Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, December 2007, pages 33-34

Islam and the Near East in the Far East

Israel Seen as Burmese Regime’s “Open Door” to the West

By John Gee

IT IS A SIGN that a regime’s days may be coming to an end when old pals suddenly start denouncing it. The suppression of September protests in Myanmar’s major cities was condemned internationally, including by states that have had close business relations with the military rulers, such as China, India and Singapore.

Israel issued a critical statement and the Foreign Ministry informed Myanmar’s ambassador of its condemnation of his government’s behavior. One can only imagine the ambassador’s response on hearing that Israel opposed the brutal military suppression of a people demanding democratic rights and justice. Its protests about such behavior elsewhere in the world will never be treated seriously while it continues to subject Palestinians to its occupation.

The news out of Burma brought the rediscovery and circulation on the Internet of an article on military ties between Israel and the rulers of this Southeast Asian state initially published in Jane’s Intelligence Review in 2000 (“Myanmar and Israel develop military pact,” by William Ashton, March 1, 2000 issue). The article traced the relationship between the two states back to the 1950s, noting that an Israeli military mission visited Burma as early as 1954. Relations cooled after Gen. Ne Win seized power in 1962, but more because the new regime followed isolationist policies toward the outside world than for any other reason. After the current regime took over in 1988, relations with Israel warmed, as most countries shunned it.

Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy won 80 percent of the vote in the election held in 1990, but the generals refused to recognize the result, placed Suu Kyi under house arrest and imprisoned all the elected members of parliament on whom they could lay their hands. According to William Ashton, Israel shipped arms to Burma in 1989, reportedly including weaponry captured from the PLO in Lebanon in 1982 (if so, it must have been left over from what it sent to the Nicaraguan Contras), and, shortly after the internationally condemned suppression of the 1990 election results, supplied Uzi submachine guns to the generals’ bodyguards. There was a steady flow of military support in the ensuing years, which included a 1997 agreement for the Israeli company Elbit to upgrade three squadrons of F-7 fighters and FT-7 trainers, originally purchased from China. One requirement of the Burmese military was for the planes to be adapted for a ground attack role, which would be consistent with a primary function of countering rebel movements inside Myanmar itself.

Without revealing any details, in 2000 Myanmar’s ambassador to Israel, Kyaw Myint, described Israel as an “open door to Western countries” for the isolated regime during a reception at his residence (“Burma’s rulers see Israel as ‘door to West,’” Charlotte Halle, Haaretz, April 14, 2000). This was perhaps an indication that Western countries embarrassed to be seen doing business with the military regime could use Israel as one of their channels for dealing with it.

In 2002, Aung San Suu Kyi, temporarily free of house arrest, told a Haaretz correspondent that since her release on May 7 of that year, she had had no contact with Israeli diplomats. Most Western countries were then in regular contact with Suu Kyi and her party. The only other state that she mentioned was not in touch with her was China (“No contact with Israeli diplomats, Aung San Suu Kyi complains,” Micha Odenheimer, Haaretz, Aug. 16, 2002).

The development of cooperation between Burma and Israel in the early 1950s was a landmark in Israeli diplomatic history, as it was its first diplomatic breakthrough in the “Third World.” Diplomatic relations were formally established in 1953.

Bangkok Seeks Improvement of Terms for Thai Workers in Israel

Thailand has signed an agreement intended to reduce the fees paid by Thais who go to work in Israel. Oddly enough, it is not a government-to-government pact, although Israel and Thailand have diplomatic relations, but an agreement between the Thai Labor Ministry and the International Organization for Migration (IOM), which works for the rights of migrants worldwide. Under the agreement’s terms, the Thai Labor Ministry will handle recruiting and funding for the workers and the IOM will oversee the process.

This is in keeping with current efforts by Southeast Asian labor exporting countries to increase state regulation of the process of worker migration.

The agreement was reported in a Sept. 23 article in Haaretz by Ruth Sinai, a regular writer on migrant affairs in Israel. “While Israel has not signed the document,” she reported, “the government decided to support it more than two years ago. High-ranking government officials have followed the process closely from its onset, including the Prime Minister’s Office Director-General Ra’anan Dinor and Yael Rubinstein, the Israeli ambassador to Bangkok.

“‘We hope that the memorandum of understanding will stop the huge exploitation of workers,’ Rubinstein said from Bangkok on Saturday. She also expressed hope that the memorandum would provide a model for similar agreements with other countries that provide Israel with migrant workers.”

If the Israeli government supported the agreement, why did it not sign it, and why does it see it as a model that could be followed with other suppliers of labor? It suggests a lack of commitment on Israel’s part to seeing the agreement implemented at its end. Without that commitment, the workers are likely to still get fleeced, regardless of what happens at the Thai end.

Sinai reports that workers are currently charged up to $8,000, which is split between agents in Thailand and in Israel.

The new agreement sets maximum charges for Thai workers going to Israel. They are to pay no more than $1,200 for their flight and $600 for all other expenses, including permits, medical checks and vaccinations. This corresponds to the actual costs, rather than the vastly inflated expenses claimed by agents.

Thai workers don’t just face exploitation, but also danger. During Israel’s 2006 assault on Lebanon, some farms insisted on their Thai employees going out to work in the fields even though the area was under rocket fire from Hezbollah fighters. At least 30 workers made official complaints about this treatment.

The Israeli workers’ rights group Kav La’Oved has frequently dealt with the issue of the exploitation of and poor conditions faced by Thai workers in Israel. Despite such conditions, workers still come because they are usually from villages in poor regions of their country. Even at rates of pay that are significantly below the official minimum wage in Israel, they may still feel better off than they are at home—once, that is, they manage to pay off the debt they incur in order to travel to Israel and take a job. Meanwhile, back in their own country, refugees from neighboring Burma take on jobs that pay too little for Thais, but earn them enough to survive.

John Gee is a free-lance journalist based in Southeast Asia, and the author of Unequal Enemies: The Palestinians and Israel, available from the AET Book Club.

< Prev		Next >