*EPF403 10/07/2004
Text: Leach Calls for Greater International Pressure on Burmese Junta
(Representative supports resolution seeking U.N. Security Council action) (1700)

The ongoing humanitarian crisis in Burma "calls out for a more robust and humane international response," Representative James Leach (Republican from Iowa) said in October 6 remarks before the full House of Representatives.

Leach, chairman of the House International Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, spoke in support of a House resolution calling on the U.N. Security Council to take appropriate action to respond to "the growing threat" that the ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) in Burma poses to the Southeast Asia region and to the people of Burma.

The measure passed in the House October 7. The Senate approved a similar resolution, S. Res. 431, on September 22.

The House resolution, designated H. Res. 768, raises several areas of concern, including:

--The SPDC's refusal to uphold the results of a 1990 parliamentary election in which the democratic opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), won 392 of 485 contested seats.

--The near continuous imprisonment or house arrest since 1995 of opposition leader and Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. Suu Kyi and other NLD supporters were most recently detained after a violent assault by government forces in May 2003.

--Severe violations of human rights by the SPDC, including extrajudicial killings, torture, forced relocations of persons, forced labor, and conscription of child soldiers.

--SPDC involvement in cross-border trafficking of persons and illegal narcotics, and attempts to acquire military hardware from China, Russia and North Korea.

--A potentially destabilizing refugee crisis on Burma's borders with Thailand and Bangladesh, as over 200,000 people have fled systematic terrorization by the Burmese military.

"[I]n response to repeated efforts by the ruling military to thwart the democratic aspirations of the Burmese people as well as to ongoing serious human rights violations, the U.S. has been compelled to utilize sanctions and coercive diplomacy as the centerpiece of our policy," Leach said.

The congressman drew an analogy to the mid-1980s imposition of sanctions against the apartheid regime in South Africa, but noted that those sanctions had carried greater weight because they had broader international support.

Leach acknowledged that some nations have expressed concern that the U.S. government is "too inclined to draw 'lines in the sand' and not sufficiently attuned to nuance" in foreign affairs.

"There may be some truth in this critique," he said, "but I think Burma is the one circumstance where they are most clearly wrong, that this is a 'line in the sand' place."

Leach welcomed efforts by the European Union to put more pressure on the SPDC with a set of demands and threatened sanctions connected to the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) that opens in Hanoi on October 8. Nonetheless, he said, these efforts remain "rather modest in their scope and effect."

The congressman also praised the increased interest U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has shown in the Burmese situation and said the United States appreciated Annan's efforts to convene a meeting on September 29 to discuss the lack of progress toward democracy and national reconciliation in Burma.

Leach said he encourages the Burmese authorities to allow the secretary-general's special envoy, Ambassador Razali Ismail, to return to Burma to facilitate dialogue between the SPDC and the NLD.

Following is the text of Leach's remarks on H. Res. 768, as prepared for delivery:

(begin text)

Representative James A. Leach
Before the House of Representatives
The Situation in Burma and H. Res. 768
October 6, 2004

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of House Resolution 768, a measure symbolizing the deep concern of the House of Representatives with the deplorable situation in Burma.

Burma presents one of the most complicated and vexing foreign policy challenges in Asia for the United States and the world community. Numerous political prisoners remain in detention, including one of the most remarkable and courageous leaders of our time, Aung San Suu Kyi. The issue is how the U.S. can best secure their release and help start a meaningful political dialogue in Burma, while also endeavoring to advance a panoply of other priorities, including stable democratic governance, human rights, counternarcotics, regional stability, combating the HIV/AIDS pandemic, as well as economic and human development.

As we all understand, in response to repeated efforts by the ruling military to thwart the democratic aspirations of the Burmese people as well as to ongoing serious human rights violations, the U.S. has been compelled to utilize sanctions and coercive diplomacy as the centerpiece of our policy. Those sanctions were renewed earlier this year.

In this context, it should be self-evident that the U.S. is confronted by multiple dilemmas in pursuing our objectives in Burma. For illustrative purposes, I would note just a few: the strongly nationalistic, self-centered outlook of the ruling regime; the reliance by the military elite on an illicit, underground economy for power and survival; the inability of major industrial countries to agree on comprehensive sanctions as the basis for a common strategy; competition for geopolitical influence in Burma between China and India; and the ongoing humanitarian crisis for the people of Burma - including for many ethnic minority groups along the country's borders - that calls out for a more robust and humane international response.

In this regard, as we look at analogies in human history, one that appears credible and reasonable from an American perspective is South Africa. As we examine the South African analogy of Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress to Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy, it is important to note that when we considered sanctions in the United States it was a very serious debate, and Congress weighed heavily the fact that Mandela and the ANC were supportive of sanctions.

The second aspect of the South African analogy, and here is where the analogy begins to break down, the United States was supported by a number of countries in Western Europe. In fact, if anything, our traditional western European allies were stronger supporters of sanctions than the United States. Although America became the linchpin country, several European countries that had long-term relations with South Africa were more forward-leaning than the United States and very supportive of sanctions.

In this regard, from a leadership perspective, there is some discomfort that the rest of the world is not following the American lead on Burma, not only in Asia and most particularly ASEAN, but also Western Europe.

As a general proposition in international affairs, and we are seeing this most clearly in the Middle East and Southwest Asia, Europe is looking at American leadership as being too inclined to draw "lines in the sand" and not sufficiently attuned to nuance distinctions in foreign affairs. There may be some truth in this critique, but I think Burma is the one circumstance where they are most clearly wrong, that this is a "line in the sand" place, and this is a situation in which we should be expecting far more from Europe.

The good news is that the EU has begun to put a bit more pressure on the SPDC by demanding, for example, that ASEAN downgrade Burma's first-ever representation at the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) in Hanoi in October. The forum, begun in 1996, brings together the European Union and 10 Asian nations, including China, Japan, and South Korea. This year marks the group's formal enlargement, adding the 10 new EU members who joined in May along with Burma, Cambodia and Laos. The summit formally opens on October 8, 2004.

Here it is positive that the EU has set a deadline for this Friday - the start of the summit - for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest and for allowing her National League for Democracy party an integral role in drafting a new constitution. My understanding is that if the deadline elapsed without progress, the EU is prepared to enact a set of "intensified sanctions" reportedly consisting of a visa ban on junta officials and a halt to international funding for Burma. Having said that, it should be understood that these enhanced sanctions are rather modest in their scope and effect, in that the EU has imposed a visa ban since 1996 and that for well over a decade Burma has been effectively barred from lending by the international financial institutions

It is also a hopeful sign that United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan is also taking increased interest in the situation in Burma. The United States was appreciative of the fact that on September 29 the Secretary General convened a meeting with his special envoy to Burma Ambassador Razali Ismail and concerned UN members to discuss the lack of progress toward democracy and national reconciliation in Burma. The Congress joins with the Executive Branch in urging the Secretary General to remain focused on this matter and we hope and expect that his engagement will generate more international community cooperation on this vital issue. In this context, I would urge the Burmese authorities to promptly allow Ambassador Razali to return to Burma and to conduct additional visits as he deems necessary.

All Americans remain deeply concerned by the continued detention of courageous democracy advocate and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, the failure of the junta to permit the National League for Democracy (NLD) to open its offices nationwide and operate freely, the junta's refusal to release over a thousand political prisoners, the recent arrest of political activists and the sentencing of four NLD members for illegal political activities.

As noted by the Department of State, America's position is clear: "the Burmese people's desire for a national reconciliation and the establishment of democracy must be respected." We again call upon the Burmese leadership to take tangible steps, including the immediate release of Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners, the full and free participation of the National League for Democracy and representatives of the ethnic minorities in the National Convention and the initiation of a meaningful dialogue to advance national reconciliation and the establishment of democracy.

I urge support for the resolution.

(end text)

(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

Return to Public File Main Page

Return to Public Table of Contents