[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George W. Bush (2008, Book II)]
[August 7, 2008]
[Pages 1120-1126]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]
Interview With Foreign Radio Journalists in Bangkok
August 7, 2008
The President. I am in Bangkok, and one of the reasons I've come is
not only to pay my respects to the Government and the people of
Thailand, but also to be in a position to speak about freedom in Burma.
I just had lunch with some people that are deeply concerned about the
future of Burma, people that were involved in the student marches of
'88, people involved with humanitarian assistance. I was regretful that
my wife couldn't join us, because she's an
articulate spokesman for the people of Burma; but she's on the border on
[[Page 1121]]
this mission of saying to the Burmese people, you have friends, and
you're not alone, and the United States cares about you.
So I want to thank you for giving me the chance to answer your
questions, and I'll be glad to do so now. Why don't we just go around
the table?
Q. Mr. President, it's an honor to be with you, and many thanks,
giving a chance to--this roundtable discussion.
The President. Thank you.
Q. My name is Thein Htike Oo, from Voice of America; Toe Zaw Latt
from Democratic Voice of Burma; and Soe Win Than from BBC. We have one
lady here from Radio Free Asia, May Pyone Aung.
The President. Good, thank you. Welcome.
U.S. Aid to Burma
Q. I would like to start a couple questions about the relief aid
policy of United States.
The President. Yes.
Q. Recent relief operation, the Burmese regime didn't allow the U.S.
Navy ship aid through the Pacific come, and international community, the
U.S., obviously, was really frustrated. I would like to know, if Burma
faced another catastrophe or disaster, are you going to try to help, or
are you going to--[inaudible]--Burmese regime again?
The President. Well, absolutely. But first of all, we care about the
human condition, human suffering. And there's no question, there was
huge human suffering when the cyclone came through. I can remember the
day it hit. I was told that this was going to be a major disaster for
the people, and so I ordered our Navy ships in the area to be prepared
to sail toward the Burmese area to provide aid and logistics and
management. We're very good about dealing with major emergencies. And
interestingly enough, we were involved with a military mission in the
area, so we were prepared to send a robust package in.
Unfortunately, the Government, the military leader chose not to allow for there to be immediate help. No
telling how many lives could have been saved or how much human suffering
could have been dealt with more effectively had there not been the slow
response of the military dictator.
But now our aid, along with other people--other countries' aid, is
beginning to move. In answer to your question, yes, our Government will
respond if there's another catastrophe. And hopefully, the military
people have learned a lesson: that there needs to be truthfulness at the
highest levels of government. People have got to understand and listen
to reality and understand that nations and people want to help when
there's suffering. And so we will respond. In the meantime, we're going
to keep pushing for freedom.
Burmese Government's Acceptance of Foreign Aid
Q. During the time, a lot of Burmese people, they were expecting a
sort of humanitarian intervention, even though the Burmese regime didn't
allow the aid. So why it didn't happen, or what is the reason----
The President. We chose to go through the normal routes. We wanted
to basically say, here's your opportunity to receive aid. I'm
disappointed that the military dictator chose not
to allow the aid in quickly. But I don't think it would have been
helpful for the Burmese people had there been a conflict over the
delivery of aid. What we don't want to do is compound a terrible
situation. In other words, if we just sent in--sent people in, our
military in without visas or permission from the Government, there's no
telling what the reaction would have been. And so therefore, we were
trying to make the problem better, not worse.
And so yes, I--no question, there was frustration on the delays, but
I felt the best way to do so was the way we ended up doing it. My only
point is, is that there's--if there's another catastrophe, and let's
pray there's not, but if there is, the Government will now see that they
have nothing to fear
[[Page 1122]]
by welcoming in U.S. aid and other countries' aid. They ought to welcome
that.
And now the question is, how quickly can the delta region rebuild?
And of course, we'd like to help on that too. We spent about $57
million, or over $50 million of help so far. And we do so generously. We
care about the stories we hear. And we want the farmers to get seed and
fertilizer so they can grow and feed their families and feed the people
in their area and, hopefully, grow enough for the country.
Joint Military Exercises
Q. Now, I don't take too long. Now, the United States has proposed
civil military relief exercise with the countries in this region, and
recent ASEAN meeting endorsed that relief exercise, and probably next
year the Philippine will host. So they agree to cooperate relief
exercise.
The President. That's good.
Q. I wonder, if the countries in this region agree to cooperate, are
you going to invite this exercise to include Burmese military regime or
North Korea?
The President. That's an interesting question. I don't know. I
haven't thought that through yet, to be frank with you. I can't answer
your question, because you're the first person who's asked me that
question. I will take it back to Washington and--under consideration.
Interesting idea. I have no--but I can't say yes or no right now.
Q. Thank you.
The President. Thank you. Yes, very good.
Yes, sir.
Q. Thank you very much, Mr. President.
The President. Toe Zaw Latt.
Burma's Foreign Policy/China
Q. There's no real consensus on how to deal with Burma in
international community. How will the United States try to overcome this
impasse, most recently seen at the Security Council over Burma?
The President. Well, what we've got to do is continue to work with
countries on the Security Council and explain to them that what matters
most in life is the human condition and that individual rights are
important. And we just have a lot of work to do to convince people that
the status quo in Burma--that life can be better, let me put it that
way. And it's in their interest that life is better, particularly China.
China is an important country on the United Nations Security
Council; they're an important country in the world, obviously, Burma's
neighbor. And we--I hope that I can use my good relations with the
Chinese leadership to convince them that the way forward is for there to
be more civic participation, more citizen participation in the future of
the country, and that the perfect way to do that is to explain to them
how backward the Government was when it came to the response for the
natural disaster. Hopefully, that will open up eyes.
But no question, there's a lot of diplomacy that needs to be done to
convince others that people like Aung Suu San Kyi [Aung San Suu
Kyi]* deserve to be free and political
prisoners ought to be free. And the reason I'm talking to you today is
because I want those in prison and their families to know that we care
about them and think about them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
*White House correction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
China-U.S. Relations
Q. Do you think there will be some common ground that the United
States and Chinese Government can work together?
The President. Well, I hope so. I mean, it's in the common ground,
for example, that the Burmese be a peaceful country. I mean, we care
about that. Whether or not the Chinese will agree that somebody like
Aung Suu San Kyi [Aung San Suu Kyi]* ought
to be free and ought to be the center of foreign policy like it is for
us, I don't know. We just have to work it hard.
[[Page 1123]]
President's Upcoming Visit to China/Meeting With Chinese Leadership
Q. Soe Win Than from BBC. Picking up on this China relation, you are
going to China today----
The President. I am soon.
Q. ----you will be meeting the highest Chinese leadership tomorrow.
The President. Yes.
Q. And you said you would mention Burma to those leaders. You
haven't been able to convince them until now.
The President. Right.
Q. How optimistic are you that you will be able to convince, and how
are you going to go about doing this time, sir?
The President. Well, you know, look, it's--I've mentioned Burma a
lot to the Chinese leadership, and it's--I've mentioned Darfur; I've
mentioned Tibet; I've mentioned religious freedom inside China. So
there's a lot of subjects to discuss with the Chinese leadership. And
it's just a matter of continuing to make the case. I have--I'm sure the
Chinese leader's mind is going to be on the
Olympics. This is a big deal for the people of China. One of the reasons
I'm going is to be able to pay my respects to the people of China, and
well as to be in a position where I can bring up these issues with the
Chinese Government.
We'll see. I'm just--it's--to me, this is a process of continually
having a consistent message, speaking to the people of Burma, letting
the prisoners know we care about them, and pressing hard at the
international level. I make no promises to your listeners except that
we'll continue to try.
Burma-U.S. Relations
Q. Yes. One thing is the relationship with the regime. Then you have
been probably the President who is more committed for the Burmese
democratic movement. But the United States tough line against Burma
sometimes entrenched the generals there, and some people would say that
given the example of the Nargis Cyclone relief efforts, then if you have
had this kind of relationship with the generals then you could be able
to do more. So----
The President. Yes, it's an interesting question. I understand your
point. We have been tough, because we believe that the general has been very stubborn in not allowing certain freedoms,
and we believe that's wrong. We believe that those arrested in the
marches of '88 ought to be released from prison. There's about 2,000
political prisoners who are being held simply because they had a belief
that was contrary to what the general thinks.
You notice I'm saying ``general'' because it's generally viewed as a
one-man regime. I know there's others that support
him.
But yes, I have been and--because I believe that--as a matter of
fact, just signed a bill that's going to continue the sanction regime,
particularly when it comes to jade and precious gems.
That's an interesting question, had we had a different relationship,
one, what would it say to the reformers, but also, would it have changed
the number of days required to let relief in? It's hard for me to tell.
What I'm concerned about is the general wasn't
being given full information, that he wasn't fully aware of reality. And
I don't think his reaction was because of relations with the United
States; I think his reaction was--is because he was in denial to a
certain extent about the realities on the ground.
But I'm constantly--look, my mission, so long as I'm the President,
which is 6 more months, is to think about ways to relieve human
suffering and how to help people inside Burma. And if I thought it would
make--help us achieve the objective by changing the relationship with
the Government, I'd give it serious consideration. But I don't
necessarily agree with that premise. I wish there was a magic wand to
wave; there isn't. On the other hand, the people that are listening to
your radio broadcast has got to know that the President of the United
States and a lot of other people
[[Page 1124]]
in America are concerned and care about how they live and want them to
be free and want them to realize the beauties of a Burmese-style
democracy. And whether that happens tomorrow or not is doubtful.
Nevertheless, what is important, though, if for there to be a strong
voice in laying out that vision. And that's what I'll continue to do.
Yes, ma'am.
President's Lunch With Burmese Activists
Q. Mr. President, you just met a group of Burmese activists and then
you share views with them on Burma's struggle. What do you see and what
do you get from having lunch with them?
The President. First of all, there's a lot of courageous people that
have made a decision to work hard on behalf of the rest of their
citizens to achieve a free society. Secondly, that they have great hopes
that the United States will continue to speak out, that the United
States will not abandon our belief in the universality of freedom.
Thirdly, they were--I asked--I said, if you were me, what would you do?
And I got a variety of opinions. And it was fascinating to hear voices
of people who have actually been on the frontlines of change.
I came away with the impression that they're very grateful to the
American people for the generous support. Sometimes our generosity is
not--actually ends up in the hands of the people as quickly as it
should, but nevertheless, that they are--there seems to be a general
awareness that the American people care. And there was a--there's a
certain reality, a certain sense that there are--one of the things I
came away with: There are people who may even be wearing the military
uniform who understand that the status quo is not acceptable, and there
needs to be a better way forward.
But a lot of the frustration was focused on a single person, the
general in charge of the country, and that--there
was a belief that he didn't seem to care that much about the plight of
the average citizen. And so hopefully, U.S. pressure and U.S. focus will
get him to think more about the average person and care about the way
the average person lives.
Burmese Democracy Movement
Q. Many critics said that our opposition itself is also very much
divided and they are not united enough against the military regime and
that--do you think that the United States can help prepare them for
their future democratic Burma?
The President. Well, first of all--that was an interesting
question--I didn't think they were very divided, at least the crowd I
was with. But I thought they were pretty united in their dream for a
better Burma.
You know, one of the things that, obviously, the people involved in
the democracy movement have got to think through is how do you get from
here to there. In other words, it's not easy to go from a very fierce
military one-man rule to democracy. And so therefore, it needs to be
well thought out. And you have a very good point, and that is, is that
there is a--is there a focused roadmap to get to a better tomorrow? It's
hard for me to tell just in that conversation. Obviously, that's going
to be a concern for--it must be a concern for people.
One thing is for certain, is the Constitution is a sham. The rewrite
of the Constitution is just a--it's not a good document; it's not a fair
document. So therefore, there needs to be a constitution at some point
in time that will enable Burma to be a Federal state that--based upon
the will of the people.
Burmese Elections
Q. Follow up on that. The military regime will hold a election in
2010, and they began preparing this month for election. And then what is
U.S. stand on this election?
The President. My stand is they ought to be open and fair, and I
doubt they will be. I think the Constitution is a sham constitution, and
therefore--but, you know,
[[Page 1125]]
I--this is a society that's not interested in democracy. They have
proved they're not interested in democracy. If they're interested in
democracy, they'd let the prisoners out of prison, for starters. The
political prisoners would be a--given to chance to leave and live in a
free life. That's the first test, not election under a sham
constitution.
And so, you know, they'll play like the election was fair and all
this--to justify their behavior. And I think people like yourself ought
to be speaking out that the elections, unless certain conditions are
met, can't possibly be fair.
Burma-U.S. Relations
Q. We understand and the Burmese listeners also understand how you
and the First Lady are compassionate for Burmese people, how much you
strongly support to the freedom for Burma. But I wonder, place here the
new administration--will be installed, and any chance the policy changes
from the United States and----
The President. I would be very surprised. I know both candidates and
the--freedom for Burma is a bipartisan issue. And the Burmese people--
it's not just the President that thinks about the citizens of Burma.
There's a lot of people in our Congress, both Republicans and Democrats,
that feel the same way. And so I think the Burmese people are going to
have a consistent friend in the United States.
China's Role in Burma
Q. You're talking to the China authorities. Do you think China can
play a role to make situation better in Burma?
The President. I think--oh, yes, I think China could play a
different role. I do. The question is whether they want to or not. And
so I'll--I will bring up the Burma--Burmese issue again to President Hu
Jintao, who I like. He's an easy man to talk to.
And they just got different interests, at times, from the United States.
And so I've got to work hard to see if I can't convince him that we
share the same goals. It's not going to be easy, but I'll try to do so.
Thailand's and ASEAN's Role in Burma
Q. Wonder will Thailand and ASEAN in Southeast Asia----
The President. Yes, Thailand can help. ASEAN can help. They need to
send a signal. Obviously, Thailand was very helpful when it came to
helping with the cyclone--aftermath of the cyclone. After all, this is a
staging center for a lot of our materials and other peoples'--countries'
materials that came through. Yes, and they can continue to work the
issue. We just got to make sure that ASEAN delivers a message that is
inspiring to the people of Burma.
International Community's Role in Burma
Q. Mr. President, besides sanction and travel restrictions on the
generals in Burma, do you--have you ever thought of alternative
strategies work on Burma--under U.S. and then with the international
community?
The President. A different strategy?
Q. Yes.
The President. You mean, trying to convince--well, I think our
strategy is the right strategy, the U.S. strategy. And if your question
is, do I--am I trying to convince others to join us on the strategy?
Well, yes. In other words, it would be better if we could all speak with
one voice. And I've been in--you know, it hadn't been that hard with
some countries, like the European countries, for example. But it's been
difficult with some of the countries in the neighborhood here because we
don't share the same goals.
My goal is democracy. Their goal is stability and--at times. And
that's not necessarily the--I'm for stability too. Don't get me wrong.
But I'd like to see the system move toward a free society. I want to see
these prisoners released. I want to see people treated better. I've got
a friend who helps deal with the rape victims along the border. These
women are being raped--
[[Page 1126]]
she says, systemically raped by the military as part of their campaign
of fear. That stuff has got to end in order for me to feel comfortable
with any other policy toward Burma.
And that's a--this is a priority. In other words, there's--and
others have different priorities. And so therefore, it's hard to find
common ground, but we'll continue to try to do so.
Okay, last--yes. Then I got to go to the games. [Laughter] I'm
cheering the American Olympic team.
U.S. Foreign Policy in Asia
Q. I'm going tonight too, sir. You have the conviction and idea to
bring freedom and democracy to Burma, but some people would say that the
United States doesn't have much strategic interest in Burma, unlike
Afghanistan. Where does Burma fit in, sir?
The President. I think so long as there's human suffering like there
is here in Burma, then this will be of strategic importance to the
United States. Look, no question, we've got a lot of issues on our
platter, but I think about Burma a lot. Maybe one reason why is my
wife was such a activist on the subject.
But nevertheless, I gave a speech today in Thailand that talked
about how America is, in many ways, a Pacific nation, and that I think--
I know the center of gravity of a lot of policy is shifting to the Far
East. And therefore, Burma--the Burmese issue is--will be an integral
part of any Far Eastern policy. And no question, America's strategic
interests lie in a lot of places, but they lie here as well. And so long
as this issue festers, then it will have the attention of the American
policymakers.
Thank you all for your time. Very good job.
Q. Thank you very much.
Note: The interview began at 1:38 p.m. at the U.S. Ambassador to Burma's
residence. In his remarks, the President referred to Senior Gen. Than
Shwe, Chairman, State Peace and Development Council of Burma; Aung San
Suu Kyi, leader of the National League of Democracy in Burma; and
President Hu Jintao of China. A tape was not available for verification
of the content of this interview.