Burma: counter-money laundering laws and drugs control

Burma has, according to the USA's Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, James Kelly, about 900 political prisoners and resists the military government resists US attempts at diplomacy.

Even so, says Kelly, there has been much improvement in the detection of drugs trafficking and recent laws aimed at the prevention of money laundering also show that the military government is not maintaining a totally isolated stance. Kelly also says that there is continued substantial production of metamphetamines, a drug which is gaining popularity in nearby countries.

The military government is widely regarded as having a strong line on dissent. One Burmese woman told World Money Laundering Report: Online "it's a beautiful country and one day I would like to go back to live. But if we try to talk about democracy, we might end up in jail."

Kelly agrees: "Burma's population continues to be denied basic human and political rights across the board."

And Kelly threatens to do something about it. Excepting the drugs issue (which the USA has used elsewhere in the past) the USA has no reason to invade Burma to try to overturn its government: it is not developing weapons of mass destruction, it is not threatening Israel, it is not threatening supplies of anything important to the US economy and the US does not need it as a military base, even temporarily. So the situation is not like that in Iraq.

Or is it?

Iraq is ruled by a despotic leader who kills and maims and imprisons vast numbers of his people. His rule is one based on cruelty and fear and a deep seated desire by most of the population not to be seen to be against him, and so they demonstrate support for him - in many cases whilst chewing their cheeks.

Aside from the killing and maiming, there is clearly an element of the same issue in Burma. "My mother won't go back," said the woman to World Money Laundering Report: Online .

When the "west" decided to do something about drugs production in Afghanistan, it tried, first, to negotiate with the Taliban. That didn't work. The Taliban did in fact hugely reduce the production of drugs - but that is widely seen as a commercial move: there was massive oversupply in the market and by letting the fields lie fallow for a year, the stock piles were used up in an attempt to increase prices. After a year of little production, the yields have again increased, says the United Nations.

The Taliban oppressed its people and the final straw was the destruction of the huge Buddah statues that brought, for the first time for many, the extremism of the Taliban to the notice of the wider public across the world.

From that time, the Taliban's days were numbered. The threat of sanctions, the use of subversive agents, the weight of the PR machine were all focussed on the abuse of the Afghanistan people by the Taliban.

Kelly is making to sort of noises in relation to Burma that have characterised the early stages of the conflicts with both Iraq and the Taliban.

For those concerned with money laundering the use of Burma as a staging post has been a major concern, and will remain so. But now the focus must shift towards the possibility of economic sanctions and, with it, sanctions busting and financing schemes.

Kelly was adamant that democracy is an issue upon which the USA and its allies are anxious to see progress: "We are at the point where, absent further progress, the process that has begun may well falter, an outcome that will cause the international community to reassess again its approach to the issue of democracy in Burma."

That is innocuous diplomatic stuff. Then he took the gloves off: "If progress remains elusive, Burma must consider the possibility that other countries may join in measures with the U.S., such as a ban on new investment."

Yet the military in Burma is also accused of atrocities to varying degrees. "We are deeply troubled by extra-judicial killings, forced relocations, and forced labour that have intensified the refugee flow into Thailand this year and created a large population of internally displaced people."

The drugs issue is live but seemingly, the USA is not unhappy with the progress being made, so further making direct action less likely: "Burmese cooperation with the international community on narcotics issues has continued to improve in real terms. Over the past year, the area under poppy cultivation has declined by 26 per cent and opium production in the country as a whole is now less than one-quarter its level in 1996. Unfortunately, methamphetamine production, which strikes worst at Burma's Southeast Asian neighbors, has likely increased. Burma has passed and begun to enforce money-laundering legislation and has worked constructively with the United Nations Drug Control Program and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, as well as with Australia and China. We need to be mindful that even with the best of cooperation, the drug problem in Burma will not be resolved in weeks or months. Poppy cultivation continues in many areas where the government's direct control is far from absolute and where short-term solutions would entail long-term, destabilizing costs. Under more favorable circumstances, neighboring Thailand needed decades to contain the problem of poppy cultivation and opium production."

The situation requires careful monitoring for future restrictions on financial dealings.