, however, is a different question. Burma is a member nation of ASEAN. When Burma affects the collective well being of ASEAN, it is the duty of all ASEAN members to help Burma resolve its internal problems. Helping does not mean ‘intervention’ by force or political coercion. Helping means to seriously investigate the problem and to suggest possible solutions that could be acceptable to all concerned parties. Now it is found that China, India and ASEAN have intervene economically on the side of the Junta marginalizing the ethno democracy forces and even winning some of the Burmese think tanks to their side by the appeasement theory.

 

Bangladesh, India, China, Laos Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore are close neighbors. Problems in Burma invariably affect them. Like ASEAN, it is in their own self-interest to help Burma to find a solution to its internal problems. Besides, Burma is also a member of the United Nations. When Burma affects the relationships of various regional groupings like ASEAN and the European Union or the Americas, the UN has a duty to try to help resolve the problem. This cannot be construed as “an intervention” but as the duty of the UNSC to solve the international problems. But if political intervention does not work than military intervention became a possibility. However, there is still time to make the political intervention if the neighboring countries of China and India choose to do.

 

Everybody knows that the reverse of ‘Intervention’ is ‘Non-intervention’, opportunistic exploitation, or benign neglect. These policies can be useful if the problem in Burma is short-term in nature or if the conflict partners can themselves find a solution. This is not the case in Burma. The conflict between the central government and the ethnic nationalities is entering its 6th decades. The conflict with the democracy advocates is now almost two decades old and Burma’s economy is in a downward spiral and her problems are multiplying. Burma as a nation is now in a very weak state. Given more time, it could collapse on its own. Or external powers might be tempted to intervene. Either way, the results may not be beneficial to Burma’s neighbors, ASEAN or the Asia region as a whole. Hence it is high time that the UN should intervene, spearheaded by the UNSC.

 

Sino-Burma Relations

 

The political landscape in Southeast Asia changed drastically when the Americans withdrew from the Philippines. This was accelerated rapidly as the People’s Republic of China became a great regional power. China’s economic and military capabilities have grown dramatically at a time when China’s traditional security concern, Russia, has faded. Japan remains a long-term but not an immediate security problem for China. This has left China free, in geopolitical terms, to shift its attention to the South. The most striking manifestation of this development has been a very assertive policy toward the South China Sea; i.e., the entire sea and all the land outcroppings within it are claimed as Chinese sovereign territory. This has been accompanied by a number of statements from senior Chinese civilian and military officials that seem to presage a kind of Chinese Monroe Doctrine for Southeast Asia, a modern reprise of the historic preponderance of the Middle Kingdom. Compounded by China’s resort to bare knuckled military intimidation aimed at Taiwan, have reinforced a growing perception in Southeast Asia of China as a major security factor-and perhaps a threat. The discovery of Chinese facilities on a reef near to, and claimed by, the Philippines did nothing to dispel these concerns.

 

Economically, China’s presence, particularly in northern Burma, has exploded. In a decade, cross border trade went from $15 million to over $800 million and now is estimated to be a billion dollars. A flood of cheap Chinese goods now dominates the Burmese consumer market. Large numbers of Chinese traders and undocumented immigrants have changed the demographic profile of northern Burma. Today, Mandalay is described by people of Burma as second Beijing, a predominantly Chinese city dominated by Chinese money. Chinese construction crews are building and upgrading highways, bridges, and railroads through northern Burma to the sea, while Chinese officials describe Burma as a potentially lucrative outlet to the Indian Ocean for Chinese trade. Bertil Lintner reports: “Most alarming, from the perspective of ASEAN, was the fact that some of the equipment for the Burmese navy had to be installed and at least partially maintained by Chinese technicians. The Chinese had gained a toehold in the maritime region between India and Southeast Asia for the first time in the entire history.”

 

From a geopolitical perspective, Burma’s Military approach to its huge northern neighbor is anomalous. The obvious point is that Burma has developed increasingly close ties with the only country in the world that is in a position to seriously threaten its vital security interests. One and a half decade of autocratic rule, mismanagement and self-imposed isolation have turned Burma into one of the world’s poorest countries. This, in turn, has made Burma vulnerable in terms of security. An economic relapse has the pernicious effect of reinforcing the Junta’s siege mentality, exacerbating its tendency toward police state methods. Such an economically hard-pressed regime has increases its collaboration in the narcotics trade with the narco barons and began to turn to China. The end result is more cross border migration and increasing control of the economy by well-capitalized Chinese traders, both home grown and from China. More far-fetched, but not impossible, is an absorption of some of Burma’s parts as happened in Tibet, for many ethnic nationality groups through their historical experience with the Chinese have found the Chinese option to be far better than the Burman. The de facto territorial integrity of a poor, weak, and divided nation cannot be taken for granted.

 

Burma was the first non-communist country to recognize the People Republic of China in 1949. She signed the Sino-Burmese border treaty in 1960 – the first border treaty signed after the Chinese civil war. The Burmese regime, ignoring the results of the 1990 election and being isolated from many sources of international credit, turned to her northern Burma, and China was the one nation willing to give economic, military, and advisory aid. In 1990 and 1994, the two countries signed arms sales agreements. Chinese investment in the country is grossly underestimated because the amount does not go through the National Investment Board. Chinese trade seems greatly under estimated and Chinese immigration into Burma has been extensive (estimates range from two to three million Chinese now in the country, compared to several hundred thousand before 1988). Beijing’s concept of “democratization” does not embrace an open acceptance of the vanguard of Burma’s democracy movement, the National League for Democracy. The Chinese Embassy in Rangoon, for instance, keeps a demonstrable distance from the NLD. Nor is there any open Chinese sympathy for the plight of its leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, held under house arrest at her home for most of the time. Yet Daw Suu ’s name often appears regularly in Chinese media reports on Burmese developments.

 

It can’t have escaped Beijing’s notice that Suu Kyi has never openly criticized China or its ties with Rangoon. Chinese foreign policy pundits must also be aware that Suu Kyi has also never expressed clearly pro-Western sentiments. Her aides describe her as a nationalist and maintain she would never, for instance, allow an American military presence in Burma—another source of comfort for Beijing. China’s vice prime minister, “iron lady” Wu Yi, told Junta chairman Than Shwe, that Beijing wanted to see Burma consolidate economic development—and at the same time achieve political stability and national harmony. For Burmese observers, this goes a long way towards explaining the success of Chinese economic policies and the miserable state of affairs in Burma.

 

The Chinese oil pipeline would connect Kunming, capital of China’s Southwestern Yunnan Province, and Akyab on the Burmese coast, cutting 1,200 km from the present sea route between the Persian Gulf and China’s Guangdong Province, via the Straits of Malacca. More than 60 percent of China’s oil travels this route. Hence the putting of the Burmese case at the UNSC, especially if additional American pressure can lead to a Chinese abstention in any UN Security Council vote on Burma, will definitely permit a new scenario to emerge in the Burmese political stalemate.

 

The regional economic integration that China needs to help boost its Southwestern provinces would be considerably enhanced if the Burmese economy were vigorous rather than the basket-case it is currently. Burma could buy more Chinese exports and provide fast transport networks to link the west of China with South Asian markets. Foreign investment in Yunnan and the rest of the region would also rise. Such a scenario would be of huge benefit to all three nations (increased trade with India would also help assuage Sino-Indian security tensions). Burma, with its dilapidated rail and road systems, and inability to access international funding to upgrade them, constitutes a black hole in the fabric of the various Asian Development Bank-funded development programs in the region comprising Yunnan, Southeast Asia and South Asia. These include the Greater Mekong Subregion and various other regional triangles and quadrangles and wider projects such as the Trans-Asian Railway and the Asian Highway, designed to speed up the transport of goods within Asia and between Asia and Europe. There are a number of Track-2 projects to promote these networks that Burma takes part in, including the Kunming Initiative made up of Bangladesh, China, India and Burma and the Ganges-Mekong project. So far these have not progressed beyond the talking stage. In the meantime, Burma has been exporting its troubles to its neighbors to the effect that the situation has to be taken up by the UNSC. To change Burma requires a political process that is well beyond the capacity of Burma’s military regime, as was witnessed from the proceedings at the generals’ re-launching “National Convention” which they hoped would complete the “basic elements” for a new constitution, but which will fail to win national or international credibility.

 

An Appeal to Burmese Thinking

 

The Burmese tend too think of China as an obstacle to its objective of achieving democracy in Burma, and feel that China is supporting the military regime due to many factors. They think that the Chinese want to justify the suppression of democracy activists in Tien-An-Men square, the sale of 1.4 billion worth of arms, the non-tolerance of Burmese democratic activities on the Chinese border; the collapse of the Burmese Communist Party and the subsequent cease-fire agreements. But the most unkindest cut is the pressuring of the KIA ceasefire with the Junta coupled with the economic development aid given to the Junta especially at a time when the Burmese democrats were seeking international sanctions against the military and the non-reception of lobby delegations of the NCGUB. No Burmese could comprehend of how China’s policy of peaceful cooperation through trade or the five principles of peaceful coexistence is being applied here.

 

The Burmese ethno-democratic hypotheses have worked well in the liberal democracies of the Western world but these have not worked well with the neighboring countries and China. The neighboring countries are themselves experiencing many difficulties in their developmental paths, and with the concept in China’s external relations of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. The non-interference in the internal affairs of a nation has been a key principle that has been applied even in the UN. Cynics will reject this last statement and give examples where China and other powers have interfered in the internal affairs of various nations. While this is true for covert operations, it is not realistic to expect governments to change their basic policies just for the sake of Burma. This is especially so since, in their perception, there is no alternative governing body to the Burmese army (Balkanization theory).

 

The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence were worked out by China, Burma and India in the early 1950’s and became the basis for the Non-Aligned Movement. The basic aim was to counter colonialism and imperialism, and enable weaker nations to exist and collectively work out their own futures. Some of these principles are still sound and should not be discarded.

 

I would humbly like to remind my Burmese democrats not to approach China with the attitude that China’s non-intervention policy towards Burma is wrong, when she has intervene economically on the side of the military regime. China also must not be approached as an obstacle to achieving democracy in Burma. Neither of these two assumptions is correct. Instead China’s non-intervention policy should be encouraged and maintained. We must understand that China does not necessarily oppose democracy or support military rule. China itself is moving towards democratization and is opening up its economy to the world. The Burmese military leaders do not have the same policy and are obstructing economic development – especially access from Southwestern China to the Indian Ocean. China has voiced its support for democratization and national reconciliation in Burma. This should be nurtured; China is the main power in the region. Burmese democrats need to accept this reality and work out how their aspirations can benefit both the peoples of Burma and China. Burma cannot expect to survive in the long-term and grow if its policies contradict or run counter to regional trends. The whole region needs to develop in tandem.

 

We should also remember that China has indigenous Kachins, Lisu, Shans, Was, Palaung, Lahus living on its borders. Burmese policies that adversely affect these peoples in Burma have an effect on the population of China. These factors cannot be ignored if Burma wants good relations. Burmese democrats must develop policies that are ‘friendly’ towards Burma’s neighbours.

 

The Benign Dragon

 

China is desirous to project itself as a benign dragon with lots of followers and admirers. Professor Johnson indicated that China is more open than many in the West recognize and that the responsibility for China’s political future is in the hand of policymakers. Since the imperial period China has been extremely subject to its external environment and America’s behavior toward China will make a great impact on the direction. With the mainland’s ongoing modernization and its desire to project power abroad, many countries in Asia believe that China is becoming the dominant power in the region. While intra-regional trade continues to expand and integrate China with its neighbors, free trade zones in East Asia have been discussed, explicitly with non-U.S. involvement. Therefore, as dynamics in the region begin to change, Roy stated there is a strong desire not to polarize Asia again due U.S.-China conflicts. Thus maintaining stable relations is an important strategic component and is in the best interest for U.S national security. Though the U.S. is working with a flawed framework and there is bound to be further Sino-American crises, Roy asserted that sound reasoning and understanding how the Chinese system works will help to prevent misperceptions and miscalculations that could lead to confrontation.

 

The Asia Pacific Community Vision also has a much more benign prediction how China will affect the region. China’s decision during the Asian crisis not to devalue its currency demonstrated its commitment to the return of economic stability and growth to the region. Figures already show that the region is well on its way to a full recovery, and before long will be leading the world in economic growth. In this context, regional institutions will be strengthened and made more effective; institutional innovations are already being mooted with this purpose in mind. China’s growing interest in and commitment to regional institutions will continue. Interdependence with Afro-Asian countries will increasingly define China’s relationship with the Asia Pacific region. These forces will also begin to transform China and the Asia Pacific. Economic openness will be followed by political liberalization and the “demand for new institutions, social welfare structures, and a more predictable legal framework.” Generational change in leaderships will bring new political values into the government of China and that of the others. As interdependence breeds a sense of regional community, structures of sovereignty and rivalry will begin to be mitigated. This may eventually contribute to the resolution of the region’s most serious ongoing tensions, between China and Taiwan, on the Korean peninsula, and in the South China Sea.

 

There is little doubt that China’s regional strategy will be driven by its overriding rivalry with the US, leading it to seek accommodation with former great power rivals: Russia, India, possibly Japan. Asia Pacific states will have more options if their relations with the US become strained. On the other hand, the new imperative for the smaller states of the region will be to avoid being trampled in the course of great power competition. They will need to manage their relations with the great powers in such a way as to avoid being “chain ganged” by a larger ally into a conflict not of their making. They will also have an interest in maintaining stability and peace between the great powers in order to escape the devastating effect of what may possibly be a nuclear conflict. Regional tension spots such as Taiwan and the Korean Peninsula, will become possible conflict detonators, and are likely to attract great attention within the region.

 

In international politics, how a country rises often has more drastic consequences for the world than the rise itself. The speed, velocity, ideology, and most significantly, the impact it has on the international balance of power, cause other countries to harbor suspicion, caution, jealousy, and fear, and trigger antipathy among other reactions. The way Germany in the late 19th century and Japan at the beginning of the 20th century made remarkable advances sparked considerable reactions from established powers. “The rise of China” could also trigger all of the above. Many things in China are regarded as potential forces that could change the status q

 

 

 

Rhododendron News

Volume VIII. No. VI. November-December 2005

Chin Human Rights Organization

www.chro.org

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Indiscriminate Killing & Prohibitive Orders

• Two Killed, Six Injured in Indiscriminate Killing

• SPDC Authority Prohibits Growing other Crops Except Rice at Farms

 

Forced Labor and Extortion

• Burmese Troop Forced Civilians to Porter, Demanded Rations

• SPDC Collected Money Illegally from Local People

• Excessive Money Collected from Identity Cards

• Local People Forced to Construct Police Station

• Excessive Taxes Exacted

 

Opinion

Will the National Convention Bring Democracy to Burma?

–By Harn Yawngwe

 

Presentation

• Human Rights Situations in Chinland

–By Salai Bawi Lian Mang

 

Activity Reports

• CHRO Key Activities Highlights in 2005

 

Back Cover Poem

• Sweet December

–By Van Biak Thang

 

 

Burmese Soldiers Killed Two Children, Injured Six Civilians in Random Shooting

 

Chin Human Rights Organization

14 November 2005

 

Aizawl: Two Burmese soldiers shot and killed two children and critically injured six other civilians in Matupi Town of southern Chin State on Saturday, November 12, 2005, Chin Human Rights Organization has learned. Local residents who witnessed the shooting identified two Burmese soldiers from Light Infantry Battalion 304 as culprits of the indiscriminate killing.

 

Bawi Sawng, a 17 year-old boy, son of Pu Cang Khawn, who just graduated from high school and a 7 year-old child were killed on the spot and six other civilians, most of them children, were seriously injured by the spray of bullets late afternoon on Saturday at around 5:00 p.m. local time.

 

The injured civilians were flown by army helicopter to hospitals in Pakhuku, Mandalay and Maymyo (Pyin Oo Lwin), CHRO source said. But further details on the condition of the victims are not immediately available.

 

The incident occurred at a local football ground during the closing ceremony of a regional football tournament sponsored by Lt. Colonel San Aung, Commander of Tactical Command II for Southern Chin State. Football teams from both civilian and the army were competing for a trophy named after Lt. Col. San Aung, which started on November 1, 2005.

 

The civilian team from Matupi won the final match against army personnel based out of Kanpalet Town. Eye witnesses said two Burmese soldiers, apparently disgruntle over their loss against the civilian team, approached from the south end of the football field and started spraying bullets from automatic rifles on a crowd of spectators watching the prize-giving ceremony. The indiscriminate shooting left two children dead and six other injured.

 

Last year in a similar football tournament a brawl brook out between Burmese soldiers and Chin civilians spectators after the soldiers loss a match against the civilians.

 

Today’s edition of Myanmar Digest, a state-run newspaper blamed the shooting on ‘Chin insurgent terrorists.’ The paper said that two Chin insurgents armed with small arms opened fired on the spectators and fled and that the regional Battalions are in hot pursuit. But that claim is disputed by eye witnesses who said they recognize the two Burmese soldiers from LIB 304 as the shooters.

 

Local residents say that Matupi Town is heavily militarized and fortified there is no way the Chin rebels could have sneak in undetected and then left without being caught.

 

Military authorities are giving 100,000 Kyats to each family of the victims in compensation. Burma Army rarely gives compensation to civilian victims and local residents believe it is meant for a hush money rather than compensation.

 

 

 

Burmese Troops Forced Civilians to Porter, Demanded Rations

 

Aizawl 26/12/2005

 

Commanding officer 2nd Lt. Ko Ko Oo from Burma Army Light Infantry Battalion 268 forced villagers in Vuangtu area to porter and forcibly collected rations from civilians on November 10, 2005. U Kaw Lian Ring, a villager of Phaikhua who was forced to porter army supplies reported to Chin Human Rights Organization. The battalion is from Falam and currently stationed at Vuangtu Village in Thantlang Township of northern Chin State.

 

The villager recounted: “The officer and his troops arrived at my village from Hmawngtlang village with three porters at 3 p.m. in the evening on November 9, 2005. As soon as they got to the village, the officer summoned all the village Peace and Development Council members and said, “I came here because I was informed that members of Chin National Army are here. I will kill you all if you fail to bring them.” Under such threats, he demanded two chickens and ten cups of rice for his squad. The village elders were unable to catch the chickens and they had to arrange Kyat 5,800 to buy 6 cans of canned fish and 6 bundles of noodle for their dinner. Additionally, the village elders had to arrange another 10 cups of rice and 6000 Kyats to buy 2 chickens for the next day’s meal.”

“We had to get up at 4 a.m. in the morning to report ourselves to the soldiers. There were three of us who were recruited for portering. Each one of us was made to carry rations, communication gears, and the commander’s rucksack. We traveled 12 miles to Hripi village. The heavy loads on our backs slowed us down but the soldiers would swear at us and forced us to keep pace. We were fed breakfast only at 11:00 o’ clock,” U Kaw Ling Ring explained.

SPDC soldiers patrolling at India-Burma border no longer bring ration from battalions since later this year. They would demand rations from villages along their way and forced civilians to carry their supplies from one village to the next.

 

SPDC Authority Prohibits Growing Other Crops Except Paddy At Farms

 

Aizawl: 26/12/2005

 

Township Peace and Development Council Chairman U Shwe Soe of Thantlang in Northern Chin State on August 10, Issued an order not to grow other crops at farms except paddy in farms across Thantlang Township. U Sui Thong, a farmer from Senthang Vilage said growing crops other than paddy requires prior authorization from the authorities.

“We only have a small number of farm owners in our area, which means that our harvests produce very little. So we grow garlic immediately after harvesting our paddy. The plantation also does not profit us well but we have an extra income through it and it is better to grow garlic than doing nothing,” he complained.

Continued U Sui Thong: “I am now 53 and I have never heard of such an order prohibiting other plantation except rice. With this kind of restriction, it is certain that my family’s situation would worsen year by year. Children’s expenditures at school are getting higher and prices of commodities are going through the roof.”

“According to the order we will harvest less and less one year after another and we farmers will not find means to survive” said the villager.

SPDC authority in Thantlang Township has been issuing various prohibiting orders these days. On 30, September 2005 Police station chief (name unknown) stationed at Hnaring Village issued an order prohibiting fishing in such rivers as Bawinu, Thangaw, and Pang Lai. The order stipulated a 20,000 Kyat fines for violation.

 

SPDC Collected Money Illegally From Local People

 

Aizawl 11/11/2005

 

Township Peace and Development Council chairman U Tin Htun from Razua Township forcibly collected 800 Kyats from every town household in the area.

Citing funding needs to sponsor soccer tournament, which trophy was named after Colonel San Aung, Vice Chairman of Chin State Peace and Development Council and Commander of Tactical Command No. 2 in Chin State. The soccer match was held on November 1, 2005 in Matupi.

“On September 5, 2005, our village was fined a sum of 10,000 Kyats because we did not present a soccer team. Now we paid 300 Kyat each household again. Since our town became a new Township administrative center, each household has paid around 50,000 Kyats in all. Look! A primary student pays 150 kyat for gyms fund regularly and each student was forced to buy two dozens of pencils. I have to buy eight dozen for four children and now the box is full of unused pencils,” complained one the village headman.

Since Rezua was awarded a Township status, residents of villages in the new jurisdiction have had to build military camps, produce gravels for road constructions, supply chickens and forced as porters. Moreover, they were forced to be members of Women Association of Burma and forced to buy the portraits of General Than Shwe and a poster of Rih Lake and forced to distribute money for governmental service daily.

 

 

Excessive Money Collected for Identity Cards

 

 

U Khua Za Khan, head of immigration office of Falam town, Northern Chin State has been asking huge amounts of money to issue National Identity Card since earlier this year. Said a local man: “Head officer U khun Za Khan demands kyat 10,000 to 15,000 from those applying for new cards, Kyats 20,000 to 30,000 for those people who would like to renew the validity, and demands Kyats 30,000 to 40,000 from those who lost their cards and wished to get a new national identity card.”

“It is very difficult to acquire a national identity card, I had spent kyat 50,000 on National Identity Card for my four children,” complained one local resident.

But according to public notice posted in the local Immigration office, getting a new identity card for the first time only costs 6 Kyats, while renewing costs 1000 Kyats and replacing a lost card costs 5000 Kyats respectively.

 

 

Local People Forced to Construct Police Station

 

Aizawl 21/11/2005

 

Police officer Kyaw Aung based at Shinletwa village, Paletwa Township, southern Chin State forced civilians in the surrounding villages to construct police camp on October 21, 2005, U Phu Uk of, headman of Pawng village reported.

 

5 villages from Wazung village tract have to construct the police camp from November 21 to November 26, 2005. One person from every household in the village track was compels to engage in the forced labor.

 

The forced laborers have to bring their own tools, and food. Besides, the villagers were compels to bring construction raw materials such as wood for the pole of the building and thatch for the roof. It took a day for forced laborers from Pawng village to travel to the construction site.

 

There are about 100 villagers engage in the forced labor constructing the police station from five villages; Shwe Ta Lak, Tawngzang, Pawng, O0Zung and Sat-Ke villages.

 

 

Excessive Taxes Exacted

Aizawl 21/11/2005.

 

Head Officer of Municipal Corporation of Falam town, Northern Chin State, U Kan Aung demands kyat 10, 000 to 150, 00 from those families who had finished building a house in Falam, a local resident reported.

Head officer U Kan Aung was said to go around the town and inspected newly constructed buildings since 2004. As soon as he came to know about a new building, he extorts huge amounts of money from the house owner. Sometimes some house owners don’t have enough money to pay him, but he often forced house owners to borrow money and to pay him without delay. Apart from the extortion of money by Municipal Corporation of Falam town, Forestry Department also extorts kyat 15, 0000 to 2, 00000 from house owners.

At the same time, health department demands kyats 10, 000 to 20, 000 from any patients for admission fees to hospital and kyat 20, 000 to 50,000 for those patients who need operation. Moreover, education department demands kyat 500 to 1000 from the students for extra times.

 

 

Will the National Convention Bring Democracy to Burma?

 

What Role Can ASEAN Play In The Process?

By Harn Yawnghwe

December 25, 2005

The focus on Burma today centers on the National Convention which was reconvened on 5 December 2005. People want to know if this process can be used to bring about democratic change. Given the frustration over the absence of any other political alternatives, some are advocating that we embrace the National Convention and work within the limited confines it seems to afford. Is this a possible avenue that we should explore? Before we make any decisions, it may be helpful to examine some of the factors surrounding the issue.

 

People assume that this National Convention is a new constitutional drafting process launched by Prime Minister Lieutenant-General Khin Nyunt, when he announced the 7-point Road Map to democracy in August 2003. The Convention is actually a continuation of the one convened in 1993. It was adjourned in 1996 and reconvened in May 2004 after an interval of almost 8 years. The Burmese military has, from the very beginning, clearly stated that one of the six key objectives for drafting the constitution is to legitimize the ‘political leadership role’ of the Tatmadaw (Armed Forces). But some have argued that since the constitution only reserves 25% of the legislative seats for the Tatmadaw, the new constitution is a good deal. After all, the military today controls 100% of the seats. While this may sound reasonable, it should be noted that the Convention has not said anything yet about how elections will be held. Under the 1974 military-sponsored ‘Socialist’ constitution, all candidates had to be first approved by the ruling party. Therefore, the Tatmadaw could still control 100% of the seats while reserving only 25% of the seats for the military. In any case, the key issue is not the percentage of seats. Under the new presidential constitution, the powerful president must have 10 years of military experience. And to make doubly sure that the military retains control, the constitution also stipulates that the Commander-in-Chief will appoint three key ministers – including his own boss, the Defence Minister, the Home Minister, and the Minister for Border Affairs. The Commander-in-Chief also has the right to seize power any time he feels that national security is threatened. The Tatmadaw is also above the constitution. Can such a constitution lead to democracy?

 

Another factor that troubles democracy advocates is that delegates to the National Convention are prohibited from criticizing the constitution whether within the formal proceedings or informally outside the sessions. The proceedings are a state secret. Those who ignore the edicts have been harassed and arrested. One was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Law No.5/96 also makes it illegal for anyone to discuss the constitution outside the National Convention. If the new constitution is intended to bring democracy to Burma, why should it be a crime to discuss it openly? But some continue to argue that in spite of the totally undemocratic outcome, we should engage the military. They say that we should use the process to create some political space. The way the Convention and the Road Map came to be launched may be instructive. The process to legitimize military rule actually started in November 1989 when Foreign Minister U Ohn Kyaw announced at the United Nations General Assembly in New York in November 1989 that Burma would hold general elections in 1990 to elect a new government. Senior-General Saw Maung, the Chair of SLORC, promised that he would hand over power to the election winners. But when the National League for Democracy (NLD) led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, actually won 82% of the parliamentary seats, SLORC changed its tune and said that the elections were not to elect a government but only to determine who would draft a new constitution. After 3 years of maneuvering, the military again changed the rules and did not allow the 482 elected representatives to draft a new constitution. They instead hand-picked 702 delegates. Of this number only 107 elected representatives were selected. When the NLD protested against the undemocratic practices within the Convention and walked out, the process stopped without any reason being given. When the National Convention finally reconvened in 2004, the ethnic cease-fire armies did exactly as is being suggested. They tried to use the process to create some political space. They requested that the 104 articles adopted in 1996 be reviewed given the 8-year gap, that the process be inclusive, and democratic. The results? Ethnic nationalities leaders were arrested and recently sentenced to over 100 years in prison each on unspecified charges. And the military recently stated that the cease-fire armies represent only a small portion of the wider ‘national races’, and that their views would not be reflected in the constitution. This is because when the military reconvened the National Convention, they changed its composition. Instead of the 215 delegates from the ‘national races’ as in 1993, this was expanded to 633 delegates to minimize any possible negative effects from inviting the 105 delegates from the ethnic cease-fire armies to participate in the Convention. There are also now only 13 elected representatives left in an expanded Convention of 1,086 delegates. The military is also now claiming that there are no cease-fires armies. They claim instead that insurgents have re-entered the legal fold and some have even exchanged their arms for peace. This actually contradicts the military’s former claim that they have achieved peace in Burma because they have cease-fire agreements with 17 groups.

 

The above shows that the Burmese military will not compromise. To them, they are engaged in a process of national salvation, and they have to win at all costs. They will change the rules, stop the process, stack the cards, and re-define the situation in short, do anything, in order to win. Given such a rigid military mind-set, it is difficult to see how the National Convention process can be used to bring about democracy. But does this mean that there is no way out? For how many more years will the military keep shifting the goal posts? For how many more years will democracy advocates and the international community keep saying no? And for how many years will Burma continue to survive as a sovereign nation with its territorial integrity intact? The British government earlier this year identified Burma as a country at risk of instability. The United Nations Resident Coordinator in Yangon warned recently that worsening economic conditions and rising rates of disease including HIV-AIDS could eventually lead to a humanitarian crisis. Given this bleak prospect, perhaps the upcoming visit by the proposed ASEAN envoy can broker a deal. The two contentious and seemingly contradictory objectives out of the six objectives proposed by the military are: the flourishing of a genuine multi-party democracy, and the Tatmadaw’s national political leadership role in the future state. But these objectives could be reconciled if the democracy movement were able to accept that the military needs to play a leading political role in a transition to democracy. The Tatmadaw must also accept that after a transition, the role of the Tatmadaw in politics must decrease if democracy is to flourish. According to the military’s plans, future sessions of the National Convention will be considering provisions to amend the constitution, and ‘prescriptions in the Transitional Period’. This could be the key to finding a solution. What is crucial now is for the Tatmadaw to agree to ASEAN’s involvement in the process of democratization in Burma and a definite time-frame. If such firm provisions guaranteed by ASEAN could be worked out, the democracy movement and the international community would welcome them.

 

Human Rights Situation in Chinland

Presentation

By

Salai Bawi Lian Mang

Of

Chin Human Rights Organization

At

Joint Venue Hosted

By

Lawyers Group of Amnesty International (Hong Kong)

&

CSW (Hong Kong)

 

November 7, 2005 Hong Kong

 

I would like to say thank you to the CWS (Hong Kong) and the Lawyers Group of Amnesty International (Hong Kong) for creating this venue, exclusively for the situation of human rights in Chinland (Chin state and western Burma). I am honored to speak about human rights situation in Chinland to a group of intellectuals, lawyers, the AI (Hong Kong) and CSW (Hong Kong) who have committed in promotion of human rights around the world.

 

Thanks to Ms. Chato Olivas Gallo for your nice introduction. My name is Salai Bawi Lian Mang from Chin Human Rights Organization (CHRO). The CHRO is an independent non-governmental human rights organization. We aim to protect and promote human rights among the Chin people, and to contribute to the movement for the restoration of democracy and human rights in Burma. Founded in 1995, CHRO has worked to document the human rights situations of the Chin people in Burma’s western region.

 

Even though the political and human rights situation in Burma has gained international attention in recent years, the situation of the Chin people remained largely unknown by international community.

 

I am regrets to say that human rights conditions among Burma’s ethnic people, including the Chin people continue to remain a matter of grave concern. In fact, human rights conditions of the Chin people have become worse and the number of displaced persons and refugees has increased in recent years. Under the reign of the State Peace and Development Council, the Chin people have continued to experience untold miseries and hardships as a result of the systematic abuse of their fundamental human rights.

 

There is a direct link between the growing abuse against the Chin people and the increase in militarization of the Chin areas. In the last fifteen years since the regime took over power, the number of army battalions stationed in Chin State has increased up to 10 times. This increase has been accompanied by the rapid acceleration in the level of human rights abuses across Chin State. The kind of human rights violations suffered by the Chins today are the same as those that have been extensively reported among ethnic Karen, Shan, and Karenni on the eastern border. These violations manifest in the forms of arbitrary arrest and detention, forced labor, torture, rape and extrajudicial executions. Moreover, the overwhelming percentage of Christians among the Chin people has also brought abuses in the form of religious persecution. Today, religious persecution is a matter of primary concern among the Chin people.

 

Since 1999, the US State Department has singled out Burma as a country that systematically violates religious freedom. The annual reports have cited a significant amount of cases of religious persecution involving the Chin people.

 

Religious Persecution:

 

Religious persecution poses a matter of grave concern among the Chin people. Chin Human Rights Organization, since 1995, has documented a range of human rights abuses by the military regime against the Chin people, including violations of religious freedom.

In December of 2004, Burma hosted a World Buddhists Summit amidst questions about its worthiness to organize such international meeting given the regime’s abysmal record of treating religious minorities and absolute disregard for fundamental human rights. Around the same time that this meeting took place in Rangoon, Burmese troops from Light Infantry Battalion (304) desecrated a Christian cross in Matupi of southern Chinland.

 

On January 3, 2005 a giant Christian cross on top of Mount Boi near Matupi town of Chin State was destroyed by Burmese troops on direct order of Colonel San Aung, one of the highest ranking military commanders in the region. The 50-foot tall concrete cross was erected by local Christians at the cost three and a half million Kyats. After destroying the cross, troops from Light Infantry Battalion (304) hoisted a Burmese flag as a sign of victory against Christianity in Chin State where more than 90 percent of the populations are Christians. There are reports the regime is making plans to construct a Buddhist pagoda on the site.

 

Christian religion has deep root in the Chin society. Since the first Chin conversion in the early 20th century following the arrival of American Baptist missionaries to the Chin Hills, Christianity gradually became accepted by a large majority of the Chin populations, who had practiced traditional animism for centuries. After a century since then, Christianity now is second culture for many Chin people.

 

Chin people today claim that more than 90 percent of Chins are Christians. Because of the overwhelming importance of Christianity among the Chins, the junta, which strongly identifies itself with Buddhism and has been preoccupied with building national unity has been trying to promote Buddhism over Christianity in Chin State with the belief that once the Chins are converted to Buddhism they can be easily subjugated.

 

For this reason, the regime has resorted to persecuting the Chins, a drastic action that involves arbitrarily removing Christian crosses erected by churches on hilltops throughout Chin State and openly directing and supporting coerced conversions of Christians into Buddhism.

 

Through the Hill Buddhist Mission, a program directly sponsored by the military regime, Buddhist monks have migrated to the Chin State. In every town and major villages in Chin State, the regime has established a Buddhist pagoda and station monks who are closely working with local army battalions. Buddhist pagodas are often built in places where Christian monuments such as crosses have formerly stood, and Christians have been either forced to donate money or forced to build the pagodas.

 

The regime is putting close scrutiny on preachers and evangelists, and in many instances has made effort to censor the contents of sermons delivered by Christian pastors and ministers. Citing the risk of security, authorities have either not permitted or arbitrarily set the number of people who could attend religious festivals and conferences. Moreover, the regime has still not permitted the printing and publication of Bibles, forcing Chin Christians to quietly bringing Bibles from abroad. In several instances, army authorities have confiscated Chin-language Bibles imported from India, and burnt or destroyed them.

 

Construction of new church buildings is prohibited and Christians must obtain prior authorization for even renovation of church buildings. These are all in stark contrast to the freedoms enjoyed by monks and Buddhists whose activities are openly supported, and encouraged by authorities. Several reports documented by CHRO show that army patrols have deliberately used Church compounds for shelter and camps, and have purposefully disturbed Church services by entering into churches during Sunday worship services.

 

The regime has also targeted Christian leaders by falsely implicating and accusing them of supporting anti-government groups, and has jailed and tortured many pastors. In remote villages and other rural areas in Chin State, army units on patrols have frequently mistreated, assaulted and tortured Christian pastors.

 

Coerced conversions of Christian families and children have also been reported in several parts of Chin State. Those who convert to Buddhism were exempted from forced labor and given special privileges. Local authorities have frequently recruited Christian children under the pretext of giving them formal education in cities. The last incidents happening in last year, five Christian children, between the ages of 7 and 18 years old from Matupi township of Chin State, who had been placed in monasteries in Rangoon, escaped confinement in Buddhist temples where they have been forced to follow Buddhist teachings.

 

Restriction on the use and teaching of Chin language:

 

Under the military regime, the teaching of Chin language in school is prohibited. In elementary schools, the permitted level of teaching Chin language is grade 2. Publications of textbooks in Chin are not provided for by the government and Christian churches are forced to bear the burden of supplying these texts. Chin school teachers of all levels of high school in Chin State are instructed to use Burmese as a medium of communication with their students. This measure has greatly diminished the level of understanding by the students in school and has served to downgrade student performance. Since the mid 1990s, the new curriculum is dominated by perspectives of Burmese or Burman culture and history, and students have complained about the lack of substance that reflects ethnic Chin perspectives in the subject. This has also been seen as an open attempt to assimilate the Chin youth into mainstream Burman culture.

 

Because of the limited number of government schools available for the Chin populations in Chin State, communities in rural villages have set up private schools to allow the children access to primary education. Unsupported by the government, villages have to seek their own means of running the school by contributing money and resources for the schools. However, since 1998, the regime has banned many self-supported private schools, depriving many children in rural communities of primary education. It should be noted that because these private schools are not under direct control of the government, they were able to offer alternative learning in Chin language. Restriction on the learning of Chin language has already taken its toll on the Chin youth. A high percentage of Chin teenagers are not able to read and write in their own language. This has been exacerbated by the fact that many Chin children look down on their own language and had instead chosen to use Burmese.

 

Forced Labor:

Burma has claimed that it has outlawed the practice of forced labor in 2001. However, independent investigations into this claim have found the pervasiveness and the continued use of forced labor in the Chin State. Local army battalions have routinely exacted forced labor from villagers and rural communities in building roads, army camps, development infrastructures and agricultural projects. In major townships of Chin state such as Hakha, Falam, Matupi and Thantlang, civilians are being routinely forced to work at government tea plantation farms. I am not going in detail about the forced labor situation, instead, I will refer you to the report we made a few months ago.

The report titled “THE FORCED LABOR PANDEMIC IN CHINLAND”

 

Political Suppression:

 

The Chin people are not represented in the central, state and local administration under the military regime. After the regime nullified the results of the 1990 elections, all Chin political parties were declared illegal. These political parties include the Chin National League for Democracy (CNLD), the Mara Peoples Party (MPP) and Zomi National Congress (ZNC) Party. Subsequent crackdowns on political dissidents have forced 3 of the 13 Chin Members of Parliament to flee the country while 2 others were arrested and imprisoned for several years. Since early 1990s, the entire Chin populations have forced to live under virtual curfew. Dozens of civilians accused of supporting, Chin National Front, underground movement were arrested, tortured and imprisoned under the Unlawful Association Act. Civilians charged under this act are routinely tortured in interrogating chambers. According to a former a woman prisoner, she was humiliated, tortured and deprived of food and sleep for one week before she was arbitrarily sentenced to 3 years in prison.

 

Refugees:

 

I would like to highlight the particularly grave situations of Chin refugees. In the year since the military regime took over power in 1988, about 60,000 Chin refugees have fled to India, Bangladesh and Malaysia. At least 50,000 Chin refugees have lived in Mizoram State of northeast India. Neither the Government of India nor the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has recognized them as refugees. As a result Chin refugees have frequently been forced back to Burma.

 

The need for protection and humanitarian assistance of Chin refugees in Malaysia is no less important. Over the past few years, more than 12,000 Chin refugees have also sought sanctuary in Malaysia. Like the Chin refugees in India, they are identified as ‘illegal’ and risk frequent arrest and deportation by Malaysian authorities. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has recognized only a very small fraction of Chin refugees.

 

Conclusion:

 

The problems faced by Burma’s ethnic groups, including the Chin people are the direct consequence of military rule and its campaign of State organized terrorism directed primarily against the ethnic people who constitute more than 40% of the country’s population. Today, the Chin people and all the ethnic people are fighting for our very survival as a people. Our cultural, ethnic and religious identities are being rapidly eroded, and our very survival as a people is being threatened by the policies of ethnic cleansing relentlessly conducted by the military regime.

 

Due to militarization and rampant human rights violations committed by the Burmese military regime, the Chin people have suffer untold misery in their daily lives and the Burmese military regime has created the situation that is impossible for the Chin people to survive in their own land.

 

The sufferings of the ethnic nationalities could only be remedied through fundamental change in the political system, a change that would allow the ethnic people equitable representation in the decision-making process of the country. Time is passing and innocent lives are being lost. The international community needs to take effective and urgent actions on Burma before the problems develop into an irreversible stage.

 

I hope I have presented a brief overall human rights situation in Chinland, and I think it will be good to open the panel for discussion and questions and answers. I will be happy to answer any question you may have.

 

Thank You.

Salai Bawi Lian Mang

Chin Human Rights Organization

Hong Kong, November 7, 2005

 

 

 

 

Some of CHRO Activities Highlights in 2005

 

 

CHRO Activities in the Moth of January

 

January 8, 2005

The Chin Human Rights Organization has its annual Board of Directors meeting in Ottawa. The meeting made evaluation of the organization’s activities in the past year and discussed about its future plan.

 

January 14, 2005

CHRO director made a briefing “Update on Ethnic nationalities In Burma” at Canadian NGO Consultation Meeting on Burma held at Canadian Council for International Cooperation.

 

January 30, 2005

In response to the destruction of the largest Christian cross by Burmese army on January 3, the Chin Human Rights Organization called international day of prayer for persecuted Chin Christians in Burma on January 30. The action called by CHRO was overwhelmingly responded by Chin churches around the world and covered by several news agencies. Exiled Chins in India, Malaysia, Canada and USA staged demonstration in front of the Burmese embassies.

 

January 31, 2005

CHRO has a meeting with Washington DC-based Refugee International regarding protection of Chin and other refugees from Burma in Malaysia. The meeting decided that the RI and CHRO make assessment trip to Malaysia in March.

 

 

 

CHRO Activities in the Month of February

 

February 1

CHRO director and its legal consultant made a briefing about current political and human rights, special focus on religious persecutions against Chin Christian, in Burma to the United States Department of State, Burma Desk officer and official from the State Department Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.

 

February 2

CHRO director Salai Bawi Lian Mang and the Organization’s legal consultant Salai Ngun Cung Lian had a meeting with World Relief, and Lutharan Immigration and Refugee Service, the two largest international faith-based organizations regarding the protection of Chin and other refugees from Burma in India and Malaysia.

 

February 28, 2005

CHRO published Rhododendron News Bulletin January-February 2005 issue.

 

CHRO activities in March

 

March 1-14, 2005

CHRO director Salai Bawi Lian Mang traveled to Malaysia and Thailand regarding the protection of Chin and other refugees from Burma in Malaysia.

 

March 7, 2005

CHRO director has a meeting with Malaysia NGO called SUARAM regarding protection of Chin and other refugees from Burma in Malaysia against police brutality and legal service for refugees detained by Malaysia police and immigration.

 

March 8, 2005

CHRO director has a meeting with Kuala Lumpur-based Jesus Refugee Service in order to work together in protection of vulnerable women and unaccompanied minor among Chin refugees from Burma in Malaysia.

 

March 9

CHRO director has a meeting with UNHCR Officials from Kuala Lumpur regarding protection of Chin and other refugees from Burma in Malaysia.

 

March 11

CHRO director has a meeting with Shan Women Action Network and Shan Human Rights Foundation. The meeting discussed about searching for a common ground to work together on protection of the rights of ethnic nationalities from Burma.

 

 

 

March 12

CHRO director has a meeting with Asia Indigenous People Pact, an umbrella organization of indigenous peoples in Asia.

 

CHRO Activities during its facts finding mission trip to Malaysia covering Marcy 1-14, 2005;

 

• March 1 meeting with Chin Refugee Committee

• March 2 Noon, Meeting with Falam Fellowship

• March 2 Evening Meeting with the Anti CRC group

• March 2 night, CHRO director was requested to serve as the meeting master for CRC General Meeting (CRC and anti CRC group)

• March 3 Morning: Meeting with Teddim Cimnuai Family & Malay Zomi Organization

• March 3, Evening Meeting with Matupi Fellowship & Mindat

• March 3, Night: Meeting with leaders of Chin Christian Fellowship

• March 4, 2005, Field trip to Daman Sarah Construction Site & Putrajaya Jungle camp with Refugee International and Chin Refugee Committee

• March 5, Meeting with Zotung Fellowship

• March 5, Evening; meeting with a group of Chin Interpreters

• March 6, meeting with a group of CRC interpreters

• March 7, meeting with SUARAM

• March 8, meeting with JESUS REFUGEE SERVICE JRS

• March 9, Meeting with UNHCR Kuala Lumpur

• March 9, Meeting with Hakha Fellowship (Haka Peng I Hoikomhnak)

• March 10, Meeting with Zophei Fellowship

• March 14, Wrap up and meeting with CRC

 

 

CHRO Activities in the Month of April

 

April 15-16

CHRO director Salai Bawi Lian made a presentation “Persecution of Chin Christian in the Union of Burma” at National Conference on Persecuted Churches at Columbia.

 

April 2005

The CHRO takes the initiative to form Chin Women Organization in Malaysia and create the safe house for vulnerable Chin Refugee Women in Kuala Lumpur with the support of Primate Anglican, based in Toronto.

 

CHRO Activities in the Month of May

 

May 21 to 30

CHRO legal consultant Salai Ngun Cung Lian traveled to Korea. The purpose of CHRO visit to Korea and Japan was to advocate for Chin refugees in Korea and Japan and to inform appropriate government agencies, human rights organizations, and the UNHCR about human rights and political situation in Burma and in Chin state.

 

During the 10 days visit to Korea and Japan, CHRO representative had met with;

 

In Korea;

• Christian Volunteers for Refugees’ Human Rights in Seoul

• International Exchange, Jubilee Center

• The Beautiful Foundation

• UNHCR office Seoul

• Visiting the Seoul Immigration Detention Center

• Mass Meeting With Chin Community in Korea

 

In Japan:

• Visiting Tokyo Immigration Detention Center

• Visiting UNHCR Office

• Visiting the Refugee Assistance Headquarters (Tokyo)

• Meeting with Japanese News Paper (Japan Times Staff Writer)

• Meeting Chin Community Japan

• Visiting the Izumibashi Law Office (The Law Farm that Volunteer to Assist Asylum Seekers from Burma)

• Visiting the Japan Association for Refugee Office

• Public Meeting Jointly Organized by National League for Democracy (NLD –LA-Japan) and Association for United Nationalities (AUN) the Non Burman ethnic group in Japan.

 

 

 

CHRO Activities in the Month of June

The CHRO provided information about the situation of refugee and internally displaced person in Chin state and western Burma to the United States Committee for Refugee annual reports on refugee and internally displaced persons.

 

The CHRO is among over a hundred of human rights organizations worldwide who endorsed “Anti Warehousing Campaign” for the rights of refugee initiated by the United States Committee for Refugee.

 

CHRO official has a meeting with Foundation for The People of Burma based in San Francisco in the last week of June. The meeting agreed that the CHRO field office in Delhi provide technical assistance to the two month project of FPB in the improvement of health among refugees and the workshop on organization management.

 

CHRO published Rhododendron News Volume VIII. No. III. May-June 2005.

 

 

 

 

 

Key Activities of Chin Human Rights Organization in July 2005:

 

From the first week of July, the Chin Human Rights Organization’s (CHRO) team from its liaison office in New Delhi, has assisted research team from Foundation for the People of Burma (FPB) in doing research about improving the health of refugees from Burma. The research team set up their research center at the CHRO office and the CHRO team has provided technical assistance, interpretation and translation, interviewing the refugees, and data collections etc. The research team and the CHRO has organized workshop on improvement of health issue attended by 70 individuals from different organizations.

 

The CHRO team also has assisted workshop run by FPB team regarding organizational management skill among Burmese refugee communities in Delhi.

 

The CHRO published a report “Nowhere to Go: Chin Refugees in Malaysia”. The report covers situation of Chin refugees in Malaysia, the reason behind the flow of Chin refugees to Malaysia, the living conditions of the refugees in Malaysia etc.. with several photos and distributed among refugees councils of several countries, humanitarian agencies and rights groups.

 

Key Activities of CHRO in August 2005:

 

On August 12, the United Nations Secretary General’s special rapporteurs and representatives submitted human rights situation in Burma to the Secretary General. And the CHRO is glad that human rights situation in western Burma, and among the Chin people, which the CHRO had provided were included in the report.

 

The following are some of CHRO key activities in this month;

 

The CHRO director has a meeting with leaders from the Pan Kachin organization and Kachin Youth Organization in USA regarding cooperation in terms of protection of refugees and advocacy works.

 

CHRO team in New Delhi has assisted the three day long Chin State Constitution Seminar in Delhi organized by the Chin Forum.

 

The CHRO team in New Delhi has assisted health research team from FPB in the implementation of clean drinking water project among refugees from Burma in Delhi.

 

The CHRO Liaison office in-charge Salai Aung Cin Thang and his team had a meeting with International Committee of the Red Cross. The ICRC assured the CHRO team that they will keep in touch regarding the situation of human rights in Chin state and situation of refugees from Burma in India.

 

 

 

The CHRO team in Delhi has assisted several refugees in their settlement process to the third countries.

 

The CHRO team from the field (India-Burma border) has collected 8 items of the news.

 

On 20th August, the Japan Times, one of the biggest newspapers in Japan has covered the initiatives taken by CHRO in protection of Chin refugees and situation of Chin community in Japan in a featured article.

 

The CHRO published Rhododendron News Volume VIII. No. IV, July-August 2005.

 

Key Activities of CHRO in September 2005

 

The CHRO has submitted forced labor situation in western Burma and Chin state to International Labor Organization (ILO) and International Confederation of Free Trade Union, Expert Committee on Forced Labor in Burma. Forced labor is one of the major concerns among the Chin people in recent years. CHRO have documented about 50 different occasions where villagers were forced to work en-mass in road construction, building army camps and as porters in a period of one year.

 

The University of Philippines, Manila, Department of Social Science and Arts has interview with CHRO director regarding Burma human rights practice and it consequence in relations with ASEAN countries.

 

The CHRO team in New Delhi plays a major role in a seminar organized by Chin Forum regarding State Constitution. Representatives from the four main political parties among the Chin Chin National League for Democracy, Mara People Party, Zomi National Congress and the Chin National Front participated in the seminar.

 

CHRO team in Delhi attended a workshop on “Identification and protection of Women-at- Risk. The workshop was organized by UNHCR in New Delhi.

 

At the last week of September our main donor NED team visited to CHRO Liaison office.

 

The CHRO has assisted and arranged the visit of Christian Solidarity Worldwide, Hong Kong to Mizoram state of India, to advocate the safety of Chin and other refugees from Burma in Mizoram state of India.

 

 

 

 

 

CHRO Key Activities in October 2005

 

The whole month, CHRO office in Delhi assisted Chin Forum for training on constitution and human rights and Ms. Chris Lewa (Consultant/ Researcher) for her assessment among Chin refugees. CHRO office in Delhi also had met various organization, groups and individuals.

 

The CHRO field office in Aizawl have collected and reported 8 item of news regarding human rights violation committed the Burmese military regime against the Chin people.

 

CHRO’s Women Rights Affairs in-charged Mai Dawt Chin has completed her training at Diplomacy Training run by NCUB at Thai-Burma border. Mai Dawt Chin went to South Africa for further training and internship.

 

CHRO published Rhododendron News Volume VIII. No. V. September-October 2005.

 

CHRO Key Activities in November 2005

 

CHRO Liaison Office led by Salai Aung Cin Thang and group collaborates with Foundation for People of Burma for water treatment project among Burmese refugees in New Delhi. The project will be finished in June 2006.

 

Every Saturday, CHRO Liaison office in Delhi provided article to Vang Lai Ni News Agency in Aizawl Mizoram on Burma issue with the aim of raising political awareness among Mizo community.

 

Van Hlei Thang, member of CHRO team from Delhi office set off to Thailand for training on Leadership Development and Management Skills Training.

 

CHRO liaison office provided monetary assistance to sick and poor needy refugees with the money received from Swiss individual sympathizers.

The CHRO field office in Aizawl has collected and reported 9 items of human rights news in November.

 

On November 5 and 6, CHRO director Salai Bawi Lian Mang made presentation titled “Persecution of Chin Christians in the Union of Burma” at the 6th Annual Hokong Christian Human Rights Conference.

 

November 7, 2005: CHRO director have a meeting with Asian Human Rights Commission based in Hong Kong.

 

On November 7, CHRO director Salai Bawi Lian Mang made presentation titled “Human Rights Situation in Chinland” at a joint venue organized by Christian Solidarity Worldwide (Hongkong) and Lawyers Groups of Amnesty International.

 

 

 

On November 8, The US Department of State, Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor released international religious freedom report on Burma, and CHRO report was cited in the report.

 

On November 14, CHRO board of directors, Mr. Victor Biak Lian and the organization’s advisory board member Dr. Lian Sakhong have a meeting with UN Human Rights Special Rappoerteur Prof. Pinheiro.

 

November 30; Amnesty International-Hong Kong ENEWS covered presentation made by Salai Bawi Lian Mang on the 7th November.

 

CHRO Activities in December 2005

 

CHRO team from Delhi office attended seminar on problems and prospects of marginalized hill people. The team continues to involve in water treatment project with foundation for the people of Burma, and continue its relief works among Chin refugees. CHRO team in Delhi continues to provide article to VangLai Ni News Agency for Burma Democracy concern.

 

CHRO field office from Aizawl collected and reported 10 items of human rights news in this month.

 

“Sweet December”

 

Van Biak Thang

Chinland Guardian

 

(I) Before

 

In the clear sky blink the stars

And bright is the moon up afar

Quiet is the night in cold zephyr

With only there the dancing crickets

 

Up the hilltop gather people

Wrapped up in shared blankets

Still their lips shiver as they warble

With the guitar and the cymbal

 

Those in the house by the fire

Busy as bees making plain teas

And sorting out chaang by each member

Before down wafts the pastor’s sweet voice

 

Once the Police Bell strikes tinkling

Each and all sings and prays in greeting

Traces of smiles and joys on all faces

Then, comes “Sweet December” wishes

 

(II) After

 

The night is quiet and the sky still clear

The moon is bright and the wind still cold

Why no crickets seen in the dancing floor

And the stars stop twinkling, though not old.

 

Yet there live people on the mountain

But no guitars are meant to entertain

And their lips and limbs shiver in fear

Cos a shared blanket can’t the cold bear

 

No lights and fire in the quiet house

Busy as a bee is only the preying mouse

And “Where are the chaang?” children whisper

As they snuggle and ease their hunger

 

Once the Police Bell strikes tinkling

Family in tears and fear sobbing

As each one recalls and prays for those away

Then, the marching sound comes on its way

(Chaang, one of Chin traditional food, is a kind of sticky rice wrapped up in banana leaves

 

 

 

To protect and promote human rights and democratic principles