A REASONED CRITIQUE OF THE CALL FOR UN SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION ON BURMA BY THE PDP PARTY

Date: 18^th October 2005

 

Ex-President Havel/Bishop Tutu Report

It is interesting to note that some political groups in Burma have come to a settled position that the ending of military rule in Burma will come from intervention from outside the country especially the developed countries. This has been particularly so  for the NLD in the past 15 years, which has passively been sloganising 'democracy and freedom' with little or no action to worry the SPDC. The reaction of the NLD to the ex-President Havel/Bishop Desmond Tutu Report in supporting with alacrity its recommendations to the UN Security Council without careful thought despite the dangerous consequences of the action under Chapter VII and Article 41 to Burma and to its neighbours is a matter great concern to those who want a resolution of the situation in Burma in the foreseeable future. Big power rivalry in the region which at present is maintained by an unspoken equilibrium or at arms length in international relations, the current latent balance would be thrust to the front in the vortex of geopolitical active competition, for strategic control or influence in this vital strategic country, whose borders are shared by principal competitors and overlooks the important critical gateway to the Sea lanes of the Indian Ocean to the South China Sea and the Pacific Ocean. The implications of the President Havel/Tutu  recommendations deserve careful analysis by any responsible political party before making any substantive dispassionate comment which is why the Parliamentary Democracy Party did not jump to make a response. The PDP has now had the opportunity to study the Report, which , though defective in many areas of fact and which led to flawed conclusions, we nonetheless welcome, their contribution to this long running political problem of military rule in Burma. Its biggest achievement will be to put Burma's situation to scrutiny on the world stage and perhaps, generate on-going discourse. In our objective view of the Report, it is unlikely to secure any UN Security Council support and will probably bring tensions among the key strategic players among the permanent members.

 

Report Neither Objective nor Realistic

The PDP agrees with some commentators that the Havel/Tutu Report taken as a whole, it is neither objective nor is it realistic in its conclusions and recommendations. It is not objective because it recycles many allegations and claims made by certain groups over a number of years but does not take account of UNODC 2003 Opium Survey, Irrawaddy Vol.11 No.4, 17 May 2003, UNODC Opium Survey 2004 and US Government published figures, which support the UNODC conclusions in its respective yearly Surveys. It is unrealistic and naïve because in view of the geopolitical strategic considerations of the region, to expect such a flawed Resolution pregnant with adverse consequences for some regional and global players, such as India, China and Russia to remain indifferent and allow it to pass muster when tabled in the Security Council for discussion is patently misconceived. The higher interests of these powers will assert themselves by preventing this Resolution being put on the Agenda of the Security Council, let alone, see it discussed as proposed and recommended by the worthy duo.

 

Threat to Peace Misconceived

It is ridiculous to suggest that HIV/AIDS and the flow of refugees into Thailand and India and trafficking of narcotics are issues, which constitute "a threat to peace" warranting action under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. But the report does not even suggest one country in the region which has been affected by such vicissitudes. It is impossible to see how the countries in the region will support such a radical UN action whose consequences are far reaching and have negative long-term effects. Without their support, no action will succeed in the UN Security Council. The position of Britain and the US, France as permanent Security Council members is equally problematic and it is doubtful, whether China and Russia, the other two Security Council members, will agree to such a radical approach. More likely than not, they will veto such a resolution if it made it to the Security Council Agenda. To informed diplomatic observers and practitioners in international relations and taking into account of the regional geopolitical realities, there is utterly no realistic prospect of such a radical UN Resolution being put on the Security Council Agenda, let alone, being successfully passed by it, even though some members might be sympathetic to what the resolution seeks. The PDP believes that as long as the UN Security Council remains as it is presently constituted, a resolution of this import whatever the situation inside Burma might be and whatever its effects are in the neighbouring countries, it is unlikely to see the light of day in view of the competing strategic considerations of the permanent members.

 

The Myth That No Other Parties Exist in Burma

There is a myth here about the reactions of the opposition groups in Burma including the rump of the now discredited NLD whose members have taken-flight because of its failure in the past 15 years to achieve or bring about democracy, freedom, and to solve the economic and social problems the country has been facing by removing the military junta from power . In its much weakened political situation, the NLD response to the Havel/Tutu report is instructive in what it has not said about other opposition political parties such as the PDP party and others, as it is revealing in its lack of understanding of the implications and serious consequences of such a radical step in the Security Council, which could destabilise Burma as well as its neighbours for many years to  come. And the resulting instability could easily become not only a 'threat to peace' but also, a threat to 'world peace', as the big powers strategic interests would be at stake.

 

Big Power Competing Interests

The Havel/Tu Tu Report and its major recommendations if they were taken to the Security Council, it would expose for all to see their individual divergent strategic competing interests of the US, China, Russia, and India, which are at present hidden under the table or diplomatic code words of democracy, freedom and humanitarian work. China, Russia, and India will see such a move with suspicion about both the short and long-term intentions of the US and its allies, even though there might not be any malign intentions. Has anybody considered what type of democracy and freedom these powers wish for Burma? Will it be the same as the people of Burma want or will it be qualified as in Afghanistan, Egypt, and Bosnia to serve particular interests? We in the Parliamentary Democracy Party are clear and know what we require for our Motherland – authentic democracy, freedom of speech, economic, and social development, and the Rule of Law to underpin all the areas of our economic and social transactions. As a matter of necessity, anything which arouses China's and Russia's suspicions of US intentions and its allies in the region, will be blocked even before it is put on the Security Council Agenda through informal channels. Yet the NLD Central Committee blithely says that the report is "detailed and accurate" and then goes on to plead that "when this subject (Burma) is brought before the Security Council, we urge and solicit all members to unite and cooperate and work together for a successful outcome and to refrain from exercising their veto powers". What the NLD is in fact advocating is UN Security Council intervention in Burma under Chapter VII and with all the consequences of Articles 39 and 41 – sanctions, possible military action etc. What a hell of a contradiction! If you want to alleviate the economic and social problems faced by the people of Burma with so-called humanitarian work, Chapter VII and Article 41 of the UN Charter are not the diplomatic or political instruments that you choose to use, as the result will make these problems worse than they are. It is therefore puzzling that some contributions to the debate are erroneously suggesting that "neither the NLD nor the CRPP specifically refer to the recommendation for action under Article VII of the UN Charter nor do they refer to any threat to peace. This is an extraordinary claim , which defies paragraph 5 of the NLD Central Executive Committee Statement dated the 21^st September, 2005, which says: "When this subject (Burma) is brought before the Security Council we urge and solicit all members to unite and cooperate and work together for a successful outcome and refrain from exercising their veto powers". This statement clearly supports directly the Havel/Tutu draft UN Security Council Resolution and action under Chapter VII and Article 41 of the UN Charter, but to suggest otherwise, is not to advance informed debate about politics in Burma.

 

Calamitous and Inept Response

The humiliation that the NLD had to be rescued from its calamitous and inept statement of 21^st Sep 2005, support on the Havel/Tutu Report on Chapter VII of the UN Charter Resolution by an outsider was and still is, a damning confirmation of the perceptive and courageous contribution of Mr.Aung Zaw's review of the political state of the NLD and its leadership since 1990 - the respected independent Editor of the Irrawaddy Magazine of 5^th May 2005, which brutally but honestly exposed the political failure and incompetence of not only Daw Aung San Suu Kyi but also of the whole NLD leadership. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's political record of delivery and leadership has little to recommend it nor that of the entire NLD leadership despite the enormous financial resources given them by Western countries. Yet an outsider, contrary to the official NLD Central Executive Committee which it issued on the 21^st September 2005, suggests in response to the Havel/Tutu Report that it did not mean what it says in paragraph 5 of its statement. This paragraph clearly says that and we quote verbatim "When this subject (Burma) is brought before the Security Council we urge and solicit all members to unite and cooperate and work together for a successful outcome and to refrain from exercising their veto powers", end of quotation. Then, the contributor makes another statement in relation to the US administration's likely attitude to the Havel/Tutu Report whether it would find it useful in its discussion of the issues involved with China and Russia. And we quote "On the other hand, the statesmanlike and conciliatory statements by the NLD and the CRPP are far more persuasive and might have influence with both China and Russia", end of quote. This statement is inconsistent with the known facts regarding the NLD's political culture nor can it be said that its statement of the 21^st September 2005 is anything but statesmanlike and conciliatory Given that the Editor of the Irrawaddy Magazine is an experienced professional journalist who has followed the ebbs and flows of opposition political parties in Burma for many years and speaks the language and probably more languages of the people and lives among them and is in touch. Are we now seriously being asked to disbelieve his well researched, objective and independent magisterial conclusions and judgement about the political performance of the NLD in the past 15 years vis a vis, the military junta? Mr.Aung Zaw has done a great service to the people of Burma by exposing the myth of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD. What he says is well-considered, rigorous, and objective, proportionate, balanced, informed, sober conclusions and independent judgement without fear or favour but the Havel/Tutu Report has completely ignored this landmark devastating independent report, which would have helped it make their report objective. Are we to believe that this Irrawaddy Magazine Report was not accessible to them? We doubt it. Why then, completely cover up the important facts produced by independent Burmese professional researchers and journalists who have no axe to grind. Do we want a free and independent press in Burma or not? The Western countries are constantly urging developing countries to adopt democracy, accountability, freedom of speech, transparency, free press, remove corruption, the rule of law, which the PDP totally agrees with as these principles and values, were inculcated into the party's psyche in the 1960s by Premier U Nu. These are not new values to us because they are bed-rock principles. However, we are bemused by the conduct of some Western countries encouraging autocratic and authoritarian tendencies of censorship of news that does not fit their pre-determined purpose, support corrupt political parties which have received tens of millions of Pounds Sterling over the past 15 years. What have they done with this money? What have they achieved? Why have they not accounted for its use? Yet, some Western countries are supporting these corrupt politicians and party in one breath, but in another, condemn developing countries for corruption? Is corruption, lack of transparency, news censorship acceptable as long as it serves the particular interests of some countries?

 

The Beginning of a Free Press

As the PDP has said before, the Editor should be congratulated for his confident, fearless and truthful exposure of the total failure and incompetence of the leaders of the NLD and by implication, that freedom and democracy to the people of Burma will not be brought about by the leader and other leaders of the NLD. No wonder that its members have deserted it, and the party has become moribund. Its leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the other leaders, whose capacities are not up to the task of removing the military junta from power and to bring democracy and freedom to the people. This magisterial judgement has not only been corroborated by many thousands of NLD members who have deserted the party but also, by a considerable number of independent political observers not aligned to any particular party or group. These are the irrefutable facts and cannot be wished away by attempts to paint a positive picture of an active organisation, where none exists but in name. It is a cruel deception to the long-suffering people of Burma whose overriding intention 15 years ago has and still is, to get rid of the military junta from power and to bring to democracy as well as to be relieved of the many economic and social ills, which they have endured for so long. For the Havel/Tutu Report and some contributors to continue to suggest that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is competent and the NLD is alive and effective and will deliver when their joint political track record is zero, deprives the Report of any objectivity and balance. The intriguing question is why and for what motives is this contributor gainsaying the objective observation of an independent practitioner at the frontline of politics and who was a strong supporter of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD before he became disillusioned after 15 years? People are rightly asking, since Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has failed in 15 years to remove the junta from power and to bring democracy and freedom, what can she now do? The NLD has collapsed, riddled with corruption and internecine struggle for power. Sein Win, the Prime Minister in exile has carved his own influence outside the NLD.

 

Only the People of Burma Will Liberate the Motherland

The content and scope of the NLD Executive Committee calamitous and inept statement issued on the 21^st September 2005 was an intriguing piece of political confusion, which revealed much about the organisation and the calibre of those who lead it and whose mentality, believes that, the international community will come post-haste to liberate the people of Burma from the military junta. We are afraid that, the international community owes Burma nothing, and as the PDP has repeatedly said,  "the liberation of Burma from military rule, will only be brought about by the efforts and sacrifices of the people of Burma and not by outsiders". Of course, the international community has a role to play but not in the sense or expectation in which the rump of the NLD wants through coercive Chapter VII and the allied Article 41 and Article 39 of the UN Charter. The PDP's stand is that we have no God given right to expect others to die for our freedom and democracy when we ourselves, are not prepared to do so, nor have we demonstrated unified focused, persistent active resistance and efforts to free ourselves from military rule, except repeatedly mouthing passive empty platitudes for "freedom and democracy and  give us our 1990 Election Mandate". The lessons from history and other parts of the world ought to be our guide and inspiration. Which is why the PDP had a dual strategy for the liberation of our Motherland. Yes, moral support and in kind, is appropriate. The most devastating critique of the NLD is the fact that its leadership and strategy over the 15 years did not even adjust their strategy when it became clear that it was not working or that the military junta was not going to  give up power quietly! Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's and the NLD leadership individual and collective political incompetence and failure, to adjust or change their strategy was a breach of the political compact which the people of Burma gave her and the party namely the task of removing the military junta from power and to bring democracy and freedom with economic benefits of employment and social progress. It was reasonably foreseeable that by renouncing the use of other means of resistance, she had effectively disarmed, tied her hands and those of the NLD  party towards failure in delivering and fulfilling the people's  mandate. This was a grave error of judgement and negligence for which she must accept responsibility.

 

Intervention Will Compromise Sovereignty

Of course  the PDP is aware of the geopolitical forces whose eyes and intentions are focused on Burma for its strategic position, and because of this, we have to negotiate pragmatically in these political waters in our international dealings, so as not to disturb the latent existing balance of Burma's interconnectedness with South East Asia, and the rest of the world, which calls for imaginative policy approaches to exchange knowledge, harmonise trade and markets, integrate regional policies and above all, learn from democracy principles of our neighbours. But the PDP believes that this is not sufficient and we must take lessons from Britain, the fountain of democracy and the Rule of Law to underpin our political and constitutional architecture. Now more than ever, we need to revist the democratic principles, hopes and ideas that prevailed pre-1962 in Premier U Nu's Government, which were so forward looking and advanced at the time. His and the party's belief in sovereign equality, interdependence, and cooperation between and among states regardless of their economic and social systems were cardinal values which he believed will protect and give present and future generations palpable peace with our neighbours and within our country and economic development to underpin democracy under the Rule of Law. In International Relations Premier U Nu believed and held fast to the principles of International Law and was adamantly opposed to breaches of national sovereignty whatever the circumstances and demanded full respect for the United Nations Charter by all its members. The PDP party with this rich heritage still subscribes to these principles and values, which is why unlike the NLD it is opposed to the intervention by the UN under Chapter VII and the consequent Article 41 action and Article 39 as it derogates from the national sovereignty of Burma. We do not want people with hidden agendas to turn Burma into a cauldron of West-East rivalry in which the people who will suffer most are the people of Burma and their neighbours for many years to come. And most probably, their independence and sovereignty would be seriously compromised. While British Colonial rule brought some undoubted benefits to Burma, which  the PDP as a political party, still cherish and has preserved and intend to introduce them when in government, we are however opposed to any putative foreign imperial power to impose its will on Burma under whatever guise or the coat-tails of the UN Chapter VII misconceived alleged "threat to peace" as  recommended by Havel/Tutu Report.

The PDP is the only party which is confronting the SPDC with confidence to bring about democracy and freedom. It defies commonsense that the report of President Havel + Bishop Tutu says that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi be made Prime Minister because the NLD won the 1990 General Election. True, this fact is not disputed but to go on to suggest that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD should be given the opportunity to form the government, is a political leap too far. It is 15 years now and the NLD has nothing to show for its stewardship notwithstanding the difficult circumstances, but this is the stuff of political leadership which demands a high order of effective communications, effective strategy and political vision to drive the campaign against the military junta until it is removed form power.

The NLD is in a condition of terminal organisation collapse and it is virtually moribund in many areas of Burma. It is risible to argue in the face of the facts, which demonstrate failure that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is a democracy leader, when her party the NLD is so undemocratic that people who express contrary views are expelled from the party peremptorily.

 

Other Opposition Parties' Advice Rejected

The arrogance of the Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Dr.Sein Win and the NLD leadership repeatedly rejected constructive political advice from other opposition political parties which had subordinated their political action to support the NLD on how to conduct the opposition to the military junta. It was simply dismissed by the arrogant curt manner that "we know what we are doing". Now that the political chickens have come home to roost, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD  must not be allowed to escape the responsibility of total failure in removing the junta from power and introducing freedom and democracy in Burma. The self-delusion of the NLD and it leadership is staggering. Dr.Sein Win is the only politician or person in Burma who believes that his stewardship as Prime Minister has delivered a political dividend to the people. The rank and file of the NLD have deserted it because they have become disillusioned that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD are not up to the job and they cannot win against the junta, after all, in 15 years, there is absolutely no success to show. NLD defectors to the PDP conceded that it was a mistake to have continued to support the NLD. Why should people now continue to support it when 15 years has not produced any political results and if anything, the position of the  people has become dire and frightening, while the military junta has strengthened itself even more.

 

No Political Skills

Informed political observers of Burma politics now recognised that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has no political skills and competence to lead a party, as she had never had political activism. She is a political trophy whose symbolism, has manifestly failed and caused untold suffering to the people of Burma. Even her former ardent supporters now recognised that she cannot deliver and despair is so deep that they are leaving the party in droves.

 

We Want True Democracy

The Havel/Tutu Report has by its rather defective aspects in matters of facts, overlooked the most urgent issues, about what the people of Burma want with urgency, the ending of military rule and introduction of democracy and freedom, which will begin to take measures that will deal with the real problems facing the people. If the Havel/Tutu Report recommendations are accepted and Chapter VII action taken which triggers Article 41 enforcement in a situation where the junta fails to comply, the resulting turmoil and mayhem will continue to cause suffering to the people of Burma and its neighbours for many years to come. This approach will and does not work just look at the Balkans, Afghanistan, Georgia, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, and Iraq. The PDP does not run away from unpalatable situations if needs must we confront them strategically consistent with our capacity. We have made concrete proposals for the short term once the military junta voluntarily gives up power to a civilian multiparty Interim Government before a General Election is held. We also have a settled future policy after a General Election. If the PDP wins an overall majority of seats in Parliament or National Assembly, it will form a Government of National Unity rather than a Government on its own. This is because we are aware of the frightening wounds that our people of all ethnic backgrounds have suffered and endured for so long which we want to begin to heal them. It is also because we in the PDP dream of an everlasting peace in Burma leading to reconciliation. It is also because we dream of a Burma not plagued by illiteracy, poverty, rampant disease, food shortages, corruption and lack of ambition among the young whose life chances have been blighted by military rule. It is because we dream of rejuvenating the educational system by providing universal primary education, University Education in all it facets of affordable fees so that our young people can spread their wings and fly so as to create a vision and reality of a vibrant economic and political culture in Burma which will meet the challenges of the 21^st Century. Last but not least, the PDP will bring about social and economic programmes to assist the mature and old to help them make a tolerable living from their endeavours.

 

The Military Junta is Illegal

The Havel/Tutu Report is in International Law correct in saying that the 1962 coup in Burma should be perceived as current in 2005, but its claim that it is "a threat to peace" is flawed. It is also correct and reasonable in law by reason of the continuity of the institution of the military junta to imply that the present military junta in Burma came to power in 1962 which overthrew the democratically elected Government of Premier U Nu. Further, the report is correct in International Law in saying that the 1962 coup in Burma should be perceived as current in 2005 as continuity of the illegality to usurp constitutional power from a legitimately elected government in a democratic election has continued. This illegality does not end simply because the illegal military junta with its panoply of armed coercive weapons, arbitrary rule, lack of freedom of speech, free press, in control of all the resources of life and death, no elected parliament in free and  fair election, which is in constitutional terms is an illegal entity per se, is incapable of transmuting itself into a constitutional order. The mere fact that it was purporting to frame "a new Constitution in 1973 allegedly designed to bring the post-coup period of unconstitutional rule to an end, which was approved in a national referendum and came into effect in 1974" in a coercive environment without freedom of speech, does not make it legal. It is sad to note that such an eminent contributor could bring himself to accept such a flawed, dishonest and illegal process by an illegal regime held in a coercive environment to regard it as a constitutional qualitative change, is puzzling as it is inexplicable. Also, the mere fact that the junta changed its name from Revolutionary Council to a  National Assembly on 1974 does not change its inherent illegality nor did the 1988 coup which merely demonstrated the continuity of the illegality of military rule, and cannot invest it with legality.

 

Deficiencies in Material Facts

There are many deficiencies in the Havel/Tutu Report which we believe have vitiated its objectivity and possible impact. Deficient though it is, it is nonetheless a creditable attempt to deal with a complex political situation stretching 43 years, in a sympathetic fashion to bring the plight of the people of Burma before the UN Security Council for possible action, albeit without having first analysed and distilled the probable consequences flowing from their recommendations to the people of Burma, their neighbours, and to West-East relations. This could turn the region into a zone of conflict by surrogates and confrontations by the principal powers with serious results to the world economy, international trade, and world peace and security

 

Researchers Lack of Diligence

The PDP believes that President Havel/Bishop Tutu have been let down by the lack of diligence by their researchers and analysts handling of historical facts and current facts. The researchers have either, from the outset decided that the conclusions they were going to reach, regardless of material facts and evidence, will be based on the most selective approach as to focus only on Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD, or they have been unbelievably incompetent. The researchers have simply ignored much fertile evidence, which conveys a negative view of the NLD and its leaders. More particularly, they have inexplicably overlooked the Irrawaddy Magazine of 5^th May, 2005 in which the Editor wrote a comprehensive objective analytical review of the NLD political condition, its leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and whether their performance and effectiveness has achieved their original objective of removing the military junta and bringing democracy to Burma. The Editorial was highly critical of the failure of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other leaders of her party to deliver any tangible political progress after 15 years, if anything, they have only brought disillusion, despair to the people and their members.

For example, the Report completely fails to mention the Editorial of the Irrawaddy Magazine of the 5^th, 2005, which forensically reviewed and analysed the performance of Daw Aung Suu Kyi,   the NLD, other NLD leaders, the state of the military junta, members leaving the NLD, debate and ideas from young people not welcomed, those who persist with inquisitiveness are sidelined, and those who persist to question or attend meetings of other groups are expelled from the party. The Editorial concluded that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was naïve and without political skills to deal with the hard and cunning military junta, and she is unlikely to bring about democracy and freedom. Why suppress this information after all, we want democracy, freedom of speech, and a free press? Failures and successes need to be exposed and leaders to be held accountable for their stewardships especially after 15 years. Why don't democratic countries in the West practice what they preach? Do those of us in developing countries have to accept a caricature of democracy as in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Georgia, Ukraine, Yugoslavia and Iraq conducted in less than free and fair environments flooded with enormous sums of money to buy votes as it was done in these countries through the NGOs and Youth Organisations which sprang up like mushrooms in a short space of time.

 

Burma Does Not Want Phantasy Democracy

The PDP with a proud heritage of democratic principles and values, we totally reject such practices and schemes to be introduced into the politics of Burma under the guise of humanitarian work and NGO's and youth organisations. We want to re-introduce democratic principles and values as practised in Britain. We will not accept phatansy democracy brought about by favoured parties rich with money to buy votes at elections and to propel them into winning the Elections. Is buying votes in an election not corruption? Why do some governments discourage corruption but at the same time practice it in funding corrupt parties? These are facts, which we have not invented, they have been widely published in the British, American, German, French media frequently. For example, no where in the Report does the name of other political parties appear nor does the NCGUB Dr.Sein Win, the Parliamentary Democracy Party – PDP and others. We are told only about the NLD as if it is the only party in the country. Most serious, we are not told about the demise of the NLD nor do they say anything about the magisterial review in the Irrawaddy Magazine of the NLD by the courageous and fearless independent Editor, which would have told them the prevailing situation in Burma. Despite these shortcomings, the Report has stimulated debate on Burma, which is to be welcomed.

 

Perpetual Mandate

The big question to ask the NLD is why does it still claim that it won the 1990 General Election and wants its mandate handed over to it to form a government 15 years after the Election? Does it not know that an election mandate has a time limit? It cannot claim a perpetual mandate. It has to account for its stewardship of what it has achieved during these years. Clinging stubbornly to this warped logic is, we are afraid, undemocratic and exhibits an authoritarian tendency characteristic of dictatorships. If an election mandate has no finite period, then the mandate should be returned to the party of Premier U Nu – the PDP who was overthrown by Gen.Ne Win in 1962 coup de-tat.  Premier U Nu won a landslide General Election in 1960, which is the rightful claimant. However, the PDP as a democratic party, has consistently said that it does not want a mandate returned to it to form a government after such a long time, but it is prepared to competitively contest a multiparty General Election with other parties for the mandate to form a Government. And let the best party that wins an overall majority of seats with a good political programme that wins an overall majority of seats have the mandate. This is what the NLD should be doing and not making itself an exception to the rule of a finite governance mandate in a democracy. This is most important.

 

Democratic Opposition

The PDP totally opposes such a claim and we are asking those well-meaning people overseas, not to encourage such a dictatorial element in our politics. The NLD should contest elections in a General Election and if the people give it sufficient support to win the election then it can legitimately and democratically proceed to form a government. No one will argue about that but we totally oppose the attempt by outsiders to give Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD a mythical mandate after 15 years of failure, which does not exist. Dr.Sein Win as Prime Minister in exile discredited by his arrogance which his alienated many supporters, his vanity has been a major obstacle to any sensible and rational political discussion or dialogue about what was needed to be done to remove the junta from power. As long as Dr.Sein Win and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi remain in office, saving face and personal dignity will take priority over ending the suffering of the people of Burma as soon as it can be practically done. You have had your opportunity to lead for 15 years but you have failed to deliver what the people have long craved for – democracy and freedom with economic opportunities. Leadership may be a proper ambition for Daw Aung San Suu Kyi to have but the leadership of Burma ought to be decided on something more important than wining in 1990 a General Election then failing to use that position to remove an illegal military junta from power. Time has moved on. The NLD leadership has aged without giving opportunities to young men and women to carry on the struggle. The leaders have virtually run out of ideas and are just marking time as if waiting for some miracle from outside to hand them power on a plate without any sacrifice.

 

Election Mandate Expired

However much we are opposed to the military junta and its oppressive rule we are, on the question of the Election Mandate in agreement with it as it has reason and political rationale on its side. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD the mandate 15 years ago in the 1990 General Election but this has expired a long time ago. The NLD and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi have been after any 8 years no different from any other political group opposing the junta. Even those who want to see the military junta removal from power, recognise that the weakened condition of the NLD and its neutered leader cannot deliver democracy and freedom to the people of Burma, as since 1990, on the objective facts of their political performance, they have proved not up to the job in bringing about democracy and freedom in which their hopes and aspirations were heavily invested. These are facts which cannot be washed away and those outsiders who are attempting to give an impression of competence and achievement by the NLD and its leaders are doing a great disservice to the people of Burma and are likely to prolong their suffering rather than end it in the foreseeable future.

 

Correct Conclusions

However, the innate native instinct of the people of Burma has helped them to draw the correct conclusions of failure, incompetence, ineffectiveness and the rampant rivalry corruption within the NLD fuelled with money to buy influence. It is no wonder that the Havel/Tutu Report has completely removed Dr.Sein Win, the Prime Minister in exile of the NCGUB from the political scene as if he did not exist and was not a prominent political figure in the NLD! This focus on one individual – Daw Aung San Suu Kyi by outsiders to the exclusion of other NLD leaders has significantly contributed to the party's collapse and failure in challenging the military junta. There is a saying among the people of Burma, which suggests that "we shall not allow outsiders to choose our General twice especially after that General has led us to defeat" In politics, failure means exit from centre stage and make way for others to lead who will probably be able to realise the peoples long delayed hope and aspirations of democracy and freedom. This is the honourable thing to do after 15 years and people will applaud such a telling move of democratic accountability and responsibility. For example, in Britain Mr. Michael Howard, M.P. the leader of the Conservative Party was defeated by Mr. Tony Blair in the British General Election in May 2005. Mr. Howard has acknowledged that as a failed leader he is resigning from the leadership. An election of the leader of the Conservatives is now in progress. This is democracy at its best. Why are some people trying to manipulate the political process in Burma to promote a failed leader who for 15 years has delivered nothing?

 

Misguided Criticism

To those people in Burma who accuse the PDP party of attacking Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD, when we criticise them, we want to tell you that this is not only the characteristic of freedom of speech, but also of the democratic process for which all of us are  fighting to realise when we remove the military junta from power. We do not make personal attacks as individuals but criticise them because of the party leadership positions they occupy on whom the hopes and aspirations of the people for democracy and freedom have been placed for them to deliver. Because they have failed to deliver democracy and freedom during the 15 years they have been leader and the military junta has become even stronger now before, what realistic prospect is there for Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other NLD leaders, have got of succeeding in the future? Absolutely none. Is not the case that other people in the NLD with a different strategy to get rid of the SPDC unlike that passive approach of the current NLD leaders which has been proved an utter failure, should be given the opportunity to do so? May we draw the attention to all the people of Burma, in  Britain, the US and Germany, where they not long ago had General Election in each country, Mr. Michael Howard the leader of the Conservative Party has severely criticised Mr. Blair the Labour Prime Minister for his alleged policy failures, in the US, George Bush was and still is, being severely criticised for the 'War on Terror' by Democrats and some members of his own Republican Party – this is the essence of Democracy and Freedom of speech, which is healthy in conducting our public affairs. The PDP welcomes criticism but ought to be informed that is factual rather than based on imaginary facts.

 

President Havel/Bishop Tutu Innocent

To the extent that the Havel/Tutu Report has been weakened by a number of factual inaccuracies and distortions, which cannot stand up to forensic scrutiny, but the PDP believes that, the conclusions reached by the distinguished personages together with the recommendations, they have made, are a direct consequence of the flawed researchers selective sources of information, manipulation of which President Havel/BishopTutu could reasonably have not been aware of. Had they been, they would certainly not have lent their names to such a discreditable enterprise, after all, they are first and foremost fearless uncompromising democrats, who fought tyrannical regimes and practices without consideration to their own lives. They were prepared to die for their political beliefs if necessary, so that others many live in a democracy and freedom. We are proud to declare that the PDP and its members critique of the Report is not directly and personally meant to refer to President Havel/Bishop Tutu but those researchers who have deliberately played loose and fast with the facts to suit their predetermined objective of acting as cheer leaders of the NLD, a political party in mortal decline, but without telling the truth to the distinguished democrats. The PDP Central Committee further declares that we hold President Havel/Bishop Tutu in highest esteem for their unrivalled contribution to democracy and freedom and we are concerned that the recommendations they have made, had they known of the selective nature of the information and the deliberate exclusion of other material facts, they would not realistically, have made them. Our respect to them has not been diminished by these inaccuracies, and we dedicate ourselves to aspire to live up to the highest standards of integrity to secure democracy for Burma and reconciliation with our tormentors – the military junta, fellow citizens whatever their ethnic allegiance and political persuasion, to rebuild and restore democracy and freedom in our country.

 

 

SPDC's Response Self-Serving

The Military junta's response to the President Havel/Tutu Report is self-serving, as it is predictable. What the junta has said are the make-believe achievements as far as political progress is concerned, and is a falsification of material facts. The oppressive and arbitrary rule is continuing to stifle the people's development and to make the country a pariah of the international community. The PDP's opposition to the SPDC is well known but we do not intend to engage in discussing the military junta in this report, as our objective is to discuss the President Havel/Bishop Tutu Report.

 

Democratic Transformation and The Rule of Law

In conclusion, the Parliamentary Democracy Party – PDP we are committed to the liberation of our Motherland from military rule by all means necessary, so as to bring about democracy, freedom, the Rule of Law, and multiparty politics where competition for political office in free and fair elections in which the electorate will vote for the party, which closely represents their hopes and aspirations, rather than, because they have been given money to do so. Further, our vision is to strive to achieve mutual trust and co-operation between and among all the diverse communities of our Motherland and transform it into a country where long-term political stability and economic reconstruction, development and social transformation can be achieved  to satisfy the people's long-term thwarted aspirations in employment, education, health-care, business and community building. We recognise that the diverse communities of our Motherland are its most precious and valued asset and resource.

 

 

Central Committee

Parliamentary Democracy Party (Burma)

GHQ (Liberated Area)

E-mail: pdp_office@yahoo.com

Web page: www.pdpburma.net

ygvDref'Drkdua&pDygwD

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY (Burma)

GHQ (Liberated Area)

 

 

OPEN LETTER TO THE BURMESE MILITARY LEADERS FROM THE PDP PARTY DURING THE 17^TH ANNIVERSARY OF 2^ND COUP AND MASSACRE IN 1988

Date: 18^th September 2005

 

 

What happened on the 18^th September 1988, is more than sufficient evidence to convict the SPDC for collective wilful murder, massacre and Human Rights violations of the people of Burma by the illegal military junta high command and its senior officers. The brutal murders and violence used by the military to regain control of the country after the 8888 political uprising by the people, even surpassed the level of violence used in 1962 by Gen.Ne Win when he mounted the first military coup against the popularly elected government of Premier U Nu. The 2^nd military coup of 18^th September, 1988 was a shameful criminal act perpetrated against a peaceful people demonstrating who were only demanding the restoration of democracy and freedom from military rule.

On this day, the PDP remembers and pays homage to the courage and resolve of those who dared to demonstrate and face the military, who were mercilessly mowed down by the soldiers' guns in their thousands.  That is why the PDP's second strategy of guerrilla liberation armed resistance against the SPDC with the purpose of removing it from power and to introduce democracy, freedom and multiparty politics by power being handed over to an Interim Multiparty Government before a General Election will take place supervised by the UN, EU, and ASEAN.

To the people the 18^th September 1988 is a deep psychological wound in their collective psyche, which has engendered an enduring hostility to military rule and their collective desire to remove this odious and murderous group of and institution of traitors who have wantonly violated the sanctity of a democratically elected government and restore democracy and freedom, but the big question is how to do it when ASSK and the NLD in the past 15 years have failed to do so, despite the many millions of dollars they received from overseas. The PDP is the only political party, which is not passive waiting for the military junta to go away of its own free will. We are a principled pro-active party with a distinctive policy and action-oriented strategies with which to engage and challenge the junta with the intention of removing it from power. This intention was shared by those who died on the 18^th September 1988 resisting the illegal regime and the PDP is determined to vindicate their courageous resistance by realising their hopes and those of the majority of the people of Burma by removing the illegal military junta from power.

To the Sec. Gen. Than Shwe and his fellow generals, we give notice to you that your attempt to convert your dictatorship into constitutional legitimacy will not succeed, as the majority of all the people of Burma are opposed to your nefarious scheme. You have no mandate from the people to draft a constitution for our Motherland. How can a group of traitors who have criminally violated the constitution of the Motherland be entrusted or even permitted to make a new constitution when still operating their criminal usurpation of political power. The people are determined to prevent this and we shall oppose you at every stage, every level to prevent you foisting your self-servicing so-called constitution so as to entrench military rule and influence for yourselves, your children and their children's children and those of your collaborators. The PDP as party is irrevocably opposed to this, and it is committed to work actively against such an unacceptable and indefensible scheme, whose intention is to excuse the crimes, which have been committed against the people by the army over the past 43 years. Only the people have the sole prerogative to do so. For the SPDC army to think that it can be its own judge and jury on this material matter is a dangerous delusion and wholly unrealistic. The days when dictatorships could do as they pleased in their own country and to their citizens of the country with impunity, without any serious consequences flowing from such actions, are long gone. This is the 21^st Century in which dictatorships are unacceptable to the international community and accountability is very much the order of the day which the Generals would have to face, if they continued to commit heinous crimes and oppression of the people.

We hope that Sec.Gen.Than Shwe an experienced professional soldier has understood the diplomatic climate in the international community that, tolerance of military dictators is no longer accepted and the pressure for democracy is insistent and cannot be denied to the people. From Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine, the dawn of democracy could not be held back and the regimes were swept into the dustbin of history. The brutal truth is this, should the illegal military regime continue to resist the demands for it to handover power to a civilian Interim Multiparty Government, the consequences for the SPDC are too serious to contemplate when the people come to prevail in their unyielding struggle for the restoration of democracy , freedom and the Rule of Law, which will determine those consequences. The PDP is committed, determined and dedicated with the unwavering intention of restoring democracy and freedom in Burma with multiparty politics.

 

Central Committee

Parliamentary Democracy Party (Burma)

GHQ (Liberated Area)

E-mail: pdp_office@yahoo.com

Web page: www.pdpburma.net

ygvDref'Drkdua&pDygwD

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY (Burma)

GHQ (Liberated Area)

 

 

THE PDP POLITICAL PRINCIPLES, VISION AND VALUES

Date: 25th August 2005

 

We have read with interest Mr.Tin Mg Htoo's e-mail contribution of the 14/08/05 subject "PDP". We would like to congratulate him for the trouble he has taken to air his views regarding the PDP however mistaken they are. We in the PDP believe strongly that the exchange of views is a necessary prerequisite of democracy and freedom of speech, which our party aspires to introduce in our Motherland through political discourse. We may disagree or differ with the views expressed by contributors in matters of fact, but we consider it proper and right to respect them and those who have made them. Further, the PDP strongly believes that no one person or group has a monopoly of the truth or wisdom nor is the PDP infallible and a fountain of all truth – it has never claimed to be in this unique category. We therefore welcome Mr.Tin Mg Htoo's contribution and take this opportunity to correct some of his uninformed glaring assertions which he has made without providing factual evidence to support them.

Firstly, Mr.Tin Mg Htoo's disingenuous and offensive assertions in paragraph two (2) of his e-mail appears to attribute them to the Editor of the Bangkok Post without providing evidence to support them and we believe that he owes an apology not only to the Editor but also, the Bangkok Post which is a well known respected independent newspaper run by experienced news and political analysts, who forensically check and double check any news story, the credentials of the person being interviewed against the factual background which the paper's journalists have gathered over a period of time, which is then put before the Editorial Board for verification and decision whether in their objective view on the basis of the material information which it posses independently, accords in all substantive respects, with those of the interview subject before publication. Mr.Htoo's comment that "I could not think of any reason why Bo Aung Din made such an absurd comment" demonstrate his ignorance of the important political developments which have occurred inside and outside Burma as he must be one of the few people left who have remained ignorant of the political scene among the opposition groups to the military regime in Burma, if he is not, perhaps this is due to his wilful self-delusion purporting to espouse a different political view which he has not had the courage to profess.

Mr.Bo Aung Din made his comment based on factual information available to all those who want to know or find out. The PDP will give Mr.Htoo a political education, not from the PDP, but from an eminent experienced independent person from an independent authoritative magazine – the Editor of the Irrawaddy, Mr.Aung Zaw, who commented in his cutting edge Editorial of May 2005 this: "Let us face facts. The military junta – led by 72 year old Sec. Gen. Than Shwe – has no interest in anything beyond solidifying and perpetrating their control over the country. Opposition groups – led by the NLD – struggle against the regime to remain politically viable. The NLD leadership seems have interested in keeping the party from getting banned by the government than taking dramatic steps towards real change". Despite Aung San Suu Kyi's reputation among many as a saint, she has no power to manipulate the government and serves more as a figurehead than a viable opposition leader. Other senior leaders of the NLD many of them in their 80s – give no indication that change can be expected". The Editorial continues, -"The role of the opposition, is to oppose – actively and aggressively – any organisation or policy that threatens the liberty of the Burmese people. The organs of power is Burma – military leaders and opposition groups alike – must make room for new voices in their faltering ranks. The problems facing Burma – political, economic, and social – will not be resolved through inaction and infighting. They will be resolved by organisations that have rejuvenated with young blood, and that have the courage to stand up and act". The Editorial continues and – in an uncompromising manner ---" The NLD led by elderly members, is struggling to survive. The party leaders are as stubborn as the military leadership and they are as dull as the government's policies. They are no longer proactive. The party is in bad shape and it has lost its potency and vision. The party leaders are unpopular with the press, which in fact commands huge sympathy within the movement at large. The government and the NLD are after all, not so different". The Editorial then magisterially concludes on a devastating note. "In the last 15 years the country and people have suffered a great deal. People voted for the party they believed could bring them a better life and freedom. The people of Burma clearly voted out the military and it associates. This was not a pointless exercise. They might feel now that they were betrayed. Looking back over the last 15 years, they probably experience not only regrets but also, deep disappointment". Now Mr.Htoo, this has not been written by the PDP but people unconnected in anyway with it. However, their views are similar or coincide with those of the PDP. They have been arrived at independently.

The PDP totally agrees with these laudable perceptive and insight observations of an incisive analytical mind of a word-class independent journalist whose commitment to factual evidence and integrity is beyond reproach. We are encouraged that Mr.Aung Zaw and the Irrawaddy magazine are the pioneers of an emergent independent free press for Burma which is a necessary institution to have to subject those who take power after democracy has been introduced at the end of military rule to acute scrutiny and transparency in all our political, economic, and social transactions under the Rule of Law. The NLD is in denial because it has consistently pretended that much has been achieved since 1990 but without giving any record of its achievements and the people should be glad for its stewardship on the last 15 years. How incongruous this appears when seen against the Irrawaddy Editor's uncompromising condemnatory stricture which says: "In the last 15 years the country and people have suffered a great deal. People voted for the party they believed could bring them a better life and freedom". Here the Editor clearly identifies the NLD as the party and yet this party continues to claim that it still has an Election Mandate! If we may be bold as to ask, to do what since they have failed to achieve anything other than increasing the misery and suffering of the people of Burma? There is no hiding place for the NLD and its leaders who must individually and collectively take responsibility for the unforgivable failure to realise the people's hopes of removing the military junta and to bring democracy, freedom, and a better life.

 It is appropriate at this point to again to restate the PDP's aims and objectives on the current situation in Burma under the military junta as well as the political dynamics to date. In the PDP's view, the most important underlying issue in Burmese politics today and for the past 42 years, has been how can the illegal military junta be removed from its illegal hold on power? This is not a new question because it has been the perennial question of successive opposition groups over the entire period the illegal military junta has been in power. The answers have been various. Most prominent has been the route of dialogue and negotiations. The others have prepared opposition demonstrations and to try to get support from Western governments to remove the military from power. Another view has been to persuade Western countries to impose economic sanctions on Burma. All these approaches have some merit in them but their weaknesses, make them unrealistic. The other approach, which has been pursued in that of armed resistance against the military junta. Most prominent in this has been the ethnic groups which have collaborated and cooperated with the Parliamentary Democracy Party over many years. This has secured some successes but also, there have been reverses. The sanctions, which have been put in place by Western countries, are mild and not sufficient to force change in the illegal military regime's thinking. As a consequence, there have been substantial failures by those opposition parties who relied on such support. This is why the PDP strongly believes that the liberation of Burma from the illegal military regime will only come through the consistent efforts and remitting struggle of all the people of Burma and it will not come as a result of outsiders. True, outsiders have a role to play, ie, to our practical efforts. The bulk of the resistance against the military junta must be done by the people themselves and not to wait for 15 years expecting other people do this vital work for us. Look where we are now! Which is why the PDP has adopted a duel strategy and the success has come from those groups among them the PDP who have adopted an armed guerrilla liberation struggle against the illegal military junta. This means the organisation and training of guerrilla forces in all aspects of highly mobile armed defensive resistance against military junta. Our armed resistance is against the illegal military regime in Burma and all the PDP's activities are stringently and restricted within that spatial entity. We neither train nor operate outside Burmese borders and this is our inviolable rule.

The failure of the NLD to remove the military junta from power after 15 years, demonstrates one principle applicable to a political party, which professes or intends to remove an entrenched brutal military dictatorship from power. Success is impossible by mere declatory condemnations and sloganising unless simultaneously, supported by a well trained and organised effective guerrilla liberation armed resistance prepared to pay the ultimate price of life. This, the NLD was not prepared to do which is why the military junta did not lose any sleep on its ineffective activities.

The liberation guerrilla armed resistance strategy to remove the military junta from power, will succeed or fail not on whether it undermines the unity of the SPDC  Council but whether, the PDP's quality of intelligence about the SPDC's military capabilities and deployment, their fighting capacity and effectiveness, and above all, the PDP's capacity and effectiveness to communicate with the junior officers and rank and life to the cause of the democracy & freedom. Our intelligence resources on the SPDC since the coup in October 2004 have generated an unexpected windfall and sharpened our strategic focus.

 Rather than engaging in mudslinging and personalities, we in the PDP believe that it is more important at this juncture to put forward ideas and talk about the challenges which face our Motherland Burma and suggest what the PDP as a party will do to meet them. The major twin objectives as we see them are the removal of the military junta from power and to introduce multiparty democracy. But how do we achieve this? The PDP has carefully considered this question, which at first appears simple but in reality, is difficult and complex. We decided on two principal strategies to pursue towards the achievement of these major twin objectives – one, political strategy, campaigning educational and information; second, to wage guerrilla armed resistance against the military and its institutions. These are to be pursued simultaneously. The PDP believes that a well-trained guerrilla liberation armed resistance is required to place at risk the survival of a decrepit discredited authoritarian military junta reliant on the rank file soldiers, whose low morale and loyalty is non-existent, and are only too ready to defect to the liberation armed resistance against their former masters in the cause of democracy. The PDP has already established links and communication with key junior officers and rank and file groups of soldiers who will join the escalation of the armed resistance offensive at the appropriate time. There is no doubt that our training and preparedness in surprise mobile attack, harass and harry and disable the junta's force, and the high morale of our forces and their willingness to die for the cause of democracy for our Motherland, will give us success over the disunited SPDC forces.

As we have said earlier, the other PDP's strategy is that of negotiations with the military junta to explore the possibility of persuading it to peacefully give up power to an Interim Multiparty Government which will organise a free and fair General supervised by the UN, EU and ASEAN based on one person one vote and the subsequent formation of a democratic government.

The PDP is an implacable and uncompromising adversary of the military junta and it is committed to remove the junta from power, either by negotiation or armed resistance. With negotiations, the PDP could do business with the SPDC in a give and take process, that would enable the SPDC while giving it substantive immunities for it to hand over power to a Civilian Interim Multiparty Government which will hold a General Election. From the secret negotiations the PDP held with the deposed Prime Minister Khin Nyunt, we found that the yearning for change inside the SPDC Council and Senior Officers to divest themselves of the heavy burden of government was accepted but was tempered by the  fear of the manner it might come about. The military need reassurance and deep confidence in the leadership of the political party which it holds negotiations with by giving it copper bottomed immunities which cannot be reversed to the junta's detriment because the increasingly frightened upper echelons of the military were concerned that when they eventually vacate the power stage, they will not be terrible vengeful reckoning of executions and wholesale humiliations. Despite these apprehensions, the PDP and the SPDC established a viable dialogue process, which was discussing substantive issues of power transfer but was srudely interrupted by the coup in October 2004. Preliminary contacts are in progress with the new SPDC Council.

The PDP believes that while armed liberation guerrilla struggle is a key to getting the illegal military junta out of power, the party has nevertheless adopted a dual policy which includes negotiations with the military junta directed at persuading it to voluntarily give up power and for a Multiparty Civilian Interim Government takeover and free and fair General Election based on one person one vote will be supervised by the UN, EU, and ASEAN. The party with an overall majority will be asked to form the Government or of no one party achieves an overall majority, a coalition government will have to be formed. As a matter of settled principle, should the PDP win an overall majority of parliamentary seats, it will as  a matter of course, form a Government of National Unity, Development, and Reconstruction. We are not hungry for power but we are hungry to heal and bind all the people of Burma as far as it can reasonably be done, into a vibrant people committed to the renaissance of Burma in which people with talent will have the opportunity to practice them and those who have deficiencies, will have the opportunity to correct and better themselves.

The PDP is a 21^st Century political party with a consistent vision of the political future for our Motherland and a political route to that future which is unquestionably democratic and multiparty but underpinned by the Rule of Law. That is why the PDP advocates that our country's future political architecture must be governed by the rule of law which will be the supreme arbiter of all our political, economic, social, and individual transactions without exceptions.  The PDP further holds and believes that checks and balances are the constitutional foundation of democracy which provide that no one person or group of persons, can be trusted with unlimited power. These are the settled core values of the PDP as a political party committed to democratic principles development, social justice, education, primary health care, housing technical skills, and University Education and Judicious market liberation will be key ingredients of our reconstruction programme.

Secondly, Mr. Htoo's third (3) and fourth (4) paragraphs are at best, a farrago of putrid assertions from an ignorant mind which is only too ready to descend in the language of the gutter, we therefore, decline to dignify them.

Thirdly, as regards the alleged tarnished party image suffered such lasting damages under its predecessor People Patriotic Party or "Pye-Chit" is insulting as it is uncivilised conduct of people whose innate instincts belong to a dictatorship, rather than democratic in situation. However, we shall confront Mr.Htoo's allegations head on. The PDP – Parliamentary Democracy Party ceased links with the People Patriotic Party eight years ago, when it reorganised itself to become an independent political party as it was in Premier U Nu's time but with an updated 21^st Century vision. The People Patriotic Party is an independent party whose conduct and political policies have nothing to do with the PDP. Again, Mr. Htoo, please get your facts right before you commit your views on paper. As we have said at the outset, we welcome your views however mistaken they are and we have taken this opportunity to trying to your notice other views from independence political observers.

In conclusion, Mr. Htoo and those who do not know the PDP's political programme and values, we have attempted in this limited space to outline them briefly. Please come and join us in this historic struggle to redeem the National Independence of our Motherland – don't be a spectator, be an active participant in the making of the history of Burma in the next five years of the 21^st Century.

There is a saying in Burmese which says that you cannot fatten a sow on market day. This means that a political party has to lay the foundations for success well before market day. Because to fatten a saw takes time.

 

Central Committee,

Parliamentary Democracy Party (Burma),

GHQ (Liberated Area)

E-mail: pdp_office@aol.com,

Web Page: www.pdpburma.net

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE DEMOCRACY HOPES OF THE 1988 UPRISING ONLY EXIST IN THE PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY

Date: 8th August 2005

 

The PDP held a conference commemorating the anniversary of the 1988 Political Uprising against the illegal military junta which by then has been in power for 26 years and to demand the restoration of democracy. Tens of thousands of youths and ordinary people from the majority Burmese and all the diverse ethnic communities poured into the streets of Rangoon and other towns to demand democracy now and the military junta to step down. For a while, the military junta was put on the defensive by the widespread demonstrations all over the country and it appeared that the military junta was ready to give up power. Because of the many activists who claimed to be leaders and began to speak with contradictory demands the junta saw an opportunity to cause a major schism in the opposition groups by neutralizing the groups by getting them to fight each other which allowed the junta to regroup and deploy its forces and police strategically and effectively. After this, it attacked the demonstrators by a ruthless and indiscriminate use of live ammunitions and thousands of young people and others were brutally massacred without pity for their crime of demanding the restoration of democracy now. Victory which had seemed to be certain, ebbed away when demonstrators began to flee away from the murderous troops which quickly consolidated their grip on the situation. The price which the pro-democracy multitudes paid was a heavy one all because of the rivalries of the groups' leaders who saw personal power as more important than the removal of the military junta from power.  They thought they could manipulate the junta to accept them as leaders of an essentially military apparatus headed by civilians. The military junta ruthlessly consumed them and their ambitions. It was a tragic political mistake to think that you can sup with the devil and survive. What went wrong? Many things went wrong then and until today they still fester as these have not been resolved. During the 1988 Uprising, those who claimed to be political leaders were not united during the pro-democracy protests as they were sending contradictory messages to the military junta. There was virtually no trust among the numerous leaders and groups which the junta had encouraged over the years. Because of these suspicions and mistrust it meant that there was lack of co-ordination and co-operation in responding to the junta's tactics. As a result, as demonstrations became widespread, the diverse groups went on their different responses which meant that they could not offer the people any unified strategic response to counter the junta.

The failure to offer the people a unified and focused response, the diverse leaders of the different groups had no idea when and what political demands to make or when to negotiate. The PDP would like to pay homage and its respects to all those who gallantly and courageously gave their lives during the 1988 Uprising demanding the restoration of democracy and for the military junta to give up power. We shall never forget them but rather, their fearless example drives the PDP to energetically campaign to remove the illegal military junta from power in the foreseeable future. To this end, the PDP is dedicated to do and its members are prepared to make challenging sacrifices.

The illegal military regime has underestimated the power and hunger of democracy in all the people of Burma in motivating them to resist, fight, and if necessary, die for their cause of liberating the Motherland from the new Colonial Rulers. The junta has also failed to recognize the limitations of terror and brutality however they are deployed by whatever instruments of death and pain. The re-organisation and emergence of the PDP in 1997 as the vanguard political party for democracy in Burma standing or working together with the ethnic communities for the purpose of removing the military junta from power and to introduce democracy was a hopeful sign for many people who had despaired of promises made by one political party in the past 15 years. The Editorial in the Irrawaddy of May 2005 magisterially commented thus "Fifteen years have passed since the National League for Democracy won a landslide victory in Burma's historic 1990 election. The military still runs the country. The opposition has to fight tooth and nail for its very survival and the future for 54 million Burmese citizens – still waiting to reap the benefits of that long past victory remains uncertain". The Editorial than continued in more forthright no nonsense terms: "Let us face facts. The military junta – led by 72 year old Snr – General Than Shwe – has no interest in anything beyond solidifying and perpetuating their control over the country. Opposition groups – led by the NLD – struggle against the regime to remain politically viable. The NLD leadership seems more interested in keeping the party from getting banned by the Government than in taking dramatic steps towards real change. Neither side seems to offer much hope for Burma's future. Aging opposition leaders refuse to acknowledge the ideas of younger party members – even expelling them, as was the case with Naw Ohn Hla for participating in activist causes not officially sanctioned by the party". The Editorial summarises the situation thus? …"The problems facing Burma – political, economic, and social – will not be resolved through inaction and infighting. They will be resolved by organizations that have been rejuvenated with young blood, and that have the courage to stand up and act".

The PDP totally agrees with these realistic and perceptive views of wisdom and integrity which are based on sober forensic analysis of the political dynamics and extant situation and developments in Burma. The PDP believes that if the people of Burma want to bring about democracy and freedom to Burma, they need to form a strong partnership with the PDP, the only major political party which has a realistic two-pronged policy with which to confront the military junta. An effective partnership between those – ethnics – waging armed resistance against the military junta will only be effective if all groups play their role. The PDP is a champion of democracy, freedom, free speech, and the Rule of Law and it abides by these ideals by practising them in all its party organs and debates. We do not expel members because they happen to have different views about issues – we exchange ideas and try to convince them – if we can't, we beg to differ but are united in our major objective of working towards the removal of the military regime. We do this because unlike the NLD, you cannot bring about democracy and freedom without respecting other groups/communities' political views by the arrogance of a decayed election mandate. 

It is an illusion to think that individual ethnic political resistance groups, for all their resolve, can make a telling impact on the much strengthened military on their own. The only way for all the people of Burma to be effective, is to join the PDP which has built a viable resistance against the military junta. Some of you may disagree with the PDP's methods and its two-pronged strategy of negotiation with the junta for it to give up power to an all-party civilian interim government and, failing this the armed resistance against it will be prosecuted with the utmost vigour – because we believe that, the two complement each other - if we are to liberate our Motherland from the New Colonialists who are oppressive and arbitrary, justifies the means the PDP has adopted.

In memory of the fallen colleagues who were brutally massacred by the military junta because they demanded the restoration of democracy and an end to military rule, the PDP believes that people should come aboard the party and help to drive its policy of active opposition to the junta and contribute towards creating a political settlement that will enable all the communities in Burma to do together what they have so far been unable to do alone. This is what those who died in the 1988 Uprising wanted done. We in the PDP have a well thought-out political programme dedicated towards the active removal or ending of the illegal military regime either by persuasion or armed resistance until we defeat the military junta and the introduction of multiparty democracy, freedom, a General Election on the basis one person one vote all underpinned by the Rule of Law. The ambition of multiparty democracy, freedom and the Rule of Law is the PDP's highest objective and is our Monument to those who died in the 1988 Uprising. It is a great disappointment that the so-called Government in Exile at the NLD has been on utter failure in this respect and a gross betrayal of the hopes and aspirations of the 1988 Uprising in the cause of democracy and freedom. Prime Minister Sein Win and his Ministers have achieved no political progress whatsoever towards the removal of the illegal military regime, if anything, because of their lack political skills and insightful strategic analysis of the geopolitical dynamics impinging on the regime, they have by default, allowed the military junta to strengthen itself while at the same time, erode the enthusiasm, morale, and support of the people for the NLD to the point of irrelevance and consigning its leadership in the cruel political museum of failures. These are the unpalatable political facts and reality of the collective incompetence and naivety of the entire NLD leadership. These observations have authoritatively been corroborated in the Editorial of the independent Irrawaddy paper recently though in different terms, but whose essence, is essentially the same. In politics, it is proper to question the political achievements of leaders as well as their political parties during the 15 years period of their stewardship. The price of leadership failure in politics is exit from politics as demonstrated by Mr. Michael Howard, the leader of the Conservative Party in Britain after being defeated in the British General Election in May this year. He will resign later this year after a new leader has been elected. Perpetual leadership is dictatorship by any other name and it is not democratic in the lexicon of democracy.

We in the PDP have never forgotten the courageous contribution of the 1988 Uprising which was motivated by the burning yearning for democracy, freedom in the breasts of that generation intending to end 26 years of military rule at the risk of their own lives. Their resistance against the junta motivates the PDP to continue the struggle albeit with a different strategy directed at the removal of the illegal military junta from power by all means necessary. In other words, the only way out of the junta's predicament is to negotiate a political settlement by handing over power to a multiparty civilian Interim Government, which, with the assistance of the UN, the EU, and the ASEAN will hold a General Election. The military will have no role in politics and governance as it will become a National Defence Force. Of course, the realistic fears of the military junta will have to be resolved before this is done. The PDP believes that the majority Community is not big enough to do this on its own nor can the ethnic communities do it on their own, as its has been demonstrated in the past 42 years of uncoordinated armed resistance. But a united political front that acts collectively with the PDP, will without doubt succeed in bringing about the restoration of multiparty democracy, freedom, the Rule of Law.

However, the PDP recognises that the ascent to multiparty democracy and political power in Burma is strewn with the most challenging obstacles that pose danger to life as well as demand consistent toil, unwavering determination to continue our historic national struggle to defeat the military junta if necessary by armed resistance as we are prepared to pay the ultimate sacrifice so that other Burmese of all communities, will enjoy and live in a democratic Burma. On the other hand, there is another route to solving the predicament of the military junta. The PDP is willing to engage in meaningful negotiations in finding a solution which will be reasonable and does not seek revenge against nor humiliate the military. The choice is SPDC's and they know where to reach us.

 

 

Central Committee

Parliamentary Democracy Party (Burma)

GHQ (Liberated Area)

E-mail: pdp_office@yahoo.com

Web page: www.pdpburma.net

 

 

---

---

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY
(Burma)
GHQ (Liberated Area)



THE NATIONAL DAY OF SHAME FOR BURMA
THE 2ND OF MARCH 1962

28th February 2004

On this National Day of Shame for our Motherland, the Parliamentary Democracy Party (PDP) wishes solemnly to invite all patriotic Burmese and ethnic groups inside and outside Burma to come together in small and large groups as the circumstances would permit in public and private, young and old, to remember the terrible wrong of violating the constitution, the massacre of innocent citizens, the destruction of democracy and of a democratically elected government in 1962 led by Premier U Nu. Discussions on public and in private, on how to energise and harness the people's strength and to commit themselves unreservedly to the removal of the detestable military regime by all means necessary either by peaceful negotiations or if necessary, by defensive protracted armed guerrilla struggle. Groups should demonstrate with placards at strategic positions peacefully and observe a 4.2 minutes salute of silence to the dead constitution, dead democracy and those people who died and have since died with heads bowed coincident with the number of years the military have illegally been in power.

It is now 42 years, since after Gen.Ne Win seized power in Burma on the 2nd March 1962. During the coup members of the Ex-premier U Nu's two year old democratic government were put behind bars, and since then, unaccountable numbers of people have been killed or tortured until now. In fact, since the army illegally took power, they have brought poverty, disaster, and changed the lives of the people for the worse. The army regime wielded power mercilessly and withdrew liberty, freedom, and democracy from the people. People feel that living under the military regime is like living in an inferno. The brutal treatment of the army led Burmese and ethnics to launch armed struggle against them.

During the 42 years of army dictatorship, not only has the military regime put behind bars ministers and party officials of the democratically elected U Nu's government, but also, the members of the winning party of the 1990 elections. That way, by applying coerce action, they have continued to illegally hold power until now.

In the middle of 2003, the SPDC regime introduced the so-called Road Map. In October of the same year, eleven countries from Asian and the developed countries gathered at a Forum held in Bangkok and discussed the political situation in Burma. It can be seen that Burma was an acute sick political patient, which needed special attention by world political specialists.

Although the world is showing their concern about Burma, the illegal military regime is more concerned about self appreciation, self praising, and self preservation. They never allow political opposition parties to compete against them, except praising themselves while comparing their own previous and present works. That is the major mistake they have made for over 42 years, and because there is no competition, there is no progress: That has led the country to stagnate and become one of the poorest countries not only in South East Asia, but also, in the world.

If we study the recent political developments, particularly the development of the talks between the military regime and the KNU (Karen National Union), this seems to  have produced certain results for both parties, but in reality, it bolsters the military regime's position. The world (including the EU) also seemed to be responding accordingly by contributing certain medical and humanitarian aid to assist the urgent requirement needed along the Burmese borders. That sort of development could have tempted the Burmese watchers to give credit to the military regime. The PDP has its own political view that the illegal military regime does not care about the suffering of the people. The result of the talks between the SPDC and the KNU is the result of a tactful political plot set up by the illegal military regime a decade ago, to encircle and neutralise the KNU by the appearance of bringing it in the so-called tripartite or salami tactics negotiations, whose agenda and content and outcome the military has already decided. While the PDP supports the KNU with whom it has been working, a friendly word of caution; beware of the wolf - study the history of the past 42 years. The road you have chosen will lead you to disaster. Pull back while there is time. Whatever decision you make, the PDP will respect that decision and we shall always be available to work with you to achieve our mutual objective of a democratic dispensation of our Motherland. Through multiparty politics and a general election supervised by the UN and the European Union, the aspirations of the  ethnic groups and the majority Burmese would be realised and our country, will once more, become free with guaranteed Human Rights.

But that does not mean that the illegal military regime's false prospectus of the so-called Road Map accords with the people's democratic aspirations. There are other opponents, who are still politically opposing them until now. Not only other ethnics are opposing them, but Burmese, including the PDP. Although the common aim is the same of bringing the illegal military regime down is shared by the ethnics and the Burmese, certain priority political concepts are different. For example, ethnic groups give first priority for 'federal and autonomy'. For Burmese, they give priority for 'democracy' and 'a free and fair general election'. Through lifelong struggle against the illegal military regime, Burmese and the ethnics had the opportunity to work together, and it leads them to become friends and allies, and shared each other views.

Because of this, when some ethnic groups make truce with the SPDC regime, it is doubtful whether the terms they have been offered will necessarily achieve their aspirations. Despite this development, the PDP intends to continue to struggle by all means necessary until the removal of the illegal military junta from power.

For the sake of attaining peace and restoring multiparty democracy, the PDP has continuously made the following demands:
.
1) Multiparty dialogue
2) A new general election, which is free and fair
3) Army must return Freedom, Human Rights, and democracy to the people.
4) Army must not be involved in the politics by any guise.
5) Army must return to the barracks.
6) Army to become a National Defence Force.
7) In the political the so-called Road Map introduced by the army, the army must not be 
      involved in politics or drawing the constitution.
8) The army personnel must not get involved in politics starting from the date of the first
      multiparty democratic general elections. Many of the army people have become
      wealthy and can use this to perpetuate the hold on government. That is the only way
      people will have confidence, peace, reconstruction and if stability is to be achieved.

Particularly, this letter is written on the occasion of the 42nd Anniversary of illegal seizure of power by the army in Burma. It is now nearly half a century that Burma is still under the same illegal military regime and people are very much upset with their dictatorship. Social, economic, and political situation are stagnant and the country urgently needs changes towards democracy to enable overall economic and social reconstruction.  Our struggle for democracy will continue with the degree of activities to match as circumstances demand.

DOWN WITH THE ILLEGGAL MILITARY DICTATORSHIP
YES, TO MULTIPARTY POLITICS
RETURN DEMOCRACY TO BURMA THROUGH MULTI-PARTY POLITICS
A  FREE AND FAIR GENERAL ELECTION IS THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT
RELEASE ALL POLITICAL PRISONERS
THE ILLEGAL ARMY TO BE TRANSFORMED AS A NATIONAL DEFENCE FORCE
NO TRIPARTITE  TALKS
ROAD MAP MUST BE TRANSPARENT AND HAVE PRICISE TIMING

Central Committee
The Parliamentary Democracy Party (Burma)
GHQ (Liberated Area
)
Contact Address: emlmpdp@aol.com

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY
GHQ ( Liberated area )
Burma


PDP'S OPEN LETTER IN THE NEW YEAR 2004

TO THE LEADERS OF THE  BURMESE AND THE ETHNIC PARTIES WHO ARE INVITED OR GOING TO BE INVITED  BY THE SPDC REGIME TO PARTICIPATE IN  NATIONAL CONVENTION AND DRAWING CONSTITUTION FOR A NEW ELECTION

Date: 1st January 2004

Our main intention: The PDP would like to present the PDP's political view, as the 
                              SPDC regime is unilaterally drawing a 'Road Map'.


Sirs/Madams,

If the SPDC regime is continuing to unilaterally draw the 'Road Map', the PDP would like to request all of you to boycott the SPDC regime. The reason is, the PDP does not see any healthy sign for the peaceful outcomes and successful result from that 'Road Map'.

If you analyse the - Amnesty International's Press Statement', it is obviously reminding that no third party could give guarantee to the participants' fate. The SPDC regime can randomly arrest people, abuse the people's rights and threaten their lives.

Amnesty International did mention the following words: Our visit has strongly reinforced our concerns about political imprisonment, arbitrary arrests, prolonged incommunicado detention and unfair trials. The military government keeps making noises about its commitment to 'change' and 'transition'. The most concrete demonstration of any commitment to change would be the immediate release of all prisoners of conscience. The government told us to be patient, and that change may come soon. But these assurances ring hallow in the face of continuing repression. We will judge progress on human rights in Burma by concrete improvements on the ground. Fine words and vague promises for the future without any timetable for change carry little weight."

Because of that, unless the SPDC regime aligns with the international norm, you should abstain from participating and co-operation with the unreliable and illegal SPDC military regime.

The PDP asks that the SPDC regime must release details of the 'Road Map', such as timing, fully participatory and transparent process, including participation of representatives of the democratic oppositions and ethnic minorities. We all should have to wait and see whether the SPDC regime will provide us these requirements.

The PDP believes that the army must not be involved in the politics. Because of that, the PDP has asked the military regime to keep away from the National Convention and the drawing of the constitution, and keep themselves in defence and security duty under the guidance of civilian government.

We would like to share our sacrifices with you again that the PDP has dedicatedly engaged its commitment to work with ethnic communities for over thirty three years since 1970. Ex-premier was the founder of the PDP. We learn some people try to discredit the role of U Nu through radio interviews or other means. Please never forget, Burma was the richest country in the South-East Asia region under the leadership of U Nu's government. Burmese people did enjoy the taste of democracy system under the U Nu government. U Nu provided a 'Speaker Box' at 'Ban-Doo-La Park' in Rangoon, so that people could shout against the government openly. Under U Nu's regime, a cleaner, who earned 83 kyats could support his wife and three children conveniently. There was not two classes, rulers and ruled. People used to say even a trishaw driver could become a prime minister. No police was allowed to randomly arrest the people without warrant. People could travel anywhere any time freely. People could sleep any where any place freely. There was no restriction for freedom of movement, and other rights.

We the PDP members are descendents of that generation. Although we were young in those days, we got the chance to learn the taste of freedom and democracy. Many of the PDP members, who are martyrs, had sacrificed their lives for restoring freedom and democracy with the intention of saving the Burmese people. Our activities were reduced at one stage to allow for review, reorganisation and the recasting of our overall strategic direction. Because of the changed political circumstances the PDP reorganised its action since the last seven years to fulfil our aims. Because of that, the PDP would like to request you to co-operate with us as we support you. Do not give in to the SPDC regime. We believe that together will win and meet in Burma in the near future. Please remember, the PDP is fighting for your cause, our cause, for the people and for the country:

EQUALITY, FRATERNITY, SOLIDARITY.


Central Committee
Parliamentary Democracy Party
GHQ (Liberated area) Burma
E-mail address: emlmpdp@aol.com
Web page: www.pdp-burma.net

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY
GHQ ( Liberated area )
Burma

PDP'S OPEN LETTER IN THE NEW YEAR 2004 TO THE SPDC REGIME

Date: 1st January 2004

Our main intention: The PDP presents political view, as regards the SPDC regime's
                         Unilaterally drawing of a 'Road Map'.

TO THE SPDC REGIME

Sirs,
The PDP views with concern the military junta's unilateral formulation of a 'Road Map', whose sole intention of prolonging and entrenching itself in power. Most Burmese citizens are very much concerned about it, as they cannot see the clarity of it. The people are opposed for the military junta to act as if they have the people's mandate to initiate political changes and the future governance of our Motherland because they are first and foremost, an illegal regime without any constitutional authority and second, they only speak for themselves. The SPDC has not produced any details of its 'Road Map' to enable the people and political parties and ethnic groups to make an informed judgement, instead it is playing favourite game of divide and rule.

If you were really serious about resolving the political, economic and social problems of Burma which are the consequences of the illegal military rule for over 40 years, you would not have placed so many preconditions about who will and cannot attend, and the direction of these talks or negotiation. You would have left to all the political groups majority Burmese and ethnic communities to decide who is to represent them or failing which each group/party to send its own representative to the conference which would then set the Agenda of the substantive discussions. However, the important thing is that the organisation and direction of these arrangements to be made by a small Working Group chosen by the parties and the ethnic groups. The military junta should not be involved in these arrangements at all other than selecting the military delegates to the conference. This is question of balance directed at neutering the preponderance of military power and influence which it is hope to give the civilian parties a democratic edge in the negotiations.

For the world, Burma is not their home or their country. They cannot fight or talk about Burma every day. Although they offer their support for Burma, they can offer their hands once or twice a year only, by condemning or producing resolution during their meetings. Thanks for their kind support.

In 1990, you organised a free and fair election. Before the 1990 election, you bribed the people who would vote for you. You condemned those who would vote against you by moving them to the barren countryside outside Rangoon. When you felt sure that you would win, you allowed the election to take place. But, when you lost, you crushed the winner. That way you had shown that you did not stick to your promise. Those Burmese, who had witnessed those events, are frustrated, confused, angry and cowered by the gratuitous violence you used against the people. Now again, you say you will allow free and fair election according to your 'Road Map'. But Amnesty International representatives' recent statement condemns the way you are treating the political prisoners, who have committed no crimes other than to oppose the illegal military junta. Most Burmese feel that you are not trustworthy and it is a risk to trust you. They all see that your previous and current political track records are weak. What can the UN do about the 'Depaying Massacre'? What can the UN do to the following arrest after the 'Depaying Massacre'? What can the UN do to the fates of the political prisoners to whom you keep them behind bars after they had already served their previous sentences. These uncertainties have to be counted, as innocent lives are involved. These circumstances have led the PDP to decide to with-hold its support to your 'Road Map'. We prefer to wait and see, until all Burmese and the observers from the world are convinced that you are alright to work with.

So, the PDP would like to challenge you to clarify your 'Road Map' in detail.  The PDP also would like to remind you that you are an illegitimate regime, usurped the power for the second time again during the 8-8-88 uprising. Because of that you have no right to draw the constitution, or no right to dictate in drawing of the constitution. We would like to remind you again that it is the job of the representatives of the people elected by the election. You should only help as a Defence Force in security matters to be able to hold a new general election based on the 1947 constitution. A new government will form a 'Constitution Drawing Committee' to draw a new constitution.

Please remember that, on persons, we respect you as army officers, but in politics, we do not, as this is not the role of the army. The PDP would like to remind you that you must go back to barracks, and serve in the national security under the guidance of the civilian government. Whoever of the army staff who is interested in politics must take off the army uniform and enter the politics as a civilian after ten years of the country returning to democracy. If you do not pay attention to our reminder, it is up to you. For the consequences of obduracy or defiance will be heavy commensurate with the crime committed against the people and the constitution. We seek no revenge. We are ready to help the military to make a peaceful transfer of power and to accommodate their security fears.



Central Committee
Parliamentary Democracy Party
GHQ (Liberated area) Burma
E-mail address: emlmpdp@aol.com
Web page: www.pdp-burma.net

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY
GHQ (Liberated area)
Burma


PDP'S OPEN LETTER
DURING THE COMMEMORATION FOR THE ANNIVERSARY OF BURMA'S INDEPENDENCE DAY ON 4TH JANUARY 2004 -

To all Burmese Citizens and Supporters,

The PDP political branches in the USA, in the U.K, in Thailand, and the
             European Union celebrate on that day.

Sirs/Madams,

The PDP party would like to convey this message through this letter again to all of you. Independence Day for the Burmese people of all communities is one of the historical moments in our memories. Adults used to pass their children the stories of those heroes who had sacrificed their lives for Independence. They also told the children how the patriots had to engage in social and political commitments to attain 'liberty'. The stories they told about those patriots who finally joined the armed resistance to achieve the goal was exciting. Many heroes emerged during the struggle and many heroes gave their lives. People also adored them, helped them, supported, and joined them during their struggle. That way, we the Burmese people of all communities together stick to our unity, courage, and morale to attain the precious goal of - Freedom -.

The fervour of those children, who had learned about those heroic stories and 'Nationalism', also rocketed, and they too were willing to sacrifice their lives in the same way their forefathers had done. That way, 'National Spirit' was transmitted all over the country. All Burmese citizens became very proud of their identities. Burma participated in the South East Asian games as one of the strongest competitors, and many players scored gold, silver and bronze medals in many occasions.

That way, Burma became a strong third world countries around the region just after the WW2 and Burmese people proudly celebrated - Independence Day - every year in the early morning of 4th January with full of high spirits. In that occasion, local children used to wake up in the early morning and gathered at their local celebrated areas. They joined games organised by the local organisers. Radios also released the background stories of - How Burma got Independence -.  That way, the spirits of the future generations were guided. All Burmese children could absorb the value and the meaning of 'Independence'.

Now, most Burmese citizens do not know much about - Independence - or - Nationalism -. Their children too do not know about them. For them, to understand the meaning of nationalism is a maze. Because of the illegal and oppressive military regime, the people have become like guinea pigs and act like robots - working just for a pittance for survival. They cannot think about - Independence Day -, or the meaning of - National Spirit -.

Through the patriotic sense of duty by members of the PDP they feel very much concerned. That sort of mentality had changed a vibrant, confident with a strong Nationalist Spirit in Burma into a people with low-self-esteem in the forty one years the military have been in power. The culprit is no other than the military regime, which is manipulating the power and distorting the history to their own benefit. The military regime erodes the 'Spirit of Freedom and Nationalism', to be able to keep the people under their control. They know that, if they promote 'the Value of Freedom and the meaning of Nationalism', it will harm them.

But according to the natural law, things are linked to one another, and we can see that a grain of sand is linked with the universe. Similarly, the suffering of the people is linked with 'Desire for Freedom' and 'Search for Nationalism'. Appreciable solution always have been produced as an out come.

Because of this, the SPDC regime should realise that the situation is very volatile. Unless they give in, the struggle for 'Freedom' will become intense and unremitting. They cannot stop the forces, and spirit of freedom just as the British Colonialists could not. The Dawn of Freedom and Democracy is our rallying and fighting call to all our people including the young, to join the PDP in this historic endeavour to rid our Motherland of the illegal military regime from power root and branch. In its place, to bring about or recapture the elixir of the National Spirit and Independence Day Vision for our Motherland to take its place again among the free nations of South East Asia.

LET'S MARCH FORWARD TO VICTORY.



Central Committee
Parliamentary Democracy Party
GHQ (Liberated area) Burma
Contact E-mail: emlmpdp@aol.com
Web page: www.pdp-burma.net

PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY PARTY (Burma) ( Liberated Area ) ( OPEN LETTER TO THE SPDC REGIME ) THE PDP ROUTE TO DEMOCRACY Date:3rd September 2003 We in the PDP have read with interest the announcement made by the self-styled Prime Minister otherwise leader of the Burmese Military Junta on 30th August 2003 regarding a "Road Map to Democracy". In his decree (rather than policy speech), General Khin Nyunt the powerful head of Military Intelligence, set out a seven - stage "Road Map" to democracy, which will involve talks with the opposition parties aimed at drawing up a constitution that will lead to elections. The PDP's position is clear on the question of the Military Junta and it is necessary to restate it. We are unalterably opposed to military rule in our country. We see the military as a dictatorship, which usurped the legitimate Government of the democratically elected Government of Premier U Nu in 1962 that extinguished the flame of freedom and democracy. When the 1990 elections were held to establish democratic government, the PDP supported the NLD, which won the election but was prevented from taking power by the military by imprisoning its leaders, politicians and others, who opposed them. Our Motherland was subjected to even greater oppression and the denial of freedom. We continued to support the NLD until 1998, as we hoped that the party would bring about multiparty democracy by forcing the military junta to step down, but alas, it failed to do so. The PDP felt that more than 8 years was more than sufficient for a party to bring about political change. This is why we decided to organise our party to pursue a distinctive dual policy to remove the military from power by dialogue, and if necessary, by armed liberation struggle to rid our Motherland of an oppressive dictatorship and to bring about multi-party democracy based on one person one vote to all our communities. This objective is our main driving objective on which there can be no compromise and we are prepared to pay the supreme price to achieve it. We make no apologies for our unalterable commitment. It is appropriate to state that our opposition and hatred of military rule is based on its illegality and oppressive nature. It is not based on the individual hatred of the persons, who occupy the seats in the military junta, but rather, on the military dictatorship institutions. We believe that the military junta are misguided in thinking that they can represent the aspirations of our people. We now come to the recent speech given by General Khin Nyunt regarding the "Road Map"/ We believe that it deserves consideration and critical examination. The fact the military junta has collectively decided to follow this path to negotiations leading to a political settlement is in itself welcome though with some caution. How serious and sincere is this initiative? The people of Burma must not let themselves be led to a political cul-de-sac which only leads to the military in the new guise of a parody of democracy, which leaves decision-making in their hands. The PDP believes that if we keep our political and democratic compass focussed, we can confound any plans to leave the military in power. That the military has taken up the PDP's call for political change as well as heeded the objective suggestion made by the Honourable Thaksin Shinawatra, the Thai Prime Minister, for a "Road Map" to bring Burma out of military rule, is indicative, we would like to think, of the changing mind-set within the competing ruling factions at the highest level, in the ruling military junta elite due to a confluence of internal and external factors as well as the need to find a viable exit strategy from their increasingly untenable position. However, if, as it is alleged in the reports that, General Khin Nyunt intends to hold talks with the NLD only and those organisations, which took part in the so-called National Convention in 1993 to produce a new constitution but failed in 1996, the PDP would warn the military junta that the political situation in Burma, has markedly changed. This is because, there are new political parties, which are much more effective and command the broadest support from all the communities in our Motherland. If these were left out, then they will not be a viable political settlement and only strife would result. The question which demands an answer is this: Who is going to chair the discussions? Who is going to select the delegates? We in the PDP are opposed to let the military choose who is to attend and who is to represent whom. We therefore suggest that the UN Special Envoy Tan Sri Razali chair the pre-constitutional meetings (PCM) to discuss modalities of the selection process of participants and then chair the Constitutional Development Forum (CDF). In this process, the military junta will only be observers for matters of security but not as participants in matters of political governance and multiparty politics leading to a general election. The military will be constituted into a National Defence Force (NDF) and return to barracks. General Khin Nyunt proposals neither should not be dismissed out of hand nor regarded as set in concrete. They should be explored with respect to their political content and intention. Clarification should be sought with the purpose of fleshing out the critical governance issues. The PDP believes that the best intermediary to carry-out this important exercise is the UN Special Envoy Tan Sri Razali. However, this must not be done to help one party but all the political parties including the ethnic groups. Some Western countries have a tendency of seeing Burma represented by one monolithic political party and its leader. This perception might have been the case eight years ago but is no longer so. There are other political parties and leaders reflecting diverse multi-party democratic objectives and constitutional arrangements. The idea that the Burmese political landscape has remained the same since 1990 elections is false as well as the oft heard claim that "since the NLD won the elections in 1990, it has the mandate to form the government and the military must hand-over power to it". This is a dangerous claim and is anti-democratic susceptible to dictatorship. A democratic mandate has a finite period within which a party is required to deliver political achievements to the people and country. So far none have been delivered and the election mandate is not continuous. Just as President George Bush has to submit to election in 2004 and similarly Mr.Tony Blair in 2005, the NLD cannot claim an everlasting mandate. The PDP believes that Western Countries would do Burma a great service if they stopped pretending that there is only one political party and one political leader. They must face reality and acknowledge the political change that has taken place within and outside the country where new political parties and leaders have emerged. Multi-party politics and dialogue ought to be the objective rather than supporting one party which no longer reflects reality. The PDP as a political party can equally claim what the NLD is doing but we are realists, we do not want to do so. The PDP party was the successor to the ruling party under the leadership of Premier U Nu which he formed in 1970. Premier U Nu was overthrown by a military coup which took power in 1962. Is the PDP now claim that it has a mandate to rule and the military must hand-over power to it? This would be an untenable proposition and politically na?ve and we believe that outsiders who continue to think that the NLD has a continuing Mandate are in denial of reality. We in the PDP believe that the suggestions we have made are practicable and achievable given the good will from political parties as well as the military. We are however, aware that at the back of the military junta's mind-set, there lurks insecurity, fear and the possible consequences for their future should they compromise or acquiesce to the projected new political multiparty political dispensation for Burma. These uncertainties are understandable and legitimate, which is why the PDP advocates national reconciliation with no Human Rights trials and revenge against the military. The sooner we move on to the "Road Map" the sooner we are likely to reach our multiparty democratic objective. In conclusion, we demand the release of all political prisoners in detention for many years and those recently detained regardless of the political parties to which they belong. This will be the first step towards reconciliation and a sign of good faith from the military. Bo Aung Din Chairman Parliamentary Democracy Party ( Burma - Liberated Area ) Contact email address: emlmpdp@aol.com
UP