(Ed. Notes: Articles in the October and December 1999 editions of Human Rights Solidarity also highlighted the People's Tribunal on Food Scarcity and Militarization in Burma. See also the Asian Legal Resource Centre's written submission to the UN Commission on Human Rights, based upon the Tribunal's report, in this edition.)

Last year, concerned by reports of growing hunger within Burma (Myanmar), the Asian Human Rights Commission convened the People's Tribunal on Food Scarcity and Militarization in Burma. Comprising three eminent leaders of Asia's human rights movement, the Tribunal's scope was to determine both whether or not food shortages exist in Burma and whether a causal nexus stands between this phenomenon and the policies and practices of the military government in that country. The Tribunal's report, Voice of the Hungry Nation, was released the following October. The Tribunal found that 'food scarcity is indeed a nationwide phenomenon' and furthermore 'while other factors such as natural disaster or mere incompetence may contribute to or exacerbate scarcity... none can override the state's role in denying the right to food.'

Lack of Change

The period since has been characterized by a lack of change in Burma. As the military remains intractable and basic economic rights are further eroded, sadly the Tribunal's analysis remains pertinent. Contrary to statements by members of the ruling council that 'the nation is gaining success in implementing the economic plan, hoping to achieve more progress than the estimated economic development rate,' independent assessments suggest otherwise. In its annual human rights report, the US State Department explicitly linked Burma's economic decline to military governance:

' Economic growth [in Burma] has slowed since the mid-1990's... in response to a worsening foreign exchange shortage, extensive overt and covert state involvement in economic activity, state monopolization of leading exports, a bloated bureaucracy, arbitrary and opaque governance, institutionalized corruption, poor human and physical infrastructure, and disproportionately large military spending at the expense of social development spending and stable prices.'

A World Bank advisor put it briefly: 'Clearly a major issue is the balance between military expenditures and social and infrastructure expenditures. Published budget figures show that per capita spending on the military is 9 times that of health services and twice that of education services, and the trend has been worsening.' The same advisor observed that according to World Bank data, 30% of children under ten years old suffer long-term malnourishment, a fact he referred to as Myanmar's 'silent emergency'.

Aggressive Policies

Apart from ongoing reductions of expenditure on social services, the government pursuit of aggressive agricultural expansion policies and compulsory paddy purchase programmes continues unabated. Speaking on this point, the regime's Vice-Chairman noted, 'Arrangements are in progress in extending cultivation of paddy which is the nation's main crop... [to] ensure adequate food for the nation till the population reaches 100 million mark and to export the surplus produce.' Ostensibly then, government policies are designed to ensure food security. In reality, they are focused on production targets aimed at building the economic base of a growing military infrastructure without regard for equitable collection and distribution of food stocks. Prevailing regional conditions are rarely taken into account when demands are placed on rural populations, mostly for paddy. Farmers unable to meet obligations to the government face the threat of land-confiscation. Those desperate to fulfill obligations are forced to buy paddy at prevailing market rates to give in lieu of their own poor harvests. All consumers feel the impact, because the overall rice price is inflated as a result. A confidential source pointed to another possible reason for steady inflation:

'Almost every giant businessman is... in debt, so to help them (because they are pro-government, searching their own interests) the government gives them loans and other facilities to plant paddy in deep water. Those paddy fields are situated in the delta area, maybe they are in saline water. When I asked about the results to one scholar, he said the paddy has grown up but the seeds are empty. So the giant businessmen collect and buy paddy from other areas to show they have succeeded. And our staple food, rice, is riding a rocket...'

Oppressive internal security measures effectively stifle most public dissent, yet occasional unrest becomes known to independent agencies such as the Democratic Voice of Burma (Norway):

'About 300 farmers held a peaceful demonstration on February 5 in front of the Kyaunggon Township Peace and Development Council Office. The farmers were reportedly demonstrating because their paddy had been seized by township authorities for failure to sell the prescribed amount to the government procurement agency. They were among those whose fields were affected by heavy rains during the monsoon season last year.

'Anti-riot units composed of the police and members of the Fire Brigade and Red Cross arrived at the scene and the township authorities urged the farmers to disperse, saying that the staging of such a public gathering to present their problem could affect the township's law and order situation. Township officials promised to hold talks with representatives of the farmers.'

Rural Hardship

Inevitably, remote rural areas suffer greatest hardship. While prices of essential goods rise in urban areas, the inflation rate is three to four times that again in rural villages. Reports of forced labor practices from all across the country emanate largely from rural areas. A field worker writing for Burma Issues remarked that in general 'during the rains when the people should be concentrating on their farming work, they can't because they have to labour for the Burma army... Sometimes after good rains, when they are ready to hoe the ground and plant seed, they are called to go serve as porters [on army operations] and so their work doesn't progress.' For subsistence labourers especially, a few days lost income can mean the difference between survival and starvation.

Villagers in border areas where the army pursues counter-insurgency operations experience extreme suffering. According to an interview by the Committee for Internally Displaced Karen People, villagers there

'Always have to live on alert... When we were in our hut the [Burma army] soldiers encircled us, aimed their guns at us and told us not to move. We dared not run. Some soldiers came into the hut, took all of our belongings and dismantled our rice store... We had 30 baskets of paddy but [they] destroyed some and took the rest away. Now we have nothing left to eat.'

The Tribunal heard of many such cases in great depth last year. It also heard of 'relocation camps', where the military compels villagers to reside. However as most of these sites offer no opportunities for residents to earn a living, many sneak back to their home areas in the hope of being able to survive by secretly eking out a living. The Shan Human Rights Foundation claims that some suffer death as a result:

'On 17.1.00, 4 displaced farmers who were returning from their farm were shot dead on the way... These farmers were originally located from Sa Haang village in Ho Yaan tract, which had been forcibly relocated to the outskirts of Kun-hing town in mid 1996... Because food was very scarce in the relocation site and there was no work available in town and no land to farm near the town, Loong Nya Mi had led some of his relatives to clear a plot of land about 2 miles from their former village...

'After about 10 days, they came back to the town. But before they reached the town... they were stopped by a column of 55-60 [Burma army] troops who accused them of having returned from providing rice for [rebel] Shan soldiers... Commander Than Oo then ordered his troops to shoot dead the 4 villagers...'

To many observers, the cessation of civil war seems the obvious solution not only to atrocious human rights violations such as this, but also to conditions of hunger in these areas. While a necessary step, it will not in itself achieve this end. That conditions of hunger will continue in these areas subsequent to the end of hostilities is a truism for those who know, live and work there. Again, from a field worker writing for Burma Issues: 'Unfortunately, the problems of hunger will not end once the civil war is finished. The land has been depleted by double cropping programs and the use of chemical fertilizers. Furthermore, there is a whole generation that was born in, and will marry and have children in, the refugee camps. These people will spend much of their life dependent on the NGOs... and won't have the skills to grow their own food...'

Conclusions

In these days after the annual harvest of the wet-season paddy crop, rice is at its most plentiful in Burma. Yet people remain hungry. While government intransigence digs deeper, wounds fester. The long-term deterioration of food security in Burma identified by the People's Tribunal in 1999 continues. The structural and militarist realities that have created food shortages remain firmly imbedded in Burmese society.

As the People's Tribunal prepares to present its findings to this year's UN Commission on Human Rights hearings, the international community is obliged to heed the Tribunal's call that an international commission be appointed with a view to examining this issue. Denial of food on a large scale is a crime against humanity. In spite of lip service that the Burmese government pays to principles of food for all, its continued lack of cooperation with outside agencies and attempts to thwart independent assessments of conditions within the country beg to be challenged by third parties. The 'silent emergency' must be heard.

The full text of the Tribunal report is available on-line, at the Tribunal web site: www.hrschool.org/tribunal. The title quote of this article is from a December 1999 statement by the National League for Democracy (Rangoon) on agricultural conditions in central Burma.