This military buildup creates a severe risk for the people of Burma and its neighbors. Burma does not have the technological support system to safely operate a nuclear power plant. Even basic services such as a dependable electric supply do not exist. It is a nuclear disaster waiting to happen. It is cause for concern for the whole region. Furthermore, the possibility of the Burma regime exporting fission material for dirty bombs will be great. There is no peaceful reason why the junta should seek to go nuclear. The junta's excuse is that the reactor will produce radioisotopes for medical and research purposes. It is important to note that the regime's program came under the international spotlight recently after two Pakistani nuclear scientists, Dr. Suleiman Asad and Dr. Muhammad Ali Muktar with long experience at two of their country's most secret nuclear installations, appeared in Burma after the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States (The Washington Times, December 10th 2001). In addition to the aircraft purchase and nuclear program, the military regime has spent billions on Chinese weapons, and has a relationship with the Chinese arms manufacturer Norinco. This is the same arms manufacturer that has been sanctioned by the United States for assisting the Iranian government's missile program.

The priorities of the Burma military regime are terribly distorted since military and industrial procurement rank higher than the people's basic needs for survival. The military regime's actions affect the whole region and are likely to create even more crises in the future. In light of the horrific human rights violations, the economic instability, HIV/AIDS and health crises, and current security concerns, the Burma army's argument that no one should interfere with its internal affairs is meaningless. The international community, our allies in South East Asia and the United States need to take serious action on Burma.

I would like to recommend the following actions for the United States government and the international community:

1. Continue to press for tri-partite dialogue-the dialogue should include Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy, the ethnic groups, and representatives of the military regime. Though Aung San Suu Kyi must be released, that alone is not sufficient progress. This will only take us back to the status quo of the pre-May attempt on Daw Suu's life. The United States and the international community must insist that measurable progress towards freedom and democracy is made. This effort should be raised at the UN Security Council.

2. Provide financial assistance for humanitarian relief to the IDPs and persuade neighboring countries not to block, but to allow, desperately needed humanitarian assistance for the IDPs. This would include food, medicine, clothes and educational supplies. Presently, despite the regime's efforts to eradicate relief efforts, it is important to note that there are ongoing procedures and mechanisms in place that allow for effective monitoring of humanitarian relief to IDPs. Both relief and the building up of democratic structures are crucial now and for a future Burma.

3. Encourage neighboring countries to allow pro-democracy Burman and ethnic groups to freely conduct their non-violent activities in these countries. This is building a foundation for a future free Burma by strengthening civil society.

4. Establish a UN Security Council commission on Burma to ensure that detailed steps with defined consequences for noncompliance be taken on a specific schedule to restore democracy. This commission should examine patterns of duplicity whereby the military regime continues brutal policies without attracting international attention. For example, whenever the military is about to launch a major offensive in the rural areas against the ethnic populations, they create a distraction in the cities, so that the press loses sight of the horrific violations. On May 6th 2002, the regime released Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest. Simultaneously the Burma Army 88th division launched a heavy offensive on the Dooplaya district in Karen State.

The people of Burma are very resilient and resourceful. At one time, we had one of the highest levels of education in Southeast Asia. All it will take is removing the yoke of oppression, and providing a window for re-growth. We can become a strong ally. We have the natural resources. We just have to allow the human capacity to bloom.

Thank you again for allowing me to testify regarding the situation in Burma and the needs of the people. I wish to extend a special thank you to the hundreds of Americans who have selflessly and freely brought help, hope and love to the op

pressed people of Burma. They uphold President Bush's recent statement, “The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity".

References

Burma Transnational Issues, CIA World Factbook. Retrieved September 15, 2003 on the world wide web at: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ bm.html#Issues

de Borchgrave, A. (2001, December 10th) Al Qaeda's Nuclear Agenda Verified. The Washington Times

Ehrlich, R. S. (2001, August 28th) U.S. F–16 Warplanes to Thailand and Russian MiG-29 Jet Fighters to Burma. European Press Network.

Human Rights Trends in Rural and Eastern Burma (1999, June 29th) Briefing Notes, Karen Human Rights Group. Retrieved September 15, 2003, on the world wide web at: http://www.ibiblio.org/freeburma/humanrights/khrg/archive/khrg99/hrbrief.html

Jagan, L. (2003 September 2) China Gives Burma Support But Also Urges Change. Inter Press Services.

Myanmar banks suspend credit card services (2003, February 17th) Agence FrancePresse

Myanmar Research Reactor Project Approved (2002, May 15th). Nuclear Threat Initiative. Retrieved September 15, 2003 on the world wide web at: www.nti.org/ db/nisprofs/russia/exports/general/nuexdev.htm Rangoon free to spend gas money on anything it wants. (2001 July 17th) Bangkok Post.

Mr. GALLEGLY. Thank you very much, Mr. Dun.

Our next witness is Michael Mitchell. Mr. Mitchell is a founding partner of Orion Strategies, a public relations firm in Washington, DC. He has worked with Burmese democracy groups since 1993, when he became program director for the International Relations Institutes Burma project. He was also a founding member of the Burma Media Association, an organization to protect journalists and discuss the role of freedom of the press in a democratic society. In addition, Mr. Mitchell was director of congressional relations at the Department of State in the Counter-Narcotics Bureau during the first Bush Administration, and also worked for Senator Mitch McConnell. In 1999, Mr. Mitchell was awarded the Order of Freedom by the Mongolian government for his work assisting that country in its transition to a democracy.

Welcome, Mr. Mitchell.

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL MITCHELL, ORION STRATEGIES Mr. MITCHELL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Members of this Committee. It is truly an honor to be here and especially on a panel with our other distinguished speakers.

It was just 2 months ago when this Congress gave concrete expression to its collective outrage at the Burmese military regime by passing the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act. The measures contained in this legislation have hit the regime hard, but we and others must do more if Burmese democracy activists are to achieve their goal of removing the odious regime that is ruling their country and replacing it with a democracy stolen from them decades

ago.

The massacre of over 100 NLD members and the near murder of Suu Kyi on the night of May 30th should offer final proof that this regime is fundamentally evil and has absolutely no interest, none, in compromise and will never voluntarily cede power.

The junta is vulnerable, and I do not believe their grip on power is secure. Burmese democracy activists are not asking for the 82nd Airborne. They are able and willing to fight their own battles.

What they are asking for is support from the international community that includes a comprehensive sanction scheme and further isolation of the regime.

Burma must matter to us because until the political stalemate in that country is resolved and the NLD is allowed to take power it will remain a failed state ruled by tyrants whose oppression serves to destabilize Southeast Asia, and affect us here at home.

I would like to make some observations.

First, the constructive engagement approach that many countries favored is a complete, complete failure. Engagement will only enrich the regime's coffers and embolden their tyranny.

Second, our goal in Burma should be nothing short of doing all we can to support the nonviolent democracy movement in their quest and ours for regime change.

Third, sanctions work, but by themselves will not remove the junta from power. However, they are a strategic necessity in order to cut off the ability of the regime to finance its instruments of ter

ror.

Fourth, the military might rule Burma, but this does not translate into public support. They are no stronger than the regimes of Ceausescu, Milosovich or Suharto that now reside in the ashcan of history.

Burma's democracy movement is broad, it is deep, and it extends well beyond Aung San Suu Kyi. We need to provide those fighting for democracy and human rights the same political, moral and appropriate financial support that was given to Polish dock workers, Hungarian democracy activists, Russian refuseniks, and the young Yugoslav freedom fighters who succeeded in tearing down the Milosovich regime.

There are several initiative United States should undertake to assist the Burmese democracy movement, and I would be happy to expand on each one during our Q&S session, but briefly summarizing.

One, we must make Burma a diplomatic priority. At every opportunity, at many different levels, internationally the Department of State and other agencies must forcefully communicate our Burma policy and use an appropriate mix of dialogue, coaxing cajoling, and when necessary, hardball pressure to support the movement.

The President has a great opportunity when he visits Thailand later this month to participate in the APEC meetings. He should use Bangkok much as two American presidents used Berlin. President Kennedy symbolically placed every American at the site of those isolated in that beleaguered city. President Reagan's challenge to General Secretary Gorbachev tore down a wall that divided Europe and ended Communism. President Bush should use Bangkok to speak directly to the Burmese people and let them know that they are not alone; that even during the darkness they are enduring they must continue their fight, and as they do their part in the struggle for freedom we will do our.

We must also work to have a full court press within the U.N. Security Council. The time for sending U.Ñ. envoys to visit the regime has long since past, serves little purpose, and only creates the illusion of action or progress.

Three, the increase in funding for democracy groups.

Four, we could bolster broadcasts into Burma of RFA and VOA. Five, I think we should make Burma an ASEAN problem. ASEAN must be made to realize that when the grouping is spending more time trying to deal with the latest crisis created by the junta instead of focusing on regional issues, they have a problem, and they need to deal with it.

I am dismayed by the policy that Thai Prime Minister Thaksin is pursuing with regard to Burma. Thailand is one of our oldest friends in the region. The actions by Prime Minister Thaksin to close down offices of Burmese democracy groups dedicated to promoting nonviolence and collecting information on human rights abuses is nothing short of alarming.

Just today I have received a report that the Thais are seeking to shut a hospital and deport registered migrant workers, including health workers, caring for IDPs.

Six, we could ask Japan to do more. Primarily, they could take a role in sponsoring a tough Burma resolution at the upcoming U.N. Human Rights Conference.

And seven, you could maintain congressional involvement, and to each and everyone of you I ask to stay engaged and articulate support for the Burmese democracy movement on a regular basis, to visit government officials, and ensure that the Administration is doing all it can to carry out the provisions of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act.

In conclusion, I want to speak to one activist, Min Ko Naing, who has spent the last 12 years in jail, solitary confinement, only rarely does he have human contact. His sentence for participating in the democracy movement expired long ago, but he remains imprisoned. The junta has offered him a deal. If you sign a statement renouncing all political activity and denouncing the NLD, you can walk free. He has refused. Imagine anyone of us in this room being in the same situation, and I ask what would you do.

Min Ko Naing's courage should inspire us because the strength of his convictions are shared with thousands of Burmese, and that is why one day, it might not be tomorrow or a month from tomorrow, but some day freedom will come this tortured land.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mitchell follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT AND MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY MICHAEL

MITCHELL, ORION STRATEGIES

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify. It was just two months ago when this Congress voiced its collective outrage at the Burmese military regime and passed the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act that President Bush signed on July 28, 2003. By many accounts, the measures contained in this legislation have hit the regime hard. This hearing comes at a critical time. The U.S. has taken far reaching actions, but much more is necessary-from the U.S. and our allies-if Burmese democracy activists are to achieve their goal of removing one of the world's most odious regimes and replacing it with the democracy that was stolen from them decades ago.

At this point, I believe any hope of a dialogue between the regime and Burma's democratic forces, led by imprisoned Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, is dead. In fact, the junta has never shown any interest in seeking negotiations to break the political impasse between their regime and Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) a political movement that was chosen by an overwhelming electoral victory in 1990 to run the country. Suu Kyi's cyclic arrest and re-arrest is nothing more than a cynical ploy to manipulate the international community and the United Nations (U.N.) into believing that political negotiation is taking place while crushing

internal dissent. The massacre of over 100 NLD members and the near murder of Suu Kyi on the night of May 30th should offer final proof that this regime, fundamentally evil as it is, has absolutely no interest-none-in giving up power. Therefore, we must now focus our efforts on strategies and programs that will gain the release of Suu Kyi and strengthen Burma's internal movement. The junta is vulnerable and I do not believe their grip on power is secure. Burma's democracy activists are not asking for the 82nd Airborne. They are able and willing to fight their own battles. What they are asking for is support from the international community that includes a comprehensive sanctions scheme and further isolation of the regime. These elements, when combined with a nonviolent grassroots civic mobilization of the population, hold the most promise of sweeping the junta aside and bringing the NLD to power.

We have critical, strategic priorities throughout Southeast Asia. Dealing with North Korea's nuclear brinksmanship, the ongoing war against terror groups in the region, China and Taiwan, as well as social ills such as HIV/AIDS are demanding, ongoing issues. We might ask ourselves, what is the strategic relevance of what happens in Burma? I believe the answer to that question is that until the political stalemate in Burma is resolved and the NLD is allowed to take power, Burma will remain a failed state ruled by tyrants whose oppression serves to destabilize Southeast Asia and affect us here at home. The regime's involvement in promoting and protecting drug trafficking and narco-kingpins serves to flood the region with methamphetamines and our streets with high-grade heroin. President Bush stated that Burma is a national security threat to the U.S. in his communication to Congress that Burma was not cooperating with us on counter-narcotics issues.

The junta's deliberate lack of health care and education to stem the HIV/AIDS epidemic makes Burma a regional epicenter for the spread of this disease. The regime can spend $100 million to purchase MiG-29 fighters from Russia and pay Ukraine $50 million for T-72 tanks, yet budget barely $40,000 on AIDS. After all, if people are fighting this disease, they cannot be fighting the regime. The junta is responsible for sending waves of refugees over Burma's borders into neighboring states as they flee horrific human rights abuses. The actions of the Burmese regime are responsible for tens of millions of dollars in costs to neighboring states as they are forced to pick up the tab for the economic and social costs of human rights abuses, AIDS, sex trafficking of children and women, increased crime, and corruption within their borders.

It also bears mentioning that the junta has contracted with Russia for a nuclear reactor allegedly for research purposes. This should alarm us—and Burma's neighbors. There is simply no reason for the country to have any type of nuclear program. The regime should not be trusted with any amount of radioactive material. The junta's closed society, track record of breaking basic international agreements they have ratified (such as the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child), and complete disregard for international institutions immediately casts into question their motives in developing a nuclear program.

Conversely, realizing the Burmese peoples' desire for a democratic Burma would play a pivotal role in providing stability and economic growth in a region rife with ethnic tensions, border disputes, terrorist threats, and undergoing major social challenges.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SOME OBSERVATIONS:

First: The "constructive engagement" approach that many countries favored, especially Japan, Thailand, and Malaysia, in dealing with the junta, is a complete failure. The notion that this regime would change through international handholding and assimilation into groups such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was fantasy at best. The bottom line is this regime, led by General Than Swe will, just as Pol Pot's in Cambodia, or Kim Jong Il's North Korea, use any means including intimidation, torture, violence and murder to stay in power.

Second: We should not seek accommodation or negotiation with this junta; our goal should be nothing short of doing all we can to support Burma's non-violent democracy_movement in their quest, and ours, for regime change. Passage of the Burma Freedom and Democracy Act is a first step in this direction and codified this policy. This goal must not change even if Suu Kyi is released tomorrow.

Third: Sanctions work, but they are one part of a three-step strategy. Sanctions by themselves will not remove the junta from power. However, they are a strategic necessity in order to cut off the ability of the regime to finance its instruments of terror-such as the military, intelligence service and street level enforcers and informers. It will not be easy for the regime to make up the estimated $350 million in legal exports that our sanctions regime will cost them. Diplomatic activity, both