What's new

BD-Burma Relations

I'm referring to Myanmar's borders with BD and Thailand. :cheers: Besides, my personal interaction with people in SE Asia and South Asia is that there's really not much animosity -- all boils down to a few border disputes if anything at all. :)

Yes both have problems with Burma.In thailand's case its worse.They are comletely in US bloc.And with AL govt. it is likely to follow the same direction.
 
Last edited:
.
This so called N. Korean nuke in Myanmar has no base and no proof. Just like WMD story had been concocted to set stage for Iraq war and regime change. Yet some Bangladeshis with blind faith to western media taking these news in confidence.

Burma’s nuclear secrets
August 1, 2009

Is Burma preparing to build a nuclear arsenal? Two years of interviews with defectors have persuaded two Australian investigators, Desmond Ball and Phil Thornton, there is more to the claim than global scepticism suggests.​

A FEW years back, a paranoid military regime packed up Burma’s capital and shifted it north a few hundred kilometres. Rangoon, it seems, simply wasn’t safe enough any more. The generals’ new home was to be known as the Abode of Kings; more commonly as Naypyidaw. A city rose from the tropical plains with shiny buildings and slick roadways – a strange priority in a country suffering chronic poverty and a health system at the bottom of world rankings.

Now, a fresh question hangs over the goals of Burmese rulers. Could this junta’s priorities be so skewed as to embark upon construction of a nuclear arsenal? And might it have reached out for help to another paranoid regime, North Korea?

Desmond Ball and Phil Thornton are convinced this is a genuine threat. They have spent two years on the Burmese border, interviewing defectors who claim to know the regime’s plans.

The testimony of two Burmese men in particular has caused Ball and Thornton to confront their own deep scepticism about the claims.

Theirs might seem an unlikely collaboration – Ball, a professor of strategic studies at ANU with a deep interest in nuclear technology, and Thornton, a freelance journalist based in Thailand. But their report on the two defectors’ claims adds to mounting – albeit sketchy – evidence that Burma may be chasing the bomb.

There have been hints Burma aspires to a nuclear program. What is uncertain is the extent and intent. Rumours have swirled around refugee circles outside Burma about secret military installations, tunnels dug into the mountains to hide nuclear facilities, the establishment of a ‘‘nuclear battalion’’ in the army and work done by foreign scientists. But one defector – known as Moe Jo to protect his identity – gives the claims added weight. He warned of the regime having a handful of bombs ready by 2020.

Moe Jo escaped Burmese army service and fled to Thailand. Ball and Thornton met with him in dingy rooms and safehouses. ‘‘His hands shook and he worried about what price his family would have to pay for his actions,’’ they write. ‘‘Before rejecting his country’s nuclear plans, Moe Jo was an officer with 10 years’ exemplary army service. A former graduate of Burma’s prestigious Defence Services Academy, he specialised in computer science.’’

Moe Joe said the regime sent him to Moscow in 2003 to study engineering. He was in a second batch of trainees to be sent to Russia as part of effort to eventually train 1000 personnel to run Burma’s nuclear program.

Before leaving, he was told he would be assigned to a special nuclear battalion.

‘‘You don’t need 1000 people in the fuel cycle or to run a nuclear reactor,’’ said Moe Joe. ‘‘It’s obvious there is much more going on.’’

We knew Russia agreed in principle to sell Burma a small nuclear plant – a light water reactor – and to train about 300 Burmese scientists to run the site. The stated reason is for research purposes, specifically to produce medical isotopes.

In dispute is whether the Russian reactor would be large enough to be diverted to produce enriched uranium or plutonium for a nuclear weapon. Usually a heavy water reactor is needed to achieve this, but perhaps not with North Korean help. Ball and Thornton write: ‘‘As North Korea has shown with their [light water] reactor, it may be slow and more complex, but it is capable.’’

Moe Jo alleged a second, secret reactor of about the same size as the Russian plant had been built at complex called Naung Laing. He said that the army planned a plutonium reprocessing system there and that Russian experts were on site to show how it was done. Part of the Burmese army’s nuclear battalion was stationed in a local village to work on a weapon. He said that an operations area was buried in the nearby Setkhaya Mountains, a set-up including engineers, artillery and communications to act as command and control centre for the nuclear weapons program.

‘‘In the event that the testimonies of the defectors are proved, the alleged ‘secret’ reactor could be capable of being operational and producing a bomb a year, every year, after 2014,’’ write Ball and Thornton.

Claims of this type have stirred serious official concerns. The US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, journeyed to Thailand for a regional security meeting last month and directly raised the issue. ‘‘We know that there are also growing concerns about military co-operation between North Korea and Burma, which we take very seriously,’’ she said.

The unease escalated when a North Korean freighter, the Kang Nam I, steamed towards Burma last month carrying undisclosed cargo. A South Korean intelligence expert, quoted anonymously, claimed satellite imagery showed the ship was part of clandestine nuclear transfer and also carried long-range missiles. Shadowed by the US Navy, the vessel eventually turned around and returned home.

Japanese police also recently caught a North Korean and two Japanese nationals allegedly trying to export a magnetic measuring device to Burma that could be used to develop missiles.

But it was what Clinton said during a television interview in Bangkok the next day that raised most eyebrows. For the first time, a senior White House official openly speculated on the prospect of nuclear co-operation between Burma and North Korea.

Clinton: ‘‘We worry about the transfer of nuclear technology and other dangerous weapons.’’

Question: ‘‘From North Korea, you mean?’’

Clinton: ‘‘We do, from North Korea, yes.’’

Q: ‘‘To Burma?’’

Clinton: ‘‘To Burma, yes.’’

Q: ‘‘So you’re concerned about the tie – the closer ties between North Korea and Burma?’’

Clinton: ‘‘Yes, yes.’’

But there are many doubts over how far Burma’s military regime has advanced its nuclear aspiration. Ball and Thornton say a regional security officer told them the Naung Laing operation was a decoy to distract people from the true site of the reactor.

‘‘Before it was a heavily guarded ‘no go-zone’. Now you can drive right up to the buildings. Villagers are allowed to grow crops again.’’ The security officer said the Russian-supplied reactor was located in the Myaing area.

To add to the confusion, there are doubts over the existence of the Russian reactor. ‘‘I’m sure the Russian reactor has not been built already,’’ says Mark Fitzpatrick, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies and a Burma watcher over most of the past decade. He will soon have a book published on nuclear plans across South-East Asia.

He sees ‘‘nothing alarming’’ in the prospective Russian deal – Russia is a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which governs the export of civilian nuclear technology – and doubts Moscow would hide a reactor. Nor has the International Atomic Energy Agency raised questions about Burma’s nuclear ambitions.

But Fitzpatrick is sceptical about the stated reasons offered by Burma’s rulers to explain their interest in nuclear technology, whether for research or power generation.

‘‘The most logical explanation for this interest in research is a prestige factor,’’ he says. Burma wants to demonstrate a level of technology expertise and perhaps also deliberately raise doubts over its nuclear capability. Having the bomb, after all, is a power military deterrent against foreign attack.’’

Of the defectors’ claims, he says: ‘‘I’ve heard these reports and I pay attention to them, and they shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand.’’ North Korea is willing to sell anything to anyone, he says, and points to recent evidence that Pyongyang secretly sold a nuclear reactor to Syria.

Ball and Thornton add to the mystery by reporting the testimony of another defector they call Tin Min. He claimed to have worked as a bookkeeper for a tycoon closely linked to the Burmese military regime, whose company had supposedly organised nuclear contracts with Russia and North Korea. The deal with North Korea on nuclear co-operation supposedly dates back nine years, covering construction and maintenance of nuclear facilities.

‘‘Tin Min spoke excellent English and presented his reports to us with a touch of self-importance,’’ write Ball and Thornton. ‘‘Tin Min had good reason to know what it was like to feel important; before defecting, he had scaled the heights of his country’s high society and had reaped the benefits of that position.’’

Tin Min dismissed the regime’s rationale for requiring nuclear technology. ‘‘They say it’s to produce medical isotopes for health purposes in hospitals. How many hospitals in Burma have nuclear science? Burma can barely get electricity up and running. It’s a nonsense.’’

He claimed his boss once told him of the regime’s nuclear dreams. ‘‘They’re aware they cannot compete with Thailand with conventional weapons. They want to play power like North Korea. They hope to combine the nuclear and air defence missiles.’’ He said the nuclear program was known as UF6 Project and was run by the senior general Maung Aye. Ball and Thornton conclude the nuclear co-operation is based on a trade of locally refined uranium from Burma to North Korea in return for technological expertise.

Tin Min claimed his boss controlled much of the shipping in and out of Burma and could organise the transport of equipment to nuclear sites from the port at Rangoon. ‘‘He arranges for army trucks to pick up the containers of equipment from the North Korean boats that arrive in Rangoon and transport them at night by highway to the river or direct to the sites.’’

He also claimed to have paid a construction company in about 2004 to build a tunnel in a mountain at Naung Laing wide enough for two large trucks to pass each other.

But his story cannot be further tested. Tin Min died late last year.

There are obvious dangers of relying on the testimony of ‘‘defectors’’. The people giving evidence may have ulterior motives, as Ball and Thornton recognise, and the regime is not shy at disseminating false information.

Andrew Selth from Griffith University, a former senior intelligence analyst and an experienced Burma watcher, remains suspicious. ‘‘Understandably,’’ he recently wrote for the Lowy Institute, ‘‘foreign officials looking at these matters are being very cautious. No one wants a repetition of the mistakes which preceded the last Iraq war, either in underestimating a country’s capabilities, or by giving too much credibility to a few untested intelligence sources.

‘‘There has always been a lot of smoke surrounding Burma’s nuclear ambitions. Over the past year or so, the amount of smoke has increased, but still no one seems to know whether or not it hides a real fire.’’

Concern is not going away, however. The most recent edition of US Foreign Policy magazine compared claims surrounding Burma’s nuclear program to 1950s leaks about Israel having a secret nuclear site in the desert. Similar doubts held for claims about India and Pakistan. All three countries have since tested the bomb.

Ball and Thornton are convinced the world must face up to some uncomfortable possibilities. ‘‘According to all the milestones identified by the defectors, Burma’s nuclear program is on schedule. It is feasible and achievable. Unfortunately, it is not as bizarre or ridiculous as many people would like to think. Burma’s regional neighbours need to watch carefully.’’

Additional reporting by Daniel Flitton
 
.
That would be a suicide.

@secularHumanist

International community also want Su kie out of prison,what happened?Nothing.Plus,Burma also has a huge reserve of oil and gas,and will get Chinese backing.

International community was also concerned about the Syrian nuclear reactor because North Korea was helping them. Look what happened. They got taken out. It will be clear to the US that Burma is going the same way as North Korea.

China might back Burma but will they back a nuclear Burma? Do they want two North Korea's in their region? I don't think so.

Oh and don't forget India. They wouldn't want a neighboring military country to get nukes, especially a country that is as oppressive as Burma.
 
Last edited:
. .
International community was also concerned about the Syrian nuclear reactor because North Korea was helping them. Look what happened. They got taken out. It will be clear to the US that Burma is going the same way as North Korea.

China might back Burma but will they back a nuclear Burma? Do they want two North Korea's in their region? I don't think so.

Oh and don't forget India. They wouldn't want a neighboring military country to get nukes, especially a country that is as oppressive as Burma.

I previously posted about India's military help to Burma few pages earlier.Those included tanks and SAMs.

But in the end,I hope you are right and Burma does not get hands to any Nukes.
 
.
I previously posted about India's military help to Burma few pages earlier.Those included tanks and SAMs.

But in the end,I hope you are right and Burma does not get hands to any Nukes.

I think most of the countries will be nuclear powered as Korea has exported tech to almost all new countries. North Korean economy is poor and they can sell the nuke at any price. :frown:
 
.
Countries without a genuine defence need go nuclear for a false prestige. North Korea and now Burma are looking for prestige. But, BD must watch it out since Burma is a neighbouring country and it has maritime conflict with Burma. BD just cannot sit idle when a neighbour, specially a rogue country like Burma, goes nuclear. Just like N. Korea bullies S. Korea, Burma will also bully BD.

Nuclear weapons may intimidate an enemy country, but its real use may not be that feasible. However, the Burmese generals live with the 15th century mind. Anything can be expected out of that regime. BD must get technological and political help from the western countries to gather intelligence on Burmese nuclear activities. The facilities, if there is any, must be destroyed before they are capable to produce plutonium 239 fuel in their reactors.

BD is the only country that has maritime conflict with Burma. Burma is not weak economically or in terms of military strength. If they have nuclear weapons they will intimidate us, there is no doubt about it. Therefore, BD must carefully consider all the options to safeguard its own security.
 
Last edited:
.
Countries without a genuine defence need go nuclear for a false prestige. North Korea and now Burma are looking for prestige. But, BD must watch it out since Burma is a neighbouring country and it has maritime conflict with Burma. BD just cannot sit idle when a neighbour, specially a rogue country like Burma, goes nuclear. Just like N. Korea bullies S. Korea, Burma will also bully BD.

Nuclear weapons may intimidate an enemy country, but its real use may not be that feasible. However, the Burmese generals live with the 15th century mind. Anything can be expected out of that regime. BD must get technological and political help from the western countries to gather intelligence on Burmese nuclear activities. The facilities, if there is any, must be destroyed before they are capable to produce plutonium 239 fuel in their reactors.

BD is the only country that has maritime conflict with Burma. Burma is not weak economically or in terms of military strength. If they have nuclear weapons they will intimidate us, there is no doubt about it. Therefore, BD must carefully consider all the options to safeguard its own security.

All your opinion based on the western media report that N. Korean ship bounded to Myanmar port with unknown cargo. This is same western media concocted Iraq nuclear weapon and set the stage for war and regime change.

Yes we have to have good defence against all threats but the way Bangladeshi stooge govt projecting it and some folks cheerleading it will go against national interest.

Besides, this awami govt destroying Bangladesh defence forces with one after another self inflicting decision and none of you seems to notice or talk about it. virtually handing over BDR under indian control, army officers force retirement, CHT withdrawals, letting indians influence and control Bangladesh defence institution, are to name a few.

That goes to show people jump with news but don't realize real facts importance and implication.
 
.
All your opinion based on the western media report that N. Korean ship bounded to Myanmar port with unknown cargo. This is same western media concocted Iraq nuclear weapon and set the stage for war and regime change.

Yes we have to have good defence against all threats but the way Bangladeshi stooge govt projecting it and some folks cheerleading it will go against national interest.

Besides, this awami govt destroying Bangladesh defence forces with one after another self inflicting decision and none of you seems to notice or talk about it. virtually handing over BDR under indian control, army officers force retirement, CHT withdrawals, letting indians influence and control Bangladesh defence institution, are to name a few.

That goes to show people jump with news but don't realize real facts importance and implication.

You are a TRUE Bangladeshi. You know what is REALLY happening and WHO ARE THE REAL ENEMIES. Myanmar is NOT BD's enemy! :agree:
 
.
N.Korea 'helping Burma build nuclear plant': report
Writer: AFP
Published: 1/08/2009 at 10:59 PM

North Korea is helping Burma build a secret nuclear reactor and plutonium extraction plant to build an atomic bomb within five years, a report said on Saturday, citing the evidence of defectors.

North Korean cargo ship the Kang Nam I, seen in 2007, has drawn international attention for suspected proliferation activities involving the Burma junta. North Korea is helping Burma build a secret nuclear reactor and plutonium extraction plant to build an atomic bomb within five years, a report said on Saturday, citing the evidence of defectors.
The nuclear complex is hidden inside a mountain at Naung Laing, in Burma's north, and runs parallel to a civil reactor being built at another site by Russia, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

The revelations come just weeks after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton voiced concerns that Pyongyang was transferring weapons and nuclear technology to fellow pariah state Burma.

Defectors codenamed Moe Jo and Tin Min reportedly told Australian investigator Desmond Ball the military junta has nuclear ambitions that far exceed its official line.

"They say it's to produce medical isotopes for health purposes in hospitals," Ball said, quoting Tin Min about the prospect of a Burma nuclear programme.

"How many hospitals in Burma have nuclear science?" Tin Min allegedly said, using Burma's former name. "Burma can barely get electricity up and running. It's a nonsense."

Giving an account of the men's testimony in the Herald, Ball said they "claim to know the regime's plans" and that a nuclear-armed Burma was a "genuine possibility".

"In the event that the testimony of the defectors is proved, the alleged secret reactor could be capable of being operational and producing one bomb a year, every year, after 2014," Ball wrote in the newspaper.

Moe Jo, a former army officer, allegedly told Ball he was trained for a 1,000-man "nuclear battalion" and that Burma had provided yellowcake uranium to North Korea and Iran.

"He said that the army planned a plutonium reprocessing system and that Russian experts were on site to show how it was done," wrote Ball, who is a strategic studies professor from the Australian National University.

Moe Jo said part of the army's nuclear battalion was stationed in a local village to work on a weapon, and a secret operations centre was hidden in the Setkhaya Mountains, according to Ball.

"(It was) a set up including engineers, artillery and communications to act as a command and control centre for the nuclear weapons program," wrote Ball.

Tin Min was said to have been a book keeper for Tay Za, a close associate of the junta's head General Than Shwe, and told Ball in 2004 he had paid a construction company to build a tunnel in the Naung Laing mountain "wide enough for two trucks to pass each other".

According to the report, Tin Min said Za negotiated nuclear contracts with Russia and North Korea and arranged the collection and transport, at night and by river, of containers of equipment from North Korean boats in Rangoon's port.

Tin Min reportedly said Za told him the junta knew it couldn't compete with neighbouring Thailand on conventional weapons, but wanted to "play power like North Korea".

"They hope to combine nuclear and air defence missiles," Za said, according to Tin Min.

Bangkok Post : N.Korea 'helping Burma build nuclear plant': report
 
.
You are a TRUE Bangladeshi. You know what is REALLY happening and WHO ARE THE REAL ENEMIES. Myanmar is NOT BD's enemy! :agree:

:rofl::rofl: Just trying to influence the BD People ?. The truth never remains hidden. It will come out always either today or tomorrow.
 
.
Good article. I would not agree upon the logistical support from the arab world.

A few more questions :
1. In case of a full scale war, how will you counter Burma's chemical weapons ?

2. How will you effect a naval blockade? This one took me by surprise.

Thanks.

Dear Stumper,
During our last standoff, Pakistan supply us with 4 C-130 cargo of military hardware supply and some pakistani general were inside BD
to help with the situation and maintain connect with Pak govt.

Same went for Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Even we did not received
any immidiate supply from them.

US was willing to give us all kind of help.

China was petty neutral as expected.

Did you get any form of support from india. No !!

It did try to rip the benefit from this situation.

Last standoff was in 1991.
 
.
From the point of bigger view, Bangladesh should keep a better relationship with Burma, irrespective of difference in political systems and existing disputes.

1) It is not wise for BD to have two enemies from the two immediate neighbors. Indian politicians’ imperialistic mentality always believes they are kind of Brits’ inheritors, thus want to keep whatever British Imperialists said/did (for instance, McMahon line with China). They think they are superior to Bangladeshis and are antagonized if BD doesn’t show homage to their “liberators” as they define it per 1971 war. Burma doesn’t have similar mentality against BD.

2) Having a road connection to China is a big deal for the people and economy of BD. If it were not stopped by Indian imperialistic mentality in the middle, a road through the “chicken neck” to Nepal to China would be really nice, but your big “liberator” says no to you. So you have to use Burma. Deepening of disputes won’t help on this.

3) As the economy of China, Burma and BD can be further integrated, people will have more exchanges in ideas and information of each other, and other disputes/pains can be lowered in priority or even mitigated. China-US relationship is a good example.

Just MHO.
 
.
1)thus want to keep whatever British Imperialists said/did (for instance, McMahon line with China).

Just MHO.

oh!. You don't believe in British Imperialist. Then leave the Baluchistan for Iran and Afghanistan. You already acceded Shaksgam Valley because you don't have courage to fight with China. You even accepted Aksai Chin as part of China.

Actual map left by British. - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/46/BritishIndianEmpireandEnvirons2.jpg.

Just accept that you don't agree with British map and leave the baluchistan for iran and afghan to be eaten.
 
.
Countries without a genuine defence need go nuclear for a false prestige. North Korea and now Burma are looking for prestige. But, BD must watch it out since Burma is a neighbouring country and it has maritime conflict with Burma. BD just cannot sit idle when a neighbour, specially a rogue country like Burma, goes nuclear. Just like N. Korea bullies S. Korea, Burma will also bully BD.

Nuclear weapons may intimidate an enemy country, but its real use may not be that feasible. However, the Burmese generals live with the 15th century mind. Anything can be expected out of that regime. BD must get technological and political help from the western countries to gather intelligence on Burmese nuclear activities. The facilities, if there is any, must be destroyed before they are capable to produce plutonium 239 fuel in their reactors.

BD is the only country that has maritime conflict with Burma. Burma is not weak economically or in terms of military strength. If they have nuclear weapons they will intimidate us, there is no doubt about it. Therefore, BD must carefully consider all the options to safeguard its own security.

BD should tie up with Thailand in this issue. Thailand has more issues with Burma than us and they are more vocal against those generals than anybody else.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom