Voices Against Corporate Complicity in Burma
Putting an end to Canadian corporate complicity with human rights abuses in Burma is one of
CFOB's primary goals. There are many ways to take action on this issue
as evidenced by the variety of Burma pro-democracy campaigns. To help you
in your motivation and campaigns, we have listed comments from key
players in the Burma pro-democracy movement.
Now is Not the Time for Business
Over the past decade, Burma's pro-democracy movement, led by Nobel Laureate, Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi, has been asking for the international community to stop all foreign investment and trade
with their country. This radical demand, which harkens back to the South African anti-apartheid
movement, comes from the legitimate leaders of Burma and the people themselves. The Burmese
military regime, following its bloody massacre of August 1988, held national elections in May
1990 in attempts to improve its international image and secure further foreign investment and
trade. At this time, the regime was facing the repercussions of international condemnation for its
1988 crackdown - in the face of mass non-violent demonstrations calling
for multi-party democracy, the junta gunned at least 3,000 (with estimates as high as 10,000)
unarmed demonstrators in cold blood - to which many Western nations responded by suspending all aid to Burma.
Despite insurmountable obstacles to the NLD's election campaigning, including their leader, Daw Suu
being placed under house arrest in 1989, the National League for Democracy (NLD) won
82% of the parliamentary seats. But military regime continues to hold onto power illegally through force of arms
and continues to prevent the NLD from taking their rightful place in office. While the military
keeps on soliciting foreign business ties, the NLD maintains that because of the military's tight
grip over Burma's economy, foreign companies can't help propping up this regime.
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi:
"I would like to make it clear that the people of Burma are not suffering as a result of
sanctions. The real profits do not go to the people of Burma. It's all concentrated in the hands
of investors who are not Burmese, or privileged people."
"My message is very simple. We are not against investment, but we want investment to be at the
right time, when the benefits will go to the people of Burma, not just to a small, select elite
connected to the government. We do not think investing in Burma at this time really helps the
people of Burma. It provides the military regime with a psychological boost."
"If companies from Western democracies are prepared to invest under these circumstances, then
it gives the military regime reason to think that, after all, they can continue with violating human
rights because even Western business companies don't mind. It sends all sorts of wrong signals to
the present government. We think there is great potential in Burma for economic development,
but at the right time and under the right circumstances. I do not think investing now is going to
be profitable either to investors or to the people of Burma."
for full text
The South African Influence - Bishop Desmond Tutu:
"Five years of constructive engagement have only given SLORC the confidence to
maintain its repressive rule. International pressure can change the situation in Burma. Tough
sanctions, not constructive engagement, finally brought the release of Nelson mandela and the
dawn of a new era in my country. This is the language that must be spoken with tyrants - for
sadly, it is the only language they understand".
John Ralston Saul
"...SLORC is not a body that is open to any form of negotiation in good faith, or even to self-interested compromise. We've been at it (constructive engagement) formally now since 1990,
and nothing has happened...it is impossible to engage a group of rogue
soldiers who are not the government of Burma...they don't govern, except by force of arms. They don't have the title of
government by any standards. Not by the Western ethical standards, [or by] Asian standards"
(speech by John Ralston Saul, 1996).
for full text
Nobel Laureate for Economics in 1998, Amartya Sen 1999:
``I think foreign investment in Burma is a bad thing because I think it bolsters the regime and because the regime doesn't have anything like the positive record China has. China has had a lot
of success and Burma has always had very little success.''
``So China is a much more difficult case than South Africa was earlier or Burma is right now.''
Sen said China was one of the most successful cases of development in the world, although it's
lack of democracy was ``a great defect that they have to cure.''
for full text
| 
