Burma Stirs

The Washington Post reports on the largest protests Burma has seen in a very long time.

Yesterday, more than 1,000 Buddhist monks marched peacefully along the rain-soaked streets of Burma’s largest city, with thousands of spectators encouraging their protest. At the head of the procession a monk carried an alms bowl turned upside down, symbolically refusing to accept any more support from the military regime, one of the world’s most repressive. In an overwhelmingly Buddhist Southeast Asian nation of 50 million people, this was a withering rebuke.

The echoes of the last great uprising, in 1988, must be alarming the country’s corrupt ruling generals — the roots in economic discontent and the slow stirrings from students to monks to the general population and from the capital to smaller cities across the nation.

As the article concludes, it’s time for some real focus on an issue that has been allowed to drag on far too long.

President Bush, who has spoken eloquently of Burma’s struggle for freedom, needs to engage in strenuous diplomacy — above all with China — to make clear that this is a U.S. priority. And China, which has more influence in Burma than any other country has, needs to decide whether it wants to host the 2008 Olympics as the enabler of one of the world’s nastiest regimes or as a peacemaker.

The US has been dancing to China’s tune in some respects in regards to Taiwan recently – Washington should make it clear it expects Beijing to scratch its back in return.

Further reports from the BBC and ABC News.

Update

The BBC reports (Sunday) that 20,000 people took part in demonstrations today – now ordinary citizens are being encouraged to join.

______________

Richard Burger is the author of Behind the Red Door: Sex in China, an exploration of China's sexual revolution and its clash with traditional Chinese values.

The Discussion: 56 Comments

President Bush, who has spoken eloquently of Burma’s struggle for freedom, needs to engage in strenuous diplomacy — above all with China — to make clear that this is a U.S. priority. And China

LOL, hahahahahhahaha……it is hard to focus on Burma when invading Iraq (wait it is Iran) is his next goal.

September 23, 2007 @ 5:20 am | Comment

it is hard to focus on Burma when invading Iraq (wait it is Iran) is his next goal

If you don’t know the difference between Iraq and Iran I’m not sure you’re qualified to discuss either. ;)

September 23, 2007 @ 8:12 am | Comment

“scratch it’s back”?? So calling out for human rights is a favour to be traded, and China should comply based on a so called favour or something? That is so sad.

September 23, 2007 @ 10:00 am | Comment

“President Bush, who has spoken eloquently ”

Sorry, the reporter just lost all credibility here.

But seriously, the hypocrisy is oozing out of my monitor. I might have to take a shower after reading that article.

“enabler of one of the world’s nastiest regimes or as a peacemaker”

Let me get this right. Bush can invade countries, set up satellite regimes far nastier than Burma’s, a network of secret prisons, torture prisoners and never put them on trial, but China has to listen to Bush’s opinion on Burma?

“Washington should make it clear it expects Beijing to scratch its back in return”

Considering Beijing owns enough US$ to collapse the US economy by pressing a button, I really don’t think the US is in any position to demand favors.

September 23, 2007 @ 11:33 am | Comment

The problem with any sort of strenuous diplomacy on the part of the US is that were Bush to lend his support for the Burmese resistance movement, it’d immediately lose all credibility. The junta would dig its heels and paint itself as the defender of Burma against American “imperialism” or whatever and much of the current unrest would dampen.

What’s truly unfortunate about all this is that China should be taken to task for its shameful support for these despotic regimes, but America (who props up bad governments too) is about the last country who should make noise about it.

September 23, 2007 @ 12:45 pm | Comment

One of the last things Beijing will do is to stop suporting the Junta in Burma.
The Chinese have a navy base in Burma which has immense strategic importance as they from there are able to monitor the street of Malacca, the one needle eye where all the oil has to go through to get to East Asia.

September 23, 2007 @ 1:27 pm | Comment

The PLAN’s base in Burma is also for surrounding India, PLAN subs regularly come out of Burma to tail Indian subs and even hang out around Singapore.

“Let me get this right. Bush can invade countries, set up satellite regimes far nastier than Burma’s, a network of secret prisons, torture prisoners and never put them on trial, but China has to listen to Bush’s opinion on Burma?”

What satellite regimes has Bush set up? And probably the only regime worse than Burma is NK, another “teeth and lips” Beijing ally.

September 23, 2007 @ 1:53 pm | Comment

Bush can invade countries, set up satellite regimes far nastier than Burma’s, a network of secret prisons, torture prisoners and never put them on trial, but China has to listen to Bush’s opinion on Burma?

First, Bush hasn’t set up any satellite-regimes – certainly he wouldn’t have the current Iraqi PM if that was the case. Second, where did the article justify US foreign policy anywhere?

In any case, “tu quoque” isn’t an excuse to defend what someone else does.

I really don’t think the US is in any position to demand favors.

So you’re telling me that US co-operation over Taiwan is based on fear of China? I think you’ll find that the US expects China to help it in return in various examples.

Also China can’t press a button and collapse the US economy. Even if it could, it would end up hugely hurting itself from the knock-on that would result in a global economic meltdown.

September 23, 2007 @ 4:42 pm | Comment

In any case, “tu quoque” isn’t an excuse to defend what someone else does.

If that’s the case, then next time Bush visits Bejing, the Chinese government can also “take US to task” for its illegal wiretapping of American citizens, for its secret prisons in Europe, for its mishandling of Katrina, for Valerie Plame, etc, etc. Right? That next, next time Bush visits Hu Jintao in a summit, the Chinese government has the responsibility to challenge the US on these issues, otherwise China will cancel its 10 billion Boeing orders, will reduce its treasury holdings. But of course if China really did that, you would be the first to say “How DARE China, the most dictatorial regime and the worst violator of human rights violator in the world, lecture the US!”. If you were to say that, then weren’t you also employing the “tu quoque” argument.

September 23, 2007 @ 11:19 pm | Comment

But of course if China really did that, you would be the first to say

No, I wouldn’t – China is not the worst human rights abuser in the world. Besides, China can say what it likes. That would, however, invalidate China’s “don’t comment on our internal policy” mantra.

September 23, 2007 @ 11:45 pm | Comment

No, I wouldn’t – China is not the worst human rights abuser in the world. Besides, China can say what it likes. That would, however, invalidate China’s “don’t comment on our internal policy” mantra.

So if you abide by the law of “tu quoque is not an excuse”, wouldn’t you have to agree that it’ll be legitimate for the Chinese gov’t to “take the US to task” on issues like Iraq, CIA Prisons in Europe, Abu Ghraib, at least as legitimate as US raising issues like Burma, Darfur with China.

September 24, 2007 @ 3:30 am | Comment

The US should persuade China that supporting dictators is bad for one’s image, as they have learned in the past.

September 24, 2007 @ 3:34 am | Comment

If you don’t know the difference between Iraq and Iran I’m not sure you’re qualified to discuss either. ;)

I hope you know that I am talking about Bush…he keeps getting them mix up in speech. :) I don’t know you are this dry Raj.

September 24, 2007 @ 3:46 am | Comment

@China_hand

China’s Boeing order is a drop in the bucket, and China has a habit of not paying for its purchases, ask the Russians.

Also, China can do nothing to the US economically. It certainly can’t sell its bond holdings if no one else wants to buy them.

September 24, 2007 @ 4:15 am | Comment

Precisely, Nanhey. If no one wants to buy T-bills from China, then that means no one wants to buy T-bills from Uncle Sam. And that would precipitate a major financial crisis in the U.S., especially with an already soft credit market from the subprime housing situation.

September 24, 2007 @ 12:12 pm | Comment

Also, China can do nothing to the US economically. It certainly can’t sell its bond holdings if no one else wants to buy them.

Clearly, you don’t know how T-bond works. Btw, US currency is T-bond based, not gold-based standard anymore.

Precisely, Nanhey. If no one wants to buy T-bills from China, then that means no one wants to buy T-bills from Uncle Sam.

No one is buying for last two months, the net trading in/out is negative.

September 24, 2007 @ 1:27 pm | Comment

Let our currency drop, let the EU carry the burden, our exports are shooting up every month.

Talk about printing funny money, China’s closed system is simply circulating money in and out of state banks.

Just take a look at what happened to one of the big 4 accounting firms in China when they reported the truth about the NPL ratio (900 trillion USD).

September 24, 2007 @ 3:45 pm | Comment

“Clearly, you don’t know how T-bond works. Btw, US currency is T-bond based, not gold-based standard anymore.”

Then why not give us a primer Arty. Put up or shut up.

September 25, 2007 @ 12:25 am | Comment

US T-bonds like most bonds carry a fixed cash value. For example, 100 dollar bonds worth exactly 100 dollars at the time of maturity. The trading prices is adjusted and the % yield is adjusted accordingly. So you can always cash out at maturity if you can’t sell it (unlikely as long as US government don’t default). Also, since Nixon abolished the gold standard on US currency, T-bond became the pegging standard for US currency (i.e. it is equal to cash). Btw, you should go read up yourself, and I don’t have to give you a brief lesson.

900 trillion USD

I don’t even think the world has that much money combine…

September 25, 2007 @ 7:13 am | Comment

It comes up every single dingle time.. China did such and such bad, , , , Oh, well, America is such and such so shut up… Or America did such and such so what you say is not valid (???)

If “America” was as bad as “China”, does that means China should then be shifted to the status of being not bad or something?

Can we like not use other people or other regimes being bad as some kind of excuse or reason for not respecting peoples comments?

Like if someone said I was bad and then I said oh well, he is bad too, ..Well like what the heck? That wouldnt make one bit of sense and would just frustrate whomever was making the point. Is that the intention or what?

Further more, if you want to compare the two within a more sensible context

1. You can’t exactly compare the Chinese Communist regime to America. One is a regime and one is a country.

America has this kind of democracy thing so when someone gets freaky, the folks have the right to get rid of that regime, so America has changed “regimes” several times, so can you really compare the Chinese Communist regime with Amercia the country?

2. Compare the evilness of the CCP over the last 50 years to the evilness of any other regime committed in the past 100 years and you will see what we are dealing with.

One problem with our discussions sometimes is that the criteria to judge who is good and who is bad is different among us. Some might say just for a hypothetical example: “Jews are so cool, so Hitler is the worste of all”, or some might say “the environment is the most important thing so China and America are sooo evil (China soon to surpass America with a huge rate of increase)”

Just brainstorming ( : ( :

September 25, 2007 @ 9:20 am | Comment

Heres a site where you can get some petitions and do some activism of your own

http://lairdkeir.spaces.live.com/

September 25, 2007 @ 9:22 am | Comment

I think all regimes and all country leaders should watch this video every morning, and I guarantee world peace and human rights EVERYWHERE. Seriously.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5P6UU6m3cqk

September 25, 2007 @ 10:13 am | Comment

Arty, if you are going to bash others with your knowledge, be prepared to answer questions in defense of claimed knowledge.

“lso, since Nixon abolished the gold standard on US currency, T-bond became the pegging standard for US currency (i.e. it is equal to cash).”

How so? I’m sure I’m not the only inquiring mind who would like to know Mr. Greenspan.

Oh, boohoo, you got me on a type-o regarding 900 billion/trillion. Congrats!

Its still alot of money and that accounting firm had to issue an official apology and retraction of their assesement which either meant 1. their China accounting staff and management is rubbish or 2. they revealed the true rotteness of China’s banking system.

September 25, 2007 @ 12:04 pm | Comment

An interesting piece in todays Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2176620,00.html

September 25, 2007 @ 12:18 pm | Comment

“lso, since Nixon abolished the gold standard on US currency, T-bond became the pegging standard for US currency (i.e. it is equal to cash).”

Sigh…because we used US t-bond as our currency standard instead of gold. I don’t get it what kind of explanation do you want. It pretty much means we used a piece of government paper to substitute or back many pieces of government papers. Btw, you learn that in Macro-economic 102 (see not 101 because that’s usually micro). Your question sounded more like some Republicans I knew in my college years who keep asking how come increase minimum wage won’t influent employment rate after the professor just spent an hour explaining it.

Oh, boohoo, you got me on a type-o regarding 900 billion/trillion. Congrats!

Are you sure it’s a typo…or you are confused about billion and trillion. :)

September 25, 2007 @ 12:37 pm | Comment

The US response to the situation in Burma has been asinine at best. Condoleezza Rice just made snarky remarks and without giving any real thought to the urgency of the situation. Something like “The regime is brutal” and “We are watching carefully.”

Come on. Even the French Foreign Minister did better than that, warning the junta not to use violence and saying they would be “held accountable” if they did.

And now Bush is announcing visa bans and other sanctions that are simply pointless and maybe even counterproductive at this point. What’s urgently needed now is a way to stop the looming carnage, not some cynical political point-scoring. Earlier there were reports that Gordon Brown would announce an aid package, apparently as an incentive for change. That would be a much better move.

September 25, 2007 @ 10:00 pm | Comment

The bottom line is that Burma has a cesspool infested with reptiles for a government and stands on the brink of political change. It’s news everywhere around the globe, drawing responses from world leaders, asinine or otherwise.

Except China. Not a word in the party rag, not a murmur from CCTV; just a wall of deafening silence.

Lovely people, these CCP boys.

September 25, 2007 @ 11:19 pm | Comment

So Arty, you are a newly minted bidness man fresh out of school. Some of us chose a more difficult academic route than to be another wannabe running around with a blackberry and a suit.

As for thebushpilot, just what is France going to do? Invade? Blockade? Burma can’t afford French technology or food exports so the French can’t threaten to withhold anything.

September 26, 2007 @ 12:46 am | Comment

So Arty, you are a newly minted bidness man fresh out of school. Some of us chose a more difficult academic route than to be another wannabe running around with a blackberry and a suit.

No, I have been out of school for awhile, and yestarday James D. Watson was calling us servants because we have chosen the most difficult academic route and not getting pay enough. :) I don’t carry a blackberry (I do carry a 400 dollar phone though) and running around in a suit. Thank god for my parents that my family is well off (I think).

September 26, 2007 @ 1:39 am | Comment

Well enough,

Back to discussing b** China’s unfailing support of Myanmar junta (and the Khmer Rouge previously).

City lights are out, curfews are in place and troops are moving into the city.

September 26, 2007 @ 1:28 pm | Comment

from the B

Last Updated: Wednesday, 26 September 2007, 06:03 GMT 07:03 UK
E-mail this to a friend Printable version
Riot police ‘beat’ Burmese monks
BBC graphic
Riot police have used batons to beat back protesters including monks at the Rangoon pagoda used as a rallying-point for marchers, eyewitnesses say.

They baton-charged a crowd of civilians and monks outside the Shwedagon Pagoda as demonstrators readied for a ninth day of protest marches.

Police and troops have been ringing Buddhist monasteries in the city.

Analysts fear a repeat of the violence in 1988, when troops opened fire on unarmed protestors, killing thousands.

In a further sign that the military authorities are cracking down, two key dissidents were arrested.

interviews of people inside of Burma are calling for a boycott of the Beijing Olympics if Beijing does not stop supporting the junta.

September 26, 2007 @ 3:27 pm | Comment

Can I ask why monks are on the street? Are they trying to establish a theocrate just like Islamic movement?

September 27, 2007 @ 2:20 am | Comment

Can I ask why monks are on the street? Are they trying to establish a theocrate just like Islamic movement?

They want to see the generals go – I have never seen any hard evidence that they want to replace them. From what I understand they’d much prefer democracy and someone else to sort the country out – I doubt they’d know what to do.

September 27, 2007 @ 3:10 am | Comment

I am wondering how much is CIA involved in this demonstration….
I would hard pressed to believe that they have no role in it….

September 27, 2007 @ 9:13 am | Comment

@Frank
what abaout the possibility that people are just fed up with the Junta and don’t need the CIA to go on the streets?

Wored in East Berlin Leipzig and in Poland like that.

September 27, 2007 @ 9:30 am | Comment

@shulan

Well, I am not disputing this part, Junta is corrupt and deserve to be get rid of. However, those guys can incite hatred and make things much worse that it should be.

I am worried that with these western involvement, peaceful demonstration will turn to violent and many monks would be hurt/killed.

It reminds me of 89 Tiananmen bloodshed. The VOA fanned up so much enthusiasm for demostration, hunger strike with lots of propaganda infested news. During that period, I listened to it whenenver I got a chance (The Chinese version is constantly disrupted but the English version is not). I myself went to demonstration as a high school student, in no small part from the VOA’s influence.

In retrospect, I find VOA’s propaganda very harmful as it made us much harder to retreat and accept compromise. I am compelled to think that I should put some blame to VOA and the US government behind the VOA for bloodshed in Tiananmen (about 10% blame, if I want to quantify it).

For Myammar, I am worried about the same thing. Some inciters makes the monks very hard to reach compromise with the junta, which will lead to new bloodshed. I really hate to see these kind of stuff happen again!

September 27, 2007 @ 10:21 am | Comment

So it’s the alleged “Western involvement” that killed those people in Rangun today. Not the Junta and their bullets.
Interesting.

I wonder who in such cases wasn’t and isn’t willing to compromise in the first place. The ones with the guns or those without them.

September 27, 2007 @ 8:49 pm | Comment

@shulan,

Have you been to any big demonstrations, especially as a student? If so, you will feel so enpowered that you can force compromise from the government. You will believe that the government will accept your demand and in 89 or Mayammar case, you will believe that they WILL NOT open fire.

To be fair, this idea is sometimes right, such as the “color revolutions”. However, BLOODSHED ensues if the idea is WRONG and I really hate it that some people want demonstrators think this way.

The “western influence” helped to enforce this idea. VOA in case of 6.4, the “inspirational” voices and twisted news made us believe that we were invincible. Some of the student leaders wanted to bring down the CCP government then and refused to compromise.

As a matter of fact, I do know the CCP government had been willing to compromise a little until the student leaders hardened their position in the events that eventually lead to the bloodshed.

I urge these people STOP from instigating more unrest. It’s not their blood, but the monks’ blood that are shed. But they will reap the benefit.

September 27, 2007 @ 9:12 pm | Comment

I wonder how many of those monks understand English. Is it a major in monk-school in Burma?

September 27, 2007 @ 9:30 pm | Comment

Just read a rather sad joke. Actually Orwell wrote a triology about Burma: Burmese Days, Animal Farm and 1984.
In Burma thus he is called The Prophet.

September 27, 2007 @ 10:53 pm | Comment

Frank, you are talking non-sense on 89 Tiananmen bloodshed. VOA and the US government did not instigate the student protectors. Of course, the US government supported the students for their flighting cause; but it did not say it out publicly. If you dispute that, can you tell me, exception for a small group of people in China, who did not support the students at that time? Of course, looking back to it from now, many people wish Tiananmen bloodshed had not had happened then as it set back chinese political reform for at least 20 years, and china will have to carry that burden of the Tiananmen legacy for a long time.

September 28, 2007 @ 2:43 am | Comment

Shulan:

Protest needs money, organizing, and PR…Without supports from other countries, I do not see the protestors having those conditions.

September 28, 2007 @ 5:52 am | Comment

It comes up every single dingle time.. China did such and such bad, , , , Oh, well, America is such and such so shut up… Or America did such and such so what you say is not valid (???)

No, America is worse, all things considered. The strongest nation in the world should not be petty, greedy, stupid, ignorant, murderous, complacent, thieving and fat. 655,000+ deaths in Iraq from starvation, disease, and civil war and counting. At least you fat retards got your oil, now you can drive your 5 mpg SUV for 30 cents less a gallon and feel great while your 30 grams of fat lunch slowly kills you.

If “America” was as bad as “China”, does that means China should then be shifted to the status of being not bad or something?

No, it just means human garbage that happen to be from America should not pretend they give a shit about human rights or democracy or freedom; just leverage to use against China if and when it becomes an economic competitor. Do you hear nanhe whining about 9-11, 1973? No. Or Iraq? Sometimes. But not about the death and suffering, it’s more about America’s economic status.

Can we like not use other people or other regimes being bad as some kind of excuse or reason for not respecting peoples comments?

Criticism of perspective is fair game.

Like if someone said I was bad and then I said oh well, he is bad too, ..Well like what the heck? That wouldnt make one bit of sense and would just frustrate whomever was making the point. Is that the intention or what?

No, it’s more like a hypocrite nagging at you for 50 years without ever shutting up or dying. It gets rejected on the grounds that it’s simply stupid.

1. You can’t exactly compare the Chinese Communist regime to America. One is a regime and one is a country.

Don’t bandy around stupid, meaningless catchwords. Yes, America is a country. The sky is blue. Pekingduck is a blog.

America has this kind of democracy thing so when someone gets freaky, the folks have the right to get rid of that regime

Yeah except “the folks” are 10% retarded and will vote for a baboon if he hates gays enough. And they couldn’t care less if America is dicking around in other countries “trading” their soldiers, empty shells, and misery for oil. There are some protests but there aren’t the kind of protests you’d see if a bomb flew into a New York school killing 30-200 children.

so America has changed “regimes” several times, so can you really compare the Chinese Communist regime with Amercia the country?

If you say everything America does then American people have always been disgusting, thieving, genocidal murderers. There hasn’t even been a “negro” or “wench” president yet, so much for democratic elections being totally fair and transparent. Because we all know them negroes and wenches ain’t good presidunts. Especially poor negroes and wenches, most of our presdints done be rich krishchun mens.

2. Compare the evilness of the CCP over the last 50 years to the evilness of any other regime committed in the past 100 years and you will see what we are dealing with.

Not the same people. Still not good leaders, but don’t make stupid statements that have no relevance to modern times at all.

One problem with our discussions sometimes is that the criteria to judge who is good and who is bad is different among us. Some might say just for a hypothetical example: “Jews are so cool, so Hitler is the worste of all”, or some might say “the environment is the most important thing so China and America are sooo evil (China soon to surpass America with a huge rate of increase)”

The problem then is that both of these hypothetical people are fucking morons. That’s the problem with democratic elections being the sole criteria for electing leaders.

September 28, 2007 @ 5:55 am | Comment

If you say everything America does then American people

Meant to say “if you say everything AMerica does is the ‘will of the people’ then… ”

September 28, 2007 @ 5:57 am | Comment

Guys, please stay on topic. We’re talking about the worsening situation in Burma – no conspiracy theories please, nor rants about how China/the US is evil or whatever.

September 28, 2007 @ 7:11 am | Comment

@shulan,

Do you really think that VOA/BBC etc only broadcast in English?

@z,
The support of Chinese people and the support from US government are different stories. I think at that time we naively believed that the US government’s political/military intervention was possible in case of bloodshed and believe that that can stop CCP from firing. Sadly it was completely wrong.

I am not saying VOA instigated the 6.4 demonstrations, but they did advise, organize, PR in many subtle ways. As an inappropriate analogy, is it moral to urge a young man to fight against a grizzly bear bare-fisted, telling him that he will be able to kill the grizzly easily, but eventually the young man is ripped apart by the grizzly?

@Raj,

I think I am drawing an analogy in the “western” role in the Burma monk’s demonstration. I feel it’s irresponsibly endangering the life of the monks.

September 28, 2007 @ 11:56 am | Comment

Raj, I don’t know what you have against talking about evil, so anyway, sorry for being off topic but I just wanted to adress, hopefully once and for all that America being bad, doesn’t excuse the CCP’s crimes.

Ferins, I think you disagreed with me but most of your points didnt really come across clearly.

As for Burma, power to the monks, if they want to stand up for justice thats great, but, of course it would be the best if people did these sorts of things in the most rational way possible. I still need to read more about this situation, but I’m sure that it is a good thing when people stand up for basic human rights like the right to freedom of belief and thought.

September 29, 2007 @ 3:19 am | Comment

snow

evil is a word bandied about too much. There are other less charged ways to make the same sort of point.

A video has come out that appears to show a Burmese soldier shoot a Japanese journalist in cold blood.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7017636.stm

Stand by for a statement saying the journalist was threatening the soldier with his camera………

September 29, 2007 @ 3:33 am | Comment

Junta tightens media screw

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7016238.stm

“”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”The Light of Myanmar newspaper said on Thursday: “Saboteurs from inside and outside the nation and some foreign radio stations, who are jealous of national peace and development, have been making instigative acts through lies to cause internal instability and civil commotion.”

It seems that slowly but surely they are trying to draw a veil of ignorance over the country.”"”"”"”"”"”"”"

Raj,

I am in Canada not America, so there is no bandying?) of the term here. People are afraid to use the term here because in Canda people are religiousl unbelievers. So, thats just to let you know that the word is not owned by American zealots, and some people use it to describe something extremely bad. But yeah, I know what you mean by “charged” I guess cause in AMerica its beeen turned into a tool to arouse support for the so called defeaters of certain Arab groups…It’s just, when you are a non political person living in Canada, the word still holds a pure meaning, so, what it looks like to you is not what it looks like to me.

September 29, 2007 @ 8:05 am | Comment

anyone think the CCP will pitch in against a veil of ignorance over Burma etc?

September 29, 2007 @ 8:25 am | Comment

wow ferins! you’re fucked up!

September 30, 2007 @ 8:09 pm | Comment

I’ve known some people who can be pretty interesting when they’re fucked up on their drug of choice. But being fucked up on nationalism like ferins, is just boring as dessicated shrimp shit.

September 30, 2007 @ 8:17 pm | Comment

Laurie said, “wow ferins! you’re fucked up!” Yep, and he claims to be a genuine voice of Taiwan. I think Ferins makes Chen Shui-bian look almost acceptable.

But in any case, I endorse Raj’s call for us to adhere to the original topic of discussion.

The Guardian has a report about China’s economic interest in Burma. It partly explains why China is eager to keep the corrupt and ineffective Junta in powerful. Here is the link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/burma/story/0,,2179815,00.html

For those of you who can’t access the Guardian, here is a short summary from CDT:

“China has expanded into key Burmese sectors such as natural gas, hydropower, minerals, wood, fisheries and farm produce as well as illicit narcotics, gems and gambling. Chinese goods are flooding Burmese markets. Parts of northern and north-eastern Burma have become Chinese settlements.

With natural gas reserves of 2.48 trillion cubic metres (1.4% of the world supply) and little capital or infrastructure to exploit it, Burma is at the centre of fierce competition between China and India to develop production and supply their home markets.”

Any comment?

September 30, 2007 @ 11:29 pm | Comment

“Do you really think that VOA/BBC etc only broadcast in English?”

Well, when the red mandarins knew how to dirupt airawes in 1989 the Junta in Burma surley knows how to do today, don’t you think so?

October 1, 2007 @ 10:19 am | Comment

Over at Beijing Newspeak there is a translation of a report at Global Times 环球时报. It’s an example of the “fair and balanced” news on Burma that the Chinese government wants Chinese people to read.

Here is the link: http://tinyurl.com/273984

October 1, 2007 @ 12:09 pm | Comment

The communist party has more than just an interest in Burma’s oil, there are quite a few more peices to this puzzle…

later.

October 2, 2007 @ 4:02 am | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.