International community should work with Burma's border resistance groups

Re: "PM sends second letter to junta", Regional, October 20.

It is heartening to see that Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont is urging the Burmese military junta to speed up United Nations special envoy Ibrahim Gambari's visit to help facilitate the process towards democratisation and national reconciliation.

But Thailand, together with concerned international stakeholders, should consider an alternative plan if Gambari fails again like all the others who have tried on behalf of the United Nations.

 Thailand, being a front-line state, could be instrumental for such a fallback plan. Let us think aloud, even if we risk venturing into uncharted waters.

 The plan should be a two-pronged approach of "pressure and engagement", which seems to be the only viable approach to deal with such an entrenched military dictatorship.

In concrete terms, it would mean the UN endorsement of a rescue plan for the oppressed people of Burma to bring democratic change, provide security, reduce poverty, rebuild civil society and facilitate capacity-building. At the same time, appropriate pressures and sanctions coupled with benchmarks should be applied to the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC).

The International Crisis Group's report has pointed out that in addition to border areas in general, areas under the control of ceasefire armies' should be given preference for humanitarian aid, which needs, more or less, endorsement from the Burmese military regime. The best place to start would be along the Thai-Burma border, where the bulk of the population of one million internally-displaced persons population - over 600,000 people - are located and which is considered to be the militarised or contested zones between the SPDC regime and ethnic resistance forces.

This would need large-scale cooperation and coordination from the Thai government and could only be worked out once Thailand sees this undertaking as beneficial to all concerned in the long run. Consequently, this type of direct intervention could only be carried out in collaboration with the resistance forces, which control the strip along Thai-Burma border, such as the Shane State Army (South), the Karenni National Progressive Party and Karen National Union, together with UN endorsement. This would also mean territorial integrity and non-intervention norms would have to take a back seat, in favour of humanitarian intervention.

If this happened, a row of other humanitarian devices and forms of aid could be carried out across the border without having to deal with the SPDC. In other words, the international community could bypass the SPDC regime to help the badly needed oppressed population along the border. After this it is, of course, not too far-fetched to create "safe havens, sanctuaries of peace, peace corridors, health as a bridge for peace" initiatives and many others.

The point here is to assert the international community's authority in the contested zones, which the SPDC considers "grey areas" or hostile territories against its rule, and give back human security and dignity to the people of the border areas, whose human rights have been violated over and over again by the military regime.

If this were to happen, the SPDC's hold on power could be eroded faster than we ever expected. Just imagine what the UN Security Council endorsed sanctions coupled with such cross-border humanitarian relief operations could do to the entrenched military dictatorship.

In different forms, "humanitarian ceasefires" have been carried out in the midst of wars in several countries. Perhaps Burma could be added into this category, provided that the international community is genuinely committed to help the people of Burma out of this situation.

Khurtaikornkhaw

Bangkok

Plans preferable to platitudes on Burma

Whether or not James Groveway uses the word genocide incorrectly in his letter "Boycotting Olympics may be the only option left", (Letters, October 15) it is Jon in his letter "Olympic boycott would be foolish," (Letters, October 20) who is being disingenuous.

While world leaders merely present platitudes, James Groveway at least presents some viable actions that could be used, while Jon in dismissing these simply presents himself as an apologist for this barbaric inhuman regime.

Dr John Patterson

Bangkok

Sanctions only hurt the common man

Re: "The main issue in Burma is democracy, not economics", Letters, October 20.

My goodness! What big words and lofty ideals brother SMW of Hamburg uses, but he can huff and he can puff and it is not likely to do any good.

As he observed, Burma is a multi-ethnic state. Historically, the three main ethnic tribes were always at war with each other. It did not help that Western powers decided to try to colonise it, failed to unify it and then just left the country to its own devices. Sound familiar?

 I wonder how democracy or those big words and ideals can help feed the Burmese (please, not "Burman" - that is too, too colonial a word) when on the other hand Western countries are calling for sanctions, which only hurt the ordinary citizens, not the ruling junta.  Look at Serbia, which is still staggering under Western sanctions and all because Western powers didn't agree with Milosevic. Stop the hypocrisy, I say.

Burma's neighbour

Bangkok

US assistance could prove decisive in ousting SPDC

In a nationally televised speech on Burma, US President George W Bush announced a second round of economic sanctions against the military junta in Burma. This is the first time any American president has made a nationally televised speech solely focussed on Burma.

The most important statement was not in reference to economic sanctions, which will irritate the generals but not do much more. President Bush's most important statement was when he stated that "further action will be taken, if needed".

President Ronald Reagan provided weapons to the freedom fighters in Cambodia, Afghanistan and Nicaragua. If President Bush promises to give weapons to the freedom fighters in Rangoon, the State Peace and Development Council generals will want to negotiate in a "New York second". You have to speak the language the generals understand and respect.

Myint Thein

Senior Adviser to the Burmese Resistance

Dallas, Texas

Sex offenders taint country's reputation

Re: "Suspect arrested in Korat", News, October 20.

It is chilling to learn that alleged paedophiles like Christopher Paul Neil are allowed to romp around Thailand abusing young boys for years before they are caught. Thailand's reputation as a safe haven for paedophiles and other sex deviants can only be enhanced when people such as Neil are allowed to fly under the police radar and get away with deviant acts.

It is about time he was caught and it is about time for Thailand to put in place and enforce tougher laws against sex offenders. In fact, Thailand should punish sex offenders the same way they punish drug dealers. A few years in a Thai jail should teach them not to do it again and serve as an effective deterrent.

On the surface, Thailand appears to be a peaceful, serene country and an easy place to live. However, evils, such as sex offenders, are tainting this reputation.

Outraged Taxpayer

Bangkok