It is supposed to be a diplomatic coup, when President Thein Sein freed the 155 Chinese workers, that were sentenced to life imprisonment for illegal logging less than two weeks ago in Burma, under a massive presidential pardon, coinciding with the Full Moon of Waso (Beginning of Buddhist Lent). But it turns out to be a failed move politically for the Union Solidarity and Development Party-Military (USDP-Military) regime.

According to the Alternative Asean Network published, Burma Bulletin for the month of July 2015, on 30 July, President Thein Sein ordered the release of 6,966 prisoners in a presidential amnesty, soon after the regime Election Commission announced the date of the upcoming general election. However, as in previous mass releases, most of those freed were criminals and former military intelligence officers jailed in 2004. Only 13 (or 0.19%) of those released were political prisoners, including five journalists. The release also included 155 Chinese loggers jailed on 22 July, and 55 more foreign nationals.

As of 31 July, at least 120 political prisoners remain incarcerated, with 444 activists facing criminal charges for political actions. In a statement released on 14 July, Human Rights Watch (HRW) warned that the recent surge in political prisoners casts doubt on the regime's commitment to a genuine democratic election in November.

Earlier, on 22 July, Myitkyina Township Court, Kachin State, sentenced 153 Chinese citizens to life in prison under Article 6(a) of the Public Property Protection Act for illegal logging in Kachin State. Two Chinese minors received ten year sentences for the same offence, while one woman received an additional 15 years on a drug charge. The loggers were arrested in January 2015 in Kachin State near the Chinese border during a crackdown by the military, police, and Forestry Department. On 23 July, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman Lu Kang released a statement condemning the harsh sentencing. On 30 July, all of the Chinese loggers were released in a presidential amnesty.

Different aspects of logging blame game

The government version is that the ethnic resistance groups are competing the extraction of natural resources with the government, which has the sole ownership of “sovereignty”, while the latter considered that it is a “shared-sovereignty”, and especially within their respective, ethnic homelands, and thus also have the same rights. They consider themselves to be entitled to make use of the natural resources to fund their armies, that have been struggling to wrestle back their rights of self-determination and defend their people from Burmese military occupation and suppression. Although the Kachin Independence Organization/Army (KIO/KIA) and the rest of ethnic resistance armies never quite spelled out officially on such a position, it is clear that they harbor such an  argument.

Following the January arrest of the Chinese loggers, the government attacked the KIA positions in March, claiming to crackdown on illegal logging, but the KIO explained its point of view and painted the different picture.

Eleven Myanmar of 23 March 2015 reported that Lamai Gum Ja from Myitkyina-based Peace-talk Creation Group (PCG) said, “The fighting occurred as the army detected timber smuggling from a helicopter. However the KIO said the place the fighting occurred is not used for timber smuggling.‟

The Irrawaddy on 23 March 2015 also reported that “The KIO official said that the Burma Army launched the attack after firing at trucks carrying timber from central Burma’s Sagaing Division. The trucks passed several government checkpoints, he said, but they came under attack after crossing into KIO territory, which they travel through to enter China illegally.”

Dau Khar, head of the Kachin Independence Organization’s technical team, in an interview with VOA, reported on 25 March 2015, said that the smuggling racket has the understanding and backing of government institutions, such as police, army and civil administration, to conduct such a big scale illegal logging with so many vehicles involved. For the KIA, it only taxes the vehicles passing through its territory. Besides, the KIA said all the logs were originated from Sagaing Division and northern Shan State, for Kachin State has no huge forest reserves to entertain such massive logging enterprise. Apart from that, the timber loaded vehicles came across many government controlled gates, before reaching KIA territories.

When the VOA, Burmese Section, asked Dau Khar on the government accusation that KIA is protecting illegal logging vehicles, he replies: “ We don’t have any need to protect them for they are working through give-and-take with various government agencies. One thing is that they have to pass through our territory, in order to go to the Chinese border. And so we just collect taxes and have no duty to protect them, whatsoever. Since they are doing their business through give-and-take with various government agencies, the KIO doesn’t need to be responsible or give protection.”

It is true that Thein Sein government has also sought to stem the depletion of rain forest with a ban on the export of raw logs that came into effect in April last year.

Actually, logging in Myanmar intensified under the country’s former military junta as the ruling generals tossed aside sustainable forestry practices in a rush to cash in on the country’s vast natural resources. The Kachin rebels were also accused of filling their war chest from timber extraction, to satisfy the huge demand across the border in China.

Timber extraction has begun, as early as 1980, when the  Communist Party of Burma (CPB) was garrisoned along the Shan-China border. However, after 1989, with the CPB downfall, ethnic armed groups that had signed ceasefire pact with the government began to export timber in large scales to China, with the permission of the regime. No doubt, the ethnic armies and as well, the then military regime profited from such transactions.

However, the truth of the logging blame game is that the regime and as well the resistance armies are equally  responsible, if viewed from the point of environmental  preservation, as there is no clear-cut heroes and villains, in this kind of played out scenario. Many environmentalists have already blamed the recent flooding in Burma as a result stemming from denuding the rain forest in Kachin State and Sagaing Division (Region), which are considered to be the roof top of the country.

Public uproar

Predictably, the public uproar, anger and disappointment were registered in Myanmar's newspapers and social media users, as the government freed the 155 Chinese in a mass amnesty, just eight days after they were jailed for illegal logging.

Most saw it as the government caving in to pressure from its massive neighbor and letting go the criminals that are responsible for environmental destruction, leading to climate change and disaster within the country.

According to Reuters report of 31 July, a Facebook user Ye Moe that had received around 1,200 "likes", said: "I hope the Chinese government reads this, though you got 153 people back, you also received the hatred of 51 million Myanmar people."

Apart from that, if the Chinese loggers that are seen as destructive to  Burma's environment could be easily released, why is the government so reluctant to release all the political prisoners and student activists that are awaiting trials for demanding a more democratic education system, have been the question put forward by those concerned to the regime.

The Global New Light of Myanmar, on 30 July, wrote: “The amnesty is aimed at furthering stability and peace process, and allowing the pardoned prisoners to participate in national reconciliation and political processes.”

If the presidential amnesty is really aimed to pull through such noble ambition, it has failed the mark miserably. For the release of criminals and Chinese illegal loggers definitely won't have anything to do with the betterment of the country, but the prisoners of conscience, political prisoners and the student activists could contribute to the said ambition. Only the government needs to be open-minded and goes beyond party politics, really aims for genuine peace process and pushes for genuine reconciliation. Rejecting those who are against the government's party policy and keeping them in prison is neither appropriate nor wise.

To pinpoint why the regime has been so eager to keep the activists in prisons, Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP) in its June 2015 report wrote:

“The fears regarding the upcoming elections are being reinforced by the imprisonment of activists who were charged months ago (some were even charged up to a year ago), yet their trials are only now being heard in court. Thus, the government can ensure that activists remain in prison in the run up to the election, and intimidate other activists who remain free.”

Rebuttal of presidential spokesman

According to the DVB report of 1 August 2015, Zaw Htay said that there are five give-and-take  points, concerning the release of the Chinese prisoners.

He said: “ First, it is the prisoners' issue. At the other side, we have about 250 prisoners; equally, there are also around 3000 refugees that they are looking after. Another point is that we have many illegal workers there, working without legal work permit. They are said to be relatively convenient with their livelihood and we are negotiating to legalize it. They also released  250 prisoners ahead (before the regime's Chinese loggers release). Another one is the peace issue. The Chinese told us three points. It could be called promises. First, China won't aid the insurgents. Second, China will support the government's peace process. Third (our adherence to) is one China policy. As we adhere to it, they will also only deal with the Burmese government. They have given us these promises. With regards to trading, Chinese government will legalize rice export from  Burma.”

Is it a well thought out consideration?

The President's hasty decision might have been able to appease the Chinese and, probably, mends the bilateral relationship of the two countries, that has been at its lowest ebb since the outbreak of Kokang conflict. But if the regime is hoping that China would pull the rug from underneath the Myanmar National Democratic Alliance Army (MNDAA), also known as Kokang, it will just be a wishful-thinking, for China has time and again said that it won't physically get involved in the conflict between the parties, but would only function as a go-between for peaceful settlement.

As it turns out, the well-meaning presidential amnesty has brought more anger than benefit for Thein Sein regime domestically. With nationwide election looming and just a few months left to go, it is questionable on how the President will try to shore up his depleting political credit in time, to be able to campaign for the presidential post, in November. But there is still consolation, for if the military faction will endorse him as one of the three presidential candidates, the other two being from the lower and upper houses, to be decided upon who should be president by the Presidential Electoral College, he still have a fighting chance to be in the race.

However, if Thein Sein could somehow woo the Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hliang to tone down his “total surrender” rhetoric of the ethnic armies, and accommodate their political aspirations to an acceptable extent, negotiating parties would be able to finalize and singe the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement (NCA) sooner than later. And if this happens, his chances of being nominated by the USDP and as well, the military would increase by leaps and bounds. Then he might have soothed away the public anger, restored the lost trust and corrected his presidential amnesty blunders, with one stroke. It is now up to his ability if he could pull this through, when the NCA negotiation starts again on 6 August, in Yangon, which probably might be the last one for this remaining legislative period.

The contributor is ex-General Secretary of the dormant Shan Democracy Union (SDU)-Editor