JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- Corporate Business English Trainers
- ACT Systems, Inc.（株式会社アクト・システムズ）, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥269,500 ~ ¥280,000 / Month
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- FT English Teachers for Kids - Osaka
- Kohgakusha Co., Ltd. （株式会社興学社）, Osaka
- Salary: ¥255,000 ~ ¥275,000 / Month Travel Expenses, Encouragement of Japanese learning*
0
Nyein_Chan
If the Bush Administration’s response to Hurricane Katrina got a grade C minus (barely over 60 out of 100 in Burmese grading system), then the Nargis cyclone relief efforts of the Burmese military government got a grade C plus (nearly 70 out of 100). If the Nargis cyclone relief efforts of the Burmese military government got a grade C plus, its public relations efforts should get a D minus (around 50 out of 100). Here is why and what more needs to be done. The government-controlled media, particularly the multi-media like television, shows the government leaders visiting the camps, extraordinarily clean and tidy, with the victims standing stiff outside their tents, supposedly and sometimes the generals and the visiting dignitaries sitting in the polished furniture in teak in a tent near the temporary shelter camp in the middle of the paddy field. It might be the image that the Burmese government leaders want to project to the public, including the international community, or at least the journalists working in the government-controlled media assumed so, judging from the past experiences. But the problem is that these images are too pretentious and too good to be true, at least to the eyes of the beholders, if not so in reality. If the fault of their opponents and opposition-sympathetic media can be found in unrealistically painting and portraying the government’s cyclone relief efforts as null and none, the fault of the Burmese government and its media can be found in found in unrealistically painting and portraying the government’s cyclone relief efforts as in perfect setting, too perfect to be true, again at least to the eyes of the beholders, if not so in reality. Who would believe their eyes if what they are seeing in the television is the extraordinarily neat and tidy camps without any hardships. At best, the public would think that the camp has been airbrushed by the bureaucrats before their superiors come to inspect. At worst, the Burmese government leaders might even be accused of staging a media show and exaggerating their handling of the situation. I know for a fact that the regime opponents, their state/non-state supporters and their sympathetic media are misleading the public when they insinuate, if not outright report, that the Burmese government is doing nothing to help the cyclone victims. Nobody would believe what the opposition-sympathetic media report. However, it would be much better for the Burmese government if the state-controlled media realistically portray the situation on the ground rather than broadcasting the extraordinarily neat and tidy camps with the cyclone victim families standing in front of their tents to greet the visiting officials. As two wrongs do not make a right, countering the unrealistically negative portrayal of the opposition-sympathetic media with the unrealistically positive images in the government-controlled media will get the cyclone relief efforts of the Burmese government nowhere. Secondly, the public will be more hesitant to believe what they see if the state-controlled TV and the newspapers are showing the generals’ cyclone relief efforts and inspecting a variety of sites everyday. Growing up in a state-controlled media, the public tends to immediately reject what they see as a media show or as the airbrushed images of the bureaucrats before their superior officers come. The public would be more willing to believe what they see on TV if they saw the images of the mid-level officers and the soldiers in the cyclone relief efforts. Remember the images that represented the army’s cyclone relief efforts around the world are not the generals’ inspection of the camps or distribution of cyclone relief aid; it was the two privates or corporals lifting some relief materials from the aircrafts delivering the international aid in the early days of the relief operations. Of course, the traditional portraits, taken as a group in front of the camera mostly to equally share their contributions and efforts, and to avoid giving more credit to one over another, or taken with the cameraman’s wishes, would not work either. It is a staged show; we can see that from the images. It would be much better and more natural to take the photos and record the videos when the participants are unaware of the cameramen provided that they are informed in advance. Of course, to take those pictures, the video and photo journalists from the government-controlled media would have to go and see the ground activities on their own, in addition to, if not rather than, following the government leaders and ministers around. The remaining question if what if those video and photo journalists assigned to work on their own, found a good corner to take a nap in stead of doing what they are supposed and expected and paid to do? At that stage, many corrective actions can be taken; between now and then, just simply have faith and hope that the video and photo journalists assigned to work on their own would do what they are supposed and expected and paid to do. In addition, some quality media images that could potentially come out of the efforts of the video and photo journalists assigned to work with the mid-level officers and soldiers would worth much more than their current products which are most likely to be rejected out of hand by the Burmese public. The Burmese military government leaders still do NOT understand the human nature. The government, particularly the soldiers and the other public employees, will have to take care of the public property and clean the trees and debris, that only a very small portion of the local population would and could take care of. However, few would remember and be thankful for their work on public properties. Most will probably think that the government and soldiers are doing what they are supposed to be doing. On the other hand, almost everybody would remember and appreciate if the government and the soldiers lend a hand in reconstructing their homes. Human nature is such that few would remember the barrister for the entire Frappuccino, but most would certainly remember the barrister for the extra cream on top. [In Burmese context, few would remember a bowl full of fish soup at the shop but most would remember for the extra or for the extra pieces of egg on top.] I can simply hope that the Burmese government, particularly its photo and video journalists would depart from the historical approach of following the top leaders and ministers around so that the government and the military’s efforts could be recorded and presented more realistically and thus that they get the due credit they deserve for all their efforts and consequently that they can reestablish a good rapport with the Burmese public, a good rapport the Burmese military had enjoyed until the mid 1980s.
Posted in: Myanmar lashes out at donors; says cyclone victims do not need 'bars of chocolate'
0
Nyein_Chan
Jyan_Bon at 06:56 AM JST - 24th May
Nyein Chan, I've read all the above articles in "The New Lights of Myanmar", the state controlled papers.
Jyan_Bon from the Junction, you LIED. You have NOT read the above articles in "The New Lights of Myanmar" because they are not there and they are NOT published in the newspapers. Jyan Bon, liar!!!
Posted in: U.N. chief says Myanmar agrees to allow all aid workers into country
0
Nyein_Chan
Part III: After Inviting the International Aid Workers In
To prevent another attempt at people’s power revolution from the part of regime opponents, what can the international actors do? The Western governments in particular and the other governments and media in general, will have to sternly tell the regime opponents NOT to take advantage of the presence of aid workers and NOT to make, during the relief operations, another attempt at people’s power revolution, and so doing could harm the international aid workers. Better yet, the Western governments can sternly tell the regime opponents what the consequences would be. The regime opponents have lost a lot of ground in Burma; they are relying mostly on their state/non-state supporters and sympathetic media in the West for their cause; therefore, they will most likely take their worthy allies’ position into consideration if such position is clearly and sincerely taken. On the other hand, the regime opponents might have never intended to take advantage of the presence of the international aid workers and make another attempt at the regime change by people’s power revolution. (I am just giving them a way out without losing face, in case they miss.) Thus, on their own accord, the regime opponents will NOT make another attempt at the regime change by people’s power revolution for the sake of their fellow Burmese cyclone victims, not due to position of their Western allies.
What if the West’s warnings are not serious or taken seriously and the regime opponents would nonetheless capitalize on the presence of international aid workers and make another attempt at people’s power revolution? The Burmese government will, euphemistically speaking, restore law and order even at the presence/risk of the international aid workers and even at the face of the severe consequences later.
Posted in: U.N. chief says Myanmar agrees to allow all aid workers into country
0
Nyein_Chan
Part II: After Inviting the International Aid Workers In
Now that the Burmese military government invited the international relief workers into their country, what are the possible worst-case scenarios we must be aware of and prepared for, and if possible, prevent. Now, all the possible bad scenarios would depend solely on a single, unwise decision of the regime opponents: to take advantage of the presence of the international aid workers inside Burma and to attempt to remove the incumbent government in a people’s power revolution. The regime opponents would gauge that they will win either way.
If a people’s power revolution is successful, the Burmese military government will be ousted. David Montero predicts in Christian Science Monitor that “Disaster May Loosen Junta’s Grip in Burma” (May 8, 2008)
If it fails, the Burmese military government is going to face the enormous global outrage and UN Security Council’s punitive resolution.
If the regime opponents plan to take advantage of the presence of international aid workers, thinking that they will win either way, what would the Burmese military leaders do?
In the name of reason of the state, the first reaction scenario of the Burmese military government is going to order the army and police to, euphemistically speaking, maintain law and order. Legally, they can do so because the emergency law is imposed for a natural disaster and legitimately because the U.S National Guards and Police did shoot some people dead in New Orleans after Katrina. The Burmese military leaders are going to and have to take a decisive action, whatever it means, even if the international aid workers are there and if they have to face later the global condemnation and UN Security Council’s punitive resolution, falling into the trap of their opponents’ infamous but unpragmatic strategy of regime change by UN Security Council’s resolutions. In this scenario, the international aid workers are suggested to stay inside their lodgings rather than venturing out into the streets like Japanese undercovered reporter Kenji Nagai.
Another possible reaction scenario from the part of Burmese military government is to allow the Burmese public in general and the international aid workers in particular to face Hobbesian dilemma: having to make a choice between anarchy and Leviathan state. The Burmese military government might also wait for a few days and may restore law and order only later as last year in Burma or as in Tibet. Even its earlier, less decisive, attempts might FAIL. The 2nd and 3rd scenarios would inevitably result in the withdrawal of its troops from some areas, as in 1988 in Burma, leaving the population (and the international aid workers) to face the Hobbesian dilemma to choose between the anarchy and Leviathan state. In anticipation of the 2ndand 3rd scenarios, the international aid workers are advised to seek accommodation in the high-rise hotels where the helicopter rescues are possible. Yes, it will cost forty or fifty dollars more than the small, family-run, motels which cost ten or twenty dollars per night. In order to be able to rescue the international aid workers out there in the field immediately, it is necessary for them to instantaneously update their location to the local authorities or even higher authorities, including the relevant ministries.
Posted in: U.N. chief says Myanmar agrees to allow all aid workers into country
0
Nyein_Chan
Part I: After Inviting the International Aid Workers In
What should we be aware of the local terrain in Burma now that the Burmese military government has accepted the international aid workers even if it did NOT accept the aid delivery from U.S., French and British warships.
We must take notice of the local political context first. Burma has held a constitutional referendum on May 10 and 24. The Burmese military government wants the draft constitution ratified and it has been ratified. Its opponents want the draft rejected. U.S, France and Western countries support the regime opponents. U.S House of Representatives went so far as taking jurisdiction over the draft constitution of another country and passing a concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 317), calling the Administration and UN to reject the referendum (process) and draft constitution (outcome).
The regime opponents might covertly plan to start the protests, politicizing the sufferings of the cyclone victims and capitalizing the presence of international aid workers. A League of Burmese Dissidents had called for a general strike today. A Burmese blogger posted an unconfirmed report that a protest of about a thousand people took place near Hle Dan Junction. A BBC correspondent in Burma reports as having “met students who are threatening strikes and protests if international help is not accepted. Some are veterans of previous protests but others have become "activists" because of the cyclone.” (Gavin Hewitt, Burma, Burmese murmurs of anger at junta, BBC News, May 23, 2008, updated at 14:14 GMT)
An AP report DOES confirm the existence of a concern from the part of Burmese government that the presence of international aid workers might create trouble and embolden their dissidents who have been trying a people’s power revolution. During the Saturday tour diplomats tried at every chance to tell the accompanying Myanmar minister that the government should provide more international aid access, [Bernard] Delpuech, [head of the European Commission Humanitarian Office in Yangon] said. He said the answer was: "Yes, they're willing, but they don't want the people who will create more problems." (Aung Hla Tun, Reuters, May 17, 2008, 8:15 a.m. New York Time, via Washington Post Website) In fact, the regime opponents took their first step by spreading the news that the public is angry at the military government and maligning the latter by accusing it of slow response.
U.S Charge d’affairs Shari Villarosa, a seemingly veteran expert of those revolutions, whose career assignments, found in the public-accessible CV, coincide with the occurrence of people’s power revolutions, the most recent being in Indonesia in 1997-8, spread the words that “the military leaders’ reluctance to admit more foreign aid and aid workers exasperated ordinary people, whose discontent over sharp inflation and political repression erupted last September in an uprising led by Buddhist monks. “Anger is still there,” Ms. Villarosa said in an interview on Sunday. “Discontent is still there. And now there is a growing discontent that there is international assistance out there that can be brought in, so why aren’t we getting it?” (A New York Times Correspondent in Yangon, Myanmar, Burmese Leader Visits Refugees, The New York Times, May 19, 2008) The presence of U. S., French and British warships, including an American aircraft carrier, near the Burmese territory encourage the regime opponents.
The regime opponents want to encourage its activists and their sympathizers with a dim prospect that, if the Burmese government crack down the protests as it did last year, that ‘Americans are coming!!! Americans are coming!!!’, coincidentally timing with the U.S, France, Britain navy warships. Gordon Lubold reports that in Mae Saout, Thailand, “thousands of Burmese exiles and refugees were excited when they saw a US helicopter flying above them on Saturday…” (Gordon Lubold, U.S. helicopters cause stir in Thai town on Burma border, Yahoo News, Washington, D.C, May 12, 2008, 4:00 a.m.; Christopher Johnson, Mae Sot, Thailand Christian Science Monitor, U.S. helicopters cause stir in Thai town on Burma border: In Mae Sot, home to many Burmese exiles and refugees, two helicopters stopped unannounced during a survey of the area, via ABC News)
The regime opponents know very well that a Burmese government has been overthrown with rumors. One of Burma’s earlier dynasties collapsed due to rumors that its enemy troops Sagaw Karens were marching to the capital.)
Posted in: U.N. chief says Myanmar agrees to allow all aid workers into country
0
Nyein_Chan
Part V: Terrain is Quite Clear but One More Thing to Do
What if the West’s warnings are not serious or taken seriously and the regime opponents would nonetheless capitalize on the presence of international aid workers and make another attempt at people’s power revolution? The Burmese government will, euphemistically speaking, restore law and order even at the presence/risk of the international aid workers and even at the face of the severe consequences later.
So, if we can get one more thing done and I think we need to, I am pretty sure (not absolutely sure though) that the Burmese military government will invite the international aid workers so that their people could be helped faster and more effectively with better technology and more specialized knowledge. On the other hand, given the sparse knowledge of the international aid workers on local situation, like sending biscuits to storm victims and bringing in malaria drugs for the population in our delta region where the malaria has seldom taken root, the Burmese government might think that it is better to rely upon the domestic manpower. (I am just giving them a way out without losing face, in case they miss.) Nonetheless, if the West can somehow guarantee that the regime opponents won’t take advantage of the presence of the international aid workers and make another attempt at the regime change by people’s power revolution, I think that it is better to have more helping hands and, hopefully, less negative media coverage.
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Part IV: Terrain is Quite Clear but One More Thing to Do
One more thing can be and need to be done in order to make the Burma’s political climate less poisonous and make its risk-averse leaders more willing to allow the international aid workers in. The Western governments will have to sternly tell its opponents not to take advantage of the presence of aid workers and not to make, during the relief operations, another attempt at people’s power revolution, and so doing could harm the international aid workers. Better yet, the Western governments can sternly tell the regime opponents what the consequences would be. The regime opponents have lost a lot of ground in Burma; they are relying mostly on their state/non-state supporters and sympathetic media in the West for their cause; therefore, they will most likely take their worthy allies’ position into consideration if such position is clearly and sincerely taken. On the other hand, the regime opponents might have never intended to take advantage of the presence of the international aid workers and make another attempt at the regime change by people’s power revolution. (I am just giving them a way out without losing face, in case they miss.) Thus, on their own accord, the regime opponents will NOT make another attempt at the regime change by people’s power revolution for the sake of their fellow Burmese cyclone victims, not due to position of their Western allies.
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Part III: Terrain is Quite Clear but One More Thing to Do
What do the regime opponents plan to do with the presence of international aid workers (and possibly media) in Burma? They know that the draft constitution will be ratified because it is the only way out of the ongoing political gridlock; that the public is going to vote for it so that they can move forward. If the regime opponents plan to take advantage of the presence of international aid workers, thinking that the military government dare NOT to disperse the protestors as it did last year and in 1988, or that if it did, it is going to face the enormous global outrage and UN Security Council’s punitive resolution and pressure, then what would the Burmese military leaders do?
Of course, in the name of reason of the state and Hobbesian dilemma, they are going to order the army and police to disperse the protestors and to shoot if judged necessary. Legally, they can do so because the emergency law is imposed for a natural disaster and legitimately because the U.S National Guards and Police did shoot some people dead in New Orleans after Katrina. The Burmese military leaders are going to and have to take a decisive action, whatever it means, even if the international aid workers are there and if they have to face later the global condemnation and UN Security Council’s punitive resolution, falling into the trap of their opponents’ infamous but unpragmatic strategy of regime change by UN Security Council’s resolutions.
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Part II: Terrain is Quite Clear but One More Thing to Do (less than 1500 characters each)
The presence of U. S and France military in the Burmese territory if possible and (already) in the neighboring countries would encourage the regime opponents and discourage the regime. The regime opponents want to encourage its activists and their sympathizers with the news that ‘Americans are coming!!! Americans are coming!!!’ ‘Americans are HERE!!’ coincidentally timing with the U.S, France, Britain navy warships, the buzzing military aircrafts and helicopters. Romesh Ratnesar asks in Time magazine “Is it Time to Invade Burma?” (May 10, 2008) (A Burmese government has been overthrown with rumors. One of Burma’s earlier dynasties collapsed due to rumors that its enemy troops Sagaw Karens were marching to the capital.) Gordon Lubold reports that in Mae Saout, Thailand, “thousands of Burmese exiles and refugees were excited when they saw a US helicopter flying above them on Saturday…” (Gordon Lubold, U.S. helicopters cause stir in Thai town on Burma border, Yahoo News, Washington, D.C, May 12, 2008, 4:00 a.m.; Christopher Johnson, Mae Sot, Thailand Christian Science Monitor, U.S. helicopters cause stir in Thai town on Burma border: In Mae Sot, home to many Burmese exiles and refugees, two helicopters stopped unannounced during a survey of the area, via ABC News)
Now that the referendum is over, the Burmese military government would more likely accept the international relief workers than before, but we need to do one more thing.
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Part I: Terrain is Quite Clear but One More Thing to Do
Some might want to point out that the Burmese military government should accept the international aid workers even if it does NOT accept the U.S warships and military aircrafts. Since the referendum is over on Saturday, it is more likely to invite the international aid workers now than before. But we need to know the and reason to see if we can find a workable solution.
The constitutional referendum was scheduled (and held) on May 10. The Burmese military government wants the draft constitution ratified. Its opponents want the draft rejected (if possible, the referendum disrupted). U.S, France and Western countries support the regime opponents. U.S House of Representatives went so far as taking jurisdiction over the draft constitution of another country and passing a concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 317), calling the Administration and UN to reject the referendum (process) and draft constitution (outcome).
The military government’s possible concern was that its opponents might covertly plan to start the protests, politicizing the sufferings of the cyclone victims and capitalizing the presence of international aid workers. An AP report DOES confirm the existence of this concern. During the Saturday tour diplomats tried at every chance to tell the accompanying Myanmar minister that the government should provide more international aid access, [Bernard] Delpuech, [head of the European Commission Humanitarian Office in Yangon] said. He said the answer was: "Yes, they're willing, but they don't want the people who will create more problems." (Aung Hla Tun, Reuters, May 17, 2008, 8:15 a.m. New York Time, via Washington Post Website) In fact, the regime opponents took their first step by spreading the news that the public is angry at the military government and maligning the latter by accusing it of slow response. David Montero predicts in Christian Science Monitor that “Disaster May Loosen Junta’s Grip in Burma” (May 8, 2008)
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Four Right Choices of Burmese Military Government: One More to Go
Despite its all other mistakes, the current Burmese military government has made FOUR right decisions which will be remembered as corner stones of their legacy for 20 years in power.
The first is its decisions to get and maintain the cease-fire agreements with all (possible) armed ethnic groups, ending five-decade-long armed conflicts.
The second is its decision to move the capital to further inland, saving the national government apparatus from sea-bound natural and not-so-natural dangers and possibly freeing up the future, military-influenced but elected governments from the danger of people’s power revolutions.
The third is its decision to hold constitutional referendum on May 10, 2008 throughout the country except the 47 townships the Cyclone Nagris severely ravaged.
The fourth is its decision to reject any foreign troops entering Burma even in the context of cyclone relief operations.
The first and the second decisions have been proven to be right and beneficial to Burma and her people. So shall the third and the fourth.
The Burmese military government should thus stand by its four decisions and needs to do only one more decision to establish its historical legacy: take the risk and transfer the state power to a civilian president chosen by the majority of 664 members of parliament, 166 appointed and 498 elected in 2010 elections.
May God Bless Burma!
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Part II: Weighting the Alternative Options and the Potential Costs in Human Life If the advent of 4,000 US marines into Burmese territory [and probably other Western military forces to follow suit] encourages the regime opponents to make another attempt at their infamous dream of toppling the regime in a people’s power revolution, politicizing the disaster and capitalizing the presence of foreign troops, that of international aid workers and the unusual attention of international media, possibly, in case of government’s crackdown, leading to the combat operations of the foreign troops inside and the subsequent military intervention. France’s Responsibility to Protect is NOT going to fly if the international responsibility is to protect the Burmese cyclone victims. However, the interventionism of U.S and France is more likely to win a wider legitimacy if it is carried out in the name of the responsibility to protect their citizens. How many people do you think will then die as a result of fighting and shooting? The rosy scenario is that the Burmese military government in a remote location will be overthrown in no time (like Saddam’s) and the return to normalcy will be speedy and the successful reconstruction efforts will be convincing and persuasive enough to sway the public opinion later. Did they also tell you that GIs will be welcomed as liberators with flowers and candies? How many people do you think will die if the Burmese military retreat and engage in guerilla warfare (the urban guerilla warfare like in Iraq and the jungle guerilla warfare like in Vietnam)? However well-intentioned our American, British, and French friends may be in offering to send warships, military aircrafts and helicopters for relief operations inside Burma, we will have to, as we should, NO. The U.S, British and French governments should concentrate their efforts in the realistic and pragmatic ways and means to help my fellow Burmese cyclone victims rather than attempting to open up the feel-good, unrealistic, and dangerous channels of helping us. The last time the British invaded Burma to colonize us, we thought in 1885 that the British were going to remove the despotic King Thibaw and replace him with a better Prince Nyaung Yan. We were wrong and our MISTAKE cost us 60 years of British colonial rule. When the British cheated us the last time to colonize us, it is their fault. If we MAKE the same mistake twice, it would be OUR fault. Some are going to say that we deserve to be colonized. This time around, we are NOT going to welcome the foreign troops under any flag, be it British, French, American, or United Nations even if their warships were bringing in the cyclone relief materials onboard rather than a fake prince like the last time. Thanks a lot but NO, thanks again.
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Part I: Weighting the Alternative Options and the Potential Costs in Human Life
"We believe that it's going to be very difficult to reach everybody and to tackle the crisis as we would like without some outside military and civilian assets," John Holmes, the U.N.'s top humanitarian official, told reporters. (USA Today, U.N. chief slams Burma junta, May 12, 2008)
Knowing how my folks survived in the past and how good they are at their own survival, I would rather let them take the chance with some cholera, diarrhea, etc. than letting the Burmese military government confront with 4000 US marines. (Amy Kazmin and Howard Schneider, U.S. Tries to Persuade Burma to Accept Aid: Military Offers to Deploy Up to 4,000 U.S. Marines, Washington Post, Monday, May 12, 2008; 1:14 PM) If the sanitation and unclean water causes the disaster-related diseases like cholera, diarrhea, some Burmese are going to die, but NOT as many as the outside world think or NOT as many as the fighting between the troops would cause. Which water do you think my fellow Burmese in the delta region had drunk before the cyclone? Where do you think they had discarded their urines and excretions before the cyclone? Yes, the floating, decomposing, dead bodies of human and animals (a lot of them currently in the water) are unusual and thus increase the chance of disease outbreak. However, if the dead bodies were to cause us the deadly diseases, we would have never been born because our ancestors would have never been born. Where do you think our ancestors had, well into the second half of the 20th century, disposed the corpses of their loved ones if the cremation is unaffordable or the burial is unfeasible? In addition, the smelly corpses naturally repel anyone to seek their drinking and cleaning water away from them.
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Are the U.S warships, aircrafts and helicopters going to engage in the combat operations immediately? NOT necessarily. They are there just to encourage the population to rise up against the Burmese military government like a people’s power revolution and to discourage the soldiers from shooting in the crackdown. The regime opponents want to encourage its activists and their sympathizers with the news that ‘Americans are coming!!! Americans are coming!!!’ ‘Americans are there!!!’ coincidentally timing with the U.S, France, Britain navy warships, the buzzing military aircrafts and helicopters in sight of Burmese public. (Burmese governments can be overthrown with rumors. One of Burma’s earlier dynasties collapsed due to rumors that its enemy troops Sagaw Karens were marching to the capital.) Gordon Lubold reports that in Mae Saout, Thailand, “thousands of Burmese exiles and refugees were excited when they saw a US helicopter flying above them on Saturday…” (Gordon Lubold, U.S. helicopters cause stir in Thai town on Burma border, Yahoo News, Washington, D.C, May 12, 2008, 4:00 a.m.; Christopher Johnson, Mae Sot, Thailand Christian Science Monitor, U.S. helicopters cause stir in Thai town on Burma border, via ABC News) Melinda Liu assesses in Newsweek that “Cyclone Nargis may have done more than just wreck Burma's cities. It may also spell doom for the government.” (Winds of Change: May 19, 2008 Issue) David Montero predicts in Christian Science Monitor that “Disaster May Loosen Junta’s Grip in Burma” (May 8, 2008)
Why is the timing? The cyclone devastation can establish a good reason of war (casus belli) and the constitutional referendum is the last chance (some wrongly assume) to overthrow the Burmese military government.
Why is the media not reporting the scheming strategy of regime change in Southeast Asia by its leaders? It is partly because its journalists are no longer good at investigative journalism and thus cannot file a report on covert activities until they become full-blown and partly because the Western media is usually self-censored. How different is a self-censored media from a government-censored media? They will find out soon, alas, at the expense of my fellow Burmese when they do.
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
A well-orchestrated U.S-led military campaign of intimidation (if not invasion) is well on its way. Washington Post reports that “Three or four [war]ships began a five-day journey to a location off Burma to be available to offer aid.” (Amy Kazmin, Colum Lynch and Howard Schneider, Burma Seizes U.N. Food Deliveries, Washington Post, Friday, May 9, 2008; 9:41 AM) Its usual partner in crime Britain and its unusual partner France did NOT take very long to follow US’s lead. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced that he is going to send the Royal Navy frigate HMS Westminster to Burma. (MSNBC, May 12, 2008, 22:13) France has sent its amphibious landing ship Le Mistral from India to Burma. The French amphibious landing ship was conveniently present in the area because of a scheduled joint exercise with the Indian and British armed forces. The French amphibious landing ship will depart the port on May 15 and arrive on May 18. (Press statement issued by M. Bernard Kouchner, Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, Paris, May 8, 2008; The Website of French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Embarquement d’aide humanitaire sur le Mistral, May 13, 2008)
In order to establish a good reason of war (casus belli), the media has been making a news reports that say – true or untrue matters less LATER like the Saddam Hussein’s attempts to buy uranium – that Burmese military refused the international aid despite the life threatening situation of over one million of its own people. In order to establish a good reason of war (casus belli), the media has been feeding the public in the past several days that the Burmese military government has abused the humanitarian assistance by giving out the international relief materials as if it were theirs.
To make the stories more sensational and the casus belli most justifiable, the media didn’t fall behind. It publishes and broadcasts the sensational stories with the headlines like “Myanmar Cyclone Victims Getting Low-Quality Supplies,” “Burma Junta Steers Bad Food to Cyclone Victims,” “Burma Junta Impounds UN Aid,” “Burma Junta Impounds More UN Aid,” etc.
Romesh Ratnesar asks in Time magazine “Is it Time to Invade Burma?” (May 10, 2008) U.S (along with French Foreign Minister and the leader of British Conservative Party) has hinted a possibly legitimate reason to send their armed forces into Burmese territory: the “responsibility to protect.”
A natural disaster that causes tens of thousands of deaths, if not a hundred thousand, and that threatens a million or more, will by and large rally the shallow public opinion in support of military campaigns.
Of course, the well-orchestrated U.S military campaign was intended to intimidate (if not invade) Burma.
Posted in: Bush, Brown turn up heat on Myanmar
0
Nyein_Chan
Indonesian government accepted U.S aid during Tsunami because the former didn’t have any problem with the latter. On the other hand, U.S has a regime change (without using U.S military) policy according to David Steinberg, Burma expert at Georgetown University. On the other hand, the constitutional referendum is scheduled in Burma tomorrow on May 10. The Burmese military government wants the draft constitution ratified. Its opponents want the draft rejected (if possible, the referendum disrupted). U.S (and France) supports the regime opponents. U.S House of Representatives went so far as taking jurisdiction over the draft constitution of another country and passing a concurrent resolution (House Con. 317), calling the Bush Administration and UN to reject the referendum (process) and draft constitution (outcome). Apparently, the Burmese military government won’t allow U.S military aircrafts into the country.
Alphaape, Burmese military government is more risk-averse than Indonesian SBY's government. The latter studied in U.S. and befriended many American generals.
Posted in: U.N. halts aid to Myanmar after junta seizes supplies
0
Nyein_Chan
beavis wrote at 05:12 AM JST - 10th May
Nyein -With the lack of potable water, I don't think rice is a good idea as an immediate sustenance . I'd personally rather choke down one of the biscuits if my life depended on it.
We the Burmese don’t eat biscuits NOT because we know their taste BUT because we just simply don’t take them as staple food. On the other hand, I don’t know how scare the food is in the storm-hit regions although I am inclined to think not as bad as you might think.
Posted in: U.N. halts aid to Myanmar after junta seizes supplies
0
Nyein_Chan
Why doesn’t the Burmese government – or the Referendum Commission in particular – want to postpone the referendum in the entire country?
One possible reason is that the Cyclone hit very badly only in several regions of the country and the referendum could go on as scheduled in the rest of the country. If a hurricane, May GOD forbid, hit the NY-NJ-PA tri-state area a few days earlier, would US postpone its presidential elections scheduled on Nov 4, 2008?
Even in the five regions declared as natural disaster zone, approximately 47 townships were ravaged. So, the referendum could be held as scheduled in the rest of the country. The latest news is that the government postponed the referendum in the severely-hit areas, 40 out of 45 townships in Yangon province and 7 in Irrawaddy.
If the referendum is held in five days on May 10 as scheduled in the country except the 47 most-severely-hit townships, the government – less concerned about another attempt at people’s power revolution in the presence of international aid workers – might be able to allow more international aid teams into the country, especially for the longer-term reconstruction and rebuilding.
The international teams wouldn’t – and shouldn’t plan to –stay on in Burma for the next two or three years until after the general elections scheduled in 2010.
The darker side of the story is that the Burmese military government might be wrong in thinking that the natural disaster and its efforts might be in its favor, resulting in the approval of the constitutional draft.
The usual scenario of the aftermath of natural disasters is that the soldiers – usually national guards in U.S – marched into the disaster hit areas, cleaned up the mess, do the difficult tasks and embraced the people’s favor. I believe that the Burmese soldiers did so and should also regain its people’s favor.
However, the oversea Burmese Opposition is getting one step ahead and maligning the Burmese military, wrongly alleging in the Burmese-language radio programs that the military fail to adequately respond the natural disaster of such magnitude; that they don’t see soldiers in the streets although there were soldiers cleaning up the main roads (think snow routes) essential for resuming the trade and essential government services. You can look at the wire news photos with the soldiers cleaning up the debris from the fallen trees on the main roads.
One such tactics is to fault the military for not helping the people enough, placing the words in the mouth of the anti-regime trishaw driver and the First Lady of U.S.
We will have to see the true attitude of the Burmese people towards the military and their appreciation of its relief efforts when the referendum poll results from the worst-hit areas are released in the future.
Can the Burmese military win back – as it did win until the mid 1980’s – the hearts and minds of its people in addition to winning the referendum?
Posted in: U.N. halts aid to Myanmar after junta seizes supplies
0
Nyein_Chan
A well-orchestrated U.S military campaign of intimidation (if not invasion) is well on its way. Washington Post reports that “Three or four [war]ships began a five-day journey to a location off Burma to be available to offer aid.” (Amy Kazmin, Colum Lynch and Howard Schneider, Burma Seizes U.N. Food Deliveries, Washington Post, Friday, May 9, 2008; 9:41 AM) The media has released a news report that says – true or untrue matters less later like the Saddam Hussein’s attempts to buy uranium – that Burmese military impounded UN relief aid. The media has been feeding the public in the past four days that the Burmese military government has refused to accept the humanitarian assistance in order to establish a good reason of war (casus belli).
U.S (along with France) has hinted a possibly legitimate reason to send their armed forces into Burmese territory: the “responsibility to protect.”
A natural disaster that causes tens of thousands of deaths, if not a hundred thousand, and that threatens a million or more, will by and large rally the shallow public opinion in support of military campaigns.
Of course, the well-orchestrated U.S military campaign was intended to intimidate (if not invade) Burma.
Are the U.S warships, aircrafts and helicopters going to start a fight immediately? NOT necessarily. They are there just to encourage the population to rise up against the Burmese military government like a people’s power revolution and to discourage the soldiers from shooting in the crackdown.
Why is the timing? The cyclone devastation can establish a good reason of war (casus belli) and the constitutional referendum is the last chance (some wrongly assume) to overthrow the Burmese military government.
Posted in: U.N. halts aid to Myanmar after junta seizes supplies
0
Nyein_Chan
The latest news is that the Burmese military government seized the UN aid. This news is damaging to the Burmese military government’s image, to the delight of its opponents and their state/non-state supporters.
What is missing in the news (particularly headlines) on the other hand, the Burmese military government allowed the other UN aid into the country. So, the government and UN should clarify without spin why the aid from that particular plan was seized.
Is it because of high-energy biscuits? Then, the government should allow UN to distribute the relief materials on their own plan, other than biscuits.
The major food items World Food Program brought is high-energy biscuits. WFP is good with their own reasoning: the storm victims won’t have means (charcoal or firewood and utensils) to cook. So, the biscuits will be easier and ready to eat. On the other hand, a little bit of local knowledge should tell them that Burmese don’t eat biscuits for meal. When they say “we need food”, they mean RICE. So, here are a few scenarios that can happen. The victims will eat biscuits as snaps and continue to complain that they don’t have food. Second, they will give biscuits to children and the children will end up hyperactive the entire time. Third, the biscuits will be sold back into the market (to buy rice) and you are going to find it scandalous.
I hope that the biscuit-crisis will end soon and both sides will learn some lessons from this biscuit-crisis: UN not to send biscuits and Burma clarify immediately its actions and decisions.
[Latest wire news update: WFP decides to resume the aid flights.]
WFP brought in high-energy biscuits. Its reasoning? The storm victims won’t have means to cook. So, the biscuits will be easier and ready to eat. Burmese don’t eat biscuits for meal. When they say “we need food” they mean RICE. Victims will eat biscuits as snacks. Second, they will give biscuits to children and the children will end up hyperactive the entire time. Biscuits will be sold back into the market (to buy rice) and you are going to find it scandalous. Hopefully this biscuit-crisis will end soon; both sides will learn some lessons from this biscuit-crisis: UN not to send biscuits; Burma clarify immediately its actions and decisions. [Latest wire news update: WFP decides to resume the aid flights.]
Posted in: U.N. halts aid to Myanmar after junta seizes supplies