ASEAN LEADERS ARE BARKING AT THE WRONG TREE WITH THE WRONG CAUSE AND WRONG OBJECTIVE

ASEAN LEADERS ARE BARKING AT THE WRONG TREE 

WITH THE WRONG CAUSE AND WRONG OBJECTIVE

 

ASEAN leaders are complaining about the convenient way to solve the Rohingya problem.

But for the Rohingyas or Burmese Muslims or Christian Chins/Karens/Kachins and Buddhist Mons/Shans/Burmese etc AND the NLDS  and political opponents and armed rebel groups_

Whether the SPDC would accept them back is not their main concern. What is the consequences after repatriation is their only problem.

Jailed? Tortured? Is the main concern for all but ‘Village arrest’ (for Rohingyas only) is the problem.

No democracy, no Human Rights, no political life, no respect for the Rights of religious minorities and Ethnic minorities is their main concern.

But the lack of development, economic problems back home are the most important fact for all of them.

There is no clear cut line to DEFINE OR CATEGORIZE THEM INTO POLITICAL OR ECONOMIC MIGRANTS. 

Continue reading

Deafening silence from Malaysia regarding Myanmar Cyclone?

Deafening silence from Malaysia regarding Myanmar Cyclone?

 

First of all I wish to apologize if I am wrong.

 

If Malaysian Government had already sent the condolence note to Myanmar, I am sorry for writing this.

 

If Malaysian Government, GLCs (government Linked companies), NST, TV3, NTV7, RTM and NGOs (esp. government affiliated) had already started a campaign to help Myanmar, please accept my  apology for wrongly writing this posting.

 

If you all haven’t done anything, it is shame on you.

 

We don’t want a cent from you Kaisu Malaysia!

 

 

We know that we are not Orang Puteh (Whiteman) , no Arab blood and have no Malay-Indonesian blood. We are ALWAYS discriminated in your country.

 

Never mind if you do not wish to recognize the undocumented workers/migrants and asylum seekers.

 

During the great disaster in Myanmar, I hope if Malaysian government could do the followings to help us without spending a cent.

 

Please announce amnesty on all the Myanmar/Burmese undocumented workers/migrants and asylum seekers including those already in the detention camp. (At least if they could work and earn, they could help their families, relatives and friends.)

 

You could put a time limit for example six months to one year.

It is shameful that you are heartless to continue arresting and some of your agents are harassing them daily.

 

Dr San Oo Aung

 

17 Myanmar Illegal Immigrants Held In Kelantan

BERNAMA, RANTAU PANJANG, May 6 (Bernama) — The Anti- Smuggling Unit (UPP) Tuesday arrested 17 Myanmar nationals without valid travel documents in Kampung Kempas, Machang, as they were being smuggled into the country by a syndicate.

Kelantan UPP commander Mazlan Che Hamid said the Myanmar nationals, aged between 16 and 30 years, had been turned over to the Immigration authorities.

He said the van driver, a Malaysian, stopped the vehicle by the roadside and fled after realising that it was being tailed by UPP personnel at 4.30 am.

The UPP personnel had followed the van from Kampung Kedap here, some 40 km from Machang, he said.

— BERNAMA

Use Olympic Games to educate China

Use Olympic Games to educate China

Concerned Netizen in Malaysiakini

I refer to the Malaysiakini article Fire on the roof of the world.

I am quite alarmed at China’s response to protests held in Tibet and surrounding regions. Daily we see protests about it along the Olympic torch run, and I wonder why we don’t hear more protests here in Malaysia. The Olympic games lend an excellent opportunity for the world to pressure China to do better in its treatment of others.

Some say that such a move is politicising the Olympic games when they are only about sport. But I beg to differ as there has always been a political element in the games. That’s why countries fight so hard to host them; so that they can show off their might and economic wealth on the world stage.

That’s why these games mean so much to the Chinese government today. From the moment they were granted the right to host the games, it has been a political issue for them. It’s not really about having a good natured contest between countries.

It’s about showing off economic clout, national power and glory. Good sportsmanship, peace and harmony are a very distant second. It’s China’s coming out party and they don’t want anyone to rain on it.

If China continues to go down the path of repression and violence, I don’t believe I can honestly turn on my television set and watch the games. It would be like taking part in a glamorous party while crowds of people outside are beaten, jailed and tortured.

It simply sickens me that we can go on with these games as if nothing is happening. Which to me is giving China the message that it can continue to have it’s cake (persecuting others or support persecution) and eat it too (world influence and ascendancy).

It’s as though that many countries and athletes in the world are saying that it doesn’t matter how China conducts itself as a nation, we will continue to support them and applaud them. I sincerely hope that heads of state will boycott the opening and closing ceremonies and that athletes will take a stand and not participate in the games.

It’s definitely a sacrifice on their part, but it sends a strong and clear message that human life is valued above fame and glory. If there are other ways to apply pressure, then we should do so. Nothing will change unless there is some pain on the part of the Chinese government. A loss of ‘face’ along with economic pain just might be the catalyst to make a difference in the lives of those who face persecution daily.

I used think it was a mistake that China was given the chance to host the games, now I believe it’s a golden opportunity for world to make a difference. If we miss this opportunity, it frightens me about what things China might demand of or take from the rest of the world as they gain more economic and military might.

I’m not so sure I want a country like China to become a world power if they continue to believe that they don’t have to shoulder any of the responsibilities that come with being a world power. Do we really need another world power with the potential to abuse the rest of the world?

Fire on the roof of the World

Sim Kwang Yang in Malaysiakini

Judging from some public commentaries and private conversations among Malaysians of Chinese ethnic persuasion on the issue of Tibet, more than a few of them have embraced the monolithic narrative of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) hook, line, and sinker.

According to them, the Tibet upheaval is a matter of law and order, a series of riots by criminal elements among the local ethnic Tibetans who have been organised, trained, supervised, and probably funded by the Dalai Lama’s government in exile. In this tale, the Dalai Lama is en evil liar who would stoop so low as to tarnish the image of the Beijing Olympics just to further his cause of independence for Tibet.

This official narrative will also accuse ‘Western media” like the BBC and the CNN of trying to spread lies throughout the world about the PRC and the Tibet issue, in order to give their political masters a leverage over the PRC in all kinds of international negotiations.

Meanwhile, the whole media machinery in the PRC from the official Xinhua News Agency, the People’s Dailies, to the various CCTV stations will bombard the international airwaves with the real “facts” about China and Tibet.

Why many Malaysian Chinese will embrace such an account so uncritically is curious in itself, but that is not my concern for the moment. My central question is this: how are we going to make sense of the Tibet issue at all?

Proud coming-out party

First, we must have a standpoint, a perspective from which we can examine the whole controversy. I suggest we have to forget for the moment that we are members of any ethnic community, and forget that we may have cultural, historical, or even social relation with any nation-state of the world. This would be after the fashion of what John Rawl’s would call his “veil of ignorance”.

When we look at China thus, we find a member of the international community of nation states, fast emerging as the third largest economy of the world, with military strength to match its economic prowess, and with obvious aspiration to become a top-notch superpower of the world. The Beijing Olympic Games is their proud coming-out party.

We also find a one party state with hard totalitarian rule by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) over her 1.2 billion citizens. Like all totalitarian one party states past and present, the ruling party is equated with the government and the state.

Naturally, any criticism of the government or the ruling party is regarded as an act of treason in China. As I write, news has just reached us that the dissident Hu Jia has been sentenced to three and a half years in prison. His crime consists of giving interviews to foreign press and publishing a few articles purportedly criticising the government.

It is an understatement to say that there is little freedom of expression in the PRC. Strict censorship and the ubiquitous secret police are probably the norms.

Patriotic Chinese nationals and their sympathisers in the global Chinese Diasporas may argue that human rights and freedom of speech are not what China needs. They may further posit the view that given the convoluted historical background of modern China, their large territory, and their very complex demographical composition, they need a strong centralised government to hold everything together. The benevolent dictatorship of the CCP is the key to the economic miracle of the PRC in the last three decades.

That may, or may not, be entirely true. It does not seem that this argument can be true for eternity. But I would not get into an argument about this point, yet.

One obvious difficulty with the lack of freedom of expression in China is both immediate and critical on the issue of Tibet though.

Natural fairness

With no alternative or independent media reporting from Tibet, how are we going to verify or falsify the Chinese official version of what has happened in that relatively isolated province sitting on top of the roof of the world?

Unlike passionately patriotic Chinese citizens and their sympathisers throughout the global Chinese Diasporas, people like me around the world cannot take the words of any government in any country on their face value on mere trust alone.

There must also be many people like me who subscribe to some notion of natural fairness. In any quarrel, wither between two neighbours, or between any government and some of their people, the views of both contending parties must be given equal time and equal space in the media. The party accused of wrong doing must then enjoy their natural right for full reply in their self-defence.

That the media is dominated by the ruling BN coalition in Malaysia is the reason why I and my friends in Malaysiakini have been labouring and chiselling away at this bamboo curtain of unfair reporting. If the newly formed Pakatan Rakyat turns out to be as bad as the BN, I am sure we will also criticise them without fear or favour.

In the case of the Tibet crisis, is it not a little strange that we have heard nothing at all from those parties allegedly doing the public protests and the rioting? Is it not strange that even when a group of foreign media organisations were invited to a guided and rigidly orchestrated tour of Tibet recently, monks were still risking their lives to scream for justice for Tibetans in front of foreign cameras?

If you want to find out the other side of the story, you can go to the internet, and simply type “Tibet” on http://www.google.com. There you will find other versions of the Tibet story, especially events leading to the escape into exile of the Dalai Lama in 1959.

On March 12, 1959, when protesters marched through the streets of Lhasa, demanding Tibetan independence from Chinese rule, Chinese troops moved in. According to the Office of Tibet in London, 86,000 Tibetans were killed that day. In the days that followed, thousands of monks were executed or arrested, while many monasteries and temples were destroyed.

The overseas Tibetan websites also give many accounts of the intervening decades since then describing how the mass migration of Han Chinese into Tibet has made the Tibetans a minority in their homeland. They have described how the PRC efforts to assimilate ethnic Tibetans into the Han culture have endangered their ancient religious, social and cultural legacies.

These stories are the other side of the Tibetan coin that we hear so little about. They may or may not be entirely true, but they give us balance in our view of the current situation in Tibet. They raise the question of whether the Tibetan disturbances in recent weeks are riots or rebellions. They raise doubt that perhaps the disturbances there are not merely criminal acts threatening law and order, but courageous acts of political statement.

Much respected

Meanwhile, we have the Dalai Lama declaring that he is not seeking independence of Tibet from Chinese rule. Rather he is hoping for some degree of autonomy. He has repeatedly requested for some kind of dialogue with the Chinese government, but they seem to have brushed aside this proposal with a great show of contempt.

All along, the Dalai Lama has propagated his idea of non-violence in this political impasse. He is much respected outside China. Why, he has been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, and of all things Western, the Nobel Award is one of the more credible institutions to the non-Chinese world. To paint him as the head of a terrorist organisation may work in the closed society within the PRC, but such demonising propaganda is a little hard for me to swallow.

The ocean of official statements and public opinions issuing forth from Mainland smacks of Cold War rhetoric. Their tone and the argument are coarse, displaying a kind of outdated worldview that borders on the hegemonic.

Lastly, there is this argument about Tibet being the internal affair of China, and the outside world has no business pitting their nose where it does not belong. I am thinking of the holocaust in Germany during WWII. Could the Nazi regime then also make a similar claim, morally?

The hard fact is that we live in an inter-connected world. China is gaining influence on the international stage. The Chinese political-economic juggernaut is spreading its wings to all parts of the developing world, scouring the globe for precious fuel and natural resources to satisfy its ravenous hunger for economic growth.

The PRC is also clamouring for a bigger say in international forum such as the many agencies of the United Nations. With greater prestige and power, comes greater responsibility, to answer to mankind for their handling of the Tibetan dilemma, and a whole host of other issues. Like all other nations on Earth, China cannot claim absolute sovereignty,

China may have looked like a First World nation in her cities like Shanghai and Beijing. But under the veneer of modernity in the coastal developed provinces, China has not yet stepped over the threshold of a Third World nation, if the handling of the Tibet crisis is anything to go by.

YES or NO? The CHOISE is yours, Myanmar voters

 YES or NO?

The CHOISE is yours, Myanmar voters

 

Malaysiakini, The power of choice Yoga Nesadurai

There are many management theories in the market place to help organisations and individuals improve. I would like to introduce a fundamental theory that is very powerful and easy to apply but often overlooked. I am talking about ‘choice’.

Webster defines choice as, ‘a selection, an alternative, the right or power to choose’.

It comes down to a very simple step – to act or not to act on the choice.

 

It represents a verb, an action, thereby giving the chooser the power to choose from a selection or if just two, an alternative.

What it ultimately points to is that the power is with you.

To make a choice, we need options.

There are times when we have no options and therefore the choice is automatic.

But in most cases we do have options available to us and I want to work through the deduction process here.

Evaluating options

Now that we have deduced options, what does evaluating our options involve? :

It requires courage and commitment to act on your choice.

 

This is the ‘locking in’ step in the ‘power of choice’ process.

This is where courage comes in. No matter what the response, I still hold on to my original intent or choice – the courage to stand by my offering and the commitment to follow through with action.

Information or an event is the stimulus that makes us take action. There are various stimuli that present themselves everyday to us. Between the stimulus and our response, lies choice!.

Attitude is our ‘way of being’ or ‘steady state’. Generally, we are all aware of our general attitude towards people and situations. Sometimes due to circumstances, like having a bad day, our attitude could vary from its natural ‘steady state’.

Where information is the stimulus that helps us derive our options, attitude is the component that helps us make the choice from our options. Attitude is therefore an important ingredient in the choices we make. It has a huge impact in making our choice and its consequences.

Making great choices

We have all made unwise choices at some point in our lives.

 

  1. It is sometimes inevitable,
  2. sometimes intentional,
  3. sometimes regrettable
  4. and sometimes transformational.

Inevitable choices are where the alternative is not a viable option. This is a case where an organisation needs to downsize, assuming all other avenues have been explored. In this instance the best thing one can do is to carry this out in the most humane manner with honesty and integrity.

Intentional choices are where you know that the alternative option is the wisest option, yet you intentionally choose the opposite option. In organisations, this is when we may bypass a certain process or person intentionally for various reasons. Or where we circumvent a certain procedure because we have the power and privilege to do so. Corruption is a classic example of the latter

Regrettable choices are where at the point of making the choice you are ‘aware’ of what the wisest choice is, however your steady state or way of being at that moment stops you from acting on it. These are usually choices made when emotions are running high, where you regret your choice as soon as have you made it or regret the choice as the words have left your mouth.

How many of us have been in this situation in the workplace and personal life? The power is still in the chooser’s hands to undo the wrong and recover the situation.

Transformational choices are what we should all be aspiring to achieve. In this instance, we take control and are accountable for making great choices. Accountability means taking responsibility for the choices made.

Even if you have made an unwise choice, you are in control to remedy it or to deal with the consequences. It is a big responsibility to be accountable, but one with many rewards when executed.

Learning to make transformational choices gives us the power to be extraordinary, therefore directly impacting you as an individual and the organisation that you represent.

Choice is an active process. It is the difference between a customer continuing to do business with your organisation versus taking their business elsewhere. Use it wisely.

 

YOGA NESADURAI is founder of O & C Advisory, which focuses on choice as a basis for leadership and organisational development and executive coaching.

 

 

My comments and advice to all the Burmese 

 

Yes the choice is yours_

There is a saying in Burmese that:

  1. If you made a wrong choice in trade (wrong choice of cargo) trip you would lose one trip or one time only.
  2. If you made a wrong choice in choosing the husband, you would lose your whole life. (Because usually Burmese practice monogamy and rarely divorce and have another marriage.)
  3. But I wish to seriously remind all of you by adding another phrase_

If you all vote wrongly in the coming referendum, the future history of our country would be gone to dogs.

Sorry for using the harsh words, proverbial jokes and defamatory jibes applied to the dogs. It may be an insult to the dog-world, who are known to love and loyal to its owners.

But Myanmar Military or Tatmadaw do not love its owner Burmese people and is not loyal to its owner, Myanmar Citizens or Pyi Thu in Burmese. Although the dog would be willing to sacrifice its life for the master Myanmar Tatmadaw is always willing to sacrifice its masters for its selfish greed of power.

Be careful, think twice before voting. This is not just an election, which consequence would for one term of government only.

This is the referendum to rubber-stamp the continuous dominance of military dictatorship in Burma/Myanmar forever…

Daw Suu, 88 Generation Students, NLD, Ethnic Minorities and opposition leaders of all the religions and races had sacrificed a lot: in the jail, tortured, some away from home and country and many had sacrificed their lives.

  •  What are you waiting for?
  • What are you scared of?
  • Are you not willing to make a minor sacrifice for your country, your race, your religion, your family, your relatives and for your future by taking a small risk of voting NO?
  • Don’t be intimidated by threats of the SPDC affiliated thugs.
  • You have shown your courage in 8888 revolution and Saffron Revolution.
  • This courage to vote is nothing when compare to the above revolutions.
  • If all the people or most of the people vote NO, what could they do?
  • Nothing at all!
  • They cannot arrest, torture or shoot and kill million of voters.
  • Just say NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! by voting NO in the coming referendum.

May you kindly allow me to refer back YOGA NESADURAI’s advice.

Please courageously make a Transformational choice by voting NO to transform our country from poor military dictatorship to truely progressive democracy.

Transformational choices are what we should all be aspiring to achieve. In this instance, we take control and are accountable for making great choices. Accountability means taking responsibility for the choices made.

Even if you have made an unwise choice, you are in control to remedy it or to deal with the consequences. It is a big responsibility to be accountable, but one with many rewards when executed.

Learning to make transformational choices gives us the power to be extraordinary, therefore directly impacting you as an individual and the organisation that you represent.

Choice is an active process. It is the difference between a customer continuing to do business with your organisation versus taking their business elsewhere. Use it wisely.

 

 

 

 

Help, not crush, Myanmar Military (to reform)

Help, not crush, Myanmar Military

(to reform)

Malaysiakini news by Soon Li Tsin

Dear Malaysiakini, reporter and Malaysiakini readers, please may all of you kindly allow me to dream as if this event is about Burma, Burmese researcher writing a book on Myanmar Military e.t.c.. I have dreamt about having an interview with DSAI and wrote more than half a dozen of articles on that subject. Please, kindly allow me to continue to dream on . . .

Modified and edited the news, “Author: Help, not crush, Umno” by Soon Li Tsin in the Malaysiakini .

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original news article. I hope that Soon Li Tsin and Malaysiakini could understand and forgive us for this. They should even be proud that they could contribute a very good article for the fellow Myanmar/Burmese citizens.

Author and academician Dr Ooi Kee Beng said Myanmar Military should be assisted (to reform) and not crushed in its attempt to reform itself.

Launching his book entitled ‘Lost in Transition: Myanmar under Military Dictatorship’ yesterday, Ooi (photo) expressed concern over the future of Myanmar Military which may resort to fascism.

“Myanmar Military is like (Taiwan’s) Kuomintang (KMT) and other parties in the region who were responsible for independence and a lot of these parties had to reform itself like the KMT – a once dictatorial party is a totally a new party today with the same name.

“It is not given that if Myanmar Military reforms itself, it would reform like how KMT did – meaning liberalize and play the democratic game. Fascism is always close at hand.

“We don’t want that to be encouraged. We should work to not crush Myanmar Military but help it along in its reforming process,” he told the audience.

The book is a compilation of articles written by Ooi – who is a fellow at the Institute of South East Asian studies in Singapore – on SPDC Myanmar Military Junta’s governance in the last twenty years.

It is a follow up to his 2006 book, ‘Era of Transition: Myanmar After General Ne Win’ which analysed Myanmar Military and tests faced by SPDC Junta Senior General Than Shwe after taking over his predecessors General Ne Win and General Saw Maung.

Asked to explain the message in his new book, he said: “It was what I felt when I put the book together at the end of last year, that something very important was lost.

“There was hope that Myanmar could develop itself in a proper manner and we were actually already on the slippery slope and we did not see any force that could stop it,” he described.

Two main challenges

During the panel discussion, Centre for Public Initiatives Director Dr Lim Teck Ghee highlighted two main challenges for Sr General Than Shwe in light of the recent Safron Revolution and the alleged internal feud currently taking place in Myanmar Military.

“One that is most crucial is that he has to battle and isolate the extremists elements within Myanmar Military and its many faceless supporters in the Kyant Phut, Swan Arrshin, ex-Military associations, the civil service and the Myanmar community.

“These are elements that are paved with revenge – launched in a campaign that is sometimes quiet and sometimes quite loud – racial-baiting and incitement,” he explained.

“(The) second challenge is to move firmly and quickly on building a good working relationship with the NLD, Ethnic Minorities, Religious Minorities and together in taking on the scourge of corruption,” he added.

The former World Bank economist noted that Myanmar Military Generals should declare their assets, introduce policy reforms and a merit-based system in order to change the country’s economic performance.

“In theory these they should lead the way to an economic revitalization for Myanmar. The Military and ex-military (U Paine) hold more than 60 per cent of the gross national product (GNP). Investors all over the world place importance on transparency, accountability and efficiency, once they could form an Interim Government with the Daw Aung San Suu Kyi led opposition.” he said.

However he warned that the Myanmar Military can derail the true democratization by using military and its affiliated associations’ machinery, state funding and the civil service to play the “revenge, obstructionist or spoilers game”.

“I’m worried. So far the Myanmar Military has used it’s military apparatus and resources and are bent on punishing the opposition as we’ve seen from the 8888 Revolution, Depayin Massacre and Saffron Revolution to the arresting of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi led NLD leaders, Ethnic Minority leaders, 88 Generation Student leaders, monks and unarmed protesting civilians” he said.

Meanwhile, Ong said he would deliberate on setting up the fair and square, truly democratic election system despite calls from the opposition to boycott it.

Lim was joined by Malaysiakini’s editor-in-chief Steven Gan and Ooi during the panel discussion.

The book launch was officiated by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and was attended by about 8888 people.

Leadership quality of the Myanmar Military Generals

 Leadership quality of  the Myanmar Military Generals

KJ John | Apr 1, 08

Modified and edited the original letter, Leadership for the times” by KJ John in the Malaysiakini .

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original article. I hope that KJ John  and Malaysiakini could understand and forgive us for this. They should even be proud that they could contribute a very good article for the fellow Myanmar/Burmese citizens.

True leadership is_

  • the art of setting new directions
  • and then creating the environment for that vision to become possible; not just plausible.
  • Nurturing the right climate for ideas and ideals to flourish

It is just as important as the new directions set.

Follower-ship consequently is_

  • the discipline of acknowledging visionary leadership
  • and the requisite obedience to new and shared directions.

Together they make up what is called_

  • a purpose-inspired life of leadership
  • and follower-ship.

Peter Vaill, my doctoral chairperson, calls this ‘Managing as a Performing Art’ (also the title of a book).

Frankly, both models are only partially relevant under current conditions of rapid, turbulent change; when small ripples become tidal waves of change being washed in, and without any human ability to control them.

Allow me to give ‘my three sen’ worth of advice to Myanmar Military SPDC leadership on differing styles of organisational leadership models that appear to be practiced.  

Unfortunately, within Myanmar Military Generals, the current models of leadership and managing are what I have in the past referred to as ‘cat or dog loyalty models of blind obedience’.

As the Burmese saying goes_

Yae Boo Pauk Tar_ Ma Low Chin Boo.

Yae Par Dar Bae_Low Chin Dae.

Yes! In the Military_

  • the leaders never accept the excuses.
  • Orders must be obeyed and fulfilled.
  • Rank and file must be willing to sacrifice their lives on the line of duty.
  • Soldiers must be like robots.
  • If the owner/handler/player click the button, whether right or wrong button, the robort must obey like a character in the video-game.
  • No reasoning nor analysis of correctness or morality or religious views of the nature of job or consequences of the order and results need to be considered.
  • Order is order.
  • Do or die in the battle field or face the consequences of punishments or court-martialed.

Because more than 70 percent of the electorate are living in urban areas, the  governance of Myanmar would be decided on modern and urban issues. That is enough reason for a predictable and fundamental change in scenario and landscape of today’s Myanmar politics.

The information age contributed to a fundamental and radical change in people’s expectations and perceptions. Urban voters were concurrently informed, misinformed and dis-informed. But, it appears like no one from the military government either heard or really understood this.  

Today, all of that is water under the bridge in urbanised Myanmar towns. These are so-called developed states in urbanisation terms. The arrogance and abuse of power in most states and local military authorities would ensure the outcome of the coming referendum.

Models of leadership

With this as the context, allow me to reflect on the two most prevalent models of leadership visible within all organisations, whether in the corporate or political world or civil society or in the military dictator governments.  

The one demands what I call ‘the cat loyalty syndrome’.

A syndrome is almost like a theological conviction about a truth that the beholder believes in and expects from the rest of the world.

The cat loyalty model demands the symbolic and implicit obedience and loyalty of a cat to the house.

This model of leadership demands that the person is loyal to the home or the institution that one belongs to, and claims full cat-like commitment to it.  

  • Most cats are in fact comfortable in the house
  • even after the owners move out.
  • They simply can carry on with life even with the new owners.
  • To the cat, that house is its home
  • and there is little or no loyalty to the master or owner of the house.
  • Owners can come and go.

This appears to be the prevalent model of leadership in SPDC leaders, demanding absolute obedience to the Tatmadaw and its current leader. Questions over their morality and ethics are a secondary matter.

The ‘dog model of loyalty’ puts a premium on loyalty explicitly to the master, but not so much to the house or organisation. But the more important question is: who is the real master? If one served long with General Ne Win or Senior General than Shwe, then one must always be almost loyal to them, in spite of differing circumstances or different worldviews one holds.

It is a lifetime personal loyalty to the person and relationship, and not so much to the authority or the position of the person. The result is almost blind loyalty to all instructions of the master and almost zero public disagreement with that person. Any disagreement must be handled in the privacy of the relationship.

Maybe Senior General than Shwe, as a strong military-type, also expects this kind of blind loyalty from all the generals.

Under conditions of turbulence, old-style captains cannot expect blind obedience. Truth is what will help all to move forward. Under whitewater conditions of extreme turbulence, what we need is a newer model of leadership, not that of a calm captain of an ocean-going vessel.

Vaill would argue that all leadership today is currently operating under whitewater conditions. Because of the Internet and the convergence of new technologies, leadership models must change to reflect new realities. He might ask, for instance: What is the real meaning of leadership under whitewater rafting conditions?

Message for Senior General than Shwe:

Robert Greenleaf’s ‘servant leadership model’, which emulates the ‘work with me and not for me’ motto should actually be the right one to replace Than Shwe’s ‘Listen to me, obey my orders’ military doctrine. There were many good speeches and slogans but things were done wrongly on the ground.  

  • Myanmar Military should work with the people.
  • Myanmar Military should work with all the opposition groups.
  • Myanmar Military should work with the NLD including their present leaders including Daw aung San Suu Kyi.
  • Myanmar Military should work with all the Ethnic Minority groups.
  • Myanmar Military should work with all the Religious Minority groups.

Senior General, you need their cooperation, their advise, their blessings to face the whole world. Their experience can tell you the truth about what is happening on the ground.

  • You need to work with them and not ask them to work for you.
  • You need to work with them  and no need to lock them up in the jails.
  • You need to work with them  and no need to lock them up in in their houses as house arrests.
  • You need to work with them  and no need to be afraid to talk to them.
  • You need to work with them  and no need to be afraid to start a dialogue with them, discuss and negotiate with them.
  • You need to work with them  and start a  national reconciliatory process which could eventually protect you, other SPDC generals, families, friends and cronies.

They will not and cannot do this as if you refuse to allow them or rufuse to listen to them or you recognize and respect them as the valuable personalities in their own rights. And they have as much if not more experience to provide leadership under whitewater conditions.

The ‘servant leadership model’ requires one to become chairperson of the board but not try to lead like an Old Captain. The person does not table papers but listens to ideas and steers the discussion towards a consensus decision.

Peter Drucker calls this ‘wise leadership’.

My three sen worth of suggestions for Sr General Than Shwe:

  • Let the people ask any question they choose and encourage open dialogue.
  • Do not protect anyone, let each carry their own weight or sack them if need be.
  • Ask all your generals to sincerely work with you and not for you.

You must start out right with good intentions, by making everyone  in SPDC to declare their assets publicly.

The people will judge you in the coming referendum and election by what you do and not just what you say.

Integrity means both –

  • doing what you say
  • and then preaching only what you have already practiced.

Let me end with a quote from John F Kennedy, who in his first speech as US president said: “Ask not what the country can do for you but ask what you can do for the country.”  

Myanmar Tatmadaw should review both the cat and dog loyalty models, and try to distinguish how every public servant and military official can serve first the public and national interest (defined as the interest of all the people of Myanmar, not just any one group regardless of how we carve the cake).

 

Let us honor our heroine Daw Suu by voting NO in referendum

Let us honor our heroine

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

to be eligible in the coming election

by voting NO in referendum

Modified and edited the original letter, “Let us be like the orchestra respecting the conductor “, by Antares  in the Malaysiakini .

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original article. I hope that Antares and Malaysiakini could understand and forgive us for this. They should even be proud that they could contribute a very good article for the fellow Myanmar/Burmese citizens.

As far as I’m concerned, Sr General Than Shwe, the supremo of Myanmar Tatmadaw is deceased. Finito. R.I.P. Kaput. What happened in the Saffron Revolution was a gigantic samurai sword that moved so swiftly that the 10-headed hydra of Might-Is-Right that has terrorized us for the last 46 years lost all its heads.

The SPDC survivors of the Saffron Revolution debacle are all operating in Safe Mode now, their operating systems having crashed big-time. Perhaps the Tatmadaw hard drive can still be booted up a few more times and some useful data saved – but the SPDC motherboard itself is on the verge of terminal malfunction. So let’s not speak ill of the dead.

Anyone who hasn’t been brainwashed by the SPDC cronies (ASEAN, Thailand, China and India) with vested interests can see that in the Saffron Revolution leaders: monks, 88 Generation leaders and NLD have got what it takes to steer this floundering Burma ship back on course. And what it takes is intelligence, courage, stamina, adaptability, good humor, experience, and most importantly, ethical sense. Their resilience has been proven over the last years by his capacity to transmute tragedy into triumph, transforming themselves from victim to victor – all the while maintaining their dignity, clarity, and focus.

Whatever their early passive political agenda, the Burmese opposition of 2007 has been forged in the furnace of personal pains and endurances.

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi could have taken the money and run – become an academic or corporate CEO. But she didn’t. She stood up to the Junta Generals and fought like a heroine. That’s how she gained the whole world’s respect, admiration and trust. There are very few in our midst today that I can describe as ‘heroic’.

To my mind nobody can match what Daw Aung San Suu Kyi  and 88 Generation Student` leaders have accomplished: they has led us through the Chapel Perilous of racial politics and now, for the first time since Independence, we can look around and appreciate the beauty of our own diversity and say, Vive la difference!

What has been missing all these decades is the possibility that we can love one another as humans, regardless of skin colour or creed – that’s because cold-blooded ambition and ruthless greed have no use for empathy and warm feelings, nor does it encourage compassion, kindness, and spontaneous joy. No, it feeds and fattens itself vampire-like on fear – other people’s fear.

In the climate of fear Myanmar Military created during their 46-year reign, anybody who dared speak the truth became a hero – or martyr. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi  and 88 Generation Student leaders, more than any other political icon in the country, succeeded in transcending to embody the universal values that will unite rather than divide us as a nation. That is indeed the mark of a hero. Let us honor this heroine (who nearly became a martyr during the Depayin massacre) by giving her what she fully deserves – the chance to serve as prime minister (at least till she tires of it or we tire of her).  

At the same time, let us all aspire to become heroes too, so that we will no longer be scared children in need of a grown-up to lead us across the street. Let us each become, in time, self- governing individuals whose relationship to our political leaders is akin to an orchestra’s respect for the conductor, knowing full well that his job is to create a symphony from the potential cacophony of so many different instruments.

March 27 Myanmar Military day message

  March 27 Myanmar Military day message

Modified and edited the original letter, Arrogance? Never again”, by Tanya  in the Malaysiakini .

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original article. I hope that Tanya and Malaysiakini could understand and forgive us for this. They should even be proud that they could contribute a very good article for the fellow Myanmar/Burmese citizens.

The absolute power of the successive ruling Tatmadaw Junta Generals corrupted them absolutely and their hubris led to their downfall.

The military dictators ravaged Myanmar/Burma for over 46 years, taking away our right to free speech, instilling fear, corrupting the country to the core, and depriving us of the wealth of this country by allowing it as largesse for his cronies. The ruling top senior general’s arrogance filtered down to the `little Napoleon generals’ who outdid him in his arrogance in implementing his will.

One of the greatest crime of the Sr General Than Shwe was the crime of ‘commission by omission’. He also let his greedy family enrich themselves at the country’s expense. However, I still do think he is a cut above the diabolical council of Tatmadaw’s crooks.

Cronies sat down and wagged their tails, happy that they got the crumbs from the table.

Dear Senior General, with all the wealth that you have now, and after all these years of your so-called “service to your people and country”, did you manage to buy peace of mind and dignity in your old age?

General Ne Win was the kind of shameless and under-handed leader we have had for over twenty years. He and his band of brigand cabinet ministers rode roughshod over the people, especially the non-Burmese, very often with barely concealed contempt for them, and most often with open contempt. His was the legacy that was continued during the days of the Than Shwe.

I call on all Myanmar/Burmese citizens from today to never, never, ever again tolerate the kind of arrogance we have been subjected to all these years at the hands of these fellows who have been mistakenly thinking they are our lords and masters. From today we will reclaim our birthright, which includes the right to liberty, freedom of expression and equality before the law. And we will remind the despicable autocrats that they have been put in their positions to serve and deliver, as our servants. They will listen when we speak our minds.

Tatmadaw Yebaws or military rank and file have been made pawns in the game played by these heartless; morally bankrupt generals, solely for the purpose of enriching and empowering themselves.

I am saying this from the bottom of my heart: if the Tatmadaw wants to be a strong and respected force that counts on the global stage, if they want their progeny to be a generation of winners, then they don’t need such generals. All they need is to believe in themselves, claim their pride and dignity, and compete on a level playing field with the civilians. I sincerely believe they can do this. Just go for it.

Most crucial at this juncture is that the delicate balance of racial and religious harmony is maintained. Without that everything else will be futile.

The Myanmar Tatmadaw will go all out to turn the Bamas against the other races. They must never succeed in this. Let us not be deceived by the Tatmadaw generals’ lies and start to distrust each other. If we work for the common good, we can ensure that all of us, will prosper. Isn’t that what we all want?

I would like to exhort all Tatmadaw rank and files not to let these evil generals poison your minds against the other minority races and minority religious persons.

If we let those generals win at their game we will all become abject losers. Above all, let us all have generous hearts. Let us not believe in the adage ‘beggar thy neighbour’. On the contrary let us believe in ‘prosper thy neighbour’. Together we will prevail.

Note: Rank and file (Idiom) =

  • Followers,
  • the general membership.

This expression comes from the military, where_

  • a rank denotes soldiers standing side by side in a row,
  • and file refers to soldiers standing behind one another.

The first recorded figurative use of this term was in 1860. 

e.g. This new senator really appeals to the rank and file in the labor unions.

 

SPDC Crony Criminal Thai PM Samak Sundaravej

Criminal Thai PM Samak Sundaravej

rules out direct dialogue with insurgents

Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej yesterday ruled out direct negotiations with Malay Muslim separatist groups, saying their demands were unacceptable to the government.

Published on March 19, 2008 in The Nation

Without mentioning what the demands were, he said the six groups involved in the talks in Switzerland were “trying to internationalise the issue”.

He did not elaborate as to what he meant by “internationalise”, but security officials familiar with the case said the separatists wanted to involve the international community, including the EU and the UN, in the process, to ensure that the Thai side lived up to whatever promises it made.

“I’ve read the demands, and the position of the Thai government is that this is not an international issue. I cannot say at this point in time that we have knowledge of all of the identities of those involved, but we do have considerable information,” Samak said.

Most senior security officials do not agree with the idea of talking to the separatist groups, he said, adding that he would not go so far as calling them “sparrow bandits” like ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra did.

He said he was not in a position to say when the violence in the region would end but insisted the local community stood with the government, because: “The insurgents are killing their own people.”

He pointed to Tuesday morning’s grenade attack on a mosque in Yala as a glaring example of the militants slaughtering fellow Muslims.

Piyanart Srivalo,

Noppadon Petcharat

The Nation

Lessons from the southern insurgency

not learned

The Nation

 Last May in Yala, then Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont told a press conference that he had received “positive feedback” from separatist groups over the idea of establishing some sort of “dialogue”.

But he warned that more work had to be done before permanent peace in the Malay-speaking deep South could be achieved.

Kasturi Mahkota, foreign-affairs chief of the Patani United Liberation Organisation (Pulo), immediately welcomed Surayud’s statement. He called it a “positive gesture”.

But on Tuesday in Bangkok, Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, ruled out the idea of negotiating with the separatists. Local media gave Samak’s statement a great deal of coverage but failed to provide a proper context to this sticky issue.

For as long as anybody can remember, Thai security officials have been going to the Middle East, Europe and neighbouring countries to talk to the leaders of long-standing separatist groups, including the Patani United Liberation Organisation (Pulo), Barisan Revolusi Nasional (BRN) and Barisan Islam Pembebasan (BIPP).

However, the outcomes of these off-and-on chats have failed to have any affect on policy because they are carried out in an ad-hoc manner. They just want to sound out the separatists rather then work towards achieving something more constructive.

“Of course, they all say they are representatives of the Thai government,” said one exiled leader who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Samak said most government agencies disagree with direct negotiations. However, he was tight-lipped about the secret meetings between the two sides while insisting that the government was not going to sit down with the separatists on an equal basis.

Jolted by the weekend car bombs in Pattani and Yala, Samak had to sound uncompromising in public. The veteran politician knows he is dealing with an issue that cannot be easily translated into a quick political victory. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why the premier and his interior chief, Chalerm Yoobamrung, have been side-stepping the issue.

The problem with the Thai security top brass is that,

  • after years of talking to the separatists,
  • their attitude has not changed.
  • They see themselves as “negotiating with bandits”
  • rather than being in a “dialogue with fellow citizens” –
  • people who embrace a different political ideology, as the communist insurgents did two decades ago.

The only thing that successive Thai administrations have agreed upon is that the issue should not be internationalised.

  • In other words, no foreign governments or international organisations should be involved in mediating the talks or be allowed to snoop around the deep South,
  • where allegations of gross human rights violations
  • and questionable security practices are rife.
  • Thailand looks at East Timor and Aceh and tells itself that this is not what it wants.

The problem with the Thai generals is that they think like Thai politicians.

They all want the violence to end under their watch.

Never mind that the problem is_

  • deeply rooted in history

  • and shaped by mistrust

  • and the resistance of southern Muslims to Thailand’s policy of assimilation.

Another problem is that the old guard – older members of the separatist groups – don’t and, in most cases, can’t control the new generation of militants on the ground.

Locally known as juwae, the new generation of insurgents do not necessarily identify with the old guard, and they engage in the kind of brutality unheard of by the previous generation. They are organised in cell clusters but have the capacity to coordinate attacks – 100 targets at a time – throughout the region.

Even after years of being on the receiving end of this battle, the government is still unable to fine-tune a number of important initiatives. At a recent Thai Journalists’ Association seminar in Pattani, the provincial Task Force commander, Major General Thawatchai Samutsakorn, said the “government can’t tell me what they [insurgents] will get if they surrender”.

Often, a suspect who surrenders is_

  • paraded in front of the media,
  • unable to speak freely,
  • while top officials tell the public how the suspect has come to his senses after being misled by some false religious teaching
  • and distorted history.

And afterwards, when released, the “reformed” militant becomes a target of his former comrades.

Nearly 3,000 people have been killed in the insurgency since it began in January 2004.

Don Pathan

The Nation

Boycott China Olympics in support of Tibet

Boycott China Olympics

in support of Tibet

Copied part of CNN politics*com, Cafferty File, Jack’s blog
ALT TEXT
A burning car sits on a street in the Tibetan capital Lhasa after violent protests broke out on March 14, 2008. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

Dalai Lama 'to resign' if violence worsens

art.wen.ap.jpg

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said China’s response to the protests in Tibet has been restrained.

  

art.lhasashops.afp.gi.jpg

Pedestrians walk past shops damaged by fire in the Tibetan capital of Lhasa. 

art.policelhasa.jpg

A video image of Chinese police carrying out door-to-door searches in Lhasa. 

FROM CNN’s Jack Cafferty:

China has been hoping to boost its image in the eyes of the world as it gets ready to host the Summer Olympics in Beijing, but the Chinese government’s crackdown on protesters in Tibet is not helping.

What began a week ago as mostly peaceful protests by monks has spiraled into violent clashes, with Tibetans attacking the Chinese and burning their businesses. The Chinese government is now vowing to protect its territory and issued a midnight deadline that’s now passed for protesters to either surrender or face harsh consequences.

There are reports of Chinese authorities parading handcuffed Tibetan prisoners in the capital of Lhasa. Chinese police are going house-to-house checking id cards and residence permits. The Chinese government puts the death toll at 16, with dozens injured. But the Dalai Lama’s exiled government says 80 people have been killed.

Meanwhile, the protests that started in Tibet have spilled into three neighboring provinces and even to Beijing. And sympathy protests are also going on around the world.

China insists the violence won’t harm the upcoming Olympic games. The U.S. has called on China to show restraint.

However, it’s getting support from who else but Russia – another beacon of human rights. The Russian government says it hopes China will take “all necessary measures to stop illegal actions.” It adds that any efforts to boycott the Olympics are “unacceptable.”

Olympic officials also say they are opposed to a boycott because of the violence in Tibet.

Here’s my question to you: Should countries boycott the Olympic Games in light of China’s crackdown on protesters in Tibet?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

 

Jeff from Carmel, New York writes:
It’s a travesty. We stomp around the world fighting for freedom except when the offender is someone like China, whose money we desperately need. The world should rise up and boycott everything Chinese until the people of Tibet regain their freedom. These are the most peaceful people on earth; they should be role models for all of us. They deserve better.

Terry writes:
I remember in 6th grade participating in a school debate over boycotting the 1980 Olympics in Moscow. I supported that boycott, but today’s world is different, as is my opinion. Go to China, enjoy the games, and take your digital cameras. The citizens will be putting on a display for you. Send your pictures to CNN. Don’t get caught. Sunshine in China may be the best thing to happen to them. If you want to boycott something to really hurt China, stay out of Wal-Mart.

Brian from Redondo Beach, California writes:
Yes, boycott. China reminds one of Germany in the 30s. Will our people be safe there? And will the judging be fair even if we do attend? Hit them economically, which is what a boycott would accomplish.

James from Canada writes:
Given Guantanamo, rendition, Abu Ghraib, waterboarding, etc., the U.S. is hardly in any position to lead a human rights boycott of the Olympics.

Krake writes:
Boycotting will be a late and inadequate reaction. Allowing China to have the Olympics was the big mistake, especially since it was already known that the Chinese government is a human rights abuser and cruel regime. The violence in Tibet simply highlights what was already known.

Troy writes:
I would rather see our athletes wear “Free Tibet” T-shirts in Beijing during the opening ceremony. Oh Mao goodness.

Filed under: Beijing Olympics • China • Tibet

Read more in Cafferty File

COMING LETHAL FORTH POLITICAL TSUNAMI

  COMING LETHAL

FORTH POLITICAL TSUNAMI

Modified and edited the original comment written by AB Sulaiman and letter in Malaysiakini.

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original article. I hope that  AB Sulaiman and Malaysiakini could understand and forgive us for this. They should even be proud that they could contribute a very good article for the fellow Myanmar/Burmese citizens

There is popular tale of the frog that cuddles comfortably in a cauldron of water. The frog feels so comfortable that it has not detected that the water is warming up by a fire coming from under the cauldron. The rate of warming is slow, so the frog does not detect the rising temperature. Until it is too late when it realises the water temperature is too hot for its comfort and has to jump out in great shock.

The 8888 first political tsunami is somewhat like the rising temperature in the cauldron. The Myanmar Military Junta (read that was BSPP and supremo General Ne Win) mindset has been too comfortable riding the wave of military power, and for so very long, so much so that it has taken the population (especially the Bama segment) for granted, and does not detect the appearance of hate, disenchantment and detestation simmering and growing on the part of the population on the Tatmadaw until it is too late. Ne Win and successive cohort military anointed leaders were dethroned.

1990 second political tsunami was dedicated to overthrowing General Saw Maung, Supremo of SLORC. Daw Aun San Suu Kyi led opposition was voted in with a landslide 86% win. That was a greatest Political Tsunami in Burma.

And then latest, the third Safron Revolution was also another unexpected third political Tsunami for the Myanmar Tatmadaw leaders, this time SPDC Supremo Senior General Than Shwe had to bear the consequence.

The FORTH (In the Chinese Dialect, Catonese number four is called Sae. The other meaning of Sae is DIE.

(It is called Homophone = One of two or more words, such as night and knight, that are pronounced the same but differ in meaning, origin, and sometimes spelling.

Pun = A play on words, sometimes on different senses of the same word and sometimes on the similar sense or sound of different words. )

So if the lethal FORTH TSUNAMI is allowed, it would wipe out the whole group of Myanmar Tatmadaw Military Generals.

And so now what do we have?

We have this momentous successive political tsunamis taking place.

What has hit?

The Military permanent dominance policy.

It is in actual fact more than just political, it is a psychological tsunami.

By definition the BSPP General Ne Win, SLORC General Saw Maung, and SPDC Supremo Senior General Than Shwe (in this context they are arguably synonymous to one another) mindsets have been going about controlling the reins of the country with the traditional mindsets of yesterday.

They rest on the ethnocentric platform of ‘Tatmadaw Thar Ah Mi_ Tatmadaw Thar Ah Pha‘ meaning that military is the true parents of the country (citizens). What kind of SHIT idea comming out from the sparrow bird’s brain?

With this they went way beyond reason to protect and propagate the sanctity of Tatmadaw, and similarly the elitism of the Tatmadaw culture, without paying too much respect to the views and sensitivities of the rest of the  civilians e.g. Bamas, Ethnic Minorities and Religious Minorities.

The military and ex-military, in the meantime, were treated like a father treating his favourite son, showering the child with a lot of goodies in the form of subsidies and a long list of affirmative action programmes. Their minds are carefully nurtured to be conservative and in conformity with the status quo. Mainly the child is nurtured and groomed to remain as a child, never allowed to grow into adulthood. The child is spoilt rotten.

All along and very much like the Burmese proverb “Chee Htae Mhar Pyaw thor Lauk”: meaning, The Maggot dropped into the pile of Shit or like a mouse falling into a sack of rice, the military leadership helped itself to the fats of the country involving obscene, ugly and astronomical amounts.

All along the non-Military or civilians were treated like enemies as witnessed by the nonchalant way the SPDC term all the oppositions as ‘enemies of the nation, to be eliminated’. More than that, it became very complacent, arrogant, immoral, irrational, and totally unprofessional with its Military leadership performance and accompanied by a deterioration of quality.

Lord Acton’s dictum that power corrupts with absolute power corrupting absolutely comes to the fore. The successive tsunamis then hits with a force far beyond even what the people had ever anticipated.

This psychological tsunami should be a wake up call to the complacent Tatmadaw mindset. Commentators and columnists have inundated the media, especially the Internet, suggesting ways and means on how this composite Permanent Military Dominence mindset can redeem itself.

I shall limit my contribution by saying that the Myanmar/Burma social, economic and political environments have changed since sixty years ago. The people are more educated, urbanised, and are enjoying a higher standard of living. They travel more often to more distant places. More importantly people read more and think more. They are more literate. They are more equipped and able to conceptualise about new ideas and new things around them. People are more matured, more ready to think of alternatives. They are not afraid of alternatives.

Coming back to the frog analogy, the Burmese people are ready to venture out from the Known to the Unknown. Put all these elements together and we have a population being more aware and more knowledgeable of things happening around them. We have a population with a declining group orientation, and taken over by a developed sense of the individual. They would require a leadership as aware and as knowledgeable as them.

The Myanmar Military Permanent Dominance policy holding incumbents SDPDC leaders should pay heed to this new breed of individual-orientated Myanmar/Burmese who have their own minds, and mainly have faith, trust, and confidence in their own judgments. Should the leaders not change as well so as to be at par with the people’s mindset, they will not be effective leaders.

In such an unfortunate mismatch situation, it is tantamount to an invitation for another more damaging LETHAL FORTH tsunami to come. Military dominence culture would surely be drowned by the sheer force of this tsunami.

 

Criminal terrorist PM Samak praises Myanmar Junta

  Criminal terrorist Thai PM Samak

praises Myanmar Junta

(BangkokPost.com) – Mr Samak Sundaravej hailed his trip to Burma last Friday as a success when he spoke on his weekly television programme aired on Channel 11 on Sunday.

The premier said he managed to talk to Burmese Prime Minister Thein Sein about several important issues including bilateral cooperation on the economic front, and on energy issues.

 “It was my job as a prime minister to judge the country through first hand experience. The general view of this country has always been one-sided, but there are two sides to a coin,” he said.

My comment: You must open both eyes and look at Myanmar. Now you closed one eye meant for the democracy, Justice and Human Rights. You open only one eye look at the benefits of your country, your cronies and yourself. And that only eye you looked at Myanmar is also covered with the greedy green spectacle.

The premier said before he left that he would not bring up human rights or democracy issues with the dictators, and also wound up witnessing the signing of a previously secret economic agreement that mandates Thai cooperation with Burma in several economic projects.

Mr Samak added that the trip made him realise that Burma is a peaceful Buddhist country. The country’s prime minister even prays and meditates on a daily basis.

My comment: In Burmese there is a saying,

” Pasat Ka_Phaya Phaya.

Let Ka_Karyar Karyar.”

So what? Myanmar PM prays and meditate daily. Pray for what? Asking Buddha to forgive the killings, torturing and jailing of Monks, demonstrators and unarmed civilians who protested peacefully?

Let’s the history of that bird with the same feathers with Myanmar SPDC Junta leaders_

Samak Sundaravej 

Samak Sundaravej (Thai: สมัคร สุนทรเวช) (born June 13, 1935) has been the Prime Minister of Thailand since January 2008, as well as the leader of the People’s Power Party since August 2007. He is of Chinese descent , ancestral surname Lee (李). Ref: [泰国] 洪林, 黎道纲主编 (April 2006). 泰国华侨华人研究. 香港社会科学出版社有限公司, 187. ISBN 962-620-127-4. 

In 1968 Samak joined the Democrat Party. Well connected to the military, Samak became head of its renegade right-wing faction. In the 1976 general election, he defeated Kukrit Pramoj and was made Deputy Interior Minister in the cabinet of Seni Pramoj. He quickly became prominent for arresting several left-wing activists. (Ref: Paul M. Handley. The King Never Smiles. Yale University Press (2006). )

Samak was removed from his ministerial position, and in reaction organised an anti-government demonstration calling for the removal of three young liberal Democrat ministers who he branded as being “communists”. On the evening of the massacre on October 6 he headed a lynch mob which confronted Prime Minister Seni in front of Government House. Although in 2008 interviews with CNN and al-Jazeera Samak denied complicity with the 6 October 1976 massacre that left officially at least 46 dead, the record tells otherwise. Accounts from witnesses, documents and published reports clearly identify Samak as chief operator of the “Armoured Car” radio programme, an ultra-right wing broadcast that constantly expounded anti-communist and pro-right propaganda.

Samak used this programme to stir up hatred against Thammasat University students, and intentionally disobeyed the Prime Minister’s orders at the time to “stop creating divisiveness.” In defending the return of 1973-ousted Field Marshal Praphat over the radio, Samak told listeners that students demonstrating against the dictator’s return were committing suicide.

Following the coup of October 6, 1976, Samak became Minister of the Interior in the administration of Tanin Kraivixien, a palace-favoured anti-Communist with a reputation for honesty. Samak immediately launched a campaign which saw hundreds of supposed leftists, many of whom were writers and other intellectuals, arrested.

In 1992, as Deputy Prime Minister in the Suchinda administration, Samak justified the military’s brutal suppression of pro-democracy demonstrators by declaring that the government had the right to do so as long as the United States could send troops to kill people in other countries. He remains unrepentant and continues to stand by his justification, stating that the military was merely trying to restore law and order after the pro-democracy demonstrators, which he branded as “troublemakers”, had resorted to “mob rule”.

 

The meeting between new Thai Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej instead focused on growing anger over killings of Cambodian immigrant workers, a spokesman said Monday.

At Samak’s two-day visit at Cambodian, issues of disputed sea borders and border killings of itinerant Cambodians had come up.

As a newly-elected leader, Samak’s visit to neighbouring nations has become a tradition for new leaders of the 10-member Association of South East Asian Nations, of which both countries are members.

Cambodian alleged that Thailand uses undue force in controlling Cambodian immigrant workers to Thailand, which results in at least a dozen shooting deaths at the hands of Thai border patrols per year, according to border police.

‘Please, do not use unnecessary violence (on the borders) because it could disturb the Cambodian people,’ Kanharith warned. ‘Thailand has full rights to control illegal immigrants, but Thailand should also respect human rights.’

Thai refused to accept the 1962 ruling of the International Court of Justice in the Hague that Preah Vihear temple belongs to Cambodia.

The oil field border dispute had been discussed extensively by Hun Sen and Samat, and Thailand had been urged to be less inflexible, allowing a ‘win-win situation between our two nations’.

As all of us know and Samak has also admitted that he is a proxy for Thaksin Shinawatra, let’s look at his puppet-master’s history_

Thaksin Shinawatra 

(Thai: ทักษิณ ชินวัตร, IPA: [tʰáksǐn tɕʰinnawát]; (Chinese: 丘達新), nickname แม้ว (maew, a northern Thailand hill tribe also known as Hmong), born July 26, 1949 in Chiang Mai, Thailand), Thai businessman and politician, is the former Prime Minister of Thailand, and the former leader of the populist Thai Rak Thai Party. He was in exile for 17 months until February 28, 2008, when he returned to Bangkok. Thaksin is commonly referred to by the Thai press as “maew” (Thai แม้ว) which is, the derogative term for a northern Thailand hill tribe also known as Hmong.

Thaksin attended the 10th class of the Armed Forces Academies Preparatory School.[24] He then attended the Thai Police Cadet Academy and upon graduation, he joined the Royal Thai Police Department in 1973.

Thaksin started his career in the Thai police, and later became a successful entrepreneur, establishing Shin Corporation and Advanced Info Service, the largest mobile phone operator in Thailand. He became one of the richest people in Thailand prior to entering politics, although he and his family later sold their shares in Shin Corporation.

His government was frequently challenged with allegations of corruption, dictatorship, demagogy, treason, conflicts of interest, acting undiplomatically, tax evasion, the use of legal loopholes and hostility towards a free press. He was accused of lèse-majesté, selling domestic assets to international investors, and religious desecration. Independent bodies, including Amnesty International, also expressed concern at Thaksin’s human rights record. Human Rights Watch described Thaksin as “a human rights abuser of the worst kind”, alleging that he participated in media suppression and presided over extrajudicial killings. A series of attacks in 2005 and 2006 by Sondhi Limthongkul and his People’s Alliance for Democracy destroyed Thaksin’s name and reputation.  He was also subject to several purported assassination attempts.

Thaksin initiated several highly controversial policies to counter a boom in the Thai drug market, particularly in methamphetamine. After earlier anti-drug policies like border blocking (most methamphetamine is produced in Myanmar), public education, sports, and promoting peer pressure against drug use proved ineffective, Thaksin launched a multi-pronged suppression campaign that aimed to eradicate methamphetamine use in 3 months. The policy consisted of changing the punishment policy for drug addicts, setting provincial arrest and seizure targets, awarding government officials for achieving targets, targeting dealers, and “ruthless” implementation.

Over the next seven weeks, press reports indicate that more than 2,700 people were killed.[75] The Government claimed that only around 50 of the deaths were at the hands of the police. Human rights critics say a large number were extrajudicially executed. The government went out of its way to publicize the campaign, through daily announcements of arrest, seizure, and death statistics.

Thaksin’s anti-drug approach was effective and extremely popular. According to the Narcotics Control Board, the policy was extremely effective in reducing drug consumption, especially in schools, at least until the 2006 coup.

King Bhumibol, in his 2003 birthday speech, supported Thaksin’s anti-drugs approach, although he did request the commander of the police to categorize the deaths between those killed by police and those killed by fellow drug dealers. Police Commander Sant Sarutanond reopened investigations into the deaths, and again found that few of the deaths were at the hands of the police. A Bangkok university poll conducted in February 2003 revealed 92% of respondents backed Thaksin’s approach. Nevertheless, his anti-drug approach was widely criticized by international community. Thaksin requested that the UN Commission on Human Rights send a special envoy to evaluate the situation, but said in an interview, “The United Nations is not my father. I am not worried about any UN visit to Thailand on this issue.”

A year after the 2006 coup, the military junta ordered another investigation into the anti-drug campaign. Former Attorney General Kanit Na Nakhon chaired the special investigative committee. “The special committee will be tasked with an investigation to find out the truth about the deaths as well as to identify remedial measures for their relatives,” said Justice Minister Charnchai Likhitjittha.

The committee found that as many as 1400 of the 2500 killed had no link to drugs. However, while giving the opinion that orders to kill came from the top, the panel failed to establish sufficient evidence to charge Thaksin directly with the murders. The Nation (an English-language newspaper in Thailand) reported on November 27, 2007:

Of 2,500 deaths in the government’s war on drugs in 2003, a fact-finding panel has found that more than half was not involved in drug at all. At a brainstorming session, a representative from the Office of Narcotics Control Board (ONCB) Tuesday disclosed that as many as 1,400 people were killed and labeled as drug suspects despite the fact that they had no link to drugs. … Senior public prosecutor Kunlapon Ponlawan said it was not difficult to investigate extra-judicial killings carried out by police officers as the trigger-pullers usually confessed.

South Thailand insurgency

A resurgence in violence began in 2001 in the three southernmost provinces of Thailand which all have a Muslim, ethnic Malay majority. There is much controversy about the causes of this escalation of the decades long insurgency. Attacks after 2001 concentrated on police, the military, and schools, but civilians have also been targets. Thaksin has been widely criticized for his management of the situation, in particular the storming of the Krue Se Mosque, the deaths of civilian protesters at Tak Bai in Army custody, and the unsolved kidnapping of Muslim-lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit.

In October 2004, 84 Muslim human rights protesters were killed at Tak Bai when the Army broke up a peaceful protest.. The many detainees were forced at gunpoint to lie prone in Army trucks, stacked like cordwood. The trucks were delayed from moving to the detainment area for hours. Many detainees suffocated to death due to gross mishandling by the military. After the 2006 coup, the Army dropped all charges and investigations into Army misconduct related to the Tak Bai incident. Thaksin announced a escalation of military and police activity in the region. In July 2005, Thaksin enacted an Emergency Decree to manage the three troubled provinces. Several human rights organizations expressed their concerns that the decree might be used to violate civil liberties.

In March 2005, Thaksin established the National Reconciliation Commission, chaired by former Prime Minister Anand Panyarachun to oversee efforts to bring peace to the troubled South. In its final report released in June 2006, the commission proposed introducing Islamic law and making Pattani-Malay (Yawi) an official language in the region. The Thaksin administration assigned a government committee to study the report, while Muslims urged the government to act faster in implementing the proposals.

There have also been complaints that Thaksin appointed relatives to senior positions in the civil service and independent commissions, for example by elevating his cousin, General Chaiyasit Shinawatra, to Army commander-in-chief. In August 2002, he was promoted from Deputy Commander of the Armed Forces Development Command to become Deputy Army Chief. Both General Chaiyasit and Defense Minister General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh denied charges of nepotism at the time. General Chaiyasit replaced General Somthad Attanan as Army commander-in-chief. However, General Chaiyasit was replaced by General Prawit Wongsuwan in August 2004, after only a year in office. His replacement was in response to an escalation of violence in southern Thailand. Prawit was succeeded by Sonthi Boonyaratglin in 2005.

Thaksin was also accused of interference after the Senate appointed Wisut Montriwat (former Deputy Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance) to the position of Auditor General, replacing Jaruvan Maintaka.

Respected former Thai ambassador to the UN Asda Jayanama, in an anti-Thaksin rally, claimed that Thaksin’s two state visits to India were made in order to negotiate a satellite deal for Thaksin’s family-owned Shin Corporation. The accusation was countered by Foreign Minister Kantathi Suphamongkhon, who attended the state visits with Thaksin.

Thaksin’s government has been accused of exerting political influence in its crackdown on unlicensed community radio stations.

Thaksin has also been accused of being superstitious.

Thaksin often faced harsh comparisons. Social critic Prawase Wasi compared him to AIDS, Privy Council President Prem Tinsulanonda and Senator Banjerd Singkaneti compared him to Hitler, Democrat spokesman Ong-art Klampaibul compared him to Saddam Hussein, and the newspaper The Nation compared him to Pol Pot.

Thaksin has been engaged in a series of lawsuits brought by American businessman William L Monson regarding a cable-television joint venture the two partnered in during the 1980s.

Accusations by Sondhi Limthongkul

The political crisis was catalyzed by several accusations published by media mogul Sondhi Limthongkul, a former Thaksin supporter. These included accusations that Thaksin:

  • Restricted press freedom by suing Sondhi after Sondhi printed a sermon by a controversial monk (see Luang Ta Maha Bua incident)
  • Masterminded the desecration of the Erawan shrine (see Phra Phrom Erawan Shrine incident)

Sale of Shin Corporation

On January 23, 2006, the Shinawatra family sold their entire stake in Shin Corporation to Temasek Holdings. The Shinawatra and Damapong families netted about 73 billion baht (about US$1.88 billion) tax-free from the sale, using a regulation that made individuals who sell shares on the stock exchange exempt from capital gains tax.[132]

The transaction made the Prime Minister the target of accusations that he was selling an asset of national importance to a foreign entity, and hence selling out his nation. The Democrat party spokesman compared him to Saddam Hussein: “Saddam, though a brutal tyrant, still fought the superpower for the Iraqi motherland”.

Thaksin faced pressure to resign following the sale of Shin Corporation to Temasek Holdings.

2006 Bangkok New Year’s Eve bombings

On December 31, 2006 and January 1, 2007, several bombs exploded in Bangkok. Thaksin later went on CNN to deny any involvement in the bombings.[150]

Thaksin was assaulted while eating at a Thai restaurant in London. A Thai woman threw a glass at him – it was not known whether he was injured.[151]

His diplomatic passport was revoked in December 31, 2006 after the junta accused him of engaging in political activities while in exile. Thai embassies were ordered not to facilitate his travels.

In January 2007, the Financial Institutions Development Fund complied with an Assets Examination Committee request to file a charge against Thaksin and his wife over their purchase of four 772 million baht plots of land from the FIDF in 2003. The charge was based on alleged violation of Article 100 of the National Counter Corruption Act, which specificies that government officials and their spouses are prohibited from entering into or having interests in contracts made with state agencies under their authorisation. As in truth, this particular law,has been proposed before the Thaksin’s regime, by the Democrats.

The Assets Examination Committee also accused Thaksin of issuing an unlawful cabinet resolution approving the spending of state funds to buy rubber saplings. However, it did not accuse him of corruption.

In March 2007, the Office of the Attorney-General charged Thaksin’s wife and brother-in-law of conspiring to evade taxes of 546 million baht (US$15.6 million) in a 1997 transfer of Shin Corp shares.

The Assets Examination Committee rules that Thaksiin was guilty of malfeasance for obstructing competition by passing an executive decree that imposed an excise tax for telecom operators. Thaksin’s Cabinet approved an executive decree in 2003 that forced telecom operators to pay an excise tax of 10% on revenues for mobile phone operations, and 2% for fixed-line operations.

 Reference

Bangkok Post

Wikipedia

 

Don’t waste time and money, Just order the new Constitution and continue ruling Myanmar forever

  Don’t waste time and money

Just order the new Constitution

and continue ruling Myanmar forever

Myanmar Military announced the dates for the referendum and election after the conclusion of the drafting guidelines for a new constitution.

The regime’s new constitution is to be voted in a referendum, elections would follows.

  • The SPDC is avoiding the dialogue with Daw Suu led NLD by using lame excuses, one sided demands and preconditions.
  • The SPDC is not interested for a National reconciliation process.
  • SPDC is actually not initiating any meaningful democratization process.
  • They just started a sham, fake democracy to use as a smokescreen to continue its dominance.

Dear SPDC Sr General Than Shwe, why do you all want waste a lot of time and money on this useless or worthless papers?

  • Do you think that Myanmar/Burmese people would accept them?
  • Do you think that USA and EU led Western democratic governments would accept them?
  • Do you think that the people around the world would accept them?
  • Do you think that Daw Suu led NLD would accept them?
  • Do you think that all the monks would accept them?
  • Do you think that all the students would accept them?
  • Do you think that the Burmese opposition would accept them?
  • Do you think that all the Ethnic Minorities would accept them?
  • Do you think that all the Religious Minorities would accept them?
  • Do you think that all the ceased fire groups would accept them?
  • Do you think that all the rebel-groups would accept them?

We don’t think so.

All the right thinking persons could give the same RIGHT answer, which is NO!

If the Sr General thinks RIGHT, we are sure there is something WRONG with your mind.

RIGHT! I mean that it is WRONG for you to even dream that your referendum result and the new election results would be accepted by anyone on earth except your cronies and sycophant.

(Sycophant = servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people. One who flatters another excessively: adulator, courtier, flatterer, toady. Informal apple-polisher.)

  • Why do you want to waste the country’s budget money?
  • Why do you want to waste your ‘precious time’?
  • Just do it!
  • Just announce it!
  • Just declare your order!
  • Just declare, announce, decree or order the new constitution yourself and hope to rule Burma forever.
  • Like the end of every fairytale, your Myanmar Tatmadaw just continues to rule Myanmar forever!

But be careful, in every fairytale_

THE GOOD ALWAYS TRIUMPH OVER THE BAD!

In every fairytale the jailed beautiful, good, kind just princess (read Daw Aung San Suu Kyi) would be freed and always regain the rightful throne.

In every fairytale the wicked, powerful, cruel, greedy villain (read SPDC Junta Sr General) would be dethroned and punished.

This theme repeats itself numerous times_

  • not only in the fairytales
  • but in the Buddhist Jattakas,
  • 550 reincarnated lives of Buddha,
  • Tora,
  • Bible,
  • Scriptures of various religions,
  • Koran,
  • Hindu Vedas
  • and even in Socialist/communists modern stories.

The virtue always prevails.

The evil would ultimately vanish.

Don’t try to fool yourself and the world. Even if your referendum got 100% approval vote, all the citizens, the whole world including the UN would just give the verdict that it was because of the intimidation, duress, vote rigging e.t.c.

 

Resounding vote of NO could lead to the Second Independence

Resounding vote of NO

could lead to the

Second Independence

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original column in Malaysiakini by KJ John. I hope that  Malaysiakini and KJ John could understand and forgive us for this. They should even be proud that they could contribute a very good article for the fellow Myanmar/Burmese citizens.

 

 

‘The Japan that Can Say No’ was a book co-written by Sony chairman Akio Morita and politician Shintaro Ishihara during Japan’s rise as an economic power-house in 1989.

As a sequel many years later he and Dr Mahathir Mohamed co-wrote a book called, ‘The Asia that Can Say No!’

  1. Of course, they were talking about saying ‘No’ to the US and its Western allies and their agenda in Asia.
  2. Burmese citizens should also say a clear and clean NO to the SPDC’s referendum.
  3. Burmese citizens should also say a loud and clear NO to permanent Military dominance in Myanmar politics.
  4. Burmese citizens should also say a loud and clear NO corruption.
  5. Burmese citizens should also say a loud and clear NO cronyism.
  6. Burmese citizens should also say a loud and clear NO to the lack of transparency.
  7. Burmese citizens should also say a loud and clear NO to the lack of accountability. 
  8. Burmese citizens should also say a loud and clear NO to the lack of humility.
  9. Burmese citizens should also say a loud and clear NO to the lack of justice for all.
  10. Burmese citizens should also say a loud and clear NO to the lack of righteousness.

What did the people really need to say?

Is it that we were against Myanmar Tatmadaw per se or its politics of anti-multi-ethnicity?

Was it that we could not agree with the lack of_

  • Individual Freedom?
  • Religious freedom?
  • Human Rights?
  • Political freedom?
  • Freedom of speech?
  • Freedom of association?

We must vote NO to show clearly that we could not accept the fake democracy so called ‘disciplined democracy’.

Tatmadaw leaders should instead discipline themselves from their_

  • uncontrolled greediness,
  • uncontrollably high megalomania,
  • sky-high pride,
  • anger,
  • rudeness,
  • stubboness,
  • injustices
  • and barbarism e.t.c.

We need to send the real message in black and white with the on paper official verdict of resounding NO at referendum.

The real meaning of the message of NO in referendum should mean: ‘We the Burmese/Myanmar citizens have the right to decide on our government; not the SPDC, mainstream media, not the Kyant Phut and Swan Arrshin cronies.’  

I believe that it should be a vote against_

  • the arrogance of the SPDC,
  • the false promises,
  • the many lies told
  • and the lack of true, honest and sincere accountability to the people;
  • for that is what democracy is all about.

And worst of all was the SPDC government’s false assumption that ‘we the people’ could not see through the smokescreen!

Burma/Myanmar will never be the same again. We could even call this another struggle or a revolution for a new second Independence – Yes; maybe it should be called the real Independence!

Resounding NO would be a great victory for the people.

  • It should be a vote against the SPDC’s inability to listen to the voice of the people.
  • We should work together against corruption in any form and cronyism in all forms.
  • We should work together to revert to the rule of law – you cannot go wrong and the law will always be on your side.
  • The Truely Democratic Constitution should be supreme and the rule of law should be our guide.

We need to oppose the Rule by Law concept of the Tatmadaw. They believe that the arbitrary Law or power come out from the barrel of the gun.

The biblical story of David and Goliath could be repeated if we dare to confront the Myanmar Military at the referendum.

The ‘small’ ones, NLD and Daw Suu led oppositions campaigned on our true democratic principles, while the SPDC, Kyant Phuts and Swan Arrshin ‘big’ ones fought with the power of incumbency, with abuse of authority, and without willingness to listen.

The problem of the SPDC Generals is:

  • they have become so arrogant.
  • They suppress any opinion that they do not like
  • and they begin to believe in their own reports, which are not actually consistent with what is happening in the country.”

Moreover, the Tatmadaw leadership was drunk with power and believed many of its own lies. 

While at George Washington University, I had a full professor of two fields of knowledge: political science and psychology. He once gave a talk on “the socio-psychological profile of disabled leaders”, having studied political leaders of a 100-year period.  

He concluded that all political leaders achieve “their disabilities” when they stop listening to the contrarian’s views and start believing false information given by their aids, who often concoct the stories to build up their own hypothesis.

Let us take the example of SPDC advertisements all over Burma. They were so simplistic and naïve while full of lies, that almost all the citizens ignored them.