BURMA: GOB "REJECTS" HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 RANGOON 000273

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EAP/BCLTV; PACOM FOR FPA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/13/2015
TAGS: PHUM PGOV PREL ELAB ECON BM
SUBJECT: BURMA: GOB "REJECTS" HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT

REF: A. RANGOON 246


B. RANGOON 224

C. RANGOON 185

Classified By: COM Carmen Martinez for Reasons 1.4 (b,d)


1. (C) Summary: Calling our human rights report "nothing
more than a catalogue of unsubstantiated allegations," the
GOB says the United States "does not have the moral
authority" to pass judgment on Burma and failed to take into
account "major progress and positive developments" such as
new infrastructure and an 8.5 percent average economic growth
rate (note: zero percent last year, according to the IMF).
We've told the GOB that we would welcome a regular dialogue
on human rights, but new abuses in 2005 clearly indicate the
regime's record is not improving. The GOB's rebuttal to the
report is a standard response to foreign criticism: question
the integrity of the messenger; steer clear of irrefutable
abuses; emphasize efforts to achieve "national unity" and
build new bridges and highways; and toss in an inflated
figure or two. End Summary.


2. (U) On March 3, MFA Director General U Thaung Tun
requested a meeting with COM to deliver a verbal response to
our recently released human rights report on Burma. Americas
Division Director Tun Ohn joined the MFA DG and P/E chief
accompanied the COM. (Note: The MFA subsequently sent the
Embassy a press release with the GOB's written response to
the human rights report, which U Thaung Tun said would be
broadcast by official state television on March 3 and printed
in official state newspapers on March 4. We've faxed the
release to EAP/BCLTV. End Note.)


3. (U) U Thaung Tun said the GOB was "disappointed and
unhappy with a human rights report that is nothing more than
a catalogue of unsubstantiated allegations and that does not
take into account positive developments." The DG said the
report concludes that the Burmese economy is crumbling, but
does not address "major progress" in building new
infrastructure and new education and health facilities. The
DG said the GOB had "improved standards on our own, even
without international resources." He also said that the
United States "does not have the moral authority to address
human rights practices in Burma or elsewhere," adding that
the report would not help bilateral relations.


4. (U) The COM replied that the human rights report is a
well-researched document that accurately reports on a host of
abuses. The COM noted that we would welcome a regular
dialogue with the GOB on human rights issues, but pointed out
that further setbacks in 2005, after the period covered in
the report, indicate the GOB's record is not improving. Such
additional abuses, she said, include arrests of democracy
activists (ref B, C); secret trials of political party
leaders; the extension of NLD Vice Chairman U Tin Oo's house
arrest (ref B); and the failure of a top-level commitment on
forced labor (refs A).


5. (U) Addressing U Tin Oo's situation, the DG said simply,
"I don't know, and can neither confirm nor deny whether his
detention was extended." On forced labor, U Thaung Tun
claimed that the early departure in late February of an ILO
delegation (ref A) was a "misunderstanding," but offered that
"at least the ILO left the door open" for future dialogue.
The ILO team, he said, had insisted on meeting with the head
of state (SPDC Chairman Than Shwe),but "in fact, had the
opportunity to meet with Prime Minister (Sein Win),"who is
the head of government and, as a member of the SPDC, speaks
for the (regime)."


6. (U) The COM replied that the GOB has promoted the notion
that no important decisions can be made without the regime's
top two members, and therefore the ILO should have every
expectation that Than Shwe and/or Maung Aye must be
personally engaged in making a commitment on forced labor.
"If the ILO left the door open," the COM added, "then you
should step through it and adhere to international standards
on forced labor." The COM also noted that the GOB had not
allowed UN Special Envoy Razali to visit Burma since March
2004 and had prohibited UN Special Rapporteur for Human
Rights Pinheiro from returning since late 2003. "There can
be no viable UN process without them," she said, "and your
senior leaders should be discussing their imminent return."
U Thaung Tun replied that the issue was indeed under
discussion, but "the authorities have not yet made a
decision."


7. (C) Comment: The MFA's DG rebuttal to the report, and the
subsequent press release, represented a standard GOB response
to foreign criticism of its human rights practices and
policies: question the integrity of the messenger; steer
clear of irrefutable abuses; emphasize efforts to achieve
"national unity" and build new bridges and highways; and toss
in an inflated figure or two (the press release claimed an
average economic growth rate of "8.5 percent annually for the
past three years;" however, the IMF estimates zero percent
growth in 2003-2004). The only unusual aspect this year was
the request today for a meeting with the COM to complain
directly about the human rights report; the GOB usually shuns
such direct dialogue and relies on propaganda issued through
its official media, as it has done over the past several
years in response to a variety of regular U.S. reports on
Burma. End Comment.
Martinez