Last July, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of Burma distributed a letter on the eve of its 66th Party Foundation Day, on 15th August 2005. In the letter, they talked of their stand and experience, and their view on "Proposal Politics" that is receiving funds from foreign donors for the movement activities. They also talked of their political proposal, "Demo 2006", its (Demo 2006) challenge to the military regime. The proposal, is a vision on "Reform the Army Movement" (RAM).
Mizzima has contacted the CPB and conducted an interview in Burmese and the following is its direct English translation.
CPB's spokesperson Comrade Po Than Chaung answers to Mizzima's queries over email.
Qns: Many have said that the "proposal politics" is still the requirement for most Burma democracy activists in exile. What is your comment?
Ans: We are not against the concept of "proposal politics ". We want to go our way. We accept the situation is different. If we take a parallel route, there will be no head-on collision. As the NLD-LA chairman once said with one or two passes the ball can be kicked into the goal. This is also our sincere wish.
Since the inception of the "Democratic Alliance of Burma" (DAB), KIO chairman Brang Seng invited CPB to join and asked for CPB's opinion. DAB mainly focused on the domestic political movement. We sincerely feel more the organisations the better it is. We wished them to get more organisations to join.
But the CPB are communists. If CPB joins DVB, some anti-Communist elements will withdraw from the DAB, making it weaker rather than stronger. It will be counterproductive if we join. We said that we would be better off as an audience. Let's go our own way and topple the SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council) together.
Then we heard about the financial scams. But it is just hearsay. We also saw some exposures about it. So did the NLD-LA. It's not good for the people.
Qns: What would you like to say on lobbying with foreign countries diplomatically?
Ans: After the miscarriage of the 1999 movement (inside Burma), many seemed to turn back to the domestic political movement in the year 2000. All of them jumped onto the "lobby" band wagon, consequently there was friction among them. They broadcast their differing views, which confused the people about their ideology. Had it not been the IT age, we would not have known about it. We said nothing because it was not our business.
The manner of thinking of 'Demo 2006' is "taking" its own way, which is kicking the ball into the goal post'. Before presenting this proposal, there was no serious response. We had heard a lot about their anti- CPB stance at their meetings. We refrained from saying anything.
The "Demo 2006" focus was only on the domestic movement. Before presenting "Demo 2006", there were no anti-domestic movements, but now they have resorted to a high pitch. There were many who blamed the people in Burma, on the new generation, and on the National League for Democracy (NLD). Some even attacked the Daw Aung San Suu Kyi by exposing its past sore points. It is unfair to put the blame on the people who are under a repressive regime. Even this is not our business, but we are very much upset.
Let's go our own way, and others can lobby as they wish. We are not against it. Similarly we would not want anybody to criticise the CPB for not going his or her way. The main goal is to topple the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC).
Qns. Many activists think that we must try and win sympathy and support from any country regardless of their being capitalists or socialists. The US is the best case in point. Do you think the US's orientation is hegemony?
Ans: Please do not underestimate Bo Than Shwe (SPDC Chairman). He learnt from a stable AFPFL (Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League) elders while serving as a waiter.
And then he learnt from Ne win in the time of Burma Socialist Programme Party (BSPP) when he was in the mid-level hierarchy in the regime. He used these experiences in the SLORC and SPDC. Don't look down on him. In the cold war era, Ne Win tried to defect to a capitalist camp in 1967, at a time when there were Chinese-Burmese communal riots. But he paid a heavy price for his mistake, went to China and sought to be pardoned by the Chinese government.
This was in the cold war era, and there were only two or three options. But Bo Than Shwe has many options. If it's not quite right that China be appeased, they will turn to India, Japan, Australia and Thailand. Then if they can befriend the US, it could prolong the reign. Now when they have good relation with the Thais, our friends and comrades in Thailand have to board the ' third country resettlement express'. It does not matter for those who are seeking third country resettlement. We talk for unwilling third country resettlers who are upset and desperate with the situation.
Watch the military regime led by Bo Than Shwe. They will only chant this slogan 'There is no stepping down from the throne is our cause'. Let us see what comes next, becoming a protege of China or for that matter anybody else. It won't take too long. They are in power. The US is aware that it's easier to make those in power to become their protege than those who are not in power.
We guessed that some are in favor of the situation similar to 1940s. At that time, everyone could calculate that Japan was losing. It didn't need much political and military training and experience. We got BIA (Burma Independence Army) and BDA (Burma Defence Army) by collaborating with Japan. And then we got AFPFL by resisting Japan. All these great events were realised within 3 years. Do not put US at par with Japan. The US is a hyper power.
If they really wished and were interested in democratisation in Burma, they would have given arms to All Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF) in 1989-90. They did not have to invade Burma. The mission would have been accomplished in a very short time. Why are they interested in Burmese politics now?
China is an expert on protracted war. India is a protracted political defiance guru. Indian National Congress (INC) was established in 1885, the year of the fall of the last king Thibaw. You can imagine what will happen to Burma which is sandwiched between these two giants. There are many ethnic peoples who would secede from the federal union when war breaks out. And there are many people who want to keep NLD and Committee for Representing People's Parliament (CRPP) aside and installs a parallel "Federal Government".
Qns. How much do you expect from your proposed "Reform the Army Movement" (RAM). The main objective is 'Demo 2006" mass movement and mass mobilisation. If it is realised, it will only mean suffering for the people, chaos and insecurity. This will only help SPDC prolonging its reign of terror against the people. How will you respond to it?
Ans. RAM and UG (Underground Movement) are not for open discussion. We can reform the seed of BIA's fascist character. The entire situation will push them to it. It was easy because all the rank and file of the BDA knew well that Japan was losing and England would win.
No party, and no personality can create mass a movement by themselves. Only when people grasp the revolutionary ideology, it becomes the material force. So the 66th party foundation day report mainly focuses on ideology. If we let out a confused ideology, the people's movement will go the wrong way. This will help the regime prolong its rule. People create history, but only through a proper ideology.
The CPB opposes all 'expecting the saviours of ideology'. It doesn't have anything against those in exile, who are on foreign soil and well established. They are not guilty. But don't push the people to this situation.
Qns. What is the main slogan of the CPB for a strike against the military regime?
Ans: It is not a slogan. It is an appeal to turn again to the domestic movement, to give the right ideology to the people. But if some feel they must strike the CPB first to topple the SPDC, then they are wrong. Please let us go our way. It will not be right, to think that 'Demo 2006' will fail.
Qns. Should Communist Party of China be urged to intervene in Burma affairs?
Ans: There is no government in big countries, which accepts and does what the opposition in small countries want. They will do what they want to if their own interests coincide with that of the opposition. There is no country which shapes and formulates its foreign policy based on values and belief.