International Action

Postcard from the Boycott Lonely Planet Campaign

International Responses to 30 May 2003 Ambush

Members of the international community have taken direct actions including strong statements and sanctions to pressure the military regime of Burma following the 30 May 2003 arrest of Burmese democracy leader Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other National League for Democracy (NLD) supporters following a violent junta-supported ambush. Some examples of these direct actions are as follows:

Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN)

· Leaders made a statement indicating they "look forward" to the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

· First time foreign ministers commented directly on a member nation, significant departure from ASEAN stated policy of non-interference in internal affairs of member states

· Closed-door debate at ASEAN meeting spent two hours on Burma issue, giving the message that the arrest of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi was a setback for ASEAN and undermined its credibility

Japan

· Burma's largest donor nation is using financial pressure to secure the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, departing from a softer position in the past

· Has given tens of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid to Burma over the years, suspended program in 1990 when junta ignored election results of a win for the NLD, aid resumed in 1995 with release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest

· Has frozen new financial assistance to Burma and stopped providing new overseas development assistance, has asked Burma for a meeting with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

· Demanded restoration of freedoms and political activities of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other NLD members

South Korea

· Called for immediate release of NLD members and an "early normalization of NLD activities," encouraged dialogue that will lead to a "peaceful and smooth transition to democracy"

Malaysia

· In a significant departure from ASEAN stated policy of non-interference in internal affairs of member states, Malaysia's former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad has threatened to expel Burma from ASEAN if Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is not released

· Abandoned the country's long-time policy of non-interference by calling on Burma's military officials to release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and to return to the negotiating table with the NLD

· Remains "good friends" with Burma and opposes sanctions on the grounds they will not achieve the desired effect, but hurt citizens rather than the junta

Singapore

· Stated that 30 May events were a setback for ASEAN

· Urged junta to cooperate with Razali Ismail, the United Nations (UN) special envoy, and grant him access to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, expressing concerns about her safety

· Called for early lifting of restrictions on Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's movement

· Urged the Burmese people to stay on course in dialogue with all parties involved

Thailand

· Called on Burma's military rulers to release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and is "not satisfied" with regime's response to international demands

Philippines

· Called for immediate release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her followers, allowing them to participate fully and safely in the political life of the Burmese people

India

· Called for the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and for dialogue to restore democracy

Nepal
· Congress demanded Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's release and commented that junta's actions were "illiberal, intolerant and undemocratic"

European Union (EU)

· Imposed sanctions including stripping Burma of trading privileges, freezing non-humanitarian economic aid, generating a list of individuals subject to visa bans and assets freeze, restricting foreign travel for senior junta figures and an arms embargo

· Prohibited technical training and assistance related to provision, manufacture, maintenance or use of arms, munitions and military equipment

Britain

· Demanded release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi with threat of further sanctions and called on British companies to stop trading with Burma

· Discouraged British trade, investment and tourism in Burma

· Urged the Association of British Travel Agents to stop arranging holidays to Burma

· Called on the tobacco firm British American Tobacco (BAT) to withdraw from Burma

· Refuses to impose an international trade embargo to avoid further isolating Burma and harming impoverished civilians

France

· Called for the "immediate regain of her [Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's] full and entire freedom of movement, as well as the leaders of the NLD, detained or under house arrest"

Canada

· Restricted travel of Burmese diplomats in Canada, denied visas for members of Burma's past and present military juntas, senior government officials and members of the military suspected of involvement in human rights violations

· Recommended against new business investment or dealings in Burma, removed Burma from Least Developed Country Market Access initiative eliminating most duties and quotas on imports

· Urged authorities in Burma to release all political prisoners including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and work toward national reconciliation

United States (US)

· Imposed "Freedom and Democracy Act" depriving Burma of about US $350 million per year over three years, freezing the regime's property holdings and financial assets in US banks, imposing a widened visa ban of Burmese officials attempting to enter the US, banning remittances from nationals working in the US and authorising the president to aid Burmese democracy activists

· Banned imports on goods manufactured in Burma and by offshore companies owned by the junta and banned new investment by US companies

· Currently considering opposing loans for Burma in international financial institutions and coordinating a visa ban with the EU

· US envoys in at least 11 countries have sought to encourage governments to pressure the regime to release Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

· Called for release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners

Australian Position on Burma

The Australian government currently endorses a policy of "constructive engagement" with the Burmese military junta, in addition to an on-going program of human rights training in Burma.

Australia insists on making no changes or threats of changes to its Burma policy.

Following the detention of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, Australian foreign minister Alexander Downer has temporarily suspended, rather than canceled, the human rights workshops the Australian government funds in Burma. These workshops involve Australian lawyers teaching civil servants about international conventions; however, the workshops have attracted no supporters except Australian officials and Burma's generals. The workshops are the brainchild of Downer himself, and he insists the workshops will resume "as soon as practicable." His refusal to threaten permanent withdrawal of the workshops leaves him, not Burma, isolated in the world.

Web Sites

Union Aid Abroad's Burma Campaign"
The Burma Campaign
Democracy Petition

The Global Unions Action Plan for Burma

Widespread use of forced labour in Burma has drawn condemnation from unions globally, inspiring an on-going campaign to pressure trade and investment out of the country. Leaders and representatives of the international union movement met in March 2001 at Tokyo, Japan and expressed full support for the resolution on Burma adopted by the 88th International Labour Organization (ILO) Conference in June 2000.

The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) has issued a Global Unions Action Plan for Burma adopted in Tokyo on 1 March 2001. A key component of the campaign includes pressuring companies to withdraw trade and investment from Burma or face public exposure and union-driven consumer boycotts. The campaign argues that foreign companies and governments must be held accountable for investing in Burmese state-development projects with widespread use of forced labour. Furthermore, the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) currently calls on affiliate unions to pressure Australian trade out of Burma.

Web Site

Global Unions

Foreign Companies Must Leave Burma

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of Burma's democracy movement, has called on all companies to stay out of the country, arguing that foreign investment funds the junta and helps to maintain its hold on power. The rationale for stopping operations in Burma is to prevent the regime from receiving desperately needed revenue. By investing in Burma, foreign companies collaborate with a military dictatorship that routinely uses human rights violations to oppress its own people. Whilst a small number of Burmese people "benefit" from investment, the wider suffering makes such investment unacceptable.

Companies operating in Burma could leave the country by providing generous packages to their workers, ensuring them a good standard of living for at least one year. This arrangement would enable companies to take care of their employees' interests in addition to the long-term interest of all Burma's people. For example, British American Tobacco, who recently dis-invested from Burma, makes a profit of US $14,380 a minute, and it would take only six minutes worth of annual profits to have given the workers in Burma one year's salary as severance pay.

Web Sites

The Burma Campaign UK - Foreign Investment
The Burma Camapign UK - Sanctions
Companies Trading in Burma
Earthrights
Irrawaddy's Investment Page

Travel Campaign

Few areas exist in the world today where human rights are fully respected. Moreover, few occasions ever occur when suppression of human rights is so extreme to warrant the exclusion of tourists from a country. However, Burma is a rare example where such an exclusion is clearly appropriate. The NLD and the exiled National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB) are the only legitimate representatives of the Burmese people, and they have implored tourists not to visit Burma at this time. Undermining the policy of these groups helps the Burmese junta and delays democratic change.

The opinion of a handful of people who support tourism in Burma does not carry more weight than the democratically elected leaders, nor does it outweigh reports of human rights abuses consistently detailed by many authoritative groups including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).

Tourism in Burma

Burma's regime found itself weak and bankrupt in 1988, but used foreign investment in the 1990s to double the size of its military and thus strengthen its grip on power. The economy of Burma relies heavily on tourism as a source of badly needed foreign exchange.

Burma reportedly earns US $100 million a year from tourism, enabling the junta to receive approximately 12% of the income of private tour companies. The country claimed to have hosted 500,000 foreign tourists in 2002--the highest since 1996--pouring many millions into the desperate economy. The regime hopes to see tourist arrivals double in coming years, and promotes tourism by building hotels and attracting foreign investment in the tourism sector, where it maintains tight control. Visiting Burma lends moral and financial support to the junta's "Visit Myanmar" policy, and hence to the junta itself.

Tourism Only "Benefits" Regime

Tourists face extreme difficultly in avoiding the provision of hard currency to the Burmese regime. For example, a requirement exists for independent tourists to exchange US $200 upon entering the country. In addition, the junta and its associates jointly or fully own many hotels, domestic airlines and other "dollar only" retail outlets. Tourism only "benefits" a small percentage of Burma's 52.4 million people, since 80 percent of the population lives in rural areas and does not see any "positive influences" at all.

Due to the widespread human rights abuses linked to tourism, the high cost of tourism development for the vast majority outweighs any "opportunities" for the minority. A few "successful" tourism projects do not compensate for the damage done by a regime that one lends legitimacy to by visiting the country.

Human Rights Violations

Numerous reports have exposed massive human rights abuses directly linked to the development of tourist infrastructure and the tourism industry in Burma. Many well-documented accounts exist of unpaid forced labour exploited to encourage private investment in tourism projects, infrastructure development and public sector works. Reports estimate more than 2 million people find themselves forced to build Burma's tourist industry.

Web Sites

Union Aid Abroad's Burma Campaign Page
Friends of NLD Tourism Page
The Burma Campaign UK's Tourism Page

One example - Lonely Planet Campaign

One travel agency still encouraging tourism to Burma is the Lonely Planet. Lonely Planet travel book company has recently published a new guide on Burma. The company estimates current sales figures in the region of 2,000 guides per year; nonetheless, they hope to double sales of the Burma guide. Such an increase will result in a greater number of people visiting Burma, providing further justification for human rights abuses of the Burmese people by the military junta, exemplified by forced labour for further tourism development and by their strengthened economy, military and power. The guide encourages people to visit Burma, despite the many ways tourism lends support to one of the world's most brutal dictatorships.

Burma Guide Misinforms Readers

Many people believe that the current edition of the Lonely Planet Burma guide presents an ill-informed account of the ethical debate concerning tourism to Burma. It is claimed the guide also neglects to mention or plays down the severity of pervasive human rights violations in the country. Human rights activists worry that the errors and lack of contextual explanation within the guide serve to misinform readers trusting Lonely Planet guides to provide accurate and well-researched information. Consequently, many consumers direct protest towards Lonely Planet for its continued manufacture and selling of Burmese guide books, in the form of boycotts and letter-writing campaigns to withdraw the Burma guide.

Web Sites

Send a message to Lonely Planet
Lonely Planet Website

Three Significant Victories for Burmese Democracy

1. British American Tobacco (BAT) Campaign
British American Tobacco (BAT) was a joint business venture with Burma's brutal military dictatorship. The Burmese subsidiary of BAT is Rothmans of Pall Mall Myanmar, a 60/40 joint venture with the Union of Myanmar Economic Holdings (UMEH). The Burmese junta completely owns and controls UMEH.

BAT produces such well-known cigarette brands as Kent, Dunhill, Benson & Hedges, Winfield and Peter Stuyvesant & Holiday. The company produced 807 billion cigarettes in 2001, claiming 15.1% of global market share. It is estimated the joint venture earned the Burmese regime US $400,000 a year, enough to buy 20,000 AK47s. BAT paid its Burmese factory workers a mere US 64 cents a day, although the UN defines anyone living on less than US $2 a day as living in extreme poverty. It would have taken 85 years or three generations for a BAT factory worker in Burma to earn what Chairman Martin Broughton earns in a single day.

The BAT factory in Burma was situated in an industrial zone the military authorities upgraded in 1996 by using child labour. For many years, BAT faced intense pressure from consumers in the form of boycotts and letter-writing in order to stop its operations in Burma. In addition, the British government had called on BAT to withdraw from Burma. In late 2003, BAT sold its holdings in Burma and left the country.

2. Intrepid Travel Campaign

Intrepid Travel is a market leader in small group adventure travel, leading groups from Australia, New Zealand, Europe and North America on tours in Asia, the Middle East and Russia. The company withdrew from operations in Burma after consulting with stakeholders in 1999, running its final trip to Burma in January 2000. Intrepid stayed out of Burma as a result of the links between the tourism industry and the military regime, and due to the legitimacy granted to the junta when tourists visit the country.

Resumption of Tours to Burma
Nevertheless, in March 2003 Intrepid decided to resume selling holidays to Burma. The company updated its web site regarding the 30 May military ambush off the NLD, but still planned to launch its first tour back to Burma starting on 23 August 2003. Intrepid had previously stated it would maintain the Burma travel boycott until a clear demonstration of democratic change transpired in Burma.

Arguments for Resumption
An argument for Intrepid's decision to resume tours to Burma was their perception of political and economic changes in the country since 1999, such as the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest in 2002 and the temporary ability of the NLD to gather freely. However, both of these changes have regressed when the regime detained Daw Aung San Suu Kyi once again and shut down all offices of the NLD. The clear demonstration of democratic change in Burma necessary for tours to resume had yet to occur.

Suspension of Burma Operations
As a result, many Union Aid Abroad-APHEDA activists and other consumers were involved in an international campaign urging Intrepid to reconsider its position and to stop selling holidays to Burma, engaging in boycotts and letter-writing campaigns against the company. On 21 August 2003, the company announced it had decided to suspend operations in Burma for the foreseeable future.

Web Sites

Intrepid Travel

3. Triumph International Campaign

In mid-2001, the Australian leg of a campaign to pressure Triumph International, a Swiss-based lingerie company, to cease manufacturing bras in Burma began. Many people campaigned through writing letters, sending postcards and protesting in the streets. These bras labelled "Made in Myanmar" were retailed in Australia at Target, Grace Bros and Kmart. The decision by Triumph International to cease sourcing bras in Burma came in October 2001 days after unions and community groups undertook a ritual bra-burning outside a Sydney department store.

Union Aid Abroad-APHEDA activists were involved in a postcard campaign targeting Triumph International and in street demonstrations against the company. Because of great international public pressure, in January 2002 Triumph International decided to close down its factory near Rangoon and to cease production in Burma altogether.

Web Sites

Triumph International

Questions

1. Why has the international community taken direct actions following the 30 May 2003 arrest of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi?

2. What is the current Australian government position of Burma, and why does it insist on making no changes or threats of changes to its Burma policy?

3. What are alternative positions Australia could take on Burma, and what are the possible results?

4. What action has Australian foreign minister Alexander Downer taken regarding the human rights workshops the Australian government funds in Burma and why?

5a. What are alternative actions Downer could take regarding the workshops, and what are the possible results?
5b. What do the workshops involve, who supports them and why?

5c. How effective have the workshops been in fulfilling their stated purpose?

5d. When will the workshops resume and why?
6. What kinds of actions has the international community taken to secure release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and NLD members, how effective have these actions been and why?

7. What are the backgrounds and roles of ASEAN and the EU?

8. Why is Japan using financial pressure for release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi?

9. What action has Malaysia's Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad threatened to take if Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is not released and why?

10. What sanctions has the EU imposed and why?

11. Why has Britain discouraged British trade, investment and tourism in Burma?

12. What is the "Freedom and Democracy Act" imposed by the US?

13. What is the Global Unions Action Plan for Burma, and what are its key components?

14. How effective has the campaign been, what are other actions it could take and what are the possible results?

15. What are the background and roles of the International Labour Organization (ILO), International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch?

16. How effective was the pressure from consumers and the British government, what are other actions democracy activists could have taken?

17. Why has Daw Aung San Suu Kyi called on all companies to stay out of Burma?

18. How could companies operating in Burma leave the country whilst ensuring the livelihood of their Burmese workers?

19. How much money does Burma reportedly earn from tourism each year, how is this money spent and why?

20. How does visiting Burma lend support to the Burmese junta?

21. What human rights violations are directly linked to the development of tourist infrastructure and the tourism industry in Burma and why?

22. What are alternative ways to develop tourism in Burma?

23. Why did Intrepid Travel decide to suspend operations in Burma for the foreseeable future on 21 August 2003?

24. What is Lonely Planet and why do many consumers engage in boycotts and letter-writing campaigns against it?

Activities

1. Complete an assignment on the 30 May 2003 attack on the NLD, including the latest news about the incident.

2. Complete an assignment on direct actions taken by the international community following the 30 May 2003 arrest of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Examine how effective have these actions been and why. Devise counterfactual scenarios for actions the international community could take and the possible results. Compare and contrast actions taken by different international actors, and your own country.

3. Compare and contrast the current international sanctions against Burma with another case of international sanctions. Examine how effective have the sanctions were in both cases and why. Devise counterfactual scenarios for sanctions the international community could take in both cases and the possible results.

4. Complete an assignment on the current Australian government position on Burma. Examine how effective have this position has been and why. Devise counterfactual scenarios for alternative positions Australia could take on Burma and the possible results.

5. Complete an assignment on the human rights workshops the Australian government funds in Burma. Examine how effective Downer's temporary suspension of the workshops has been and why. Devise counterfactual scenarios for alternative actions Downer could take regarding the workshops and the possible results.

7. Complete an assignment on the comparative backgrounds and roles of ASEAN and the EU.

8. Complete an assignment on the Global Unions Action Plan for Burma. Examine how effective the campaign has been and why. Devise counterfactual scenarios for other actions the campaign could take and the possible results.

9. Complete an assignment on the 88th ILO Conference Burma Resolution.

10. Complete an assignment on the background and role of the International Labour Organization (ILO), International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch.

11. Complete an assignment on BAT, its previous operations in Burma and the campaign by consumers and the British government to pressure its withdrawal from Burma. Examine why the campaign was effective.

12. Complete an assignment on tourism in Burma. Examine how the regime earns money from tourism, how they spend it and why. Devise counterfactual scenarios for other ways this money could be spent and the possible results. Examine how tourism only "benefits" a small percentage of the Burmese people. Devise counterfactual scenarios for how it could benefit more people and the possible results. Examine the tourism stance taken by the NLD and the NCGUB and why. Examine why tourists should avoid visiting Burma, and devise counterfactual scenarios for what might happen if they do.

13. Complete an assignment on human rights violations directly linked to the development of tourist infrastructure and the tourism industry in Burma. Devise counterfactual scenarios for alternative ways to develop tourism in Burma and the possible results.

14. Complete an assignment on Intrepid Travel, its operations in Burma and the campaign by consumers to pressure cancellation of its tours to Burma. Examine how effective the campaign was and why.

15. Complete an assignment on Lonely Planet, its guide book on Burma and the campaign by consumers to pressure withdrawal of its Burma guide. Examine how effective the campaign has been and why. Devise counterfactual scenarios for other actions the campaign could take and the possible results. Devise policies and actions Lonely Planet could implement to support the democracy movement and the possible results. Write an alternative Burma guide that informs the audience more thoroughly about issues in Burma.

16. Participate in the letter-writing campaigns directed at an Australian company still operating in Burma.

17. Organise classroom discussion and debate representing both sides of any of the above topics.

© Union Aid Abroad - APHEDA 2003.
Site proudly produced by Social Change Online

Last Modified: Sunday, 22-Apr-2007 16:18:30 EST
This page: http://apheda.org.au/campaigns/burma_schools_kit/resources/1074486101_10857.html