Wednesday, September 9, 2009

An 'Election' Burma's People Don't Need(U Win Tin's article on the Washingtion Post)


By U Win Tin
Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Much attention has been focused on Sen. James Webb's recent visit to my country and his meetings with Senior Gen. Than Shwe and incarcerated Nobel Peace Prize recipient Aung San Suu Kyi. I understand Webb's desire to seek a meaningful dialogue with the Burmese ruling authorities. Unfortunately, his efforts have been damaging to our democracy movement and focus on the wrong issue -- the potential for an "election" that Webb wants us to consider participating in next year as part of a long-term political strategy. But the showcase election planned by the military regime makes a mockery of the freedom sought by our people and would make military dictatorship permanent.

In our last free election, the Burmese people rejected military rule in a landslide, awarding our National League for Democracy party more than 80 percent of the seats in parliament. Yet the military has refused to allow the NLD to form a government. In the 19 years since that election, Burmese democracy activists have faced imprisonment, intimidation, torture and death as they have peacefully voiced demands for justice, individual and ethnic rights, and a democratic form of government that is representative of all Burma's people.

While never ending our struggle for democracy, the NLD has continually sought to engage the regime and open a dialogue -- based on peace and mutual respect -- that could address Burma's critical political as well as social problems. Make no mistake -- these two issues are linked. Burma was once the rice bowl of Asia. Today, because of the regime's destructive economic policies and its use of oppression to maintain military rule, Burma is a shattered, poverty-stricken country.

The regime is seeking to place a veneer of legitimacy on itself through showcase "elections" and claiming that "disciplined democracy" will be instituted next year. Yet in May 2008, just days after a massive cyclone devastated Burma and killed more than 100,000 people, the regime used a farcical process to claim that 93 percent of voters chose to adopt a constitution that permanently enshrines military rule and prevents those with undefined "foreign ties" from holding public office -- catch-all provisions that would bar Suu Kyi and democracy activists from seeking office.

Some international observers view next year's planned elections as an opportunity. But under the circumstances imposed by the military's constitution, the election will be a sham. We will not sacrifice the democratic principles for which many millions of Burmese have marched, been arrested, been tortured and died to participate in a process that holds no hope whatsoever for bringing freedom to our country.

The demands of the NLD are reasonable. In April we issued another declaration to encourage engagement with the military that called for the release of all political prisoners, a full review of the constitution, reopening of all NLD offices and the right to freely organize. The regime's answer is the continued jailing of Suu Kyi and 2,000 other activists, massive military offensives against ethnic groups and the enforcement of rules to gag democracy.

How can the international community play a meaningful role? First, officials such as Webb should stop fear-mongering about China. His language about containing China, and working with Burma's regime to do so, is based on an outdated and unrealistic thesis. Suu Kyi rejected such notions by informing Webb that "we will not deal with anyone with fear and insecurity. We will deal with anyone, China, America, India, equally and friendly. As we can't choose our neighbors, we understand that we need to have a good relationship with China." Second, the NLD encourages other countries and international organizations to engage with Burma's military leaders to persuade them to engage with us and Burma's ethnic groups. The United States and many other nations have imposed sanctions on Burma. That is their decision and in keeping with their justified solidarity with the democratic values that we all hold so dear. If the regime genuinely engages with the NLD and ethnic representatives, releases political prisoners, ceases attacks against ethnic minorities and takes additional steps to build a true democratic state, these sanctions will be repealed at the right time.

In the meantime, let no one doubt our resolve. The NLD is a reflection of Burmese society. We will not be cowed or coerced into participating in a fatally flawed political process that robs the Burmese people of the freedom for which we struggle. We stand ready to engage, but we are more than willing to continue our struggle for the democratic values that so many have given their lives and their freedom to achieve.

U Win Tin is a member of the Central Executive Committee and a founder of Burma's National League for Democracy party. He was a political prisoner from 1989 to 2008.

Letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the Current Burma Policy Review


အေမရိကန္ႏုိင္ငံရဲ႕ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံဆုိင္ရာ ေပၚလစီ အျမန္ထုတ္ျပန္ဖုိ႔ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးအဖဲြ႔ ေတာင္းဆုိ
10 September 2009(VOA)
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံဆုိင္ရာ အေမရိကန္ရဲ႕ မူ၀ါဒ ျပန္လည္သံုးသပ္ေနတာနဲ႔ပတ္သက္ၿပီး နယူးေယာက္ အေျခစိုက္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ေလ့လာေရးအဖြဲ႔ (HRW) က အေမရိကန္ႏုိင္ငံျခားေရး၀န္ႀကီး ဟီလာရီ ကလင္တန္ဆီကို စက္တင္ဘာ ၉ ရက္ေန႔ ေန႔စြဲနဲ႔ စာတစ္ေစာင္ ေရးသားေပးပို႔ၿပီး အခုလိုသာ ျပန္လည္သံုးသပ္ေနတဲ့ကိစၥဟာ ေႏွာင့္ေႏွးေနရင္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးဆိုင္ရာ အေမရိကန္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုရဲ႕ ကတိက၀တ္ေတြဟာ အားေပ်ာ့ေနၿပီလို႔ ျမန္မာစစ္ေခါင္းေဆာင္ေတြ အထင္ေရာက္ေအာင္ တြန္းပို႔ေနသလို ျဖစ္လိမ့္မယ္လို႔ အဲဒီစာထဲမွာ ေရးသားေဖာ္ျပထားပါတယ္။
ဒါ့အျပင္ ပစ္မွတ္ထားပိတ္ဆို႔တာ မဟုတ္ဘဲ အက်ယ္အျပန္႔ အေထြေထြ အေရးယူ ပိတ္ဆို႔ဒဏ္ခတ္အေရးယူတာက မထိေရာက္ဘူးလို႔လည္း HRW အဖြဲ႔က ဆိုပါတယ္။ စစ္အစိုးရရဲ႕ အဓိကေခါင္းေဆာင္ေတြနဲ႔ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ခ်ိဳးေဖာက္သူေတြကို ေရြးခ်ယ္ပစ္မွတ္ထားၿပီး အေရးယူပိတ္ဆို႔တာနဲ႔ အေထြေထြအေရးယူ ပိတ္ဆို႔တာကို လဲလွယ္အစားထိုးသင့္တယ္လို႔ HRW အဖြဲ႔က ေျပာပါတယ္။
တခ်ိန္တည္းမွာပဲ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံကို လူသားခ်င္းစာနာေထာက္ထားတဲ့ အကူအညီေတြ အႀကီးအက်ယ္ ေပးဖို႔ကိုလည္း HRW အဖြဲ႔က ထပ္မံေတာင္းဆိုထားပါတယ္။


Letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the Current Burma Policy Review
September 9, 2009

Related Materials: Burma: US Should Complete Policy Review

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

US Department of State

2201 C Street NW

Washington, DC 20520



Re: Burma Policy Review

Dear Secretary Clinton:

We write to you again about the human rights and political situation in Burma and the current US policy review. We believe it is important for the US government to conclude the policy review you announced in February so that American policy and strategy towards Burma will be clear to all concerned. We also believe that as intractable as the situation in Burma may seem, the United States does have options that could have a positive impact on the human rights and political situation in Burma.

As you know, Burma remains one of the most repressive countries in the world. There are strict limits on basic freedoms of expression, association, and assembly. The intelligence and security services are omnipresent. Censorship is draconian. More than 2,100 political prisoners suffer in Burma's squalid prisons. These prisoners include many members of the political opposition, courageous protestors who peacefully took to the streets in August and September 2007, and individuals who criticized the government for its poor response to Cyclone Nargis in May 2008. All have been sentenced after sham trials, summary hearings that often take place in the prisons themselves. The recent conviction of Aung San Suu Kyi on ridiculous charges reminded the world of the despotic nature of the military government that has been in power since 1962.

At the same time, military abuses connected to armed conflicts in ethnic minority areas continue. Human Rights Watch has for many years documented the recruitment and deployment of child soldiers, the use of forced labor, and summary killings, rape, and other abuses against minority populations, including the Rohingya, Chin, Shan, and Karen. Recent attacks against Shan and Karen communities have once again led to large-scale displacement of ethnic communities and needless death and hardship. Fighting between the Burmese army and ethnic militias has also driven thousands of refugees from northern Shan state into China.

In addition to rampant violations of civil and political rights, corruption and mismanagement have meant that under military rule Burma has become one of the poorest countries in Asia. The government seems to care little for the basic welfare of its people; to give but one example, while the Burmese government received an estimated US$150 million per month in gas export revenue in 2008, its last announced annual budget to address its AIDS crisis in 2007 was a mere $172,000. While most Burmese struggle to subsist, the country's leaders have the comfort of "5 star" lives of luxury generated through corruption from the plunder of the country's natural resources.

There is no mystery in the military's long-term intentions, as the ruling junta, the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), has been totally open about its plans to stage-manage an electoral process that will ensure continued military rule with a civilian face. Burma's generals have learned from their resounding defeat by Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy in 1990 and periodic protest movements that it cannot risk staging a credible election (indeed, last year the government announced a 98 percent turnout and a 92 percent vote in favor of a new constitution, just months after the 2007 street protests that rocked the country). They doubtlessly hope that this will mollify the United States, European governments, and other countries that oppose military rule, end the pressure from ASEAN states to make progress on political reform and national reconciliation, and encourage large-scale international aid flows.

Based on the experience of the 2008 referendum, the harsh prison sentences handed down to activists, the lack of serious dialogue with the political opposition and Burma's many ethnic groups, the stonewalling of United Nations and ASEAN efforts to discuss political and human rights issues, the lack of any reform measures, and the trial of Aung San Suu Kyi on ridiculous charges, it is clear that there will be no meaningful change in the political direction of the country before or after the 2010 elections unless concerned governments and international bodies take steps to change the SPDC's calculations.

We recognize the scale of this challenge. The military government has close relations with its neighbors China, India, and Thailand, and has large revenue streams from these countries from the sale of gas, timber, gems, and other natural resources. China, Russia, and even South Africa have protected the government from action at the United Nations Security Council. In short, while much of the world sees Burma's rulers as isolated, ruthless, and despised, from the SPDC's perspective it has influential friends in the region that provide massive resources through the purchase of energy and other commodities, and shield Burma from concerted action at the UN, ASEAN, and other international fora on subjects like effective arms embargoes or targeted sanctions.

We largely agree with your statement that "the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn't influenced the Burmese junta," but that "reaching out and trying to engage them hasn't influenced them either." We suggest that the policy review should, therefore, aim at making more effective all three prongs of US policy - diplomacy, sanctions and humanitarian aid - and not placing one ahead of the others.

Diplomacy

On diplomacy, as a starting point there should be no wishful thinking or illusions that more conciliatory talk from the US and others will somehow cause Burma's senior leadership to alter its plans. It is committed to remaining in complete control, whether through managed elections or the current system. Yet, as in other countries with which the Obama administration is now talking or attempting to open better lines of communication, Human Rights Watch supports US government efforts to speak to the Burmese government at the highest levels. While it is far from clear that the Burmese leadership has any interest in meaningful discussions with the US or any other critical actors, such a policy would remove the perception that the US and others are not willing to engage or be reasonable. Should the leadership be willing to have serious talks, there is nothing to be lost from talking so long as the US stands by its principles to uphold the basic human rights of the Burmese people.

But a couple of cautions: first, it is important that more intensive diplomacy does not lead into the trap of making improved relations the primary goal of US policy. The protection of the rights of Burmese and a genuine and credible political reform process needs to be the primary goal for US policy.

Second, the US should keep in mind that the Burmese officials who normally speak to foreigners - whether the foreign minister or the functionaries involved in the post-Nargis reconstruction - have no real authority in the government and are probably as scared of Than Shwe and other senior leaders as anyone else. Many foreign diplomats and others who have invested a great deal of time and energy in pursuing relations with the second tier of leadership have told us that it was time largely wasted. Those who do have the authority - Senior General Than Shwe, Vice-Senior General Maung Aye, Lt. General Thura Shwe Mann, Prime Minister Thein Sein, and key regional commanders - usually don't engage with outsiders. Talking to the deputy health minister and mid-level civil servants can be useful in facilitating humanitarian relief and resolving discrete practical problems on the ground. But it is not a way of addressing the fundamental issues in the country or causes of friction between Burma and the US.

On key political matters, the engagement that has taken place thus far has not been very meaningful and in some cases has even been counterproductive. During the crackdown following the 2007 demonstrations, for instance, diplomatic action merely allowed the SPDC to buy time and pretend that it was engaged in serious discussions. For example, the efforts of the UN Secretary-General's special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari, have failed to achieve anything of substance. The situation has devolved to the point that at times getting a visa or a short meeting with Aung San Suu Kyi was treated as a success, with the unintended but predictable consequence of being used by the SPDC for its own propaganda. Ban's most recent visit also failed to achieve anything of substance; he was not even allowed to meet Aung San Suu Kyi and was given empty promises to release political prisoners.

Human Rights Watch recommends that the United States appoint its own special envoy, as called for in the Block Burmese JADE Act of 2008. That envoy should have a direct line to the Secretary of State and specific instructions to engage in a principled way with the SPDC and other key bilateral and multilateral actors. Vigorous diplomacy is needed with China, India, Thailand, Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia and other influential actors to ensure that new revenue streams are not made available to the government.

We also encourage you to consider the establishment of a Burma Contact Group or some form of multilateral grouping to meet and regularly discuss diplomatic engagement with the Burmese government on a range of issues. This could have the effect of converging the views and policies of China, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Japan, the EU and UN, and gradually minimize the ability of the SPDC to play states off against each other. There is considerable common ground on a range of issues, including the need for political reform and credible elections involving the political opposition, concern over Burma's trafficking in heroin and methamphetamines, and the need for a regional approach to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Such a grouping would, of course, have to be predicated on the US sticking to its principles and not engaging in diplomatic horse-trading on core issues of reform.

As the United Nations has long been the focal point for diplomacy on Burma, we urge the US to support the continuation of a special envoy of the secretary-general. It is crucial that the secretary-general and the special envoy not get sucked into the game of access or high-level meetings being the goal or a sign of progress. The envoy must be an individual with the principles, skills, and backing of the international community to make an impact.



Sanctions

There is now a strong and even emotional debate on sanctions against Burma. Some argue that sanctions have not had any discernible impact on the military government and should be lifted. Others argue that for political and technical reasons they have never been properly implemented and, therefore, more pressure should be applied by imposing sanctions on additional companies and individuals, and also by encouraging countries and institutions that have not imposed sanctions to do so.

Part of the problem is that this debate tends to treat all sanctions as the same, when in fact they should be differentiated. In our work in various countries around the globe, we have found that properly imposed targeted sanctions can be effective in bringing about improvements in human rights. Targeted sanctions include arms embargoes and restrictions on military assistance, travel bans on individuals, financial sanctions on individuals and entities, and investment and trade sanctions that are specifically focused on companies or economic sectors of greatest concern.

Perhaps the most effective of these are financial sanctions, which we urge the United States to expand, strengthen, and fully implement. The United States has authorities it is not yet using - for example, to deny foreign banks access to the US financial system if they are holding targeted Burmese accounts or otherwise undermining US measures, and going after transactions by the oil and gas authority, the key revenue-generating entity in Burma. This requires the dedication of intelligence resources and continual monitoring and adjustment by US officials - another reason why it's important to have a senior envoy in place.

Targeted sanctions don't impose hardship on ordinary people, but do provide leverage if effectively implemented. One approach to make targeted sanctions more effective is for the US to take the lead in coordinating efforts among the US, EU, Switzerland, Australia, and Canada to target key individuals, both military and civilian, who bear responsibility for abuses; their business interests; and the individuals and entities whose considerable financial support of the SPDC could undermine these sanctions. These individuals are at the apex of the system inside Burma and susceptible to this kind of pressure. More effective coordination could also lead to greater support from other key states such as Japan and Singapore. EU states have been noticeably slow to implement full financial sanctions; the US should first set a good example and then press European countries to follow suit. Slow implementation by the US and poor coordination internationally have undermined financial and other sanctions, and kept them from realizing their potential.

Human Rights Watch also believes the US should pursue openings for targeted military sanctions through the UN Security Council's agenda on children and armed conflict. The Security Council has stated in two resolutions (SC Res. 1539 and Res. 1612) that it will consider bans on the export and supply of small arms, light weapons, and other military equipment and assistance to parties that refuse to end their recruitment and use of child soldiers. The Burmese military retains thousands of children in its ranks and has been identified repeatedly since 2002 by the UN secretary-general for its continued recruitment and use of child soldiers. While the imposition of sanctions by the Security Council against Burma has proven nearly impossible, the children and armed conflict agenda provides a useful avenue for stronger Security Council action. A credible threat of military sanctions can be used as leverage to gain concrete improvements in ending the widespread recruitment and use of children as soldiers.

While we strongly support targeted measures, Human Rights Watch recognizes that generalized sanctions are less likely to be effective and may hurt large numbers of ordinary people, while not having significant impact on governments in targeted countries. In the case of Burma, the existing ban on garment imports has had no discernible impact on the SPDC. We think the US ban on all imports from Burma as it applies to garments should, at the right time, be suspended, lifted, or phased out -- so long as the exporting companies and their contractors meet international labor standards, these companies and associated individuals are not themselves targeted for sanctions because of their close ties to the generals, and the companies in question are not otherwise directly linked to the SPDC or armed forces.

However, in light of the sham trial of Aung San Suu Kyi and the lack of political reform, we do not think now is the right time to change these sanctions, as it would send the wrong signal to the SPDC, suggesting that the United States or others have lost their will or commitment to keep up the pressure for democratic reform. Further, it is critical that when the import sanctions as they apply to garments are suspended, lifted, or phased out that this take place only at the same time that new, more effective, targeted sanctions are imposed on key individuals and types of business activity that sustain the regime and existing related sanctions are strengthened.

Aid

On humanitarian aid, Human Rights Watch has long called for increased assistance to deal with acute humanitarian needs in Burma. US funding should increase. But, again, some cautions. First, the cause of Burma's humanitarian problems is not a lack of available resources. Burma has made gas deals with Thailand that provides the government its largest source of revenue, worth approximately $2 billion annually. A new deal to supply natural gas to China via an overland pipeline will significantly add to that sum. Burma's leaders also count on large earnings from sales of gems and timber, and ongoing hydroelectric projects are expected to generate additional lucrative export revenue.

Despite these large revenue sources, the military government spends next to nothing on the welfare of its people. The largest share of the state budget is allocated to the military, as much as 40 percent, while combined social spending is estimated to be a paltry 0.8 percent of GDP for 2008/09, making public expenditures on health and education in Burma among the lowest in the world. Huge numbers of Burmese live in grinding poverty, brought upon by decades of government economic mismanagement and corruption. For this reason, the suggestion that Western business investment in Burma would somehow open up the country is fallacious. Foreign investment in Burma is concentrated on the extraction of natural resources and building of hydropower projects. The resulting revenues are largely squandered, stolen, or used for military spending instead of to meet humanitarian and development needs, ,thereby resulting in the strengthening of those in power and robbing the Burmese people of their patrimony.

Donor discussions with the SPDC over the provision of humanitarian assistance should not neglect the government's ability to contribute substantially to such assistance. Donors should also remember that the purpose of humanitarian aid is humanitarian - to keep people alive and healthy - not political. No one should expect humanitarian aid itself to have a significant political effect in opening up the country or changing the government's policies. Donors will also need to stress the importance of transparency and accountability in the delivery of humanitarian aid, including the need for approaches that strengthen civil society rather than existing corrupt power structures and that respond to the views and needs of ordinary people.

The SPDC does not want to be totally dependent on China. For this reason, it also wants assistance from the US, EU, and Japan. Development aid is a very important incentive for change in Burma. However, we do not believe development aid from the US or other countries should be made available until there is significant political reform, progress on human rights, better governance, and the possibility of consulting civil society and local communities in setting development goals. Likewise, World Bank lending for development should also not be resumed until these conditions are met. Unfortunately, the SPDC gives priority to development projects that are "vanity projects" for its leaders, facilitate abusive military campaigns, and help generate funds to strengthen military rule, when what is needed is development that would alleviate the poverty and deprivation of ordinary citizens.

Helping the Burmese people is one of the most difficult and intractable problems the world has faced in recent decades. We don't underestimate the challenge, but we think a revitalized approach with strong US leadership can make a significant difference in the years ahead.

Sincerely,

Kenneth Roth
Executive Director


US Should Complete Policy Review


Principled Diplomacy, Aid, and Targeted Sanctions Can Spur Change



(New York) - The Obama administration should promptly conclude its Burma policy review and adopt initiatives to make its policies on diplomacy, sanctions and humanitarian aid more effective, Human Rights Watch said in a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton released today.

"Delays in announcing a new Burma policy could encourage Burmese military leaders to believe the US is weakening its commitment to human rights and pluralism," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "Although the situation in Burma seems intractable, an energetic and revitalized approach to Burma from the Obama administration could help bring positive change."

Human Rights Watch recommended that the United States appoint its own special envoy on Burma, who would have a direct line to the secretary of state and specific instructions to engage in a principled way with the Burmese government and key bilateral and multilateral actors. Vigorous diplomacy is specifically needed with China, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Japan.

Human Rights Watch also recommended the establishment of a Burma Contact Group or similar form of multilateral grouping to meet and regularly discuss diplomatic engagement with the Burmese government on a range of issues. This could have the effect of converging the views and policies of China, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Japan, the European Union, and the United Nations, and gradually minimize the ability of Burma to play states off against each other. There is considerable common ground on a range of issues, including the need for political reform and credible elections involving the political opposition, concern over Burma's trafficking in heroin and methamphetamines, and the need for a regional approach to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Such a grouping would demand that the US remain firm on fundamental human rights principles and not engage in diplomatic horse-trading on core issues of reform.

As the UN has long been the focal point for diplomacy on Burma, Human Rights Watch urged the US to support the continuation of a special envoy of the secretary-general. It is crucial that the secretary-general and the special envoy not accept access or high-level meetings as the goal or a sign of progress in Burma, as they have in the past. The envoy should be an individual with the principles, skills, and backing of the international community to make an impact.

"More high-level diplomacy is welcome, so long as the US stands by its principles to uphold the basic rights of the Burmese people and work for a genuine and credible process of political reform," said Adams. "But there should be no wishful thinking or illusions that more conciliatory talk from the US and others will somehow cause Burma's generals to alter their plans."

Human Rights Watch said that generalized sanctions on Burma that have had little or no impact and have not been targeted on key decision-makers and human rights abusers should be reconsidered and phased out at an appropriate time. At the same time, properly imposed, targeted sanctions - such as financial sanctions on individuals and entities, investment and trade sanctions that are specifically focused on companies or economic sectors of greatest concern, arms embargoes, restrictions on military assistance, and travel bans on individuals -should be tightened, as they can be effective in bringing about improvements in human rights.

Human Rights Watch particularly urged the United States to expand, strengthen, and fully implement financial sanctions. The US should take the lead in coordinating efforts among the US, EU, Switzerland, Australia, and Canada to target key individuals, both military and civilian, who bear responsibility for abuses; their business interests; and the individuals and entities whose considerable financial support of the Burmese government could undermine these sanctions. These individuals are at the apex of the system inside Burma and susceptible to this kind of pressure. More effective coordination could also lead to greater support from other key states, such as Japan and Singapore. EU states have been noticeably slow to implement full financial sanctions; the US should take the lead and then press European countries to follow suit. Slow implementation by the US and poor coordination internationally have undermined financial and other sanctions, and kept them from realizing their potential.

"The US has legal tools it is not yet using - for example, to deny foreign banks access to the US financial system if they are holding targeted Burmese accounts or otherwise undermining US measures, and going after transactions by the oil and gas authority, the key revenue-generating entity in Burma," said Adams. "This requires the dedication of intelligence resources and continual monitoring and adjustment by US officials."

Human Rights Watch has long called for increased assistance to deal with acute humanitarian needs in Burma. US and other donor funding should increase, but in a coordinated and realistic manner. The military government spends next to nothing on the welfare of its people. Combined social spending is estimated to be a paltry 0.8 percent of GDP for 2008-2009, making public expenditures on health and education in Burma among the lowest in the world. Huge numbers of Burmese live in grinding poverty, resulting from decades of government economic mismanagement and corruption. Donors will need to stress the importance of transparency and accountability in the delivery of humanitarian aid, including the need for approaches that strengthen civil society rather than existing corrupt power structures and that respond to the views and needs of ordinary people.

"The US and other donors offer to provide more humanitarian aid with appropriate oversight, but they should also insist that their contributions are matched by a genuine commitment from the military government to use its vast revenues from natural resources to help the Burmese people," said Adams.

TTC ၏ ေက်ာင္းေခၚခ်ိန္(ေနာက္ဆက္တြဲသတင္း)

တီတီစီ မွာေက်ာင္းအပ္ဖို႕က ေက်ာင္းဝင္ခြင့္ေလွ်ာက္လႊာနံပါတ္နဲ႕ လံုးဝမဆိုင္ပါဘူး။
ေက်ာင္းကိုဝင္ခြင့္ရဖို႕အတြက္ နည္းလမ္း ႏွစ္မ်ိဳးူရွိပါတယ္။
(၁) မည္သည့္အဆင့္ၿမင့္ပညာဦးစီးဌာန လက္ေအာက္မွာရွိတဲ့ဝန္ထမ္းရဲ႕ သားသမီးမဆို
ေက်ာင္းဝင္ခြင့္ရႏိုင္ပါတယ္။ တကၠသိုလ္မ်ိဳးစံုမွာ ဆရာဆရာမမ်ားရဲ႕ သားသမီးအရင္းအခ်ာမ်ားနဲ႕
ပညာေရးတကၠသိုလ္လက္ေအာက္ရွိေက်ာင္းဆရာဆရာမမ်ား၊ ဝန္ထမ္းမ်ားရဲ႕ သားသမီးမ်ားက
ေက်ာင္းတက္ခြင့္ေလွ်ာက္ထားႏိုင္ပါတယ္။ ၉ဝ ရာခိုင္ႏႈန္းနီးပါးက တက္ေရာက္ခြင့္ရၾကပါတယ္။
(၂) လူၾကီးလက္မွတ္ၿဖင့္ေက်ာင္းတက္ၿခင္း။
လူၾကီးလက္မွတ္ဆိုတာက ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္အဆင့္ၿမင့္အရာရွိၾကီးမ်ားရဲ႕လက္မွတ္ၿဖစ္ပ ါတယ္။
လက္မွတ္က ဘယ္ေလာက္ရာထူးၾကီးၾကီး ပံုစံမက်ရင္မေရြးပါဘူး။ ဒီႏွစ္(ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ေမာင္ေအး)
ရဲ႕လက္မွတ္ပါတာေတာင္မွ ပံုစံမမွန္လို႕ ေအခန္း(VIP) အခန္းကိုတက္ခြင့္မရလို႕ ၿပႆနာတက္ပါေသးတယ္။ ဒီႏွစ္ကစလို႕ အခန္းကိုလည္းမဲႏီႈက္ၿပီးေရြးခ်ယ္ပါတယ္။
ေအခန္းကလြဲလို႕ေပါ့ေလ။ အရင္ကေတာ့ အခန္းေကာင္းေကာင္းရဖို႕က ေလွ်ာက္လႊာနံပါတ္နဲ႕ အနည္းငယ္ဆိုင္ပါတယ္။
ပံုစံအမွန္ဆိုတာက ရာထူးေတာ္ေတာ္ၾကီးတဲ့ ပုဂိၢဳလ္တစ္ဦးက သူ႕ရဲ႕ေၿမး၊သို႕မဟုတ္ တူ၊တူမေတာ္စပ္ေၾကာင္း၊ ဒီအတြက္ ေက်ာင္းဝင္ခြင့္ၿပဳေစလုိေၾကာင္းဆိုတဲ့လက္မွတ္ပါ။
ပညာေရးတကၠသိုလ္အသိုင္းအဝိုင္း၊ အဆင့္ၿမင့္ပညာဦးစီးဌာနအသိုင္းအဝိုင္းက ရာထူးၾကီးၾကီးေတြလည္း အဲလိုထိုးေပးရင္ ရပါတယ္။ ပြဲစားနဲ႕ဘဲၿဖစ္ၿဖစ္ ကိုယ္ပိုင္လမ္းေၾကာင္းရွိလို႕ဘဲ လက္မွတ္ေကာင္းေကာင္းတစ္ခုရဖို႕ အင္မတန္အေရးၾကီးပါတယ္။အၿပင္မွာပိုက္ဆံေတြအရမ္းကုန္တယ္ေၿပာေနၾကတာ ပြဲစားေတြက ၾကားခံလုပ္စားေနတာပါ။
လက္မွွတ္ထိုးေပးတဲ့ လူၾကီးေတြေတာင္ တစ္ဝက္မရပါဘူး။


အၿပင္မွာ ပိုက္ဆံေတြနင္းကန္ေတာင္းေနၾကေပမယ့္ ေက်ာင္းရဲ႕တရားဝင္ ဝင္ေငြကေတာ့ သုညပါ။ အလွႈေငြေတာင္းခံၿခင္းလံုးဝလက္မခံေတာ့ပါ။ အၿပင္ကေက်ာင္းေတြကေတာ့ လက္ခံေနၾကေပမယ့္ တီတီစီကေတာ့လက္ခံလို႕မရေသးပါ။ ႏွစ္စဥ္ဆယ္တန္းေတြကို ေရႊအစစ္ဆုခ်ေနတဲ့ အစဥ္အလာက သူငယ္တန္းေက်ာင္းဝင္ခြင့္က ရတဲ့ပိုက္ဆံပါ။ အခုေတာ့ ဝင္ေငြမရွီေတာ့လို႕ ႏွစ္စဥ္ စပြန္ဆာရွာေနရပါတယ္။ မႏွစ္ကေတာ့ စပြန္ဆာက တီတီစီေက်ာင္းသားေဟာင္း ဦးေတဇပါ။

ရန္ကုန္ေလဆိပ္မွာ ထိန္းသိမ္းခံခဲ့ရတဲ့ ကုိညီညီေအာင္ႏွင့္ ဆက္သြယ္ခြင့္ရဖုိ႔ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံးႀကိဳးပမ္း

Photobucket

ရန္ကုန္ေလဆိပ္မွာ ထိန္းသိမ္းခံခဲ့ရတဲ့ ကုိညီညီေအာင္ႏွင့္ ဆက္သြယ္ခြင့္ရဖုိ႔ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံးႀကိဳးပမ္း

10 September 2009(VOA)
၈၈ မ်ဳိးဆက္ေက်ာင္းသား ႏုိင္ငံေရးတက္ၾကြသူ အေမရိကန္ ႏုိင္ငံသားတဦးဟာ မၾကာေသးခင္က ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံကုိ အသြား အာဏာပုိင္ေတြရဲ႕ ဖမ္းဆီးခံခဲ့ရလုိ႔ အေမရိကန္သံ႐ုံး တာ၀န္ရွိသူေတြက ေတြ႔ဆုံခြင့္ရဖုိ႔ ေတာင္းခံထားပါတယ္။ ဖမ္းဆီးခ်ိန္ကစလုိ႔ သူ႔မိသားစုေတြကေတာ့ သူ႔အေျခအေနကုိ တိတိက်က် မသိႏုိင္ဘဲ ျဖစ္ေနရလုိ႔ စိုးရိမ္မကင္း ျဖစ္မႈေတြလည္း ထြက္ေပၚေနပါတယ္။ ဒီအေၾကာင္း သိထားသမွ် ကုိေအာင္လြင္ဦး က တင္ျပထားပါတယ္။

အေမရိကန္ႏုိင္ငံမွာ ေနထုိင္သူ ျမန္မာ့အေရး လႈပ္ရွားသူ တဦးျဖစ္တဲ့ ကုိညီညီေအာင္ ေခၚ ကုိေက်ာ္ေဇာလြင္ ဟာ ဒီလ ၃ ရက္ေန႔ကပဲ ထုိင္းႏုိင္ငံကတဆင့္ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံကုိအသြား ရန္ကုန္ မဂၤလာဒုံေလဆိပ္မွာပဲ ဖမ္းဆီးခံခဲ့ရတဲ့အေၾကာင္း မိသားစုနဲ႔ နီးစပ္သူေတြက ေျပာၾကတာပါ။ ဒီကိစၥနဲ႔ပတ္သက္လုိ႔ အခုအခါမွာ အေမရိကန္ႏုိင္ငံ ကလည္း သိရွိထားၿပီး ျဖစ္သလုိ ရန္ကုန္မွာရွိတဲ့ အေမရိကန္ သံ႐ုံးကလည္း ဆက္သြယ္ စုံစမ္းမႈေတြ လုပ္ေဆာင္ေနၿပီလုိ႔ ေျပာခြင့္ရပုဂၢိဳလ္ တဦးျဖစ္တဲ့ အီရန္ ကယ္လီ (Ian Kelley) က ဗုဒၶဟူးေန႔ သတင္းစာရွင္းလင္းပဲြအတြင္း သတင္းေထာက္ေတြကုိ ေျပာဆုိခဲ့တာပါ။

"ဒီသတင္းက်ေနာ္တုိ႔ ရရခ်င္းဆုိသလိုပါပဲ၊ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ အစုိးရဆီသြားၿပီး သတင္းအခ်က္အလက္ ရယူဖုိ႔ ေတာင္းခံခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမယ့္လည္း လူပုဂၢိဳလ္တဦးခ်င္းရဲ႔ အခြင့္အေရး အကာအကြယ္ေပးတဲ့ ဥပေဒအရ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ ဒါေတြနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လုိ႔ အေသးစိတ္ေတာ့ ထုတ္ေျပာခြင့္မရွိပါဘူး။ ေကာင္စစ္၀င္႐ုံး တာ၀န္ရွိသူေတြက ေတြ႔ဆုံခြင့္ေတြ ရဖုိ႔လည္း က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ ေတာင္းခံထားပါတယ္။"

အေမရိကန္ ႏုိင္ငံသားအျဖစ္ ခံယူထားသူ ကုိညီညီေအာင္ ရဲ႔ မိသားစု၀င္ေတြကေတာ့ ဖမ္းဆီးခံရတဲ့ သတင္း ၾကားသိခ်င္းဆုိသလုိ ဆက္သြယ္စုံစမ္းမႈေတြ လုပ္ေဆာင္ခဲ့ေပမယ့္ အခုအခ်ိန္အထိ အေျခအေနကုိ ေရေရရာရာ မသိရလုိ႔ စုိးရိမ္မကင္း ျဖစ္ေနရတာပါ။ အေမရိကန္ႏုိင္ငံမွာရွိတဲ့ မိသားစုမိတ္ေဆြတဦးျဖစ္တဲ့ ကုိေဇာ္ေဇာ္ ကေတာ့ သူ႔ကုိ ဖမ္းသြားခ်ိန္ကစလုိ႔ အက်ဳိးအေၾကာင္း မသိရတဲ့ အေျခအေနမုိ႔ စိတ္ပူေနၾကတာလုိ႔ ေျပာပါတယ္။

"က်ေနာ္တို႔သိတာကေတာ့ ဘန္ေကာက္မွာရွိတဲ့ သူ႔အစ္ကိုကေနတဆင့္ က်ေနာ္တို႔ သိတာေပါ့ေလ။ သူ ရန္ကုန္ ေလဆိပ္ေရာက္ေတာ့ သူ႔ကို ဖမ္းသြားတယ္ဆိုတဲ့ သေဘာမ်ိဳး သိလိုက္ရတယ္ေပါ့ေနာ္။ ဒါေပမယ့္ အေသးစိတ္ ဘယ္လိုပံုစံမ်ိဳးနဲ႔ ဖမ္းသြားတယ္ဆိုတာေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔ အေသးစိတ္ မသိရေသးဘူး။ အခုေလာေလာဆယ္က သူ ဘယ္မွာ ေရာက္ေနမွန္းမသိေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔အားလံုး သူငယ္ခ်င္းေတြ အကုန္လံုးက စိတ္ပူတယ္။ ဘယ္ေရာက္လို႔ေရာက္မွန္းမသိ၊ ဘာမွလည္း သတင္းမၾကားတဲ့အခါၾကေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ အားလံုးကေတာ့ အဓိက သူ႔ရဲ႕ လံုၿခံဳေရးကို စိတ္ပူတယ္ေပါ့။ ဘာမ်ားျဖစ္လဲေပါ့။ တခုခု ေခၚသြားၿပီး ေပ်ာက္သြားတာမ်ိဳး အရင္တုန္းကလည္း ရွိခဲ့တာမ်ိဳးရွိေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔က အေတာ္ေလး စိုးရိမ္ပါတယ္။"

အခု အာဏာပုိင္ေတြ ဖမ္းဆီးတာ ခံလုိက္ရတယ္ဆုိတဲ့ ကုိညီညီေအာင္ ဟာ ၁၉၈၈ ခုႏွစ္ ဒီမုိကေရစီေရး ေတာင္းဆုိ အုံၾကြမႈေတြမွာ ပါ၀င္ခဲ့တဲ့ တက္ၾကြလႈပ္ရွားသူ တဦးျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ဒီလုိပဲ သူ႔ရဲ႔ မိခင္ျဖစ္သူ အသက္ ၆၀ အရြယ္ရွိ ေဒၚစန္းစန္းတင္ ဟာ ဆုိရင္လည္း ၂၀၀၇ ခုႏွစ္ စက္တင္ဘာ သံဃာေတာ္ေတြရဲ႔ ဦးေဆာင္လႈပ္ရွားမႈေတြနဲ႔ ဆက္ႏြယ္ၿပီး ဖမ္းဆီးခံထားရတာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ကုိညီညီေအာင္ ရဲ႔ ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံ ခရီးစဥ္ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္ဟာ ဘာလဲဆုိတာ အခုအခ်ိန္မွာ သဲသဲကြဲကဲြ မသိရေသးေပမယ့္ မိသားစုနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လုိ႔ စုိးရိမ္မကင္းျဖစ္မႈေတြနဲ႔ ဆုိင္လိမ့္မယ္လုိ႔လည္း မိတ္ေဆြျဖစ္တဲ့ ကုိေဇာ္ေဇာ္ က ေျပာပါတယ္။

"ညီညီ ရဲ႕ အေမ အန္တီ စန္း က ေထာင္ထဲမွာေပါ့ေလ။ ၿပီးခဲ့တဲ့ ေရႊ၀ါေရာင္ သံဃာေတာ္ေတြရဲ႕ လႈပ္ရွားမႈနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီးေတာ့ ညီညီရဲ႕ အေမကို ဖမ္းသြားတယ္။ ညီညီရဲ႕ ၀မ္းကြဲ ညီမႏွစ္ေယာက္ကိုပါ ဖမ္းသြားတာေပါ့။ ညီညီရဲ႕ အေမကလည္း ေထာင္ထဲမွာ အေျခအေန က်န္းမာေရး ေတာ္ေတာ္ေလး ဆိုးတယ္။ က်န္းမာေရး သိပ္မေကာင္းဘူး ဆိုတဲ့အခါက်ေတာ့ ညီညီ အေနနဲ႔ စိတ္ပူပင္မယ္လို႔ က်ေနာ္တို႔ ထင္တယ္။ ဒါကေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔ ျဖစ္ႏုိင္ေခ်ရွိတဲ့ဟာကို ေျပာတာေပါ့ေလ။ သူ႔ရဲ႕ အဓိက သြားရတဲ့ ရည္ရြယ္ခ်က္ကေတာ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔လည္း ေသခ်ာအတိအက် မသိဘူး။ ဒါေပမယ့္ ျဖစ္ႏုိင္ေခ်ရွိတာကေတာ့ သူ႔အေမအတြက္ စိတ္ပူတယ္။ သူ႔ေမာင္ႏွမသားခ်င္းေတြ အတြက္ စိတ္ပူၿပီးေတာ့ သူ႔အေနနဲ႔ တခုခု လုပ္ႏုိင္လိမ့္မယ္လို႔ ယူဆၿပီးေတာ့သြားတယ္လို႔ က်ေနာ္ ထင္တယ္ေပါ့ေလ။"

အာဏာပုိင္ေတြ ဖမ္းဆီးတာခံေနရတဲ့ ကုိညီညီေအာင္ ေခၚ ကုိေက်ာ္ေဇာလြင္ ရဲ႔ မိသားစု မိတ္ေဆြ တဦးျဖစ္သူ ကုိေဇာ္ေဇာ္ ပါ။ ဒီလုိ သူဖမ္းဆီးခံေနရတဲ့ ကိစၥနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လုိ႔ ဆက္လက္ၿပီး လုိက္လံကူညီ ေဆာင္ရြက္ႏုိင္ဖုိ႔ အတြက္ကုိေတာ့ မိသားစုနဲ႔ မိတ္ေဆြေတြက သူေနထုိင္ရာ မဲဆႏၵနယ္ေျမမွာရွိတဲ့ လႊတ္ေတာ္ တာ၀န္ရွိေတြထံ အေၾကာင္းၾကား အကူအညီ ေတာင္းခံထားတယ္လုိ႔လည္း သူက ေျပာပါတယ္။
Any other questions please send e-mail to Ma Wa (wawamaw@gmail. com). We have to stand for our brotherhood ---real and pure 88's blood.
keeps on eyes for him. However, we have to support and doing something for him urgently.
Any updated news--we send to you again.--please spread to other...
When I send this postcard campaign for him everyone could use on web/mail/news letter. (by Ma Wa)

ကမၻာေအးဘုရားလမ္းက ေကာ္ဖီဆိုင္ ဖ်က္သိမ္းရသိမ္းရေသာ ဇစ္ျမစ္






ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးႀကီး သန္းေရႊ၏ေျမး ဖိုးလျပည့္က ရန္ကုန္ၿမိဳ႕ေတာ္၊ ဗဟန္းၿမိဳ႕နယ္ရွိ ေကာ္ဖီဆိုင္ တဆိုင္ကို မွန္မ်ားရိုက္ခြဲ ဖ်က္ဆီးရန္ သူ၏ လံုၿခံဳေရး တာ၀န္ယူသူ ဗိုလ္မွဴးအား ေစခုိင္းခဲ့ၿပီးေနာက္ အဆုိပါေကာ္ဖီဆိုင္မွာ ယခု ပိတ္သိမ္းလိုက္ရသည္။

ဆုိင္သည္ ဗဟန္းၿမိဳ႕နယ္၊ ကမၻာေအး ဘုရားလမ္း၊ ခ်င္းေခ်ာင္းနန္းေတာ္ ေရွ႕ရွိ ယဥ္ေက်းမႈ ၀န္ႀကီးဌာနပိုင္ ေျမတြင္ မၾကာမီ လပိုင္းကမွ ငွားရမ္း ဖြင့္လွစ္ထားသည့္ Seven Corners ေကာ္ဖီဆိုင္ ျဖစ္သည္။ စားသုံးသူမ်ား ႀကိဳးမ့ဲ အင္တာနက္ အသုံးျပဳႏုိင္သည့္ ေကာ္ဖီဆုိင္လည္း ျဖစ္သည္ဟု ဆုိသည္။

ၿပီးခဲ့သည့္ သီတင္းပတ္ ၃ ပတ္ခန္႔က ဖုိးလျပည့္က ဆုိင္ရွိ ပစၥည္းႏွင့္ မွန္မ်ားကို ရိုက္ခြဲရန္ ေစခိုင္းခဲ့ျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္ ဟု သိရွိရသည္။

ထိုသို႔ရိုက္ခြဲစဥ္ “ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ အတြင္းေရးမွဴး တာ၀န္ ယူထားတဲ့သူေတြရဲ႕ သားသမီးေတြက ဒီလို ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ပိုင္ ေျမေပၚမွာ စီးပြားေရး လုပ္စားရသလား” ဟုပါ ေျပာဆုိရန္ ေျမးျဖစ္သူက ညႊန္ၾကားခဲ့သည္ဟု အရာရွိေဟာင္း တဦးက ေျပာၾကားသည္။

ထိုသို႔ ရိုက္ခြဲ ဖ်က္ဆီးခုိင္းသည့္ ကိစၥမျဖစ္မီ ရက္ပိုင္းအလိုတြင္ အဆိုပါ ဆိုင္သုိ႔ ဖုိးလျပည့္ ေရာက္ခ့ဲၿပီး က်ပ္ ၅ေထာင္တန္ ေကာ္ဖီ ေသာက္လိုေၾကာင္း မွာၾကားခ့ဲသည္ဟု ဆုိသည္။

၀န္ထမ္းမ်ားက ဆုိင္တြင္ ၃ေထာင္ေက်ာ္တန္ ေကာ္ဖီသာ ရိွေၾကာင္း ရွင္းျပခ့ဲၿပီး ထုိ ေစ်းအႀကီးဆုံး ေကာ္ဖီကုိသာ ေရာင္းခ်ေပးခဲ့သည္ဟု ဆုိသည္။ ဖုိးလျပည့္က က်ပ္ ၅ေထာင္ ေပးေခ်ၿပီး ထြက္ခြာသြားခဲ့သည္ဟု သိရသည္။ ထုိအျဖစ္အပ်က္ ေနာက္ပုိင္းတြင္ ဆုိင္ကုိ ဖ်က္ဆီးမိန္႔ ေပးခ့ဲျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္ဟု ဆုိသည္။

ဆိုင္ရွိမွန္မ်ား ရိုက္ခြဲခံရၿပီးေနာက္တြင္ ဆိုင္ပိတ္ထားသည္ကုိ ေတြ႔ရသည္။ ၿပီးခဲ့သည့္ သီတင္းပတ္ကုန္တြင္ ဆိုင္ အေဆာက္အဦးကိုပါ အျမန္ ဖ်က္သိမ္းလ်က္ရွိသည္ကို ေတြ႕ရသည္။

ဆုိင္ကုိ နအဖအဖြဲ႕ အတြင္းေရးမွဴး ၁ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီး သီဟသူရ တင္ေအာင္ျမင့္ဦး၏ သား၊ အမ်ိဳးသားစီမံကိန္း ႏွင့္ စီးပြားေရးဖြံ႕ၿဖိဳးတိုးတက္မႈ ၀န္ႀကီးဌာန ၀န္ႀကီး ဦးစိုးသာ၏သား တုိ႔ အပါအ၀င္ ၅ဦး အစုစပ္ ဖြင့္လွစ္ၾကျခင္းျဖစ္သည္ဟု သိရသည္။

အျခား သီးျခား အတည္မျပဳႏိုင္သည့္ သတင္း တရပ္ အရ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးႀကီး ေျမးျဖစ္သူႏွင့္ ဆက္ႏြယ္သည့္ ကုမၸဏီက ကုန္ပစၥည္း တင္သြင္းခြင့္ ပါမစ္ ေလွ်ာက္ထားရာတြင္ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီး သီဟသူရတင္ေအာင္ျမင့္ဦးက ပယ္ခ်သည့္အတြက္ ယခုလို လုပ္ေဆာင္ရန္ ေစ့ေဆာ္ခဲ့ျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္ဟု ဆိုသည္။

ယခု အျဖစ္အပ်က္သည္ မၾကာေသးမီ ႏွစ္မ်ားက ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေဟာင္း ေန၀င္း၏ နာမည္ေက်ာ္ ေျမးျဖစ္သူ ေက်ာ္ေန၀င္းနွင့္ အေပါင္းအပါမ်ား ရန္ကုန္ၿမိဳ႕ရွိ ကလပ္မ်ားတြင္ ရမ္းကားခဲ့သည့္ အျဖစ္အပ်က္မ်ားကို ျပန္လည္ သတိရေစၿပီး၊ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးႀကီး ေျမးျဖစ္သူက အဆိုပါ ေက်ာ္ေန၀င္းတို႔၏ ေနရာကို ၀င္ယူသည့္ သေဘာ ျဖစ္ေနသည္ဟု ရန္ကုန္ၿမိဳ႕မွ သတင္းေထာက္ တဦးက ေ၀ဖန္ ေျပာဆိုသည္။

နအဖ ေခါင္းေဆာင္ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးႀကီး၏ သားသမီးမ်ား ပိုင္ဆိုင္သည့္ စီးပြားေရး လုပ္ငန္းမ်ား ရန္ကုန္ၿမိဳ႕တြင္ပင္ မ်ားစြာ ရွိေနသည္။ အလားတူပင္ ဒုတိယတန္း ေခါင္းေဆာင္မ်ား ျဖစ္သည့္ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးမ်ား၊ ဒုတိယဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးမ်ား၏ သားသမီးမ်ားလည္း နယ္ပယ္အသီးသီးတြင္ စီးပြားေရး လုပ္ကိုင္လ်က္ ရွိၾကသည္ကို စီးပြားေရးနယ္ပယ္မွ လုပ္ငန္းရွင္မ်ားက သိရွိၾကသည္။

J Donuts ေကာ္ဖီဆိုင္ဆိုလွ်င္ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးႀကီး၏ မယားပါသား ဦးထြန္းႏိုင္ေရႊ ပိုင္ဆုိင္ၿပီး၊ ရန္ကုန္ၿမိဳ႕ စူပါမားကက္ နယ္ပယ္တြင္ အေအာင္ျမင္ဆံုး ျဖစ္သည့္ စီးတီးမတ္ အုပ္စုမွာလည္း ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးႀကီး၏ သားသမီးမ်ားက ရွယ္ယာ အမ်ားစုကို ပိုင္ဆိုင္သည္ဟု အမည္မေဖၚလိုသည့္ အေကာက္ခြန္ ၀န္ထမ္းေဟာင္း တဦးက ေျပာဆိုသည္။

အဆိုပါ ၀န္ထမ္းက အျခားစီးပြားေရး လုပ္ငန္းရွင္မ်ား အေနျဖင့္ ျပည္ပမွ ဇိမ္ခံပစၥည္း၊ အစားအေသာက္မ်ား တင္သြင္းရန္ ခက္ခဲခ်ိန္တြင္ စီးတီးမတ္အတြက္ ကုန္ပစၥည္းမ်ားကို စစ္တပ္ အမည္ခံထားသည့္ ကုန္ေသတၱာမ်ားျဖင့္ တင္သြင္းခဲ့ၿပီး မည္သည့္ အေကာက္ခြန္၊ ေထာက္လွမ္းေရးမွ ဖြင့္ၾကည့္ စစ္ေဆးရန္ မ၀ံ့ရဲၾကဟု ဆိုသည္။

မိုးမခ

ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးၾကီးသန္းေရႊေျမးရဲ႕၊ စီးပြားေရးေလာဘ။

ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးၾကီးသန္းေရႊနဲ႔ ေဒၚမၾကိဳင္တို႔ရဲ႕ေျမးျဖစ္သူ၊ ဖိုးလျပည့္(ခ)ေနေရႊေသြးေအာင္ဟာ၊ အဖိုး၊ အဖြား ေတြရဲ႕စီးပြားေရးပိတ္ဆို႔မွဳ၊ (ယာယီ) ဒါဏ္ခတ္ခံထားရေၾကာင္း၊ ဖိုးလျပည့္နဲ႔နီးစပ္တဲ့၊ သူငယ္ခ်င္းမ်ားထံမွ၊ ၾကားသိရပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့ဖိုးလျပည့္ဟာ၊ အဖိုးအဖြားေတြမသိေအာင္၊ ဝန္ၾကီးဌာနေတြကို၊ ဝင္ထြက္သြားလာ ေလ့ရွိျပီး၊ ပံုမွန္ဝင္ေငြ (၎တို႔႔အဆို၊ မုန္႔ဘိုး) ရွာေဖြရာမွာ၊ အထူးကြ်မ္းက်င္သူျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း၊ ဆက္လက္ ေျပာၾကားၾကပါတယ္။


အင္းယားလမ္း (ဘြဲ႔ႏွင္းသဘင္ ခန္းမေဆာင္ အေနာက္ဖက္)ရွိ၊ ပညာေရးဝန္ၾကီးဌာနပိုင္ ေျမႏွင့္ အေဆာက္ အဦးကို၊ ျပင္ဆင္မြန္းမံျပီး၊ ဖိုးလျပည့္ကိုယ္ပိုင္ Night Club ဖြင့္ရန္၊ လွ်ိဳ႕ဝွက္စီစဥ္ျပင္ဆင္ေနစဥ္၊ အင္တာ နက္မွာ၊ သတင္းေပါက္ၾကားမွဳျဖစ္ခဲ့ရာမွ၊ အဖိုးအဖြားေတြသိရွိသြားျပီး၊ တားျမစ္ခံခဲ့ရပါတယ္။

ဒါကို ေဒါသထြက္ေနတဲ့၊ ဖိုးလျပည့္က၊ တျခားသူေတြရဲ႕ စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ငန္းမ်ားကို၊ လိုက္လံစံုစမ္းျပီး၊ မပိတ္ ပိတ္ေအာင္ နည္းမ်ိဳးစံုသံုး ေဆာင္ရြက္ေနေၾကာင္း၊ ယခုရက္ပိုင္းအတြင္း၊ ဆိုင္ဖ်က္သိမ္းခံလိုက္ရတဲ့၊ စစ္ဗိုလ္ ခ်ဳပ္တဦးရဲ႕သားတဦးမွ၊ ဖြင့္ဟဝန္ခံခဲ့ပါတယ္။

ရန္ကုန္ျမိဳ႕၊ ကမၻာေအးဘုရားလမ္း (အႏုပညာဦးစီးဌာနပိုင္ေျမေနရာ)ေပၚမွာ၊ ေငြေၾကး အေျမာက္အျမား၊ အကုန္အက်ခံ တည္ေဆာက္ထားတဲ့၊ ေခတ္မွီ စားေသာက္ဆိုင္တဆိုင္ကို၊ အထက္အမိန္႔အရ၊ ခ်က္ျခင္းဖ်က္ သိမ္းလိုက္ရပါတယ္။ “7 Lekker” အမည္နဲ႔၊ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ၾကီးတခ်ိဳ႕နဲ႔ ဝန္ၾကီးတခ်ိဳ႕ (စုစုေပါင္း ခုႏွစ္ဦး) တို႔ရဲ႕သားသမီးမ်ား စုေပါင္း ဖြင့္လွစ္ထားျပီး၊ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ၾကီး သီဟသူရ တင္ေအာင္ျမင့္ဦးရဲ႕သားမွ ဦးစီး လုပ္ကိုင္ေဆာင္ ရြက္ေနတာပါ။ ျပင္ပ စီးပြားေရး လုပ္ငန္းရွင္တခ်ိဳ႕လည္း၊ ရွယ္ယာ ပါဝင္ထားေၾကာင္း၊ သိရွိရပါတယ္။



အဆိုပါဆိုင္မွာ၊ လာေရာက္စားေသာက္ၾကသူ အမ်ားစုကေတာ့၊ စစ္အာဏာရွင္ အသိုင္းအဝိုင္းနဲ႔၊ သူတို႔နဲ႔နီး စပ္တဲ့၊ စီးပြားေရး အသိုင္းအဝိုင္းမွ ျဖစ္ၾကပါတယ္။ ဆိုင္ေရွ႕မွာရပ္ထားတဲ့၊ ေခတ္ေပၚ အေကာင္းစားကား ၾကီးေတြဟာ၊ အားလံုးနီးပါးမွန္ေတြကို၊ အမဲေရာင္ Sticker မ်ားကပ္ထားၾကပါတယ္။ (ႏိုင္ငံျခားရုပ္ရွင္ ေတြထဲကလို၊ မာဖီးယား လူဆိုးဂိုဏ္းဝင္ေတြရဲ႕ ကားေတြနဲ႔တူတယ္လို႔၊ ေျပာၾကပါတယ္။) ထိုင္းႏိုင္ငံမွ စားဖိုမွဴးၾကီးမ်ားကို၊ ငွားရမ္း အသံုးျပဳထားတာေၾကာင့္၊ ေစ်းၾကီးေပး စားေသာက္ရတာျဖစ္လို႔၊ သာမာန္ျပည္သူေတြ အနားမကပ္နိုင္ပါဘူး။ ျပည္သူေတြဆင္းရဲေတာ့၊ သံဃာေတာ္ေတြေတာင္ ဒုကၡေတြ႔ေနၾကရပါတယ္။



သားသမီးေတြရဲ႕စီးပြားေရးကို၊ အခုလိုထိခိုက္ေစတဲ့၊ အျဖစ္အပ်က္ေတြေၾကာင့္၊ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ၾကီးသီဟသူရ တင္ေအာင္ျမင့္ဦးနဲ႔၊ စစ္ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္တခ်ိဳ႕ မေၾကမနပ္ျဖစ္ေနၾကပါတယ္။ တပ္ခ်ဳပ္ၾကီးအေနနဲ႔၊ ဖိုးလျပည့္အလိုၾက၊ တဖက္သတ္ ဆံုးျဖတ္ေဆာင္ရြက္ေနမွဳအေပၚ၊ မေၾကနပ္ၾကတဲ့၊ အဆိုပါ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္တခ်ိဳ႕က၊ တိုးတိုး တိတ္တိတ္ ေဝဖန္လွ်က္ရွိေၾကာင္း၊ ေနျပည္ေတာ္ စစ္တပ္အသိုင္းအဝိုင္းမွ ၾကားသိရပါတယ္။

သူရဲေကာင္း

Posted by ကိုထိုက္

အယူခံကို မိုးအဆံုး ေျမအဆံုး လုိက္ၾကစို႔




ႏုိင္ငံေရးအမႈလုိက္ ေရွ႕ေနၾကီး
ဗုဒၶဟူးေန႔၊ စက္တင္ဘာလ 09 ရက္ 2009 ခုႏွစ္ 17 နာရီ 19 မိနစ္

အယူခံဝင္တယ္လုိ႔ ေျပာလုိက္တာနဲ႔ ႏိုင္ငံေရးနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္တဲ့ မိတ္ေဆြ အေပါင္းအသင္းေတြက ဒါဟာ ရန္သူ႔ဆီမွာ အညံ့ခံတာပဲလုိ႔ ထင္ျမင္တတ္ၾကပါတယ္။

ဘာေၾကာင့္ ဒီလုိအယူအဆေတြ ေပၚေပါက္လာခဲ့ရသလဲဆုိရင္ ႏိုင္ငံေရးျပစ္မႈနဲ႔ ဖမ္းဆီး ထားခံခဲ့ရသူေတြကုိ စစ္ေၾကာေရးမွာ လနဲ႔ခ်ီၿပီး (တခ်ဳိ႕ ႏွစ္နဲ႔ ခ်ီပါတယ္၊) စစ္ေဆးေမးျမန္းတာ ခံခဲ့ၾကရပါတယ္။

အဲဒီလုိႏွိပ္စက္ညႇဥ္းပမ္းၿပီး ရရွိလာတဲ့ စစ္ေၾကာေရးထြက္ခ်က္ တခုတည္းနဲ႔ စစ္ခုံ႐ံုး၊ အထူးခုံ႐ံုးဆုိၿပီး အက်ဥ္းေထာင္အတြင္းမွာ စစ္ေဆးခ်င္ေယာင္ေဆာင္တဲ့ တရား႐ံုးေတြမွာသာ တရားစီရင္တာ ၾကံဳခဲ့ရတာေၾကာင့္ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။

အဲဒီလုိ စစ္ေၾကာေရးမွာ နည္းမ်ဳိးစုံနဲ႔ ႐ုိက္ႏွက္ညႇဥ္းပန္းႏွိပ္စက္ၿပီး၊ စစ္ေမးထားခ်က္ေတြကုိ စြဲကိုင္ကာ စစ္ယူနီေဖာင္းဝတ္ထားတဲ့ တရားသူၾကီးဆုိသူေတြေရွ႕မွာ ဝန္ခံခုိင္းခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ဘယ္သူမွ အဲဒီတရားသူၾကီးေတြေရွ႕မွာ ဝန္မခံၾကပါဘူး။ ဒီေတာ့မွ အမႈစစ္အရာရွိဆုိသူေတြက ေခ်ာ့ျမႇဴကာ၊ ဝန္ခံလုိက္ရင္ ေလွ်ာ့ေပးမယ္ဆုိၿပီး ျမႇဴဆြယ္စြဲေဆာင္ခဲ့ၾကပါတယ္။ စစ္ေၾကာေရးမွာတုန္းက ရက္ရက္စက္စက္ လုပ္ခဲ့သူေတြဟာ အခုတရား႐ံုးေရွ႕မွာမွ သေဘာေကာင္းျပေနတာကုိက မ႐ုိးသားမွန္း သိသာေနတဲ့အတြက္ ဘယ္သူမွ ဝန္မခံၾကပါဘူး။

ဒါေၾကာင့္ ဘာမွစစ္ေဆးေမးျမန္းမေနဘဲ အမိန္႔ခ်ခ်င္သလုိ ခ်လုိက္ၿပီး၊ ေနာက္တေန႔မွ ေထာင္ဝန္ထမ္းေတြတဆင့္ အယူခံဝင္မလားလုိ႔ လာေမးခုိင္းတာမ်ဳိးေတြနဲ႔သာ ၾကံဳဆုံဖူးခဲ့ရတာ မ်ားပါတယ္။

တရား႐ံုးေရွ႕မွာ အမႈေတာင္ အစအဆုံး တခါမွမစစ္ခဲ့ဘဲနဲ႔ အယူခံဝင္မလားလုိ႔ လာၿပီး သေဘာေကာင္းျပေနတာဟာ အညံ့ခံခုိင္းတာ သက္သက္ျဖစ္တယ္လုိ႔ အားလုံးက ယုံၾကည္ေနခဲ့ၾကပါတယ္။

ပုိဆုိးတာက လြတ္လပ္တဲ့ေရွ႕ေန ငွားရမ္းခုခံခြင့္လည္းမရေတာ့ မူလအမႈမွာ ဥပေဒနဲ႔မညီ ျပဳမူထားတာေတြကုိ ေထာက္ျပခုခံမႈ မျပဳႏိုင္ခဲ့တာေၾကာင့္ အယူခံဝင္ေနလည္း ႏိုင္ဖုိ႔ရာ အေၾကာင္းမရွိႏိုင္ဘူးေပါ့။

တကယ္ေတာ့ စစ္ေၾကာေရးေတြမွာ ၿခိမ္းေျခာက္တာ၊ ႏိွပ္စက္ညႇဥ္းပန္းတာ၊ ျဖားေယာင္းတာေတြေၾကာင့္ ထြက္ဆုိခဲ့ရတာေတြဟာ တရား႐ံုးမွာ သက္ေသခံမျဖစ္ပါဘူး။ အဲဒီထြက္ခ်က္ေတြေပၚ အေျခခံၿပီး ျပစ္ဒဏ္ခ်မွတ္ခဲ့တာေတြဟာ ဥပေဒနဲ႔ လံုးဝမညီေၾကာင္းကို ခုခံေခ်ပခြင့္လည္း ဘယ္သူမွ မရခဲ့ၾကပါဘူး။

အမွန္တကယ္ကေတာ့ အယူခံမႈဆုိတာ ဒုတိယစစ္ေဆးစီရင္ျခင္း မဟုတ္ဘဲ၊ မူလအမႈကုိ ဆက္လက္ေဆာင္ရြက္ျခင္းသာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။

အယူခံဆုိတာ အဆင့္နိမ့္တရား႐ံုး တ႐ံုး႐ံုးက ခ်မွတ္ထားတဲ့ အမိန္႔တစုံတရာဟာ တရားဥပေဒနဲ႔ မညီတဲ့အေၾကာင္း အဆင့္ျမင့္တရား႐ံုးကုိ အေရးဆုိလႊာ တင္သြင္းျခင္းပဲ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ ေနာက္ဆုံးေပၚ မာရီယမ္အြန္လုိင္း အဘိဓာန္ျဖစ္တဲ့ Merriam-Webster Dictionary မွာေတာ့ (a legal proceeding by which a case is brought before a higher court for review of the decision of a lower court.) ေအာက္အဆင့္နိမ့္႐ံုးက ဆုံးျဖတ္ခ်က္ေတြကုိ အဆင့္ျမင့္႐ံုးေရွ႕မွာ ျပန္လည္ၾကားနာသုံးသပ္ေပးဖုိ႔ အမႈေခၚထားတဲ့ တရားစီရင္ေနတဲ့အဆင့္ကုိ အယူခံအမႈလုိ႔ အဓိပၸာယ္ဖြင့္ဆုိထားပါတယ္။

အယူခံမႈမွာ ဥပေဒျပႆနာ (Law issue) အျပင္၊ အေၾကာင္းျခင္းရာျပႆနာ (Fact issue) ေတြကုိပါ ေထာက္ျပၿပီး အယူခံအေၾကာင္းျပခ်က္ေတြကုိ ခုိင္မာေအာင္ သက္ေသျပရမွာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။

မူလ႐ံုးရဲ႕ ေကာက္ယူသုံးသပ္ခ်က္ေတြဟာ ဥပေဒအရ မွားယြင္းေနေၾကာင္းကုိ အကိုးအကားစုံလင္စြာနဲ႔ တင္ျပရမယ့္တာဝန္ဟာ အယူခံတရားလုိမွာ တာဝန္ရွိပါတယ္။

အယူခံအမူမွာ အယူခံတင္သြင္းသူက တရားလုိျဖစ္သြားၿပီး မူလ႐ံုးတရားလုိက အယူခံတရားခံ ျပန္ျဖစ္သြားပါတယ္။

အယူခံအခြင့္အေရးဟာ ႏုိင္ငံတုိင္းလုိလုိမွာေတာ့ ဖဲြ႔စည္းအုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ပုံ အေျခခံဥပေဒက ျပ႒ာန္းေပးထားတဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံသားတုိင္းရတဲ့ ေမြးရာပါအခြင့္အေရး ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။

ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံမွာလည္း လြတ္လပ္ေရးရၿပီးကတည္းက အေျခခံဥပေဒန႔ဲ အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ခဲ့လုိ႔ အယူခံအခြင့္အေရးဆိုတာ အေျခခံဥပေဒကေပးတဲ့ အခြင့္အေရး ျဖစ္ခဲ့ဖူးပါတယ္။ ၁၉၇၄ ခုႏွစ္ အေျခခံဥပေဒ ပုဒ္မ ၁ဝ၁ (ဆ) မွာ အမႈမ်ားမွာ ခုခံေခ်ပခြင့္နဲ႔ ဥပေဒအရ အယူခံခြင့္ေပးျခင္းဆုိတဲ့ တရားစီရင္ေရးမူ ၈ ခ်က္ထဲက တခ်က္အျဖစ္ ပါဝင္တယ္ဆုိတာကုိ ေတြ႔ရမွာပါ။

ဒါေပမဲ့ အေျခခံဥပေဒ မရွိေတာ့ပါဘူး။ အဲဒီအေျခခံဥပေဒကုိ အာဏာသိမ္းအစုိးရျဖစ္တဲ့ နဝတ က မေလးမစား ဖ်က္သိမ္းလုိက္ပါၿပီဆုိတဲ့အေၾကာင္းကုိ တရားသူၾကီးခ်ဳပ္က ၁၉၉၇ ခုႏွစ္ ၾသဂုတ္လ ၂၈ ရက္ေန႔မွာ သက္ေသျပခဲ့ပါတယ္။

လြတ္လပ္စြာ တရားစီရင္ေရးအေျခခံမူ ေပက်င္းေၾကညာခ်က္ (Beijing Statement of Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary) ကုိ ဖိလစ္ပုိင္ႏိုင္ငံ မနီလာၿမိဳ႕မွာ အာရွ၊ ပစိဖိတ္ႏုိင္ငံ ၃၂ ႏိုင္ငံလုံး လက္မွတ္ေရးထုိးပြဲမွာ တရားသူၾကီးခ်ဳပ္ ဦးေအာင္တုိး ကုိယ္တုိင္ လက္မွတ္ေရးထုိးခဲ့ပါတယ္။

အဲဒီလုိ လက္မွတ္ေရးထုိးၿပီး ေနာက္ ၃ ႏွစ္ၾကာမွ ၂ဝဝဝ ျပည့္ႏွစ္ တရားစီရင္ေရး ဥပေဒကုိ ျပ႒ာန္းခဲ့ျခင္းဟာ ၁၉၇၄ ခုႏွစ္ အေျခခံဥပေဒ မရွိေတာ့ပါဘူးလုိ႔ တရားသူၾကီးခ်ဳပ္ကုိယ္တုိင္ ဝန္ခံလုိက္ျခင္းသာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။

ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲဆုိေတာ့ ၁၉၇၄ ခုႏွစ္ အေျခခံဥပေဒပုဒ္မ ၁ဝ၁ မွာပါဝင္တဲ့ တရားစီရင္ေရးမူ ၈ ခ်က္ကုိ ၂ဝဝဝ ျပည့္ႏွစ္ တရားစီရင္ေရးမူ ၇ ခ်က္ဆုိၿပီး ဆုိရွယ္လစ္စနစ္ကုိ ကာကြယ္ေစာင့္ေရွာက္ျခင္းဆုိတဲ့ တခ်က္ပဲ ထုတ္ပယ္လုိက္ၿပီး က်န္ ၇ ခ်က္အတုိင္း ျပန္လည္ျပ႒ာန္းလုိက္ရတာက ရွိၿပီးသားဆုိရင္ ထပ္မံျပ႒ာန္းစရာ မလုိပါဘူးေပါ့။

အဲဒီအေျခခံဥပေဒ အသက္မရွိေတာ့ဘူးဆုိတဲ့ ဥပေဒေရးရာ ျပႆနာနဲ႔ ေအာက္႐ံုး ခ႐ုိင္တရားသူၾကီးေတြရဲ႕ အမိန္႔ဟာ မွားယြင္းေၾကာင္း သက္ေသျပရန္တာဝန္ (Burden of proof) အရ သက္ေသျပရျခင္း ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။

အေၾကာင္းျခင္းရာ ျပႆနာမွာလည္း က်န္းမာေရးမေကာင္းလုိ႔ ညအိပ္ခြင့္ေတာင္းခဲ့သူ မစၥတာဂြ်န္ဝီလ်ံယက္ေတာဟာ ေမလ ၅ ရက္ေန႔ည ၁၁ နာရီ ၄၅ မိနစ္မွာ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္အိမ္က ျပန္လည္ထြက္ခြာသြားခဲ့တယ္ ဆုိေပမယ့္၊ ေမလ ၆ ရက္ေန႔ မနက္ ၅ နာရီ ၃ဝ မွာမွ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ ေနအိမ္နဲ႔ အရမ္းကုိေဝးတဲ့ ယခု အုိင္ဘီစီေခၚ (International Business Centre) ေဘး၊ ယခင္ ကန္သာယာေဆး႐ုံေရွ႕မွာ ၅ လီတာဝင္ ေရသန္႔ဘူး ၂ လုံးကုိပုိက္ၿပီး ေရကူးေနတာကုိ ရဲဒုတပ္ၾကပ္မ်ဳိးလြင္က ေတြ႔ၿပီး ကုန္းေပၚဆြဲတင္ခဲ့တယ္လုိ႔ တရားလုိျပသက္ေသ ရဲအုပ္သန္းႏိုင္က ထြက္ဆုိခဲ့ပါတယ္။

အမႈအတြင္း ေအာက္႐ံုးတရားသူၾကီးေတြက မစၥတာယက္ေတာကုိ အခင္းျဖစ္ေနရာကုိ လုိက္လံျပသခိုင္းတုန္းက အဲဒီလုိ ၆ နာရီနီးပါးၾကာေအာင္ ေရကူးခဲ့တာ ဟုတ္၊ မဟုတ္ စမ္းသပ္ေရကူးခုိင္းခဲ့ျခင္းမ်ဳိး မလုပ္ခဲ့ပါဘူး။

အင္းယားကန္ဆုိတာ ေရေမွာ္ဒုိက္ေတြထူပိန္းေနတဲ့ ေရေသေရကန္တခုျဖစ္တာေၾကာင့္ အဲဒီကန္ထဲမွာ ေရသန္႔ဘူးပုိက္ၿပီး ေရကူးမယ္ဆုိရင္ ေခြးကူးသာကူးလုိ႔ရမွာ ျဖစ္တယ္။ တကယ္လုိ႔ ေခြးကူးသာကူးခဲ့ပါက ေျခေထာက္ ၂ ေခ်ာင္းမွာ ေရေမွာ္ဒုိက္ေတြနဲ႔ ၿငိၿပီး အေလာင္းပါ ၃ ရက္ေလာက္ေပ်ာက္ေနတတ္တဲ့ ကန္ၾကီးတခုပါ။

ဒါေၾကာင့္ ေရကူးဝင္တယ္ဆုိတာ လုံးဝမျဖစ္ႏုိင္ဘဲ လမ္းေလွ်ာက္ဝင္ခဲ့တယ္လုိ႔ အျငင္းပြားစရာ ျပႆနာ ေပၚေပါက္ေနပါတယ္။ လမ္းေလွ်ာက္ဝင္ခဲ့တယ္ဆုိပါက လုံၿခံဳေရးတာဝန္က် ရဲဝန္ထမ္း၊ ေထာက္လွမ္းေရး ဝန္ထမ္းေတြမွာသာ တာဝန္ရွိရမွာ ျဖစ္တယ္ဆိုတဲ့ အေၾကာင္းျခင္းရာ ျပႆနာေတြကုိ ပုိင္ပုိင္ႏုိင္ႏုိင္ တင္ျပခြင့္ဟာ အယူခံမႈမွာမွ တရားဝင္ ေျပာၾကားခြင့္ ရတာပါ။

အဆင့္ဆင့္ အယူခံေလွ်ာက္လႊာ တင္သြင္းႏိုင္တဲ့ အခြင့္အေရးက အခု တုိင္းတရား႐ံုးအျပင္ ေအာက္ျမန္မာျပည္ တရား႐ံုးခ်ဳပ္ (ရန္ကုန္)နဲ႔ တရား႐ံုးခ်ဳပ္ (ေနျပည္ေတာ္)ထိ ေနာက္ထပ္ အယူခံ႐ံုး ၂ ႐ံုး က်န္ေနေသးပါတယ္။

ကမာၻက ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ေနတဲ့ လူထုေခါင္းေဆာင္တေယာက္ရဲ႕ အမႈျဖစ္တာကတေၾကာင္း၊ ျမန္ျမန္ဆန္ဆန္ၿပီးေအာင္ စစ္ခ်င္တဲ့ စီမံခ်က္ဆုိတာေတြေၾကာင့္တေၾကာင္းမုိ႔သာ ဒီလုိတရား႐ံုးခ်ဳပ္တက္လုိက္၊ အယူခံဝင္လုိက္ဆုိတာ ၄လ ေက်ာ္အတြင္းမွာ ၿပီးစီးသြားႏုိင္တာပါ။ သာမန္အမႈေတြမွာဆုိရင္ ၿမိဳ႕နယ္႐ံုးကေန ခ႐ုိင္တရား႐ံုးေလာက္ ေရာက္ဖုိ႔ေတာင္ အနည္းဆုံး တႏွစ္ေက်ာ္ၾကာမယ့္ အမႈမ်ဳိးျဖစ္ပါတယ္။

အဂၤလိပ္ ကုိလုိနီေခတ္က ျမန္မာေတြ အေမြမႈ (တရားမ) ေတြ ျဖစ္ၾကၿပီဆုိရင္ ျမန္မာျပည္မွာရွိတဲ့ အျမင့္ဆုံးတရား႐ံုးေတြအထိ ကုန္ေအာင္ အယူခံမႈေတြတင္တဲ့အျပင္၊ အဂၤလန္မွာရွိတဲ့ ပရီဗြီေကာင္စီအထိပါ အယူခံဝင္ေလ့ ရွိၾကပါတယ္။

အခု ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ရဲ႕ အမႈကိုလည္း မုိးအဆုံး၊ ေျမအဆုံး လိုက္ၾကရမယ္။ တရားစီရင္ေရးစနစ္ၾကီးက မမွ်တဘူး၊ မေကာင္းဘူးလုိ႔ ေျပာခ်င္ရင္၊ အဲဒီတရားစီရင္ေရး အဆင့္ဆင့္ကုို အားလုံးျဖတ္ေက်ာ္ခဲ့ၿပီးကာမွ တရားစီရင္ေရးစနစ္ၾကီးတခုလုံး မေကာင္းဘူးလုိ႔ ေျပာႏိုင္ေအာင္ အားထုတ္ၾကရပါမယ္။ ဒါမွ ကမၻာက နအဖ စစ္အစိုးရ လက္ေအာက္က ျမန္မာ႔တရားေရးစနစ္ကို ကြက္ကြက္ကြင္းကြင္း ျမင္ေတြ႔လာၾကမွာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။

ေနာက္ဆံုး ေအာက္႐ံုးတရားသူၾကီးေတြရဲ႕ ပညာမျပည့္ဝမႈေၾကာင့္ လက္လြန္ေျခလြန္ ျဖစ္သြားရပါတယ္ဆိုခဲ့ရင္၊ အထက္တရား႐ံုးေတာ္ေတြကလည္း ဘယ္လိုဘယ္ပံုရွိမလဲ။ အယူခံဝင္ၿပီး ေစာင့္ၾကည့္ၾကပါစို႔။ ။

9September ဒိုင္ယာရီ

ဖိုင္ရယူရန္


9 September News

အိမ္မီးရိႈ႔ခံရေသာ ရွမ္းရြာသားမ်ားကို အိမ္ျပန္ေဆာက္ခြင့္ျပဳ (႐ုပ္သံသတင္း)
မဇၩိမသတင္းဌာန
ဗုဒၶဟူးေန႔၊ စက္တင္ဘာလ 09 ရက္ 2009 ခုႏွစ္ 19 နာရီ 33 မိနစ္


ကခ်င္႐ုပ္ရွင္ ရန္ကုန္မွာ ႐ုံတင္ျပီ (႐ုပ္သံသတင္း)
မဇၩိမသတင္းဌာန
ဗုဒၶဟူးေန႔၊ စက္တင္ဘာလ 09 ရက္ 2009 ခုႏွစ္ 17 နာရီ 46 မိနစ္

အရပ္သားအျမင္နဲ႔ စစ္သားအထင္



ဦးေအာင္ခင္
၉ စက္တင္ဘာ ၂၀၀၉

ျမန္မာျပည္မွာ ဒီမုိကေရစီစနစ္တည္ေဆာက္ခ်င္တဲ့ အရပ္သားအဖြဲ႔အစည္းေတြနဲ႔ စစ္အစုိးရတုိ႔ ေစ့စပ္ေဆြးေႏြးတဲ့အဆင့္ကုိ မေရာက္ႏုိင္ေသးဘဲ လိပ္ခဲတည္းလည္းျဖစ္ေနရတဲ့ အေျခခံအေၾကာင္းတခုက အရပ္သားရဲ႕ သမုိင္းအျမင္နဲ႔ စစ္သားရဲ႕ သမုိင္းအျမင္ ကြဲျပားျခားနားေနလုိ႔ပါပဲ။ စစ္တပ္တုိင္းမွာ သီးျခားအသြင္လကၡဏာရွိတယ္။ အရပ္သားနဲ႔စစ္သားဟာ သမုိင္းအျမင္ခ်င္း မတူတာမ်ားပါတယ္။ စစ္ဗိုလ္ရဲ႕ အေတြးအေခၚဟာ စစ္တပ္ရဲ႕သမုိင္းအျမင္က လႊမ္းမုိးေလ့ရွိတယ္။

အရပ္သားဟာ သူေတြ႔ရွိတဲ့ အခ်က္အလက္ေပၚမွာမူတည္ၿပီး သမုိင္းေရးတယ္။ မိမိေတြ႔ရွိတဲ့ အခ်က္အလက္ကုိလုိက္ၿပီး သုံးသပ္မႈနဲ႔ အဓိပၸာယ္ေဖာ္မႈလည္း ေျပာင္းသြားရပါတယ္။ ကုိယ္ျဖစ္ခ်င္တာကုိ ေရးလုိ႔မရဘူး။ ကုိယ္ထင္တာကုိမေရးဘဲ ေတြ႔တဲ့အတုိင္းေရးတာကုိ သတၱိရွိတယ္လုိ႔ ေျပာတာပါပဲ။ ဗမာစစ္တပ္က သမုိင္းေရးသလုိ လုိခ်င္တာေတြထည့္ၿပီး မလုိခ်င္တာ ကုိ ဖယ္ထုတ္လုိ႔မရပါဘူး။ လူသတ္တာကုိ ကယ္တင္တာလုိ႔ ေရးလုိ႔မရပါဘူး။ အေနာက္တုိင္းမွာ နာမည္ႀကီးတဲ့ စစ္သမုိင္းဆရာေတြဟာ အရပ္သားေတြပါ။ ဗမာျပည္မွာေတာ့ စစ္ဗုိလ္ကသာ စစ္သမုိင္းကုိ ေရးခြင့္ရွိသလုိ ျဖစ္ေနတယ္။

စစ္တပ္ကုိအယုံတင္သြင္းရာမွာ သမုိင္းကုိ ၀ါဒျဖန္႔ပစၥည္းအျဖစ္ အသုံးျပဳၿပီး ပုံႀကီးခ်ဲ႕ေလ့ရွိတယ္။ ဒီလုိေျပာပါမ်ားလာေတာ့ စစ္ေခါင္းေဆာင္ေတြကုိယ္တုိင္ ဂ်ပုိးကုိလိပ္လုိ႔ ယုံၾကည္လာတာပါပဲ။ ဒါကုိ စိတ္ပညာမွာ auto-suggestion လုိ႔ေခၚတယ္။ ၂၀ ရာစုအေစာပုိင္းမွာ ျပင္သစ္စိတ္ပညာရွင္တဦး Emile Coue 1857-1926 ေတြ႔တဲ့နည္းပါ။ မိမိကုိယ္မိမိ ကယ္တင္ရွင္လုိ႔ အႏွစ္ (၅၀) နီးပါး ၀ါဒျဖန္႔လာတဲ့ စစ္ေခါင္းေဆာင္ေတြဟာ သူတုိ႔၀ါဒျဖန္႔တာကုိ သူတုိ႔ကုိယ္တုိင္ ျပန္ယုံေနတဲ့အတြက္ ေနရာတကာ စစ္ဗိုလ္က ဦးေဆာင္ခြင့္ရွိေၾကာင္း ဥပေဒျပဳတာျဖစ္တယ္။

ဥပမာ အေမရိကန္နဲ႔ အဂၤလိပ္ စစ္အင္အားႀကီးမားလုိ႔ ဂ်ပန္စစ္႐ႈံးရတာ တကမာၻလုံး သိတယ္။ ဂ်ပန္႔လက္ေအာက္ခံ ဗမာစစ္တပ္က ဂ်ပန္ကုိေတာ္လွန္ၿပီး အဂၤလိပ္နဲ႔ အေမရိကန္ဘက္က ကူတုိက္ေပးတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္တပ္ မကူလည္း အဂၤလိပ္/အေမရိကန္က ႏုိင္မွာပါပဲ။ ဗမာစစ္တပ္က ေတာ္လွန္လုိ႔ ဂ်ပန္စစ္႐ႈံးတာမဟုတ္ဘူး။ ဂ်ပန္ကုိ ေတာ္လွန္တဲ့အတြက္ ဗမာစစ္တပ္သာ အျမတ္ထြက္သြားတယ္။ ဂ်ပန္နဲ႔လက္တြဲၿပီး အဂၤလိပ္၊ အေမရိကန္တပ္ကုိ သြားတုိက္မယ္ဆုိရင္ ဗမာစစ္တပ္ဟာ အိႏၵိယလြတ္လပ္ေရးတပ္ဖြဲ႔လုိ အဂၤလိပ္စစ္တပ္ရဲ႕ ကူလီဘ၀ကုိ ေရာက္သြားမွာ ေသခ်ာတယ္။

ဒီအျဖစ္အမွန္ကုိမထုတ္ေဖာ္ဘဲ တပ္မေတာ္ကေတာ္လွန္လုိ႔သာ ဂ်ပန္စစ္႐ႈံးသလုိလုိ တျပည္လုံးကုိ ၀ါဒျဖန္႔ထားတာ စစ္တပ္ရဲ႕ သမုိင္းအျမင္ပါပဲ။ ဗမာစစ္တပ္တုိက္ယူလုိ႔ လြတ္လပ္ေရးရတာလုိ႔ စစ္ဗိုလ္ေတြယူဆထားတာဟာ မွားယြင္းတဲ့သမုိင္းအျမင္ပါ။ ျမန္မာ့လြတ္လပ္ေရးလႈပ္ရွားမႈသမုိင္းမွာ ဖက္ဆစ္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးဟာ အခန္းက႑ေလးတခုသာျဖစ္တယ္။ စစ္ၿပီးေခတ္ လြတ္လပ္ေရးႀကိဳးပမ္းမႈဟာ ႏွလုံးရည္တုိက္ပြဲသာျဖစ္တယ္။ အဲဒီအခ်ိန္မွာ ဗမာစစ္တပ္ဟာ အဂၤလိပ္စစ္တပ္ရဲ႕ လက္ေအာက္ခံ ျဖစ္ေနလုိ႔ လြတ္လပ္ေရးလႈပ္ရွားမႈမွာ တုိက္႐ုိက္မပါ၀င္ႏုိင္ခဲ့ဘူး။

ေခတ္ပညာတတ္ စစ္ဗိုလ္ဆရာ၀န္ စာေရးဆရာ ေဒါက္တာေမာင္ေမာင္ညိဳ လုိဟာမ်ဳိးကေတာင္ ဂ်ပန္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးကုိ အႀကီးအက်ယ္ ေအာက္ေမ့ေနတယ္။ ၁၉၇၃ ခုနွစ္က တုိက်ဳိမွာ က်ေနာ္ သမုိင္းသုေတသနလုပ္ေနတုန္း ေဒါက္တာေမာင္ေမာင္ညိဳနဲ႔ ခဏဆုံမိေတာ့ ဂ်ပန္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးအေၾကာင္း ဘာေတြေရးထားသလဲလုိ႔ သူကေမးတယ္။ ဂ်ပန္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးကုိ အေလးအနက္ထားသူ သိပ္မရွိေၾကာင္း ေျပာျပေတာ့ ေဒါက္တာေမာင္ေမာင္ညိဳ အေတာ္မေက်မနပ္ ျဖစ္သြားတယ္။ ဂ်ပန္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးကုိ ေမွးမွိန္ေသးသိမ္ေအာင္ က်ေနာ္က တမင္ေျပာတဲ့ပုံစံနဲ႔ သူ႔ခရီးသြားမွတ္တမ္းမွာ ၁၉၇၇ က ေရးထားတယ္။ စစ္ဗုိလ္ဆရာ၀န္ ေဒါက္တာေမာင္ေမာင္ညိဳလည္း စစ္တပ္၀ါဒျဖန္႔တာကုိ ယုံၾကည္သူပါပဲ။

အခုေတာ့ ဂ်ပန္ကုိ ဗမာစစ္တပ္က တြန္းလွန္လုိက္တယ္ဆုိတဲ့ စိတ္ကူးယဥ္ခ်က္ကုိ အမ်ားယုံၾကည္လာေအာင္ ပုံႀကီးခ်ဲ႕၀ါဒျဖန္႔ၿပီး ႏုိင္ငံေရးအာဏာကုိ လက္၀ါးႀကီးအုပ္ထားတယ္။ ဂ်ပန္ကုိ တုိက္ထုတ္သူဟာ ဗမာစစ္တပ္ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ပုံႀကီးခ်ဲ႕တာကုိနားေထာင္ၿပီး လူငယ္ေတြ ႀကီးျပင္းလာရတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္တပ္ရဲ႕ ပုံႀကီးခ်ဲ႕ဇာတ္လမ္းအရ အဂၤလိပ္စစ္တပ္၊ အေမရိကန္စစ္တပ္၊ တ႐ုတ္၊ ကရင္၊ ကခ်င္၊ ခ်င္း၊ နာဂနဲ႔ ျမန္မာအရပ္သားေတြကေတာ့ ဂ်ပန္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးမွာ မပါသလုိ ျဖစ္ေနတယ္။

တကယ္ေတာ့ ဂ်ပန္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးကုိ ပထမဆုံး စတင္ဆင္ႏႊဲသူဟာ ကရင္နဲ႔ ခ်င္းအမ်ဳိးသားေတြပါ။ ကရင္တုိင္းရင္းသားေတြနဲ႔ အတူ ပထမဆုံးေသာ ဂ်ပန္ဆန္႔က်င္ေရးတုိက္ပြဲ ဦးေဆာင္ဆင္ႏႊဲခဲ့သူ ၿဗိတိသွ်ဗိုလ္မႉး Hugh Paul Seagrim ျဖစ္တယ္။ ကရင္ေျပာက္က်ားအဖြဲ႔က ဂ်ပန္စစ္တပ္ကုိ ပထမဆုံးေတာ္လွန္တာျဖစ္တယ္။

၁၉၄၂ ခုႏွစ္ ေဆာင္းဦးရာသီမွာ ကေလးၿမိဳ႕ကုိ ဂ်ပန္သိမ္းပုိက္ထားတုန္း ကင္းလွည့္တဲ့ ဂ်ပန္စစ္သားကုိ ဇုိျပည္သူ႔စစ္က ေျဖာင္ပစ္တဲ့အတြက္ အဲဒီအခ်ိန္ကတည္းက ခ်င္းေတာ္လွန္ေရးစတယ္လုိ႔ ဆုိႏုိင္ပါတယ္။ ကေလးၿမိဳ႕အနီးမွာ ဂ်ပန္တပ္ဖြဲ႔တဖြဲ႔ အနားယူေနစဥ္ ၁၉၄၂ ခုႏွစ္ ဒီဇင္ဘာ (၂၃) ရက္ေန႔မွာ ဇုိျပည္သူ႔စစ္က လွ်ပ္တျပက္၀င္တုိက္လုိ႔ ဂ်ပန္ (၁၂) ဦး က်သြားတယ္။ ဒီတုိက္ပြဲသတင္းကုိ ဒီဇင္ဘာ (၂၆) ရက္ေန႔မွာ ဘီဘီစီအဂၤလိပ္ပုိင္းက ေၾကညာတယ္။ ဒါဟာ အရပ္သားေရးတဲ့ သမုိင္းပါ။ စစ္တပ္ကုိ ကယ္တင္ရွင္လုိ႔ ျပည္သူလူထုက မယူဆပါဘူး။

စစ္ေခါင္းေဆာင္ကုိ သစၥာရွိတဲ့စစ္တပ္ဟာ အဲဒီစစ္ေခါင္းေဆာင္အလြဲသုံးစားလုပ္တာကုိ ခံရတယ္။ ဗုိလ္ေန၀င္းနဲ႔ ဗုိလ္သန္းေရႊဟာ သာဓကေတြပဲ။ ဒီကေန႔ စစ္ဗိုလ္ေတြလက္ခံတဲ့ ႏုိင္ငံေရးအယူအဆကုိ ေနာက္တေန႔မွာ စစ္ဗိုလ္ေတြ ေမ့သြားႏုိင္တယ္။ ၁၉၆၂ ကစၿပီး ဗမာစစ္တပ္တခုလုံးက ယုံၾကည္ပါတယ္လုိ႔ ေႂကြးေၾကာ္ခဲ့တဲ့ ဆုိရွယ္လစ္၀ါဒကုိ ၁၉၈၈ ေရာက္ေတာ့ ယုံၾကည္တဲ့စစ္ဗိုလ္ တေယာက္မွမရွိေတာ့ဘူး။ ဒါဟာ ဗမာစစ္ဗိုလ္ေတြရဲ႕ ခံယူခ်က္လား။

အျပင္လူက ျမန္မာျပည္ကုိ နားလည္ဖုိ႔လုိအပ္သလုိ ျမန္မာေတြကလည္း မိမိကိုယ္မိမိ အကဲျဖတ္ဖုိ႔လုိအပ္ေၾကာင္း အေမရိကန္သမုိင္းဆရာႀကီး ဂြန္ေကဒီ ၁၉၅၇ ခုႏွစ္က ေျပာဖူးတယ္။ ဗမာစစ္အစုိးရက အႏွစ္ (၅၀) နီးပါး ကုိယ္ရည္ေသြး ၀ါဒျဖန္႔ခဲ့တာေၾကာင့္ ျမန္မာ့သမုိင္းျဖစ္ရပ္မွန္ကုိ သိႏုိင္ဖုိ႔ မလြယ္ပါဘူး။ အျဖစ္မွန္ကုိမသိရင္ တဘက္နဲ႔တဘက္ နားလည္ဖုိ႔နဲ႔ ျပႆေျဖရွင္းဖုိ႔ ခက္ခဲႏုိင္တယ္။

ဥပမာ အဂၤလိပ္ကုိလုိနီနယ္ခ်ဲ႕ဟာ တုိင္းရင္းသားလူမ်ဳိးေတြကုိ စိတ္၀မ္းကြဲျပားေအာင္လုပ္ၿပီး ျမန္မာျပည္ကုိ ေသြးစုပ္ျခယ္လွယ္ တယ္ဆုိတာနဲ႔ ဖက္ဆစ္ေတာ္လွန္ေရးဆင္ႏႊဲလုိ႔ လြတ္လပ္ေရးရတာဆုိတဲ့ ၀ါဒျဖန္႔ခ်က္ေတြကုိ ယုံၾကည္ေလေလ တုိင္းရင္းသားျပႆနာ ေျဖရွင္းရတာ ခက္ေလေလပါပဲ။ ျမန္မာ့ျပႆနာဟာ တုိင္းရင္းသားအေရးမွာ အေျခခံတယ္လုိ႔ဆုိတယ္။ ဗမာလူမ်ဳိး ေရာက္မလာမီကတည္းက ျမန္မာျပည္မွာ တုိင္းရင္းသားအမ်ဳိးမ်ဳိးရွိေနတယ္။ တုိင္းရင္းသားေတြဟာ ဗမာမင္းကုိ သစၥာခံလုိက္၊ တ႐ုတ္လက္ေအာက္ေရာက္သြားလုိက္၊ ထုိင္းကုိသစၥာခံလုိက္နဲ႔ ေနာက္ဆုံး အဂၤလိပ္လက္ထက္ေရာက္ေတာ့မွ သူတုိ႔ဘ၀ဟာ လုံၿခံဳသြားတဲ့သေဘာပါပဲ။ ေရွးကတည္းက ဗမာမင္းနဲ႔ တုိင္းရင္းသားေတြ အကြဲကြဲအၿပဲၿပဲျဖစ္လာတာကုိ အဂၤလိပ္က လုိသလုိ အသုံးခ်သြားတာပါပဲ။

ဖက္ဆစ္ဂ်ပန္စစ္ဗိုလ္ကလည္း သူ႔ကုိယ္သူကုိယ္ ကယ္တင္ရွင္လုိ႔ ယူဆတာပဲ၊ ၁၉၄၅ မွာ ဂ်ပန္လက္နက္ခ်ၿပီး စစ္တပ္တခုလုံး ဖ်က္သိမ္းလုိက္ေတာ့မွ ကယ္တင္ရွင္၀ါဒ နိဂုံးခ်ဳပ္သြားတယ္။ စစ္ၿပီးေခတ္ဂ်ပန္မွာ ႏွစ္ေပါင္းအေတာ္ၾကာ စစ္တပ္မရွိဘူး။ အေမရိကန္စစ္တပ္နဲ႔ ဂ်ပန္အရပ္သားအစုိးရက ပူးတြဲအုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ပါတယ္။ စစ္ဗိုလ္ေတြေၾကာင့္ တုိင္းျပည္ပ်က္စီးခဲ့ရတဲ့အေျဖစ္ကုိ နာၾကည္းခဲ့တဲ့ ဂ်ပန္ႏုိင္ငံမွာ စစ္မႈထမ္းအလုပ္ကုိ ဂုဏ္ယူစရာလုိ႔ မယူဆၾကေတာ့ဘူး။ စစ္႐ႈံးလုိ႔ရရွိလုိက္တဲ့ အက်ဳိးအျမတ္ကေတာ့ ဂ်ပန္ျပည္မွာ စစ္၀ါဒကြယ္ေပ်ာက္ၿပီး ဒီမုိကေရစီစနစ္ ထြန္းကားလာတာပါပဲ။