Nadi Nadi on Wed, 31 May 2000 17:21:16 +0200 (CEST)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

<nettime> The WRTC's contribution to the Globalisation E-conference

Dear ALL,

The following is the contribution the WRTC made to the Globalisation
E-forum organized by the World Bank. A four week long forum was
successfully ended on last week Friday.

Approximately more than two millions people around the world participated
including myself. The reflections for over all discussions were posted on
Tuesday because Monday was the US holiday. Your feedback is *most* welcome.
We hope to have many feedback as much as we did received from the Forum

Oops.. a feedback from Brazil just pops in while I am writing this.

Warm regards,

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 00:03:52 +0200 (W. Europe Daylight Time)
From: "Dr. Khin Ni Ni Thein" <>
To: Globalization E-Conference <>
Subject: [globalization] A view from Burma/Myanmar

Original Subject: A view from a unique country which bears two names: Burma
and Myanmar

Dear ALL,

This is my first and last posting to the forum. I have learnt a lot during
the past four weeks. The best experience of all is being enlightened by
those whom I think have much knowledge, dignity and experience than I ever
had and going to have in this very life. Thanks to you ALL.

My humble self is called Khin Ni Ni Thein, a woman from Burma. I am
originally a water resources engineer who ended up as a Hydroinformatician
after obtaining a Ph.D. degree in Hydroinformatics. To utilise this
knowledge in its fullest I founded a non-profit NGO called Water, Research
and Training Centre for a new Burma (WRTC), URL is, a knowledge-based resource centre which uses ICT
as its primary vehicle. The WRTC is three years old now. It took an
initiative to set up *an unprecedented example* for other NGOs to operate
in Myanmar or Burma. Hence it is a pioneer-role-model NGO of its kind. The
current activities are (1) capacity building, (2) institutional building,
(3) research, (4) advocacy, (5) learning, (6) gender issues, (7)
networking, (8) mediation and (9) free consultancy.

Having introduced both the organisation and myself, I would like to
contribute a short discussion which is based upon the overall discussion
that has taken place during the past 4 weeks and our own aspirations as a
unique nation with two names, Burma and Myanmar.

There were about 50+ points I wrote down and commented on. I then boiled
them down to six.

(1) Globalisation, empowerment and the poor
(2) Learning
(3) Fair share mechanism
(4) Peace
(5) Transitional Economy
(6) Poverty eradication

Although six points are listed the first five can be seen as means to reach
an end called poverty eradication. Transitional economy is listed instead
of economy because my emphasis is on the developing countries in general
and my own nation in particular as a LDC country. Please excuse me for a

>From point one to five following its path with correct definitions, which
give us ways to eradicate poverty, to promote the real development and to
sustain the planet Earth, our only home. Correct me if I am wrong or
incomplete. What I mean by following its path with correct definitions is
this. For example, peace is not just lack of fighting. Peace is a state of
living that prevails and at the same time assures harmony, freedom and
happiness based upon fair sharing of all tangible and intangible human
needs within inter- and intra-communities. Also the definition of fair
share mechanism/paradigm/narrative can be found in the postings of Anne K.
Haugestad <> and relative responses during week 4.

Issues of globalisation, empowerment and poverty had been discussed to the
extent that we do have enough knowledge to work on - or act upon. The same
to the case with development models and modes of development. In fact, all
these have been a great learning period with the aid of ICT, Information
and Communication Technology. Without Internet and e-mail facilities how
could we all (more than two million participants) discuss and interact as
we have done during past four weeks. At this point, let me be a
Myanmar-Burmese-centric here. As a woman from this unique country, I can't
help but fitting my country into this gigantic GLOBALISATION business and
its *dynamism*. For us, to be on the Globalisation train is "a Nivirna
problem", so to speak, it means more than life and death.

We are poorest of the poor, at the bottom of the LDC country list. We have
a problem defining "the sovereignty" let alone to exercise it or empower
it. We have a problem of learning which ranks two on the above list. I am
not complaining about the closure of the universities and institutes. In
fact, on the Co-operative Community Life-long Learning Centres electronic
forum, we have been talking about de-schooling and um-schooling. The
problem in Myanmar or Burma is deeper than that. *The deprivation of
learning environment*, so to speak. The empowerment of locals, poor-people
and women follow the same suits. For these reasons Burma or Myanmar is not
on the Globalisation train, I am afraid. Not yet.

So, why I am here for? This forum is to discuss about Globalisation.
However, my first duty is to put our country on the train nicely. The
second is to make sure that the train won't derail - by all means.

To this end, I would like to point out without money and water we won't
live. The second World Water Forum was held in March 2000 in The Hague. We,
all participants, discussed about WATER thoroughly, furiously, positively,
desperately and enthusiastically. Although ALL of us agreed to acknowledge
that water is both a commodity (with few conditions) and *a human right*,
the latter did not appear in an official statement signed by the ministers
at the ministerial meeting held on 22 March 2000. In consolation it
appeared on the separate document as an official acknowledgement. Be sad or
happy is entirely up to an individual. What lesson we have learnt is money
speaks louder. Well, then, if it is the reality, let's face it. But the
question is HOW?

As a dedicated Buddhist, I would go with a middle way, a Buddhist's way.
The essence is "facing the harsh reality with wisdom and compassion".
However, correct and precise definitions for these two words, 'wisdom' and
'compassion', is necessary. [To keep the posting short, let me refer to the
book entitled "Good question good answer" by S. Dhammika, pp 36-39, ISBN-
983-9382-08-x]. True wisdom is to directly see and understand for
ourselves. The middle way approach gives us an option to develop things in
the right direction. Keeping wisdom and compassion work hand in hand
harmoniously for us, we can avoid making decisions as a good hearted fool
(a compassion driven person) or as a robot (a strict rational being). The
belief that wisdom can best be developed when all emotions, including
compassion, are kept out of the way, provide us nuclear bomb, germ warfare,
and the like.

Having this middle path in mind we still need professionals who can
reconstruct the country. My best bet is to train and capacitate
'Socio-technologists' instead of 'technologists'. *Right-minded
professionals* instead of professionalised professionals!!! Dissemble the
'separatism' in all levels of education and promote 'holism'. We don't need
schools. We can learn something under the trees practically. What we need
is just a 'different way of thinking' and a bit of 'creativity'.

I am looking forward to the next 'Globalisation' forum and I am sure we
(Burmese-Mynmarnese people) will be talking about our experience on
globalisation then.

Thanks for your time and attention.

Dr. Khin Ni Ni Thein
Water, Research and Training Centre for a new Burma (WRTC)

FREE global voice/fax/e-mail in your mailbox at

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: contact: