Rare glimpse of Hmong in Laos fails to quell concerns

• Cached page:  http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/173030/rare-glimpse-of-hmong-in-laos-fails-to-quell-concernsg
• Published: 28/03/2010 at 12:49 PM
• Online news: Asia

A small, woollen-hatted woman, one of thousands of ethnic Hmong recently expelled from Thailand, creeps up to the row of rare foreign visitors in her new Laotian village.

Lao Hmong hill tribe villagers watch as foreign media and diplomats visit the village of Phongkham in Bolikhamsai province on March 26, 2010 where some 3,000 Lao Hmong were resettled after recently being deported from Thailand.

“I want to go to another country,” she whispers to the diplomats and journalists, who have been invited by the communist government for a tightly-monitored trip to this remote, newly-built community.

“I don’t feel good here in the village,” says the 50-year-old, while the Laotian army’s deputy chief, Brigadier General Bouasieng Champaphan, is delivering a rather different message to the audience.

“All the returnees are calm and stable and satisfied that they have returned to live in their home country again,” he says. “They are very pleased and satisfied with the government’s assistance.”

Thailand faced a barrage of international criticism in December when it used troops to forcibly repatriate about 4,500 Hmong from camps in the country’s north back to Laos, despite concerns of persecution on their return.

The Hmong’s fear of retribution from the Laotian regime is a lingering remnant of the Vietnam War, when members of the ethnic hill tribe fought in a US-funded irregular army as the conflict secretly spilled into Laos.

After the communists took power in 1975, some Hmong hid in the jungle and fought a low-level insurgency against the regime. Hundreds of thousands of Lao and Hmong fled the country.

Though Thailand insisted all the Hmong recently sent back to Laos were illegal economic migrants, the United Nations recognised 158 of them as refugees, but was never allowed to assess if the thousands of others needed international protection.

While diplomats say there have been no reports of mistreatment, suspicions remain about the Hmong’s rights and living standards in Phonkham village, which was built specifically for the group in central Bolikhamsay province.

“They’ve put them on a Laos equivalent of a desert island,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director of Human Rights Watch. “There’s no sustained access to these people or quality of access.”

Laotian officials said 3,457 of the repatriated Hmong were sent to Phonkham, while others went back to their home towns.

Laos said it would grant the international community’s request for “free and unfettered” access to the returnees within 30 days of their repatriation, but so far visits have been scarce, brief and strictly monitored.

On the latest two-hour visit Friday, foreign diplomats, reporters and a few UN representatives were among those escorted in two helicopters from the Laotian capital Vientiane, a 45-minute flight away.

The delegation was ushered straight to an unfinished village hall to be greeted by smiling youngsters in traditional Hmong dress, before a briefing by central government and Phonkham officials.

“In the beginning of their resettlement… they were afraid because of not being familiar with their new environment and not understanding the Lao government’s policies,” said Bounthan Douangtanya of the village administration committee.

“But the authorities have conducted an education course for these returnees in order to… make them understand the policy regulations,” he said, before detailing plans to develop the village infrastructure.

Diplomats were given a brief but revealing chance to question the 300 or so Hmong gathered in the hall.

How many had been outside of the village since arriving? One hand went up in response. How many had received money, parcels or anything else from contacts outside the village? Two. How many had yet received ID cards or official registration? None.

As the meeting ended, several of the Hmong approached their visitors, saying they wanted to leave. “I want to go to Canada,” one 16-year-old girl told AFP, in English, as tears welled in her eyes.

She said she was one of the 158 recognised refugees who have been offered resettlement in Canada, the United States, Australia and the Netherlands. Embassies have been told by Laos that these people now want to stay.

One diplomat on the trip said that the Hmong who “explicitly” expressed a desire to leave “seemed to be demonstrating courage in coming to talk to us, despite the best efforts of the authorities to stage-manage the situation”.

But the visit was “altogether not too bad,” another Western diplomat said. “Obviously the transparency of the dialogue was limited,” he added.

Brigadier General Bouasieng said foreign countries willing to assist the village should contact the government in Laos, which is one of Asia’s poorest countries.

There are hopes that such aid, if allowed, would facilitate more openness about the Hmong.

“I think (the Laotian authorities) are going to struggle to support them. The trade-off is: if they want donations, they must give access,” said Robertson of Human Rights Watch.

Rights groups say they have serious concerns about availability of clean water, food and medical treatment for the group.

“As long as access is strictly scripted and stage-managed, visitors will not be able to assess the well-being of the returnees,” said Brittis Edman of Amnesty International.

Writer: AFP News agency

Position: Agence France-Presse



2009 National Trade Estimate Report – Laos

2009 National Trade Estimate Report – Laos

http://www.ustr.gov/countries-regions/southeast-asia-pacific/laos

The United States is working closely with Laos to implement the terms of the 2005 Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA), normalizing trade relations between the two countries, and to support its accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Under the BTA, the United States extended Normal Trade Relations status (NTR) (formerly referred to as “most favored nation” or MFN) to products of Laos. Laos agreed to implement a variety of reforms to its trade regime, including most favored nation and national treatment for products of the United States, transparency in rule-making, establishment of a regime to protect intellectual property rights, and implementation of WTO-compliant customs regulations and procedures.

The United States is working closely with Laos to implement the terms of the BTA and to support Laos’ efforts to accede to the WTO. The fourth meeting of the WTO Working Party for Laos’ accession took place in July 2008.

U.S.-Laos Trade Facts

Laos is currently our 173rd largest goods trading partner with $61 million in total (two ways) goods trade during 2008. Goods exports totaled $18 million; Goods imports totaled $42 million. The U.S. goods trade deficit with Laos was $24 million in 2008.

A Failure to Learn from the Past: Will granting NTR lead to democratization in Laos?

Will granting NTR lead to democratization in Laos?

millions of US dollars a year in real transfers and commitments in the form of …. not lead to democracy in Laos. However, NTR with democracy will lead to …
www.laoeconomy.org/views/v041115ntr.pdf

Laos: Background and U.S. Relations

by T Lum – 2004 – Cited by 1 – Related articles
pressure on human rights, particularly regarding religious freedom, and welcomed NTR status as a step toward better U.S.–Lao relations. …
https://www.policyarchive.org/bitstream/handle/…/RS20931_20051019.pdf

A Failure to Learn from the Past: Open Letter of the Lao Community of the Northwest to US Ambassador Douglas Hartwick

Seattle, January 26, 2003

H.E. Ambassador Douglas Hartwick Honorable Congressman Adam Smith

The Lao-American community of the Northwest submits this open letter to urge H.E. Ambassador Douglas Hartwick and Honorable Congressman Adam Smith to:

(1) Intervene with the Lao Communist Government for an immediate and unconditional release of all political and religious prisoners held in various prisons or “re-education” camps, or rather, prison camps, throughout Laos.

(2) Call on the US Administration and Congress to delay the granting of Normal Trade Relations (NTR) status to the Lao Communist Government.

First, the community particularly urges the United States Government, the United Nations Human Rights Commission, and the European Union Parliament to call for the immediate and unconditional release of the five student leaders – Mr. Thongpaseuth Keuakoun, Mr. Khamphouvieng Sisaath, Mr. Seng Aloun Phengphanh, Mr. Bouavanh Chanhmanivong and Mr. Keochay. These five student leaders were arrested in October 1999 for attempting to hold a peaceful demonstration in Vientiane (the capital of Laos) on October 26, 1999. The demonstration’s main objectives were (1) the respect of human rights, (2) the release of political prisoners, (3) fair and open election and (4) the implementation of a multi-political parties system to achieve true democracy in Laos.

These student leaders have been arrested for peacefully exercising their rights as guaranteed in Article 31 of the LPDR’s own Constitution, promulgated in August 1991. Article 31 of the LPDR’s Constitution stipulates: “Lao citizens have the right and freedom of speech, press and assembly; and have the right to set up associations and to stage demonstrations which are not contrary to the law.”

The arrest and the continued incarceration of the student leaders also violate the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, particularly, Articles 2, 11, 19, and 20(1). Article 20(1) of the Declaration specifically stipulates: “Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.” Laos is a signatory of the Declaration.

True to its dictatorial principles and long tradition of deceptive and lying practices, the LPDR denied and deceived that there ever was a demonstration on October 26, 1999. According to Amnesty International’s Public Statement of October 25, 2002 (AI Index: ASA 26/005/2002), a spokeman of the Lao Foreign Ministry was quoted, in November 1999, as saying: “I have checked the report thoroughly and stand firm that there was no protest or arrest of anyone in the past two weeks. There might have been some drunken people scuffling or making noise that caused outsiders visiting Vientiane to think they were protesting.” These official lies of the LPDR were unmasked when a group of six students, who participated in the demonstration, were able to escape Laos immediately after the failed attempt demonstration and were granted asylum in Seattle, Washington in October 2000.

The Lao Communist Government would have continued its charade of deception if it were not for the strong pressure from the European Union parliamentarians to come clean regarding the arrest of the protesters. According to the same October 25, 2002 Amnesty International’s Public Statement, Lao officials admitted in June 2002 during their talk with European parliamentarians that the five student leaders had been sentenced in June 2001. How could there have been a sentence if there were no arrests? Once again, the Lao Communist Government was caught lying.

Second, while applauding the US Government’s policies of engagement with the Lao Communist Government, the Lao-American Community of the Northwest strongly believes that granting NTR to the Lao Communist Government at this point would be counterproductive and lead to further abuse of human rights. It would also send a wrong message by rewarding a government that violates basic human rights as stipulated in the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Economically, Laos has very few products and virtually no services that would benefit from gaining NTR status and thus, free or low tariff access to the US market, except for the garment industry. The Lao people would not enjoy any benefits as a result of the NTR status. Only the ruling elites and the foreign garment tycoons would fully reap the benefits. As experiences in other developing countries have shown that there have been frequent abuse of women and children in the garment industry in countries where transparency is not the norm, but rampant corruption at the highest level of government is. Laos, under the Communist regime, is no different, if not worse. True, there have been numerous decrees issued to “fight and eradicate” corruption; as a matter of fact, every prime minister since Kaysone Phomvihane, the first prime minister of LPDR, through Boungnang Vorachit, the current prime minister, has issued at least one such decree. One has to wonder why corruption today is more rampant. The answer is because in a dictatorial regime the people cannot scrutinize and question their government. This answer may seem simplistic and obvious, but that’s the true nature of dictatorship.

It has been almost thirty years that the Lao people have suffered under the dictatorship of the Lao Communist Government. Although there appears to be some economic improvement after billion of dollars in foreign aids and foreign investments, the vast majority of the Lao people still live in poverty today. Laos, as a country, has been driven further into one of the least developed countries. While the country and the people are in dire poverty, the ruling elites are enjoying all the luxuries that money can buy. Let’s think for a moment: how can a person with a monthly salary of less than five hundred dollars (the official salary of a minister of the LPDR) afford to pay cash for luxury cars and mansions?

Another economic reality is that Laos is a landlocked country where all its exporting products have to go through its neighboring countries such as Thailand and Vietnam. The labor cost must be low enough to offset the high costs of transit transportation. This condition, adding to the rampant corruption at the highest level of government, will lead to a slavery of the Lao women and children working in the exporting industries. What guarantee will they have for reasonable wages and working conditions when the Lao Communist Government has repeatedly ignored its own constitution and its international obligations under the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Politically, by granting NTR status at this point, the US Government would inadvertently send the wrong message to the Lao people that it rewards a dictatorial government, which consistently ignores its own constitution and its international obligations to uphold and comply with the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It would dash any hopes and dreams the Lao people may still have and hold dear to their hearts that some day their country, through the international pressure, would enjoy true liberty and democracy that we, Americans, have been taking for granted for so long. Any economic benefits from the NTR status would only further enhance and perpetuate the oppressive and persecutorial regime of the Lao Communist Government and the vast majority of the Lao people would continue to live in poverty and fear.

The Lao-American community of the Northwest believes that there will be a time when NTR status will benefit the vast majority of the Lao people. That time will come when the Lao people can freely and without fear, elect their own representative form of government that is not imposed upon them by a one dictatorial party-state government as they are currently forced to endure. Until then, NTR status would just enhance the bloody, oppressive hands of the Lao Communist Government.

Once again, the Lao-American community of the Northwest calls on the US Government, the United Nations Human Rights Commission, and the European Union to press the Lao Communist Government for an immediate and unconditional release of all political and religious prisoners, especially the five student leaders. The community also re-iterates its call for delaying the granting of NTR status until human rights violations are ceased and verifiably guaranteed.

Lao-American Community of The Northwest

http://www.radicalparty.org/en/content/laos-open-letter-lao-community-northwest-us-ambassador-douglas-hartwick

A Failure to Learn from the Past: Establishing Normal Trade Relations with Vietnam & Laos

Cached page: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Establishing+Normal+Trade+Relations+with+Vietnam+&+Laos–.-a077806352

* Congressional ratification of the bilateral trade agreements with Vietnam and Laos will complete the long-delayed normalization In relational database management, a process that breaks down data into record groups for efficient processing. There are six stages. By the third stage (third normal form), data are identified only by the key field in their record.  process with these two former U.S. enemies.

* Bilateral trade agreements are part of standard international practice and should not be confused with multilateral structures such as APEC APEC
in full Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

Trade group established in 1989 in response to the growing interdependence of Asia-Pacific economies and the advent of regional economic blocs (such as the European Union and the North American Free Trade Area) , NAFTA NAFTA
in full North American Free Trade Agreement

Trade pact signed by Canada, the U.S., and Mexico in 1992, which took effect in 1994. Inspired by the success of the European Community in reducing trade barriers among its members, NAFTA created the world’s , or the WTO See World Trade Organization. .

* As normal relations between the U.S. and Southeast Asia Southeast Asia, region of Asia (1990 est. pop. 442,500,000), c.1,740,000 sq mi (4,506,600 sq km), bounded roughly by the Indian subcontinent on the west, China on the north, and the Pacific Ocean on the east.  continue to develop, cold war thinking resonates less and less, even among veterans and Asian-Americans.

After years of negotiations, stalling tactics, and domestic political debate, the U.S. Congress is considering ratification of bilateral trade agreements (BTAs) with the Socialist Republic Socialist Republic is a republic governed on the principles of socialism usually by a communist or a socialist party. They are usually focused on a centrally planned economy, but sometimes they mix their economy with elements of a free market
….. Click the link for more information. of Vietnam and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR Lao PDR Lao People’s Democratic Republic  or Laos) this summer. These agreements represent the culmination of the post-Vietnam War normalization process. Although the Vietnamese agreement is much more specific, both documents establish normal trade relations (NTR NTR Normal Trade Relations (international economic term; Most Favored Nation, MFN)
NTR Nitro (Nintendo DS codename)
NTR National Trauma Registry (Canada)
NTR Non-Traditional Revenue , previously called “most favored nation Most Favored Nation

A privilege granted by one country to another whereby the products of the privileged country pay the lowest delivered duty paid charged by the granting country.
….. Click the link for more information.” status), lowering tariff levels from an average of 40% to less than 3%. The agreements also provide for expanded trade in services Trade in Services refers to the sale and delivery of an intangible product, called a service, between a producer and consumer. Trade in services takes place between a producer and consumer that are, in legal terms, based in different countries, or economies, this is called  and protection of intellectual property rights.

The U.S. broke relations with Vietnam in 1975; however, ties with Laos continued unabated and have never been interrupted. After President Clinton lifted the postwar embargo on Vietnam in 1994 and the two countries established diplomatic relations in 1995, negotiations began on a trade agreement. The agreement was signed in July 2000 after an agreement in principle was reached a year earlier. The Lao agreement was signed in December 1998.

NTR status is enjoyed by the vast majority of America’s trading partners. The only other nations currently excluded are Afghanistan, Cuba, Libya, Iraq, and North Korea–none of which has normal diplomatic relations with Washington. Ratifying the Vietnamese and Lao BTAs gives no special market access that other countries do not possess. Rather, it finishes the decade-long process of dismantling the system of cold war sanctions applied to America’s former Southeast Asian enemies: sanctions that amounted to a continuation of the war by other means.

The Vietnamese and Lao BTAs are subject to different congressional procedures for ratification. Vietnam must follow the provisions of the 1975 Jackson-Vanik Amendment, requiring yearly congressional approval of a presidential waiver allowing trade. (President Bush recently extended the waiver for another year.) Since Laos’s government did not become communist until December 1975, however, it falls outside the Jackson-Vanik provisions. Thus Vietnam’s NTR status, if approved, will be renewable on an annual basis. But Laos’s new trade status will be permanent from the beginning. Another impact of Vietnam’s Jackson-Vanik status is that Congress cannot amend its trade agreement, whereas it can make changes to the Lao BTA (Business Technology Association, Kansas City, MO, http://www.bta.org). A membership association of manufacturers, dealers, distributors and service companies in the business equipment and systems industries, founded in 1994. .

Both the Vietnamese and Lao agreements are part of President Bush’s trade agenda, introduced by U.S. Trade Representative (USTR USTR United States Trade Representative
USTR United States Transuranium Registry (Richmond, Washington)
USTR Underground Storage Tank Regulation ) Robert Zoellick in May. The USTR originally hoped to package the entire agenda together, including fast-track or “trade promotion authority,” in an omnibus bill. Following the defection of Sen. James Jeffords, however, Senate Democrats clarified that they prefer to act on each item of the trade agenda separately. President Bush formally submitted the Vietnamese BTA on June 8, giving both houses of Congress 75 working days to respond. The Lao agreement has not yet been submitted, but may well be added as an amendment to other legislation. For instance, the proposals for NTR for Kyrgyzstan and Georgia were attached to the 2000 Miscellaneous Trade and Tariffs Bill once a consensus was reached to go ahead with these agreements.

Approval of the Vietnamese BTA should have a smoother ride through Congress than the Lao agreement. NTR with Vietnam enjoys clear bipartisan support from war veterans such as Sens. John Kerry (D-MA), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and John McCain (R-AZ). President Clinton’s landmark visit to Vietnam last year further raised the profile of emerging relations between the former enemies. And there is considerable interest among American businesses in investment in Vietnam’s 80 million-person consumer market. Laos attracts much less attention from either the political or business standpoint, owing both to its small size and the still-unacknowledged realities of the secret U.S. war against large portions of the country. Nevertheless, according to Ted Posner, counsel to Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), there is “no visible opposition” to the Lao agreement in the Senate Finance Committee; its passage is merely a matter of time and consensus building.

Some members of the House and Senate may still be tempted to attach a nonbinding “sense of Congress” resolution to either agreement or to add explicit conditions in the case of Laos. Changes in the Senate make passage of hostile amendments less likely, but the danger still exists of old-line conservatives once again blocking a change in U.S. policy. As normal relations between the U.S. and Southeast Asia continue to develop, however, cold war thinking resonates less and less, even among veterans and Asian-Americans.

Andrew Wells-Dang <wells_dang@hotmail.com> currently works as the resident director of CET CET
abbr.
Central European Time

---

CET Central European Time

CET n abbr (= Central European Time) → hora de Europa central

CET abbr Academic Programs, Inc., in Ho Chi Minh City Ho Chi Minh City, formerly Saigon, city (1997 pop. 5,250,000), on the right bank of the Saigon River, a tributary of the Dong Nai, Vietnam.  (Saigon), Vietnam. The views expressed in this brief are his own.