Burma's Suu Kyi 'to be charged'

No one's saying that the various campaigns are the cause of the situation, but with 20-30 years of hindsight available now with NO CHANGE in the situation, one has consider the potentially nefarious secondary effects that such policies as pulling jobs out of the country have had. It was of course well-intended, but what have been their true effects? Ask the citizenry how they feel about that.

The whole point is there is no reasonable suggestion as to what to do, at least from a confrontational perspective: as we've so painfully witnessed time and again, the regime is immune, with China ready to use its UN veto power for them on any relevant occasion (unless Myanmar should god-forbid cut off trade with them). It's all "internal affairs".

The west's economic sanctions are now meaningless, with China, India, and Thailand continuing to fund the country by buying up all their abundant natural resources. The trucks continue to roll while we sign petitions here.

Is the unmitigated rape of those resources at least partially a secondary effect of the west's sanctions and their 'enemy status' in the regime's eyes? It's time to think hard about that.

The people can't rise up; they just get mowed down with bullets. The UN can't touch the internal affairs of the regime as long as China remains their big brother. And pressure from western politicians and democracy groups ONLY CAUSES THEM TO RETREAT AND ISOLATE THEMSELVES FURTHER. That's what history is showing us time and again. Other than a military invasion (and we all know how well those go over), what solution is there?

Other than engagement... that does seem an option that's not been fully explored yet. It may even end up benefiting the people of the country. Whether it's already too late to engage, well, .... Obama's just extended the U.S. sanctions.

Edited by: zeke7

It is one more example of the UN's inability to do anything, anywhere, in any timely manner, with any effectiveness. The UN was created after the tragedy of the Nazi's death camp, so much for it preventing genocide the world over, just the last decade its hands are bloody in a dozen conflicts.

If world leaders like the US, take military action, its aggression and unpopular in the rest of the world.

China and Thailand are passive, India a byproduct of western colonialism, and the Junta has only one fear, the tribal minorities. Should we should start arming them now, just like in Afghanistan, two things will happen, a bloody civil war, or insurgency of bad asses that will make the Junta look tame and like nice folks.

Worst case scenario, if things get worse in Burma, Thailand will need US support, if fighting spills over the border, along with refugees, and as a ally and previous American War partner, is natural for the US to counter any Chinese support (Arms) of the Junta.

We are all of course batting on the same team, but what we disagree with is the way in which we can bring about change to Myanmar. We all have the same goals, but how we achieve it is what divides us.

Bear in mind that we are not dealing with a democratically elected government and furthermore, a government which has proven that it does not care about the welfare of its own citizens. This must be understood by those who wish to help make a difference to the people of Myanmar. Thus, some of the techniques that's normally used in any civil democracy to bring about change, eg, petitions, trade sanctions, boycotts etc, that would normally cause community outrage in a civilised democracy will have absolutely no effect on the military junta in Myanmar. You only need to look as far back as the 2007 Monk uprising to realise this. When even the highly respected monks of Myanmar society were brutally dealt with when they tried to bring about change, what hope does a petition from the Burma Campaign have?

As for a solution to the problem, if we all had the answer to that, then none of us would be sitting here typing on Thorntree. I'd hate to suggest that military intervention is the only answer as it won't be pretty (especially for those who have friends and family in Myanmar), but think about how dictatorships in the recent past have been over thrown and it will give a hint as to what is needed to solve the problem. The Junta knows that this is a possibility .. that's why they moved the nation's capital to Naypyidaw. They know it's coming.

viagra--thank you for explaining kananga's and other's position more explicitly and clearly though again I don't necessarily agree that petitioning is futile. I actually agree with much of what you've posted, especially with regards to the analysis of the brutal Myanmar junta, that I also assume that most of us here on the TT support regime change, preferably non-violently if possible, and that military intervention may be necessary.
But what I don't understand is the hostility and even contempt directed at petition signers. It may be ineffective and may not produce results but a petition pressuring for the release of ASSK immediately is not necessarily futile nor are petitions for reform or even regime change. Absent any international outcry and pressure, the regime may deem that the world is unconcerned over ASSK's welfare and have carte blanche to behave however it wishes. But knowing that there is an international demand for her release, they know the world is watching and that there are consequences for their actions.
The logic that 'petitions are futile' is to me, dis-empowering. Just because it doesn't produce the result one wishes, doesn't necessarily mean it's unproductive. Given the logic that such action is futile because it doesn't produce results desired, then why protest? Why demonstrate? Why take action of any sort? It develops an apathetic and a defeatist attitude. This is the type of non-action that keeps dictators and tyrants in power. They want a docile citizenry. The Burmese cannot voice their dissent without dire consequences but we as outsiders can. And we can make it known to the junta that the world IS watching what is happening with Suu Kyi and are demanding change even though it's unlikely that they'll bow to pressure. It also serves the purpose of letting the Burmese opposition in Myanmar as well as the Burmese people know that they haven't been forgotten. That alone is empowering to its citizenry, to know that the world does care about what's transpiring over there. Even though they can't read what's happening because of censorship, they do watch CNN and BBC, they do listen to VOA or Thai radio.
Also, taking 'action', even if it's just signing a petition means something. Not all of us have the time to attend demonstrations or donate money but even small actions have meaning. It may not to you, but it may to others. As you posted, we don't have the answers on how to force the junta to change, but we should act no matter how small such action may seem and even if it doesn't produce the results we want quickly. The struggle against despots never is but doesn't mean we shouldn't try in whatever manner we can. And in this case, it is to demand for the immediate release of ASSK.

~~~But what I don't understand is the hostility and even contempt directed at petition signers.~~~

Neither do I, and as far as I can see there hasn't been hostility or contempt on this thread. Just the voice of a different opinion. Isn't that what you are 'petitioning' for in Myanmar after all? The right to have a voice and a different opinion?

~~~The logic that 'petitions are futile' is to me, dis-empowering. Just because it doesn't produce the result one wishes, doesn't necessarily mean it's unproductive. Given the logic that such action is futile because it doesn't produce results desired, then why protest? Why demonstrate?~~~

No one has said don't demonstrate (although in my opinion that is just as pointless in this case) we are talking about the pointlessness of online petitions and the Free Burma UK organisation when it comes to having any effect on Myanmar's Junta or ASSK.

Security tight at Suu Kyi trial

YANGON, Myanmar (AP) - Riot police behind barbed wire barricades ringed a notorious prison where pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi was to go on trial Monday for allegedly harboring an American man who swam to her lakeside home.
The tight security came as activist groups, which spearheaded a bloody uprising against Myanmar's military rulers in 2007, called for protest rallies in front of the Insein prison until Suu Kyi is freed.
On the eve of the trial, her defense lawyer said Suu Kyi was innocent of the charges, which could put her into prison for up to five years.
"We call all political forces for Free Aung San Suu Kyi to mobilize all over Burma, by holding praying sessions in homes, places of worship ... and holding silent, peaceful rallies in front of Insein prison," said a statement from three activist groups. Burma is the old name for Myanmar and preferred by the military regime's opponents.
These included an organization of Buddhist monks, who were at the forefront of the 2007 protests, which were brutally crushed by the regime.
Security forces blocked all roads leading to the prison as several hundred riot police, many armed with guns, batons and shields, guarded the perimeter of Insein, where the regime has for years incarcarated political prisoners.
"After listening to the sequence of events, it is very clear that there is no breach of conditions of her restrictions," lawyer Kyi Win said after visiting the Noble Peace Prize laureate in the prison over the weekend.
Suu Kyi, 63, was charged Thursday with violating the terms of her detention by sheltering John William Yettaw, reportedly a Vietnam War veteran, who will also be tried along with two female assistants who have been with Suu Kyi since 2003.
Suu Kyi had been scheduled to be freed May 27 after six consecutive years of house arrest.
The charges are widely seen as a pretext for the ruling junta to keep Suu Kyi detained past elections it has scheduled for next year as the culmination of a "roadmap to democracy" which has been criticized as a fig leaf for continued military control.
In Monday's court session, Kyi Win said Suu Kyi's defense team will ask for an open trial and may also request bail. The prosecution is expected to call 22 witnesses during the trial.
Kyi Win said Suu Kyi was ready to tell her side of the story. "She has always been ready to tell the truth," he said.
On Sunday, a family member said Suu Kyi's personal physician, Tin Myo Win, was released by authorities a day earlier after being taken from his home on May 7, a day after Yettaw was arrested near Suu Kyi's lakeside residence, where she has been detained for more than 13 of the last 19 years.
The family member spoke on condition of anonymity, citing possible reprisals by authorities.
It is not known why Tin Myo Win was arrested. A spokesman for Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy earlier said the doctor's detention may have been related to the American swimmer, who has been labeled a "fool" by the pro-democracy movement.
Her latest arrest has sparked a storm of international appeals to Myanmar's government to free her and to restore democracy in the country, which has been under military rule since 1962.
In unusually sharp criticism from a Southeast Asian nation, Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo said Sunday that his government was "deeply troubled and outraged" over the "trumped-up charges" against Suu Kyi.
"We urge the government of Myanmar to resolve the matter speedily and to release Aung San Suu Kyi immediately and unconditionally," he said.
Normally, members of the 10-country Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which includes Myanmar, refrain from criticizing one another.
Exactly why Yettaw, of Falcon, Missouri, swam across the lake to see Suu Kyi remains unclear. After leaving, he was fished out of the lake by authorities about 1.2 miles (two kilometers) from her residence and taken into custody.
His wife, Betty Yettaw, described her husband as eccentric but peace-loving and "not political at all."
According to his ex-wife Yvonne Yettaw, he said he went to Asia to work on a psychology paper about forgiveness.
She said he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and a head wound during his military service.
While Yettaw was in Thailand, "Myanmar caught his attention," she said. "There really is not politics behind this. He does not have a political agenda and meant her absolutely no harm."
His former wife said Yettaw belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly known as the Mormons, adding it was unlikely he was in Southeast Asia to proselytize for the church or convert the Nobel laureate.
But a police report on the case against Suu Kyi said that on an earlier visit to her house last November, he left a Book of Mormon, the religion's sacred text, in her compound "with intention for her to read (it)."
The report, made available by the Washington-based activist group U.S. Campaign for Burma, said on Yettaw's visit on May 3, Suu Kyi allowed him to stay at her residence until the night of May 5, speaking with him and providing him with food and drinks.

Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Kananga--so what action/s do you think are effective and worthwhile in order to get ASSK released or to get the junta to reform? You'd mention the Mark Thomas Project and via a cursory search did not find references to Burma? Could you provide a link? Is he a political satirist? I'm not familiar with english activist. Is he similar to John Stewart or Stephen Colbert in the US? What is it that he's done or said that has been effective?

search for mark thomas product .. rather than project

He's a comedian who did some political topics some years back. Put the British Home Secretary in an embarrasing position on live tv. Google 'Premier Oil Robin Cook.'

And any thoughts on what is effective action/s? I'll double check again both yours and mosegrisen's suggestions although I've gone into the Channel 4 website and did a search under keyword 'Burma' and came up with a lot of recent news but no reference yet to his confrontation with the PM? Oh well, will search under your suggestion of 'Premier Oil Robin Cook'.