Human Rights? U.S. choses Investment instead.

On Wednesday, President Obama’s administration announced that it would be lifting US sanctions on investment and financial activity in Burma, specifically Burma’s booming energy sector: a decision that has raised urgent concerns for many human rights groups and activists. The decision, which is in stark opposition to Aung San Suu Kyi’s objections, holds inevitable consequences for the people of Burma who are still struggling for democracy and freedom from oppression, despite promises of reform from the government.

Lifting the investment ban without any restrictions or safeguards opens the door for a flood of human rights abuses and stands to undercut any change or real reform in Burma. While companies will be held to reporting requirements (companies will have to inform the US government of any new deals within 60 days), these requirements will do little to nothing towards ensuring the safety and protection of Burmese civilians, villagers or farmers. The reporting requirements do not guarantee any sense of accountability by companies. There are no repercussions or consequences for companies whose investments are linked to land abuses or human rights violations, making these requirements more superficial protocol than an actual safeguard. Furthermore, the absence of any legitimate safeguards or restrictions increases the possibility of businesses fueling and adding to the innumerable human rights abuses still occurring in Burma on a daily basis.

The lack of safeguards is especially troubling in the case of companies eager to work with Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE). MOGE, a state-owned company that has funded the military junta for decades, lacks any transparency in their dealings and fails to meet international standards for the responsible management of public funds. The Burmese government has made it a requirement for all foreign investors to take part in a joint venture with state owned companies. In effect, absolutely all US investment in Burma will be in cooperation with and will support the military junta. Therefore, US investments in Burma and, specifically with MOGE, only stand to fuel corruption and offer lucrative benefits to those who have been responsible for human rights abuses and obstructing reform, while worsening the human rights situation.

The human rights abuses and violations in Burma are still ongoing, despite whatever promises the Burmese government may have made to the international community.  The lifting of the investment ban will inevitably exacerbate the already terrible conditions the Burmese people are facing. As new projects are put into development, more and more unlawful land confiscation cases will arise, leaving villagers and farmers uncompensated and without land to call home. Currently, without US investment, land confiscation cases are rampant across the nation, with 63% of farming families in the Ta’ang region reporting loss of land to the military junta and their cronies. New foreign investment and more projects will undoubtedly raise the number of land confiscation cases perpetrated against farmers and villagers in Burma. Furthermore, pumping US money into state institutions and corporations that are responsible for some of the greatest atrocities against humanity will inevitably lead to horrible consequences for both the people of Burma and for a country that prides itself on protecting and upholding freedom for all people.

While Burma stands poised to make “positive change” for the future, the lifting of the US investment ban has the potential to undo any reform achieved thus far. Instead of caving into corporate pressure, the US government needs to first and foremost protect and demand human rights for the Burmese people. Until the Burmese government has proven that it’s taking real steps towards reform, there should be no US economic involvement in Burma.

Will Derek Mitchell be the New Ambassador?

After two decades of downgraded diplomatic relations between Burma and the United States, the two countries are about to reestablish full diplomatic ties, whether either country is ready or not. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a confirmation hearing today for Derek Mitchell, President Obama’s nominee as the next Ambassador to Burma, a post that has been unoccupied since 1990.

The first question Mitchell was asked by the Chairman, Senator Webb, was about the reason America was able to lift sanctions on Burma as well as appoint an ambassador. Mitchell responded by talking about all of the progress Burma has made in the last year since he last addressed congress. He said that America helped this process with the right mix of pressure on the Burmese government, and now with the support we will give them. Mitchell said that by working together, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and Thein Sein have already established positive reforms, and will continue to do so.

“Positive conduct calls for reciprocal gestures,” said Mitchell.

However, while he did say that Burma is on the right path, he also spoke about how there is still much more that needs to be done. He said that there are, “no illusions about the challenges that lie ahead.” Mitchell agreed with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi when he said the progress that has been made is not irreversible, especially because the constitution allows the military to have so much power.

“As long as the [military] is imbedded into the constitution, there will continue to be problems,” said Mitchell.

He also said how there are still human rights abuses, conflicts in ethnic areas, and the lack of transparency of certain companies like the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE). MOGE is the state enterprise controlled by the military whose profits and activities often go to increasing ethnic violence due to the military’s control over the company and prevalence of oil and gas resources located in ethnic minority areas.

However, while Mitchell spoke of the problems that still exist in Burma and the need for investors to look at each investment on a case by case basis, Senator Webb refused to support any type of restriction for American investments, including investing in extractive companies like MOGE, a militarily controlled company whose profits often go to increasing conflict in ethnic areas. What was more surprising though was that Webb spoke out against Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the Burmese democracy movement. When talking about Daw Aung Suu Kyi’s plea for foreign companies to not invest in companies that do not conform to the IMF’s requirements of transparency, including MOGE, he said that he found it difficult to accept any foreign diplomats recommendations to not invest in something, as if he was insulted by anyone else intervening with America’s growth.  Webb’s remarks are a direct rebuke to the leadership of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the United States and international communities’ longstanding support for democratic leaders and oppressed dissidents in promoting and supporting democracy around the world.

It was Senator Rubio who actually directed the conversation to focus back on the Burmese people, rather than the prospects for American profit. He asked Mitchell about the number of political prisoners still imprisoned, and about the rights they have.  He addressed one of the most critical areas of concern, the lack of civilian control over the Burmese military, the biggest impediment to genuine democracy in Burma.  He also asked about the problems of child soldiers and human trafficking, two more issues that make Burma a lot less ready for the release of sanctions than either Senator Webb or Inhofe would care to admit.

Mitchell will continue to privately field questions before the Senate votes on his confirmation, which Senator Webb hopes will be agreed upon by the end of this week.

 

Why You Should Call Congress Today

You have the power to make sure that the US continues to push for an end to atrocities in Burma. By calling your congressmen and asking them to support the renewal of sanctions on Burma, you can offer your support for the people of Burma.

Each year, the House of Representatives and Senate must vote to renew the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act (BFDA); a bill that keeps an import ban Burma. The sanctions are the last piece of leverage the US has to push the Burmese military regime towards real and lasting change. We need to renew these sanctions to ensure that hundreds of millions of American dollars don’t end up in the hands of the oppressive and corrupt military junta. More importantly, renewing the BFDA sends the message that the US government and its citizens care about protecting the human rights of the Burmese people and will stand up for those rights.

While Daw Aung San Suu Kyi may be free, there are still hundreds of political prisoners that are behind bars in Burma. Moreover, the military is still committing innumerable human rights violations and attack ethnic minority communities. The regime continues to violate international human rights codes through its rampant use of torture, sexual violence, forced labor, forced portering and illegal confiscation of land and displacement of innocent civilians. We need to send the message that until irreversible change has come to Burma, and all of its people are protected from human rights violations and abuse, we cannot and will not lift sanctions on Burma.

Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) who co-sponsored the bill recognize that the Burmese government has a lot to accomplish before it can claim to have reformed. “Over the past year, we have seen some remarkable changes in Burma after years of violence and repression…But the government of Burma still has a lot of work to do to demonstrate to us, the international community and, above all, the people of Burma that it is truly committed to reform, democratization and national reconciliation” Feinstein said.

McConnell issued a similar sentiment, stating, “The Burmese government still has not met all the necessary conditions to justify a complete repeal of all existing sanctions. Despite the unmistakable progress made by the Burmese government, now is not the time to end our ability either to encourage further governmental reform or to revisit sanctions if necessary. ” The bill has continuously garnered support across party lines because it signifies an ideal that all people can and should unite under; protecting the human rights of innocent people.

In a country like the US where political participation is not only permitted, but encouraged, it’s incredibly important for us to lend our voices to protect those who have been silenced.

What you can do:

-        Check your Senators’ voting history on Burma at our Congressional Scorecard Map.

-        Please take a few minutes out of your day to call your Senators and ask them to renew sanctions and the BFDA.  It’s not as scary as it seems and we have a step by step guide to make it easy.

Women Leading Way of Peace

 

Today, as Burma’s government stands poised to make “promising” political reforms, the resilient spirit of the Burmese people is more evident than ever. In February 2012, the Women’s League for Burma (WLB) initiated their Peace Signature Campaign, a movement that united over 17,000 Burmese peoples from all walks of life, including Internally Displaced peoples (IDPs), refugees and migrant workers. The Women’s League of Burma is and alliance of 13 women’s organization, representing many ethnic groups.

On World Refugee Day (June 20), the WLB issued an open letter for peace; a call for unity among the many different groups and peoples in the country to stand together in a “Public Peace Process.” The campaign and letter both represent cautious optimism; recognizing the importance of public unity and action in order to achieve real lasting change for Burma.

When many stories coming out of Burma today still report growing conflicts and tensions between different groups, a nationwide campaign calling for unity becomes increasingly important. The Peace Signature Campaign and the open letter speak to the necessity of solidarity among all people of Burma in support of freedom, and the acceptance and protection of refugees, IDPs, minorities and women’s rights. The campaign is delivering the message that public participation is an absolute necessity for political change and that if Burma is to step forward into a brighter era, all of its people must walk together.

Currently, the Peace Signature Campaign has 17,063 signatures and is still gaining support. While the campaign and letter are indicative of many things, perhaps the most important value it represents is unity. The greatest message the WLB and its supporters are sending through this campaign is that the united spirit of the people of Burma is much stronger than oppressive and intolerant forces and is fully capable of affecting great change. As the last paragraph of WLB’s open letter states:

“The Women’s League of Burma is urging political parties, civil society organizations, religious organizations, all armed forces, refugee and all citizens of Burma to prepare to be involved in a “Public Peace Process”: a nationwide peace process which mobilizes people in all communities to raise awareness and support for peace and to highlight issues that are critical and must be included in negotiations.”

Fittingly, the theme of this year’s World Refugee Day was “Restoring Hope” and it’s clear that the Burmese people stand ready to take that task into their own hands, together.

Daw Suu’s Nobel Speech

[Below is the text Daw Aung San Suu Kyi gave on June 16th - finally able to accept her Nobel Peace Prize in Person]

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highness, Excellencies, Distinguished members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Dear Friends,

Long years ago, sometimes it seems many lives ago, I was at Oxford listening to the radio programme Desert Island Discs with my young son Alexander. It was a well-known programme (for all I know it still continues) on which famous people from all walks of life were invited to talk about the eight discs, the one book beside the bible and the complete works of Shakespeare, and the one luxury item they would wish to have with them were they to be marooned on a desert island. At the end of the programme, which we had both enjoyed, Alexander asked me if I thought I might ever be invited to speak on Desert Island Discs. “Why not?” I responded lightly. Since he knew that in general only celebrities took part in the programme he proceeded to ask, with genuine interest, for what reason I thought I might be invited. I considered this for a moment and then answered: “Perhaps because I’d have won the Nobel Prize for literature,” and we both laughed. The prospect seemed pleasant but hardly probable.

(I cannot now remember why I gave that answer, perhaps because I had recently read a book by a Nobel Laureate or perhaps because the Desert Island celebrity of that day had been a famous writer.)

In 1989, when my late husband Michael Aris came to see me during my first term of house arrest, he told me that a friend, John Finnis, had nominated me for the Nobel Peace Prize. This time also I laughed. For an instant Michael looked amazed, then he realized why I was amused. The Nobel Peace Prize? A pleasant prospect, but quite improbable! So how did I feel when I was actually awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace? The question has been put to me many times and this is surely the most appropriate occasion on which to examine what the Nobel Prize means to me and what peace means to me.

As I have said repeatedly in many an interview, I heard the news that I had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize on the radio one evening. It did not altogether come as a surprise because I had been mentioned as one of the frontrunners for the prize in a number of broadcasts during the previous week. While drafting this lecture, I have tried very hard to remember what my immediate reaction to the announcement of the award had been. I think, I can no longer be sure, it was something like: “Oh, so they’ve decided to give it to me.” It did not seem quite real because in a sense I did not feel myself to be quite real at that time.

Often during my days of house arrest it felt as though I were no longer a part of the real world. There was the house which was my world, there was the world of others who also were not free but who were together in prison as a community, and there was the world of the free; each was a different planet pursuing its own separate course in an indifferent universe.

What the Nobel Peace Prize did was to draw me once again into the world of other human beings outside the isolated area in which I lived, to restore a sense of reality to me. This did not happen instantly, of course, but as the days and months went by and news of reactions to the award came over the airwaves, I began to understand the significance of the Nobel Prize. It had made me real once again; it had drawn me back into the wider human community. And what was more important, the Nobel Prize had drawn the attention of the world to the struggle for democracy and human rights in Burma. We were not going to be forgotten.

To be forgotten. The French say that to part is to die a little. To be forgotten too is to die a little. It is to lose some of the links that anchor us to the rest of humanity. When I met Burmese migrant workers and refugees during my recent visit to Thailand, many cried out: “Don’t forget us!” They meant: “don’t forget our plight, don’t forget to do what you can to help us, don’t forget we also belong to your world.” When the Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize to me they were recognizing that the oppressed and the isolated in Burma were also a part of the world, they were recognizing the oneness of humanity. So for me receiving the Nobel Peace Prize means personally extending my concerns for democracy and human rights beyond national borders. The Nobel Peace Prize opened up a door in my heart.

The Burmese concept of peace can be explained as the happiness arising from the cessation of factors that militate against the harmonious and the wholesome. The word nyein-chan translates literally as the beneficial coolness that comes when a fire is extinguished. Fires of suffering and strife are raging around the world. In my own country, hostilities have not ceased in the far north; to the west, communal violence resulting in arson and murder were taking place just several days before I started out on the journey that has brought me here today. News of atrocities in other reaches of the earth abound. Reports of hunger, disease, displacement, joblessness, poverty, injustice, discrimination, prejudice, bigotry; these are our daily fare. Everywhere there are negative forces eating away at the foundations of peace. Everywhere can be found thoughtless dissipation of material and human resources that are necessary for the conservation of harmony and happiness in our world.

The First World War represented a terrifying waste of youth and potential, a cruel squandering of the positive forces of our planet. The poetry of that era has a special significance for me because I first read it at a time when I was the same age as many of those young men who had to face the prospect of withering before they had barely blossomed. A young American fighting with the French Foreign Legion wrote before he was killed in action in 1916 that he would meet his death:  “at some disputed barricade;” “on some scarred slope of battered hill;” “at midnight in some flaming town.” Youth and love and life perishing forever in senseless attempts to capture nameless, unremembered places. And for what? Nearly a century on, we have yet to find a satisfactory answer.

Are we not still guilty, if to a less violent degree, of recklessness, of improvidence with regard to our future and our humanity? War is not the only arena where peace is done to death. Wherever suffering is ignored, there will be the seeds of conflict, for suffering degrades and embitters and enrages.. 

A positive aspect of living in isolation was that I had ample time in which to ruminate over the meaning of words and precepts that I had known and accepted all my life. As a Buddhist, I had heard about dukha, generally translated as suffering, since I was a small child. Almost on a daily basis elderly, and sometimes not so elderly, people around me would murmur “dukha, dukha” when they suffered from aches and pains or when they met with some small, annoying mishaps. However, it was only during my years of house arrest that I got around to investigating the nature of the six great dukha. These are: to be conceived, to age, to sicken, to die, to be parted from those one loves, to be forced to live in propinquity with those one does not love. I examined each of the six great sufferings, not in a religious context but in the context of our ordinary, everyday lives. If suffering were an unavoidable part of our existence, we should try to alleviate it as far as possible in practical, earthly ways. I mulled over the effectiveness of ante- and post-natal programmes and mother and childcare; of adequate facilities for the aging population; of comprehensive health services; of compassionate nursing and hospices. I was particularly intrigued by the last two kinds of suffering: to be parted from those one loves and to be forced to live in propinquity with those one does not love. What experiences might our Lord Buddha have undergone in his own life that he had included these two states among the great sufferings? I thought of prisoners and refugees, of migrant workers and victims of human trafficking, of that great mass of the uprooted of the earth who have been torn away from their homes, parted from families and friends, forced to live out their lives among strangers who are not always welcoming.

We are fortunate to be living in an age when social welfare and humanitarian assistance are recognized not only as desirable but necessary. I am fortunate to be living in an age when the fate of prisoners of conscience anywhere has become the concern of peoples everywhere, an age when democracy and human rights are widely, even if not universally, accepted as the birthright of all. How often during my years under house arrest have I drawn strength from my favourite passages in the preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

……. disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspirations of the common people,
…… it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law . . .

If I am asked why I am fighting for human rights in Burma the above passages will provide the answer. If I am asked why I am fighting for democracy in Burma, it is because I believe that democratic institutions and practices are necessary for the guarantee of human rights.

Over the past year there have been signs that the endeavours of those who believe in democracy and human rights are beginning to bear fruit in Burma. There have been changes in a positive direction; steps towards democratization have been taken. If I advocate cautious optimism it is not because I do not have faith in the future but because I do not want to encourage blind faith. Without faith in the future, without the conviction that democratic values and fundamental human rights are not only necessary but possible for our society, our movement could not have been sustained throughout the destroying years. Some of our warriors fell at their post, some deserted us, but a dedicated core remained strong and committed. At times when I think of the years that have passed, I am amazed that so many remained staunch under the most trying circumstances. Their faith in our cause is not blind; it is based on a clear-eyed assessment of their own powers of endurance and a profound respect for the aspirations of our people.

It is because of recent changes in my country that I am with you today; and these changes have come about because of you and other lovers of freedom and justice who contributed towards a global awareness of our situation. Before continuing to speak of my country, may I speak out for our prisoners of conscience. There still remain such prisoners in Burma. It is to be feared that because the best known detainees have been released, the remainder, the unknown ones, will be forgotten. I am standing here because I was once a prisoner of conscience. As you look at me and listen to me, please remember the often repeated truth that one prisoner of conscience is one too many. Those who have not yet been freed, those who have not yet been given access to the benefits of justice in my country number much more than one. Please remember them and do whatever is possible to effect their earliest, unconditional release.

Burma is a country of many ethnic nationalities and faith in its future can be founded only on a true spirit of union. Since we achieved independence in 1948, there never has been a time when we could claim the whole country was at peace. We have not been able to develop the trust and understanding necessary to remove causes of conflict. Hopes were raised by ceasefires that were maintained from the early 1990s until 2010 when these broke down over the course of a few months. One unconsidered move can be enough to remove long-standing ceasefires. In recent months, negotiations between the government and ethnic nationality forces have been making progress. We hope that ceasefire agreements will lead to political settlements founded on the aspirations of the peoples, and the spirit of union.

My party, the National League for Democracy, and I stand ready and willing to play any role in the process of national reconciliation. The reform measures that were put into motion by President U Thein Sein’s government can be sustained only with the intelligent cooperation of all internal forces: the military, our ethnic nationalities, political parties, the media, civil society organizations, the business community and, most important of all, the general public. We can say that reform is effective only if the lives of the people are improved and in this regard, the international community has a vital role to play. Development and humanitarian aid, bi-lateral agreements and investments should be coordinated and calibrated to ensure that these will promote social, political and economic growth that is balanced and sustainable. The potential of our country is enormous. This should be nurtured and developed to create not just a more prosperous but also a more harmonious, democratic society where our people can live in peace, security and freedom.

The peace of our world is indivisible. As long as negative forces are getting the better of positive forces anywhere, we are all at risk. It may be questioned whether all negative forces could ever be removed. The simple answer is: “No!” It is in human nature to contain both the positive and the negative. However, it is also within human capability to work to reinforce the positive and to minimize or neutralize the negative. Absolute peace in our world is an unattainable goal. But it is one towards which we must continue to journey, our eyes fixed on it as a traveller in a desert fixes his eyes on the one guiding star that will lead him to salvation. Even if we do not achieve perfect peace on earth, because perfect peace is not of this earth, common endeavours to gain peace will unite individuals and nations in trust and friendship and help to make our human community safer and kinder.

I used the word ‘kinder’ after careful deliberation; I might say the careful deliberation of many years. Of the sweets of adversity, and let me say that these are not numerous, I have found the sweetest, the most precious of all, is the lesson I learnt on the value of kindness. Every kindness I received, small or big, convinced me that there could never be enough of it in our world. To be kind is to respond with sensitivity and human warmth to the hopes and needs of others. Even the briefest touch of kindness can lighten a heavy heart. Kindness can change the lives of people. Norway has shown exemplary kindness in providing a home for the displaced of the earth, offering sanctuary to those who have been cut loose from the moorings of security and freedom in their native lands.

There are refugees in all parts of the world. When I was at the Mae La refugee camp in Thailand recently, I met dedicated people who were striving daily to make the lives of the inmates as free from hardship as possible. They spoke of their concern over ‘donor fatigue,’ which could also translate as ‘compassion fatigue.’ ‘Donor fatigue’ expresses itself precisely in the reduction of funding. ‘Compassion fatigue’ expresses itself less obviously in the reduction of concern. One is the consequence of the other. Can we afford to indulge in compassion fatigue? Is the cost of meeting the needs of refugees greater than the cost that would be consequent on turning an indifferent, if not a blind, eye on their suffering? I appeal to donors the world over to fulfill the needs of these people who are in search, often it must seem to them a vain search, of refuge.

At Mae La, I had valuable discussions with Thai officials responsible for the administration of Tak province where this and several other camps are situated. They acquainted me with some of the more serious problems related to refugee camps: violation of forestry laws, illegal drug use, home brewed spirits, the problems of controlling malaria, tuberculosis, dengue fever and cholera. The concerns of the administration are as legitimate as the concerns of the refugees. Host countries also deserve consideration and practical help in coping with the difficulties related to their responsibilities.

Ultimately our aim should be to create a world free from the displaced, the homeless and the hopeless, a world of which each and every corner is a true sanctuary where the inhabitants will have the freedom and the capacity to live in peace. Every thought, every word, and every action that adds to the positive and the wholesome is a contribution to peace. Each and every one of us is capable of making such a contribution. Let us join hands to try to create a peaceful world where we can sleep in security and wake in happiness.

The Nobel Committee concluded its statement of 14 October 1991 with the words: “In awarding the Nobel Peace Prize … to Aung San Suu Kyi, the Norwegian Nobel Committee wishes to honour this woman for her unflagging efforts and to show its support for the many people throughout the world who are striving to attain democracy, human rights and ethnic conciliation by peaceful means.” When I joined the democracy movement in Burma it never occurred to me that I might ever be the recipient of any prize or honour. The prize we were working for was a free, secure and just society where our people might be able to realize their full potential. The honour lay in our endeavour. History had given us the opportunity to give of our best for a cause in which we believed. When the Nobel Committee chose to honour me, the road I had chosen of my own free will became a less lonely path to follow. For this I thank the Committee, the people of Norway and peoples all over the world whose support has strengthened my faith in the common quest for peace. Thank you.

Peace

The conflict in Western Burma has been deeply sorrowful. The U.S. Campaign for Burma supports an end to all violence in Western Burma. We believe all human beings should have their human rights respected.

One of the most promising articles I have seen was about various religious leaders calling for peace:

“If we really want peace, then everyone in the country should hold peaceful discussions and behave peacefully towards one another – please stop killing one another,” said renown Theravada Buddhist monk Pinnyasiha.

Wunna Shwe, an official from the All-Myanmar Islam Association said: “We have been contacting concerned government and religious organisations and are trying our best to bring tranquility to the situation. We will try our best to bring a solution based upon love for this to solve this problem.”

An official from Myanmar Baptist Convention said: “We are praying for [peace] at our religious events – we are praying for peace for all.”

365 Days Later, They Are Still Caught in Conflict

Displaced people hiding in the forest

“I asked my mum to run, because the Burmese soldiers were coming, but she wouldn’t come with me,” he says. “I heard three loud gunshots but kept running. When I came back to find her she had a big hole in her chest and her legs were broken.” Brang Shawng, a 12 year old Kachin boy is now an orphan after his mother was brutally murdered by Burmese soldiers in Bhamo, Kachin State.

Sadly, stories similar to Brang Shawng’s continue to emerge everyday, highlighting the atrocities currently faced by the Kachin people in Northern Burma. It was one year ago today that the Burmese Army broke a 17-year ceasefire with the Kachin Independence Organization, leading to the death of countless innocent civilians and the displacement of over 75,000 people in Kachin State.

As the world looks upon the reforms in Burma as a catalyst for democracy and rewards the Burmese regime by lifting sanctions, the Burmese Army continues to commit egregious human rights abuses against the Kachin people. Living in constant fear of assault by Burmese soldiers, the Kachin people have been subjected to forced portering, use as human landmine shields and landmine sweepers, rape, torture, extrajudicial killings, disappearance, forced relocation, and the destruction and confiscation of food and property.

The situation in Kachin state is rapidly deteriorating and the Kachin people desperately need our help. Join the USCB and many Burmese advocacy organizations to call attention to the human rights abuses being faced by the Kachin people at the hands of the Burmese army. There are many ways you can make a difference:

1) Sign the change.org petition calling on U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton not to suspend American sanctions on Burma without putting legally binding safeguards in place to prevent American business from fueling atrocities and abuses in Burma.

2) Please tell USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah to urgently provide humanitarian assistance to the Kachin community-based relief committees so that they can carry on their work and save the lives of Kachins who have already had to endure so much.

3) Email your Congression(wo)man now and urge them to cosponsor the renewal of the Freedom and Democracy Act, which denies hundreds of millions of dollars from getting into the hands of Burma’s military and its crony companies. Click here to get instructions on who and how to call.

4) Donate to the USCB and help us take our work to the next level! A generous donor has offered to match our supporters’ donations – so every donation you give will have double the impact. We need your help to continue to push for human rights and a political system that is sustainable, equitable, and truly democratic in Burma.