THE FIGHTING IN TACHILEK

THE FIGHTING IN TACHILEK

This has been covered extensively by the media, including S.H.A.N. itself, and also by the Burmese, who gave a very different picture from what actually happened, on 6 May. 

Militarily, the Burmese have won - albeit at a very heavy price - a few hundred square kilometers of territory formerly under Shan resistance control, by relying solely on massive firepower. But behind their trumpeted headlines, the Shans have already penetrated their rear, welcomed and supported by the people who were deeply moved and touched by Second Lieutenant Khwang's heroic death during the Tachilek raid on 20 March. 

The fight in 1994 drew a clean line between the Burmese and the Shans and rekindled the Shan nationalism of the people who had long been kept intimidated under the Burmese military. The fight this year, particularly the raid on Tachiled, gave the finest example of a people fighting and dying for a sacred cause and who, by their heroic sacrifice, proved to the skeptical world, that it was not for drugs that they gave their cherished lives. Meanwhile the SLORC, by their killing and mistreatment of the populace as well as the burning of many houses, which was vividly covered by the world and local media, have proved once again the bankruptcy of any policy of appeasement towards them. 

To the author of "Smack Land"

This is in response to an article by Lally Weymouth entitled "Smack Land: it's time to attack the drug lords in Burma," published on March 24 1995, in the USA.

This interesting article begins with the message that whatever happens in Burma, America's first and foremost concern is to stop the flow of drugs from there to the States. It goes on to suggest rather persuasively that despite the serious human rights records of the Burmese government, America should help it fight against the rebels, whom the junta calls drug traffickers. 

The intensity of the article is such that one can almost hear the author exclaiming: "To hell with human rights violations, our job is to stop the drugs from poisoning our sons and daughters, and we will do it!" Unfortunately, it ends with the conclusion that the military option against the rebels will not eradicate the heroin problem. That is like saying: To stop the flow of drugs, you have to attack Khun Sa. However, attacking him will not stop the flow of drugs. 

Which leaves the reader wondering why he should support the idea at all. 

The gist of the author appears to be that human rights are only for Americans and not for the rest of the world, especially those filthy Asians who could be up to their necks in dictators, but he couldn't care less. 

He also does not seem to know that SLORC itself is the root of the American heroin problem. Overthrowing or helping to overthrow the SLORC means helping oneself to get rid of the problem. On the other hand, helping it to deal with the problem means working against one's own ends. 

Ultimately, of course, it is the decision of the American people. Since America does not lack for people who see things as they really are, I don't believe I need to say much. But one thing I've learned is that it is hard, and sometimes absolutely impossible, to reason with people who refuse to be reasonable. 
Khun Pha