Laura Bush, “Blood Rubies” and the Export Economy of Burma.
Is there such a thing as a “blood ruby?”
Should gems from Burma be boycotted?
In this, the first of three posts on this subject, I provide some interesting information about where the generals in Burma really get the money that supports their oppression.
In an October White House press release, Laura Bush recently took what appeared to be a high moral ground in the Ruby Conflict.. “Every Burmese stone bought, cut, polished, and sold sustains an illegitimate, repressive regime,” she states in her press release.
I will be addressing the issue of whether or not rubies from Burma are actually a highly centralized, government controlled commodity or not in later posts. But for now, I’d like to focus on the broader export base in Burma.
Clearly, if Laura Bush was really interested in fighting the regime, then she might have suggested, perhaps during pillow talk with her husband, to boycott other more important elements in the Burma economy, which you can view at the CIA’s fact book on Burma’s economy:
Quoting from a section of an article by Dara O’Rourke in Multinational Monitor:
“Between 70 and 90 percent of the profits from oil and gas development will go directly to the military regime. The Burma Rights Movement for Action, an opposition group based in Bangkok, Thailand, estimates oil exploration contracts have accounted for 65% of the foreign investment in Burma since 1988”.
Michele Bohana, the director of the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Asian Democracy, asserts that the oil and gas investments, “directly support the illegitimate military junta of Burma. The government is bankrupt. They have to get foreign exchange to survive.”
The government of Burma depends upon the 2.2 billion dollars of annual revenues that oil and gas provide. Amoco, Unocal, Texaco, Royal Dutch Shell, Petro-Canada and Idemitsu also give the government legitimacy and lobby against international economic sanction.
In addition to oil and gas revenues, the timber trade is also highly centralized. According to a recent Mother Jones article
Though the EU recently boycotted Burmese lumber, (if that is even possible given the illegal logging that sustains the finish wood product supply chain,) companies such as Ikea, Home Depot and Armstrong still retail Chinese finished lumber products in the US.
What this essentially shows is that Laura Bush is able to maintain the appearance of being politically correct. The real issue of what is best for the pro-democracy movement of Burma is bypassed for that of large corporate interests.
The stance of the jewelry industry around these issues will be examined in the next two posts.
