The Tea Party and U.S. Foreign Policy
By WALTER RUSSELL MEAD
Published: February 21, 2011
I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor
The rise of the Tea Party movement has been the most controversial and dramatic development in U.S. politics in many years. Supporters have hailed it as a return to core American values; opponents have seen it as a racist, reactionary and ultimately futile protest against the emerging reality of a multicultural, multiracial United States and a new era of government activism.
Nonetheless, the Tea Party movement has clearly struck a nerve in American politics, and students of American foreign policy need to think through the consequences of this populist and nationalist political insurgency.
As is so often the case in the United States, to understand the present and future of American politics, one must begin by coming to grips with the past.
The Tea Party movement taps deep roots in U.S. history. It is best understood as a contemporary revolt of Jacksonian common sense — the idea that moral, scientific, political and religious truths can be ascertained by the average person — against elites perceived as both misguided and corrupt.
And although the movement itself may splinter and even disappear, the populist energy that powers it will not go away any time soon. Jacksonianism is always an important force in American politics; at times of social and economic stress and change, like the present, its importance tends to grow.
In foreign policy, Jacksonians embrace a set of strongly nationalist ideas. They combine a firm belief in American exceptionalism with deep skepticism about the nation’s ability to create a liberal world order. The Obama administration is trying to steer U.S. foreign policy away from Jacksonian approaches just as a confluence of foreign and domestic developments are creating a Jacksonian moment.
Forecasting how this newly energized populist movement will influence foreign policy is difficult. Public opinion is responsive to events; a terrorist attack inside U.S. borders or a crisis in East Asia or the Middle East, for example, could transform the politics of U.S. foreign policy overnight.
Nevertheless, some trends seem clear.
The first is that the contest in the Tea Party between what might be called its Palinite and its Paulite wings will likely end in a victory for the Palinites. The Palinite wing of the Tea Party (after Sarah Palin) wants a vigorous, proactive approach to the problem of terrorism in the Middle East, one that rests on a close alliance between the United States and Israel. The Paulite wing (Rand Paul) would rather distance the United States from Israel as part of a general reduction of the United States’ profile in a part of the world from which little good can be expected.
The Paulites are likely to lose this contest because the commonsense reasoning of the American people now generally takes as axiomatic that security at home cannot be protected without substantial engagement overseas.
Terrorist attacks and events such as the Iranian effort to build nuclear weapons are likely to keep that sense of international danger alive (recent polls show that up to 64 percent of the U.S. public favors military strikes to end the Iranian nuclear program). Widespread public concern about perceived threats from a rising China will also strengthen public support for a strong military force and global American engagement.
Paulites and Palinites are united in their dislike for liberal internationalism — the attempt to conduct international relations through multilateral institutions under an ever-tightening web of international laws and treaties.
There is much in the Tea Party movement to give pause, but effective foreign policy must always begin with a realistic assessment of the facts on the ground.
Today’s Jacksonians are unlikely to disappear. Americans should rejoice that in many ways the Tea Party movement, warts and all, is a significantly more capable and reliable partner for the United States’ world-order-building tasks than were the isolationists of 60 years ago. Compared to the Jacksonians during the Truman administration, today’s are less racist, less antifeminist, less homophobic, and more open to an appreciation of other cultures and worldviews.
Furthermore, today’s southern Republican populists are far more sympathetic to core liberal capitalist concepts than were the populist supporters of William Jennings Bryan a century ago.
Foreign policy mandarins often wish the public would leave them alone so that they can get on with the serious business of statecraft. That is not going to happen in the United States. If the Tea Party movement fades away, other voices of populist protest will take its place. American policymakers and their counterparts overseas simply cannot do their jobs well without a deep understanding of what is one of the principal forces in American political life.
Walter Russell Mead is professor of foreign affairs and the humanities at Bard College and editor-at-large of The American Interest. A longer version of this article appears in the March/April issue of Foreign Affairs.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Ref:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/opinion/22iht-edrusselmead22.html?_r=1&ref=global
The Opinion Pages/The New York Times & International Herald Tribune
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Libya's Gadhafi Vows He Will Not Leave
Libya's Gadhafi Vows He Will Not Leave
February 22, 2011/VOA News
Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi says anti-government protests will not force him out, and that he expects to die a "martyr" in Libya.
Mr. Gadhafi spoke on Libyan state television Tuesday in his first detailed address to the country since the bloody wave of demonstrations began. He urged his supporters to help defend Libya against people he called "gangs" and "terrorists." Clenching a green book that appeared to be a guide to his political philosophy, he threatened the death penalty for anyone who takes up arms against Libya or engages in espionage.
Also Tuesday, one of Mr. Gadhafi's closest associates, Interior Minister Abdel Fattah Younis, announced his defection and support for the "February 17 revolution." Speaking to Al Jazeera television from the protester-held eastern city of Benghazi, Younis urged other armed forces to join the people and their "legitimate demands."
Numerous high-level Libyan officials, including ministers, diplomats and military officers, have abandoned the regime and announced their support for the rebellion.
Meanwhile, U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Lynn Pasco, said United Nations staff in Libya have seen aircraft and helicopters flying but could not confirm attacks against civilians. Lynn Pasco, speaking in New York, said the U.N. fears crimes against humanity have been committed in the North African nation and that the situation is deteriorating.
Libya's ambassador to the U.N. said the country's air force has not attacked civilians, but he acknowledged that most of Libya's eastern provinces are under the control of anti-regime forces. Abdurrahman Shalgham also said Libya's public prosecutor has begun an investigation into the deaths of protesters.
Witnesses in Tripoli say Libyan helicopter gunships and warplanes struck civilian areas Monday, while African mercenaries and pro-Gadhafi gunmen opened fire indiscriminately to terrorize the population. Human Rights Watch said it has received reports of at least 62 deaths in Tripoli since Sunday, on top of its previous toll of 233 dead, mostly in the country's eastern provinces.
The reports could not be independently confirmed because Libya has barred the entry of foreign journalists and cut some communication networks in the country.
The administration of U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday offered its condolences to the victims. White House spokesman Jay Carney condemned Libyan authorities for practicing "appalling violence" against the population.
Libyan diplomats in several countries say they have severed relations with Mr. Gadhafi to protest attacks by his forces on protesters. Libya's ambassador to the United States, Ali Aujali, called on the Libyan leader to step down. The Libyan ambassadors to India and Indonesia and a senior diplomat in China have all resigned.
Libya's embassies in Malaysia and Australia said they no longer represent Mr. Gadhafi. His Justice Minister Mustafa Abdel-Jalil resigned Monday in protest at the crackdown, while two Libyan fighter pilots flew their jets to Malta, saying they had defected after being ordered to attack demonstrators.
The protests represent the greatest challenge to Mr. Gadhafi's rule since he took power in 1969.
Some information for this report was provided by AP, AFP and Reuters.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Libyas-Gadhafi-Vows-He-Will-Not-Leave--116697594.html
February 22, 2011/VOA News
Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi says anti-government protests will not force him out, and that he expects to die a "martyr" in Libya.
Mr. Gadhafi spoke on Libyan state television Tuesday in his first detailed address to the country since the bloody wave of demonstrations began. He urged his supporters to help defend Libya against people he called "gangs" and "terrorists." Clenching a green book that appeared to be a guide to his political philosophy, he threatened the death penalty for anyone who takes up arms against Libya or engages in espionage.
Also Tuesday, one of Mr. Gadhafi's closest associates, Interior Minister Abdel Fattah Younis, announced his defection and support for the "February 17 revolution." Speaking to Al Jazeera television from the protester-held eastern city of Benghazi, Younis urged other armed forces to join the people and their "legitimate demands."
Numerous high-level Libyan officials, including ministers, diplomats and military officers, have abandoned the regime and announced their support for the rebellion.
Meanwhile, U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Lynn Pasco, said United Nations staff in Libya have seen aircraft and helicopters flying but could not confirm attacks against civilians. Lynn Pasco, speaking in New York, said the U.N. fears crimes against humanity have been committed in the North African nation and that the situation is deteriorating.
Libya's ambassador to the U.N. said the country's air force has not attacked civilians, but he acknowledged that most of Libya's eastern provinces are under the control of anti-regime forces. Abdurrahman Shalgham also said Libya's public prosecutor has begun an investigation into the deaths of protesters.
Witnesses in Tripoli say Libyan helicopter gunships and warplanes struck civilian areas Monday, while African mercenaries and pro-Gadhafi gunmen opened fire indiscriminately to terrorize the population. Human Rights Watch said it has received reports of at least 62 deaths in Tripoli since Sunday, on top of its previous toll of 233 dead, mostly in the country's eastern provinces.
The reports could not be independently confirmed because Libya has barred the entry of foreign journalists and cut some communication networks in the country.
The administration of U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday offered its condolences to the victims. White House spokesman Jay Carney condemned Libyan authorities for practicing "appalling violence" against the population.
Libyan diplomats in several countries say they have severed relations with Mr. Gadhafi to protest attacks by his forces on protesters. Libya's ambassador to the United States, Ali Aujali, called on the Libyan leader to step down. The Libyan ambassadors to India and Indonesia and a senior diplomat in China have all resigned.
Libya's embassies in Malaysia and Australia said they no longer represent Mr. Gadhafi. His Justice Minister Mustafa Abdel-Jalil resigned Monday in protest at the crackdown, while two Libyan fighter pilots flew their jets to Malta, saying they had defected after being ordered to attack demonstrators.
The protests represent the greatest challenge to Mr. Gadhafi's rule since he took power in 1969.
Some information for this report was provided by AP, AFP and Reuters.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Libyas-Gadhafi-Vows-He-Will-Not-Leave--116697594.html
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
U.S. Foreign Policy Goals and Objectives in Southeast Asia for 2011 ( Kurt M. Campbell Assistant Secretary )
U.S. Foreign Policy Goals and Objectives in Southeast Asia for 2011
Kurt M. Campbell
Assistant Secretary
Washington, DC
February 2, 2011
Video
2:30 P.M. EST
MODERATOR: Good afternoon and thank you all very much for being with us this afternoon. For the sake of time – I know you all have lots of questions – we’re going to get right into the briefing. Assistant Secretary Campbell will give brief remarks, and then we’ll open it up for question and answer. A caveat to the question-and-answer period, please be advised, again, that only members of the Foreign Press will be able to ask questions. Additionally, members of the Diplomatic Corps are not invited to participate in the question-and-answer period, so please keep that in mind.
Without further ado, Assistant Secretary Campbell.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Thank you very much, and it’s an honor to be back here at the Foreign Press Center. Good afternoon to everyone, nice to see so many friends here today.
I’ll just make a couple of opening comments about if that’s all right, and I’ll be happy to take any questions. I know there are a lot of journalists here from Northeast Asia and I know there’ll be some questions regarding developments in Northeast Asia. But I’ll talk a little bit about just the last couple of weeks in terms of my own activities.
First of all, I think as you all know, we had a successful – we think very highly successful visit of President Hu to Washington two weeks ago. I was deeply engaged in the work with my counterpart Vice Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai on the joint statement and worked closely with my colleague and friend Jeff Bader on all elements of this visit. And I think we were very pleased. I think this was a visit in which we stated very clearly our desire to have a strong, deep, and comprehensive relationship with China, but we also were clear about areas of divergence where we have differences of view and differences of perspective. We didn’t try to hide from those. We were upfront and clear about them. And I think if you look carefully at the speeches given in advance of the visit by Secretaries Geithner, Clinton, and the Secretary of Commerce, you will see a very clear theme in which we articulate areas where we want to work together but also challenges that endure in every particular area.
I’m happy to talk about specifics associated with that trip, but I should just say last week I was in Hawaii and Southeast Asia. I think part of what we are trying to do is send a very clear message that, of course, U.S.-China relations are important, but they are embedded in a broader, wider region, and we are deeply committed not only to our security partners in Northeast Asia, a strong relationship with China, but taking steps to underscore our commitment to renew the engagement in Southeast Asia and also the Pacific.
Too often when we say the Asian Pacific region, the word that gets short shrift in that is the Pacific, and so one of the things that we did in Hawaii was meet a series of our ambassadors in other countries, Pacific nations, who are in many respects suffering from real challenges in terms of climate change, some issues associated with poverty and disease. The United States has taken efforts in the course of last year so to reengage in terms of USAID programs and a variety of steps to underscore an enduring American commitment to the security, to the health and the well-being of the people of the Pacific.
We also had a chance for trilateral coordination between the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. I think as you all have seen that over the course of the last year, we have rebuilt our relationship with New Zealand after a period in which we had very little security interaction. And we are now working closely together on a range of issues. Those discussions between the three nations centered on not only developments in Northeast Asia but developments associated with Fiji and other island nations and developments in the South Pacific.
I also was in Singapore and the Philippines. In the Philippines, we had the first-ever Strategic Dialogue, which brought together my counterpart and good friend from the Defense Department, Derek Mitchell. He led a large delegation. I had a large group from the State Department and other parts of the U.S. Government in which we sat down with our counterparts in the Philippines. And again, this is the first time we’ve ever had such a dialogue to review areas of common purpose, to underscore our strong commitment to the security to the Philippines and to find areas that we can work together in the future.
I think of specific concern was a desire to step up our activities to support the Philippines in terms of maritime awareness, maritime engagement, and other issues associated with the very large area that the Philippines is responsible for in terms of their own territorial waters but also waters adjacent to the Philippines as well. And I think these talks were important. We also underscored that the United States was going to work closely with the Philippines as part of the new program in which enhanced partnership, in which we wanted to work carefully to identify areas of economic and political engagement, allow the Philippines to take the next step on its road to development.
And in Singapore, a close strategic friend in the region, we stopped off for deliberations. They were particularly interested to discuss next steps in the U.S.-China relations. I think what they were particularly interested to know is next steps in the mil-to-mil relationship between the United States and China. I think we were able to tell them that there were some very hopeful steps in terms of the visit of Secretary of Defense Gates to China in the immediate period before the summit, and clearly, there is a roadmap for increasing contacts and engagement. We are looking for a relationship with China’s military that is steady, that is stable, that allows for greater transparency, and also creating mechanisms and procedures whereby if there are accidents or inadvertent developments between the United States and China, we are quickly and reliably able to communicate with our counterparts to ensure that there are no disagreements that cause a disruption to peace and stability.
I would say that if you look into 2011, it is an incredibly consequential year for American policy in the Asian Pacific region across many fronts. We recognize that Asian friends are grateful for a reengagement at the strategic and political level. Obviously, they know of our enduring military commitments in the Asian Pacific region. What they are really looking for us to do is to step up our game economically, commercially, and in the trade realm.
I think one of the most important things that the United States can do in that respect is to recover. And clearly, I think you can see that President Obama is working very closely with new members of his Cabinet and in the White House to underscore his commitment to boost exports, particularly to the Asian Pacific region. There are plans underway now to cement the Korea Free Trade Agreement for full ratification. And obviously, our efforts associated with the transpacific partnership, which would be the most innovative trade agenda that the United States has ever done, has really taken off. There have been substantial and very important discussions with all of the potential partners, and we recognize how significant this will be for us as we move forward.
Later this year, President Obama will represent for the first time the United States at the East Asia summit. We think that’s very significant. We also hold a next round of our U.S.-ASEAN partnership meeting at the head-of-states level. And of course, 2011, the United States is holding and hosting the APEC meeting in Hawaii, in which we are looking to streamline the agenda and make clear the continuing relevance of APEC as an institution in the Asian Pacific region.
So incredibly busy sessions. Secretary Clinton will be hosting her counterparts, along with Secretary Geithner, for next round of the Strategic Economic Dialogue in May. And you will have seen, when President Hu visited, that the United States has announced that Vice President Biden will be going to Asia later this year to meet with the future leader of China as part of a counterpart visit. So we recognize that even with all the challenges and difficulties that we are confronting currently in the Middle East that it is extraordinarily important to underscore that the United States recognizes very clearly that the 21st century is going to be being played out in the Asian Pacific region.
Why don’t I stop at that and I’ll be happy to take questions. And if I could just ask you, just to identify – I know most of you, but just for the record, I’ve been asked to – for each of you to identify yourselves, if you would, please.
Yes, old friend.
QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary Campbell. John Zang with CTI-TV of Taiwan. AID Chair Erin Burkhart (ph) spoke in Taipei and he mentioned that China actually proposed a full communiqué in preparation for President Hu’s visit, but that proposal was rejected by the United States side. Could you share with us on what grounds and how the United States rejected that proposal? Thank you.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: First of all, thank you very much. I’m not going to elaborate on what Mr. Burkhart (ph) said in Taiwan. I would simply say that this – the document that was issued from the United States and China was a statement and we thought that the language on the Taiwan Straits was very clear and very positive, and we welcomed the positive developments across the Taiwan Straits. We also very clearly recognize our responsibilities. Before the visit of President Hu, Secretary Clinton reaffirmed our commitment not only to the three communiqués but the Taiwan Relations Act. And President Obama, in his public statements during the visit of President Hu, also underscored our unique responsibilities under the Taiwan Relations Act. Thank you.
I’ll go to – in the back next. Then I’ll come to you.
QUESTION: Thanks. Sean Hannan with AFP.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi, Sean.
QUESTION: I wanted to ask you a bit about the situation in Burma, what’s your reading of things there now In 2011, do you see a resumption of dialogue in any way? And where do things more broadly stand right now? There is the release of Aung San Suu Kyi but also the new parliament in the elections. Are there hopeful signs or is it too early to tell which way things are going?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Well, I think we’ve stated very clearly in the past that we were disappointed with the preparations in advance for the elections held last year, and we think that most of the efforts domestically revealed that the process was fatally flawed. As you know, today the new parliament sits inside the country. We did welcome the release of Aung San Suu Kyi. We have been in deep consultations with her, along with many other nations. And we have encouraged her role and we will be continuing to press the authorities in the country about allowing her political party to take on a legal status despite the ruling of the Supreme Court.
I think, generally speaking, the United States recognizes that there are many problems inside the country. There’s the lack of dialogue with the key ethnic minorities. The vast majority of political prisoners have not been released. There are enormous difficulties to conduct any aspect of civil society. And the country continues to engage in proliferation activities that are antithetical to the maintenance of peace and stability in the region and in violation of UN Security Council resolutions. So there are many problems and many challenges.
I think the United States nevertheless still believes that a form of engagement and testing the leadership in terms of its goals and ambitions is an appropriate next step. And so we will be watching carefully and closely for positive signs. But we also stand ready to take steps, should there be a continuing of – a continuation of negative trends or backtracking even further on the kinds of things that we’d like to see inside the country.
Overall, we remain concerned and disappointed. One of the reasons for this trip was to coordinate closely with our friends in Southeast Asia. You will have seen that several Southeast Asian nations have come out saying it’s time to lift sanctions. We have stated very clearly we think that that is obviously premature and that we are looking for much more concrete steps from the new government as they form a new government policy on a host of issues.
Yeah. The woman and then – sorry, thank you.
QUESTION: Thank you. It’s Jane Cowan from the Australian Broadcasting Corp.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMBELL: Hi, Jane. How are you?
QUESTION: I wonder what consequences you’d say – what potential consequences for Asia and the Pacific from the situation in Egypt, first of all. And also, will the President be visiting Australia, finally, anytime soon?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Okay. First of all, can I just say I think I speak for everyone here and others that we are watching with concern and sadness, with terrible, horrible weather in Queensland and elsewhere. The United States has offered, and we will continue to stand by, to provide direct assistance where we can be helpful to Australia. And we’re in close consultations in a range of venues about how we can do that going forward.
I think there are a number of reactions in Asia to the developments in Egypt. One of them is obviously a concern for whether there will be spillover effects in other parts of the Middle East and what that might mean to regional stability as a whole. I think other countries that have centralized authoritarian leaders are always worried about what the consequences will be and whether there are follow-on effects. And I think there probably is a recognition that such an event really takes an enormous amount of focus from the United States Government, given our strong commitments to the region and also to the people of Egypt, and they are going to want to see that the United States can continue a strong engagement in Asia at the same time that there is deep challenges in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East.
And on issues associated with presidential travel, I will refer you to the White House. So obviously, we are deeply engaged in high-level visits all the time. And I know that we’re looking forward to having closer consultations at a senior level soon, but I really can’t talk much about the President’s travel schedule. Thanks.
MODERATOR: Assistant Secretary Campbell, we should probably shoot to New York.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Okay. Hi.
MODERATOR: New York, go ahead, please.
QUESTION: Hi. Good afternoon, Mr. Campbell. Shehabuddin Kisslu Probe News and BanglaNews24.com. I’d just like to request you to give your answer. Would you kindly just tell us what is the – as you have remarked that the air warnings*, American air warnings* and American engagement in that region – would you kindly tell the U.S. strategic position on the Bangladesh-India-American issue that is in the international forum right now?
And secondly, would you kindly be able to tell us what is the U.S. policy stand on the international tribunal’s trial on crime against humanity in Bangladesh, please?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Okay. Let me take part of that question and then I’m going to have to take for guidance the second part of your question. I know this is going to sound hopelessly bureaucratic, but Bangladesh is not in my area of operation. And so I’d love to be able to give you a knowledgeable answer but I can’t, and so I’m not going to pretend. I’ll have to take that for review and I’ll get back to you.
On the first part of your question, I will say that one of the primary goals of the U.S. Government going forward – and we’d like to expand on this in 2011 and 2012 – is to further seek opportunities and avenues of cooperation: strategic, military, political, with India in the Asian-Pacific region. We believe that Asia’s role, its policy to look east, is now really starting to bear fruit. And we want to work closely with Indian friends on a range of issues – strategy for how to work together in the East Asia summit now that the United States is a full member, working together in the ASEAN Regional Forum, and increasing dialogue and discussions on a range of mutual security issues in Southeast Asia and in Northeast Asia as well.
We have seen in recent months a substantial increase in Indian activities with a variety of states in Southeast Asia, but also most notably with Japan, and we would seek to support that going forward. We have also increased our deliberations with India about a variety of developments in Southeast Asia, and including the Pacific, and we think that this is a very important ingredient. We also, frankly, support an improvement in dialogue between India and China and we would seek to take steps to facilitate that as we move forward. Ultimately, we think that India’s role in the Asian Pacific region is – stands to be one of the most important new developments over the course of the next decade moving forward.
Hi, Nadia (ph).
QUESTION: Hi. Happy New Year.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Happy New Year to you, too. Today, right?
QUESTION: Yeah.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Are you celebrating?
QUESTION: I am.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Good, yeah.
QUESTION: After this briefing. (Laughter.)
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: You look like you’ve been out celebrating.
QUESTION: ( Nadia Tsao, Liberty Times,Taiwan) And I think in the joint statement, there’s a sentence mentioned that you would support and want to see more engagement between Taiwan and China other than economic. You also want to see the political issues advanced. I wonder that – do you have any idea or picture what kind of political engagement that should be? And also, Taiwan’s government mentioned on several occasions, if they want to talk about a political issue with China, they need U.S. support so they can go on with confidence. And – but we haven’t seen much, really, developments between U.S. and Taiwan so far regarding arms sales of F-15s the Taiwan Government’s request or high-level dialogue. But will be able to see some breakthrough this year? Thanks.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Thank you very much. Let me just say it is the position of the U.S. Government not to comment about the security situation in terms of arms sales vis-à-vis Taiwan, so I will not be finding new ground here. This is the longstanding American position. I stand by it.
The language in the joint communiqué is meant to be very careful –
QUESTION: Joint statement.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: In the joint statement, sorry. I didn’t mean the – sorry, stuck in my mind is – in the joint statement was very clear in terms of welcoming contacts across the Taiwan Strait. We believe that those contacts are the business of the people of China and Taiwan to discuss among themselves, to take the appropriate steps at the appropriate timing. The United States takes no particular view. We think it’s extraordinarily important that there be comfort on both sides. Primarily what the joint statement did was to welcome ECFA* and the burgeoning of economic ties between the two countries, between the two sides. And we think that’s an important step in improving confidence. And we know that there are ongoing dialogues across a range of issues, culturally and the like. I think I would just simply say that the United States supports these. And anything that will build trust and confidence to a greater degree, we think is in the best interest not only of the United States but all the peoples involved.
QUESTION: Well, does it mean a breakthrough between U.S. and China on arms levels?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Look, we think we have a strong unofficial relationship with Taiwan. We have a number of interactions with them and those will continue in 2011 and beyond.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Hi. My name is Sungwon Baik from Voice of America Cambodia. Thanks for your briefing. Wondering if North Korea has recently asked a food aid from the United States via their New York dialogue channel?
And related, the famed diplomatic source also mentioned that the United States is positive about resuming aid to North Korea. Could you state your position, please?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yes, very clearly I can state that. I think it would be fair to say that the United States is and continues to monitor the humanitarian situation in North Korea but we have no plans for any contributions at this time.
Question: Ai Awaji, Jiji Press
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Pardon me?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Oh, please, yeah. I’m not – just so you know, I won’t have much more beyond that, but I can repeat the answer, so – (laughter) – go ahead. Go ahead, Ai, ask a question.
QUESTION: Hi. I understand that the United States has expressed its readiness to provide assistance if North Korea agrees some conditions in terms of monitoring, interpreters on food aid before. And I’m wondering if you still have the same position.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: No, I think – let me try this one again. See – I think I can do it with more gusto now. (Laughter.) The United States continues to monitor the humanitarian situation in North Korea but has no plans for any contributions at this time.
QUESTION: I mean, if North Korea had asked food aid.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I think I’ll just stand with that statement, if that’s all right. Thank you.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Hi. Liming Yang from China Youth Daily. During your trip in the Philippines, both sides agree to increase the cooperation in the territorial defense and maritime security. Could you elaborate a little bit about the specific areas in which U.S. and the Philippines are cooperate with?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Thank you. I think I would simply say the United States and the Philippines have had a broad cooperation in the last decade or so that has centered primarily on terrorist issues in Mindanao and elsewhere, and I think that cooperation has been significant and very important, both for the United States and the Philippines. I think there’s a recognition that, in terms of next steps, the United States wants to support the Philippines as it builds capacity and capabilities to better able to monitor the – its territorial waters and elsewhere. And so that process will involve the potential provision of equipment through excess defense sales, training of elements of their coast guard and navy, and deeper consultations at a strategic, political, and military level. And I think we’re committed to do all of those things.
The Philippines remains a strong tree ally, we are committed to its security, and we believe that a carefully designed program which insists on clear progress and close coordination is in the best interests of both countries. Thanks.
MODERATOR: Okay. Just before we proceed, Assistant Secretary Campbell has an engagement after this, so we have time for maybe one or two questions.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I’ll try to take two or three and then – and I’ll move quickly. I’m – it’s my fault. I’m out of practice answering too long.
I’ll take you. Thanks.
QUESTION: Kyoko Yamaguchi from Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper. I have a question about North Korea. I would like to ask you how you plan to address the uranium enrichment program issue. Do you plan to bring this to the Security Council meeting? Or since there is talk of resuming Six-Party Talks, do you plan to bring this as an issue and to be discussed in Six-Party Talks?
And also, if I may, since there would be a meeting between North and South Korea, it’s appearing they are meeting for the military talks, what do you exactly expect to see to come out of this meeting? Thank you.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Let me take the first question first – the second question first. First of all, we welcome a resumption of dialogue. We are in close consultations with our South Korean allies and friends and we fully support them in this overall process. We stand with them in wanting to see from North Korea a sincere commitment to a variety of steps, including a renunciation of the provocative actions of the last half year, a commitment to take the appropriate steps that will allow the Six-Party Talks to resume, and other signals of a desire to work more closely with the South Koreans. We recognize and believe that the essential first step in any process of reengagement with North Korea requires a North-South – a true and significant North-South dialogue.
On the first part of your question, I think I would refer you to what Deputy Secretary Steinberg said when he was in both Japan and South Korea. And I think we believe that the international community and our key partners and allies have been very clear that any uranium enrichment program or any other kind of nuclear program, for that matter, that is being undertaken by the North Koreans is in violation of its commitments and obligations, including the 2005 joint communiqué, UN Security Council provisions, and other international acts. And I think we are working closely with our allies and friends in terms of the appropriate venue to press our case in this regard.
Yeah.
QUESTION: I am Ther N Oo, Voice of America Service. I have a question about the U.S. policy on Burma. Both sanctions and engagement doesn’t seem to be working. So you said that all political prisoners are still in prisons and new parliaments are totally controlled by the military. So do you have any plan to review the policy, on ongoing with this policy? Do you think you can see more hope, to any more hope for the changes in Burma?
ASSISSTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Look, I think one of the things that I will say, we have been disappointed. There’s no question about the overall engagement policy over the course for the last year that was enunciated by President Obama and laid out clearly by Secretary Clinton. We have tried to be very clear about potential steps that Burma could take and that we would respond to accordingly. We have been disappointed basically across the spectrum in this regard.
It is also the case, however, that we believe a degree of engagement serves the best interests of the United States and our regional policy. And we think that it is appropriate to at least create the opportunity to test this new government about whether they are prepared to take the necessary steps to rejoin the international community and also to work more closely with the United States and other partners.
What we have tried to do all along this – in this process is not oversell the results. We’ve never come back and said we’ve made this progress or this step. We’ve tried to be very clear form the outset what we would need to see, and we have never shied from underscoring our disappointment from what we’ve seen from the leadership.
Now it is true that over the course of the last year, there was a lot of uncertainty and maneuvering inside the country in anticipation of this flawed election. I think it’d be fair to say that we are still waiting to see what steps a new government might be prepared to take, although, frankly, we are quite concerned about steps that we’ve seen to date and are not encouraged by the level of dialogue that we’ve seen inside the country. And frankly, we stand with Aung San Suu Kyi in much of what she’s said in terms of giving the government a chance to declare its intentions on a range of issues.
I can take two last questions. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Thanks. Bradney Norington from the Australian newspaper --
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi. Good to see you.
QUESTION: You, too. In light of President Hu’s visit to Washington, do you have confidence in China playing a more positive role in reining in some of the rogue behavior of North Korea and bringing North Korea to the table in meaningful negotiations?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPELL: Thank you. It’s a very good question. I think we had a very constructive set of discussions with China’s interlocutors before and during the visit of President Hu Jintao. And you will have seen in the joint statement and in other statements by both the U.S. and Chinese side, for the first time in many months China has stated very clearly its concern associated with an element of North Korea’s provocative behavior, namely the uranium enrichment program.
I would – I think it’s fair to say that consultations between the United States and China have intensified. We believe that China plays a critical role in a dialogue on the Korean Peninsula and we continue to make clear to our interlocutors in Beijing that it is essential for them to weigh in in Pyongyang about the need for North Korea to renounce its very provocative steps and take sincere efforts to reengage across a range of issue as part of a process towards the Six-Party Talks. And I think we were pleased by some of the interactions that we had with Chinese friends but it is still at the beginning stages, and we will continue to build on that. That’s one of the reasons that Deputy Secretary Steinberg went to Beijing last week.
Last question. Yeah.
QUESTION: Thank you. Patrick Braden from Global Future. In light of all the rumors of Japan’s acceding to The Hague Convention on Child Abductions, do you have any idea of how long it might take to actually return some of these American citizen children who have been abducted illegally from the United States?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I would say just not soon enough, frankly. And I – this is an issue that’s very important to Secretary Clinton and to the White House. I just want to underscore that the situation in which a large number of American families have been separated, that children have been illegally taken from rightful custody situations and are kept away from parents, is a deeply worrisome situation. We are in close consultation with our Japanese friends. We have underscored to them how it is – how essential it is for them to join with the vast majority of the industrialized democracies in signing on to The Hague Convention and taking the necessary steps, not only going forward on these issues but also dealing responsibly and humanely with the existing cases.
I have found that as I – as we put a face on these issues, talk directly to Japanese friends, once they have a greater knowledge of these issues, they, too, want to see justice for these families and this really heartbreaking set of circumstances. So I thank you for the question. It’s going to be important that we see progress soon on this issue. There is a building degree of anxiety, and in some places anger, on Capitol Hill. I’ve been working closely with Japanese counterparts. I’m a very good friend of Japan, very strong supporter of the U.S.-Japan alliance. Let’s take the opportunity over the next several months to get this done and to move beyond this issue and focus on the critical issues between the United States and Japan in a new Asian set of circumstances.
Thank you all very much. I really appreciate being here today.
MODERATOR: Thank you.
Ref:
http://fpc.state.gov/155878.htm
Kurt M. Campbell
Assistant Secretary
Washington, DC
February 2, 2011
Video
2:30 P.M. EST
MODERATOR: Good afternoon and thank you all very much for being with us this afternoon. For the sake of time – I know you all have lots of questions – we’re going to get right into the briefing. Assistant Secretary Campbell will give brief remarks, and then we’ll open it up for question and answer. A caveat to the question-and-answer period, please be advised, again, that only members of the Foreign Press will be able to ask questions. Additionally, members of the Diplomatic Corps are not invited to participate in the question-and-answer period, so please keep that in mind.
Without further ado, Assistant Secretary Campbell.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Thank you very much, and it’s an honor to be back here at the Foreign Press Center. Good afternoon to everyone, nice to see so many friends here today.
I’ll just make a couple of opening comments about if that’s all right, and I’ll be happy to take any questions. I know there are a lot of journalists here from Northeast Asia and I know there’ll be some questions regarding developments in Northeast Asia. But I’ll talk a little bit about just the last couple of weeks in terms of my own activities.
First of all, I think as you all know, we had a successful – we think very highly successful visit of President Hu to Washington two weeks ago. I was deeply engaged in the work with my counterpart Vice Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai on the joint statement and worked closely with my colleague and friend Jeff Bader on all elements of this visit. And I think we were very pleased. I think this was a visit in which we stated very clearly our desire to have a strong, deep, and comprehensive relationship with China, but we also were clear about areas of divergence where we have differences of view and differences of perspective. We didn’t try to hide from those. We were upfront and clear about them. And I think if you look carefully at the speeches given in advance of the visit by Secretaries Geithner, Clinton, and the Secretary of Commerce, you will see a very clear theme in which we articulate areas where we want to work together but also challenges that endure in every particular area.
I’m happy to talk about specifics associated with that trip, but I should just say last week I was in Hawaii and Southeast Asia. I think part of what we are trying to do is send a very clear message that, of course, U.S.-China relations are important, but they are embedded in a broader, wider region, and we are deeply committed not only to our security partners in Northeast Asia, a strong relationship with China, but taking steps to underscore our commitment to renew the engagement in Southeast Asia and also the Pacific.
Too often when we say the Asian Pacific region, the word that gets short shrift in that is the Pacific, and so one of the things that we did in Hawaii was meet a series of our ambassadors in other countries, Pacific nations, who are in many respects suffering from real challenges in terms of climate change, some issues associated with poverty and disease. The United States has taken efforts in the course of last year so to reengage in terms of USAID programs and a variety of steps to underscore an enduring American commitment to the security, to the health and the well-being of the people of the Pacific.
We also had a chance for trilateral coordination between the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. I think as you all have seen that over the course of the last year, we have rebuilt our relationship with New Zealand after a period in which we had very little security interaction. And we are now working closely together on a range of issues. Those discussions between the three nations centered on not only developments in Northeast Asia but developments associated with Fiji and other island nations and developments in the South Pacific.
I also was in Singapore and the Philippines. In the Philippines, we had the first-ever Strategic Dialogue, which brought together my counterpart and good friend from the Defense Department, Derek Mitchell. He led a large delegation. I had a large group from the State Department and other parts of the U.S. Government in which we sat down with our counterparts in the Philippines. And again, this is the first time we’ve ever had such a dialogue to review areas of common purpose, to underscore our strong commitment to the security to the Philippines and to find areas that we can work together in the future.
I think of specific concern was a desire to step up our activities to support the Philippines in terms of maritime awareness, maritime engagement, and other issues associated with the very large area that the Philippines is responsible for in terms of their own territorial waters but also waters adjacent to the Philippines as well. And I think these talks were important. We also underscored that the United States was going to work closely with the Philippines as part of the new program in which enhanced partnership, in which we wanted to work carefully to identify areas of economic and political engagement, allow the Philippines to take the next step on its road to development.
And in Singapore, a close strategic friend in the region, we stopped off for deliberations. They were particularly interested to discuss next steps in the U.S.-China relations. I think what they were particularly interested to know is next steps in the mil-to-mil relationship between the United States and China. I think we were able to tell them that there were some very hopeful steps in terms of the visit of Secretary of Defense Gates to China in the immediate period before the summit, and clearly, there is a roadmap for increasing contacts and engagement. We are looking for a relationship with China’s military that is steady, that is stable, that allows for greater transparency, and also creating mechanisms and procedures whereby if there are accidents or inadvertent developments between the United States and China, we are quickly and reliably able to communicate with our counterparts to ensure that there are no disagreements that cause a disruption to peace and stability.
I would say that if you look into 2011, it is an incredibly consequential year for American policy in the Asian Pacific region across many fronts. We recognize that Asian friends are grateful for a reengagement at the strategic and political level. Obviously, they know of our enduring military commitments in the Asian Pacific region. What they are really looking for us to do is to step up our game economically, commercially, and in the trade realm.
I think one of the most important things that the United States can do in that respect is to recover. And clearly, I think you can see that President Obama is working very closely with new members of his Cabinet and in the White House to underscore his commitment to boost exports, particularly to the Asian Pacific region. There are plans underway now to cement the Korea Free Trade Agreement for full ratification. And obviously, our efforts associated with the transpacific partnership, which would be the most innovative trade agenda that the United States has ever done, has really taken off. There have been substantial and very important discussions with all of the potential partners, and we recognize how significant this will be for us as we move forward.
Later this year, President Obama will represent for the first time the United States at the East Asia summit. We think that’s very significant. We also hold a next round of our U.S.-ASEAN partnership meeting at the head-of-states level. And of course, 2011, the United States is holding and hosting the APEC meeting in Hawaii, in which we are looking to streamline the agenda and make clear the continuing relevance of APEC as an institution in the Asian Pacific region.
So incredibly busy sessions. Secretary Clinton will be hosting her counterparts, along with Secretary Geithner, for next round of the Strategic Economic Dialogue in May. And you will have seen, when President Hu visited, that the United States has announced that Vice President Biden will be going to Asia later this year to meet with the future leader of China as part of a counterpart visit. So we recognize that even with all the challenges and difficulties that we are confronting currently in the Middle East that it is extraordinarily important to underscore that the United States recognizes very clearly that the 21st century is going to be being played out in the Asian Pacific region.
Why don’t I stop at that and I’ll be happy to take questions. And if I could just ask you, just to identify – I know most of you, but just for the record, I’ve been asked to – for each of you to identify yourselves, if you would, please.
Yes, old friend.
QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary Campbell. John Zang with CTI-TV of Taiwan. AID Chair Erin Burkhart (ph) spoke in Taipei and he mentioned that China actually proposed a full communiqué in preparation for President Hu’s visit, but that proposal was rejected by the United States side. Could you share with us on what grounds and how the United States rejected that proposal? Thank you.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: First of all, thank you very much. I’m not going to elaborate on what Mr. Burkhart (ph) said in Taiwan. I would simply say that this – the document that was issued from the United States and China was a statement and we thought that the language on the Taiwan Straits was very clear and very positive, and we welcomed the positive developments across the Taiwan Straits. We also very clearly recognize our responsibilities. Before the visit of President Hu, Secretary Clinton reaffirmed our commitment not only to the three communiqués but the Taiwan Relations Act. And President Obama, in his public statements during the visit of President Hu, also underscored our unique responsibilities under the Taiwan Relations Act. Thank you.
I’ll go to – in the back next. Then I’ll come to you.
QUESTION: Thanks. Sean Hannan with AFP.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi, Sean.
QUESTION: I wanted to ask you a bit about the situation in Burma, what’s your reading of things there now In 2011, do you see a resumption of dialogue in any way? And where do things more broadly stand right now? There is the release of Aung San Suu Kyi but also the new parliament in the elections. Are there hopeful signs or is it too early to tell which way things are going?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Well, I think we’ve stated very clearly in the past that we were disappointed with the preparations in advance for the elections held last year, and we think that most of the efforts domestically revealed that the process was fatally flawed. As you know, today the new parliament sits inside the country. We did welcome the release of Aung San Suu Kyi. We have been in deep consultations with her, along with many other nations. And we have encouraged her role and we will be continuing to press the authorities in the country about allowing her political party to take on a legal status despite the ruling of the Supreme Court.
I think, generally speaking, the United States recognizes that there are many problems inside the country. There’s the lack of dialogue with the key ethnic minorities. The vast majority of political prisoners have not been released. There are enormous difficulties to conduct any aspect of civil society. And the country continues to engage in proliferation activities that are antithetical to the maintenance of peace and stability in the region and in violation of UN Security Council resolutions. So there are many problems and many challenges.
I think the United States nevertheless still believes that a form of engagement and testing the leadership in terms of its goals and ambitions is an appropriate next step. And so we will be watching carefully and closely for positive signs. But we also stand ready to take steps, should there be a continuing of – a continuation of negative trends or backtracking even further on the kinds of things that we’d like to see inside the country.
Overall, we remain concerned and disappointed. One of the reasons for this trip was to coordinate closely with our friends in Southeast Asia. You will have seen that several Southeast Asian nations have come out saying it’s time to lift sanctions. We have stated very clearly we think that that is obviously premature and that we are looking for much more concrete steps from the new government as they form a new government policy on a host of issues.
Yeah. The woman and then – sorry, thank you.
QUESTION: Thank you. It’s Jane Cowan from the Australian Broadcasting Corp.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMBELL: Hi, Jane. How are you?
QUESTION: I wonder what consequences you’d say – what potential consequences for Asia and the Pacific from the situation in Egypt, first of all. And also, will the President be visiting Australia, finally, anytime soon?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Okay. First of all, can I just say I think I speak for everyone here and others that we are watching with concern and sadness, with terrible, horrible weather in Queensland and elsewhere. The United States has offered, and we will continue to stand by, to provide direct assistance where we can be helpful to Australia. And we’re in close consultations in a range of venues about how we can do that going forward.
I think there are a number of reactions in Asia to the developments in Egypt. One of them is obviously a concern for whether there will be spillover effects in other parts of the Middle East and what that might mean to regional stability as a whole. I think other countries that have centralized authoritarian leaders are always worried about what the consequences will be and whether there are follow-on effects. And I think there probably is a recognition that such an event really takes an enormous amount of focus from the United States Government, given our strong commitments to the region and also to the people of Egypt, and they are going to want to see that the United States can continue a strong engagement in Asia at the same time that there is deep challenges in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East.
And on issues associated with presidential travel, I will refer you to the White House. So obviously, we are deeply engaged in high-level visits all the time. And I know that we’re looking forward to having closer consultations at a senior level soon, but I really can’t talk much about the President’s travel schedule. Thanks.
MODERATOR: Assistant Secretary Campbell, we should probably shoot to New York.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Okay. Hi.
MODERATOR: New York, go ahead, please.
QUESTION: Hi. Good afternoon, Mr. Campbell. Shehabuddin Kisslu Probe News and BanglaNews24.com. I’d just like to request you to give your answer. Would you kindly just tell us what is the – as you have remarked that the air warnings*, American air warnings* and American engagement in that region – would you kindly tell the U.S. strategic position on the Bangladesh-India-American issue that is in the international forum right now?
And secondly, would you kindly be able to tell us what is the U.S. policy stand on the international tribunal’s trial on crime against humanity in Bangladesh, please?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Okay. Let me take part of that question and then I’m going to have to take for guidance the second part of your question. I know this is going to sound hopelessly bureaucratic, but Bangladesh is not in my area of operation. And so I’d love to be able to give you a knowledgeable answer but I can’t, and so I’m not going to pretend. I’ll have to take that for review and I’ll get back to you.
On the first part of your question, I will say that one of the primary goals of the U.S. Government going forward – and we’d like to expand on this in 2011 and 2012 – is to further seek opportunities and avenues of cooperation: strategic, military, political, with India in the Asian-Pacific region. We believe that Asia’s role, its policy to look east, is now really starting to bear fruit. And we want to work closely with Indian friends on a range of issues – strategy for how to work together in the East Asia summit now that the United States is a full member, working together in the ASEAN Regional Forum, and increasing dialogue and discussions on a range of mutual security issues in Southeast Asia and in Northeast Asia as well.
We have seen in recent months a substantial increase in Indian activities with a variety of states in Southeast Asia, but also most notably with Japan, and we would seek to support that going forward. We have also increased our deliberations with India about a variety of developments in Southeast Asia, and including the Pacific, and we think that this is a very important ingredient. We also, frankly, support an improvement in dialogue between India and China and we would seek to take steps to facilitate that as we move forward. Ultimately, we think that India’s role in the Asian Pacific region is – stands to be one of the most important new developments over the course of the next decade moving forward.
Hi, Nadia (ph).
QUESTION: Hi. Happy New Year.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Happy New Year to you, too. Today, right?
QUESTION: Yeah.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Are you celebrating?
QUESTION: I am.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Good, yeah.
QUESTION: After this briefing. (Laughter.)
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: You look like you’ve been out celebrating.
QUESTION: ( Nadia Tsao, Liberty Times,Taiwan) And I think in the joint statement, there’s a sentence mentioned that you would support and want to see more engagement between Taiwan and China other than economic. You also want to see the political issues advanced. I wonder that – do you have any idea or picture what kind of political engagement that should be? And also, Taiwan’s government mentioned on several occasions, if they want to talk about a political issue with China, they need U.S. support so they can go on with confidence. And – but we haven’t seen much, really, developments between U.S. and Taiwan so far regarding arms sales of F-15s the Taiwan Government’s request or high-level dialogue. But will be able to see some breakthrough this year? Thanks.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Thank you very much. Let me just say it is the position of the U.S. Government not to comment about the security situation in terms of arms sales vis-à-vis Taiwan, so I will not be finding new ground here. This is the longstanding American position. I stand by it.
The language in the joint communiqué is meant to be very careful –
QUESTION: Joint statement.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: In the joint statement, sorry. I didn’t mean the – sorry, stuck in my mind is – in the joint statement was very clear in terms of welcoming contacts across the Taiwan Strait. We believe that those contacts are the business of the people of China and Taiwan to discuss among themselves, to take the appropriate steps at the appropriate timing. The United States takes no particular view. We think it’s extraordinarily important that there be comfort on both sides. Primarily what the joint statement did was to welcome ECFA* and the burgeoning of economic ties between the two countries, between the two sides. And we think that’s an important step in improving confidence. And we know that there are ongoing dialogues across a range of issues, culturally and the like. I think I would just simply say that the United States supports these. And anything that will build trust and confidence to a greater degree, we think is in the best interest not only of the United States but all the peoples involved.
QUESTION: Well, does it mean a breakthrough between U.S. and China on arms levels?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Look, we think we have a strong unofficial relationship with Taiwan. We have a number of interactions with them and those will continue in 2011 and beyond.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Hi. My name is Sungwon Baik from Voice of America Cambodia. Thanks for your briefing. Wondering if North Korea has recently asked a food aid from the United States via their New York dialogue channel?
And related, the famed diplomatic source also mentioned that the United States is positive about resuming aid to North Korea. Could you state your position, please?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Yes, very clearly I can state that. I think it would be fair to say that the United States is and continues to monitor the humanitarian situation in North Korea but we have no plans for any contributions at this time.
Question: Ai Awaji, Jiji Press
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Pardon me?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Oh, please, yeah. I’m not – just so you know, I won’t have much more beyond that, but I can repeat the answer, so – (laughter) – go ahead. Go ahead, Ai, ask a question.
QUESTION: Hi. I understand that the United States has expressed its readiness to provide assistance if North Korea agrees some conditions in terms of monitoring, interpreters on food aid before. And I’m wondering if you still have the same position.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: No, I think – let me try this one again. See – I think I can do it with more gusto now. (Laughter.) The United States continues to monitor the humanitarian situation in North Korea but has no plans for any contributions at this time.
QUESTION: I mean, if North Korea had asked food aid.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I think I’ll just stand with that statement, if that’s all right. Thank you.
Yeah.
QUESTION: Hi. Liming Yang from China Youth Daily. During your trip in the Philippines, both sides agree to increase the cooperation in the territorial defense and maritime security. Could you elaborate a little bit about the specific areas in which U.S. and the Philippines are cooperate with?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Thank you. I think I would simply say the United States and the Philippines have had a broad cooperation in the last decade or so that has centered primarily on terrorist issues in Mindanao and elsewhere, and I think that cooperation has been significant and very important, both for the United States and the Philippines. I think there’s a recognition that, in terms of next steps, the United States wants to support the Philippines as it builds capacity and capabilities to better able to monitor the – its territorial waters and elsewhere. And so that process will involve the potential provision of equipment through excess defense sales, training of elements of their coast guard and navy, and deeper consultations at a strategic, political, and military level. And I think we’re committed to do all of those things.
The Philippines remains a strong tree ally, we are committed to its security, and we believe that a carefully designed program which insists on clear progress and close coordination is in the best interests of both countries. Thanks.
MODERATOR: Okay. Just before we proceed, Assistant Secretary Campbell has an engagement after this, so we have time for maybe one or two questions.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I’ll try to take two or three and then – and I’ll move quickly. I’m – it’s my fault. I’m out of practice answering too long.
I’ll take you. Thanks.
QUESTION: Kyoko Yamaguchi from Japan’s Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper. I have a question about North Korea. I would like to ask you how you plan to address the uranium enrichment program issue. Do you plan to bring this to the Security Council meeting? Or since there is talk of resuming Six-Party Talks, do you plan to bring this as an issue and to be discussed in Six-Party Talks?
And also, if I may, since there would be a meeting between North and South Korea, it’s appearing they are meeting for the military talks, what do you exactly expect to see to come out of this meeting? Thank you.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Let me take the first question first – the second question first. First of all, we welcome a resumption of dialogue. We are in close consultations with our South Korean allies and friends and we fully support them in this overall process. We stand with them in wanting to see from North Korea a sincere commitment to a variety of steps, including a renunciation of the provocative actions of the last half year, a commitment to take the appropriate steps that will allow the Six-Party Talks to resume, and other signals of a desire to work more closely with the South Koreans. We recognize and believe that the essential first step in any process of reengagement with North Korea requires a North-South – a true and significant North-South dialogue.
On the first part of your question, I think I would refer you to what Deputy Secretary Steinberg said when he was in both Japan and South Korea. And I think we believe that the international community and our key partners and allies have been very clear that any uranium enrichment program or any other kind of nuclear program, for that matter, that is being undertaken by the North Koreans is in violation of its commitments and obligations, including the 2005 joint communiqué, UN Security Council provisions, and other international acts. And I think we are working closely with our allies and friends in terms of the appropriate venue to press our case in this regard.
Yeah.
QUESTION: I am Ther N Oo, Voice of America Service. I have a question about the U.S. policy on Burma. Both sanctions and engagement doesn’t seem to be working. So you said that all political prisoners are still in prisons and new parliaments are totally controlled by the military. So do you have any plan to review the policy, on ongoing with this policy? Do you think you can see more hope, to any more hope for the changes in Burma?
ASSISSTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Look, I think one of the things that I will say, we have been disappointed. There’s no question about the overall engagement policy over the course for the last year that was enunciated by President Obama and laid out clearly by Secretary Clinton. We have tried to be very clear about potential steps that Burma could take and that we would respond to accordingly. We have been disappointed basically across the spectrum in this regard.
It is also the case, however, that we believe a degree of engagement serves the best interests of the United States and our regional policy. And we think that it is appropriate to at least create the opportunity to test this new government about whether they are prepared to take the necessary steps to rejoin the international community and also to work more closely with the United States and other partners.
What we have tried to do all along this – in this process is not oversell the results. We’ve never come back and said we’ve made this progress or this step. We’ve tried to be very clear form the outset what we would need to see, and we have never shied from underscoring our disappointment from what we’ve seen from the leadership.
Now it is true that over the course of the last year, there was a lot of uncertainty and maneuvering inside the country in anticipation of this flawed election. I think it’d be fair to say that we are still waiting to see what steps a new government might be prepared to take, although, frankly, we are quite concerned about steps that we’ve seen to date and are not encouraged by the level of dialogue that we’ve seen inside the country. And frankly, we stand with Aung San Suu Kyi in much of what she’s said in terms of giving the government a chance to declare its intentions on a range of issues.
I can take two last questions. Yes, sir.
QUESTION: Thanks. Bradney Norington from the Australian newspaper --
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: Hi. Good to see you.
QUESTION: You, too. In light of President Hu’s visit to Washington, do you have confidence in China playing a more positive role in reining in some of the rogue behavior of North Korea and bringing North Korea to the table in meaningful negotiations?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPELL: Thank you. It’s a very good question. I think we had a very constructive set of discussions with China’s interlocutors before and during the visit of President Hu Jintao. And you will have seen in the joint statement and in other statements by both the U.S. and Chinese side, for the first time in many months China has stated very clearly its concern associated with an element of North Korea’s provocative behavior, namely the uranium enrichment program.
I would – I think it’s fair to say that consultations between the United States and China have intensified. We believe that China plays a critical role in a dialogue on the Korean Peninsula and we continue to make clear to our interlocutors in Beijing that it is essential for them to weigh in in Pyongyang about the need for North Korea to renounce its very provocative steps and take sincere efforts to reengage across a range of issue as part of a process towards the Six-Party Talks. And I think we were pleased by some of the interactions that we had with Chinese friends but it is still at the beginning stages, and we will continue to build on that. That’s one of the reasons that Deputy Secretary Steinberg went to Beijing last week.
Last question. Yeah.
QUESTION: Thank you. Patrick Braden from Global Future. In light of all the rumors of Japan’s acceding to The Hague Convention on Child Abductions, do you have any idea of how long it might take to actually return some of these American citizen children who have been abducted illegally from the United States?
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CAMPBELL: I would say just not soon enough, frankly. And I – this is an issue that’s very important to Secretary Clinton and to the White House. I just want to underscore that the situation in which a large number of American families have been separated, that children have been illegally taken from rightful custody situations and are kept away from parents, is a deeply worrisome situation. We are in close consultation with our Japanese friends. We have underscored to them how it is – how essential it is for them to join with the vast majority of the industrialized democracies in signing on to The Hague Convention and taking the necessary steps, not only going forward on these issues but also dealing responsibly and humanely with the existing cases.
I have found that as I – as we put a face on these issues, talk directly to Japanese friends, once they have a greater knowledge of these issues, they, too, want to see justice for these families and this really heartbreaking set of circumstances. So I thank you for the question. It’s going to be important that we see progress soon on this issue. There is a building degree of anxiety, and in some places anger, on Capitol Hill. I’ve been working closely with Japanese counterparts. I’m a very good friend of Japan, very strong supporter of the U.S.-Japan alliance. Let’s take the opportunity over the next several months to get this done and to move beyond this issue and focus on the critical issues between the United States and Japan in a new Asian set of circumstances.
Thank you all very much. I really appreciate being here today.
MODERATOR: Thank you.
Ref:
http://fpc.state.gov/155878.htm
Asian History Lessons By PHILIP BOWRING (New York Times The Opinion Pages)
Asian History Lessons
By PHILIP BOWRING
Published: February 15, 2011
I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor
HONG KONG — With Egypt both hopeful and uncertain in the aftermath of Hosni Mubarak’s departure, it is worth reflecting on lessons that may be learned from the fall of two of Asia’s U.S.-allied strongmen, the Philippines’ Ferdinand Marcos in 1986 and Indonesia’s Suharto in 1998.
All three had in common that they followed rigged elections, suggesting that phony democracy can be more dangerous for dictators than none at all (a thought that may give hope in Myanmar). In all three, the military was an important factor but not the driving force, which in each case was the populace in the streets.
The relatively orderly transitions in Indonesia and the Philippines give clues to how a similar result may be possible in Egypt.
Indonesia’s was perhaps the most remarkable and surprising transition, given that Suharto’s downfall coincided with — and was partly caused by — the collapse of the economy at the time of the Asian financial crisis. Much of the banking system had failed and unemployment had soared.
This diverse country also faced rebellions in Timor and Aceh and separatist tendencies elsewhere. Relatively homogeneous ethnically and suffering economic malaise rather than crisis, Egypt faces no such high hurdles.
So how did Indonesia come through? One reason was that it had a constitution, dating to 1945, to which Suharto had always nominally adhered. So when he resigned, the vice president, whose time in the regime had been short-lived, was seen as an acceptable transitional figure.
It helped, too, that political parties that reflected the major political and religious groups of society had operated legally for several years. The media had long been pushing the envelope of freedom.
In the Philippines, the opposition had a figure — the future president Corazon Aquino, widow of an assassinated Marcos opponent — as its standard-bearer. It operated in a country that had never been as tightly controlled as either Indonesia or Egypt. And the Philippines had a small elite used to swapping places in power; they were mostly more interested in money than killing each other.
Egypt now starts with a revoked constitution, temporary military rule and political parties that, with the exception of the Muslim Brotherhood, appear relatively undeveloped. It also, as yet, lacks a person or party to lead. Nor is it yet clear that the Egyptian masses will rally to the idea of liberal democracy as Indonesians and Filipinos have done rather than opt for a new, possibly Islam-based, authoritarianism.
Because of its diversity, Indonesia can only survive if pluralism is its basis. Egypt has no such constraint, but it has had 5,000 years of history to teach it the follies of ideology and extremism.
If Asia is an example, political change will probably not undo the liberal economic tendencies that Mubarak had showed in reversing the socialism inherited from the era of President Gamal Abdel Nasser. Indeed, if Indonesia is any guide, the reaction against crony capitalism will open the economy up to competition.
There is the danger that a reaction against the corruption under Mubarak will lead not just to attempts to recover ill-gotten gains from Swiss banks, but to an attack on the credibility of all business that have prospered under the ousted regime. As in Asia, family wealth is now in legitimate businesses and held through third parties.
For the longer term, Egypt might just get a new set of cronies, or the gradual return of old ones, as has happened in Indonesia and the Philippines. But that is another issue.
In Indonesia and the Philippines, efforts to prosecute past misdeeds soon lost steam, which was a poor reflection on good governance but allowed for an atmosphere of forgiveness that contributed to political stability.
Some Egyptian distancing from the U.S. is inevitable, just as the post-Marcos legislature got rid of U.S. military bases. But nothing fundamentally changed in Washington’s relationship with either the Philippines or Indonesia. By that measure, the most important foreign aspect of the Tahrir revolution will be its impact on Arab politics.
Egypt’s centrality to the Arab world, and to all Middle East politics, give it an importance that surpasses its size. Nonetheless, the “people power” experiences of two larger but less central Asian nations give some encouragement as Egypt feels its way to the future.
A version of this op-ed appeared in print on February 16, 2011, in The International Herald Tribune.
Ref:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/opinion/16iht-edbowring16.html?_r=1&ref=global
(OPINION)
By PHILIP BOWRING
Published: February 15, 2011
I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor
HONG KONG — With Egypt both hopeful and uncertain in the aftermath of Hosni Mubarak’s departure, it is worth reflecting on lessons that may be learned from the fall of two of Asia’s U.S.-allied strongmen, the Philippines’ Ferdinand Marcos in 1986 and Indonesia’s Suharto in 1998.
All three had in common that they followed rigged elections, suggesting that phony democracy can be more dangerous for dictators than none at all (a thought that may give hope in Myanmar). In all three, the military was an important factor but not the driving force, which in each case was the populace in the streets.
The relatively orderly transitions in Indonesia and the Philippines give clues to how a similar result may be possible in Egypt.
Indonesia’s was perhaps the most remarkable and surprising transition, given that Suharto’s downfall coincided with — and was partly caused by — the collapse of the economy at the time of the Asian financial crisis. Much of the banking system had failed and unemployment had soared.
This diverse country also faced rebellions in Timor and Aceh and separatist tendencies elsewhere. Relatively homogeneous ethnically and suffering economic malaise rather than crisis, Egypt faces no such high hurdles.
So how did Indonesia come through? One reason was that it had a constitution, dating to 1945, to which Suharto had always nominally adhered. So when he resigned, the vice president, whose time in the regime had been short-lived, was seen as an acceptable transitional figure.
It helped, too, that political parties that reflected the major political and religious groups of society had operated legally for several years. The media had long been pushing the envelope of freedom.
In the Philippines, the opposition had a figure — the future president Corazon Aquino, widow of an assassinated Marcos opponent — as its standard-bearer. It operated in a country that had never been as tightly controlled as either Indonesia or Egypt. And the Philippines had a small elite used to swapping places in power; they were mostly more interested in money than killing each other.
Egypt now starts with a revoked constitution, temporary military rule and political parties that, with the exception of the Muslim Brotherhood, appear relatively undeveloped. It also, as yet, lacks a person or party to lead. Nor is it yet clear that the Egyptian masses will rally to the idea of liberal democracy as Indonesians and Filipinos have done rather than opt for a new, possibly Islam-based, authoritarianism.
Because of its diversity, Indonesia can only survive if pluralism is its basis. Egypt has no such constraint, but it has had 5,000 years of history to teach it the follies of ideology and extremism.
If Asia is an example, political change will probably not undo the liberal economic tendencies that Mubarak had showed in reversing the socialism inherited from the era of President Gamal Abdel Nasser. Indeed, if Indonesia is any guide, the reaction against crony capitalism will open the economy up to competition.
There is the danger that a reaction against the corruption under Mubarak will lead not just to attempts to recover ill-gotten gains from Swiss banks, but to an attack on the credibility of all business that have prospered under the ousted regime. As in Asia, family wealth is now in legitimate businesses and held through third parties.
For the longer term, Egypt might just get a new set of cronies, or the gradual return of old ones, as has happened in Indonesia and the Philippines. But that is another issue.
In Indonesia and the Philippines, efforts to prosecute past misdeeds soon lost steam, which was a poor reflection on good governance but allowed for an atmosphere of forgiveness that contributed to political stability.
Some Egyptian distancing from the U.S. is inevitable, just as the post-Marcos legislature got rid of U.S. military bases. But nothing fundamentally changed in Washington’s relationship with either the Philippines or Indonesia. By that measure, the most important foreign aspect of the Tahrir revolution will be its impact on Arab politics.
Egypt’s centrality to the Arab world, and to all Middle East politics, give it an importance that surpasses its size. Nonetheless, the “people power” experiences of two larger but less central Asian nations give some encouragement as Egypt feels its way to the future.
A version of this op-ed appeared in print on February 16, 2011, in The International Herald Tribune.
Ref:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/opinion/16iht-edbowring16.html?_r=1&ref=global
(OPINION)
ရွင္ေက်ာ္ဘုရားပြဲမွ ထူးျခား ျဖစ္ရပ္မ်ားႏွင့္ အဖမ္းအဆီး သတင္း
ရွင္ေက်ာ္ဘုရားပြဲမွ ထူးျခား ျဖစ္ရပ္မ်ားႏွင့္ အဖမ္းအဆီး သတင္း
2/15/2011
-------------
ေမာင္ေအး
-------------
ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္ ေျမာက္ဦးျမိဳ႕မွ နာမည္ၾကီး ရွင္ေက်ာ္မုနိ ဘုရားပြဲေတာ္ကို ေဖေဖၚ၀ါရီလ ၁ ရက္ေန႕မွ ၃ ရက္ေန႕ထိ စည္ကားသိုက္ျမိဳက္စြာ က်င္းပခဲ့ရာ ပြဲေတာ္ကာလအတြင္း ထူးျခားေသာ ျဖစ္ရပ္မ်ား ျဖစ္ပြားခဲ့သည္ဟု ပြဲေတာ္သို႕ သြားေရာက္ခဲ့သူမ်ားက ေျပာသည္။
Alodawpyei
Photo: Alodawpyei
ပြဲေတာ္သုိ႕ သြားေရာက္ခဲ့သူ တစ္ဦးက “ ဒီႏွစ္ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ ဘုရားပြဲမွာ ထူးျခားတဲ့ ျဖစ္ရပ္ေတြ တစ္ခုျပီး တစ္ခုေပၚေပါက္ခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ခါတိုင္းႏွစ္ေတြမွာ ျပဳလုပ္တဲ့ ဘုရားပြဲ မတူတဲ့ ထူးျခားတဲ့ ျဖစ္ရပ္ေတြ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္” ဟု ေျပာသည္။
ရွင္ေက်ာ္ဘုရားပြဲ၏ ယခုႏွစ္ထူးျခားမူမွာ ပြဲေတာ္အား ျပာသိုလကြယ္ေန႕တြင္ ျပဳလုပ္ျခင္း၊ ပြဲေတာ္အတြင္း သားမိႏွစ္ဦး ေရနစ္ေသဆံုးျခင္း၊ ဘုရားပြဲေတာ္အတြင္း ထီးေတာ္တင္ရန္ စီစဥ္ေနစဥ္ ရဟန္းေတာ္ တစ္ပါးမွ “ ေအာင္ျပီ” “ ေအာင္ျပီဟု ဆိုကာ အနီးအနားတြင္ ထိုင္ေနေသာ အေနာက္ပိုင္းတိုင္း တိုင္းမွဴး ဗုိလ္မွဴးခ်ဳပ္ စိုးသိန္းႏွင့္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီးမ်ားကို ကန္ေက်ာက္ျခင္းမ်ားကို ျပဳလုပ္ခဲ့ျခင္းမ်ား ျဖစ္ၾကသည္။
မ်က္ျမင္ ရဟန္းေတာ္ တစ္ပါးက “ ျပာသုိလကြယ္ေန႕ နံနက္ပိုင္း ၈ နာရီ ၉ နာရီခန္႕ရွိမယ္ ထင္ပါတယ္။ တိ္ုင္းမွဴး အပါအ၀င္ အလိုေတာ္ျပည့္ ဆရာေတာ္ ဘုရားၾကီးတို႕ ထီးေတာ္တင္ဖို႕ ျပင္ဆင္ ေနခ်ိန္မွာ တိမ္ညိဳနားမွာ ရွိတဲ့ သေျပကန္ ဆရာေတာ္ ဦးသု၀႑က နတ္ပူးတယ္လို႕ ေျပာပါတယ္။ တိုင္းမွဴး စိုးသိန္းကို ေျခေထာက္နဲ႕ ကန္တယ္။ အလိုေတာ္ျပည့္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီးကိုလည္း လည္ပင္း ညစ္ဖို႕ လုပ္ပါတယ္။ ပီးရင္ ေအာင္ျပီ ေအာင္ျပီလို႕လည္း ေအာ္ပါတယ္။ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီး ရုပ္ထုကိုလည္း ေျခေထာက္နဲ႕ ကန္ပါတယ္။ တိုင္းမွဴးအနားမွာ လံုျခံဳေရး ယူထားတဲ့ စစ္သားနဲ႕ ရဲေတြက ဦးသု၀႑ကို ဖမ္းဖို႕ လုပ္ပါတယ္။ ပြဲေတာ္ကို ေရာက္ေနတဲ့ ကိုေနထက္လင္းတို႕ ကုိဘုန္းလွ်ံတို႕ထင္ပါတယ္။ တစ္ခုခု မွားျပီး စိတ္ေဖါက္ျပန္တဲ့ အတြက္ ျဖစ္တာပါ။ ဘာမွ မလုပ္ၾကပါနဲ႕။ မလုပ္ၾကပါနဲ႕လို႕ စပီကာကတဆင့္ ေအာ္ေတာ့ ခဏေလးအၾကာမွာ ဘုန္းၾကီး ျငိမ္က်သြားတယ္။ ျဖစ္တာက ငါးမိနစ္ေလာက္ဘဲ ၾကာပါတယ္” ဟု ေျပာသည္။
Alodawpyei
Photo: Alodawpyei
အဆိုပါ ျဖစ္စဥ္ကို တျခား စစ္ေတြမွ လူငယ္ တစ္ဦးကလည္း အတည္ျပဳေျပာၾကားသည္။
“ထီးေတာ္တင္ေနတဲ့ အခ်ိန္မွာ ျဖစ္တာပါ။ နတ္၀င္တယ္လို႕ ေျပာပါတယ္။ “ေအာင္ျပီ ေအာင္ျပီ”လို႕ ေအာ္တယ္။ ျပီးေတာ့တိုင္းမွဴး စိုးသိန္းကို ေျခနဲ႕ကန္တယ္။ ေနာက္ျပီး အလိုေတာ္ျပည့္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီး လက္ကိုလည္း ကိုက္တယ္လို႕ ေျပာပါတယ္။ ကၽြန္ေတာ္တို႕ အေ၀းက ဆိုေတာ့ ဘာျဖစ္ခဲ့တယ္ဆိုတာ တိတိက်က် ေျပာဖို႕ ခက္ပါတယ္။”
တျခားဆရာေတာ္ တစ္ပါးကလည္း အဆိုပါ ျဖစ္စဥ္မွာ ဟုတ္မွန္ေၾကာင္း ေျပာၾကားေသာ္လည္း အဆိုပါ ဆရာေတာ္ သု၀႑မွာ စိတ္ေဖါက္ျပန္ေနသည့္ ရဟန္း တစ္ပါး ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း အတည္ျပဳ ေျပာၾကားသည္။
အဆိုပါ ျဖစ္စဥ္ႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္ျပီး ေသြးရိုးသားရိုး ျဖစ္သလား၊ အဆိုပါ ျဖစ္စဥ္ ေနာက္ကြယ္တြင္ ထူးျခားေသာ အေၾကာင္းအရာမ်ား ရွိေနသလားဟု ဆိုကာ ရခိုင္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီးမ်ား အၾကား အမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳး ေ၀ဖန္ ေျပာဆိုမူမ်ား ထြက္ေပၚေနသည္ဟုလည္း သိရသည္။
၎ျပင္ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ေက်းရြာမွ ကူးတို႕သည္ ဦးလွေမာင္သိန္း (၃၅ ႏွစ္)အားလည္း ေလွနစ္၍ ေသဆံုးသြားသူ သားမိႏွစ္ဦး၏ ေဆြမ်ိဳးမ်ားမွ တစံုတရာ အမႈ မလုပ္လိုပါဟု ေျပာေသာ္လည္း ရဲက ဖမ္းဆီးထားျပီး မနက္ျဖန္တြင္ ေျမာက္ဦးျမိဳ႕နယ္ တရားရံုးတြင္ ရံုးထုတ္မည္ဟု သိရသည္။
ယခုႏွစ္ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ပြဲေတာ္တြင္ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ဘုရား ထီးေတာ္တင္ပြဲႏွင္ အတူ ရခိုင္မွ နာမည္ၾကီး အဆိုေတာ္မ်ား အျပင္ ရန္ကုန္မွ အဆိုေတာ္မ်ားလည္း လာေရာက္ ေျဖေဖ်ာ္ခဲ့ၾကသျဖင့္ ပြဲေတာ္သို႕ လူေပါင္း (၂) သိန္းခန္႕ ေရာက္ရွိခဲ့ကာ အထူး စည္ကားခဲ့သည္ဟု သိရသည္။
အဆိုပါ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ ဘုရား စိန္ဖူးေတာ္၊ ဌက္မ်က္နားေတာ္၊ ေရႊထီးေတာ္ တို႔အား ရန္ကုန္ျမိဳ႔ ေန အလိုေတာ္ျပည့္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီး၏ တပည့္ဒကာ - ဒကာမ ဦးေဇာ္၀င္းေအာင္ ဇနီး ေဒၚ၀ါ၀ါေအာင္ (ေရႊမိုးဦးကုမၸဏီနွင့္ - GDE¬-) ကုမၸဏီ မိသားစု တို႔ မွ လွဴဒါန္းခဲ့ျပီး ေရႊထီးေတာ္ နွင့္ စိန္ဖူးေတာ္တင္ မဂၤလာ အခမ္းအနားသို႔ ပင့္ သံဃာ (၁၀၈)ပါး နွင့္ ဖိတ္ၾကားထားေသာ ဧည့္သည့္ေတာ္ (၅၀၀)ေယာက္ တက္ေရာက္ ခဲ့သည္ ဟု အလုိေတာ္ျပည့္ ၀က္ဆိုက္တြင္ ေဖၚျပထားသည္။
Ref:
http://www.narinjara.com/detailsbur.asp?id=3040
2/15/2011
-------------
ေမာင္ေအး
-------------
ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္ ေျမာက္ဦးျမိဳ႕မွ နာမည္ၾကီး ရွင္ေက်ာ္မုနိ ဘုရားပြဲေတာ္ကို ေဖေဖၚ၀ါရီလ ၁ ရက္ေန႕မွ ၃ ရက္ေန႕ထိ စည္ကားသိုက္ျမိဳက္စြာ က်င္းပခဲ့ရာ ပြဲေတာ္ကာလအတြင္း ထူးျခားေသာ ျဖစ္ရပ္မ်ား ျဖစ္ပြားခဲ့သည္ဟု ပြဲေတာ္သို႕ သြားေရာက္ခဲ့သူမ်ားက ေျပာသည္။
Alodawpyei
Photo: Alodawpyei
ပြဲေတာ္သုိ႕ သြားေရာက္ခဲ့သူ တစ္ဦးက “ ဒီႏွစ္ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ ဘုရားပြဲမွာ ထူးျခားတဲ့ ျဖစ္ရပ္ေတြ တစ္ခုျပီး တစ္ခုေပၚေပါက္ခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ခါတိုင္းႏွစ္ေတြမွာ ျပဳလုပ္တဲ့ ဘုရားပြဲ မတူတဲ့ ထူးျခားတဲ့ ျဖစ္ရပ္ေတြ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္” ဟု ေျပာသည္။
ရွင္ေက်ာ္ဘုရားပြဲ၏ ယခုႏွစ္ထူးျခားမူမွာ ပြဲေတာ္အား ျပာသိုလကြယ္ေန႕တြင္ ျပဳလုပ္ျခင္း၊ ပြဲေတာ္အတြင္း သားမိႏွစ္ဦး ေရနစ္ေသဆံုးျခင္း၊ ဘုရားပြဲေတာ္အတြင္း ထီးေတာ္တင္ရန္ စီစဥ္ေနစဥ္ ရဟန္းေတာ္ တစ္ပါးမွ “ ေအာင္ျပီ” “ ေအာင္ျပီဟု ဆိုကာ အနီးအနားတြင္ ထိုင္ေနေသာ အေနာက္ပိုင္းတိုင္း တိုင္းမွဴး ဗုိလ္မွဴးခ်ဳပ္ စိုးသိန္းႏွင့္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီးမ်ားကို ကန္ေက်ာက္ျခင္းမ်ားကို ျပဳလုပ္ခဲ့ျခင္းမ်ား ျဖစ္ၾကသည္။
မ်က္ျမင္ ရဟန္းေတာ္ တစ္ပါးက “ ျပာသုိလကြယ္ေန႕ နံနက္ပိုင္း ၈ နာရီ ၉ နာရီခန္႕ရွိမယ္ ထင္ပါတယ္။ တိ္ုင္းမွဴး အပါအ၀င္ အလိုေတာ္ျပည့္ ဆရာေတာ္ ဘုရားၾကီးတို႕ ထီးေတာ္တင္ဖို႕ ျပင္ဆင္ ေနခ်ိန္မွာ တိမ္ညိဳနားမွာ ရွိတဲ့ သေျပကန္ ဆရာေတာ္ ဦးသု၀႑က နတ္ပူးတယ္လို႕ ေျပာပါတယ္။ တိုင္းမွဴး စိုးသိန္းကို ေျခေထာက္နဲ႕ ကန္တယ္။ အလိုေတာ္ျပည့္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီးကိုလည္း လည္ပင္း ညစ္ဖို႕ လုပ္ပါတယ္။ ပီးရင္ ေအာင္ျပီ ေအာင္ျပီလို႕လည္း ေအာ္ပါတယ္။ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီး ရုပ္ထုကိုလည္း ေျခေထာက္နဲ႕ ကန္ပါတယ္။ တိုင္းမွဴးအနားမွာ လံုျခံဳေရး ယူထားတဲ့ စစ္သားနဲ႕ ရဲေတြက ဦးသု၀႑ကို ဖမ္းဖို႕ လုပ္ပါတယ္။ ပြဲေတာ္ကို ေရာက္ေနတဲ့ ကိုေနထက္လင္းတို႕ ကုိဘုန္းလွ်ံတို႕ထင္ပါတယ္။ တစ္ခုခု မွားျပီး စိတ္ေဖါက္ျပန္တဲ့ အတြက္ ျဖစ္တာပါ။ ဘာမွ မလုပ္ၾကပါနဲ႕။ မလုပ္ၾကပါနဲ႕လို႕ စပီကာကတဆင့္ ေအာ္ေတာ့ ခဏေလးအၾကာမွာ ဘုန္းၾကီး ျငိမ္က်သြားတယ္။ ျဖစ္တာက ငါးမိနစ္ေလာက္ဘဲ ၾကာပါတယ္” ဟု ေျပာသည္။
Alodawpyei
Photo: Alodawpyei
အဆိုပါ ျဖစ္စဥ္ကို တျခား စစ္ေတြမွ လူငယ္ တစ္ဦးကလည္း အတည္ျပဳေျပာၾကားသည္။
“ထီးေတာ္တင္ေနတဲ့ အခ်ိန္မွာ ျဖစ္တာပါ။ နတ္၀င္တယ္လို႕ ေျပာပါတယ္။ “ေအာင္ျပီ ေအာင္ျပီ”လို႕ ေအာ္တယ္။ ျပီးေတာ့တိုင္းမွဴး စိုးသိန္းကို ေျခနဲ႕ကန္တယ္။ ေနာက္ျပီး အလိုေတာ္ျပည့္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီး လက္ကိုလည္း ကိုက္တယ္လို႕ ေျပာပါတယ္။ ကၽြန္ေတာ္တို႕ အေ၀းက ဆိုေတာ့ ဘာျဖစ္ခဲ့တယ္ဆိုတာ တိတိက်က် ေျပာဖို႕ ခက္ပါတယ္။”
တျခားဆရာေတာ္ တစ္ပါးကလည္း အဆိုပါ ျဖစ္စဥ္မွာ ဟုတ္မွန္ေၾကာင္း ေျပာၾကားေသာ္လည္း အဆိုပါ ဆရာေတာ္ သု၀႑မွာ စိတ္ေဖါက္ျပန္ေနသည့္ ရဟန္း တစ္ပါး ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း အတည္ျပဳ ေျပာၾကားသည္။
အဆိုပါ ျဖစ္စဥ္ႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္ျပီး ေသြးရိုးသားရိုး ျဖစ္သလား၊ အဆိုပါ ျဖစ္စဥ္ ေနာက္ကြယ္တြင္ ထူးျခားေသာ အေၾကာင္းအရာမ်ား ရွိေနသလားဟု ဆိုကာ ရခိုင္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီးမ်ား အၾကား အမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳး ေ၀ဖန္ ေျပာဆိုမူမ်ား ထြက္ေပၚေနသည္ဟုလည္း သိရသည္။
၎ျပင္ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ေက်းရြာမွ ကူးတို႕သည္ ဦးလွေမာင္သိန္း (၃၅ ႏွစ္)အားလည္း ေလွနစ္၍ ေသဆံုးသြားသူ သားမိႏွစ္ဦး၏ ေဆြမ်ိဳးမ်ားမွ တစံုတရာ အမႈ မလုပ္လိုပါဟု ေျပာေသာ္လည္း ရဲက ဖမ္းဆီးထားျပီး မနက္ျဖန္တြင္ ေျမာက္ဦးျမိဳ႕နယ္ တရားရံုးတြင္ ရံုးထုတ္မည္ဟု သိရသည္။
ယခုႏွစ္ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ပြဲေတာ္တြင္ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ဘုရား ထီးေတာ္တင္ပြဲႏွင္ အတူ ရခိုင္မွ နာမည္ၾကီး အဆိုေတာ္မ်ား အျပင္ ရန္ကုန္မွ အဆိုေတာ္မ်ားလည္း လာေရာက္ ေျဖေဖ်ာ္ခဲ့ၾကသျဖင့္ ပြဲေတာ္သို႕ လူေပါင္း (၂) သိန္းခန္႕ ေရာက္ရွိခဲ့ကာ အထူး စည္ကားခဲ့သည္ဟု သိရသည္။
အဆိုပါ ရွင္ေက်ာ္ ဘုရား စိန္ဖူးေတာ္၊ ဌက္မ်က္နားေတာ္၊ ေရႊထီးေတာ္ တို႔အား ရန္ကုန္ျမိဳ႔ ေန အလိုေတာ္ျပည့္ ဆရာေတာ္ၾကီး၏ တပည့္ဒကာ - ဒကာမ ဦးေဇာ္၀င္းေအာင္ ဇနီး ေဒၚ၀ါ၀ါေအာင္ (ေရႊမိုးဦးကုမၸဏီနွင့္ - GDE¬-) ကုမၸဏီ မိသားစု တို႔ မွ လွဴဒါန္းခဲ့ျပီး ေရႊထီးေတာ္ နွင့္ စိန္ဖူးေတာ္တင္ မဂၤလာ အခမ္းအနားသို႔ ပင့္ သံဃာ (၁၀၈)ပါး နွင့္ ဖိတ္ၾကားထားေသာ ဧည့္သည့္ေတာ္ (၅၀၀)ေယာက္ တက္ေရာက္ ခဲ့သည္ ဟု အလုိေတာ္ျပည့္ ၀က္ဆိုက္တြင္ ေဖၚျပထားသည္။
Ref:
http://www.narinjara.com/detailsbur.asp?id=3040
Monday, February 14, 2011
China overtakes Japan as world's second-biggest economy
China overtakes Japan as world's second-biggest economy
14 February 2011 Last updated at 06:19 ET
China has overtaken Japan as the world's second-biggest economy.
Japan's economy was worth $5.474 trillion (£3.414 trillion) at the end of 2010, figures from Tokyo have shown. China's economy was closer to $5.8 trillion in the same period.
Japan has been hit by a drop in exports and consumer demand, while China has enjoyed a manufacturing boom.
At its current rate of growth, analysts see China replacing the US as the world's top economy in about a decade.
"It's realistic to say that within 10 years China will be roughly the same size as the US economy," said Tom Miller of GK Dragonomics, a Beijing-based economic consultancy.
The US economy is currently almost three times the size of the Chinese economy in dollar terms. The UK's economy is estimated to be the world's sixth largest.
Overseas risk
Japan played down the significance of the shift in the economic league table, and the fact that it has been replaced as the second-largest economy for the first time in more than four decades.
"As an economy, we are not competing for rankings but working to improve citizens' lives," said Economics Minister Kaoru Yosano.
The minister added that China's booming economy was welcome news for Japan as a neighbouring country.
China is now Japan's main trading partner and is increasingly important to companies such as electronics firm Sony and carmakers like Honda and Toyota.
However, Mr Yosano said that Japan needed to watch closely "risks from overseas economies and currency moves".
Negative demand
The yen has been strengthening against other currencies, recently touching a 15-year high against the dollar, and the fear is that the currency's gains may hurt foreign demand for Japanese products.
According to the latest figures from Tokyo, Japan's economy contracted at an annualised rate of 1.1% in the final three months of 2010. Growth declined 0.3% from the previous quarter.
It was the first time in five quarters that the economy had contracted and it was caused by a dip in domestic and export demand, analysts said.
Consumer spending fell 0.7% in the final three months of 2010, the figures showed.
Analysts said that while demand had been picking up since the start of the year, there would not be a sudden revival in Japan's economic fortunes.
Not least because government plans to boost consumer spending by giving incentives to buy products such as consumer durables had either finished or were about to end.
"The main reasons for the contraction are the expiry of government stimulus measures and negative external demand," said Takeshi Minami, chief economist at Norinchukin Research Institute.
"It is going to be difficult for the economy to emerge from a lull in the January-March period.
"We are unlikely to see the economy worsen, but the recovery will not be strong enough for people to actually feel it is happening."
'Lost decade'
Japan has been struggling to come to terms with what many analysts call the "lost decade" of the 1990s when a property market and asset crash turned the economy on its head.
Domestic demand tumbled and exports also dropped as consumers looked for cheaper products from other emerging markets, and China in particular.
Today, Japan's biggest headaches are an ageing population that is spending less, and a workforce that is relatively expensive and inflexible to operate.
By contrast, the majority of China's growth has been funded by a long-running manufacturing boom and the subsequent expansion of its domestic industries and infrastructure.
"There was an emphasis on infrastructure," said Duncan Innes-Ker of the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) in Beijing.
"They were building way ahead of where people thought the demand would be. And because the infrastructure was there, companies went there."
Whole picture
Most economists agree that while China as a whole is growing, and the average person is getting wealthier, comparing only the size of its economy to Japan's does not paint an accurate enough picture.
"Most people in China are still poor, more people live in the countryside than in cities," said Mr Miller of GK Dragonomics.
"The average Japanese person is much much richer than the average Chinese person."
The International Monetary Fund estimates that GDP per head of the population is almost $34,000 in Japan, while in the People's Republic of China it is just over $7,500.
Ref:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12427321
..........................
World's 10 biggest economies
* US
* China
* Japan
* Germany
* France
* UK
* Italy
* Brazil
* Canada
* Russia
Source: IMF 2010
..................................
Countries with highest GDP per head of population
* 1. Qatar: $88,232
* 2. Luxembourg: $80,304
* 3. Singapore: $57,238
* 4. Norway: $52,238
* 5. Brunei: $47,200
* 6. US: $47,123
* ...
* 20. UK: $35,053
* 24. Japan: $33,828
* 93. China $7,518
Source: IMF estimates 2010, done on a purchasing power parity basis, which tries to reflect the cost of living
..................................
14 February 2011 Last updated at 06:19 ET
China has overtaken Japan as the world's second-biggest economy.
Japan's economy was worth $5.474 trillion (£3.414 trillion) at the end of 2010, figures from Tokyo have shown. China's economy was closer to $5.8 trillion in the same period.
Japan has been hit by a drop in exports and consumer demand, while China has enjoyed a manufacturing boom.
At its current rate of growth, analysts see China replacing the US as the world's top economy in about a decade.
"It's realistic to say that within 10 years China will be roughly the same size as the US economy," said Tom Miller of GK Dragonomics, a Beijing-based economic consultancy.
The US economy is currently almost three times the size of the Chinese economy in dollar terms. The UK's economy is estimated to be the world's sixth largest.
Overseas risk
Japan played down the significance of the shift in the economic league table, and the fact that it has been replaced as the second-largest economy for the first time in more than four decades.
"As an economy, we are not competing for rankings but working to improve citizens' lives," said Economics Minister Kaoru Yosano.
The minister added that China's booming economy was welcome news for Japan as a neighbouring country.
China is now Japan's main trading partner and is increasingly important to companies such as electronics firm Sony and carmakers like Honda and Toyota.
However, Mr Yosano said that Japan needed to watch closely "risks from overseas economies and currency moves".
Negative demand
The yen has been strengthening against other currencies, recently touching a 15-year high against the dollar, and the fear is that the currency's gains may hurt foreign demand for Japanese products.
According to the latest figures from Tokyo, Japan's economy contracted at an annualised rate of 1.1% in the final three months of 2010. Growth declined 0.3% from the previous quarter.
It was the first time in five quarters that the economy had contracted and it was caused by a dip in domestic and export demand, analysts said.
Consumer spending fell 0.7% in the final three months of 2010, the figures showed.
Analysts said that while demand had been picking up since the start of the year, there would not be a sudden revival in Japan's economic fortunes.
Not least because government plans to boost consumer spending by giving incentives to buy products such as consumer durables had either finished or were about to end.
"The main reasons for the contraction are the expiry of government stimulus measures and negative external demand," said Takeshi Minami, chief economist at Norinchukin Research Institute.
"It is going to be difficult for the economy to emerge from a lull in the January-March period.
"We are unlikely to see the economy worsen, but the recovery will not be strong enough for people to actually feel it is happening."
'Lost decade'
Japan has been struggling to come to terms with what many analysts call the "lost decade" of the 1990s when a property market and asset crash turned the economy on its head.
Domestic demand tumbled and exports also dropped as consumers looked for cheaper products from other emerging markets, and China in particular.
Today, Japan's biggest headaches are an ageing population that is spending less, and a workforce that is relatively expensive and inflexible to operate.
By contrast, the majority of China's growth has been funded by a long-running manufacturing boom and the subsequent expansion of its domestic industries and infrastructure.
"There was an emphasis on infrastructure," said Duncan Innes-Ker of the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) in Beijing.
"They were building way ahead of where people thought the demand would be. And because the infrastructure was there, companies went there."
Whole picture
Most economists agree that while China as a whole is growing, and the average person is getting wealthier, comparing only the size of its economy to Japan's does not paint an accurate enough picture.
"Most people in China are still poor, more people live in the countryside than in cities," said Mr Miller of GK Dragonomics.
"The average Japanese person is much much richer than the average Chinese person."
The International Monetary Fund estimates that GDP per head of the population is almost $34,000 in Japan, while in the People's Republic of China it is just over $7,500.
Ref:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12427321
..........................
World's 10 biggest economies
* US
* China
* Japan
* Germany
* France
* UK
* Italy
* Brazil
* Canada
* Russia
Source: IMF 2010
..................................
Countries with highest GDP per head of population
* 1. Qatar: $88,232
* 2. Luxembourg: $80,304
* 3. Singapore: $57,238
* 4. Norway: $52,238
* 5. Brunei: $47,200
* 6. US: $47,123
* ...
* 20. UK: $35,053
* 24. Japan: $33,828
* 93. China $7,518
Source: IMF estimates 2010, done on a purchasing power parity basis, which tries to reflect the cost of living
..................................
Constitutional Referendum in Egypt Promised in 2 Months
Constitutional Referendum in Egypt Promised in 2 Months
February 14, 2011/VOA News
Egyptian pro-democracy activist Wael Ghonim says the country's new military rulers have promised him that a referendum will be held on a revised constitution in two months.
Ghonim and blogger Amr Salama posted a note on their website saying they secured the commitment in talks with the military council that took control of Egypt from President Hosni Mubarak when he resigned last Friday. They described Sunday's meeting as encouraging.
Ghonim, a Google executive, and other cyber activists played a key role in organizing 18 days of nationwide anti-government protests that forced Mr. Mubarak to step down and hand power to the military after 30 years in power.
The activists say the military council told them that a newly-appointed committee will finish drafting constitutional amendments in 10 days and seek public approval for the new charter in a national referendum in two months. Egypt's military rulers have not confirmed the timelines.
The military council suspended the constitution and dissolved parliament Sunday, meeting two key demands of pro-democracy protesters who viewed the charter and legislature as tools of Mr. Mubarak's authoritarian rule.
In a statement Sunday, Egypt's military rulers said they will govern for six months or until new presidential and parliamentary elections are held. The votes are scheduled for September.
The 9-part communique also said Egyptian Defense Minister Mohamed Hussein Tantawi will act as effective head of state, representing the country in the transitional period before the elections. Egyptian opposition figure Ayman Nour welcomed the statement, calling it a victory for the revolution that ousted Mr. Mubarak.
In other developments, Egypt's Central Bank says financial institutions will be closed across the country on Monday and Tuesday because of strikes and a religious holiday. Striking bank workers forced authorities to make Monday an unscheduled bank holiday, running into a public observance already set for Tuesday.
Protests, sit-ins and strikes have spread in recent days at a number of Egyptian state-owned institutions, including the stock exchange, textile and steel companies, media organizations, the postal service and railways. Workers have an array of grievances.
An Egyptian military source told the Reuters news agency that the military council plans to ban meetings by labor unions and warn that it will act against "chaos and disorder." The source said the orders are intended to stifle further disruption and get the country back to work.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Egyptian-Activists-Military-Rulers-Promise-Constitutional-Referendum-in-2-Months-116150319.html
February 14, 2011/VOA News
Egyptian pro-democracy activist Wael Ghonim says the country's new military rulers have promised him that a referendum will be held on a revised constitution in two months.
Ghonim and blogger Amr Salama posted a note on their website saying they secured the commitment in talks with the military council that took control of Egypt from President Hosni Mubarak when he resigned last Friday. They described Sunday's meeting as encouraging.
Ghonim, a Google executive, and other cyber activists played a key role in organizing 18 days of nationwide anti-government protests that forced Mr. Mubarak to step down and hand power to the military after 30 years in power.
The activists say the military council told them that a newly-appointed committee will finish drafting constitutional amendments in 10 days and seek public approval for the new charter in a national referendum in two months. Egypt's military rulers have not confirmed the timelines.
The military council suspended the constitution and dissolved parliament Sunday, meeting two key demands of pro-democracy protesters who viewed the charter and legislature as tools of Mr. Mubarak's authoritarian rule.
In a statement Sunday, Egypt's military rulers said they will govern for six months or until new presidential and parliamentary elections are held. The votes are scheduled for September.
The 9-part communique also said Egyptian Defense Minister Mohamed Hussein Tantawi will act as effective head of state, representing the country in the transitional period before the elections. Egyptian opposition figure Ayman Nour welcomed the statement, calling it a victory for the revolution that ousted Mr. Mubarak.
In other developments, Egypt's Central Bank says financial institutions will be closed across the country on Monday and Tuesday because of strikes and a religious holiday. Striking bank workers forced authorities to make Monday an unscheduled bank holiday, running into a public observance already set for Tuesday.
Protests, sit-ins and strikes have spread in recent days at a number of Egyptian state-owned institutions, including the stock exchange, textile and steel companies, media organizations, the postal service and railways. Workers have an array of grievances.
An Egyptian military source told the Reuters news agency that the military council plans to ban meetings by labor unions and warn that it will act against "chaos and disorder." The source said the orders are intended to stifle further disruption and get the country back to work.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Egyptian-Activists-Military-Rulers-Promise-Constitutional-Referendum-in-2-Months-116150319.html
ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္နဲ႔ ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ
ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္နဲ႔ ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ
စေန, 12 ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီ 2011/By ဦးေအာင္ခင္ & မညိဳညိဳလြင္
ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို စီးပြားေရးဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔ထားတာ ရုတ္သိမ္းေပးဖို႔ ႏိုင္ငံေရးပါတီအခ်ဳိ ႔က အေမရိကန္အစိုးရကို ေတာင္းဆုိၾကပါတယ္။ တခ်ဳိ ႔ကလည္း ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈအခ်ဳိ ႔အဝက္ကိုသာ ရုတ္သိမ္းဖို႔ လိုလားၾကပါတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရနဲ႔ ဆက္ဆံတဲ့မူဝါဒကို အေမရိကန္အစိုးရက်င့္သံုးေနတဲ့အတြက္ အခုလို ေတာင္ဆုိလာၾကတာ ျဖစ္ပံုရပါတယ္။ ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔ေရး အစီအစဥ္ေတြကို သမၼတလက္ေအာက္ခံ ဝန္ႀကီးဌာနေတြက အေကာင္အထည္ေဖာ္ေနတာမို႔ အေမရိကန္အစိုးရမွာ ရုတ္သိမ္းပိုင္ခြင့္ရွိသလို ထင္ေယာင္ထင္မွား ျဖစ္ႏိုင္ပါတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔ရာမွာ အဓိကဦးေဆာင္သူဟာ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ အေမရိကန္သမၼတ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။
ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဒဏ္ခတ္တဲ့ ဥပေဒကို ကြန္ဂရက္ ေအာက္လႊတ္ေတာ္နဲ႔ အထက္ဆီးနိတ္လႊတ္ေတာ္ ႏွစ္ရပ္က ၁၉၉၆ မွာ ျပဌာန္းထားတဲ့ဥပေဒကို အေမရိကန္သမၼတ က ၁၉၉၇ ရာ စတင္က်င့္သံုးတာကိုၾကည့္ရင္ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ရဲ ႔ ၾသဇာအာဏာကို ခန္႔မွန္းႏိုင္ပါတယ္။ အေပၚယံၾကည့္ရင္ေတာ့ အေမရိကန္အစိုးရက ႏိုင္ငံျခားလမ္းစဥ္ကုိ ဖန္တီးတယ္လို႔ ေျပာႏိုင္ေပမယ့္ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ကလည္း အေမရိကန္ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရးလမ္းစဥ္အေပၚ ၾသဇာေညာင္းႏိုင္ပါတယ္။
ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို စီးပြားေရးဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔ရာမွာ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္က အရင္ဆံုးဥပေဒျပဳၿပီး သမၼတကို က်င့္သံုးခိုင္းတာျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ စစ္အစိုးရတက္လာတဲ့ ၁၉၈၈ က ၁၉၉၅ အထိ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို အကူအညီမေပးဖို႔သာ အေမရိကန္အစိုးရကလည္း စည္းရံုးလႈပ္ရွားခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ဒီအေတာအတြင္း ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရရဲ ႔ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မႈဟာ ပိုမိုဆိုးဝါးလာပါတယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ ဒီမုိကေရစီလႈပ္ရွားမႈမွာ ပါဝင္တဲ့ အေမရိကန္ေရာက္ ျမန္မာေတြ၊ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးအဖြဲ႔ေတြနဲ႔ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္အမတ္ေတြက ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ျပင္းျပင္းထန္ထန္ အေရးယူဖို႔ ေတာင္းဆိုလာၾကပါတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူဖို႔ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္အမတ္အခ်ဳိ ႔က အရင္ဆံုးလႈပ္ရွားၾကပါတယ္။
ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူေရးနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ ၾကားနာပြဲေတြ ၁၉၉၃ ကစၿပီး လုပ္ပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာ့ေရးရာကြ်မ္းက်င္သူ၊ တသီးပုဂၢလအဖြဲ႔ဝင္၊ စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ငန္းရွင္၊ ဆီးနိတ္လႊတ္ေတာ္အမတ္ စတဲ့ ပုဂၢိဳလ္ေတြက ၾကားနာပြဲမွာ ထြက္ဆိုၾကပါတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို အေရးယူဖို႔ စိတ္ထက္သန္သူေတြရွိသလို ျမန္မာျပည္မွာ စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ဖို႔သာ စိတ္ပူသူေတြလည္းရွိပါတယ္။ ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူတဲ့ဖက္က အဓိကအက်ဆံုး ပုဂိၢဳလ္ဟာ ဆီးနိတ္အမတ္ Mitch McConnell ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာလြတ္လပ္ေရးနဲ႔ ဒီမုိကေရစီ အက္ဥပေဒကို မူၾကမ္းကုိ ေရးဆြဲရာမွာ ျမန္မာေက်ာင္းသား၊ တုိင္းရင္းသားေခါင္းေဆာင္၊ ဒီမိုကေရစီ အက်ဳိးေဆာင္ နဲ႔ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ရဲ ႔ လုပ္ေဖာ္ကိုင္ဖက္ေဟာင္းေတြကို တိုင္ပင္တယ္လို႔ Mitch McConnell က အတိအလင္း ေဖာ္ျပပါတယ္။
၁၉၉၅ ခုႏွစ္ ျမန္မာလြတ္လပ္ေရးနဲ႔ ဒီမိုကေရစီအက္ဥပေဒမွာ ျမန္မာ့သြင္းကုန္ပိတ္ပင္ေရး၊ ရင္းႏီွျမဳပ္ႏွံမႈ ပိတ္ပင္ေရး၊ ျမန္မာျပည္ကို သြားခြင့္ပိတ္ပင္ေရး စတဲ့အခ်က္ေတြ ပါဝင္ပါတယ္။ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈကို မပိတ္ပင္ဘူးဆုိရင္ ထိုင္းနဲ႔ တရုတ္ကို ေပးထားတဲ့ ကုန္သြယ္ေရးအခြင့္ထူးေတြ ရုတ္သိမ္းပစ္ဖို႔လည္း အႀကံျပဳထားပါတယ္။ ဒီ အက္ဥပေဒကို ဆီနိတ္လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ ၾကားနားပြဲလုပ္ရာမွာ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ဦးစားေပးသူေတြေရာ အေမရိကန္အမႈထမ္းေတြေရာ ထြက္ဆိုၾကပါတယ္။ အေမရိကန္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရးဌာန အေရွ ႔အာရွေရးရာ လက္ေထာက္ဝန္ႀကီး Wiston Lord က ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူရင္ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရနဲ႔ ဆက္ဆံရာမွာ လုပ္ရကိုင္ရ ခက္ခဲသြားတာမို႔ သေဘာမတူဘူးလို႔ ဆုိပါတယ္။ ၁၉၉၅ အက္ဥပေဒအရ ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူတာကို သမၼတ ကလင္တန္ က လက္မခံႏိုင္ပါဘူး။ ေနာက္ၿပီးေတာ့ ဥပေဒျပဳပံုနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ဘဝင္မက်တဲ့အမတ္ေတြလည္း ရွိေနတာမုိ႔ အတည္ျပဳတဲ့အဆင့္ကို မေရာက္ခဲ့ပါဘူး။
၁၉၉၅ ျမန္မာ့လြတ္လပ္ေရးနဲ႔ ဒီမုိကေရစီအက္ဥပေဒကို အတည္မျပဳႏိုင္ဘဲ ျဖစ္သြားရတဲ့အေၾကာင္းရင္း ႏွစ္ခုကို ဆီနိတ္အမတ္ Mitch McConnell က ေထာက္ျပပါတယ္။ သမၼတ မေထာက္ခံတာဟာ ပထမအေၾကာင္းရင္းျဖစ္ၿပီး ဒုတိယအေၾကာင္းရင္းက Unicol နဲ႔ Texaco ေရနံကုမၼဏီေတြဘက္က အႀကီးအက်ယ္ lobby လုပ္တာေၾကာင့္ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ တနည္းဆုိရင္ေတာ့ စီးပြားေရးဦးစားေပးအုပ္စုက အႏိုင္ရသြားလို႔ ၁၉၉၅ ခုႏွစ္မွာ ျမန္မာလြတ္လပ္ေရး နဲ႔ ဒီမုိကေရစီအက္ဥပေဒကို ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ မျပဌာန္းႏိုင္ခဲ့တာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ေနာက္ ရွစ္ႏွစ္ၾကာေတာ့မွ ၂၀၀၃ ခုႏွစ္မွာ ျမန္မာ့လြတ္လပ္ေရးနဲ႔ ဒီမုိကေရစီအက္ဥပေဒကို ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္က ျပဌာန္းလိုက္ပါတယ္။
အတည္မျပဳႏိုင္တဲ့ ၁၉၉၅ အက္ဥပေဒကို ျပင္ဆင္ၿပီး ၁၉၉၆ ခုႏွစ္မွာ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ ႏွစ္ရပ္စလံုးက အတည္ျပဳျပဌာန္းပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့ ၇ လၾကာေတာ့မွ သမၼတက က်င့္သံုးဖို႔ ဆံုးျဖတ္ပါတယ္။ ဒီျဖစ္စဥ္ကိုၾကည့္ရင္ အေမရိကန္သမၼတ မလုပ္ခ်င္လုပ္ခ်င္ ျဖစ္ေနတဲ့ ကိစၥေတြကို ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္က ဥပေဒျပဌာန္းၿပီး အေကာင္အထည္ေဖာ္ဖို႔ တိုက္တြန္းတာ ေတြ႔ရပါတယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္မို႔ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ စီးပြားေရး ဦးစားေပး lobby အုပ္စု ၾသဇာေညာင္းလာမွသာ ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈကို ရုတ္သိမ္းဖို႔ အလားအလာေပၚထြက္လာဖြယ္ရွိေၾကာင္း တင္ျပလုိက္ရပါတယ္။
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/news/news-analysis/news_analysis_02-12-2911-116000849.html
စေန, 12 ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီ 2011/By ဦးေအာင္ခင္ & မညိဳညိဳလြင္
ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို စီးပြားေရးဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔ထားတာ ရုတ္သိမ္းေပးဖို႔ ႏိုင္ငံေရးပါတီအခ်ဳိ ႔က အေမရိကန္အစိုးရကို ေတာင္းဆုိၾကပါတယ္။ တခ်ဳိ ႔ကလည္း ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈအခ်ဳိ ႔အဝက္ကိုသာ ရုတ္သိမ္းဖို႔ လိုလားၾကပါတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရနဲ႔ ဆက္ဆံတဲ့မူဝါဒကို အေမရိကန္အစိုးရက်င့္သံုးေနတဲ့အတြက္ အခုလို ေတာင္ဆုိလာၾကတာ ျဖစ္ပံုရပါတယ္။ ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔ေရး အစီအစဥ္ေတြကို သမၼတလက္ေအာက္ခံ ဝန္ႀကီးဌာနေတြက အေကာင္အထည္ေဖာ္ေနတာမို႔ အေမရိကန္အစိုးရမွာ ရုတ္သိမ္းပိုင္ခြင့္ရွိသလို ထင္ေယာင္ထင္မွား ျဖစ္ႏိုင္ပါတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔ရာမွာ အဓိကဦးေဆာင္သူဟာ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ အေမရိကန္သမၼတ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။
ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဒဏ္ခတ္တဲ့ ဥပေဒကို ကြန္ဂရက္ ေအာက္လႊတ္ေတာ္နဲ႔ အထက္ဆီးနိတ္လႊတ္ေတာ္ ႏွစ္ရပ္က ၁၉၉၆ မွာ ျပဌာန္းထားတဲ့ဥပေဒကို အေမရိကန္သမၼတ က ၁၉၉၇ ရာ စတင္က်င့္သံုးတာကိုၾကည့္ရင္ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ရဲ ႔ ၾသဇာအာဏာကို ခန္႔မွန္းႏိုင္ပါတယ္။ အေပၚယံၾကည့္ရင္ေတာ့ အေမရိကန္အစိုးရက ႏိုင္ငံျခားလမ္းစဥ္ကုိ ဖန္တီးတယ္လို႔ ေျပာႏိုင္ေပမယ့္ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ကလည္း အေမရိကန္ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရးလမ္းစဥ္အေပၚ ၾသဇာေညာင္းႏိုင္ပါတယ္။
ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို စီးပြားေရးဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔ရာမွာ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္က အရင္ဆံုးဥပေဒျပဳၿပီး သမၼတကို က်င့္သံုးခိုင္းတာျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ စစ္အစိုးရတက္လာတဲ့ ၁၉၈၈ က ၁၉၉၅ အထိ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို အကူအညီမေပးဖို႔သာ အေမရိကန္အစိုးရကလည္း စည္းရံုးလႈပ္ရွားခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ဒီအေတာအတြင္း ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရရဲ ႔ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မႈဟာ ပိုမိုဆိုးဝါးလာပါတယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ ဒီမုိကေရစီလႈပ္ရွားမႈမွာ ပါဝင္တဲ့ အေမရိကန္ေရာက္ ျမန္မာေတြ၊ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးအဖြဲ႔ေတြနဲ႔ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္အမတ္ေတြက ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ျပင္းျပင္းထန္ထန္ အေရးယူဖို႔ ေတာင္းဆိုလာၾကပါတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူဖို႔ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္အမတ္အခ်ဳိ ႔က အရင္ဆံုးလႈပ္ရွားၾကပါတယ္။
ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူေရးနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ ၾကားနာပြဲေတြ ၁၉၉၃ ကစၿပီး လုပ္ပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာ့ေရးရာကြ်မ္းက်င္သူ၊ တသီးပုဂၢလအဖြဲ႔ဝင္၊ စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ငန္းရွင္၊ ဆီးနိတ္လႊတ္ေတာ္အမတ္ စတဲ့ ပုဂၢိဳလ္ေတြက ၾကားနာပြဲမွာ ထြက္ဆိုၾကပါတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရကို အေရးယူဖို႔ စိတ္ထက္သန္သူေတြရွိသလို ျမန္မာျပည္မွာ စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ဖို႔သာ စိတ္ပူသူေတြလည္းရွိပါတယ္။ ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူတဲ့ဖက္က အဓိကအက်ဆံုး ပုဂိၢဳလ္ဟာ ဆီးနိတ္အမတ္ Mitch McConnell ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာလြတ္လပ္ေရးနဲ႔ ဒီမုိကေရစီ အက္ဥပေဒကို မူၾကမ္းကုိ ေရးဆြဲရာမွာ ျမန္မာေက်ာင္းသား၊ တုိင္းရင္းသားေခါင္းေဆာင္၊ ဒီမိုကေရစီ အက်ဳိးေဆာင္ နဲ႔ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ရဲ ႔ လုပ္ေဖာ္ကိုင္ဖက္ေဟာင္းေတြကို တိုင္ပင္တယ္လို႔ Mitch McConnell က အတိအလင္း ေဖာ္ျပပါတယ္။
၁၉၉၅ ခုႏွစ္ ျမန္မာလြတ္လပ္ေရးနဲ႔ ဒီမိုကေရစီအက္ဥပေဒမွာ ျမန္မာ့သြင္းကုန္ပိတ္ပင္ေရး၊ ရင္းႏီွျမဳပ္ႏွံမႈ ပိတ္ပင္ေရး၊ ျမန္မာျပည္ကို သြားခြင့္ပိတ္ပင္ေရး စတဲ့အခ်က္ေတြ ပါဝင္ပါတယ္။ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈကို မပိတ္ပင္ဘူးဆုိရင္ ထိုင္းနဲ႔ တရုတ္ကို ေပးထားတဲ့ ကုန္သြယ္ေရးအခြင့္ထူးေတြ ရုတ္သိမ္းပစ္ဖို႔လည္း အႀကံျပဳထားပါတယ္။ ဒီ အက္ဥပေဒကို ဆီနိတ္လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ ၾကားနားပြဲလုပ္ရာမွာ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ဦးစားေပးသူေတြေရာ အေမရိကန္အမႈထမ္းေတြေရာ ထြက္ဆိုၾကပါတယ္။ အေမရိကန္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရးဌာန အေရွ ႔အာရွေရးရာ လက္ေထာက္ဝန္ႀကီး Wiston Lord က ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူရင္ ဗမာစစ္အစိုးရနဲ႔ ဆက္ဆံရာမွာ လုပ္ရကိုင္ရ ခက္ခဲသြားတာမို႔ သေဘာမတူဘူးလို႔ ဆုိပါတယ္။ ၁၉၉၅ အက္ဥပေဒအရ ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူတာကို သမၼတ ကလင္တန္ က လက္မခံႏိုင္ပါဘူး။ ေနာက္ၿပီးေတာ့ ဥပေဒျပဳပံုနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ဘဝင္မက်တဲ့အမတ္ေတြလည္း ရွိေနတာမုိ႔ အတည္ျပဳတဲ့အဆင့္ကို မေရာက္ခဲ့ပါဘူး။
၁၉၉၅ ျမန္မာ့လြတ္လပ္ေရးနဲ႔ ဒီမုိကေရစီအက္ဥပေဒကို အတည္မျပဳႏိုင္ဘဲ ျဖစ္သြားရတဲ့အေၾကာင္းရင္း ႏွစ္ခုကို ဆီနိတ္အမတ္ Mitch McConnell က ေထာက္ျပပါတယ္။ သမၼတ မေထာက္ခံတာဟာ ပထမအေၾကာင္းရင္းျဖစ္ၿပီး ဒုတိယအေၾကာင္းရင္းက Unicol နဲ႔ Texaco ေရနံကုမၼဏီေတြဘက္က အႀကီးအက်ယ္ lobby လုပ္တာေၾကာင့္ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ တနည္းဆုိရင္ေတာ့ စီးပြားေရးဦးစားေပးအုပ္စုက အႏိုင္ရသြားလို႔ ၁၉၉၅ ခုႏွစ္မွာ ျမန္မာလြတ္လပ္ေရး နဲ႔ ဒီမုိကေရစီအက္ဥပေဒကို ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ မျပဌာန္းႏိုင္ခဲ့တာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ေနာက္ ရွစ္ႏွစ္ၾကာေတာ့မွ ၂၀၀၃ ခုႏွစ္မွာ ျမန္မာ့လြတ္လပ္ေရးနဲ႔ ဒီမုိကေရစီအက္ဥပေဒကို ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္က ျပဌာန္းလိုက္ပါတယ္။
အတည္မျပဳႏိုင္တဲ့ ၁၉၉၅ အက္ဥပေဒကို ျပင္ဆင္ၿပီး ၁၉၉၆ ခုႏွစ္မွာ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ ႏွစ္ရပ္စလံုးက အတည္ျပဳျပဌာန္းပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့ ၇ လၾကာေတာ့မွ သမၼတက က်င့္သံုးဖို႔ ဆံုးျဖတ္ပါတယ္။ ဒီျဖစ္စဥ္ကိုၾကည့္ရင္ အေမရိကန္သမၼတ မလုပ္ခ်င္လုပ္ခ်င္ ျဖစ္ေနတဲ့ ကိစၥေတြကို ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္က ဥပေဒျပဌာန္းၿပီး အေကာင္အထည္ေဖာ္ဖို႔ တိုက္တြန္းတာ ေတြ႔ရပါတယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္မို႔ ကြန္ဂရက္လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ စီးပြားေရး ဦးစားေပး lobby အုပ္စု ၾသဇာေညာင္းလာမွသာ ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈကို ရုတ္သိမ္းဖို႔ အလားအလာေပၚထြက္လာဖြယ္ရွိေၾကာင္း တင္ျပလုိက္ရပါတယ္။
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/news/news-analysis/news_analysis_02-12-2911-116000849.html
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Burma Military Urges People to Protect New Democracy
Burma Military Urges People to Protect New Democracy
February 12, 2011/VOA News
The head of Burma's military has urged people to protect the country's new democratic system.
In his annual Union Day message Saturday, Senior General Than Shwe called for the nation's citizens to build together and safeguard what he called a "democracy system" that is "still in its infancy."
The message was published in the state-controlled media and read out by Vice President-elect Tin Aung Myint Oo, another leading member of the military government.
Than Shwe also warned it is mandatory for everyone to tackle any forms of disruptions to the new system.
Western nations regard Burma's transition to democracy as a charade and say last year's election was orchestrated to keep the military in power.
Some information for this report was provided by AP.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/Burma-Military-Urges-People-to-Protect-New-Democracy-116077644.html
February 12, 2011/VOA News
The head of Burma's military has urged people to protect the country's new democratic system.
In his annual Union Day message Saturday, Senior General Than Shwe called for the nation's citizens to build together and safeguard what he called a "democracy system" that is "still in its infancy."
The message was published in the state-controlled media and read out by Vice President-elect Tin Aung Myint Oo, another leading member of the military government.
Than Shwe also warned it is mandatory for everyone to tackle any forms of disruptions to the new system.
Western nations regard Burma's transition to democracy as a charade and say last year's election was orchestrated to keep the military in power.
Some information for this report was provided by AP.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/Burma-Military-Urges-People-to-Protect-New-Democracy-116077644.html
Mubarak Resigns
Mubarak Resigns
February 11, 2011/Luis Ramirez | Cairo
It was 18 days of sometimes violent demonstrations that forced the man who ruled Egypt for nearly 30 years to step down. Friday was the day the demonstrators had been awaiting. The announcement of Mr. Mubarak’s resignation drew an immediate roar of cheers and honking automobile horns throughout Cairo that went on for hours.
The announcement came from Vice President Omar Suleiman on state television.
He said Mr. Mubarak was stepping down and had asked the military to take control of the country. He ended his statement with the words “May God help everyone.”
Thousands headed to Cairo’s central Tahrir Square to join the tens of thousands already there. Among them was 33-year-old Eman Saad.
“My reaction? It's amazing! Freedom!” said an jubilant Saad.
In Tahrir Square itself, there was euphoria. Demonstrators said this was the day they had waited decades to see. The celebrations in the first hours were peaceful, but sporadic gunfire was heard in central Cairo in the early evening Friday.
Only one day earlier, Mr. Mubarak had told the nation he would remain in power until elections in September. On Friday, reports said he had gone to the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm el Sheikh.
According to Egypt's constitution, the speaker of parliament becomes acting president, but with the military’s assumption of power, it was unclear whether this would happen.
The political future of Egypt remains uncertain.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Egypts-President-Resigns-Amid-Mass-Protests-115914569.html
February 11, 2011/Luis Ramirez | Cairo
It was 18 days of sometimes violent demonstrations that forced the man who ruled Egypt for nearly 30 years to step down. Friday was the day the demonstrators had been awaiting. The announcement of Mr. Mubarak’s resignation drew an immediate roar of cheers and honking automobile horns throughout Cairo that went on for hours.
The announcement came from Vice President Omar Suleiman on state television.
He said Mr. Mubarak was stepping down and had asked the military to take control of the country. He ended his statement with the words “May God help everyone.”
Thousands headed to Cairo’s central Tahrir Square to join the tens of thousands already there. Among them was 33-year-old Eman Saad.
“My reaction? It's amazing! Freedom!” said an jubilant Saad.
In Tahrir Square itself, there was euphoria. Demonstrators said this was the day they had waited decades to see. The celebrations in the first hours were peaceful, but sporadic gunfire was heard in central Cairo in the early evening Friday.
Only one day earlier, Mr. Mubarak had told the nation he would remain in power until elections in September. On Friday, reports said he had gone to the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm el Sheikh.
According to Egypt's constitution, the speaker of parliament becomes acting president, but with the military’s assumption of power, it was unclear whether this would happen.
The political future of Egypt remains uncertain.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Egypts-President-Resigns-Amid-Mass-Protests-115914569.html
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Memorandum (1/2011)
Memorandum (1/2011)
February 10,2011
This blog is intended to prepare the collections of reference resources for supporting academic study as well as policy analysis concerning “U.S. foreign policy toward Asia or the East“. China, Japan and Asia-Pacific region, South-East Asian nations, the Indian Sub-continent and the Russian Federation are the targeted Geo-political parts of this study to understand the real meaning and the true purpose of the “U.S. foreign policy toward Asia or the East“.
Under that title, such a policy toward Burma (Myanmar) is fundamentally and necessarily included for the sake of shaping future relationship, between the two countries, Burma and United States of America, which had been infertile since after the stepping down of General Ne Win.
As reformers, we always propose to make a talk directly only between the two governments, U.S and Burma (Myanmar) to achieve good understanding for the smooth relationship in coming days, months and years. U.S. has also openly said that a policy of pragmatic engagement with the Burmese authorities holds the best hope for advancing our goals.*
*U.S. Policy Toward Burma : Kurt Campbell (Assistant Secretary of State) Sunday, November 7, 2010
Suggestions and Opinions are welcome.Please post in the reader comments.Thanks.
February 10,2011
This blog is intended to prepare the collections of reference resources for supporting academic study as well as policy analysis concerning “U.S. foreign policy toward Asia or the East“. China, Japan and Asia-Pacific region, South-East Asian nations, the Indian Sub-continent and the Russian Federation are the targeted Geo-political parts of this study to understand the real meaning and the true purpose of the “U.S. foreign policy toward Asia or the East“.
Under that title, such a policy toward Burma (Myanmar) is fundamentally and necessarily included for the sake of shaping future relationship, between the two countries, Burma and United States of America, which had been infertile since after the stepping down of General Ne Win.
As reformers, we always propose to make a talk directly only between the two governments, U.S and Burma (Myanmar) to achieve good understanding for the smooth relationship in coming days, months and years. U.S. has also openly said that a policy of pragmatic engagement with the Burmese authorities holds the best hope for advancing our goals.*
*U.S. Policy Toward Burma : Kurt Campbell (Assistant Secretary of State) Sunday, November 7, 2010
Suggestions and Opinions are welcome.Please post in the reader comments.Thanks.
အစိုးရသစ္ကို အေမရိကန္ လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံေရးနဲ႔ ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ ပူးတြဲက်င့္သံုးမည္
အစိုးရသစ္ကို အေမရိကန္ လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံေရးနဲ႔ ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ ပူးတြဲက်င့္သံုးမည္
ဗုဒၶဟူး, 09 ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီ 2011/By ဦးသန္းလြင္ထြန္း
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ ေနာက္တက္လာမယ့္ ျမန္မာအစိုးရ အဖြဲ႕သစ္နဲ႔ ဆက္ဆံညႇိႏႈိင္းၿပီး လက္ရွိ က်င့္သုံးေနတဲ့ လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံေရးနဲ႔ ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ ပူးတြဲ မူ၀ါဒကို ဆက္လက္ က်င့္သုံးသြားမယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံး ယာယီတာ၀န္ခံ မစၥတာ လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါး (Larry Dinger) က ဗြီအိုေအကုိ ေျပာပါတယ္။ ၀ါရွင္တန္ၿမိဳ႕ေတာ္ အေမရိကန္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရးဌာနမွာ သူ႔ကုိ သြားေရာက္ ေတြ႕ဆုံခဲ့တဲ့ ဗြီအိုေအ ျမန္မာပုိင္း ဌာနမွဴး ဦးသန္းလြင္ထြန္းက တင္ျပေပးထားပါတယ္။
အႏွစ္ ၂၀ ေက်ာ္အတြင္း ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံရဲ႕ ပထမဦးဆုံး အရပ္သား အစုိးရအဖြဲ႕ အမည္စာရင္းကို သမၼတသစ္ ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေဟာင္း တျဖစ္လဲ ဦးသိန္းစိန္က ေနျပည္ေတာ္ လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ တင္သြင္းခဲ့ၿပီး ျဖစ္တာမို႔ အစုိးရအဖြဲ႕သစ္ မၾကာခင္ အတည္ျပဳ ေပၚထြက္လာပါေတာ့မယ္။ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ကေတာ့ လက္ရွိမူ၀ါဒျဖစ္တဲ့ လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံက်င့္သုံးေရး မူ၀ါဒနဲ႔ ပိတ္ဆို႔ဒဏ္ခတ္ေရး ပူးတြဲမူ၀ါဒကုိ ဆက္လက္ က်င့္သုံးသြားမွာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု သံ႐ုံးတာ၀န္ခံ သံမွဴးႀကီး လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါးက ဗြီအိုေအကုိ ေျပာၾကားပါတယ္။
“က်ေနာ့္အျမင္အရေတာ့ အခုတက္လာတဲ့ အစိုးရဟာ အစိုးရသစ္ တခုရယ္ေတာ့ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။ ျမင္ေနက် မ်က္ႏွာေတြပါပဲ။ ဒါေပမဲ့ အရင္ကေတာ့ အဲဒီ အစုိးရ အဖြဲ႕ေဟာင္းထဲက လူေတြဟာ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ အေပၚမွာပဲ အာ႐ုံစိုက္ေနခဲ့ၾကၿပီး ေဆြးေႏြးေျပာဆုိဖုိ႔ သိပ္ အခြင့္အေရး မရွိခဲ့ပါဘူး။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ အခုအခ်ိန္မွာေတာ့ ဒီလူေတြဟာ အရင္လူေတြပဲ ျဖစ္ေနေပမဲ့လည္း အျမင္နဲ႔ ရပ္တည္မႈ ေျပာင္းလာတာမ်ဳိးေတြ ရွိေလမလား၊ ေဆြးေႏြးေျပာဆုိမႈေတြ လုပ္ဖို႔ ပိုၿပီး လုိလားတာေတြ ရွိမလားဆုိတာ တီးေခါက္ၾကည့္ဖို႔ လုိေနပါတယ္။ ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲဆုိေတာ့ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံမွာ အင္မတန္ နက္နဲတဲ့ ျပႆနာေတြကုိ မျဖစ္မေန ေျဖရွင္းဖုိ႔ လိုေနပါတယ္။”
၀ါရွင္တန္ၿမိဳ႕ေတာ္ကုိ ေခတၱ ျပန္ေရာက္ေနတဲ့ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံး တာ၀န္ခံ သံမွဴးႀကီး လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါး ေျပာသြားတာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုဟာ ၁၉၄၈ ခုႏွစ္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံ လြတ္လပ္ေရး ရခဲ့စဥ္ကတည္းက အစိုးရ အဆက္ဆက္နဲ႔ သံအဆက္အသြယ္ မျပတ္ခဲ့သလုိ အခုလည္း ဆက္ဆံသြားမွာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ဆုိပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း အခုလက္ရွိ ဆက္ဆံေရးဟာ သံမွဴးႀကီးအဆင့္ ဆက္ဆံေရးသာျဖစ္ၿပီး မၾကာခင္မွာ သံအမတ္ႀကီးအဆင့္ ျပန္လည္ဆက္ဆံဖုိ႔ အလားအလာေတြမ်ား ရွိပါသလားဆုိတဲ့ ေမးခြန္းကိုေတာ့ ဒါဟာ ၀ါရွင္တန္မွာ ရွိေနတဲ့ မူ၀ါဒေရးရာ ခ်မွတ္သူေတြ သုံးသပ္ရမယ့္ကိစၥ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း၊ လက္ရွိ က်င့္သုံးေနတဲ့ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒ ဘယ္ေလာက္အထိ တုိးတက္မႈရွိသလဲ ဆုိတဲ့အေပၚမွာ မူတည္ေနေၾကာင္းနဲ႔ လတ္တေလာမွာေတာ့ ဒီလုိ သံအမတ္ႀကီးအဆင့္ တုိးျမႇင့္ၿပီး ျပန္ဆက္ဆံဖုိ႔ အေျခအေန မျမင္ေသးပါဘူးလုိ႔လည္း မစၥတာ ဒင္းဂါးက ဆုိပါတယ္။
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒအရ ပူးတြဲၿပီး က်င့္သုံးေနတဲ့ ပိတ္ဆုိ႔ဒဏ္ခတ္ေရး အစီအစဥ္ေတြရဲ႕ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္နဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔လည္း သူက အခုလို ရွင္းျပပါတယ္။
“က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ရဲ႕ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္ကေတာ့ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံမွာရွိတဲ့ အာဏာပုိင္ေတြ အေနနဲ႔ သူတုိ႔ရဲ႕ မူ၀ါဒေတြကို ျပန္ၿပီးေတာ့ သုံးသပ္လာေစဖုိ႔ပါပဲ။ ႏုိင္ငံေရး လႈပ္ရွားသူေတြကို မဖမ္းဖို႔၊ ႏုိင္ငံေရး အက်ဥ္းသားေတြကို လႊတ္ေပးေရး ဖိအားေပးဖို႔၊ အစုိးရက လုပ္ေနတဲ့ ႏုိင္ငံေရး လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္ေတြမွာ အားလုံး ဘက္ေပါင္းစုံ ပါ၀င္လာေစေရး လမ္းဖြင့္ေပးေစဖို႔၊ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမုိကေရစီ အဖြဲ႕ခ်ဳပ္လို ႏုိင္ငံေရး အတုိက္အခံေတြ၊ အဖြဲ႕အစည္းေတြ အားလုံးနဲ႔ ေဆြးေႏြးညိႇႏႈိင္းမႈေတြ ျပဳလုပ္ေစဖုိ႔၊ ၿခဳံၿပီးေျပာရရင္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံရဲ႕ ေကာင္းမြန္တဲ့ အနာဂတ္အေရးကို စဥ္းစား လုပ္ေဆာင္လာေရး စစ္အစိုးရကို တြန္းအားေပးဖို႔ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္ပဲ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။”
အေမရိကန္ ဦးေဆာင္တဲ့ အေနာက္အုပ္စု ႏုိင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ ပိတ္ဆုိ႔ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြေၾကာင့္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံမွာ သာမန္ျပည္သူေတြ ပိုအထိနာၿပီး ဆင္းရဲမြဲေတမႈ လမ္းေၾကာင္းေပၚကုိ ပုိၿပီး တြန္းပုိ႔ေနသလုိ ျဖစ္တယ္ဆုိတဲ့ စြပ္စြဲခ်က္ေတြကိုေတာ့ သူက ျငင္းဆိုခဲ့ၿပီး ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံ ဆင္းရဲမြဲေတမႈ ျပႆနာဟာ ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ အစိုးရ အဆက္ဆက္ က်င့္သုံးခဲ့တဲ့ မမွန္ကန္တဲ့ စီးပြားေရး မူ၀ါဒေတြေၾကာင့္သာ ျဖစ္ၿပီး အဂတိ လုိက္စားမႈ၊ မူ၀ါဒေရးရာ ဆုံးျဖတ္ခ်က္ မမွန္ကန္မႈ စတာေတြကလည္း အဓိက ျပႆနာေတြ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း မစၥတာ ဒင္းဂါးက ေျပာသြားခဲ့ပါတယ္။
ဒါဟာ ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ ရက္ပုိင္းက အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖြဲ႕ခ်ဳပ္က ထုတ္ျပန္ခဲ့တဲ့ စစ္တမ္းတရပ္က ေထာက္ျပထားတာနဲ႔ ကိုက္ညီေနပါတယ္။ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမုိကေရစီ အဖြဲ႕ခ်ဳပ္ရဲ႕ စစ္တမ္းမွာ ႏုိင္ငံတကာ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆုိ႔မႈရဲ႕ အက်ဳိးသက္ေရာက္မႈေတြနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ျပည္တြင္း အေျပာင္းအလဲေတြပါ အလိုက္သင့္ ျဖစ္ေပၚလာေစဖို႔အတြက္ ပိတ္ဆို႔ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ဘယ္လို၊ ဘယ္အခ်ိန္၊ ဘယ္လို အေျခအေနမ်ဳိးေတြမွာ ျပန္ၿပီး သုံးသပ္ ေျပာင္းလဲသင့္သလဲ ဆုိတာကို ေဆြးေႏြးလုိပါေၾကာင္း ကမ္းလွမ္းထားတာနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး အေမရိကန္ သံမွဴးႀကီး လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါးက...
“ဆက္ဆံညိႇႏႈိင္းေရးဆုိတဲ့ လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္ဟာ တစုိက္မတ္မတ္ ေရြ႕လ်ား လႈပ္ေဆာင္သြားရမယ့္ လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္လို႔ပဲ ျမင္ပါတယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ ဘက္ေပါင္းစုံနဲ႔ အေျခအေနအားလုံး သုံးသပ္ ေဆြးေႏြးႏုိင္ဖုိ႔ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ အၿမဲ ႀကိဳးစားေနပါတယ္။ အစိုးရနဲ႔ ဆက္ၿပီး ေျပာဆုိ ေဆြးေႏြးသြားမွာ ျဖစ္သလုိ အတုိက္အခံေတြ၊ တုိင္းရင္းသား အဖြဲ႕အစည္းေတြ အားလုံးနဲ႔လည္း စဥ္ဆက္မျပတ္ ေတြ႕ဆုံမႈေတြ လုပ္ေနပါတယ္။ ေနျပည္ေတာ္ကုိ က်ေနာ္ လစဥ္ သြားသလုိပဲ အက်ယ္ခ်ဳပ္က လြတ္ေျမာက္ေနၿပီျဖစ္တဲ့ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔လည္း က်ေနာ္ မၾကာခဏ ေတြ႕ဆုံျဖစ္ပါတယ္။” လို႔ ေျပာသြားပါတယ္။
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အစိုးရ မူ၀ါဒေရးရာ သုံးသပ္သူေတြ အေနနဲ႔ အေျခအေနကုိ စဥ္ဆက္မျပတ္ ေလ့လာ သုံးသပ္ေနၿပီး လိုအပ္သလုိ ျပင္ဆင္ ေျပာင္းလဲမႈေတြ လုပ္သြားမွာျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒသစ္ကုိ ေၾကညာစဥ္ကတည္းက ေျပာၾကားထားၿပီး ျဖစ္ပါေၾကာင္းလည္း ၀ါရွင္တန္ၿမိဳ႕ေတာ္ကို ေခတၱ ျပန္လည္ေရာက္ရွိေနတဲ့ ရန္ကုန္ၿမိဳ႕ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံး တာ၀န္ခံ သံမွဴးႀကီး လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါးက ဗြီအိုေအကုိ ရွင္းျပသြားခဲ့ပါတယ္။
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/news/us-burma-policy-115683229.html
ဗုဒၶဟူး, 09 ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီ 2011/By ဦးသန္းလြင္ထြန္း
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ ေနာက္တက္လာမယ့္ ျမန္မာအစိုးရ အဖြဲ႕သစ္နဲ႔ ဆက္ဆံညႇိႏႈိင္းၿပီး လက္ရွိ က်င့္သုံးေနတဲ့ လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံေရးနဲ႔ ဒဏ္ခတ္ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ ပူးတြဲ မူ၀ါဒကို ဆက္လက္ က်င့္သုံးသြားမယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံး ယာယီတာ၀န္ခံ မစၥတာ လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါး (Larry Dinger) က ဗြီအိုေအကုိ ေျပာပါတယ္။ ၀ါရွင္တန္ၿမိဳ႕ေတာ္ အေမရိကန္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရးဌာနမွာ သူ႔ကုိ သြားေရာက္ ေတြ႕ဆုံခဲ့တဲ့ ဗြီအိုေအ ျမန္မာပုိင္း ဌာနမွဴး ဦးသန္းလြင္ထြန္းက တင္ျပေပးထားပါတယ္။
အႏွစ္ ၂၀ ေက်ာ္အတြင္း ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံရဲ႕ ပထမဦးဆုံး အရပ္သား အစုိးရအဖြဲ႕ အမည္စာရင္းကို သမၼတသစ္ ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေဟာင္း တျဖစ္လဲ ဦးသိန္းစိန္က ေနျပည္ေတာ္ လႊတ္ေတာ္မွာ တင္သြင္းခဲ့ၿပီး ျဖစ္တာမို႔ အစုိးရအဖြဲ႕သစ္ မၾကာခင္ အတည္ျပဳ ေပၚထြက္လာပါေတာ့မယ္။ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ကေတာ့ လက္ရွိမူ၀ါဒျဖစ္တဲ့ လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံက်င့္သုံးေရး မူ၀ါဒနဲ႔ ပိတ္ဆို႔ဒဏ္ခတ္ေရး ပူးတြဲမူ၀ါဒကုိ ဆက္လက္ က်င့္သုံးသြားမွာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု သံ႐ုံးတာ၀န္ခံ သံမွဴးႀကီး လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါးက ဗြီအိုေအကုိ ေျပာၾကားပါတယ္။
“က်ေနာ့္အျမင္အရေတာ့ အခုတက္လာတဲ့ အစိုးရဟာ အစိုးရသစ္ တခုရယ္ေတာ့ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။ ျမင္ေနက် မ်က္ႏွာေတြပါပဲ။ ဒါေပမဲ့ အရင္ကေတာ့ အဲဒီ အစုိးရ အဖြဲ႕ေဟာင္းထဲက လူေတြဟာ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ အေပၚမွာပဲ အာ႐ုံစိုက္ေနခဲ့ၾကၿပီး ေဆြးေႏြးေျပာဆုိဖုိ႔ သိပ္ အခြင့္အေရး မရွိခဲ့ပါဘူး။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ အခုအခ်ိန္မွာေတာ့ ဒီလူေတြဟာ အရင္လူေတြပဲ ျဖစ္ေနေပမဲ့လည္း အျမင္နဲ႔ ရပ္တည္မႈ ေျပာင္းလာတာမ်ဳိးေတြ ရွိေလမလား၊ ေဆြးေႏြးေျပာဆုိမႈေတြ လုပ္ဖို႔ ပိုၿပီး လုိလားတာေတြ ရွိမလားဆုိတာ တီးေခါက္ၾကည့္ဖို႔ လုိေနပါတယ္။ ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲဆုိေတာ့ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံမွာ အင္မတန္ နက္နဲတဲ့ ျပႆနာေတြကုိ မျဖစ္မေန ေျဖရွင္းဖုိ႔ လိုေနပါတယ္။”
၀ါရွင္တန္ၿမိဳ႕ေတာ္ကုိ ေခတၱ ျပန္ေရာက္ေနတဲ့ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံး တာ၀န္ခံ သံမွဴးႀကီး လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါး ေျပာသြားတာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုဟာ ၁၉၄၈ ခုႏွစ္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံ လြတ္လပ္ေရး ရခဲ့စဥ္ကတည္းက အစိုးရ အဆက္ဆက္နဲ႔ သံအဆက္အသြယ္ မျပတ္ခဲ့သလုိ အခုလည္း ဆက္ဆံသြားမွာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ဆုိပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း အခုလက္ရွိ ဆက္ဆံေရးဟာ သံမွဴးႀကီးအဆင့္ ဆက္ဆံေရးသာျဖစ္ၿပီး မၾကာခင္မွာ သံအမတ္ႀကီးအဆင့္ ျပန္လည္ဆက္ဆံဖုိ႔ အလားအလာေတြမ်ား ရွိပါသလားဆုိတဲ့ ေမးခြန္းကိုေတာ့ ဒါဟာ ၀ါရွင္တန္မွာ ရွိေနတဲ့ မူ၀ါဒေရးရာ ခ်မွတ္သူေတြ သုံးသပ္ရမယ့္ကိစၥ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း၊ လက္ရွိ က်င့္သုံးေနတဲ့ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒ ဘယ္ေလာက္အထိ တုိးတက္မႈရွိသလဲ ဆုိတဲ့အေပၚမွာ မူတည္ေနေၾကာင္းနဲ႔ လတ္တေလာမွာေတာ့ ဒီလုိ သံအမတ္ႀကီးအဆင့္ တုိးျမႇင့္ၿပီး ျပန္ဆက္ဆံဖုိ႔ အေျခအေန မျမင္ေသးပါဘူးလုိ႔လည္း မစၥတာ ဒင္းဂါးက ဆုိပါတယ္။
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒအရ ပူးတြဲၿပီး က်င့္သုံးေနတဲ့ ပိတ္ဆုိ႔ဒဏ္ခတ္ေရး အစီအစဥ္ေတြရဲ႕ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္နဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔လည္း သူက အခုလို ရွင္းျပပါတယ္။
“က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ရဲ႕ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္ကေတာ့ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံမွာရွိတဲ့ အာဏာပုိင္ေတြ အေနနဲ႔ သူတုိ႔ရဲ႕ မူ၀ါဒေတြကို ျပန္ၿပီးေတာ့ သုံးသပ္လာေစဖုိ႔ပါပဲ။ ႏုိင္ငံေရး လႈပ္ရွားသူေတြကို မဖမ္းဖို႔၊ ႏုိင္ငံေရး အက်ဥ္းသားေတြကို လႊတ္ေပးေရး ဖိအားေပးဖို႔၊ အစုိးရက လုပ္ေနတဲ့ ႏုိင္ငံေရး လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္ေတြမွာ အားလုံး ဘက္ေပါင္းစုံ ပါ၀င္လာေစေရး လမ္းဖြင့္ေပးေစဖို႔၊ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမုိကေရစီ အဖြဲ႕ခ်ဳပ္လို ႏုိင္ငံေရး အတုိက္အခံေတြ၊ အဖြဲ႕အစည္းေတြ အားလုံးနဲ႔ ေဆြးေႏြးညိႇႏႈိင္းမႈေတြ ျပဳလုပ္ေစဖုိ႔၊ ၿခဳံၿပီးေျပာရရင္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံရဲ႕ ေကာင္းမြန္တဲ့ အနာဂတ္အေရးကို စဥ္းစား လုပ္ေဆာင္လာေရး စစ္အစိုးရကို တြန္းအားေပးဖို႔ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္ပဲ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။”
အေမရိကန္ ဦးေဆာင္တဲ့ အေနာက္အုပ္စု ႏုိင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ ပိတ္ဆုိ႔ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြေၾကာင့္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံမွာ သာမန္ျပည္သူေတြ ပိုအထိနာၿပီး ဆင္းရဲမြဲေတမႈ လမ္းေၾကာင္းေပၚကုိ ပုိၿပီး တြန္းပုိ႔ေနသလုိ ျဖစ္တယ္ဆုိတဲ့ စြပ္စြဲခ်က္ေတြကိုေတာ့ သူက ျငင္းဆိုခဲ့ၿပီး ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံ ဆင္းရဲမြဲေတမႈ ျပႆနာဟာ ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ အစိုးရ အဆက္ဆက္ က်င့္သုံးခဲ့တဲ့ မမွန္ကန္တဲ့ စီးပြားေရး မူ၀ါဒေတြေၾကာင့္သာ ျဖစ္ၿပီး အဂတိ လုိက္စားမႈ၊ မူ၀ါဒေရးရာ ဆုံးျဖတ္ခ်က္ မမွန္ကန္မႈ စတာေတြကလည္း အဓိက ျပႆနာေတြ ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း မစၥတာ ဒင္းဂါးက ေျပာသြားခဲ့ပါတယ္။
ဒါဟာ ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ ရက္ပုိင္းက အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖြဲ႕ခ်ဳပ္က ထုတ္ျပန္ခဲ့တဲ့ စစ္တမ္းတရပ္က ေထာက္ျပထားတာနဲ႔ ကိုက္ညီေနပါတယ္။ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမုိကေရစီ အဖြဲ႕ခ်ဳပ္ရဲ႕ စစ္တမ္းမွာ ႏုိင္ငံတကာ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆုိ႔မႈရဲ႕ အက်ဳိးသက္ေရာက္မႈေတြနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ျပည္တြင္း အေျပာင္းအလဲေတြပါ အလိုက္သင့္ ျဖစ္ေပၚလာေစဖို႔အတြက္ ပိတ္ဆို႔ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ဘယ္လို၊ ဘယ္အခ်ိန္၊ ဘယ္လို အေျခအေနမ်ဳိးေတြမွာ ျပန္ၿပီး သုံးသပ္ ေျပာင္းလဲသင့္သလဲ ဆုိတာကို ေဆြးေႏြးလုိပါေၾကာင္း ကမ္းလွမ္းထားတာနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး အေမရိကန္ သံမွဴးႀကီး လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါးက...
“ဆက္ဆံညိႇႏႈိင္းေရးဆုိတဲ့ လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္ဟာ တစုိက္မတ္မတ္ ေရြ႕လ်ား လႈပ္ေဆာင္သြားရမယ့္ လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္လို႔ပဲ ျမင္ပါတယ္။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ ဘက္ေပါင္းစုံနဲ႔ အေျခအေနအားလုံး သုံးသပ္ ေဆြးေႏြးႏုိင္ဖုိ႔ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ အၿမဲ ႀကိဳးစားေနပါတယ္။ အစိုးရနဲ႔ ဆက္ၿပီး ေျပာဆုိ ေဆြးေႏြးသြားမွာ ျဖစ္သလုိ အတုိက္အခံေတြ၊ တုိင္းရင္းသား အဖြဲ႕အစည္းေတြ အားလုံးနဲ႔လည္း စဥ္ဆက္မျပတ္ ေတြ႕ဆုံမႈေတြ လုပ္ေနပါတယ္။ ေနျပည္ေတာ္ကုိ က်ေနာ္ လစဥ္ သြားသလုိပဲ အက်ယ္ခ်ဳပ္က လြတ္ေျမာက္ေနၿပီျဖစ္တဲ့ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔လည္း က်ေနာ္ မၾကာခဏ ေတြ႕ဆုံျဖစ္ပါတယ္။” လို႔ ေျပာသြားပါတယ္။
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အစိုးရ မူ၀ါဒေရးရာ သုံးသပ္သူေတြ အေနနဲ႔ အေျခအေနကုိ စဥ္ဆက္မျပတ္ ေလ့လာ သုံးသပ္ေနၿပီး လိုအပ္သလုိ ျပင္ဆင္ ေျပာင္းလဲမႈေတြ လုပ္သြားမွာျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း လက္ေတြ႕က် ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒသစ္ကုိ ေၾကညာစဥ္ကတည္းက ေျပာၾကားထားၿပီး ျဖစ္ပါေၾကာင္းလည္း ၀ါရွင္တန္ၿမိဳ႕ေတာ္ကို ေခတၱ ျပန္လည္ေရာက္ရွိေနတဲ့ ရန္ကုန္ၿမိဳ႕ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံး တာ၀န္ခံ သံမွဴးႀကီး လယ္ရီ ဒင္းဂါးက ဗြီအိုေအကုိ ရွင္းျပသြားခဲ့ပါတယ္။
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/news/us-burma-policy-115683229.html
လူ႕အခြင့္အေရး တိုးတက္မႈေတြ ရိွလာဖို႔ ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ ဆက္ထားရိွမည္
လူ႕အခြင့္အေရး တိုးတက္မႈေတြ ရိွလာဖို႔ ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ ဆက္ထားရိွမည္
အဂၤါ, 08 ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီ 2011 / By ဦးသားၫြန္႔ဦး
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း စီးပြားေရး အက်ပ္အတည္းေတြဟာ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ အေရးယူ ပိတ္ဆို႕မႈေၾကာင့္ မဟုတ္ဘဲ အစိုးရရဲ႕ မွားယြင္းတဲ့ မူ၀ါဒေတြေၾကာင့္သာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္က ထုတ္ျပန္လိုက္ခ်ိန္မွာ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုကေတာ့ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံအေပၚ အေရးယူ ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြကို ဆက္လက္ ထားရိွသြားမယ္လို႔ ေျပာလိုက္ပါတယ္။ အခုလို အေရးယူမႈေတြဟာ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း အမ်ဳိးသား ျပန္လည္သင့္ျမတ္ေရး အတြက္ ရည္ရြယ္တယ္လို႔ ဆိုပါတယ္။ အျပည့္အစုံကို ဆက္သြယ္ေမးျမန္းထားတဲ့ ကိုသားၫြန္႔ဦးက တင္ျပေပးထားပါတယ္။
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း အေျပာင္းအလဲေတြ မယ္မယ္ရရ မေတြ႕ရေသးတာေၾကာင့္ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ နဂိုခ်မွတ္ထားတဲ့ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံအေပၚ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ႐ုတ္သိမ္းဖို႔ မရိွေသးဘူးလို႔ တုံ႔ျပန္ခဲ့တာပါ။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံအေပၚ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ၾကည့္ရင္ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုက လက္ရိွ ခ်မွတ္ထားတာဟာ အျပင္းထန္ဆံုးလို႔ ေျပာရမွာပါ။
အထူးသျဖင့္ စစ္အစိုးရ စစ္တပ္ အႀကီးအကဲေတြနဲ႔ သူတို႔ မိသားစု၀င္ေတြ၊ သူတို႔နဲ႔ နီးစပ္တဲ့ စီးပြားေရးသမားေတြကို ပစ္မွတ္ထားၿပီး ေငြေၾကးနဲ႔ ခရီးသြားလာခြင့္ ပိတ္ဆို႔ အေရးယူထားတာေတြ ပိုၿပီး ထိေရာက္တယ္လို႔ အတိုက္အခံ ဒီမိုကေရစီ အင္အားစု အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားက ယူဆပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း ရင္းႏွီးျမဳႇပ္ႏွံမႈေတြ မလုပ္ဖို႔ တားျမစ္တဲ့ အေရးယူမႈဟာ ျမန္မာလူထုကို ထိခိုက္ေစသလို ပစ္မွတ္ထား အေရးယူမႈဟာလည္း ထင္သေလာက္ ထိေရာက္မႈ မရိွဘူးလို႔ ေ၀ဖန္သံေတြလည္း အေတာ္ က်ယ္ေလာင္ခဲ့ပါတယ္။
အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္ကေတာ့ ျမန္မာ့စီးပြားေရး အက်ပ္အတည္းေတြဟာ ဒီ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြေၾကာင့္ မဟုတ္ဘဲ စစ္အစိုးရ ကိုယ္တိုင္ရဲ႕ မူ၀ါဒ လမ္းၫႊန္မႈေတြေၾကာင့္သာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ အျပစ္တင္ပါတယ္။
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ေတာ့ လက္ရိွ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ အေျပာင္းအလဲေတြ ျဖစ္လာေအာင္ ဖိအားေပးဖို႔ အေရးယူမႈေတြကို ဆက္ထားရိွမွာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရးဌာန အရာရိွတဦးက ဗီြအိုေအ ျမန္မာပိုင္းကို ေျပာပါတယ္။
“ျမန္မာအာဏာပိုင္ေတြ အေနနဲ႔ ထင္သာျမင္သာတဲ့ အေရးယူ ကိုင္တြယ္ေျဖရွင္းမႈေတြ လုပ္ေဆာင္ဖို႔ ဖိအားေပးတဲ့ အေနနဲ႔ ဒီ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ဆက္ထားရိွပါမယ္။ အမ်ဳိးသား ျပန္လည္သင့္ျမတ္ေရး အတြက္ ႏိုင္ငံေရး အက်ဥ္းသားေတြ လႊတ္ေပးဖို႔၊ အတိုက္အခံ ဒီမိုကေရစီ အင္အားစုေတြ၊ တိုင္းရင္းသား ေခါင္းေဆာင္ေတြနဲ႔ စစ္မွန္တဲ့ ေတြ႕ဆံုညိႇႏိႈင္းမႈေတြ လုပ္ဖို႔ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ အသိုင္းအ၀ိုင္းနဲ႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုတို႔က လိုလားပါတယ္။”
ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း အေရးယူမႈေၾကာင့္ လူထုကို ဘယ္ေလာက္ ထိခိုက္ေစသလဲ ဆိုတာေတြကိုလည္း အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ မျပတ္ အၿမဲတမ္း ေလ့လာေနတယ္လို႔လည္း ေျပာပါတယ္။
“ပိတ္ဆို႔အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈဟာ ဘယ္ေလာက္အထိ ထိေရာက္သလဲ ဆိုတာနဲ႕ ဘယ္ေလာက္အထိ ထိခိုက္ေစသလဲ ဆိုတာေတြကို ဒီမိုကေရစီ အတိုက္အခံ အုပ္စုေတြ၊ တိုင္းရင္းသား လူနည္းစုေတြနဲ႔ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ အသိုင္းအ၀ိုင္းေတြနဲ႔ ပံုမွန္မျပတ္ ေဆြးေႏြးတိုင္ပင္မႈ ရိွပါတယ္။”
တကယ္ေတာ့ လႊတ္ေတာ္တြင္း ၀င္ေရာက္တဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံေရးပါတီ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ား၊ ကိုယ္စားလွယ္ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားက စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြကို ျပန္လည္စဥ္းစားဖို႔ ပန္ၾကားထားတာပါ။
USCB အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေျခစိုက္ ျမန္မာ့အေရး လႈပ္ရွားမႈအဖဲြ႕ အမႈေဆာင္ ၫႊန္ၾကားေရးမႉး ကိုေအာင္ဒင္ကေတာ့ တိုင္းျပည္ စီးပြားေရး ျပႆနာကို ၾကည့္မယ္ဆိုရင္ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ တခုတည္းကို ေဇာင္းေပးေျပာဆိုေနတာ မလုပ္သင့္ဘူးလို႔ ေ၀ဖန္ပါတယ္။
“တကယ့္ တုိင္းျပည္ရဲ႕ ျပႆနာေတြကို ေသခ်ာစဥ္းစား သုံးသပ္ၿပီး မွန္မွန္ကန္ကန္ ဆုံးျဖတ္ဖုိ႔ လုိပါတယ္။ တကယ္ကိုပဲ လူထုအက်ဳိးစီးပြား ဦးစားေပးၾကမယ္ဆုိရင္၊ လက္ရွိကာလမွာ နအဖ စစ္အုပ္စုရဲ႕ မတရားသျဖင့္ အာဏာကို သိမ္းပိုက္ထားမႈေတြ၊ မမွ်မတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈေတြ၊ ကိုယ္က်ဳိးရွာမႈေတြ၊ လာဘ္စားမႈေတြ စသျဖင့္ေပါ့၊ အလြဲသုံးစား လုပ္မႈေတြ၊ မွန္ကန္တဲ့ ဥပေဒ ျပ႒ာန္းခ်က္ေတြ မရွိတာ၊ ဒါေတြအားလုံးက တုိင္းျပည္ရဲ႕ စီးပြားေရး ခၽြတ္ၿခဳံက်မႈကို ဦးေဆာင္ေနတာပါ။
“တုိင္းျပည္ရဲ႕ စီးပြားေရး ျပႆနာကို ၾကည့္မယ္ဆိုရင္ Sanction ကုိ အဓိကထား ၾကည့္ရမယ့္အစား ျပည္တြင္းမွာ ျဖစ္ေပၚေနတဲ့ မတရားမႈေတြ၊ ျပႆနာေတြကို အရင္ဆုံး အေျဖရွာရမွာပါ။ အဲဒီလို အေျဖရွာဖုိ႔အတြက္ သူတုိ႔ကုိယ္ႏႈိက္က နအဖစစ္အုပ္စုကုိေရာ၊ အခုတက္လာမယ့္ ပုံသဏၭာန္ ေျပာင္းသြားမယ့္ အစုိးရသစ္ကုိေရာ ပြင့္ပြင့္လင္းလင္း ေ၀ဖန္ ေထာက္ျပဖို႔ လုိပါတယ္။ အဲဒီလို ျပည္တြင္းမွာေတာ့ တကယ္တမ္း တာ၀န္ရွိတဲ့ စစ္အုပ္စုကုိ တုိက္႐ုိက္ မေျပာရဲဘဲနဲ႔ ႏုိင္ငံတကာ Sanction ေတြကို လာၿပီး ဦးစားေပးေနမယ္ဆုိရင္ သူတုိ႔ရဲ႕ လူထုအေပၚ သစၥာရွိတယ္၊ ယုံၾကည္တယ္ဆုိတဲ့ အခ်က္အလက္ေတြကေတာ့ အင္မတန္ သံသယရွိစရာ ျဖစ္ပါလိမ့္မယ္။”
အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္ရဲ႕ မေန႔က ထုတ္ျပန္ခ်က္မွာေတာ့ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈရဲ႕ ႐ိုက္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ေလ့လာသံုးသပ္ရာမွာ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြကို ေ၀ဖန္တာေတြဟာ တိုင္းျပည္အတြင္း လတ္တေလာ ျဖစ္ေနတဲ့ အဓိက ျပႆနာရပ္ေတြကေန အာ႐ံုလဲႊမႈ ျဖစ္ေစတယ္လို႔ သုံးသပ္ပါတယ္။ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြဟာ ေတာင္းဆိုခ်က္ေတြေၾကာင့္ မဟုတ္ဘဲ သက္ဆိုင္ရာ ႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ စဥ္းစား ဆံုးျဖတ္ခ်က္သာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔လည္း ေထာက္ျပသလို အဲဒီႏိုင္ငံေတြက စိုးရိမ္ေနတဲ့ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း ျပႆနာရပ္ေတြကို ကိုင္တြယ္ ေျဖရွင္းျခင္းကသာ ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြကို ဖယ္ရွားႏိုင္မယ္လို႔ ဆိုပါတယ္။ ဒီအေျခအေနေတြ အတြက္လည္း စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ လုပ္ထားတဲ့ သက္ဆိုင္ရာ ႏိုင္ငံေတြနဲ႔ ညိႇႏိႈင္းေဆြးေႏြးမႈေတြ လုပ္ဖို႔ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္က အာဏာပိုင္ေတြကို ေတာင္းဆိုထားပါတယ္။
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/news/burma-sanction-us-115609344.html
အဂၤါ, 08 ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီ 2011 / By ဦးသားၫြန္႔ဦး
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း စီးပြားေရး အက်ပ္အတည္းေတြဟာ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ အေရးယူ ပိတ္ဆို႕မႈေၾကာင့္ မဟုတ္ဘဲ အစိုးရရဲ႕ မွားယြင္းတဲ့ မူ၀ါဒေတြေၾကာင့္သာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္က ထုတ္ျပန္လိုက္ခ်ိန္မွာ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုကေတာ့ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံအေပၚ အေရးယူ ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြကို ဆက္လက္ ထားရိွသြားမယ္လို႔ ေျပာလိုက္ပါတယ္။ အခုလို အေရးယူမႈေတြဟာ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း အမ်ဳိးသား ျပန္လည္သင့္ျမတ္ေရး အတြက္ ရည္ရြယ္တယ္လို႔ ဆိုပါတယ္။ အျပည့္အစုံကို ဆက္သြယ္ေမးျမန္းထားတဲ့ ကိုသားၫြန္႔ဦးက တင္ျပေပးထားပါတယ္။
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း အေျပာင္းအလဲေတြ မယ္မယ္ရရ မေတြ႕ရေသးတာေၾကာင့္ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ နဂိုခ်မွတ္ထားတဲ့ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံအေပၚ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ႐ုတ္သိမ္းဖို႔ မရိွေသးဘူးလို႔ တုံ႔ျပန္ခဲ့တာပါ။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံအေပၚ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ၾကည့္ရင္ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုက လက္ရိွ ခ်မွတ္ထားတာဟာ အျပင္းထန္ဆံုးလို႔ ေျပာရမွာပါ။
အထူးသျဖင့္ စစ္အစိုးရ စစ္တပ္ အႀကီးအကဲေတြနဲ႔ သူတို႔ မိသားစု၀င္ေတြ၊ သူတို႔နဲ႔ နီးစပ္တဲ့ စီးပြားေရးသမားေတြကို ပစ္မွတ္ထားၿပီး ေငြေၾကးနဲ႔ ခရီးသြားလာခြင့္ ပိတ္ဆို႔ အေရးယူထားတာေတြ ပိုၿပီး ထိေရာက္တယ္လို႔ အတိုက္အခံ ဒီမိုကေရစီ အင္အားစု အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားက ယူဆပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း ရင္းႏွီးျမဳႇပ္ႏွံမႈေတြ မလုပ္ဖို႔ တားျမစ္တဲ့ အေရးယူမႈဟာ ျမန္မာလူထုကို ထိခိုက္ေစသလို ပစ္မွတ္ထား အေရးယူမႈဟာလည္း ထင္သေလာက္ ထိေရာက္မႈ မရိွဘူးလို႔ ေ၀ဖန္သံေတြလည္း အေတာ္ က်ယ္ေလာင္ခဲ့ပါတယ္။
အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္ကေတာ့ ျမန္မာ့စီးပြားေရး အက်ပ္အတည္းေတြဟာ ဒီ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြေၾကာင့္ မဟုတ္ဘဲ စစ္အစိုးရ ကိုယ္တိုင္ရဲ႕ မူ၀ါဒ လမ္းၫႊန္မႈေတြေၾကာင့္သာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ အျပစ္တင္ပါတယ္။
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ေတာ့ လက္ရိွ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ အေျပာင္းအလဲေတြ ျဖစ္လာေအာင္ ဖိအားေပးဖို႔ အေရးယူမႈေတြကို ဆက္ထားရိွမွာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရးဌာန အရာရိွတဦးက ဗီြအိုေအ ျမန္မာပိုင္းကို ေျပာပါတယ္။
“ျမန္မာအာဏာပိုင္ေတြ အေနနဲ႔ ထင္သာျမင္သာတဲ့ အေရးယူ ကိုင္တြယ္ေျဖရွင္းမႈေတြ လုပ္ေဆာင္ဖို႔ ဖိအားေပးတဲ့ အေနနဲ႔ ဒီ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ဆက္ထားရိွပါမယ္။ အမ်ဳိးသား ျပန္လည္သင့္ျမတ္ေရး အတြက္ ႏိုင္ငံေရး အက်ဥ္းသားေတြ လႊတ္ေပးဖို႔၊ အတိုက္အခံ ဒီမိုကေရစီ အင္အားစုေတြ၊ တိုင္းရင္းသား ေခါင္းေဆာင္ေတြနဲ႔ စစ္မွန္တဲ့ ေတြ႕ဆံုညိႇႏိႈင္းမႈေတြ လုပ္ဖို႔ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ အသိုင္းအ၀ိုင္းနဲ႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုတို႔က လိုလားပါတယ္။”
ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း အေရးယူမႈေၾကာင့္ လူထုကို ဘယ္ေလာက္ ထိခိုက္ေစသလဲ ဆိုတာေတြကိုလည္း အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ မျပတ္ အၿမဲတမ္း ေလ့လာေနတယ္လို႔လည္း ေျပာပါတယ္။
“ပိတ္ဆို႔အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈဟာ ဘယ္ေလာက္အထိ ထိေရာက္သလဲ ဆိုတာနဲ႕ ဘယ္ေလာက္အထိ ထိခိုက္ေစသလဲ ဆိုတာေတြကို ဒီမိုကေရစီ အတိုက္အခံ အုပ္စုေတြ၊ တိုင္းရင္းသား လူနည္းစုေတြနဲ႔ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ အသိုင္းအ၀ိုင္းေတြနဲ႔ ပံုမွန္မျပတ္ ေဆြးေႏြးတိုင္ပင္မႈ ရိွပါတယ္။”
တကယ္ေတာ့ လႊတ္ေတာ္တြင္း ၀င္ေရာက္တဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံေရးပါတီ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ား၊ ကိုယ္စားလွယ္ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားက စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြကို ျပန္လည္စဥ္းစားဖို႔ ပန္ၾကားထားတာပါ။
USCB အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေျခစိုက္ ျမန္မာ့အေရး လႈပ္ရွားမႈအဖဲြ႕ အမႈေဆာင္ ၫႊန္ၾကားေရးမႉး ကိုေအာင္ဒင္ကေတာ့ တိုင္းျပည္ စီးပြားေရး ျပႆနာကို ၾကည့္မယ္ဆိုရင္ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ တခုတည္းကို ေဇာင္းေပးေျပာဆိုေနတာ မလုပ္သင့္ဘူးလို႔ ေ၀ဖန္ပါတယ္။
“တကယ့္ တုိင္းျပည္ရဲ႕ ျပႆနာေတြကို ေသခ်ာစဥ္းစား သုံးသပ္ၿပီး မွန္မွန္ကန္ကန္ ဆုံးျဖတ္ဖုိ႔ လုိပါတယ္။ တကယ္ကိုပဲ လူထုအက်ဳိးစီးပြား ဦးစားေပးၾကမယ္ဆုိရင္၊ လက္ရွိကာလမွာ နအဖ စစ္အုပ္စုရဲ႕ မတရားသျဖင့္ အာဏာကို သိမ္းပိုက္ထားမႈေတြ၊ မမွ်မတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈေတြ၊ ကိုယ္က်ဳိးရွာမႈေတြ၊ လာဘ္စားမႈေတြ စသျဖင့္ေပါ့၊ အလြဲသုံးစား လုပ္မႈေတြ၊ မွန္ကန္တဲ့ ဥပေဒ ျပ႒ာန္းခ်က္ေတြ မရွိတာ၊ ဒါေတြအားလုံးက တုိင္းျပည္ရဲ႕ စီးပြားေရး ခၽြတ္ၿခဳံက်မႈကို ဦးေဆာင္ေနတာပါ။
“တုိင္းျပည္ရဲ႕ စီးပြားေရး ျပႆနာကို ၾကည့္မယ္ဆိုရင္ Sanction ကုိ အဓိကထား ၾကည့္ရမယ့္အစား ျပည္တြင္းမွာ ျဖစ္ေပၚေနတဲ့ မတရားမႈေတြ၊ ျပႆနာေတြကို အရင္ဆုံး အေျဖရွာရမွာပါ။ အဲဒီလို အေျဖရွာဖုိ႔အတြက္ သူတုိ႔ကုိယ္ႏႈိက္က နအဖစစ္အုပ္စုကုိေရာ၊ အခုတက္လာမယ့္ ပုံသဏၭာန္ ေျပာင္းသြားမယ့္ အစုိးရသစ္ကုိေရာ ပြင့္ပြင့္လင္းလင္း ေ၀ဖန္ ေထာက္ျပဖို႔ လုိပါတယ္။ အဲဒီလို ျပည္တြင္းမွာေတာ့ တကယ္တမ္း တာ၀န္ရွိတဲ့ စစ္အုပ္စုကုိ တုိက္႐ုိက္ မေျပာရဲဘဲနဲ႔ ႏုိင္ငံတကာ Sanction ေတြကို လာၿပီး ဦးစားေပးေနမယ္ဆုိရင္ သူတုိ႔ရဲ႕ လူထုအေပၚ သစၥာရွိတယ္၊ ယုံၾကည္တယ္ဆုိတဲ့ အခ်က္အလက္ေတြကေတာ့ အင္မတန္ သံသယရွိစရာ ျဖစ္ပါလိမ့္မယ္။”
အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္ရဲ႕ မေန႔က ထုတ္ျပန္ခ်က္မွာေတာ့ အေရးယူ ဒဏ္ခတ္မႈရဲ႕ ႐ိုက္ခတ္မႈေတြကို ေလ့လာသံုးသပ္ရာမွာ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြကို ေ၀ဖန္တာေတြဟာ တိုင္းျပည္အတြင္း လတ္တေလာ ျဖစ္ေနတဲ့ အဓိက ျပႆနာရပ္ေတြကေန အာ႐ံုလဲႊမႈ ျဖစ္ေစတယ္လို႔ သုံးသပ္ပါတယ္။ စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြဟာ ေတာင္းဆိုခ်က္ေတြေၾကာင့္ မဟုတ္ဘဲ သက္ဆိုင္ရာ ႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ စဥ္းစား ဆံုးျဖတ္ခ်က္သာ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔လည္း ေထာက္ျပသလို အဲဒီႏိုင္ငံေတြက စိုးရိမ္ေနတဲ့ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း ျပႆနာရပ္ေတြကို ကိုင္တြယ္ ေျဖရွင္းျခင္းကသာ ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈေတြကို ဖယ္ရွားႏိုင္မယ္လို႔ ဆိုပါတယ္။ ဒီအေျခအေနေတြ အတြက္လည္း စီးပြားေရး ပိတ္ဆို႔မႈ လုပ္ထားတဲ့ သက္ဆိုင္ရာ ႏိုင္ငံေတြနဲ႔ ညိႇႏိႈင္းေဆြးေႏြးမႈေတြ လုပ္ဖို႔ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္က အာဏာပိုင္ေတြကို ေတာင္းဆိုထားပါတယ္။
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/news/burma-sanction-us-115609344.html
Monday, February 7, 2011
China’s top 10 Sichuan teahouses
China’s top 10 Sichuan teahouses
In China Food & Drink
04 February 2011 | By Daniel McCrohan, Lonely Planet
Nobody does tea better than the Chinese. And nowhere is China's tea culture better represented than in Sichuan province
Related article: One-of-a-kind dining in Hong Kong
But there seems to be more teahouses here than leaves in a cup of jasmine, so to help you decide which ones to visit, here is a list of the best Sichuan teahouses.
1. Wangye Temple, Zigong
Zigong, the one-time salt-mining capital of China, is also the king of Sichuan teahouses, and its jewel in the crown is housed within the ochre-coloured walls of this 100-year-old temple. Perched above the Fuxi River, Wangye was built to ensure safe passage for boats transporting salt downstream. No longer an active temple, it is now the perfect hangout for salt-of-the-earth locals who come here for tea, banter, card games and a great river view.
2. Huanhou Palace, Zigong
Zigong does it again with this fabulous teahouse located inside an 1868 butcher's guildhall. No river views with this one, but the hugely imposing stone facade has to be the most dramatic entrance to any teahouse in China. Step inside and you will find seating in a tree-filled, open-air courtyard bordered by intricate stone carvings, wooden beams and a charming old stone stage.
3. Heming Teahouse, People's Park, Chengdu
As Sichuan's capital city, Chengdu naturally has its fair share of wonderful teahouses. This one, in the city's most central park, is perfect people-watching material. Many locals, particularly elderly ones, seem to spend all day everyday here, sitting by the small lake, sipping tea while they play cards, gossip, have their hair cut or even have their earwax removed! (It would be 10 yuan per ear, in case you were wondering.)
4. Any teahouse by the river, Pingle
Not one single teahouse, but a whole row of them, all lined up along the riverside in the ancient town of Pingle. Art students flock here to paint the scenery, and for good reason; it is gorgeous. Order a pot of China's finest and sit beside a wooden Ming dynasty building while you watch other tourists punt their way along the river on bamboo rafts.
5. Tibetan Restaurant, Ganzi
About a third of Sichuan lies across grasslands and mountains rising up towards the Tibetan plateau, and much of what you find in the west of the province is more Tibetan than Chinese... including the teahouses. Tibetan Restaurant is actually a teahouse in disguise. Although it does food - in this case excellent food - for most of the day its prime purpose is to serve gossip-hungry Tibetans their daily fix of yak-butter tea. Staff members are wonderful and the decor - a riot of golds, reds and blues - shows you that this is Tibet in all but name.
6. Tibetan Culture Dew, Kangding
Kangding is not quite as deep into Tibetan territory as Ganzi, but this is still a great place to hang out with yak-butter-tea-sipping locals. The outside of the building is distinctly Chinese (think white-tiled housing block), but inside is more rustic, with stone walls and wood beams decorated in colourful Tibetan prayer flags. There are all sorts of tea if you do not like the yak-butter variety, plus coffee and beer. And the menu is in English.
7. Yingyue Tea Garden, Songpan
A change of scene here at Yingyue, or Moon Reflection Tea Garden, as you sit in a bamboo chair overlooking the river that runs through the north Sichuan village of Songpan. This is mahjong territory, and locals sit in fours around tables playing the ancient Chinese game until...well, until they can see the moon reflected in their cups of tea.
8. Shangqing Temple, Qingcheng Shan
The lush, forested mountain known as Qingcheng Shan has been a Taoist retreat for more than 2,000 years and right near the top, in amongst the trees, is Shangqing Temple, a Qing dynasty rebuild of the original Jin dynasty temple. The temple is still active, but monks here welcome guests to eat in their small restaurant or enjoy a brew in their lovely little teahouse. You would be hard pushed to find more peaceful tea-sipping surroundings.
Ref:
http://www.bbc.com/travel/feature/20110128-chinas-top-10-sichuan-teahouses
In China Food & Drink
04 February 2011 | By Daniel McCrohan, Lonely Planet
Nobody does tea better than the Chinese. And nowhere is China's tea culture better represented than in Sichuan province
Related article: One-of-a-kind dining in Hong Kong
But there seems to be more teahouses here than leaves in a cup of jasmine, so to help you decide which ones to visit, here is a list of the best Sichuan teahouses.
1. Wangye Temple, Zigong
Zigong, the one-time salt-mining capital of China, is also the king of Sichuan teahouses, and its jewel in the crown is housed within the ochre-coloured walls of this 100-year-old temple. Perched above the Fuxi River, Wangye was built to ensure safe passage for boats transporting salt downstream. No longer an active temple, it is now the perfect hangout for salt-of-the-earth locals who come here for tea, banter, card games and a great river view.
2. Huanhou Palace, Zigong
Zigong does it again with this fabulous teahouse located inside an 1868 butcher's guildhall. No river views with this one, but the hugely imposing stone facade has to be the most dramatic entrance to any teahouse in China. Step inside and you will find seating in a tree-filled, open-air courtyard bordered by intricate stone carvings, wooden beams and a charming old stone stage.
3. Heming Teahouse, People's Park, Chengdu
As Sichuan's capital city, Chengdu naturally has its fair share of wonderful teahouses. This one, in the city's most central park, is perfect people-watching material. Many locals, particularly elderly ones, seem to spend all day everyday here, sitting by the small lake, sipping tea while they play cards, gossip, have their hair cut or even have their earwax removed! (It would be 10 yuan per ear, in case you were wondering.)
4. Any teahouse by the river, Pingle
Not one single teahouse, but a whole row of them, all lined up along the riverside in the ancient town of Pingle. Art students flock here to paint the scenery, and for good reason; it is gorgeous. Order a pot of China's finest and sit beside a wooden Ming dynasty building while you watch other tourists punt their way along the river on bamboo rafts.
5. Tibetan Restaurant, Ganzi
About a third of Sichuan lies across grasslands and mountains rising up towards the Tibetan plateau, and much of what you find in the west of the province is more Tibetan than Chinese... including the teahouses. Tibetan Restaurant is actually a teahouse in disguise. Although it does food - in this case excellent food - for most of the day its prime purpose is to serve gossip-hungry Tibetans their daily fix of yak-butter tea. Staff members are wonderful and the decor - a riot of golds, reds and blues - shows you that this is Tibet in all but name.
6. Tibetan Culture Dew, Kangding
Kangding is not quite as deep into Tibetan territory as Ganzi, but this is still a great place to hang out with yak-butter-tea-sipping locals. The outside of the building is distinctly Chinese (think white-tiled housing block), but inside is more rustic, with stone walls and wood beams decorated in colourful Tibetan prayer flags. There are all sorts of tea if you do not like the yak-butter variety, plus coffee and beer. And the menu is in English.
7. Yingyue Tea Garden, Songpan
A change of scene here at Yingyue, or Moon Reflection Tea Garden, as you sit in a bamboo chair overlooking the river that runs through the north Sichuan village of Songpan. This is mahjong territory, and locals sit in fours around tables playing the ancient Chinese game until...well, until they can see the moon reflected in their cups of tea.
8. Shangqing Temple, Qingcheng Shan
The lush, forested mountain known as Qingcheng Shan has been a Taoist retreat for more than 2,000 years and right near the top, in amongst the trees, is Shangqing Temple, a Qing dynasty rebuild of the original Jin dynasty temple. The temple is still active, but monks here welcome guests to eat in their small restaurant or enjoy a brew in their lovely little teahouse. You would be hard pushed to find more peaceful tea-sipping surroundings.
Ref:
http://www.bbc.com/travel/feature/20110128-chinas-top-10-sichuan-teahouses
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Egypt protests: Muslim Brotherhood 'to join talks'
Egypt protests: Muslim Brotherhood 'to join talks'
5 February 2011 Last updated at 22:07 ET
Anti-Mubarak protesters remain entrenched in Tahrir Square
Egypt's most influential opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood, says it will enter talks with officials on ending the country's political crisis.
The group told Reuters the talks would begin on Sunday and would assess how far the government was "ready to accept the demands of the people".
The negotiations would be the first ever to be held between the government and the officially banned Brotherhood.
President Hosni Mubarak has rejected protesters' demands that he quit now.
Mr Mubarak - who has been in office since 1981, tolerating little dissent - has said he will not stand in elections due in September.
Huge crowds have been on the streets of Cairo and other cities in the past few weeks demanding his immediate resignation and calling for democratic reforms.
The Muslim Brotherhood had previously said it would not take part in negotiations between the government and opposition groups.
But a spokesman told Reuters: "We have decided to engage in a round of dialogue to ascertain the seriousness of officials towards the demands of the people and their willingness to respond to them."
A spokesman told the AFP news agency the dialogue was also aimed at ending "foreign or regional interference" in the situation.
The Islamist group is Egypt's most influential and well-organised opposition but it remains officially banned and its members and leaders have been subject to frequent repression.
Mr Mubarak has blamed it for the unrest and said that if he leaves, the group will exploit the ensuing political chaos.
The Muslim Brotherhood denies accusations that it is seeking to create an Islamist state in Egypt.
Resignations
Opposition demonstrators are continuing to occupy Cairo's Tahrir Square as the protests enter their 13th day, although the numbers have fallen from Friday's huge rally.
The military has been attempting to re-open the square to the public in an attempt to restore normality, and to confine the protests to a small area.
A protesters in front of a tank in Tahrir Square, Cairo, Egypt (5 Feb 2011) (photo)
"You all have the right to express yourselves but please save what is left of Egypt. Look around you," said army commander Hassan al-Roweny, addressing the crowds on Friday evening through a loud speaker.
But hundreds of people then attempted to prevent the army from entering the square - some lay on the ground in front of the tanks to block their progress.
The BBC's Jim Muir in Cairo says they fear the protests would become irrelevant if they were confined to a smaller area - but he adds that relations between the soldiers and the demonstrators have remained friendly.
The US - a key ally of the Mubarak government - has called for a swift transition of power, although it has not explicitly told Mr Mubarak to leave.
It has also encouraged all parties to fully engage in talks with opposition groups.
US Vice-President Joe Biden phoned his Egyptian counterpart Omar Suleiman on Saturday, and called for "credible, inclusive negotiations for Egypt's transition to a democratic government to address the aspirations of the Egyptian people", the state department said.
The entire leadership of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) resigned en masse on Friday, apparently in response to the protests.
Two of Mr Mubarak's allies, including his son Gamal, lost their posts while Hossam Badrawi was appointed secretary general.
Ref:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12375426
.........................
Continue reading the main story
Analysis
image of Jonathan Marcus Jonathan Marcus BBC Diplomatic correspondent, Munich
Mr Wisner is a veteran diplomat who knows Egypt and President Mubarak well. He urged people to control their rhetoric - the more Egyptians hear demands from outside the country for Mr Mubarak to stand down, he argued, the more it could have negative consequences.
The former ambassador set out the familiar US demands - changes to the Egyptian Constitution; respect for minority rights; a free press; free and fair elections and so on.
Crucially he said that, in his view, Mr Mubarak should stay in office to steer these changes through. So is this the view of just a well-informed expert on Egypt? Or a glimpse from Mr Obama's special envoy of the real game plan in Washington?
......................................
5 February 2011 Last updated at 22:07 ET
Anti-Mubarak protesters remain entrenched in Tahrir Square
Egypt's most influential opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood, says it will enter talks with officials on ending the country's political crisis.
The group told Reuters the talks would begin on Sunday and would assess how far the government was "ready to accept the demands of the people".
The negotiations would be the first ever to be held between the government and the officially banned Brotherhood.
President Hosni Mubarak has rejected protesters' demands that he quit now.
Mr Mubarak - who has been in office since 1981, tolerating little dissent - has said he will not stand in elections due in September.
Huge crowds have been on the streets of Cairo and other cities in the past few weeks demanding his immediate resignation and calling for democratic reforms.
The Muslim Brotherhood had previously said it would not take part in negotiations between the government and opposition groups.
But a spokesman told Reuters: "We have decided to engage in a round of dialogue to ascertain the seriousness of officials towards the demands of the people and their willingness to respond to them."
A spokesman told the AFP news agency the dialogue was also aimed at ending "foreign or regional interference" in the situation.
The Islamist group is Egypt's most influential and well-organised opposition but it remains officially banned and its members and leaders have been subject to frequent repression.
Mr Mubarak has blamed it for the unrest and said that if he leaves, the group will exploit the ensuing political chaos.
The Muslim Brotherhood denies accusations that it is seeking to create an Islamist state in Egypt.
Resignations
Opposition demonstrators are continuing to occupy Cairo's Tahrir Square as the protests enter their 13th day, although the numbers have fallen from Friday's huge rally.
The military has been attempting to re-open the square to the public in an attempt to restore normality, and to confine the protests to a small area.
A protesters in front of a tank in Tahrir Square, Cairo, Egypt (5 Feb 2011) (photo)
"You all have the right to express yourselves but please save what is left of Egypt. Look around you," said army commander Hassan al-Roweny, addressing the crowds on Friday evening through a loud speaker.
But hundreds of people then attempted to prevent the army from entering the square - some lay on the ground in front of the tanks to block their progress.
The BBC's Jim Muir in Cairo says they fear the protests would become irrelevant if they were confined to a smaller area - but he adds that relations between the soldiers and the demonstrators have remained friendly.
The US - a key ally of the Mubarak government - has called for a swift transition of power, although it has not explicitly told Mr Mubarak to leave.
It has also encouraged all parties to fully engage in talks with opposition groups.
US Vice-President Joe Biden phoned his Egyptian counterpart Omar Suleiman on Saturday, and called for "credible, inclusive negotiations for Egypt's transition to a democratic government to address the aspirations of the Egyptian people", the state department said.
The entire leadership of the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP) resigned en masse on Friday, apparently in response to the protests.
Two of Mr Mubarak's allies, including his son Gamal, lost their posts while Hossam Badrawi was appointed secretary general.
Ref:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12375426
.........................
Continue reading the main story
Analysis
image of Jonathan Marcus Jonathan Marcus BBC Diplomatic correspondent, Munich
Mr Wisner is a veteran diplomat who knows Egypt and President Mubarak well. He urged people to control their rhetoric - the more Egyptians hear demands from outside the country for Mr Mubarak to stand down, he argued, the more it could have negative consequences.
The former ambassador set out the familiar US demands - changes to the Egyptian Constitution; respect for minority rights; a free press; free and fair elections and so on.
Crucially he said that, in his view, Mr Mubarak should stay in office to steer these changes through. So is this the view of just a well-informed expert on Egypt? Or a glimpse from Mr Obama's special envoy of the real game plan in Washington?
......................................
Anti-Mubarak Protesters Plan New Push
Anti-Mubarak Protesters Plan New Push
February 03, 2011 / Luis Ramirez | Cairo
Anti-government demonstrators in Egypt are preparing for another massive protest Friday to further pressure President Hosni Mubarak to leave power. The streets of the capital have been the scene of bloody battles between opposition demonstrators and supporters of Mr. Mubarak.
Anti-Mubarak demonstrators are calling Friday Hosni Mubarak's day of departure. Bloodied and beaten from clashes with the president's supporters, they hoped their sustained pressure will make the 82-year-old Egyptian leader will go immediately.
Mr. Mubarak has been in power for nearly thirty years and this week sought to halt the protests by announcing he will not seek re-election in September elections.
The Egyptian leader gave his first interview since the protests began. He spoke off-camera with journalist Christiane Amanpour of the U.S. television network ABC and told her he is fed up and wants to go. Amanpour quotes the president as saying that if he goes now, there would be chaos in Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood would take over.
Thursday saw more gunfire in the area and heavy fighting in the streets around Tahrir Square in Central Cairo.
The army brought in reinforcements and soldiers prevented protesters from both sides from entering the area around the square. Police carried out a wave of arrests.
Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik went on state television to apologize for the violence and denied government involvement in the clashes.
The anti-government demonstrators are not convinced. They accuse the government of encouraging, or at least allowing the pro-Mubarak demonstrators to approach and strike the anti-government demonstrators.
This 20-year-old opposition protester says President Mubarak's supporters staged an angry attack on Tahrir Square.
"There was big violence," said the protester. "All that area I was in was full of Mubarak's guy's Mubarak's people."
Mubarak supporters targeted foreign journalists, accusing the foreign media of instigating the protests. A large number of international reporters say they have been harassed, beaten, mobbed, or detained.
With police off the streets at least for a few days, demonstrators have had a week of unprecedented freedom to express their anger toward Mr. Mubarak. By Thursday, with plain clothes agents on the streets and threatening those who talked to reporters, signs of the old police had returned.
The demonstrator who spoke to VOA did so away from the street. He says the demonstrations have gone too far to go back, and he intends to return to the square and continue protesting.
"We are Egyptian," said the demonstrator. "We have a brave heart. We have to get our freedom. This is 30 years without freedom in Egypt."
Mubarak's government has called for a dialogue with the opposition but says no negotiations can begin until the protests end. The opposition wants Mubarak out of office, out of the country, or put on trial.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Anti-Mubarak-Protesters-Plan-New-Push-115234604.html
February 03, 2011 / Luis Ramirez | Cairo
Anti-government demonstrators in Egypt are preparing for another massive protest Friday to further pressure President Hosni Mubarak to leave power. The streets of the capital have been the scene of bloody battles between opposition demonstrators and supporters of Mr. Mubarak.
Anti-Mubarak demonstrators are calling Friday Hosni Mubarak's day of departure. Bloodied and beaten from clashes with the president's supporters, they hoped their sustained pressure will make the 82-year-old Egyptian leader will go immediately.
Mr. Mubarak has been in power for nearly thirty years and this week sought to halt the protests by announcing he will not seek re-election in September elections.
The Egyptian leader gave his first interview since the protests began. He spoke off-camera with journalist Christiane Amanpour of the U.S. television network ABC and told her he is fed up and wants to go. Amanpour quotes the president as saying that if he goes now, there would be chaos in Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood would take over.
Thursday saw more gunfire in the area and heavy fighting in the streets around Tahrir Square in Central Cairo.
The army brought in reinforcements and soldiers prevented protesters from both sides from entering the area around the square. Police carried out a wave of arrests.
Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Shafik went on state television to apologize for the violence and denied government involvement in the clashes.
The anti-government demonstrators are not convinced. They accuse the government of encouraging, or at least allowing the pro-Mubarak demonstrators to approach and strike the anti-government demonstrators.
This 20-year-old opposition protester says President Mubarak's supporters staged an angry attack on Tahrir Square.
"There was big violence," said the protester. "All that area I was in was full of Mubarak's guy's Mubarak's people."
Mubarak supporters targeted foreign journalists, accusing the foreign media of instigating the protests. A large number of international reporters say they have been harassed, beaten, mobbed, or detained.
With police off the streets at least for a few days, demonstrators have had a week of unprecedented freedom to express their anger toward Mr. Mubarak. By Thursday, with plain clothes agents on the streets and threatening those who talked to reporters, signs of the old police had returned.
The demonstrator who spoke to VOA did so away from the street. He says the demonstrations have gone too far to go back, and he intends to return to the square and continue protesting.
"We are Egyptian," said the demonstrator. "We have a brave heart. We have to get our freedom. This is 30 years without freedom in Egypt."
Mubarak's government has called for a dialogue with the opposition but says no negotiations can begin until the protests end. The opposition wants Mubarak out of office, out of the country, or put on trial.
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Anti-Mubarak-Protesters-Plan-New-Push-115234604.html
Saturday, February 5, 2011
White House and Egypt Discuss Plan for Mubarak’s Exit (The New York Times)
White House and Egypt Discuss Plan for Mubarak’s Exit
By HELENE COOPER and MARK LANDLER
Published: February 3, 2011
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is discussing with Egyptian officials a proposal for President Hosni Mubarak to resign immediately and turn over power to a transitional government headed by Vice President Omar Suleiman with the support of the Egyptian military, administration officials and Arab diplomats said Thursday.
Even though Mr. Mubarak has balked, so far, at leaving now, officials from both governments are continuing talks about a plan in which Mr. Suleiman, backed by Lt. Gen. Sami Enan, chief of the Egyptian armed forces, and Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the defense minister, would immediately begin a process of constitutional reform.
The proposal also calls for the transitional government to invite members from a broad range of opposition groups, including the banned Muslim Brotherhood, to begin work to open up the country’s electoral system in an effort to bring about free and fair elections in September, the officials said.
Senior administration officials said that the proposal was one of several options under discussion with high-level Egyptian officials around Mr. Mubarak in an effort to persuade the president to step down now.
They cautioned that the outcome depended on several factors, not least Egypt’s own constitutional protocols and the mood of the protesters on the streets of Cairo and other Egyptian cities.
Some officials said there was not yet any indication that either Mr. Suleiman or the Egyptian military was willing to abandon Mr. Mubarak.
Even as the Obama administration is coalescing around a Mubarak-must-go-now posture in private conversations with Egyptian officials, Mr. Mubarak himself remains determined to stay until the election in September, American and Egyptian officials said. His backers forcibly pushed back on Thursday against what they viewed as American interference in Egypt’s internal affairs.
“What they’re asking cannot be done,” one senior Egyptian official said, citing clauses in the Egyptian Constitution that bar the vice president from assuming power. Under the Constitution, the speaker of Parliament would succeed the president. “That’s my technical answer,” the official added. “My political answer is they should mind their own business.”
Mr. Mubarak’s insistence on staying will again be tested by large street protests on Friday, which the demonstrators are calling his “day of departure,” when they plan to march on the presidential palace. The military’s pledge not to fire on the Egyptian people will be tested as well.
The discussions about finding a way out of the crisis in Cairo take place as new questions are being raised about whether American intelligence agencies, after the collapse of the Tunisian government, adequately warned the White House and top lawmakers about the prospects of an uprising in Egypt.
During a Senate hearing on Thursday, both Democrats and Republicans pressed a senior Central Intelligence Agency official about when the C.I.A. and other agencies notified President Obama of the looming crisis, and whether intelligence officers even monitored social networking sites and Internet forums to gauge popular sentiment in Egypt.
“At some point it had to have been obvious that there was going to be a huge demonstration,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who is chairwoman of the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence.
She said that intelligence agencies never sent a notice to her committee about the growing uprising in Egypt, as is customary in the case of significant global events.
Stephanie O’Sullivan, the C.I.A. official, responded that the agency had been tracking instability in Egypt for some time and had concluded that the government in Cairo was in an “untenable” situation. But, Ms. O’Sullivan said, “we didn’t know what the triggering mechanism would be.”
Because of the fervor now unleashed in Egypt, one Obama administration official said, Mr. Mubarak’s close aides expressed concern that they were not convinced that Mr. Mubarak’s resignation would satisfy the protesters.
In an interview with Christiane Amanpour of ABC News, Mr. Mubarak said that he was “fed up” with being president but that he could not step down for fear of sowing chaos in the country.
“The worry on Mubarak’s part is that if he says yes to this, there will be more demands,” said Leslie H. Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations. “And since he’s not dealing with a legal entity, but a mob, how does he know there won’t be more demands tomorrow?”
A number of high-level American officials have reached out to the Egyptians in recent days. While administration officials would not offer details of the alternatives that were being discussed, they made it clear that their preferred outcome would be for Mr. Suleiman to take power as a transitional figure.
(page 2)
Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. spoke by phone to Mr. Suleiman on Thursday, the White House said in a statement, urging that “credible, inclusive negotiations begin immediately in order for Egypt to transition to a democratic government that addresses the aspirations of the Egyptian people.”
Mr. Biden’s phone call came after a mission by Mr. Obama’s private emissary, Frank G. Wisner, was abruptly ended when Mr. Mubarak, angry at Mr. Obama’s toughly worded speech on Tuesday night, declined to meet with the envoy a second time, officials said.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has made three calls since the weekend to Egypt’s powerful defense minister, Field Marshal Tantawi, who served on the coalition’s side in the Persian Gulf war of 1991.
Pentagon officials declined on Thursday to describe the specifics of the calls but indicated that Mr. Gates’s messages were focused on more than urging the Egyptian military to exercise restraint.
Officials familiar with the dialogue between the Obama administration and Cairo say that American officials have told their Egyptian counterparts that if they support another strongman to replace Mr. Mubarak — but without a specific plan and timetable for moving toward democratic elections — Congress might react by freezing military aid to Egypt.
On Thursday, the Senate passed a resolution calling on Mr. Mubarak to begin the transfer of power to an “inclusive, interim caretaker government.”
Anthony H. Cordesman, an expert on the Egyptian military at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said that a transition government led by Mr. Suleiman and the military, with pledges to move toward democratic elections, was in his mind “the most probable case.” But he said the administration had to proceed with extreme caution.
“Everybody working this issue knows that this is a military extremely sensitive to outside pressure,” Mr. Cordesman said.
Even as the Obama administration has ratcheted up the pressure on Egypt, it has reaffirmed its support for other Arab allies facing popular unrest.
The White House released a statement saying that Mr. Obama called President Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen on Wednesday to welcome Mr. Saleh’s recent “reform measures” — the Yemeni president promised not to run again in 2013.
And on Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called King Abdullah II of Jordan to say that the United States looked forward to working with his new cabinet — recently announced — and to underline the importance of the relationship between Jordan and the United States.
Philip J. Crowley, the State Department spokesman, declined to say whether Mrs. Clinton had enlisted King Abdullah in an effort to ease out Mr. Mubarak. But Mr. Crowley praised the king for responding to the unrest in Jordan.
“He’s doing his best to respond to this growing aspiration,” Mr. Crowley said. “And we appreciate the leadership he’s shown.”
Elisabeth Bumiller, Mark Mazzetti and Thom Shanker contributed reporting.
Ref:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/04/world/middleeast/04diplomacy.html?_r=1&nl=us&emc=politicsemailema1
By HELENE COOPER and MARK LANDLER
Published: February 3, 2011
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is discussing with Egyptian officials a proposal for President Hosni Mubarak to resign immediately and turn over power to a transitional government headed by Vice President Omar Suleiman with the support of the Egyptian military, administration officials and Arab diplomats said Thursday.
Even though Mr. Mubarak has balked, so far, at leaving now, officials from both governments are continuing talks about a plan in which Mr. Suleiman, backed by Lt. Gen. Sami Enan, chief of the Egyptian armed forces, and Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the defense minister, would immediately begin a process of constitutional reform.
The proposal also calls for the transitional government to invite members from a broad range of opposition groups, including the banned Muslim Brotherhood, to begin work to open up the country’s electoral system in an effort to bring about free and fair elections in September, the officials said.
Senior administration officials said that the proposal was one of several options under discussion with high-level Egyptian officials around Mr. Mubarak in an effort to persuade the president to step down now.
They cautioned that the outcome depended on several factors, not least Egypt’s own constitutional protocols and the mood of the protesters on the streets of Cairo and other Egyptian cities.
Some officials said there was not yet any indication that either Mr. Suleiman or the Egyptian military was willing to abandon Mr. Mubarak.
Even as the Obama administration is coalescing around a Mubarak-must-go-now posture in private conversations with Egyptian officials, Mr. Mubarak himself remains determined to stay until the election in September, American and Egyptian officials said. His backers forcibly pushed back on Thursday against what they viewed as American interference in Egypt’s internal affairs.
“What they’re asking cannot be done,” one senior Egyptian official said, citing clauses in the Egyptian Constitution that bar the vice president from assuming power. Under the Constitution, the speaker of Parliament would succeed the president. “That’s my technical answer,” the official added. “My political answer is they should mind their own business.”
Mr. Mubarak’s insistence on staying will again be tested by large street protests on Friday, which the demonstrators are calling his “day of departure,” when they plan to march on the presidential palace. The military’s pledge not to fire on the Egyptian people will be tested as well.
The discussions about finding a way out of the crisis in Cairo take place as new questions are being raised about whether American intelligence agencies, after the collapse of the Tunisian government, adequately warned the White House and top lawmakers about the prospects of an uprising in Egypt.
During a Senate hearing on Thursday, both Democrats and Republicans pressed a senior Central Intelligence Agency official about when the C.I.A. and other agencies notified President Obama of the looming crisis, and whether intelligence officers even monitored social networking sites and Internet forums to gauge popular sentiment in Egypt.
“At some point it had to have been obvious that there was going to be a huge demonstration,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who is chairwoman of the Senate’s Select Committee on Intelligence.
She said that intelligence agencies never sent a notice to her committee about the growing uprising in Egypt, as is customary in the case of significant global events.
Stephanie O’Sullivan, the C.I.A. official, responded that the agency had been tracking instability in Egypt for some time and had concluded that the government in Cairo was in an “untenable” situation. But, Ms. O’Sullivan said, “we didn’t know what the triggering mechanism would be.”
Because of the fervor now unleashed in Egypt, one Obama administration official said, Mr. Mubarak’s close aides expressed concern that they were not convinced that Mr. Mubarak’s resignation would satisfy the protesters.
In an interview with Christiane Amanpour of ABC News, Mr. Mubarak said that he was “fed up” with being president but that he could not step down for fear of sowing chaos in the country.
“The worry on Mubarak’s part is that if he says yes to this, there will be more demands,” said Leslie H. Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations. “And since he’s not dealing with a legal entity, but a mob, how does he know there won’t be more demands tomorrow?”
A number of high-level American officials have reached out to the Egyptians in recent days. While administration officials would not offer details of the alternatives that were being discussed, they made it clear that their preferred outcome would be for Mr. Suleiman to take power as a transitional figure.
(page 2)
Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. spoke by phone to Mr. Suleiman on Thursday, the White House said in a statement, urging that “credible, inclusive negotiations begin immediately in order for Egypt to transition to a democratic government that addresses the aspirations of the Egyptian people.”
Mr. Biden’s phone call came after a mission by Mr. Obama’s private emissary, Frank G. Wisner, was abruptly ended when Mr. Mubarak, angry at Mr. Obama’s toughly worded speech on Tuesday night, declined to meet with the envoy a second time, officials said.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has made three calls since the weekend to Egypt’s powerful defense minister, Field Marshal Tantawi, who served on the coalition’s side in the Persian Gulf war of 1991.
Pentagon officials declined on Thursday to describe the specifics of the calls but indicated that Mr. Gates’s messages were focused on more than urging the Egyptian military to exercise restraint.
Officials familiar with the dialogue between the Obama administration and Cairo say that American officials have told their Egyptian counterparts that if they support another strongman to replace Mr. Mubarak — but without a specific plan and timetable for moving toward democratic elections — Congress might react by freezing military aid to Egypt.
On Thursday, the Senate passed a resolution calling on Mr. Mubarak to begin the transfer of power to an “inclusive, interim caretaker government.”
Anthony H. Cordesman, an expert on the Egyptian military at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said that a transition government led by Mr. Suleiman and the military, with pledges to move toward democratic elections, was in his mind “the most probable case.” But he said the administration had to proceed with extreme caution.
“Everybody working this issue knows that this is a military extremely sensitive to outside pressure,” Mr. Cordesman said.
Even as the Obama administration has ratcheted up the pressure on Egypt, it has reaffirmed its support for other Arab allies facing popular unrest.
The White House released a statement saying that Mr. Obama called President Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen on Wednesday to welcome Mr. Saleh’s recent “reform measures” — the Yemeni president promised not to run again in 2013.
And on Thursday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called King Abdullah II of Jordan to say that the United States looked forward to working with his new cabinet — recently announced — and to underline the importance of the relationship between Jordan and the United States.
Philip J. Crowley, the State Department spokesman, declined to say whether Mrs. Clinton had enlisted King Abdullah in an effort to ease out Mr. Mubarak. But Mr. Crowley praised the king for responding to the unrest in Jordan.
“He’s doing his best to respond to this growing aspiration,” Mr. Crowley said. “And we appreciate the leadership he’s shown.”
Elisabeth Bumiller, Mark Mazzetti and Thom Shanker contributed reporting.
Ref:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/04/world/middleeast/04diplomacy.html?_r=1&nl=us&emc=politicsemailema1
Thursday, February 3, 2011
အေမရိကန္မူ၀ါဒ အေျပာင္းအလဲ ျမန္္မာအစိုးရသစ္အေပၚ မူတည္
အေမရိကန္မူ၀ါဒ အေျပာင္းအလဲ ျမန္္မာအစိုးရသစ္အေပၚ မူတည္
ဗုဒၶဟူး, 02 ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီ 2011/By ဦးသားၫြန္႔ဦး
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ လက္ရိွ တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒဟာ ရလဒ္ေကာင္း မရေသးဘဲ စိတ္ပ်က္စရာေတြ ရင္ဆိုင္ေနရေပမဲ့ ေနာက္တက္လာမယ့္ ျမန္မာအစိုးရသစ္ရဲ႕ တုံ႔ျပန္မႈကိုေတာ့ ေစာင့္ၾကည့္သြားမယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုက ေျပာပါတယ္။ လက္ရိွ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ ျမန္မာအေပၚ မူ၀ါဒဟာ ျမန္မာအစိုးရသစ္အတြက္ စမ္းသပ္ခ်က္ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔လည္း အေမရိကန္ လက္ေထာက္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး ကာ့တ္ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္ (Kurt Campbell) က ၀ါရွင္တန္ဒီစီ ႏိုင္ငံျခား သတင္းေထာက္မ်ား အသင္းတိုက္မွာ ေျပာသြားတာပါ။ အျပည့္အစုံကို ကိုယ္တိုင္ သတင္းသြားေရာက္ ယူခဲ့တဲ့ ကိုသားၫြန္႔ဦးက တင္ျပေပးထားပါတယ္။
အခု ၂၀၁၁ ခုႏွစ္အတြင္း ေမွ်ာ္မွန္းထားတဲ့ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ အေရွ႕ေတာင္အာရွဆိုင္ရာ မူ၀ါဒေတြကို အာရွ၊ ပစိဖိတ္ဆိုင္ရာ လက္ေထာက္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး ကာ့တ္ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ရွင္းလင္းသြားရာမွာ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ လက္ရိွ မူ၀ါဒေတြ ရလဒ္ေကာင္း မထြက္တဲ့အေပၚ စိတ္ပ်က္ရတယ္လို႔ ေျပာသြားပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း လာမယ့္ အစိုးရသစ္ အေနနဲ႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ထာင္စုက ထားရိွတဲ့ မူ၀ါဒနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ ဘယ္လို တုံ႔ျပန္လာမလဲ ဆိုတာကိုေတာ့ အေရးတယူ ေစာင့္ၾကည့္သြားမယ္ ဆိုတာကို အေသအခ်ာ ေျပာသြားပါတယ္။
“တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒ တခုလံုးအရ ရလဒ္ေတြဟာ စိတ္ပ်က္စရာေတြခ်ည္း ဆိုတာ ျငင္းစရာ မရိွပါဘူး။ ဒီမူ၀ါဒကို သမၼတ အိုဘားမား အစိုးရက ခ်မွတ္ၿပီး ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး ကလင္တန္က မႏွစ္တုန္းက ေရးဆဲြခဲ့တာပါ။ ျမန္မာအစိုးရက ဘယ္လို ေဆာင္ရြက္ႏိုင္မလဲ၊ ၿပီးေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔ဘက္က ဒီအေပၚမွာ ဘယ္လိုတုံ႔ျပန္ ေဆာင္ရြက္မလဲဆိုတဲ့ လုပ္ႏိုင္ေခ်အဆင့္ ရွင္းရွင္းလင္းလင္းျဖစ္ေအာင္ ႀကိဳးပမ္းေနပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့ အေျခခံအားျဖင့္ အေျခအေန အားလံုးကို ၿခံဳၾကည့္ရင္ေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔ စိတ္ပ်က္ရပါတယ္။”
တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒဟာ အေျခခံအားျဖင့္ အလုပ္မျဖစ္ေသးဘူး ဆိုတာ ၀န္ႀကီး ကာ့တ္ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ၀န္ခံ ေျပာခဲ့ေပမဲ့ အျခားတဘက္မွာေတာ့ ဒီမူ၀ါဒဟာ အစိုးရသစ္အတြက္ စမ္းသပ္မႈ ျဖစ္လိမ့္မယ္လို႔ ေျပာပါတယ္။
“ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒဟာ တစိတ္တပိုင္း အားျဖင့္ေတာ့ ေဒသတြင္း မူ၀ါဒ အတြက္ေရာ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အတြက္ပါ အေကာင္းဆံုး အက်ဳိးစီးပြား ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ယံုၾကည္ပါတယ္။ အနည္းဆံုးေတာ့ လာမယ့္ အစိုးရသစ္ကို စမ္းသပ္မယ့္ အခြင့္အလမ္းတခု ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ အစိုးသစ္ အေနနဲ႔ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ အသိုင္းအ၀ိုင္းနဲ႔ ျပန္ဆက္စပ္ႏိုင္ေအာင္ ဘာေတြလုပ္မလဲ၊ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုနဲ႔ အျခားႏိုင္ငံေတြနဲ႔ အနီးကပ္ ပူးေပါင္း ေဆာင္ရြက္ႏိုင္ေအာင္ အစိုးရသစ္ အေနနဲ႔ ဘာေတြ လက္ေတြ႕ ေဆာင္ရြက္မလဲ၊ အခြင့္အလမ္းေတြ ေပးထားပါတယ္။”
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံကို ယခင္က ပိတ္ဆို႔အေရးယူမႈ တခုတည္းကေန မႏွစ္တုန္းက မူ၀ါဒေျပာင္းၿပီး ပိတ္ဆို႔အေရးယူမႈေရာ အစိုးရနဲ႔ တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံမႈေရာ ႏွစ္ခုလံုးကို က်င့္သံုးလာတာပါ။ ျမန္မာအစိုးရ အေနနဲ႔က အေျပာင္းအလဲေတြအတြက္ ျပည္တြင္းကပဲ ႀကိဳးပမ္း ေဆာင္ရြက္သြားမယ္လို႔ ႏိုင္ငံတကာကို ကတိေပးၿပီး ဖဲြ႕စည္းပံုဆဲြ၊ ေရြးေကာက္ပဲြလုပ္၊ အခုေနာက္ဆံုး လႊတ္ေတာ္ေတြပါ ေခၚယူခဲ့ပါတယ္။
ဒါေပမဲ့ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ကေတာ့ ဒီႀကိဳးပမ္းခ်က္ေတြမွာ အားနည္းမႈေတြ ရိွတယ္လို႔ ျမင္တဲ့အေၾကာင္း မစၥတာ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ေျပာပါတယ္။ အထူးသျဖင့္ ေရြးေကာက္ပဲြ မတိုင္မီ အာဏာပိုင္ေတြရဲ႕ ျပင္ဆင္ ေဆာင္ရြက္ခ်က္ေတြ အေပၚမွာ စိတ္ပ်က္မိတယ္လို႔ ေျပာပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ အေနနဲ႔ ေျဖရွင္းရမယ့္ ျပႆနာရပ္ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားရိွတယ္ ဆိုတာကိုလည္း မစၥတာ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ေထာက္ျပသြားပါတယ္။
“ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ ျပႆနာ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ား ႀကံဳေနရတယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုက အသိအမွတ္ျပဳ နားလည္ထားပါတယ္။ အဓိကက်တဲ့ လူနည္းစု တိုင္းရင္းသားေတြနဲ႔ ေတြ႕ဆံုညိႇႏိႈင္းတာမ်ဳိးေတြ မရိွပါဘူး။ ႏိုင္ငံေရး အက်ဥ္းသား အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ား မလြတ္ေျမာက္ေသးပါဘူး။ လူထုအေျချပဳ လူမႈအဖဲြ႕အစည္းေတြ လုပ္ကိုင္ ေဆာင္ရြက္မႈမွာလည္း အခက္အခဲ ႀကီးႀကီးမားမားကို ရိွေနပါတယ္။ ကုလသမဂၢ လံုၿခံဳေရးေကာင္စီ ဆံုးျဖတ္ခ်က္ကို ခ်ဳိးေဖာက္ၿပီး ေဒသတြင္း ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးနဲ႔ တည္ၿငိမ္မႈအတြက္ အေရးပါတဲ့ လက္နက္ျပန္႕ပြားမႈ ကိစၥေတြမွာ ဆက္လက္ပါ၀င္ ပတ္သက္ေနတာေတြ ရိွပါတယ္။”
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ေရးမူေၾကာင့္ ရလဒ္ေကာင္းေတြ မေတြ႕ရေသးေပမဲ့ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ ေရြးေကာက္ပဲြ ၿပီးကတည္းက ျပည္တြင္းေရာ ျပည္ပမွာပါ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ ပိတ္ဆို႔ အေရးယူမႈေတြကို ျပန္လည္႐ုပ္သိမ္းဖို႔ ေျပာဆို တိုက္တြန္းမႈေတြကေတာ့ ပိုမ်ားလာပါတယ္။ အထူးသျဖင့္ ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ အာဆီယံ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး အစည္းအေ၀းမွာ အာဆီယံ တိုင္းျပည္ေတြက ျမန္မာအေပၚ ပိတ္ဆို႔ အေရးယူတာေတြကို ႐ုပ္သိမ္းေပးဖို႔ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေတြကို တိုက္႐ိုက္ တိုက္တြန္းလာပါတယ္။
မစၥတာ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္ကေတာ့ အခုလို အေရးယူမႈေတြ ျပန္လည္႐ုပ္သိမ္းဖို႔ ကိစၥဟာ အခ်ိန္ေစာေသးတယ္လို႔ ျမင္ပါတယ္။ အခုနကလိုပဲ လာမယ့္ အစိုးရသစ္ရဲ႕ ေဆာင္ရြက္ပံုကို ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ခ်င္တဲ့သေဘာ ေတြ႕ရပါတယ္။
“ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ ေဒသတြင္း ခရီးစဥ္ရဲ႕ ရည္မွန္းခ်က္တခုက အေရွ႕ေတာင္အာရွ ေဒသက က်ေနာ္တို႔ မိတ္ေဆြေတြနဲ႔ ပိုၿပီး နီးနီးကပ္ကပ္ ေဆာင္ရြက္ဖို႔ပါ။ အေရွ႕ေတာင္အာရွႏိုင္ငံ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားက အခုအခ်ိန္မွာ ပိတ္ဆို႔ အေရးယူမႈကို ႐ုပ္သိမ္းဖို႔ အခ်ိန္ေရာက္ေနၿပီလို႔ ေျပာၾကဆိုၾကပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း အေရးယူမႈေတြ ႐ုပ္သိမ္းဖို႔ အခ်ိန္ကာလ ေစာလြန္းတယ္လို႔ ရွင္းရွင္းလင္းလင္း ေျပာထားပါတယ္။ အစိုးရသစ္တရပ္ ေပၚလာၿပီး အစိုးရသစ္ရဲ႕ မူ၀ါဒေတြကို ခ်မွတ္တဲ့အခါမွာ ဘယ္လို သိသာထင္ရွားတဲ့ ေျခလွမ္းေတြ လွမ္းမလဲဆိုတာ က်ေနာ္တို႔ ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ေနပါတယ္။”
အျခားတဘက္မွာ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ အျခားႏိုင္ငံေတြနဲ႔အတူ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔ အနီးကပ္ ထဲထဲ၀င္၀င္ တိုင္ပင္ညိႇႏိႈင္းမႈေတြ လုပ္ေနတယ္လို႔ မစၥတာ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ေျပာပါတယ္။ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္ တရား၀င္ ရပ္တည္ႏုိင္ေရး အတြက္လည္း အာဏာပိုင္ေတြကို ဆက္ၿပီး ဖိအားေပး တိုက္တြန္းသြားမယ္လို႔ ေျပာပါတယ္။ လာမယ့္ အစိုးရသစ္ အေနနဲ႔ အေၾကာင္းရပ္ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားကို ဘယ္လို သေဘာထားမယ္၊ ဘယ္လို ေဆာင္ရြက္မလဲ ဆိုတာကို အခြင့္အလမ္းေပး ေစာင့္ၾကည့္လိုတယ္ ဆိုတာဟာလည္း ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔ အတူ တသေဘာတည္း ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ေျပာသြားပါတယ္။
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/news/us-policy-burma-115149899.html
ဗုဒၶဟူး, 02 ေဖေဖာ္ဝါရီ 2011/By ဦးသားၫြန္႔ဦး
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ လက္ရိွ တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒဟာ ရလဒ္ေကာင္း မရေသးဘဲ စိတ္ပ်က္စရာေတြ ရင္ဆိုင္ေနရေပမဲ့ ေနာက္တက္လာမယ့္ ျမန္မာအစိုးရသစ္ရဲ႕ တုံ႔ျပန္မႈကိုေတာ့ ေစာင့္ၾကည့္သြားမယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုက ေျပာပါတယ္။ လက္ရိွ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ ျမန္မာအေပၚ မူ၀ါဒဟာ ျမန္မာအစိုးရသစ္အတြက္ စမ္းသပ္ခ်က္ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔လည္း အေမရိကန္ လက္ေထာက္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး ကာ့တ္ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္ (Kurt Campbell) က ၀ါရွင္တန္ဒီစီ ႏိုင္ငံျခား သတင္းေထာက္မ်ား အသင္းတိုက္မွာ ေျပာသြားတာပါ။ အျပည့္အစုံကို ကိုယ္တိုင္ သတင္းသြားေရာက္ ယူခဲ့တဲ့ ကိုသားၫြန္႔ဦးက တင္ျပေပးထားပါတယ္။
အခု ၂၀၁၁ ခုႏွစ္အတြင္း ေမွ်ာ္မွန္းထားတဲ့ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ အေရွ႕ေတာင္အာရွဆိုင္ရာ မူ၀ါဒေတြကို အာရွ၊ ပစိဖိတ္ဆိုင္ရာ လက္ေထာက္ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး ကာ့တ္ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ရွင္းလင္းသြားရာမွာ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ လက္ရိွ မူ၀ါဒေတြ ရလဒ္ေကာင္း မထြက္တဲ့အေပၚ စိတ္ပ်က္ရတယ္လို႔ ေျပာသြားပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း လာမယ့္ အစိုးရသစ္ အေနနဲ႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ထာင္စုက ထားရိွတဲ့ မူ၀ါဒနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ ဘယ္လို တုံ႔ျပန္လာမလဲ ဆိုတာကိုေတာ့ အေရးတယူ ေစာင့္ၾကည့္သြားမယ္ ဆိုတာကို အေသအခ်ာ ေျပာသြားပါတယ္။
“တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒ တခုလံုးအရ ရလဒ္ေတြဟာ စိတ္ပ်က္စရာေတြခ်ည္း ဆိုတာ ျငင္းစရာ မရိွပါဘူး။ ဒီမူ၀ါဒကို သမၼတ အိုဘားမား အစိုးရက ခ်မွတ္ၿပီး ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး ကလင္တန္က မႏွစ္တုန္းက ေရးဆဲြခဲ့တာပါ။ ျမန္မာအစိုးရက ဘယ္လို ေဆာင္ရြက္ႏိုင္မလဲ၊ ၿပီးေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔ဘက္က ဒီအေပၚမွာ ဘယ္လိုတုံ႔ျပန္ ေဆာင္ရြက္မလဲဆိုတဲ့ လုပ္ႏိုင္ေခ်အဆင့္ ရွင္းရွင္းလင္းလင္းျဖစ္ေအာင္ ႀကိဳးပမ္းေနပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့ အေျခခံအားျဖင့္ အေျခအေန အားလံုးကို ၿခံဳၾကည့္ရင္ေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔ စိတ္ပ်က္ရပါတယ္။”
တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒဟာ အေျခခံအားျဖင့္ အလုပ္မျဖစ္ေသးဘူး ဆိုတာ ၀န္ႀကီး ကာ့တ္ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ၀န္ခံ ေျပာခဲ့ေပမဲ့ အျခားတဘက္မွာေတာ့ ဒီမူ၀ါဒဟာ အစိုးရသစ္အတြက္ စမ္းသပ္မႈ ျဖစ္လိမ့္မယ္လို႔ ေျပာပါတယ္။
“ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံေရး မူ၀ါဒဟာ တစိတ္တပိုင္း အားျဖင့္ေတာ့ ေဒသတြင္း မူ၀ါဒ အတြက္ေရာ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အတြက္ပါ အေကာင္းဆံုး အက်ဳိးစီးပြား ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ယံုၾကည္ပါတယ္။ အနည္းဆံုးေတာ့ လာမယ့္ အစိုးရသစ္ကို စမ္းသပ္မယ့္ အခြင့္အလမ္းတခု ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ အစိုးသစ္ အေနနဲ႔ ႏိုင္ငံတကာ အသိုင္းအ၀ိုင္းနဲ႔ ျပန္ဆက္စပ္ႏိုင္ေအာင္ ဘာေတြလုပ္မလဲ၊ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုနဲ႔ အျခားႏိုင္ငံေတြနဲ႔ အနီးကပ္ ပူးေပါင္း ေဆာင္ရြက္ႏိုင္ေအာင္ အစိုးရသစ္ အေနနဲ႔ ဘာေတြ လက္ေတြ႕ ေဆာင္ရြက္မလဲ၊ အခြင့္အလမ္းေတြ ေပးထားပါတယ္။”
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံကို ယခင္က ပိတ္ဆို႔အေရးယူမႈ တခုတည္းကေန မႏွစ္တုန္းက မူ၀ါဒေျပာင္းၿပီး ပိတ္ဆို႔အေရးယူမႈေရာ အစိုးရနဲ႔ တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ ဆက္ဆံမႈေရာ ႏွစ္ခုလံုးကို က်င့္သံုးလာတာပါ။ ျမန္မာအစိုးရ အေနနဲ႔က အေျပာင္းအလဲေတြအတြက္ ျပည္တြင္းကပဲ ႀကိဳးပမ္း ေဆာင္ရြက္သြားမယ္လို႔ ႏိုင္ငံတကာကို ကတိေပးၿပီး ဖဲြ႕စည္းပံုဆဲြ၊ ေရြးေကာက္ပဲြလုပ္၊ အခုေနာက္ဆံုး လႊတ္ေတာ္ေတြပါ ေခၚယူခဲ့ပါတယ္။
ဒါေပမဲ့ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ကေတာ့ ဒီႀကိဳးပမ္းခ်က္ေတြမွာ အားနည္းမႈေတြ ရိွတယ္လို႔ ျမင္တဲ့အေၾကာင္း မစၥတာ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ေျပာပါတယ္။ အထူးသျဖင့္ ေရြးေကာက္ပဲြ မတိုင္မီ အာဏာပိုင္ေတြရဲ႕ ျပင္ဆင္ ေဆာင္ရြက္ခ်က္ေတြ အေပၚမွာ စိတ္ပ်က္မိတယ္လို႔ ေျပာပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ အေနနဲ႔ ေျဖရွင္းရမယ့္ ျပႆနာရပ္ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားရိွတယ္ ဆိုတာကိုလည္း မစၥတာ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ေထာက္ျပသြားပါတယ္။
“ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ ျပႆနာ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ား ႀကံဳေနရတယ္လို႔ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုက အသိအမွတ္ျပဳ နားလည္ထားပါတယ္။ အဓိကက်တဲ့ လူနည္းစု တိုင္းရင္းသားေတြနဲ႔ ေတြ႕ဆံုညိႇႏိႈင္းတာမ်ဳိးေတြ မရိွပါဘူး။ ႏိုင္ငံေရး အက်ဥ္းသား အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ား မလြတ္ေျမာက္ေသးပါဘူး။ လူထုအေျချပဳ လူမႈအဖဲြ႕အစည္းေတြ လုပ္ကိုင္ ေဆာင္ရြက္မႈမွာလည္း အခက္အခဲ ႀကီးႀကီးမားမားကို ရိွေနပါတယ္။ ကုလသမဂၢ လံုၿခံဳေရးေကာင္စီ ဆံုးျဖတ္ခ်က္ကို ခ်ဳိးေဖာက္ၿပီး ေဒသတြင္း ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးနဲ႔ တည္ၿငိမ္မႈအတြက္ အေရးပါတဲ့ လက္နက္ျပန္႕ပြားမႈ ကိစၥေတြမွာ ဆက္လက္ပါ၀င္ ပတ္သက္ေနတာေတြ ရိွပါတယ္။”
အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ တိုက္႐ိုက္ထိစပ္ေရးမူေၾကာင့္ ရလဒ္ေကာင္းေတြ မေတြ႕ရေသးေပမဲ့ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံမွာ ေရြးေကာက္ပဲြ ၿပီးကတည္းက ျပည္တြင္းေရာ ျပည္ပမွာပါ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေတြရဲ႕ ပိတ္ဆို႔ အေရးယူမႈေတြကို ျပန္လည္႐ုပ္သိမ္းဖို႔ ေျပာဆို တိုက္တြန္းမႈေတြကေတာ့ ပိုမ်ားလာပါတယ္။ အထူးသျဖင့္ ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ အာဆီယံ ႏိုင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး အစည္းအေ၀းမွာ အာဆီယံ တိုင္းျပည္ေတြက ျမန္မာအေပၚ ပိတ္ဆို႔ အေရးယူတာေတြကို ႐ုပ္သိမ္းေပးဖို႔ အေနာက္ႏိုင္ငံေတြကို တိုက္႐ိုက္ တိုက္တြန္းလာပါတယ္။
မစၥတာ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္ကေတာ့ အခုလို အေရးယူမႈေတြ ျပန္လည္႐ုပ္သိမ္းဖို႔ ကိစၥဟာ အခ်ိန္ေစာေသးတယ္လို႔ ျမင္ပါတယ္။ အခုနကလိုပဲ လာမယ့္ အစိုးရသစ္ရဲ႕ ေဆာင္ရြက္ပံုကို ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ခ်င္တဲ့သေဘာ ေတြ႕ရပါတယ္။
“ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ ေဒသတြင္း ခရီးစဥ္ရဲ႕ ရည္မွန္းခ်က္တခုက အေရွ႕ေတာင္အာရွ ေဒသက က်ေနာ္တို႔ မိတ္ေဆြေတြနဲ႔ ပိုၿပီး နီးနီးကပ္ကပ္ ေဆာင္ရြက္ဖို႔ပါ။ အေရွ႕ေတာင္အာရွႏိုင္ငံ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားက အခုအခ်ိန္မွာ ပိတ္ဆို႔ အေရးယူမႈကို ႐ုပ္သိမ္းဖို႔ အခ်ိန္ေရာက္ေနၿပီလို႔ ေျပာၾကဆိုၾကပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း အေရးယူမႈေတြ ႐ုပ္သိမ္းဖို႔ အခ်ိန္ကာလ ေစာလြန္းတယ္လို႔ ရွင္းရွင္းလင္းလင္း ေျပာထားပါတယ္။ အစိုးရသစ္တရပ္ ေပၚလာၿပီး အစိုးရသစ္ရဲ႕ မူ၀ါဒေတြကို ခ်မွတ္တဲ့အခါမွာ ဘယ္လို သိသာထင္ရွားတဲ့ ေျခလွမ္းေတြ လွမ္းမလဲဆိုတာ က်ေနာ္တို႔ ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ေနပါတယ္။”
အျခားတဘက္မွာ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စု အေနနဲ႔ အျခားႏိုင္ငံေတြနဲ႔အတူ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔ အနီးကပ္ ထဲထဲ၀င္၀င္ တိုင္ပင္ညိႇႏိႈင္းမႈေတြ လုပ္ေနတယ္လို႔ မစၥတာ ကမ့္ဘဲလ္က ေျပာပါတယ္။ အမ်ဳိးသား ဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖဲြ႕ခ်ဳပ္ တရား၀င္ ရပ္တည္ႏုိင္ေရး အတြက္လည္း အာဏာပိုင္ေတြကို ဆက္ၿပီး ဖိအားေပး တိုက္တြန္းသြားမယ္လို႔ ေျပာပါတယ္။ လာမယ့္ အစိုးရသစ္ အေနနဲ႔ အေၾကာင္းရပ္ အေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားကို ဘယ္လို သေဘာထားမယ္၊ ဘယ္လို ေဆာင္ရြက္မလဲ ဆိုတာကို အခြင့္အလမ္းေပး ေစာင့္ၾကည့္လိုတယ္ ဆိုတာဟာလည္း ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔ အတူ တသေဘာတည္း ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ေျပာသြားပါတယ္။
Ref:
http://www.voanews.com/burmese/news/us-policy-burma-115149899.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)