[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 71 (Tuesday, May 22, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5455-S5458]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Helms, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Hollings, 
        and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 926. A bill to prohibit the importation of any article that is 
produced, manufactured, or grown in Burma; to the Committee on 
Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, the people of Burma continue to suffer at 
the hands of the world's most brutal military dictatorship which 
cynically calls itself the State Peace and Development Council, (SPDC). 
Now more than ever, as a nation committed to internationally-recognized 
human rights and worker rights, democracy, and freedom, America must 
heed the call of the International Labor Organization, (ILO), and 
support stronger, coordinated multilateral actions against Burma's 
repressive regime. In the face of overwhelming evidence of continued, 
systematic use of forced labor, including forced child labor in Burma, 
we must do all we can to deny any material support to the military 
dictators who rule that country with an iron fist.
  Furthermore, there is no clear and tangible evidence that the latest 
informal, closed-door dialogue between the Burmese generals on one side 
and Aung San Suu Kyi and the other duly-elected leaders of the pro-
democracy movement on the other side is bearing fruit. Therefore, we 
must demonstrate anew to the Burmese people our recognition of their 
nightmarish plight as well as our support for their noble struggle to 
achieve democratic governance.
  In 1997, a strong, bipartisan majority of the Congress enacted some 
sanctions and former President Clinton issued an Executive Order in 
response to a prolonged pattern of egregious human rights violations in 
Burma. At the heart of those measures is the existing prohibition on 
U.S. private companies making new investments in Burma's 
infrastructure. Many other national governments, as well as scores of 
city and State governments in the U.S. followed suit and adopted their 
own sanctions.
  Nevertheless, the ruling military junta in Burma has clung to power 
and continues to blatantly violate internationally-recognized human and 
worker rights. The 1999 State Department Human Rights Country Report on 
Burma cited ``credible reports that Burmese Army soldiers have 
committed rape, forced porterage, and extrajudicial killing.'' It 
referred to arbitrary arrests and the detention of at least 1300 
political prisoners.
  The following excerpts from the most recent 2000 State Department 
Human Rights Country Report paint an even more disturbing reality:

       The Burmese Government's extremely poor human rights record 
     and longstanding severe repression of its citizens continued 
     during the year. Citizens continued to live subject at any 
     time and without appeal to the arbitrary and sometimes brutal 
     dictates of the military regime. Citizens did not have the 
     right to change their government. There continued to be 
     credible reports, particularly in ethnic minority areas, that 
     security forces committed serious human rights abuses, 
     including extrajudicial killings and rape. Disappearances 
     continued, and members of the security forces tortured, beat, 
     and otherwise abused prisoners and detainees.
       The judiciary is not independent and there is no effective 
     rule of law.
       The Government continued to restrict worker rights, ban 
     unions, and use forced labor for public works and for the 
     support of military garrisons. Forced labor, including forced 
     child labor, remains a serious problem. The use of forced 
     labor as porters by the army--with attendant mistreatment, 
     illness, and sometimes death--remain a common practice. In 
     November, 2000 the International Labor Organization ILO 
     Governing Body judged that the Government had not taken 
     effective action to deal with `widespread and systematic' use 
     of forced labor in the country and, for the first time in its 
     history, called on all ILO members to apply sanctions to 
     Burma. Child labor is also a problem and varies in severity 
     depending on the country's region. Trafficking in persons, 
     particularly in women and girls to Thailand and China, mostly 
     for the purposes of prostitution, remain widespread.
       As of September, 2000, the International Committee of the 
     Red Cross had visited more than 35,000 prisoners in at least 
     30 prisons, including more than 1,800 political prisoners. 
     The ICRC also has begun tackling the problem of the roughly 
     36,000 persons in forced labor camps.
       The Government continued to infringe on citizens' privacy 
     rights, and security forces continued to monitor citizens' 
     movements and communications systematically, to search homes 
     without warrants, and to relocate persons forcibly without 
     just compensation or due process.
       The SPDC continued to restrict severely freedom of speech, 
     press assembly, and association. It has pressured many 
     thousands of members to resign from the National League for 
     Democracy, NLD, and closed party offices nationwide. Since 
     1990 the junta frequently prevented the NLD and other pro-
     democracy parties from conducting normal political 
     activities. The junta recognizes the NLD as a legal entity; 
     however, it refuses to accept the legal political status of 
     key NLD party leaders, particularly the party's general 
     secretary and 1991 Nobel Laureate, Aung San Suu Kyi, and 
     restrict her activities severely through security measures 
     and threats.

  Furthermore, Human Rights Watch/Asia reports that children from 
ethnic minorities are forced to work under inhumane conditions for the 
Burmese Army, lacking adequate medical care and sometimes dying from 
beatings.
  Last year, the UN Special Rapporteur on Burma, in a chilling and 
alarming account, puts the number of child soldiers at 50,000, the 
highest in the world. Sadly, the children most vulnerable to 
recruitment into the military are orphans, street children, and the 
children of ethnic minorities.
  The same UN report also discusses the dire state of minorities in 
Burma who continue to be the targets of violence. Specifically, it 
details that the most frequently observed human rights violations aimed 
at minorities include extortion, rape, torture and other forms of 
physical abuse, forced labor, ``portering'', arbitrary arrests, long-
term imprisonment, forcible relocation, and in some cases, 
extrajudicial executions. It also cites reports of massacres in the 
Shan state in the months of January, February, and May of 2000.
  A 1998 International Labor Organization Commission of Inquiry 
determined that forced labor in Burma is practiced in a ``widespread 
and systematic manner, with total disregard for the human dignity, 
safety, health and basic needs of the people.''
  Last August, California District Court Judge Ronald Lew found in one 
high-profile court case ``ample evidence in the record linking the 
Burmese Government's use of forced labor to human rights abuses.''
  In sum, the Burmese military junta continues to commit such horrific 
and appalling human rights and worker rights violations that we have no 
choice but to unite with other nations around the world and take 
stronger action.
  Even though the Burmese military junta has been terrorizing the 48 
million people of Burma since it came to power in 1988 and has vowed to 
destroy the National League for Democracy, NLD, Aung San Suu Kyi, a 
remarkably courageous leader and very brave woman, manages to stand 
steadfast,

[[Page S5456]]

like a living Statue of Liberty, in her undaunted quest and that of the 
Burmese people for democracy. We must never forget that she and her NLD 
colleagues won 392 of 485 seats in a democratic election held in 1990. 
But they have never been allowed to take office.
  Aung San Suu Kyi, the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner, and countless 
others are denied freedom of association, speech and movement on a 
daily basis. Last summer, she came under renewed threats and 
intimidation. For example, her vehicle was forced off the road last 
August by Burmese security forces when she tried to travel outside 
Rangoon to meet with her NLD colleagues. She sat in her car on the 
roadside for a week until a midnight raid of 200 riot police forced her 
back to her home and placed her under house arrest until September 14, 
2000. Nevertheless, she tried again on September 21st, but she was 
prevented from boarding a train. The pathetic excuse from the 
authorities for abridging her freedom to travel within Burma, on that 
occasion, was that all tickets had been sold out.
  This Congress must answer anew the cry of the Burmese people and 
their courageous freedom-fighters. That is why I am introducing 
bipartisan legislation today, along with Senator Jessee Helms and 
several of our colleagues, to ban soaring imports from Burma, most of 
which are apparel and textiles sold by many brand-name American 
retailers. I am equally pleased that U.S. Congressman Tom Lantos from 
California is introducing the companion bill in the U.S. House of 
Representatives this week.
  Most Americans think that a trade ban with Burma already exists. 
Nothing could be further from the truth. When I began investigating 
U.S. trade with Burma last summer in concern with the National Labor 
Committee, I was chocked and alarmed to discover skyrocketing U.S. 
apparel and textile imports for example.
  Last November I requested cable traffic between the U.S. Embassy in 
Burma and the U.S. State Department at Foggy Bottom to see exactly what 
officials in Washington, D.C. knew about soaring imports from Burma. It 
took nearly four months for me to get this unclassified cable traffic. 
But now I know why. Its contents are very troubling. It constitutes 
irrefutable evidence that current U.S. sanctions with Burma are far 
more apparent than real. They are far more bluster than bite. Consider 
the fact that the U.S. Government currently provides the Burmese 
military junta with very easy access to the U.S. apparel market because 
95 percent of their exports are under no practical import restrictions 
at all.
  Due to rising imports of apparel and textiles from Burma alone, more 
than $400 million dollars are now flowing into the coffers of the 
Burmese military dictatorship. These ruthless military dictators and 
their drug-trafficking cohorts are spending this hard currency to 
purchase more guns from China and to buy loyalty among their troops to 
continue their policy of extreme repression and human cruelty.
  In other words, American consumers are unwittingly helping to sustain 
the repressive military junta's grip on power when buying travel and 
sports bags, women's underwear, jumpers, shorts, tank tops and towels 
made in the Burmese gulag. It is outrageous that many brand-name U.S. 
apparel companies such as FILA, Jordache, and Arrow Golf are making 
more and more of their clothes in the Burmese gulag where many workers 
earn as little as 7 cent/hour or $3.23/week and where production is 
non-stop--24 hours/day and 7 days/week.
  Make no mistake about it. U.S. apparel imports from Burma are 
providing the SPDC with a growing source of critically-needed hard 
currency because the military dictators directly own or have taken de 
facto control of production in many apparel and textile factories. They 
are further enriched by a 5 percent export tax. As I said earlier, this 
hard currency is used to finance the purchase of new weapons and 
ammunition from China and elsewhere, thus helping to underwrite the 
perpetuation of modern-day slavery, forced labor and forced child labor 
in Burma.
  But you don't have to take my work for it. U Maung Maung, the General 
Secretary of the Federation of Trade Unions in Burma, decried at a 
recent news conference in Washington, D.C., that ``the practice of 
purchasing garments made in Burma extends the continued exploitation of 
my people, including the use of slave labor by the regime, by further 
delaying the return of democratic government in Burma.'' At grave 
personal risk, he and other NLD leaders have disclosed the growing 
importance of exports to America and other foreign markets in helping 
sustain the Burmese military junta in power.
  Some may question whether a ban on Burmese trade, including apparel 
and textile imports, might not harm American companies and consumers? 
Nothing could be further from the truth. Currently, U.S. apparel and 
textile imports from Burma account for less than one-half of one 
percent of total U.S. apparel and textile imports.
  Others may assert that enactment of this legislation would violate 
WTO rules. Yes, Burma does belong to the WTO. Accordingly, the SPDC 
would have the standing technically to bring a formal complaint when 
this legislation is enacted. But our response to such a development 
should be bring it on. Let the Burmese generals argue before the WTO 
that they have the right to export products made by forced labor and 
child slaves and in flagrant violation of other internationally-
recognized worker rights. This would clearly bring into focus the folly 
of writing rules for global trade that don't include enforceable worker 
rights, thus compelling workers in civilized trading nations to have to 
compete for their jobs de facto with forced labor in Burma.
  America must answer the clarion call of the ILO and take a stronger 
stand in solidarity with the Burmese people and in defense of universal 
human rights and worker rights in that besieged nation. A trade ban 
with Burma will reaffirm the belief of the American people that 
increased trade with foreign countries must promote respect for human 
rights and worker rights as well as property rights. It will also 
signal American readiness to join in a new and stronger course of 
coordinated, multilateral action that is designed to force the Burmese 
generals from power once and for all and to satisfy the yearning of the 
Burmese people for democratic, self-government.
  In closing, I also ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record and that four recent editorials from the 
Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Boston Globe calling 
attention to the profound and prolonged suffering of the Burmese people 
and the need for stronger action in the U.S. and around the world also 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 926

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The International Labor Organization (ILO), invoking an 
     extraordinary constitutional procedure for the first time in 
     its 82-year history, adopted in 2000 a resolution calling on 
     the State Peace and Development Council to take concrete 
     actions to end forced labor in Burma.
       (2) In this resolution, the ILO recommended that 
     governments, employers, and workers organizations take 
     appropriate measures to ensure that their relations with the 
     State Peace and Development Council do not abet the system of 
     forced or compulsory labor in that country, and that other 
     international bodies reconsider any cooperation they may be 
     engaged in with Burma and, if appropriate, cease as soon as 
     possible any activity that could abet the practice of forced 
     or compulsory labor.

     SEC. 2. UNITED STATES SUPPORT FOR MULTILATERAL ACTION TO END 
                   FORCED LABOR AND THE WORST FORMS OF CHILD LABOR 
                   IN BURMA.

       (a) Trade Ban.--
       (1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, until such time as the President determines and 
     certifies to Congress that Burma has met the conditions 
     described in paragraph (2), no article that is produced, 
     manufactured, or grown in Burma may be imported into the 
     United States.
       (2) Conditions described.--The conditions described in this 
     paragraph are the following:
       (A) The State Peace and Development Council in Burma has 
     made measurable and substantial progress in reversing the 
     persistent pattern of gross violations of internationally-
     recognized human rights and worker rights, including the 
     elimination of forced labor and the worst forms of child 
     labor.
       (B) The State Peace and Development Council in Burma has 
     made measurable and

[[Page S5457]]

     substantial progress toward implementing a democratic 
     government including--
       (i) releasing all political prisoners; and
       (ii) deepening, accelerating, and bringing to a mutually-
     acceptable conclusion the dialogue between the State Peace 
     and Development Council (SPDC) and democratic leadership 
     within Burma (including Aung San Suu Kyi and the National 
     League for Democracy (NLD) and leaders of Burma's ethnic 
     peoples).
       (C) The State Peace and Development Council in Burma has 
     made measurable and substantial progress toward full 
     cooperation with United States counter-narcotics efforts 
     pursuant to the terms of section 570(a)(1)(B) of Public Law 
     104-208, the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and 
     Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1997.
       (b) Effective Date.--The provisions of this section shall 
     apply to any article entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
     consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
                                  ____


                [From the New York Times, May 11, 2001]

                     Myanmar's Incorrigible Leaders

       A few months ago it looked as if the military junta in 
     Myanmar might ease its repressive rule slightly. The regime 
     was talking with the country's courageous pro-democracy 
     leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and there even seemed to be a 
     possibility that she would be liberated from the prolonged 
     house arrest the government has enforced. But those hopes 
     have all but vanished. If the Bush administration means to 
     speak out against human rights abuses abroad and pressure 
     governments to treat their citizens humanely, Myanmar would 
     be a fine place to start.
       The military leaders of Myanmar, formerly called Burma, are 
     among the world's cruelest violators of human rights. The 
     junta has tortured and executed political opponents, 
     exploited forced labor and condoned a burgeoning traffic in 
     heroin and amphetamines. In the clearest indication that the 
     regime has little intention of reforming, the United Nations 
     special envoy who acted as a catalyst for the talks between 
     the government and Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi has been denied 
     permission to visit the country since January. Also, an 
     anticipated release of political prisoners has failed to 
     materialize, as has a pledge by the junta that Mrs. Aung San 
     Suu Kyi's party, the National League for Democracy, would be 
     allowed to resume activity.
       Earlier this year the junta released 120 mostly youthful 
     members of the party who had been imprisoned the previous 
     year, but it is still believed to be holding as many as 1,700 
     political prisoners, including 35 people who were elected to 
     Parliament in 1990. Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi's party won more 
     than three-quarters of the seats in that election, but the 
     junta annulled the results.
       The United States and the European Union have cooperated to 
     isolate Myanmar, and in 1997 the Clinton administration 
     banned new American investments there. But some Asian 
     countries have been reluctant to join in sanctions. China, in 
     particular, has helped sustain the junta with military aid. 
     Regrettably, last month Japan broke ranks with a Western-led 
     12-year ban on non-humanitarian assistance to Myanmar by 
     approving a $29 million grant for a hydroelectric dam.
       Last year the International Labor Organization, responding 
     to concerns about forced labor, voted to urge governments and 
     international donors to impose further sanctions on Myanmar. 
     Washington should consider a ban on imports from that nation, 
     including textiles. Myanmar is rapidly increasing apparel 
     exports to the United States. Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi's allies 
     have argued that the hard-currency earnings primarily benefit 
     the military, not the laborers who make the garments. 
     Washington should certainly be using its influence with Japan 
     and other Asian countries to deter any further 
     nonhumanitarian assistance.
                                  ____


                  [From the Boston Globe, May 7, 2001]

                         Burma Sanctions' Value

       When it comes to the military dictatorship ruling Burma, 
     President Bush has an opportunity he should welcome to 
     demonstrate the realism his advisers commend and, 
     simultaneously, a firm commitment to America's democratic 
     ideals.
       The Burmese junta stands condemned by much of the world for 
     its horrendous abuse of human rights, its complicity in the 
     trafficking of heroin and methamphetamines, and its thwarting 
     of the democratic government that was elected with 80 percent 
     of the seats in Parliament in Burma's last free election, in 
     1990.
       Currently, there are varying sanctions on the junta. The 
     International Labor Organization, for the first time in its 
     81-year history, asked its members to sanction the regime for 
     the continuing, brutal imposition of forced labor on Burmese 
     and minority ethnic groups.
       There are also European Union sanctions and restrictions 
     imposed by the Clinton administration that prohibit new U.S. 
     investment in Burma and ban senior officials in the regime 
     from obtaining visas to enter the United States.
       Although it is far from clear that the junta intends to 
     permit a revival of democracy, there is little doubt that it 
     has engaged in talks with Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San 
     Suu Kyi--who is held under virtual house arrest in Rangoon--
     in large part because of the unremitting pressure of 
     sanctions.
       As a result of sanctions, the officers in power cannot 
     disguise their bankrupting of what had been one of Asia's 
     most literate and resource-rich countries. Even the junta's 
     principal sponsor for membership in the Association of 
     Southeast Asian Nations, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad of 
     Malaysia, has counseled Burma's ruling officers to ease the 
     embarrassment of their fellow ASEAN members by opening a 
     dialogue with Suu Kyi.
       In a letter last month to Bush, 35 senators including 
     Edward Kennedy and John Kerry made a strong case for 
     maintaining sanctions, noting that ``the sanctions have been 
     partially responsible for prompting the regime to engage in 
     political dialogue with Aung San Suu Kyi and her 
     supporters.'' The letter also said there is ``strong evidence 
     directly linking members of the regime to'' the trafficking 
     of ``the heroin which plagues our communities.''
       Bush should insist that the junta take measurable steps 
     toward the retrieval of democracy in Burma, and not merely 
     for altruistic reasons. Next to the regime in North Korea, 
     the Burmese junta has been Beijing's chummiest ally, 
     permitting China to project its burgeoning power into the Bay 
     of Bengal, to the dismay of India.
       Were a democratic government to replace the junta, 
     neighboring Thailand, which is now suffering from an influx 
     of drugs from Burma, would join India and the rest of the 
     region in breathing a sigh of relief.
                                  ____


               [From the Washington Post, Nov. 26, 2000]

                        A Rebuke to Forced Labor

       Not in 81 years had the International Labor Organization 
     imposed such sanctions; but Burma is a special case. The ILO, 
     a United Nations arm in which unions, businesses and 
     governments participate, found that the Asian nation also 
     known as Myanmar has so flagrantly violated international 
     norms that sanctions had to be imposed. In particular, its 
     ruling generals were found guilty of encouraging forced and 
     slave labor in ``a culture of fear.''
       Burma is a special case in part because its dictators 
     cannot even pretend to reflect the will of their people. In 
     1990, they permitted a national election. A pro-democracy 
     party headed by Aung San Suu Kyi, daughter of Burma's hero of 
     independence, won four out of five parliamentary seats. But 
     parliament never met; the generals refused to accept the 
     results. Aung San Suu Kyi, who won the Nobel peace prize in 
     1991, is under house arrest; most of her party colleagues are 
     in prison. The generals grow more corrupt while Burma grows 
     ever poorer.
       The ILO sanctions approved last week are, as AFL-CIO 
     president John Sweeney said, ``only a starting point.'' 
     Nations are ``urged to halt any aid, trade or relationship 
     that helps Burmese leaders remain in power,'' he said. The 
     United States already has imposed restrictions on investment, 
     but that hasn't stopped companies such as Unocal from 
     mounting major efforts in the country. Nor has it prevented 
     trade, much of which enriches only the generals.
       Companies that do business in Burma now more than ever will 
     have to explain themselves. So will nations that sought to 
     water down the ILO action, including fellow autocracies like 
     Malaysia and China and, more surprisingly, democracies like 
     India and Japan. Those nations, though, found themselves very 
     much in the minority, just as Burma finds itself more 
     isolated than ever.
                                  ____


                [From the New York Times, Nov. 19, 2000]

                          The Ruin of Myanmar

       The Southeast Asian nation of Myanmar is a case study in 
     repression and misgovernment. For 12 years a secretive 
     military junta has ground down the liberties and living 
     standards of 50 million people. By banning most contact with 
     the outside world and buying off the leadership of restive 
     ethnic minorities, the junta has deflected serious challenges 
     to its rule, despite the dismal failure of its economic 
     policies and spreading social ills.
       The military has ruled Myanmar since 1962, when it was 
     known as Burma. After the violent suppression of democracy 
     movement in 1988, an even more ruthless set of generals took 
     charge. They permitted elections in 1990, then ignored the 
     results when democratic forces led by Daw Aung Sang Suu Kyi 
     won an overwhelming victory. She has spent 6 of the past 11 
     years under house arrest. Other leaders of her party have 
     been relentlessly persecuted, university students have been 
     relocated from the cities, and unions and civic associations 
     have been prohibited. The junta has banned computer modems, 
     e-mail and the Internet and made it a crime for people to 
     invite foreigners into their homes.
       The Times's Blaine Harden recently reported that Myanmar, 
     which a half-century ago had one of Asia's best health care 
     systems and highest literacy rates, is now near the bottom in 
     these and many other measures of development as government 
     spending has been diverted from schools and health care to 
     the military. Most people now live on less than a dollar a 
     day. Drug smuggling and AIDS have grown explosively and 
     threaten to spill over to neighboring countries like China 
     and Thailand.
       The United States has led international efforts to isolate 
     Myanmar through economic sanctions, including a ban on new 
     investment. But other Asian countries have been reluctant to 
     apply pressure. China, in particular, has helped sustain the 
     junta through

[[Page S5458]]

     military aid. But an increasing number of countries are 
     losing patience. Last week the 175-member International Labor 
     Organization took the unusual step of condemning the junta's 
     use of forced labor and invited member countries to impose 
     sanctions. A good start would be restricting trade and 
     investment in areas of the economy that profit from forced 
     labor. Washington too should consider additional steps like 
     encouraging disinvestment by American companies. Myanmar's 
     people deserve international support in their struggle 
     against a destructive tyranny.
                                 ______