[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 12]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 17345]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




       FOURTEENTH ANNIVERSARY OF BLOODY END OF DEMOCRACY IN BURMA

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. TOM LANTOS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 18, 2002

  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to invite my colleagues to 
commemorate a very sad day in Burma. Today, September 18th, marks the 
14-year anniversary of the Burmese military regime's bloody takeover of 
Burma, after gunning down an estimated 10,000 non-violent demonstrators 
throughout the country. Since that awful day, the Burmese people, led 
by the courageous 1991 Nobel Peace Prize recipient Daw Aung San Suu 
Kyi, have against great odds never given up their hope, their belief, 
and their struggle for the kind of freedom we have enjoyed in this 
country. This struggle was enshrined into political reality when Daw 
Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy won a democratic 
election in 1990 with 82% of the seats in parliament--a landslide 
election the regime has never recognized.
  Today, I commend the 50 million people of Burma on their struggle, 
and call on them to never give up their passionate belief that freedom 
and democracy should not be reserved for a small number of western 
nations, but extended to all men and women. Freedom and democracy are 
your rights. You struggle on the side of truth, and sooner or later, 
truth always triumphs over darkness.
  Recently, our hopes for change in Burma were raised. In May of this 
year, just as my colleagues and I in the U.S. Congress were strongly 
considering to greatly expand international pressure on the regime, Daw 
Aung San Suu Kyi was released from 19 months of house arrest. At the 
time, we hoped that her release signaled the start of a tripartite 
political dialogue in Burma that would include the regime, ethnic 
nationalities, and the National League for Democracy. My distinguished 
colleague and chair of the House International Relations Committee, 
Henry Hyde, and I stated, ``It is our hope that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's 
release represents the dawn of a new era in Burmese history. However, 
first the junta must demonstrate through concrete actions a serious and 
consistent commitment to national reconciliation.''
  However, we were proven right to be cautious. The junta has yet to 
show a serious commitment to these discussions, which still must yield 
tangible reforms and changes toward democracy. It would be a tragedy if 
the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi ended up mere window dressing for 
an ongoing litany of abuse. The regime has stonewalled the NLD in its 
efforts to commence a political dialogue and refused to release all 
political prisoners while factual reports of an intensified campaign of 
systematic rapes, massacres, and arrests have increased. The regime 
terrorizes its own population with particular brutality in the 
country's ethnic areas, where its soldiers continue to facilitate the 
drug trade.
  I am especially frustrated by the regime's refusal to extradite Khun 
Sa and other drug lords and end its complicity in production of the 
methamphetamines and heroin that are destroying the lives of people 
around the world. Those who have watched this regime's untrustworthy 
leaders over years know that we must rely on actions rather than words. 
The regime has not complied with our efforts to stop the global flow of 
drugs. As long as this narco-regime stays in power, it can expect to 
receive no assistance from the United States.
  Fourteen years is far too long for freedom, and we absolutely must 
lend our vocal public support to the Burmese people's struggle for 
freedom. It is time the United States and the international community 
see through the regime's smoke and mirrors and again move to increase 
concrete political and economic pressure.

                          ____________________