First of all, on behalf of the NCGUB and elected MPs of Burma, I would like to express my deep appreciation to Forum Asia Democracy for giving me an opportunity to comment on the economic liberties in Burma. September 18 will mark the 14th anniversary of military takeover in Burma, and it is a painful reminder to look at the continuing saga of Burmese struggles for democracy as well as economic freedom. I commend the Forum Asia Democracy for convening this very timely conference, which I believe will be able to brainstorm on the urgent tasks in helping Burma achieve a breakthrough from the current stalemate.

I feel privileged to sit together with my fellow Southeast Asians in this panel. It reminds me how important are economic liberties to our countries, where every freedom is thoroughly denied to our people. The lack of economic and political freedom in our countries breed another destructive phenomenon—political corruption. The statement saying corruption is a common problem does not mean that all forms and instances of corruption are equally harmful. Corruption may be observed everywhere, but their nature and sources of problem differ radically among the countries. Questions of degree and kind are crucial to differentiate their varying effects on each society and the solutions needed to address them. In our countries, the most damaging form of corruption stems all the way from the top, which I will term as political corruption.

Political corruption is particularly important in the transitional economies and emerging markets. Such countries may include the countries which this conference is focusing: Burma, Laos and Vietnam. First, in these countries, political reforms lag economic liberalization, and the state has the enormous discretionary power to allocate economic resources. It means the state has ample authority to create rent and distribute it through corruption networks in order to maintain political support and to pursue private gains. Second, these states have recently liberalized their economies in terms of opening foreign trade and investment sectors as well as privatizing state economic enterprises. Increasing access to global capital and markets increases the opportunities to capture rents while lack of transparency in privatization led to siphoning of productive state assets to the hands of cronies. Third, the civil society barely exists in these countries; therefore, there is less awareness among the population to conceive the existence of corruption let alone mobilizing citizen's watchdogs to counter the political corruption. In effect, economic liberalization short of political reforms increases opportunity structures within these transition countries, which make these countries naturally vulnerable to political corruption.

It is often true that political corruption is rampant where the leaders on top are themselves corrupt. It is often true that political leadership deliberately distort policies to benefit their cronies and followers in a most corruptive way. This is a system which the current military regime in Burma keeps its power. In a way, corruption is basic to their strategy of maintaining in absolute control over the society. Under these circumstances, international and local business people are locked in a prisoners' dilemma in which the dominant strategy is to bribe. A corrupt equilibrium is reached, as a result of which rulers and top civil servants and some private companies gain, but society loses.

In order to stay in power in the face of strong opposition from the society, the military leaders also need to maintain the main income to their system of political corruption. The grease to this dictatorial wheel in Burma is drug; which my country produces the largest quantity of heroin and amphetamine type stimulants or ATS in the world. These drugs are causing enormous social problems in all neighboring states, particularly Thailand, Laos and China. The decline of productive assets in Burmese economy may have forced the regime to make a blind eye to the drug menace; and unless there are systemic changes, Burma will continue posing a great threat to the livelihood of neighboring populations.

Lack of economic liberties, high corruption, and dependence on drug economy all led to in high inflation, massive unemployment, and an unstable currency, which plagued the weak economy in recent weeks. Despite dire situations in the economy, the regime continued to make decisions that are detrimental to budgetary management or sound fiscal policy. The purchase of MIG-29 fighter jets and a nuclear reactor from Russia is proof of the regime’s blatant neglect of people's interests. Due to an extremely unstable macroeconomic framework, foreign firms -- including those from Burma's neighbors -- continue to divest from the country. Under these circumstances, I believe that no amount of external assistance can help correct the situation in Burma unless there is an overhaul of the economic system. Above all, meeting this daunting challenge requires a responsible and responsive government, a government which does not exist in Burma today.

Taking into account of all these circumstances, I conclude that Burma still needs international pressure s against the military regime to encourage it to come to the dialogue table for resolving the national crisis. It is time for Burma’s military to move beyond simple confidence building and enter into genuine political dialogue with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the ethnic leaders. With that hope in mind and that goal ever before us, my government will continue to maintain our international campaigns to rally sustained actions from the governments as well as the grassroots organizations. At the same time, we will support new initiatives that can mobilize humanitarian aid to the suffering and needy populations of Burma who so desperately need it. However, we will be careful to advise the governments and donors that such humanitarian activities should be consistent with and serve to reinforce our goals for democracy and human rights.

The release of our leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is welcoming news for all of us. Although I am much encouraged by her release and 300 political prisoners, we have yet to see a fundamental change in the SPDC's attitude toward a meaningful resolution of this crisis. More importantly, the National League for Democracy, which still owes the people the implementation of their overwhelming national mandate, needs to function as a full-fledged political party. The SPDC must be making efforts at liberalization in order to restore public trust and international support toward Burma. If they do not, then the reconciliation process will not be sustainable; steps towards democratic reform and the improved observance of human rights will be in jeopardy. Toward this end, I recognize and commend the efforts of U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan and his Special Envoy, Mr. Razali Ismail, for tirelessly working for reconciliation in Burma.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we are pleased that we have been able to work together with the European Union on issues such as humanitarian assistance to fight the HIV/AIDS, assistance without which the epidemic may and the already volatile social conditions in the country may worsen. We look for your continued interest and involvement in these push and pull strategies to encourage and facilitate democratic changes in Burma. Interest, involvement, and discussion can assist reconciliation. I am particularly grateful for this opportunity to speak with you today about Burma and discuss these important and compelling issues. Thank you.