[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 74 (Thursday, May 26, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3449-S3451]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. McCONNELL (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein Mr. McCain, and Mr. 
        Durbin):
  S.J. Res. 17. A joint resolution approving the renewal of import 
restrictions contained in the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 
2003; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, today, I rise along with my colleagues, 
Senators Feinstein, McCain and Durbin, to introduce renewal of 
sanctions against the military junta in Burma.
  The casual observer could be excused for thinking that things have 
changed for the better in Burma over the past year. After all, 
elections were held last fall, a ``new'' regime took office earlier 
this year, Aung San Suu Kyi was freed and the lead Burmese general Than 
Shwe seemed to retire from political life. However, in Burma as is so 
often the case, things are not what they seem. And that is certainly 
the case here.
  First, the elections that were held in November took place without 
the benefit of international election monitors. All reputable observers 
termed the elections not to be free or fair. This was in large part 
because the National League for Democracy, NLD, Suu Kyi's party and the 
overwhelming winner of the last free elections in the country in 1990, 
was effectively banned by the junta and could not participate in the 
election. There were restrictions placed on how other political parties 
could form and campaign. No criticism of the junta could be voiced. And 
the results were unsurprising: the regime's handpicked candidates won 
big and the democratic opposition was largely sidelined.
  Second, the new regime is essentially the junta with only the 
thinnest democratic veneer pulled over it. The Constitution, which 
places great power in the military as it is, cannot be amended without 
the blessing of the armed forces. Those in parliament are limited in 
how they can criticize the regime. Moreover, sitting atop these new 
institutions is rumored to be a shadowy panel known as the State 
Supreme Council, which is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, and 
which is led by, you guessed it, the military.
  The only legitimately good news of late was the freeing of Suu Kyi. I 
was fortunate enough to be able to speak with her for the first time 
earlier this year. Yet, the extent of her freedom remains open to 
question. She was, of course, freed only following the sham election. 
She and her party have also been publicly threatened by the regime; 
thus, the extent to which she can move about the country or travel 
overseas remains unclear. Further, more than 2,000 other political 
prisoners remain behind bars in Burma; they are no better off than 
before. Neither are the hundreds of thousands of refugees and displaced 
persons who are without a home due to the repressive policies of the 
junta.
  Finally, it is worth noting that there are growing national security 
factors that cause one to be even more reluctant than ever to remove 
sanctions and reward bad behavior. The junta's increasingly close 
bilateral military relationship with North Korea is a source of much 
concern in this vein.
  For all of these reasons, I believe the sanctions that are in place 
should remain until true democratic reform has been instituted. That is 
the position of Suu Kyi herself and of the NLD. It is also the position 
of the Obama administration. In a State Department letter dated April 
27, the State Department states that ``in the absence of meaningful 
reforms, the U.S. government should maintain its sanctions on Burma.'' 
As Suu Kyi herself recently stated, ``[s]o far'' there hasn't been 
``any meaningful change'' since the November elections.
  We should not be fooled by the transparent efforts of the regime. It 
is merely trying to get out from under the international cloud of 
sanctions, without making true changes in how it governs itself, treats 
its people and interacts with the rest of the world.
  It is my hope that my colleagues will once again renew this 
bipartisan measure that in 2010 enjoyed the support of 68 Senate 
cosponsors and was adopted 99-1. The bill is identical to last year's 
in that it does the following: continues the ban on imports from Burma 
into the U.S., including products containing rubies and jadeite; 
authorizes the freezing of assets against a number of Burmese leaders; 
prevents the U.S. from supporting loans for Burma in international 
financial institutions; prohibits the issuance of visas to junta 
officials; and limits the use of correspondent accounts that may 
facilitate services for the regime's leaders. These measures would 
remain in place until the regime undertakes meaningful steps toward 
democratization and reconciliation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the joint 
resolution and a letter of support be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                              S.J. Res. 17

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     approves the renewal of the import restrictions contained in 
     section 3(a)(1) and section 3A(b)(1) and (c)(1) of the 
     Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.

[[Page S3450]]

     
                                  ____
                                     U.S. Department of State,

                                   Washington, DC, April 22, 2011.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator McConnell: Thank you for your letter of March 
     29 regarding sanctions and the nomination of a Special 
     Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma.
       On April 14, President Obama nominated Derek Mitchell as 
     the Special Representative and Policy Coordinator for Burma. 
     Currently serving as the Defense Department's Principal 
     Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense for Asian and Pacific 
     Security Affairs, Derek Mitchell has both the regional 
     expertise and diplomatic acumen to successfully enhance our 
     coordination of Burma policy. We will be submitting his 
     nomination shortly for your advice and consent.
       As you note, Burma's elections were neither free nor fair 
     and the regime continues its repressive policies and human 
     rights abuses. We agree with you and the National League for 
     Democracy's conclusions that, in the absence of meaningful 
     reforms, the U.S. government should maintain its sanctions on 
     Burma. We look forward to soon having Mr. Mitchell as the 
     Special Representative in place to coordinate multilateral 
     sanctions as called for by Section 7 of the Tom Lantos Block 
     JADE (Junta's Anti-Democratic Efforts) Act.
       We hope this information is helpful. Please do not hesitate 
     to contact us if we can be of further assistance on this or 
     any other matter.
           Sincerely,

                                           Joseph E. Macmanus,

                                       Acting Assistant Secretary,
                                              Legislative Affairs.

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise again today with my friend and 
colleague from Kentucky, Senator McConnell, to submit the joint 
resolution to renew the import ban on Burma for another year.
  We are proud to be joined in this effort by two champions for 
democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in Burma, Senators McCain 
and Durbin, and we look forward to swift action by the Congress and the 
President on this important matter.
  Congressman Joseph Crowley and Congressman Peter King are introducing 
this resolution in the House and I appreciate their leadership and 
support.
  Since we last debated the import ban on the Senate floor, we have 
received one bit of good news, but also, sadly, more confirmation on 
the urgent need to keep the pressure on the ruling military regime.
  On November 13, 2010, Nobel Peace Prize laureate and leader of the 
democratic opposition, Aung San Suu Kyi, was released from house 
arrest.
  While her latest detention lasted more than 7\1/2\ years, she had 
spent the better part of the past 20 years in prison or under house 
arrest.
  Her release was wonderful news for those of us who have been inspired 
by her courage, her dedication to peace and her tireless efforts for 
freedom and democracy for the people of Burma.
  Yet our joy was tempered by the fact that her release came just days 
after fraudulent and illegitimate elections for a new parliament based 
on a sham constitution.
  The regime's intent was clear: keep the voice of the true leader of 
Burma silent long enough until they could solidify their grip on power 
using the false veneer of a democratic process.
  Neither I, the people of Burma, nor the international community were 
fooled.
  We all know that the last truly free parliamentary elections were 
overwhelmingly won by Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy in 
1990 but annulled by the military junta.
  This new constitution was drafted in secret and without the input of 
the democratic opposition led by Suu Kyi and her National League for 
Democracy.
  It set aside 25 percent of the seats in the new 440 seat House of 
Representatives for the military.
  This would be in addition to the seats won by the ``Union Solidarity 
and Development Party'' founded by the military junta's Prime Minister 
Thein Sein and 22 of his fellow cabinet members who resigned from the 
army to form the ``civilian'' political party.
  It barred Suu Kyi from running in the parliamentary elections.
  And it forced the National League for Democracy to shut its doors 
because it would not kick Suu Kyi out of the party.
  It should come as no surprise that the military backed party won 
nearly 80 percent of the seats in the new parliament.
  In addition to preventing Suu Kyi and the National League for 
Democracy from competing in the elections, the regime ensured that no 
international monitors would oversee the elections and journalists 
would be prohibited from covering the election from inside Burma.
  President Obama correctly stated that the elections ``were neither 
free nor fair, and failed to meet any of the internationally accepted 
standards associated with legitimate elections.''
  The National League for Democracy described the elections and the 
formation of a new government as reducing ``democratization in Burma to 
a parody.''
  Indeed, the new parliament elected Thein Sein, the last prime 
minister of the junta's State Peace and Development Council, as Burma's 
new president.
  He is reported to be heavily influenced by Burma's senior military 
leader and former head of state, General Than Shwe.
  So, the names change--the State Law and Order Restoration Council, 
the State Peace and Development Council, the Union Solidarity and 
Development Party--but the faces, and the lack of democracy, human 
rights, and the rule of law, remain the same.
  So, while we celebrate the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, we recognize 
that Burma is not yet free and the regime has failed to take the 
necessary actions which allow for the import ban to be lifted.
  As called for in the original Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act, we 
must stand by the people of Burma and keep the pressure on the military 
regime to end violations of internationally recognized human rights; 
release all political prisoners; allow freedom of speech and press; 
allow freedom of association; permit the peaceful exercise of religion; 
and bring to a conclusion an agreement between the military regime and 
the National League for Democracy and Burma's ethnic minorities on the 
restoration of a democratic government.
  Until the regime changes its behavior and embraces positive, 
democratic change, we have no choice but to press on with the import 
ban as a part of a strong sanctions regime.
  This also includes tough banking sanctions.
  I would like to take this opportunity to once again urge the 
administration to put additional pressure on the ruling military junta 
by exercising the authority for additional banking sanctions on its 
leaders and followers as mandated by section 5 of the Tom Lantos Block 
Burmese Junta's Anti-Democratic Efforts Act.
  Some of my colleagues may be concerned about the effectiveness of the 
import ban and other sanctions on Burma and the impact on the people of 
Burma.
  I understand their concerns. I am disappointed that we have not seen 
more progress towards freedom and democracy in Burma.
  But let us listen to the voice of the democratic opposition in Burma 
about the sanctions policy of the United States and the international 
community.
  A paper released by Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for 
Democracy argues that these sanctions are not targeted at the general 
population and are not to blame for the economic ills of the country.
  Rather, the economy suffers due to mismanagement, cronyism, 
corruption and the lack of the rule of law.
  The best way for the Burmese government to get the sanctions lifted, 
the paper argues, is to make progress on democracy, human rights, and 
the rule of law.
  It concludes:

       Now more than ever there is an urgent need to call for an 
     all inclusive political process. The participation of a broad 
     spectrum of political forces is essential to the achievement 
     of national reconciliation in Burma. Progress in the 
     democratization process, firmly grounded in national 
     reconciliation, and the release of political prisoners should 
     be central to any consideration of changes in sanctions 
     policies.

  I agree.
  So, let us once again do our part and stand in solidarity with Aung 
San Suu Kyi and the people of Burma.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.

[[Page S3451]]



                          ____________________