Ignorant Americans are paying for Israel’s war crimes in-spite of gloomy economy

Ignorant Americans are paying for Israel’s war crimes 

in-spite of  gloomy economy

Maybe, just maybe, its the policies that are all screwed up. And that means looking at the top. A nation raised on the fear of the holocaust, all ready to fight. Winning votes by being victorious in war crimes.

U.S. seeks ship to move arms to Israel
The U.S. is seeking to hire a merchant ship to deliver hundreds of tons of arms to Israel from Greece later this month, tender documents seen by Reuters show.

The U.S. Navy’s Military Sealift Command (MSC) said the ship was to carry 325 standard 20-foot containers of what is listed as “ammunition” on two separate journeys from the Greek port of Astakos to the Israeli port of Ashdod in mid-to-late January.
A “hazardous material” designation on the manifest mentions explosive substances and detonators, but no other details were given.

“Shipping 3,000-odd tons of ammunition in one go is a lot,” one broker said, on condition of anonymity.

Americans, YOU are paying for all this stuff, at a time when 11 million of you have lost your jobs, and one out of every ten of you will lose your homes this year.

Continue reading

Responsible Thai generals must be punished for torturing and killing of Imam

Responsible Thai generals must be punished

for torturing and killing of Imam

BANGKOK, Jan 11 – The death of an imam while in army custody last year will present Thailand’s new government with its first test of whether it can deliver justice in the country’s troubled southern provinces.

 

On Christmas Day, a court in Narathiwat ruled that 56-year-old imam Yapa Kaseng was tortured and killed while being interrogated by soldiers in March.

The body of the Muslim community leader bore evidence of blunt force trauma, including rib fractures. His lungs were punctured, and his body was covered with bruises, and had abrasions on the back.

The death of the imam has gone down as a landmark abuse case. Rarely has anyone been held accountable for deaths in custody a long-held complaint of locals as well as non-governmental organisations and watchdog groups like the New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW).

Continue reading

The Beatles – Revolution

Continue reading

If SPDC refused we need to revolt and fight (in Burmese)

If SPDC refused we need to revolt and fight

ျမန္မာလူထုက အမ်ိဳးသားေရးစိတ္ဒဏ္သင့္တဲ့ အနာ သံုးခါရိိွခဲ့ပါျပီ။ ဆရာၾကီးေရြဥေဒါင္းစကားနဲ ့ေျပာရင္ေတာ့ အသည္းႏွလံုးမွာ ဆူးၾကီးေပါက္ခဲ့သလိုခံစားခဲ့ရတာ။ ေဒၚမာမာေအးစကားနဲ ့ေျပာရင္ေတာ့ အသည္းနာကမၻာမေၾကနာ- မဟာနာက်ည္းမႈၾကီး ။ ဒါေတြကေတာ့
၁- ၈၈လႈပ္ရွားမႈၾကီးအနိမ္နင္းခံရျပီးေနာက္၊ ၁၉၉၀ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ ရလဒ္အေကာင္အထည္မေပၚလာတာ။
၂- ၂၀၀၇ခုနစ္ စက္တင္ဘာ ေတာ္လွန္ေရးက ေတာင္းဆိုခ်က္ဘာတခုမွမရပဲ ရက္ရက္စက္စက္နိမ္နင္းခံခဲ့ရတာ။
၃- နာဂစ္မုန္းတိုင္း ခံရတဲ့ျပည္သူေတြအတြက္ နိင္ငံတကာအကူညီေတြကိုစစ္အစိုးရက ျငင္းဆန္ျပီး ေထာက္ပံမႈေတြကိုအလံုအေလာက္မလုပ္ေဆာင္ေပးခဲ့တာ ။ ဒီအေပၚမွာ လူထုက စိတ္ဒဏ္သင့္ခဲ့တယ္။ ဒီစိတ္ဓံသင့္မႈက အလြန္ အႏၱရယ္ရိွတယ္။ လူထုက ေတာ္လွန္ေရးအေပၚမွာ ယံုၾကည္မႈက်ဆင္းသြားေစတတ္တယ္။ ကိုယ္ကိုကိုယ္ ယံုၾကည္မႈက်ဆင္းသြားေစခဲ့တယ္။ ဒီအနာၾကီးကိုေျဖေဖ်ာက္ဖို ့အတြက္ လူထုကို ေမ်ာ္လင့္ခ်က္ေတြေပးဖို ့လိုတယ္။ ဒါကေတာ့ လူထုတိုက္ပြဲေတြ ျပန္လည္ေဖၚထုတ္ရမယ္။ နအဖ ရဲ ့ စီးပြားေရးျပစ္မွတ္ေတြကို တိုက္ခိုက္ဖို ့လိုတယ္။ ဒီလိုျဖစ္ရပ္မ်ိဳးက ၁၉၈၈ ခုနစ္ မတ္လ ၁၆ ရက္ တံတားနီအေရးခင္မွာ က်ေနာ္တို ့ ကို မဆလ စစ္အစိုးရက နိမ္နင္းခံခဲ့ရတဲ့အေျခအေနနဲ ့တူတယ္။ တံတားနီေက်ာင္းသားလႈပ္ရွားမႈမွာ ေက်ာင္းသား တရာေက်ာ္အသတ္ခံရတယ္။ သံုးေထာင္နီးပါးအဖမ္းခံရတယ္။ ငါးရာေက်ာ္ေက်ာင္းထုတ္ခံရတယ္။ ေက်ာင္းသားေတြကိုလံုထိမ္းကရက္ရက္စက္စက္ သတ္ျဖတ္ခံရမႈေၾကာင့္ ေက်ာင္းသားထုအတြင္းမွာ စိတ္ပိုင္းဆိုင္ရာဒဏ္သင့္သြားနိင္တယ္။ အေၾကာက္လြန္သြားနိင္တယ္။ စိတ္အားငယ္မႈေတြျဖစ္လာနိင္တယ္။
ေခါင္းေဆာင္လုပ္သူေတြက ဒီအေျခအေနကို အေရာက္မခံဖို ့လိုတယ္။ ဒီေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို ့
သိမ္ၾကီးေစ်း စီရံုကို မီးတင္ရိႈ ့ခဲ့တယ္။ ဒီေတာ့ ေက်ာင္းသားထုနဲ ့လူထုက စိတ္အားျပန္လည္တက္ၾကြလာတယ္။ ငါတို ့ကိုမတရားလုပ္ျခင္တိုင္းလုပ္လို ့မရဘူး။ ငါတို ့ထဲမွာ မတရားမႈကိုရဲရဲရင့္ရင့္ ဆန္က်င္မဲ ့အင္အားစုေတြရိွေသးတယ္ဆိုတာကိုသိသြားလို ့ပဲ။ အခု အေျခအေနၾကီးကိုက်ေနာ္တို ့မၾကိဳက္ဘူး။ လူထုထဲမွာ က်ဆင္းေနတဲ့စိတ္ဓါတ္ကို ျပန္လည္တက္ၾကြလာနိင္ဖို ့အတြက္ တခ်ိဳ ့ျပစ္မွတ္ေတြကို က်ေနာ္တို ့ရွာေဖြ တိုက္ခိုက္သင့္တယ္လို ့တိုက္တြန္းလိုပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာျပည္ေဒါင့္တေနရာမွာေတာ့ မတရားမႈေတြကိုလက္တုန္ျပန္မဲ ့ အင္အားစုေတြရိွတယ္ဆိုတာကို ရဲရဲ ၀ံ၀ံျပသၾကပါစို ့။

ေအာင္ပြဲသို ့

မိုးသီး

 

 

 

Let’s start a campaign to kick out Than Shwe and his thugs

Let’s start a campaign to kick out Than Shwe

and his thugs

Let’s start a campaign to kick out Than Shwe and his thugs bu showing our hatred and disapproval to them and reveal to the world that Myanmar Tatmadaw is the illegal ruler of our country, Burma.

Showing our hatred to SPDC and cohorts is another step forward for us from the ineffective nonviolent civil disobedience campaign.

We must start the campaign by brainwashing all the people with a propaganda barrage that it is disgraceful to be associated with the SPDC Junta and its affiliated groups that disguised as civilians. Myanmar/Burma needs self consciences people that hate this cruel military government.

We all have an obligation to devote our life to fighting for justice and the present time of SPDC shouting the victory success as if more then 92% of us had supported them and as if it has effectively nullify the 1990 NLD’s election win. We all have a responsibility not to give those injustices our practical support by keeping quiet, remained submissive, obedient, loyal and subservient.

Continue reading

Let’s start a global struggle (in Burmese)

 Let’s start a global struggle (in Burmese)

 

ဒီစာကို Select ေပးၿပီးေရးပါ…ေန ့စြဲ -ေမလ ၂၆၊ ၂၀၀၈

ေလးစားအပ္ပါေသာ
ျပည္တြင္းျပည္ပရိွညီအကိုေမာင္ႏွမအေပါင္းတို ့ခင္ဗ်ား

ရန္ကုန္ျမိဳ ့ ဆီဒိုးနားေဟာ္တယ္ မွာက်င္းပျပဳလုပ္ျပီးသြားတဲ့ အလ်ဴရွင္မ်ား အစည္းေ၀း – Donors Meeting – အျပီးမွာ ေလေဘးဒုကၡသည္မ်ားအေျခအေနဟာ အလြန္ကိုဆိုး၀ါးေနဆဲျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ပုသိမ္မွာရိွတဲ့ဒုကၡသည္မ်ားဟာ ေနရပ္ကိုအတင္းအၾကပ္ျပန္ပို ့တာခံေနရပါတယ္။ ဖ်ာပံု၊က်ိဳက္လတ္နဲ ့အျခားျမိဳ ့နယ္မ်ားမွာရိွတဲ့ ေလေဘးဒုကၡသည္မ်ားဟာလည္း မျဖစ္စေလာက္အကူညီတခါနစ္ခါလာေပးတာကလြဲလို ့ဘာတခုမွမရရိွေသးပါဘူး။

နဂ်စ္မုန္တိုင္းက က်ေနာ္တို ့ျပည္သူ သိန္းေပါင္းမ်ားစြာရဲ ့အသက္ကို တမဟုတ္ျခင္းေခ်ြခဲ့ပါတယ္။ မေသလို ့က်န္ခဲ့တဲ့ ၂သန္းနီးပါးျပည္သူေတြကေတာ့ ကုလသမဂနဲ ့အာဆီယံနိင္ငံေတြရဲ ့တေျဖးေျဖးျခင္းညင္းသတ္တာကိုခံရေတာ့မွာပါ။
ျပည္သူလူထုမွာအကာအကြယ္မဲ့ေနပါျပီ။ Continue reading

The Dawn of the Revolution in Burma

The Breach of Social Contract that Leads to

The Dawn of the Revolution in Burma

 SAN OO AUNG  in BURMA DIGEST

In the book Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes, wrote in 1642 about a minimalist state which was strangely similar to the present day Myanmar and SPDC Junta. Let’s compare that Leviathan State with the Myanmar under successive Military Dictators.

1.                   The threatened citizens:

  • With the civil war with the Ethnic Minorities leading to possible disintegration of the country.
  • Or with the foreign invaders leading to re-colonization.
  • Disappearance of Bama Race and Buddhist Religion. 

Burma (Myanmar) really has the most numbers of the armed rebels for about half a century.

So the Myanmar Military’s claim was even believed and echoed by some prominent ASEAN leaders.

But almost all of those Ethnic Minority rebels supported NLD leader Daw Aung San Su Kyi and are ready to stop the rebellion and give up the aim of separation from the Union if there is a formation of real democratic, secular, federal Union.

2.                   Hobbes called for a state where effective political power was concentrated in a single authority, the State. And it was in the hands of a minority of rulers or a single monarch. Real effective political power was concentrated in the hands of the ruling elite only. In Burma the Military under General Ne Win, Saw Maung and Senior General Than Shwe control the power very firmly and it is according to Hobbes principle.

3.                   Hobbes’ constant fear of civil conflict was his highest justification for the creation of this small but immensely powerful state machinery or Authoritarian or Dictator System with total control of the daily lives of ordinary citizens. And the whole population is depoliticized.

In Burma, as long as a person stayed away from politics he could do whatever he likes, but he need to grease the palms of the relevant authorities in every step.  This is in accordance to Hobbes’ idea of allowing the public to stay as they like provided they did not meddle with the affairs of state. The State, on the other hand, would interfere as little as possible in the affairs of the masses provided they ‘behaved’ themselves or in Myanmar terms bribed enough to the authorities. But under the excuse of internal security, the Military of Burma dictates control and watches almost all the activities of its citizens.

4.                   The state that Hobbes envisioned had peace, public order, openness and stability. But actually the power was absolute, centralized and personalized. In Burma there is a “peace agreement” with armed rebels but not with the unarmed NLD. Neither openness nor transparency at all prevails in Burma/Myanmar. The condition is quite fragile in Myanmar. The power is absolute, centralised and Myanmar Military Generals are still in absolute control.

5.                   The hidden element of Hobbes’ theory of the centralized State was the culture of fear and terror that usually develop if his model actually exists. Yes, that fear is the most important factor in Myanmar now. We all need to overcome that fear.

6.                   Today we see the real replica in present-day Myanmar (Burma) as if Myanmar could be called a model Leviathan State of Myanmar. Today we have seen the emergence of a powerful State apparatus of the Military in Myanmar, and it practically dominates all sectors of public life.

7.                   Like the many other blatantly oppressive and dictatorial regimes (such as the Philippines under Marcos or Indonesia under Suharto), the fierce and cruel power of Military dominate Myanmar since 1962 up to the present time.

8.                   In Burma the relentless intimidation and use of unnecessary brutal military might, combined with frequently changing random arbitrary ad hoc laws effectively suppressed and tamed the socio-political atmosphere. Thus for much of the Myanmar population, hard life continues boringly in slow pace and under constant fear.

9.                   The Myanmar Military’s promotion of an “open-market economy” has never changed  Myanmar public which has been already ruined into to a corruption based black-market lifestyle and leading to extreme materialism.

10.               Political activism and any public debate on matters political, cultural and philosophical is practically suppressed. For years, the quality of intellectual life in the media, local universities and the public arena has been stifled thanks to the cumulative effect of laws and regulations which have effectively robbed the ordinary citizens of their rights of free speech, association and assembly.

11.               Set against this is a state of Myanmar Military apparatus which has grown increasingly powerful, centralized and personalized. A cult of leadership has been developed in the country, centred on the personality and personal tastes and preferences leading to one man- show of Sr. General Than Shwe.

12.               Hobbes ‘Leviathan country’- intimidates and compels citizens to give in and toe the line all the time. The Military in Myanmar has been able to act in a coercive and forceful manner.

13.               Hobbes predicted that there is a limit to how far the State can go in its exercise of power. Hobbes social contract which binds the citizens to their State was based on mutual respect for a common concern: namely, to protect the interests of all parties concerned.

14.               Hobbes predicted that the citizens would no longer respect and obey the State if the latter was no longer protecting their interests.

The social contract effectively comes to an end when the State exceeds its limits and begins

to abuse the rights of the citizens arbitrarily, such as in cases of blatant abuse of power.

15.               At this point, Hobbes argues that, the citizens are no longer beholden to the state and thus are free to rebel.

If we look at the present day Myanmar under the SPDC Junta, this ‘invisible’ limit has been reached, and indeed, breached by the SPDC Military rulers.

In Myanmar today the SPDC had clearly crossed the line of our limit with his brutal cruelties on all the Ethnic Minorities, minority religions and almost all the citizens.

So it is the dawn of a revolution where the dominance of the authoritarian Military rulers is being questioned for the first time, thanks to the NLD under Daw Aung San Su Kyi and all the opposition groups.

The end result of this process will take some time. But one thing is for sure: the climate of fear and obedience which was so crucial in maintaining the system of autocratic centralized rule is now slowly diminishing, and Burmese citizens are beginning to question the legitimacy of the Military that has ruled them for so long.

SAN OO AUNG  

 

Dilemmas of Revolutionaries

Dilemmas of Revolutionaries 

 As SHWE BA in Burma Digest

Revolution! 

What is revolution? What is the aim and objective? What are the Tactics and Strategies for revolution?

Violence or nonviolence? What is the goal? What is the plan for the final push, knock-out strike or lethal last assault to grasp power? What is the plan to control the country after the revolution? What type of government and system? What could we, citizens expect? What are the plans after revolution? What do you promise for each and every actor/participant/citizen after the revolution? What are the rewards for us? How and who and how long would you rule the country after revolution? How are the statuses of each and every citizen?

Yes, we must convince ALL the people and the rest of the world with our aim, objective, goal and the proper plan to rule the country. Rules and regulations must be clearly indicated, discussed, agreed in advance. Then only we could get the full support from all the sectors.

‘Nga Myin Ngar Saing – Sagaing yok yok, Nga Hlay Ngar htoe-Pago yawk yawk’ meaning if we would do something just for the sake of doing would not achieve any meaningful thing.

Bodawpaya (1791 to 1819) give a lot of favour to U Paw Oo and one of the ministers openly complaint to His Majesty about the unfair treatments. So Bodawpaya summoned that Minister and U Paw Oo and ordered to go to Sagaing Mayor’s house to look at the new born puppies (dogs) and to report back to him. He arranged the separate audience in the open court.

When the complainant minister came back, he was asked about the number of dogs, colour of different dogs, gender etc. That minister had to go back to Sagaing many times to get the correct answers. But U Paw Oo could amazingly answer all the questions without needing to go back to Sagaing. Then only, His Majesty Bodawpaya told that Minister in front of all the audiences that His Paw Oo was different from him so he had to give more favours. So I wish to request that our revolution leaders would kindly follow the wisdom of U Paw Oo, plan and execute their task properly and wisely not on ad hock basics. Since then the Burmese saying,’ sagaing khwe kyi khine tha lo’ meaning, ‘ordered to go and see the puppies at Sagaing’ became well known.

Just because Than Shwe moved his capital to Kyet Pyae we could not just claimed victory like U Paw Oo:” “Your Majesty, can’t you see how your barge has won a decisive victory, like a fighting cock preening his feathers while the poor loser of a little canoe runs away for her dear life in the vanguard.” U Paw Oo was knowingly trying to please the king to save face.

Just mentioning about boat race, we have to keep our General Aung San’s advice not to be overconfidence and raise our oar prematurely to celebrate a victory just because we are ahead of our competitors but still away from the finish-line or goal.

Please give us the definite target, aims and objects. Give us the definite map or road map. And you should also really give us the coordinates of the map. If not some of us may row to Sagaing and some would ride up the Pagu instead of our focus point Yangon or Pyinmana. Worse senerio may be some of us may row backwards, few trying to turn to left or right while the rest of us are rowing forwards.

And we need a definite plan to proceed with our attack once we are ashore. Our think-tanks should consider all the possible issues and how to handle or address all of them. We should not brush aside any issue as minor. We should focus on all the possible issues and go in-depth. We should pursue a definite plan to tackle all the possible issues to see the best possible results. All of us cannot get all we wish for or want but must be ready to sacrifice and compromise for our common cause or victory.

Please kindly allow me to ask what follows the revolution? If we start any revolution we want to know how would our leaders plan to execute the final touches, how to take over the powers of the country and run the country with what rules and regulations. What are our rights and rewards?

We do not want the indefinite vague answers like most of the leaders including our beloved Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, answered during and just after 8888. “We need to get democracy first, your request regarding the rights of ethnic minorities and minority religions would be considered later. Don’t worry; with the democracy there would not be any problem with the human rights issues, all will be OK.”. We could understand and accept those words at that time but now there is a lot of time and we wish to get a more mature and definite answer.

We should unanimously decide to choose our leader in advance, e.g. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi as the future Prime Minister of the Interim Government or some one definitely now!. If not all the ‘leaders’ would wish and demand to become the head of the state like during the 8888 movement. There may appear some disgruntled inspiring leaders sabotaging our revolution, what we called in Burmese, ‘Min Thar gyi ma loke ya loe, pat ma gyi hto phauk’. U Nu announced himself to be the legal PM, U Aung Gyi also shifted position to support the Military but at last that leadership division was seen as a weakness and that was fully and successfully exploited by the Myanmar Military leaders.

During the later part of the 8888 uprising, instead of calling check mate and winning the game with a final move many of our demonstrators busy themselves greedily taking the pawns from People’s stores and factories. Some of us waste the time or our turn to move by overenthusiastically killing the knights, by revenge killing of MI agents. Because of these at last we won the early battles but lost the war.

We need more sophisticated method of collecting all the evidences, photos, videos of the atrocities of the Myanmar SPDC troops on the demonstrating people. Once the uprising starts, we should buy (or request) the 24 hr spy satellite photos of the major Burmese cities. We should request in advance to the foreign embassies in Burma to help collect those audio-video evidences. We should stage our people at all the landing points of planes departed from Burma to talk and request to all the tourists, travelers and aircrew members for any evidences.

As I had written last week, the capital was moved, SPDC have to defend their new capital. If the people in Rangoon or Mandalay or other costal big town started an uprising and even if the uprising opposition could declare independence in one town for one day or an hour only, we could ask help from US and UN to send troops. (We should request this kind of things in advance to the US authorities.) Finished! We could declare amnesty for all the SPDC Generals and soldiers who wish to change side. No need to even fight like in Afghanistan or Iraq. US and UN need not fight for us, just defend us. Looks like childish plan but who knows it would not work.

And last of all but not the least, what are the rewards for each and every citizen? It must be not less than the international standard Citizen and Human Right promise. And I just wish to remind that in a family, if father ordered a special privilege for himself because he is a bread earner, mother wants more because she is working like a house keeper the whole day, eldest and youngest daughters asked for special favour, the only son in the family wish for special treatment and a handicapped child also needs special attention… and if the two adopted children have to satisfy with their left-over only it would not be fair. And what is there also for normal ordinary children?

And I am sure we are writing these plans to pool our resources, dialogue to plan for our country’s future. This is the right and bold initiation and decision taken by Burma Digest. We need a pool of intelligent, wise and clever professionals like Pho Yaza who could remember the King’s question one year later and could give the right answer immediately. The King had asked for the name of the best food a year ago and one year later suddenly asked an incomplete question, “Is that alone?” And Pho Yaza replied correctly to eat with a little bit of salt.

We should prepare, discuss all the answers, could not say that we would try to cross the bridge if we arrive. We don’t want that kind of answers and those are similar in our Burmese saying, ‘Mee sin kyi-Ka myi.’

And we are divided between those who strongly advocate the non violence methods only and those who, like Chairman Mao, believe that the forceful violent methods are the only means on the way to succeed in any revolutions. But I pragmatically believe that we need a multi pronged approach. We must use the universally accepted good cop bad cop strategy.

The only important thing is that we need to consider or brain storm all the tactics, strategies and most important of all is how to execute the final lethal strike to take control of the country’s power.

We must have a common goal, destination or type of government, constitution and basic laws decided in advance. We must consider how to persuade the 400,000 strong SPDC Myanmar Military, armed groups still struggling against the SPDC and those groups that signed the peace agreement with the present government. We should consider and decide in advance how to handle them. This is more complicated than transforming of BIA to BDA after our first Independence in 1948. Although we had our Government lead by General Aung San and U Nu even before our first Independence we had failed to maintain our success. I am worried about our country’s socio-political, security and economic conditions after our second Independence.

If we consider about the multi rebels just after independence, condition of Burma at that time was even worse than present Iraq. U Nu’s government was even rightly called Rangoon Government. Mandalay and upper Burma, Meikhtila with air force base were under the rebel’s control. Deputy Commander-in-chief of Burma Army was captured by the rebels. Even Rangoon’s suburban Insein was controlled by rebels. Even if we could take over the country with our future strong army with the help of US or UN we should plan in advance to avoid repeating the same mistakes after our first Independence or to avoid the chaos of the present Iraq.

We must brain storm in advance not only for the revolution but what to do after our success or to effectively steer or guide our country immediately and for the long term progress.

Revolutions are usually staged by a larger group and radically changes the political system. Lets consider the smaller and easier type of revolutions, that is coup d’état.

Let’s consider some scenario as practical case studies:

If some one offer to stage a coup d’état and tried to contact our opposition now, how will we respond? We all understood that a coup d’état is the sudden overthrow of a government through ‘unconstitutional means’ by a part of the government and just replaces the few top leaders. (In our case, present SPDC Junta is already unconstitutional.)

It is sometimes violent or sometimes not. Coup d’état is in French, meaning “a sudden blow or strike to a state” Coup = hit, and état = state.

A coup d’état usually involves control of some active portion of the military while neutralizing the remainder of a country’s armed services.

This active group usually uses the power of the existing government for its own takeover and tried to do the followings:

  1. captures leaders,
  2. seizes physical control of important government offices,
  3. control the means of main communication, and
  4. control the physical infrastructure e.g. streets, radio TV stations and power plants.

Mass street protests or popular uprisings like our 8888 movement should also be able to force the unpopular and corrupt leaders from office in a coup-like fashion e.g. General Ne Win’s BSPP Government and his successive puppet governments. This often results in a period of stability and calm, in which an unknown and uncontroversial vice president can rule the nation until new elections can be held. But Saw Maung and Than Shwe’s SLORC and SPDC continue to hang on the power in Burma.

If our opposition leaders could seized the power immediately after the 8888 uprising,  present condition would be different.

Have we planned to rapidly grasp and consolidate the power if there is any uprising now?

Breakthrough coups – In which a revolutionary army overthrows a traditional government and creates new bureaucratic elite. Breakthrough coups are generally led by non-commissioned officers (NCOs) or junior officers and only happen rarely in history. Because the coup is led by junior officers or enlisted men, it could be seen also as a mutiny.

So does any leader of opposition have any planned programme or appropriate response if some junior officers of Myanmar Military contact us?

This is not a hypothetical question. Our unsung hero Captain Ohn Kyaw Myint had once already offered his service to our NLD U Tin Oo. His reply was not an enthusiastic or encouragement or open support. He never refused nor report to higher authorities but just reminds them to be careful not to overdo their coup as it may lead to the bloody killings like in the Bangladesh coup!

So have we prepared the best answer if any one offers this kind of service to us? Have we prepared to effectively take over power to form a legitimate government? If just form a government only and if no future plans yet means we would definitely lead to the condition of present Iraq!

Veto coups – These coups occur when the army vetoes mass participation and social mobilization. In these cases the army must confront and suppress large-scale and broad-based opposition and as a result they tend to be repressive and bloody.

This was the second face of our 8888 revolution. We had just raised our hands and went back into our houses without much resistance naively hoping that Myanmar Military would keep their promise of withdrawing back into their barracks after election. I am sure we still don’t have a concrete plan to push further till we get the power in this kind of repeat situation.

Veto coups and guardian coups tend to be led by senior officers. There is also a category known as bloodless coups in which the mere threat of violence is enough to force the current government to step aside. Bloodless coups are so called because they involve no violence and thus no bloodshed. Ne Win’s ‘coup’ twice from U Nu was successful. First one was also could be called a coup as he had forced U Nu to turn over power. (U Nu’s ‘Tartay sanay thar’, Saturday born son, book in Burmese). And Ne win had staged the Veto coups after 8888 using his subordinates and stayed behind the scene as a puppet master. His main cable was General Khin Nyunt and his MIs. Bloodless coups he claimed are not true to be considered “bloodless”: as he had killed alot of people and leaders.

Let’s say Senior General Than Shwe got enlightenment and repent like his predecessors General Saw Maung and offers a guardian bloodless coups against the whole SPDC Generals, who wish to hold on the power as their legitimate inheritance rights. Do we have any plans?

Or if General Maung Aye and some few top SPDC Generals fed up with idiotic His Majesty suffering from senile dementia and Megalomania, and offer a guardian coups, do we have any plans?

What could we offer back to them? Or should we try to offer them with something which they could not resist and try persuading them to change sides?

Incentives like giving the Military rulers to act as Constitutional Monarchy or King of Burma to reign for five years each or post of five yearly Presidents should be considered. We could even consider to give the whole SPDC like the status of an upper house, selected mostly from Military as a Guardian of Burma for the long term stability but not to interfere in the daily running of the elected government. We still have no concrete plan to rule the country, even not a constitution and the condition is not yet favourable to discuss and agree to a new one. There isn’t any draft constitution as uniting power for all of us. No policy was heard from our various oppositions how we wanted to handle Burma after the fall of SPDC Junta. We Burmese people don’t have a leadership to guide us even though we had NLD and many opposition groups. Different groups demanding different conditions.

Or say, if USA or UN lead NATO or International troops decided to invade Burma and actively help us what will we do? How do we form the government? What are the plans to prevent our country’s political and security conditions deteriorating into the present state of affairs in Iraq?

So I hereby suggested restarting or rebooting our selves based on Panglon treaty and our First old constitution.

First govern the country with Interim Government. Within ten years we would draw a new constitution, and share power between all the opposition, all ethnic minority all races.

PM from NLD with all the full executive powers.

President, person proposed by Military. Veto power to control the integrity of the country.

DPM from Ethnic Minorities: Kachin, Shan, Kayin, Chin, Mon.

Each and every group leaders choose 3 persons from themselves to choose for the Cabinet Ministers, Deputy Ministers, and Parliament Secretaries positions.

To appoint the DGs and MDs all according to meritocracy.

We have to plan in advance what to do if we get the power, to form a government. We need to discuss in advance with UN US EU NATO for help and support.

We should decide to offer amnesty to all the SPDC Generals and soldiers to change to our side.

If possible we should need to define the exact type of Secular Democratic Federal Union we want. Iraq could offer US with oil. Although US denied that they had helped because of oil, we could not get support because we are too proud and wish to be on our own at the end of their help.

Now Burma got oil and gas but not much to persuade the west with this alone. Promise of long term support in geopolitics. Burma is in a very important geo-political situation between China, India and ASEAN. Yes we could give long term commitment of political and all means of Military support to USA to be able to control the whole Indian Ocean, entrance of Malacca traits by offering 100 years’ usage of Co Co Inlands. I am not asking to sell our country or to become a puppet nation. But nothing is free man! There is no free lunch. There must be give and take. If we give peanuts we could get monkeys only. If we want our whole Burma back we have to sacrifice few small islands thousands of kilometers away from our mainland. And the much needed long term promise of loyal support of USA policies. SPDC could take advantage by accusing us as selling the country by just pointing our fingers. But that is their right for propaganda warfare; we need to do what is right for all of us. After all they had given Co Co Islands and some islands for the Chinese Navy.

And what for our each and every citizen? Not less than an internationally recognized citizen’s rights. If not Kalas, Tayokes and Rohingyas could just stay away from any active struggle as after all their conditions would be same. And they know that all the politicians are universally corrupt from SPDC to our future opposition leaders. They knew that they could grease any government officers of the day with their money. For them just forget the political struggle and concentrate on economic struggle only if we could not persuade them.

I wish to propose an idea for our friends at the other extreme of political divide. After reading the Thura Maung Ree, I understand our brothers’ strong feelings but even if we just give the FRC status which is equivalent to Permanent residency or Green Card status to those Rohingyas, we are postponing only one generation only for all of them to be given full citizenship. My dear brother is just buying time only. We understand their legitimate Xenophobia but look for our country’s future. Racial prejudice must be abolished. Dear brother, what do you want to comment about the popular Burmese saying,” If we see a snake and a Arakanese, we have to kill the Arakanese first”. Sorry brother. I do not condone this. I hate this saying. I am not bluffing, my best friend is an Arakan Buddhist. I still dream about my friend, we attend same school, same university and worked in Burma in the same place. I even still dream about him although I am away from him for many years. Not only two of us were friends but both families are also close because of our friendship. We need to stop racial profiling and Racial Prejudices. For the religion if we could separate the state from all religious affairs it would be best for all of us. We know, even those profess the separation of states from churches for hundred of years could not totally get rid of themselves from the shades of their worshipping places.

And for the right of separation of the states, Ethnic Minorities must sacrifice that and made an offer to SPDC and all that they want a Federation (we should decide now, not later) and must be transparent.

Right to keep own army. SPDC and general public could not accept this. We must learn the lesson from transformation of BIA to BDA. We could retain Ethnic Minority army units under the central command.

We should push forward and support the legal action initiated by Burma Digest and Shan leaders. And we have to rethink our strategy if some of us wish to struggle the violent means. Cutting the leaves or brunches is useless. We need to cut the trunk or de-root a tree to clear it off. Fighting at the border is useless even if you could kill few thousands of SPDC soldiers. Burmese Communist party and Wa alliance had done that. If possible attempt to eliminate the top SPDC Generals but I am not promoting or supporting this but just revealing the facts only. Just bombing the railways or the present bombings in Burma is useless. Target must be top leaders, their families and their close associates only. Even attacking the Embassies is almost useless and host countries’ governments would grip tightly on all of our citizens as revenge. Target their family members shopping or traveling or doing business abroad.

Civil disobedience is another option for us.

The active refusal to obey laws, demands and commands of SPDC and local authorities without resorting to physical violence. Civil disobedience has been used in nonviolent resistance movements in India in the fight against British colonialism.

Henry David Thoreau (18490 wrote the “Resistance to Civil Government”, it stated that people should not allow governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences, and that people have a duty both to avoid doing injustice directly and to avoid allowing their acquiescence to enable the government to make them the agents of injustice.

He wrote,” That government is best which governs least. The best government is that which governs least.”

He remarked, “Government, if we need it at all, is only justified if it is helpful — but governments are typically more harmful than helpful. Democracy is no cure for this, as majorities simply by virtue of being majorities do not also gain the virtues of wisdom and justice.

There is no reason to expect that the judgment of your own conscience is inferior to the decisions of a political body or majority.

Indeed, you serve your country poorly if you do so by suppressing your conscience in favor of the law — your country needs consciences more than it needs conscienceless robots.It is disgraceful to be associated with the SPDC government. I wouldn’t be making such a big deal about this if the government just happened to be a little corrupt or unjust in the course of doing its otherwise-important work; but in fact, the government is primarily an agent of corruption and injustice.

Political philosophers have reminded that the revolution usually causes a lot of deaths and sufferings. But that cost vs. benefit calculation should not be done if the government is facilitating injustices:

We have an obligation to devote our life to fighting for justice, but you do have an obligation not to commit injustice and not to give injustice your practical support.

 Refuse to pay full taxes or donations or bribes.

But if the law is itself clearly unjust break the law. Stop paying taxes, even if this means courting imprisonment. It is quite difficult for ordinary Burmese. But according to the author, “Under a government which imprisons unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.… where the State places those who are not with her, but against her, —… Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up if a thousands of men were not to pay their tax bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible.”

It is risky to rebel in this way, as the government will retaliate. The more you have to lose, the harder it will be, which is another reason why I prefer living abroad.

At times I wonder whether it is as useless to rage against the stupidities and cruelties of SPDC government as it would be to shake my fist angrily at a tornado. “The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual.… Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.”

The driving idea behind the essay of Henry David Thoreau was that of self-reliance, and how one is in morally good standing as long as they “get off another man’s back”; so you don’t have to physically fight the government, but you must not support it or have it support you (if you are against it). This essay has had a wide influence on many later practitioners of civil disobedience. In the essay, Thoreau explained his reasons for having refused to pay taxes as an act of protest against slavery and against the Mexican-American War.

Use in Struggles against Colonialism and Occupation

Civil disobedience has served as a major tactic of nationalist movements in former colonies in Africa and Asia prior to their gaining independence. Most notably Mahatma Gandhi developed civil disobedience as an anti-colonialist tool. Gandhi said “Civil disobedience is the inherent right of a citizen to be civil, implies discipline, thought, care, and attention”. Civil disobedience was a tactic used by Polish opposition to the former communist government.

Civil Disobedience in the United States

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a leader of the US civil rights movement in the United States in the 1960s also adopted civil disobedience techniques, and antiwar activists both during and after the Vietnam War have done likewise.

Theories and Techniques of Civil Disobedience

In seeking an active form of civil disobedience, one may choose to deliberately break certain laws, such as by forming a peaceful blockade or occupying a facility illegally. Protesters practice this non-violent form of civil disorder with the expectation that they will be arrested, or even attacked or beaten by the authorities. Protesters often undergo training in advance on how to react to arrest or to attack, so that they will do so in a manner that quietly or limply resists without threatening the authorities.

For example, Mahatma Gandhi outlined the following rules:

  1. A civil resister (or satyagrahi) will harbour no anger.
  2. He will suffer the anger of the opponent.
  3. In so doing he will put up with assaults from the opponent, never retaliate; but he will not     submit, out of fear of punishment or the like, to any order given in anger.
  4. When any person in authority seeks to arrest a civil resister, he will voluntarily submit to the arrest, and he will not resist the attachment or removal of his own property, if any, when it is sought to be confiscated by authorities.
  5. If a civil resister has any property in his possession as a trustee, he will refuse to surrender it, even though in defending it he might lose his life. He will, however, never retaliate.
  6. Retaliation includes swearing and cursing.
  7. Therefore a civil resister will never insult his opponent, and therefore also not take part in many of the newly coined cries which are contrary to the spirit of ahimsa.
  8. A civil resister will not salute the National flag, nor will he insult it or officials.
  9. In the course of the struggle if anyone insults an official or commits an assault upon him, a civil resister will protect such official or officials from the insult or attack even at the risk of his life.

Nonviolent resistance (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Nonviolent resistance (or nonviolent action) comprises the practice of applying power to achieve socio-political goals through symbolic protests, economic or political noncooperation, civil disobedience and other methods, without the use of violence. It has the guiding principle of nonviolence.

Like other strategies for social change, nonviolent action can appear in various forms and degrees. It may include, for example, such varied forms as information wars, protest art, lobbying, tax refusal, boycotts or sanctions, legal/diplomatic wrestling, material sabotage, underground railroads, principled refusal of awards/honours, picketing, vigiling, leafletting, and/or general strikes.

The “peaceful revolution” by organizing enough strikers to completely paralyze the state. With the state and corporate apparatus thus crippled, the workers would be able to re-organize society along radically different lines. This philosophy is favored by the legendary labor union

Some scholars of nonviolence, arguing that many movements have pragmatically adopted the methods of nonviolent action as an effective way to achieve social or political goals, distinguish the methods of nonviolent action from the moral stance of nonviolence or non-harm towards others.

Types of nonviolent resistance

Gene Sharp has identified 198 methods of nonviolent action which practitioners may use to defend against invasions, undermine dictatorships, block coups d’état or challenge unjust social systems.

They include:

  1. symbolic protests
  2. tax resistance
  3. hunger strikes
  4. paralysis of transportation
  5. social boycotts
  6. specific and general strikes
  7. civil disobedience
  8. economic shutdowns
  9. political non-cooperation
  10. “disappearance” under false identity
  11. economic boycotts
  12. public demonstrations
  13. slow-downs
  14. publication of banned newspapers
  15. deliberate inefficiencies
  16. assistance to persecuted people
  17. broadcasts about resistance on radio and television
  18. judicial resistance
  19. defiance by the government (e.g. George Wallace‘s “Stand in the Schoolhouse Door”)
  20. denial of legitimacy to usurpers
  21. non-cooperation of civil servants
  22. legislative delays
  23. declarations of defiance
  24. persistent continuation of old policies and laws
  25. student defiance
  26. children’s demonstrations
  27. individual and mass resignations
  28. refusal of collaboration
  29. maintenance of autonomy of independent organizations and institutions

Nonviolent resistance in colonial India

The story of nonviolent resistance in colonial India is synonymous with the story of the Non-Cooperation Movement and Mahatma Gandhi. Besides bringing about Independence, Gandhi’s nonviolence also helped to improve the status of Untouchables in Indian religion and society. In the conflicts that ensued from Independence and Partition, Gandhi is credited with keeping Calcutta and the whole eastern border of India peaceful.

Nonviolence (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Nonviolence (or non-violence) is a set of assumptions about morality conflict that leads its proponents to reject the use of violence in efforts to attain social or political goals. While often used as a synonym for pacifism, since the mid 20th century the term nonviolence has come to embody a diversity of techniques for waging social conflict without the use of violence, as well as the underlying political and philosophical rationale for the use of these techniques.

As a technique for social struggle, nonviolence is most often associated with the campaign for Indian independence led by Mahatma Gandhi, and the struggle to attain civil rights for African Americans, led by Martin Luther King. The former was deeply influenced by Leo Tolstoy’s Christian anarchism ideas of nonresistance based on the Sermon on the Mount.

On November 10th, 1998, the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed the first decade of the 21st century and the third millennium, the years 2001 to 2010, as the International Decade for the Promotion of a Culture of Peace and Non-Violence for the Children of the World.

Why nonviolence?

Most advocates of nonviolence draw their preference for nonviolence either from religious or ethical beliefs, or from a pragmatic political analysis. The first justification for nonviolence is sometimes referred to as principled or ethical nonviolence, while the second is known as pragmatic or strategic. However, it is not uncommon to find both of these dimensions present within the thinking of particular movements or individuals.

In the west, nonviolence has been used extensively by the labour, peace, environment and women’s movements. Less well known is the role that nonviolence has played and continues to play in undermining the power of repressive political regimes in the developing world and the former eastern bloc:

In 1989, thirteen nations comprising 1,695,000,000 people experienced nonviolent revolutions that succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest expectations … If we add all the countries touched by major nonviolent actions in our century (the Philippines, South Africa … the independence movement in India …) the figure reaches 3,337,400,000, a staggering 65% of humanity! All this in the teeth of the assertion, endlessly repeated that nonviolence doesn’t work in the ‘real’ world.

(Walter Wink, as quoted by Susan Ives in a 2001 talk)

How does nonviolence work?

The nonviolent approach to social struggle represents a radical departure from conventional thinking about conflict, and yet appeals to a number of common-sense notions.

Among these is the idea that the power of rulers depends on the consent of the populace. Without a bureaucracy, an army or a police force to carry out his or her wishes, the ruler is powerless. Power, nonviolence teaches us, depends on the co-operation of others. Nonviolence undermines the power of rulers through the deliberate withdrawal of this co-operation.

Also of primary significance is the notion that just means are the most likely to lead to just ends. When Gandhi said that, “the means may be likened to the seed, the end to a tree,” he expressed the philosophical kernel of what some refer to as pre-figurative politics. Proponents of nonviolence reason that the actions we take in the present inevitably re-shape the social order in like form. They would argue, for instance, that it is fundamentally irrational to use violence to achieve a peaceful society.

  1. Some proponents of nonviolence, advocate respect or love for opponents. It is this principle which is most closely associated with spiritual or religious justifications of nonviolence,
  2. as may be seen in the Sermon on the Mount when Jesus urges his followers to “love thine enemy,” in the Taoist concept of wu-wei, or effortless action,
  3. in the philosophy of the martial art Aikido,
  4. in the Buddhist principle of metta, or loving-kindness towards all beings,
  5. and in the principle of ahimsa, or non-violence toward any being, shared by Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism.
  6. Respect or love for opponents also has a pragmatic justification, in that the technique of separating the deeds from the doers allows for the possibility of the doers changing their behaviour, and perhaps their beliefs.
  7. As Martin Luther King said, “Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but also internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him.”
  8. The Christian focus on both non-violence and forgiveness of sin may have found their way into the story of Abel in the Qur’an. Liberal movements within Islam have consequently used this story to promote Islamic ideals of non-violence.
  9. Finally, the notion of Satya, or truth, is central to the Gandhian conception of nonviolence. Gandhi saw truth as something that is multifaceted and unable to be grasped in its entirety by any one individual. We all carry pieces of the truth, he believed, but we need the pieces of others’ truths in order to pursue the greater truth.

This led him to a belief in the inherent worth of dialogue with opponents, and a sincere wish to understand their drives and motivations. On a practical level, willingness to listen to another’s point of view is largely dependent on reciprocity. In order to be heard by one’s opponents, one must also be prepared to listen. (Note: SPDC Generals should read this.)

The methods of nonviolent action

  1. Hunger strikes,
  2. pickets,
  3. vigils,
  4. petitions,
  5. sit-ins,
  6. tax refusal,
  7. go slows,
  8. blockades,
  9. draft refusal and
  10. demonstrations are some of the specific techniques that have been deployed by nonviolent movements. Throughout history, these are among the nonviolent methods used by ordinary people to counter injustice or oppression or bring about progressive change.

To be effective, tactics must be carefully chosen, taking into account political and cultural circumstances, and form part of a larger plan or strategy.

Walter Wink points to Jesus Christ as an early nonviolence strategist. Many of his teachings on nonviolence are revealed to be quite sophisticated when the cultural circumstances are understood. For example, among the people he was speaking to; if by collecting debts a person drove someone indebted to him to be naked, great shame fell on the debt collector — not the naked man.

So Jesus’ suggestion – that if someone asks you for your coat you give him your clothes as well – was a way to bring shame upon the debt-collector and symbolically reverse the power relation.

This kind of creativity is typical of nonviolent movements. AristophanesLysistrata gives the fictional example of women withholding sexual favours from their husbands until war was abandoned. SPDC Generals and soldiers could help us with this tactic but I don’t think we could recruit them successfully.

A useful source of inspiration, for those seeking the best nonviolent tactics to deploy, is Gene Sharp’s list of 198 methods of nonviolent action, which includes symbolic, political, economic and physical actions.

Activist/researcher George Lakey says there are three applications of nonviolent action, for:

  1. social defense (as in protection of a neighborhood or country from outside invaders);
  2. social change (its most known form, for advocating either reform or revolutionary   changes); and
  3. third-party nonviolent intervention.

This latter has been used as a method of intervention across borders to deter attack and promote peaceful resolution of conflicts. This has met with several failures (at least on the level of deterring attack) such as the Human Shields in Iraq, but also many successes, such as the work of Project Accompaniment in Guatemala. Currently there are several non-governmental organizations working in this area, including, for example: Peace Brigades International, and the Nonviolent Peace force. The primary tactics that they employ are unarmed accompaniment and human rights observation/reporting.

Many leftist and socialist movements have hoped to mount a “peaceful revolution” by organizing enough strikers to completely paralyze it. With the state and corporate apparatus thus crippled, the workers would be able to re-organize society along radically different lines.

Living nonviolence

For many practitioners, practicing nonviolence goes deeper than withholding from violent behavior or words.

It means caring in one’s heart for everyone, even those one strongly disagrees with.

One implication of this is the necessity of caring for those who are not practicing nonviolence.

Criticism

Leon Trotsky, Frantz Fanon, Subhash Chandra Bose, Chairman Mao and Malcolm X were fervent critics of nonviolence, arguing variously that violence is a necessary accompaniment to revolutionary change, or that the right to self-defense is fundamental.

In the midst of violent repression of radical African Americans in the United States during the 1960s, Black Panther member George Jackson said of the nonviolent tactics of Martin Luther King, Jr.:

“The concept of nonviolence is a false ideal. It presupposes the existence of compassion and a sense of justice on the part of one’s adversary. When this adversary has everything to lose and nothing to gain by exercising justice and compassion, his reaction can only be negative.”

Malcolm X also clashed with civil rights leaders over the issue of nonviolence, arguing that violence should not be ruled out where no other option remained:

“Concerning nonviolence, it is criminal to teach a man not to defend himself when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks.”

The efficacy of nonviolence was also challenged by anti-capitalist protestors advocating a “diversity of tactics” during street demonstrations across Europe and the US following the anti-World Trade Organization protests in Seattle, Washington in 1999.

American feminist writer D. A. Clarke, in her essay “A Woman With A Sword,” suggests that for nonviolence to be effective, it must be “practiced by those who could easily resort to force if they chose.” This argument reasons that nonviolent tactics will be of little or no use to groups that are traditionally considered incapable of violence, since nonviolence will be in keeping with people’s expectations for them and thus go unnoticed.

One of the possible reasons that such criticisms are leveled against nonviolence is that it tends to be a slow, gradual means of achieving political change, and thus the connection between action and effect is less apparent than for violence.

In addition, the most notable successes of nonviolent protests, such as the United States Civil Rights Movement, have been against comparatively liberal governments. Another possible reason is that there are many different nonviolent strategies, and selecting strategies which work in a particular situation can be difficult; hence nonviolence does not always succeed – even though the same is true for violent means of social change.

The specific criticism that nonviolence is a form of passivity can be countered by noting that successful nonviolent campaigns have often centred around actively depriving a ruling regime of financial income (as in Gandhi‘s breaking of the salt tax), or the cooperation necessary to run industrial infrastructure. In this context nonviolence can be viewed as a form of attack on the command structure of a government or regime, rather than upon its personnel.

A much-debated topic is the issue of violence against objects, as opposed to against people. Some consider that damage to property falls within the scope of nonviolent action, while others reject such actions.

Political revolutions are often characterized by violence, and vast changes in power structures that can often result in further, institutionalized, violence, as in the Russian and French revolutions (with the “Purges” and “the Terror”, respectively). A political revolution is the forcible replacement of one set of rulers with another (as happened in France and Russia), while a social revolution is the fundamental change in the social structure of a society, such as the Protestant Reformation or the Renaissance. However, blurring the line between these two categories, most political revolutions wish to carry out social revolutions, and they have basic philosophical or social underpinnings which drive them. The most common revolutions with such underpinnings in the modern world have been liberal revolutions and communist revolutions, with the occasional nationalist revolution. In contrast, a coup d’état often seeks to change nothing more than the current ruler.

Some political philosophers regard revolutions as the means of achieving their goals. Most anarchists advocate social revolution as the means of breaking down the structures of government and replacing them with non-hierarchal institutions.

Among Marxist communists, there is a split between those who supported the Soviet Union and other so-called ‘communist states‘ and those who were/are critical of those states (some even rejecting them as non-communist, see state capitalism), for example trotskyists.

Social and political revolutions are often “institutionalized” when the ideas, slogans, and personalities of the revolution continue to play a prominent role in a country’s political culture, long after the revolution’s end. As mentioned, communist nations regularly institutionalize their revolutions to legitimize the actions of their governments. Some non-communist nations, like the United States, France or Mexico also have institutionalized revolutions, and continue to celebrate the memory of their revolutionary past through holidays, artwork, songs, and other venues.

Nonviolent action can appear in various forms:

  1. It may include the information wars (like various opposition radio, TV and Internet sites),
  2. lobbying (like present successful lobbyings against TOTAL etc),
  3. boycotts or sanctions,
  4. legal/diplomatic wrestling (like Burma Digest and Shan leaders legal action at International Criminal Court), etc

So it is clear that we urgently need a think tank to brain storm to get answers for all the above questions and all other possible problems.

We could not wait or postpone or procrastinate till it is too late. There is a Burmese saying, ‘Sit Yoke hma_Hmya Chun. Moe loon hma htun cha’. We need a definite plan, road map and well defined goal before we start a revolution.

SHWE BA

 

Comments

M M L said _

A brief principle with some explanations in Myanmar should be issued. Then a forum should be posted just to see how people respond.

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.

 

Eroding the racial divide

Eroding the racial divide

Insight Down South, Star on line
By SEAH CHIANG NEE

Deepening globalisation has generated an ‘us vs them mentality’, compelling the various races to come together and work things out.

FASTER than anything else, globalisation has eroded much of the historical racial divide in Singapore, especially between Chinese and Malays, without eliminating it.

Given its longstanding nature, this scourge is unlikely to disappear any time soon, but the next best thing is happening.

Deepening globalisation has brought in new challenges (as well as benefits) that are compelling the various races to come together to work things out, instead of bickering over petty racial issues.

One perceived threat from the people’s point of view is immigration.

While the large-scale arrival of foreigners – mainly from China and India – has contributed significantly to the overall economy, locals perceive it as a threat that cuts across racial lines.

The strongest resentment against the presence of Chinese mainlanders, for example, has not come from the Malays or Indians, but from local Chinese.

Similarly local-born Indians have hit out against the new arrivals from their former motherland.

Race issues have been replaced by a common feeling that the local population is slowly becoming a minority in its own country as an overwhelming number of foreigners arrives.

To a large extent, this has helped to bond them.

“Its an emotional thing. The foreigners have brought the different races closer together,” a social worker said.

“It’s sort of an us versus them mentality.”

When Singapore’s most dangerous terrorist Mas Selamat Kastari escaped from a high-security detention centre, a shocked nation sprung into action to set up an island-wide search.

Joining hordes of security forces were volunteers who spread across residential estates to distribute pamphlets with the picture of the wanted Jemaah Islamiah leader.

Many were Malays, as was the large number of security forces hunting for Mas Selamat.

“This man is a threat to us all because he wants to bomb us irrespective of whether we’re Chinese, Indian or Malay,” explained a middle-aged Malay housewife on television.

This is the latest evidence that race relations in Singapore, particularly between Chinese and Malays, have significantly changed from the violent 60s.

More Malays – like other Singaporeans – are marrying outside their race. Last year three in 10 Muslims did so, compared with only 20% in 1997.

And in a recent survey, 94% of ethnic Chinese undergrads said they would not mind an Indian for a Prime Minister, while 91% would accept a Malay Prime Minister.

This is Singapore’s new generation, born after independence in 1965.

They have no living memory of the deadly race riots of the 60s.

Racial bonding has also another ally – education.

Last week I saw seven teenage students, obviously classmates, two Malays, an Indian and three Chinese, noisily lunching at a fast-food outlet. They were laughing and joking, oblivious of their different backgrounds.

This is actually a normal scene in Singapore schools these days (which still celebrate Racial Harmony Day every year), so common that it arouses little interest.

To an old journalist like me, however, who has lived through the worst of times of Chinese-Malay riots, the whole thing is a minor miracle.

Singapore kids have lived, studied, worked and played together for over 40 years.

To ensure racial and educational immersion, the authorities long ago imposed a rule that forbids neighbourhood schools from catering exclusively to any one race, but makes sure of a proper mix.

The same, too, applies in public housing.

The units of each block of Housing Board flats are apportioned roughly 70% to the Chinese, 16% to Malays and 8% to Indians.

Despite the progress, racial issues still surface even among the best educated.

Three young bloggers were prosecuted for posting racial remarks against Malays.

Two of them were jailed for making seditious remarks and the third sentenced to do work within the Malay community.

This would help him “correct his misguided dislike for Malays”, the judge said.

A shocking eye-opener came last year from – of all people – a Public Service Commission (PSC) scholar studying in the United States, Chuan Chen San, who remarked in his blog: “The Singapore Association (in the campus) has become an Indian association, so gross. And some more (they’re) non-Singaporeans. It’s just so repulsive, these ugly guys with dark skin and irksome features.”

“I still find Indians and Filipinos (dark ones) so repulsive and such a turn-off. Anyway, so now we have this ugly mass as our president (etc).”

The only merit of the case was the universal condemnation by Singaporeans of Chuan, who was criticised in strong terms by almost every one.

More serious are complaints often voiced by Malays and Indians of job discrimination.

These minority job seekers are angry over employers who asked them during interviews if they were proficient in Chinese or whether they could speak Mandarin, even in jobs that require no special language needs.

Landlords, too, frequently display bias against dark-skinned tenants; many of the room-to-let advertisements blatantly rule out Indians.

The government has warned against such racial discrimination and may take action to stop it.

One person is not too optimistic about the possible emergence of a Singaporean identity that is free of racial, language, religious and cultural identities of its people.

The cynic is Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, who understands racial problems here better than most.

He said: “The melting pot idea (of throwing in all the races and hoping one day to pull out one people) is idealistic, but not realistic.”

Troubling times

Troubling times

Modified and edited the original comment written By P RAMAKRISHNAN . He is Aliran president and this article first appeared in Aliran Monthly and reprinted in Malaysiakini.

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original article P RAMAKRISHNAN . I hope that the P RAMAKRISHNAN  and Aliran  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 silent majority must wake up and take a stand against chauvinistic Myanmar Military who are using race and religion to stir the cauldron. These are troubling times and we have every reason to be troubled. Race and religion seem to be running riot and upsetting the equilibrium of our lives and portending a dangerous future for Myanmar/Burma.

Race and religion can cause discomfort and disquiet. They can be a very potent force that can threaten and shatter our fragile unity, undo our common efforts to live in peace and harmony.

We have witnessed these many months how unscrupulous people have used the issues of race and religion for their selfish ends without any consideration for the welfare of the country.

It is indeed sad that more than half-a-century of nationhood has not produced a common citizenry. We are still compartmentalised into our ethnic identities in so many ways. Whether it is your birth certificate, National Registration card, application forms, registering for an examination, getting married – whatever you do in Myanmar – you are forced to identify yourself along ethnic and religious lines.

It is only when we apply for passports to leave the country that most of us can identify ourself as a Myanmars. But once we return Myanmar, we lose that identity.

We should not be subjected to this moral shame. It is demeaning and undignified that I should leave the country as a Myanmar and return home as an Indian mixed blooded (read migrant).

Why is it so difficult to forge a common nationhood?

Shouldn’t that be the natural consequence of independence?

Wasn’t that the dream of our forefathers that eventually we would evolve into a nation with a common destiny, remaining true to our  Country?

But that was not to be so. Selfish communal politicians and Military leaders made sure that it is in their interest to keep the various races and religions apart. They never stopped stirring the cauldron of hate; they made sure that intolerance and prejudice would be there at all times, smouldering and simmering.

Stirring the cauldron

It was only recently that we witnessed how extreme the situation has become. It was shocking that so much venom was spewed with such impunity in the General Ne Win’s BSPP party convention prior to the formulation of the new Immigration Law, which was termed as ‘the most racially charged Tatmadaw event in years, shocking many people who read the proceedings and the apple-polisher newspaper articles, comments and editorials calling the Burmese Muslims, “Kala dein” or spawns of Indians and “Mi Ma Sit_Pha Ma Sit”, in Burmese meaning BASTARDS.

No one intervened to stop them from expressing so much antagonism, anger and hatred. Nobody chided them for their unbridled tirade. But, on the other hand, there was much cheering and approval for what was said.

Clearly some of the things that were said were without doubt seditious. They had a tendency to inflame emotions and provoke passions.

Actually every human being is willing to risk lives and bathe in blood in defense of race and religion. Don’t play with fire Tatmadaw leaders. If you mess with our rights, we will mess with yours.

 ‘When tension rises, the blood of Jehadist warriors could run in our veins’. And Burmese Muslims’ thread of driving the cars full with petrol tanks and jerry cans into the Buddhists homes and set the whole city on fire as the revenge had made the Military leaders, agitators and provocateurs to stop their plan to create more anti-Muslim riots.

 ‘Don’t test the patience of the Burmese Muslims and don’t play with fire’.

Japanese Bushido Samurais believe that once ‘You have unsheathed the knife KATANA, you must use it’

It was so bad and shocking that the level of open debate on issues relating to race and religion was worryingly threatening Myanmar Muslims. But it appeared that we were helpless to put a stop to this very damaging rhetoric that had a field day in Myanmar up to the present!

Insensitive, irresponsible

The remarks are intolerably rude, crude and insulting.

The hate-filled sentiments at the assembly, was regrettable and the whole Burma/Myanmar is shrouded in an atmosphere of fiery and emotional sentiments, remarks that were more poisonous and unreasonable.

They could raise issues of race, religion and citizenship. That is every government or leader’s rights. But the Myanmar Military leaders should not attack or hurt the feelings of other communities while highlighting the problems of one particular community…You think it’s very clever, but it hurts people’s feelings…Don’t do anything that will provoke.

The unkind debates over the mixed blooded Kala Deins are the cause for concern for all of us.

But it should not be viewed as if only the Myanmar-Muslims were upset and angry with what transpired Myanmar. A vast majority of well-meaning Burmese, both Buddhists, true monks and non-Muslims, were aghast that the Myanmar Military Junta and Military Intelligence or MI could have descended to such an atrocious level. They were disappointed that a dominant ruling Military Junta leaders could be so insensitive and irresponsible in dehumanising and demonising the fellow Muslim citizens.

Religious ultras, opportunistic politicians

While the racial approach is being played contemptuously, the religious approach is gaining a frightening momentum. It is fanned by the ultra-conservatives and opportunistic Military Generals who are hell-bent on changing the way of life that we have been accustomed to. They have gone into top gear to bring about changes that will ultimately affect all those who disagree with them by denying the very rights that are guaranteed under the old constitution and the late General Aung San.

Knowing that it is Tatmadaw that dictates policies and sets the directions of the country, citizens have cause to worry. Military Junta’s decisions become national policies with no regard for the majority opinion at the national level.

It is difficult to comprehend the reasoning for this uncompromising stand. They proclaim that Islam is in the assault mode on Buddhism but produce no evidence.

We wonder how is it possible to have mature democracies in the uncivilised military dominated Myanmar.

How is it there can be so much tolerance and mutual respect elsewhere that seems to be lacking here?

No problem before

There were no racial problem nor tensions before 1930 when the Bamas used the Nationalistic Spirit against the Indians and Muslims as a smoke-shield to start a revolution against Colonial rulers, British. Actually most of the Burmese Citizens had accepted the, One God, Many Paths, reflecting the viewpoints of Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Science.

Since then, things have taken a dramatic turn for the worse. It has become so intolerable that what used to be a natural thing as wishing and greeting one another during festive occasions and even visiting houses were abandoned in some towns.

Time to wake up

If we take a careful look at the way things are evolving, it reveals a minority vocal group in influential positions in the Myanmar Tatmadaw and MI who are dictating terms and deciding policies against Muslims of Myanmar. And as long as the majority who disagree with them stay sullen and silent, things will not get better – it will only become worse.

That is why it is necessary for the majority of Burmese to realise that unless we get together and take a common stand against the forces that pose a clear danger to our ethnic relations and harmony, we stand to lose all that we cherish.

Well-meaning people must get involved in this effort all over the country and send forth a clear message that if the present Military Junta leaders do not change, then we must change them for the good of the nation. We must not hesitate but act seriously and bravely.

Let us draw strength and hope from this saying:

‘It is from the numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped.

Each time a man stands up for an ideal or acts to improve the lot of others or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centres of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.

REFORM IS NOT REVOLUTION

Reform Is Not Revolution

Modified and edited the original comment written By TAY TIAN YAN/ Sin Chew Daily and blogged by By labisman    .

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original article in the Sin Chew Daily  newspaper by TAY TIAN YAN. I hope that the Sin Chew Daily  newspaper and Ms.  TAY TIAN YAN 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

Change is not revolution. The new civilian governments of future Myanmar must understand the difference.

Revolution is to overturn the existing regime, to break its original system, as well as to negate its original policy. In short, everything has to be restart.

In the 1799 French Revolution, the people overthrew the monarchy of Louis XVI to establish the Republic. The new regime negated the old order. One of the leaders, Robespierre said: “Louis must die for the sake of the Republic”. As a result, Louis was executed.

However, the Republic had also entered into a major catastrophe. The latest event was in the 1980s. The General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Gorbachev, wanted to reform the Soviet Union.

His “Glasnot” (open up) and “Perestoika” (reform) are like two scalpels and cut on the patient- Soviet Union. The Soviet Union finally died within the next few years.

The history tells the world that changing the politics is different from changing the hairstyle. It cannot be changed immediately. Any changes must be gradual and step by step. It is especially for the deep-rooted old thinking, where patience and persuasion are needed for slow inspiration.

New thinking also need to be nurtured and instilled for a long period before they can become the mainstream values.

The thinking of racism and privileges will not disappear overnight. Of course, these thinkings may not dominate the country as what they were in the past. Nevertheless, they will still exist in some people’s mind and mixed into the ideology of some political parties.

The new governments must be patient. They must also avoid making drastic changes. The government can review the deviations of the Old Economic Policy silently. However, it does not need any publicity. Otherwise, the rebound will be very intense. The people with bad intention might strike back and it may create social differences.

After all, reform is not revolution. (By TAY TIAN YAN/ Sin Chew Daily)

Added as Comment ( Somewhere from Raja Petra’s web) 

Maybe we should do what Bakri Musa has suggested, hit the donkey on the head with a piece of wood. Than Shwe may realize his unwelcome then. 

The Sr General Than Shwe has not appeared in public. It is likely (or rather it should be) that Burmese will boo him wherever and whenever he is seen in public. This is a prospect the Sr General Than Shwe will have to face for every extra day he remains in power. May I suggest that all right thinking Burmese start a booing campaign from today. Whenever the Sr General Than Shwe appears in public people must boo. Other things that we can do are to turn our backs when they are present or just ignore them. Let’s make them feel the unwelcome they are denying again.

Its time for you to leave now, Sr General Than Shwe.

Either go in peace or you will be kicked out bouncing on your head.

The people will soon start booing you everywhere you go.

Worse your wife will also get booed.

Soon you must lock yourself up inside your house and office and cannot venture out at all.Leave now.

Get out.

Be gone.

 

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.

 

Veteran Journalist Calls for People Power to Oust Regime

Veteran Journalist Calls for

People Power to Oust Regime

By VIOLET CHO in Irrawaddy

QUOTE OF THE DAY
There are no countries in the world which have gained liberation though the help of the United Nations.
– Ludu Sein Win, Burmese Prominent Journalist

Less than a week after an unsuccessful visit to Burma by UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari, one of the country’s most respected journalists has made an extraordinary appeal for a “people power” uprising to end the ruling regime’s stranglehold on power.

In a recorded message addressed to Burmese both inside and outside the country, Ludu Sein Win, a prominent journalist and former political prisoner, said that he believed that force was the only way to end more than four decades of military rule.

“In the entire history of the world, there has never been a dictator who willingly gave up power once he had it firmly in his hands,” he said in his message, recorded in the former capital, Rangoon.

“And there are no countries in the world which have gained liberation though the help of the United Nations,” he added, in apparent reference to the failed efforts of the UN special envoy, who left the country on Monday after being chastised by the ruling generals for “bias” in favor of the democratic opposition.

Describing the deepening political, social and economic crisis facing the country, the sixty-eight-year-old veteran journalist warned the Burmese people that it was futile to pin their hopes for a better future on the diplomatic efforts of the international community.

“Don’t waste your time dreaming about dialogue and considering help from the UN Security Council,” he said. “We already have the power to force out the military dictatorship. That power is the force and strength of every Burmese citizen.”

In the wake of last September’s monk-led protests, which attracted worldwide attention, the time is right to launch a renewed effort to overthrow military rule, the veteran journalist insisted. 

Ludu Sein Win has experienced more than his fair share of trouble at the hands of the country’s ruling dictators.

He began his distinguished career as a young reporter for the Mandalay-based left-wing newspaper, Ludu (“The People”), launched in 1946. As the publication’s Rangoon bureau chief, he was arrested at the age of 27 and sentenced without trial to 13 years in prison, during which he was tortured by the authorities. He then spent an additional two years confined on Coco Island, a penal colony located about 430 km southwest of Rangoon in the Indian Ocean.

He is one of Burma’s most outspoken advocates of independent media, and is the author of many books on the basic theory and ethics of journalism. He is also popular as a prolific writer of books on issues relating to young people.