The NCGUB's Official Response to the Editorial of Irrawaddy, TIME FOR SOUL SEARCHING,Vol. 8, No. 8, August 2000

To the Editor,

The National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma believes that a free and independent press is crucial for maintaining a healthy democracy. Although we have not yet achieved democracy in Burma, the NCGUB believes
that the freedom of the press amongst Burmese exiles should be encouraged and nurtured. In this context, the NCGUB welcomes the editorial in the Irrawaddy magazine in August (Vol.8, No.8).

It is indeed time for the Burmese democracy movement to seriously assess both its successes and its failures. We need to do so not because we are facing a crisis of leadership and extreme frustration as intimated by the editorial. We need to do so because we need to freely debate on a wide range of issues including how after dismantling the military dictatorship, we will begin to rebuild a new Burma, which is democratic and respectful of the rights of all its citizens.

In this sense, the NCGUB regrets that the Irrawaddy did not use the opportunity to open up a serious and informed debate. It merely reiterated unsubstantiated allegations and misinformed rumors with undeclared source of
information. The NCGUB was surprised that a respected journal like the Irrawaddy did not check its facts or even ask the NCGUB for clarification before taking a position. In the interest of opening up a free and informed debate, the NCGUB would now like to respond to some of the issues raised.The NCGUB was not formed by a group of elected parliamentarians who decided to do so on their own. Only the National League for Democracy has the people
’s mandate to form a government. It was the resolution of the NLD at Ghandi Hall in July 1990 subsequently backed by the signatures from 250 elected representatives, which provided the basis to form a provisional government.
When the military junta began nation-wide crackdown on the elected representatives, a small group managed to escape to the Thai border. Recognizing the validity of the NLD’s claim, the elected representatives were welcomed by the Democratic Alliance of Burma and the National Democratic Front. With the support of all major organizations including All Burma Student Democratic Front, Karen National Union, the Kachin Independence Organization, and the New Mon State Party, the NCGUB was formed in December 1990.

From the beginning, a difference of opinion has existed amongst Burmese exiles regarding the NCGUB. Some objected because their advice against forming a government was not heeded. Some were disappointed because they were not included. Yet others were disappointed because the NCGUB could not take care of the needs of all Burmese citizens in Burma and abroad. Second, Dr Sein Win and his fellow parliamentarians were implementing a decision taken by the majority of elected representatives. They had no choice but to form a government. With the consent directly received from fellow members of representatives, the parliamentarians felt they could not allow the mandate to be weakened by including non-elected cabinet members. Third, the NCGUB had no resources to look after itself, let alone the people
of Burma whether at home or abroad. Therefore, from the beginning the NCGUB was disappointed, as it was not able to meet the expectations raised.

Recognizing its limitation, the NCGUB focussed on its political mandate instead and tried to work within its understanding of the framework acceptable to the NLD. For example, it strengthened its alliance with the ethnic forces through the National Council of the Union of Burma, and formally adopted as its objective, the establishment of a democracy and a federal Union of Burma. Furthermore, in 1995, recognizing the need to be more inclusive, the NCGUB was reconstituted to include parliamentarians from the ethnic states.

Internationally, the NCGUB concentrated on denying the military regime resources that sustain its rule and the legitimacy it needed to gain those resources. At the same time, the NCGUB worked to increase both the legitimacy of and resources for the democracy movement in order to bring about political change in Burma.The NCGUB is not the future government of Burma. When there is a transition to democracy in Burma and the NLD and other political parties are allowed to fulfil their mandates, the role of the NCGUB will end. That is perhaps one reason why the NCGUB has not actively sought support in Burma or abroad for itself. The NCGUB’s mistake was perhaps to assume that if it concentrated on achieving its objectives, the whole movement would benefit and appreciate its efforts.

The NCGUB has not, as claimed, received large amounts of funding from various international agencies and western governments. The NCGUB first received financial support from the Democratic Alliance of Burma. In 1991, a Canadian institution provided funds to enable Burmese parliamentarians to receive training in international diplomacy in the US and some non-government organizations (NGO) assisted the NCGUB to make its first attempt at the United Nations General Assembly in New York to inform governments about the situation in Burma. It was successful in getting the UNGA to adopt a consensus resolution on the human rights situation in Burma.To date, the NCGUB has been able to get 9 consecutive consensus resolutions on Burma at the UNGA and the UN Commission on Human Rights. Each subsequent resolution was stronger in recognizing the results of the 1990 general elections and eventually called on the Secretary-General to implement the resolutions and assist in resolving the situation in Burma.After Daw Aung San Suu Kyi received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, Norway began to fund the NCGUB but it was always conscious of the ethnic diversity of Burma and as a matter of policy, has never assisted the NCGUB alone. In fact, in 1992, at the initiative of the NCGUB, the Norwegian Burma Council hosted the first Burma Donors Forum in order to ensure that agencies funding Burma projects did not exclude funding to ethnic and smaller groups without international access. A quick analysis will show that the ethnic people or smaller groups have not been neglected as claimed by the editorial. This information is available to the public from funding agencies.A point on funding that also needs to be clarified is that most funds are tied. In other words, funds for humanitarian aid, human rights, or other activities like journalism cannot be used by the NCGUB for political purposes. In the same way, funds for democratic development, etc, cannot be
used for humanitarian or other purposes. Reducing funds to the NCGUB will not increase funds available to refugees or an ethnic human rights organization, or vice versa.

Most funding agencies are very specific about what their funds can be used for. Funding is not automatic and most projects including the NCGUB’s are reviewed by funding agencies every year to ensure that funds are used in the
prescribed way. In addition, external accounting firms audit the NCGUB's books annually.

A major problem the NCGUB has had to overcome was the initial reluctance of agencies and governments to fund ethnic groups. This was because they were seen as either being armed or involved in drug trafficking. Today, it is
accepted by all that the ethnic peoples are involved in a political struggle which is as valid as the struggle for democracy.

Two current major programs that specifically address the political needs of the ethnic peoples are the European Office for the Development of Democracy and the National Reconciliation Program. Although neither is managed by the
NCGUB, the application for funds for these programs was given political support by the NCGUB.

In this respect, where possible or when asked, the NCGUB has always supported the application for funding by any credible organization with a genuine program. The NCGUB has never blocked funding for any organization
even if the organization does not recognize the NCGUB or agree with its policies. The NCGUB has on occasion raised objections or not recommended certain projects if they do not meet generally accepted minimum accountability and transparency requirements, or are divisive, or are deemed counter-productive or involve violence.

The NCGUB, however, has no veto power over the funding decision of any of the agencies. The agencies make their own decisions according to their own criteria and mandate. In fact, many projects are funded without being referred to the NCGUB. In general, the NCGUB also does not get involved in funding decisions for humanitarian purposes on the borders of Burma. Aid for refugees, which amount to several million dollars a year are handled capably by professional agencies.If funds for the ethnic political struggle have been limited, it is because funding for political activities are limited. Funding for the NCGUB has also been limited. For the first 4 years, only Canada and Norway funded the NCGUB. In 1994, US-based institutions started funding the NCGUB for the movement’s delegations to the UN. Sweden assisted the NCGUB to reorganize in 1995 and Denmark started at the end of 1996.

In the 10 years of its existence, the NCGUB has received only a fraction of international funds that have been channeled to the support of democratic cause in Burma. For example, the NCGUB has received no more than 5% of what the US Congress has earmarked for supporting democratic struggle in Burma since it started the funding. In addition, these funds are used not only to run NCGUB offices but to fund all its activities as well as consultations with its allies in the movement around the world. Comparatively, the total amount received by the NCGUB in 10 years is less than the annual Burma budget of one of the funding agencies.

Information about the NCGUB’s activities is available to those who are interested – via the media in general, the Democratic Voice of Burma, the NCGUB’s website (www.ncgub.net), and the NCGUB’s newsletter and news updates. The NCGUB’s financial information is also available to those who have a need to know. The Irrawaddy would have been given the information if it had requested it. The information is not distributed to all because of security considerations. Although the NCGUB is working to establish a democracy, it must be remembered that the NCGUB is also engaged in a
struggle against a repressive military regime that would love to destroy not only the NCGUB but also the NLD and the movement.

Finally, the NCGUB should be judged on its political policies and its achievements according to its own objectives and not according to unrealistic expectations. The wide acceptance by the world community of the legitimate right of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD to govern Burma, the recognition that the ethnic peoples of Burma have a role in determining the future of Burma, the pariah status of the military regime, and the continued strong international support for the whole democracy movement are the NCGUB’ s achievements. By all means, let us debate and try to improve our
performance but let us do so based on facts and in order to benefit the movement.

Bo Hla-Tint
Chairman of the Finance Committee
National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma

September 20, 2000

The Burma Fund