The World is not Flat
|
By AUNG ZAW |
Monday, October 26, 2009
|
The Thai government prepared to fend off a “red shirt” army at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) summit in the Thai resort town of Cha-am, mounting security measures designed to prevent a repetition of the embarrassing scenes that disrupted a similar Asean meeting in Pattaya. This time, the red shirts behaved well—unlike Cambodia’s Prime Minister, Hun Sen, who called the fugitive former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra his “eternal friend” and compared him to Burma’s Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi. Hun Sen, a former Khmer Rouge commander known for his provocative remarks, said: “Many people talk about Aung San Suu Kyi in Burma, why not talk about Thaksin? That cannot be referred to as interfering.” Was Hun Sen joking? Not really. The ill-considered remark from the head of the Cambodian government illustrated the quality of leadership we have in Asean. Hun Sen’s remark was not only an insult to Thailand but also to Burma. The Cambodian prime minister should be made fully aware that Thaksin and Suu Kyi have nothing at all in common. There are thousands of reasons for ruling out any comparison—but let’s look at just a few… Suu Kyi is dedicated to the struggle for democracy and freedom in Burma. It won’t matter whether Suu Kyi becomes leader of Burma or not—today she is a symbol of change in Burma and remains a beacon of hope in spite of the attempts to belittle her by a repressive regime that has locked her up in her own home for years. Thaksin, a billionaire telecommunications tycoon, was ousted in a bloodless coup in 2006. He skipped bail after an indictment on corruption charges and has since been living at various locations—including Nicaragua, Montenegro and the United Arab Emirates. During his time at the head of the Thai government, the press in Thailand was muzzled and he launched a “war on drugs,” which killed more than 2,000 people who, if they had been legally dealt with and convicted, would have served prison terms. Thaksin claimed that he and his government knew the situation in Burma very well because the two countries are immediate neighbors. Here are some facts... Thaksin was a known friend of Burma’s military regime. His government courted the junta by offering loans, improving border trade and sending numerous delegations to Rangoon. During the Asean summit in Bali, Indonesia, in 2004, Thaksin surprised many of the delegates by giving Burma his unconditional support and praising then prime minister and feared spy chief Gen Khin Nyunt’s “sincerity.” Philippine president Gloria Arroyo later told journalists that Thaksin defended Burma throughout the entire summit. While other governments in the region—and worldwide—were voicing increasing criticism of the junta and championing speedy democratic change in Burma, Thaksin was seen to be defending the generals, investing in the country and promising piecemeal progress. Thailand was then Burma’s third most important investment partner, exporting goods worth around US $1.26 billion annually. Thaksin also had his own business interests in Burma. In 2003, Shin Corp, the telecoms company owned until recently by Thaksin’s family, signed a deal with Bagan Cybertech, the Internet service provider run by Ye Naing Win, son of disgraced Prime Minister Gen Khin Nyunt. In 2004, Thaksin visited the ancient former Burmese capital Pagan to sell his Economic Cooperation Strategy, and promised Burma aid and support worth $45 million. He also set his sights on what he called the “excellent prospects” of Burma’s tourism industry, proposing the construction of a ski resort in Burma’s northern Kachin State and the development of the unspoilt beaches of Arakan State. The “Bangkok Process,” hosted by Thaksin’s government to advance democracy in Burma, fizzled out when Burmese representatives failed to turn up for a planned second session—a clear demonstration that even the Burmese generals didn’t count on him. Back home, Thaksin’s administration cracked down on Burmese seeking economic and political refuge in Thailand, raising concerns about a conflict of interests and doubts about Bangkok’s ability to act as an honest broker in Burma’s political standoff. Sadly, Thaksin’s government, by its attitude towards Burmese migrants and refugees living in Thailand, played the nationalism card in order to boost the prime minister’s popularity. In early 2004, UN human rights envoy Hina Jilani visited Thailand and said: “Many of the Burmese human rights defenders feel very insecure with regard to their freedom of movement inside Thailand.” Not surprisingly, Jilani received a cool reception in Bangkok. Just before the 2006 coup, Thaksin stayed in his heavily-guarded home for a day because of a bomb threat, likening the experience to Suu Kyi’s enforced house detention. He said he sympathized with Suu Kyi.
1 | 2 
 COMMENTS (35)
|
Okkar,
I think you miss this one. "Please read our policy before you post comments. Click here!" Please make sure you read the policy thoroughly before you post your comments. Remember that the Irrawaddy is not your website. You cannot write and post whatever you have in your mind. The issue that you have with Irrawaddy is policy issue, not the democracy issue.
I am not pro-Islam, pro-Buddhism, pro-Hinduism or pro-Christianity. I am a 21st-century humanist. Like I said, set up a website. Who is stopping you from establishing your own website? It won't cost you too much. If you can't afford a website, set up a blog. Then you will have to read my comments. Make sure you do not delete or edit any of my comments. Let's talk about something that's meaningful to us. Forget about the website policy issues. |
|
 |
TeethLa Wrote: |
04/11/2009 |
|
| Just curious, is the same "Tadarlay" where Than Shwe used to live? |
|
 |
|
KKK,
Just because The Irrawaddy peddles your pro-islam views and supports border-crossing Bengalis, that does not make them a Thinktank for old and new generation Burmese. If The Irrwaddy could think, they would think about whether or not it is democratic to censor comments that do not conform to their policies.
Some people are proud of The Irrawaddy because it serves their purposes despite being undemocratic and repressive. If The Irrawaddy truly represent freedom of expression then they should stop censoring any comments which they find embarrassing or point out the facts that they didn't want the general public to see. This is a double edge sword, but if you are truly for democracy and freedom, you have nothing to fear... right?
(Note from Editors: Okkar's contributions are edited, like those of other readers, to make them intelligible--often a difficult task--or to remove unnecessarily abusive or insulting remarks (although never those directed at The Irrawaddy!) |
|
|
|
Okkar,
Well, you will see who are the real wolves in sheep clothing one day. I just don't understand the mentality of dissident pepole like you. You don't like The Irrawaddy and you hate so much The Irrawaddy. But you have been posting comments on Irrawaddy since day one. I am sure you will be keep posting comments on The Irrawaddy.
There is no website like The Irrawaddy. I would say The Irrawaddy is a think tank for the old and new generation Burmese.
You have the same mentality as your genenals (SPDC). The SPDC says so much bad things about the West. But your SPDC generals are so crazy about the West's luxury items. Even your generals' uniforms' materials are from the West. Shame on you and them.
I just don't understand why you can't support The Irrawaddy. We don't have to agree 100 percent with The Irrawaddy. At least we have to be proud of The Irrawaddy. We have got to support each other and encourage each other. That's how we need to grow up and pass this kind of attitude to the next generation Burmese. |
|
|
|
KKK,
During the Nuremburg trial, Field Marshal Kietel said "He was just doing his job."
I hope you have the same excuse for him as well.
As for my postings here, I am sure you and other demo campers would love to see the back of me as I often expose the underlying mentality of you democracy campers. You are all just a bunch of wolves in sheep clothing. |
|
|
|
To Free Man,
Some ASEAN leaders can't think straight, which means some can think straight.
As for Western leaders, they all can't think straight. Lucky for the rest of the world that China and Russia are increasingly rising. If not, the Western bully will be worse than the status quo.
|
|
|
Free Man Wrote: |
29/10/2009 |
|
Some ASEAN leaders can't think straight and are hopeless. Who on earth in their right mind would compare Thaksin with DASSK?
|
|
|
|
plan B:
I do know the Tadarlay is no longer there. We used to say "Go to Tadarlay" if somebody is so different from us. That was what I meant. I did not refer the actual place.
Okkar/Mr. Democratic,
The Irrawaddy has a right to edit any inappropriate comments whether you like it or not. If you don't want your comments edited, why don't you set up your own web site? If you have your own, you can post any comments, articles, and essays you like. No one can edit yours. I want to see your own web site and let's see how capable you are. Democratic principles do not say that you can say or write whatever you want to. The Irrawaddy editor is just doing his/her job. You really need to understand the true meaning of democratic. |
|
|
|
KKK,
I believe Tadarlay no longer serves as the institution you refer to. Neither is there the 8th mile. I refrain from using the Burmese translation of 8 for obvious reasons.
The 8th mile now is army barracks.
I am not faulting you in anyway for not being able to keep up.
Ko Okkar needs to get over his gripe.
I believe everybody is equally "edited" by The Irrawaddy.
Put it appropriately and it will be posted.
I don't believe The Irrawaddy edits me unfairly especially being labeled as an SPDC apologist by most in this forum.
|
|
|
|
KKK,
Who would have thought silencing the opposing views would be the tactics of democracy supporters? Do you not believe in democratic principles? You ought to be ashamed of yourself for your comment. Do you realise that you are showing the world how undemocratic opposition supporters are? |
|
|
|
To Okkar:
You are the only one who is consistently complaining about The Irrawaddy. It seems to me you have a mental problem. You should see a psychiatrist from "TadarLay." Why don't you set up your own website and post comments? I want to see your website. If you don't have ability and capability, you should shut up your mouth and keep quiet. Shame on you, man! Show us some gratitude. |
|
|
|
| What are you expecting from the ASEAN mafia or yakuza? Which ASEAN country is a truly democratic country? How long can Abhisit stay in power? |
|
|
Steven Baldesco Wrote: |
28/10/2009 |
|
My goodness, Thaksin being compared to Aung San Suu Kyi?
She has more (and I mean MORE) moral authority than that man who bought the Manchester City FC with millions upon millions of dollars and who compared himself to "The Lady" by staying inside his home for a day. Compare that to all of Aung San Suu Kyi's many sufferings, sacrifices and challenges, and spells of house arrest that she has faced and endured in leading the Burmese Democracy Forces.
Would anyone, other than Hun Sen and the Former Thai PM's die-hard supporters, even consider Thaksin Shinawatra, a great hero and a savior of the Thai People?
More like a great embarrassment.
Hun Sen's comments were truly insulting, and shocking.
Thaksin? A hero like Daw Suu? As I have written at the start, my goodness. |
|
|
LuuSoeLay Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
Westerners think the world is round.
Asians think the world is flat.
The regime thinks the world is square, whatever...
Typical honorable, brainless, bottomless, shameless and corrupted leaders accusing each other are in the house now.
It may go wild as more beers flow in. Well, just wait and see who is starting to throw a bottle and get into a bloody mess until one can claim that the world finally is....whatever.
good luck! |
|
|
Sceptic Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
Thaksin Shinawatra and Aung San Suu Kyi do have at least two things in common and they are significant. Both were elected with massive popular majorities, previously unknown in the histories of their countries (Thaksin on four occasions!). Both of them were deposed by military forces with the specific intention of denying those popular mandates. In Thaksin's case the coup came immediately before a general election which his party was widely expected to win by another landslide. Indeed, the imminence of this election was the sole real rationale for the coup.
The issue is not the widely divergent personalities of Thaksin and Mrs Suu Kyi, the one a seasoned practitioner, the other a comparative political innocent. Nor is it even the personal right of either of them to hold and exercise political power. The real issue is simply the denial of the right of the majority of the peoples of Burma and Thailand to express, as both have in clear and unequivocal terms, how and by whom they wish their countries to be governed. |
|
|
bayintnaung Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
Thaksin is an oppertunist, a murderer a thief and a corrupt politian. How anyone can compare him to DASSK is beyond my imagination.
Taksin however can be more compared to Chen Shui-bian of Taiwan, except one is in jail and one is still on the run. |
|
|
Nat Ka Lay Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
Yes, it is a quality issue. It is unbelievable that a leader of a nation has such a low analysis. Hun Sen even does not know that Thaksin is pro-dictatorship and Daw Aung San Su Kyi is otherwise.
In fact, Hun Sen and Thaksin are the same guys in disguise. Hun Sen makes sure of his grip on power and held an election. Thaksin uses the same method. Hun Sen and Thaksin are in the same category of totalitarianism. With this vision, Hun Sen would claim that he is the Aung San Su Kyi of Cambodia if he was pushed out of power. |
|
|
tocharian Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
I have heard the Chinese compare ASSK with the Dalai Lama (whom they deeply despise!), because both of them are icons in the West.
In this hypocritical world, I think, China would actually prefer to have Thaksin back. It's obvious what Hun Sen wants.
This talk by the Burmese junta and also by the opposition groups of how the brothers and sisters of Asia (ASEAN, China, India, Japan, Korea) really understand "Asian values" and the "Asian Road to Democracy" better than Western nations is just pure hypocrisy, because many Asian countries don't really believe in human rights or democracy and are run by corrupt feudal oligarchies or one-party rule.
Go figure how ASEAN or for that matter China, Korea, Japan and India will ever really want a regime change in Burma. No wonder most refugees from Burma seek political asylum in the West, if they can, but even that procedure is corrupt as we all know. Honesty and integrity are not Asian values anymore. |
|
|
John Comnenus Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
A very good analysis. Comparing Thaksin to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is like comparing brass to gold: there's a superficial resemblance, but no more.
Hun Sen's remarks are the kind of thing we in Australia expect to hear from leaders who have been in power so long they've lost touch with reality. It is clear that Cambodia's long-serving PM has either passed his use-by date or at least need a serious reality-check. |
|
|
Eric Johnston Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
| The author's comments are valid, but he should be careful to avoid using the word "Burma" when he means the military regime. The difference may be clear to Burma-watchers but one needs to think of the average world citizen. |
|
|
Pokpong Lawansiri Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
Anyone who has been following the Southeast Asia political situation would never compare Thaksin to Aung San Suu Kyi.
However, would The Irrawaddy be brave enough to question what has this government (under Abhisit Vejjajiva) done to bring justice to the human rights violations under Thaksin (either against Burmese or Thais)?
What has this regime done regarding bringing the military officials who were involved in the war on drugs (which left 2,000 people dead), or the massacre at Tak Bai (which left 86 people dead) in 2004 to justice?
Has the government been able to bring justice to Burmese migrant workers who were abused by their Thai employers? Has Abhisit been able to come up with any solutions regarding the Rohingya refugee crisis?
The answers for all these are "no."
What makes Abhisit better than Thaksin is that he is good with words, good with rhetoric.
|
|
|
Thidar Aye Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
Thaksin was known as a good friend of military thugs, so Han Sen should compare Thaksin with his good friend Dictator Than Shwe.
Hun Sen's remark is an insult to all Burmese people and democracy lovers in the world. |
|
|
|
| Hun Sen is recognized as the smartest politician among the asean leaders by the Western bloc. He told reporters a decade ago, that Asean meetings are nothing but playing golf, eating durians and seafood, wearing traditional dress and watching traditional dancing. |
|
|
|
There is no doubt that one can not compare Thaksin with Suu Kyi. One of the main reasons is that Thaksin actually proved what kind of policy he would carry out - whereas Suu Kyi never had the chance to prove herself in that field.
For her, it's not enough to be popular, she also has to come up with good and lasting solutions to satisfy the different ethnic groups.
One could think that she came off on the wrong foot by starting having talks with the Western diplomatic corps, without making her standpoint and objectives clear beforehand. It would be safe to say that many people are not quite sure what she is up to.
When it comes to Thaksin, I believe the writer of the article came with some very shallow points - at least sometimes.
Thaksin's war on drug crimes did claim dead people, and undoubtedly too many! However, one can not ignore that Thailand had been flooded with drugs from Burma and that it was and is a big problem which needed to be dealt with. |
|
|
|
Ko Aung Zaw,
Respect and affection for DASSK is amicable, illustrated well in numerous articles and commentaries.
Hun Sen is but another leader by default tolerated by the West after the neglected "Killing Fields" policy of Pol Pot.
DASSK stood alone in her achievement.
The important question is: Will the West's useless policy ensure the perpetuation of SPDC treatment of the citizenry which is tantamount to "Killing Fields" over a longer period as opposed to over a few years in Cambodia? |
|
|
|
TL & Timothy,
I can understand your frustrations toward the Myanmar government. But don’t be too self-focused. Thailand gets the lion's share of Myanmar refugees; Singapore provides the biggest education and job opportunities to your fellow economic and intellectual refugees who have been impacted by sanctions; the rest of the ASEAN nations generally provide some sort of opportunities for your fellow citizens (Christians in the Philippines and Muslims in Malaysia and so on).
Your white papas in North America and the EU only want to take a tiny share of the so-called political refugees and they mainly want Christians Kayins and Chins. Of course they become citizens of the West, and yet they can hardly come out of the refugee image. But in Asia, any type of Myanmar refugee, if he or she works hard, can at least reach some sort of higher level. E.g. some academics in Thai’s universities, plenty of high-tech Myanmar professionals in Singapore. Don't forget that the Asian century is rapidly rising. |
|
|
Kyi May Kaung Wrote: |
27/10/2009 |
|
This is an excellent article. Thank you, Ko Aung Zaw, for writing it.
I remember a "criticism" published in a Burmese newspaper in the 1990s, unfortunately I can't remember the name (anonymous)of the writer.
But essentially it said, Suu Kyi's alleged "corruption" amounted to a few spoonfuls of lahpet or pickled tea salad she ate at each NLD event. We can all see how thin and malnourished she looks.
Her lahpet is literally peanuts compared to the scale of Taksin's multimillion dollar empire.
Besides, how can she be corrupt when she is a prisoner herself?
I sometimes wonder if she or her supporters have to pay for her food like the other political prisoners' htaung win sar, provided by their families and skimmed or totally taken by the prison wardens.
|
|
|
|
Suu Kyi and Thaksin do have many things in common. Both are extremely wealthy, both have a base in the United Kingdom, their children lead luxurious lives while their fellow countrymen suffer in poverty. Both are backed by Western governments, both have English passports, both claimed to work for democracy and human rights of their people... the list could go on and on....
No doubt, The Irrawaddy would censor this comment because it would prove that Aung Zaw didn't do his research properly before writing this article. Shame on you, Irrawaddy! So much for the democratic free press.. you are no different to the New Light of Myanmar. |
|
|
leeyiankun Wrote: |
26/10/2009 |
|
Thaksin was ousted by the Thai Army. if you'd done your homework, you'd know who's the real power holder in the country.
Hun Sen hasn't hit the mark with his comments, but to millions of people in Thailand, it came close.
He fought not for freedom, but for the poor people. Fighting poverty is heroic enough. Drug wars and 30 baht medicare placed him firmly in the hearts of the people.
Suu Kyi may be big as a Nobel prize-winner and fighter for freedom. But Thai people hold Thaksin in much higher regards.
Hopefully, after the fog is cleared, we'll finally see the ugly hidden truth in the land of smiles. Then may you finally understand who is to blame for those policies. |
|
|
Hkun Sam Wrote: |
26/10/2009 |
|
The world is still flat for some parts of the world. Their leaders fool around their citizens and the international community.
Mr. Hun Sen, you made a big mistake here. You can fool around with your people to win elections over and over. But don’t try to reveal your inner stupid wisdom too much. It will be so shameful for your people. |
|
|
Terrence Wrote: |
26/10/2009 |
|
Good job, Ko Aung Zaw for the true description of the sorrowful attitude of the ASEAN leaders. It is no surprise to see a motley band of dishonest people believing in their own pretense of promoting human rights! Ludicrous, to say the least.
The EU must be thinking "How dare they...!". It never ceases to amaze me how shameless and insincere they are every time they hold their annual summit. It is indeed a great misfortune to Burmese people to have such depraved leaders supporting a bunch of thugs in Naypyidaw. |
|
|
|
I have noticed that The Irrawaddy is never missing any opportunity to show the Thai elite that Thaksin was a bad person. You even defended the coup. We never hear any comments however about the Thai political victims, for instance those imprisoned or those in exile for asking the world questions about the role of the monarchy.
Hun Sen is spot-on just like the writer of this article. the world is not flat, although Aung Zaw seem to think so even though he is trying to let us believe otherwise.
Burma is bad, there are places on Earth where it is worse, even in China, Bangladesh, Pakistan or India just to mention a few places.
Preposterous is the fact that the writer seem to think that the royalists are right and that the vote of a poor schmuck should be of less value than that of an academic.
Consider moving your operation to Europe or the US. You will be able to criticize the Thai government without running the risk to be deported. It will give you some credibility. |
|
|
|
It might be preposterous to think that Aung San Suu Kyi is the only political prisoner.
It is never nice for a group of people who patented suffering and suppression as only valid to their own to hear that it happens not only in Burma but also in Laos, Vietnam Singapore, Malaysia or Thailand.
There are many Aung Suu Kyi's out there. The problem is that the Burmese press and people in exile should have the courage to operate independently and not make comments to please their host nation.
Thaksin is still the chosen leader within Thailand with a mandate while a majority of Burmese people did not had the chance to tell us if they really think if the NLD is the right party to take Burma forward.
The NLD is almost as undemocratic as the clique around Than Shwe. Grow up and accept that 14 million Thai voters think like Hun Sen does. |
|
|
Than Lwin Wrote: |
26/10/2009 |
|
Excellent portrayal by Ko Aung Zaw of this organisation--the Association of South East Asian Pimps.
The essence of its constitution is "You don't complain about what is happening in my brothel, and I don't complain about what is happening in yours"
They are pimps, thugs, war lords, drug barons, dacoits, pirates who have been accepted for membership in this organisation because they gained power in their own countries by whatever means.
It's so shameful that they even attempt to compare themselves with the EU. It will never becomes like the EU, ever. |
|
|
timothy Wrote: |
26/10/2009 |
|
| It is indeed the standard of Asean leaders and we should not have much expectation about the human rights charter and its meaning, at least for their low intellectual standard. That is the quality one needs to become a leader. The shining example is Than Shwe, who is praised by the Asean group for genocide, murder, torture and killing of monks. This is their way of democracy so the seven steps of the junta received a wild applause from this illiterate crowd. |
|
|
|
|
RECOMMEND (44)
E-MAIL
PRINT
