Sobering and Grim Documentary Film on the US’s Secret War in Laos

(Above left to right) Tom Vater, film writer; Marc Eberle, producer and director of “The Most Secret Place of Earth”; Fred Branfman, humanitarian aid worker and the person who first broke the news about the US secret way in Laos.

Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand. November 22, 2010. 'The Most Secret Place on Earth' is a sobering and grim documentary film. I watched it with a deepening sense of gloom. I have read three books on our secret war in Laos during the Vietnam War, all of which were memoirs of Americans who had been involved, in one capacity or another, with the CIA’s actions in trying to oppose a Communist takeover of Laos, which eventually occurred in 1975, and continues to this day. Here is the FCCT’s description of the film, which is well worth reading.

The Vietnam War was the most intensely televised war ever. However, next door in neighboring Laos, the longest and largest air war in human history was underway, which eventually made Laos one of the most bombed countries on earth.

The Secret War was the largest operation ever conducted by the CIA, yet it was conducted covertly and it is only in recent years that the true nature and scale of what occurred has been revealed. Critics call it the biggest war crime of the Vietnam War era and point to striking similarities to present conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan; similarities that were tested and set in motion back in Laos in the 1960s.

In The Most Secret Place On Earth, key players of the Secret War -- former CIA agents, American pilots, Laotian fighters and war reporters -- take us on a journey into the physical heart of the conflict: Top secret Long Cheng, where the CIA built its headquarters in 1962. It was from this base that the Secret War was largely planned and executed. As the war dragged on, Long Cheng became the busiest airbase in the world and a major centre for the global opium and heroin trade.

We journey to Long Cheng -- a site has been off limits to the outside world since the end of the war in 1975 -- as the film reconstructs the story of the operation and illustrates its relevance to current American conflicts.

A shorter version of this film drew a packed house when shown at the club in August 2008, but we will show the long version (102 minutes) this time because of the high level of interest previously, and the fact it coincide with good news -- the start of the Global Ban on Cluster Munitions and an international conference in Vientiane to set this historic treaty in action.

Documentary maker Marc Eberle is flying from Phnom Penh for this event and will speak and answer questions about the film after it is shown. American anti-war activist Fred Branfman, who helped expose the "Secret War" in Laos to the US public back in the early 70s, will also fly in from Vientiane and report on the latest developments in Laos following the start of the Cluster Munitions Treaty. (Fred has to fly out shortly after the movie, so it will be start at 7pm sharp after a short introduction.)

For more information: www.tomvater.com/laos/the-most-secret-place-on-earth-the-cia-covert-war-in-laos-at-fcc-bangkok-on-november-22nd/

Buzz Joins the International Press Corps

The Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand is located on the top floor of a high rise office building in Bangkok’s CBD. Also on the floor, are the offices and studios of international media such as BBC, ITN, CNN, Bloomberg and CCTV. Periodically, the FCCT arranges tours of these media outlets for members to see how the news is put together and then broadcast throughout the world. I joined one of these informative evenings on November 19, 2010.

Reporters are in danger throughout the world. Two foreign correspondents were killed in Bangkok six months ago as they covered the red shirts’ burning of downtown Bangkok. As a precaution, reporters now wear bullet proof jackets and helmets, which, I can now tell you, are extremely heavy, hot and uncomfortable. I don’t know how they can wear this protective gear for very long. But, I tried (above).

The BBC is the largest foreign news agency in Bangkok. In its offices, one of three regular reporters stationed in Bangkok (above), describes how news is gatherer, edited, and eventually broadcast via satellite.

There are two radio broadcast studios at the BBC in Bangkok. Here, I sit at one of the radio consoles (above), but I’m not yet qualified to do a BBC broadcast. Next life, maybe.

The newsroom itself looks like many office premises, except for the ever-present TV monitors and lots of media gear.

Only two weeks ago, the China Central Television (CCTV), the major state broadcaster in China, opened a Bangkok office as part of its world-wide expansion plans (that sounds familiar). At the present time, CCTV sublets space in the BBC offices, until it can find its own offices and studio. Here, two Chinese reporters work on a story.

The CCTV’s Bangkok reporter explains the policies and goals behind the expansion of CCTV to become a world-wide influence. She was very frank and honest in answering questions, including ones about press freedom. At a time when the BBC, one of the great forces for honest and balanced reporting left in the world, is faced with extreme budget cuts, which will most definitely diminish its scope, this reporter affirmed that CCTV was not strapped for funds and that it would spend whatever it takes to accomplish its goals. To put it bluntly, as the West retrenches, for the Chinese, money is not a problem. In the US, only a threatened veto from President Obama, prevented congress from cutting or eliminating the funding for National Public Radio.

Buzz’s Journal---Americans Can Take a Two Year Snooze

The 2010 election was not a game changer. Long before the predictable results, it was clear that any policy initiatives that had a chance of improving America, were doomed by opposition of one kind or another, and that any spirit of compromise that could produce innovative policy was absent from the political landscape. Now that the election is over, Americans can take a two year snooze because, when they wake up in November 2012, either before or after the results of the presidential election are known, America then will look much like the America they knew when they began their snooze. Here’s what they’ll see in 2012:

Benefits and Taxes. Anyone concerned about benefits they are currently receiving, or are scheduled to receive during the next two years, have nothing to worry about. Not one dollar of anyone’s benefit will have been cut. Forget all the talk about reductions, they won’t occur during your snooze. Same for taxes. Anyone who thinks that their taxes will go up can sleep comfortably. There will be no tax increases, even for the super-rich, who have already convinced the country that they should keep the tax breaks handed to them by President Bush. All tax breaks scheduled to expire this year will be extended at least until 2012, and they’ll be no new taxes. Don’t worry.

The Deficit. You can sleep through all the talk about cutting the deficit and saving the taxpayers’ money. Two years from now, the national debt will be higher than it is today. That’s guaranteed. If you want to wake up for some entertainment during you two year snooze, a good place to do so would be when Congress debates increasing the national debt limit. After all the grandstanding, the debt limit will be increased so that when you finally awake in 2012, your country will owe a lot more to China and others.

The Economy. Based on employment statistics from the past three months, it is clear that there will be no double dip recession. While you sleep, the America economy will grow slightly, around 2% per year, plus or minus a few 10ths of a percent. Economists and others will talk about the recovery, but such meager growth means that when you awake in 2012, it still won’t feel like a recovery to you or to any Americans who stayed awake while you slept.

Jobs and Unemployment. Anyone who currently has a job doesn’t have to worry about being laid off for the next two years. Unemployment has probably peaked. However, economic growth will be too tepid to restore the millions of jobs lost over the past few years, and too tepid to provide jobs for college graduates and others entering the workforce. While the unemployment rate might improve slightly, will still be substantially where it is today. That is the saddest part of the Great Recession.

Inflation/Deflation. I fail to see how Ben Bernanke can still be worried about America entering into a Japan-style deflation. Wage inflation in China and world-wide commodity prices, as well as a declining US dollar, ensure that there will be no deflation in America. You can also forget about the hysterics and scare tactics that would lead you to believe that when you awake in 2012, America will be experiencing hyper or run away inflation. In fact, the yearly inflation rate will be around 2%. Oh, while I’m at it: The hysteria over gold will have subsided somewhat and the price of gold will be lower than it is today in inflation adjusted terms, but the price of oil will be higher.

Interest Rates. While the unemployed get most of the attention as victims of the Great Recession, the other great sufferers from America’s excesses which created the Great Recession, are the savers, those tens of millions of citizens who were taught that the way to financial security and a steady income, especially in retirement, was to save and put your money in the bank, CDs, and in US government bonds. Those mostly voiceless victims, who now get no interest to speak of, and have to pay taxes on the interest, are losing the value of their savings on a daily basis and are denied the income on which they thought they could depend. Sorry folks, this situation will essentially continue unchanged during the next two years. The Federal Reserve is determined to keep interest rates very, very low for a long time. When you awake, your savings will be worth less than they are today.

Stock Market. A decade or two ago, economists believed that the stock market was decoupled from the “real economy,” that, in other words, there was Wall Street and Main Street and never the twain shall meet. Then it became fashionable to look at Wall Street as the place where all the action was, that it was, in fact, the real economy. It is now clear, especially with electronic programmed trading with supercomputers, that the former view is the correct one. Therefore, Wall Street can and does prosper even when the real economy languishes. The stock market thrives on low interest rates and on large multinational companies who do well abroad, create jobs in every country other than America, and whose earnings from abroad look great when translated into cheaper American dollars. Besides, with low interest rates, there’s no other place for dollars to find themselves. When you wake up in two years, you will find that the American stock markets are at a higher level than they are today, but don’t expect a bonanza.

Value of the Dollar. The Fed is taking steps through its so-called quantitative easing program of buying Treasuries with dollars that it prints, that the dollar will continue its decline. Actually, the dollar’s decline didn’t need the assist of the Fed; it was going down just fine on its own. You will awake in 2012 to a yet weaker dollar. But, you ask: Isn’t that a good thing because a cheaper dollar means more exports for domestic industry and that’s good for America? You would be right if imports didn’t increase. So, here’s another prediction: Imports will have increased during your two year snooze faster than exports will have increased, thereby wiping out anything beneficial from a weaker dollar. Sorry about that.

Real Estate. While you slept, most of the mortgage foreclosures had been accomplished and cleared the market so that some sort of a real estate recovery could begin just at the time you awake in 2012. Prices will have ceased to fall, but new construction, while having picked up some, will still be in the doldrums. But, demand for new housing will be incipient and, with still low interest rates, buyers will start appearing.

Health Care. The Obama health care legislation was a modest attempt to better the system and cut costs over a long period of time. In fact, what it really did was to enshrine the expensive and wasteful private health insurance system within America for at least another generation, probably permanently. Any modest hopes of America doing better under this experiment, required lots of cooperation, which is totally lacking. So, when you awake in 2012, you will find that the health care legislation is still on the books and that efforts to repeal it have been unsuccessful. But, you will also find that it has been sabotaged, especially on the state level, so that nothing will have changed in health care when you awake. In fact, no surprise here, your health care costs will be higher than they are today, the increases being greater than the general rate of inflation. Naturally, that will be blamed on Obamacare, but you and I know, that health care costs would have gone up anyway. The important statistic to look at is the percentage of GDP that goes to health care, currently about 17%. In 2012 that figure will be higher, which means that America will continue its decline in world-wide competitiveness because no other country comes even close to us on the amount it spends for healthcare. Don’t forget, we can’t invest in education, building bridges and repairing roads, etc., at the same time we spend 17+% of our national income on health care. This is known as crowding out: dollars spend on health care crowd out investment in new jobs, etc.

Income Inequality. There is probably no other measurement that has as profound effect on the kind of America in which we live, than the percentage of national wealth in the hands of the very rich, that is the top 1%. Without a large and strong middle class, America will be a much different, and much diminished, society. Unfortunately, this is measure of our society is looking really bad. In 1976, the richest 1% of Americans took home 9% of the nation’s income. Today, the richest 1% of Americans take home nearly 24% of income. From 1980 to 2005, 60% of the total increase in American incomes went to the richest 1 percent. That’s a startling statistic if you stop to contemplate it for a moment. Here’s one way to look at it: Every time you read about some economic good news, 60% of the good news goes to 1% of the country. Unfortunately, the results of the 2010 election mean that this income inequality will increase during your two-year snooze.

Entertainment You’ll Miss. If it weren’t so serious, while you slept, you will have missed a lot of entertainment. There will be increased shouting over gay marriage, abortion, stem cell research, and creation “science.” Those Americans who thrive on those non-issues, have been emboldened and reenergized by the 2010 election results, and they’ll be especially active at the state level. However, when you awake, gays will be openly serving in the military.

Afghanistan and Iran. Even though no one talked about this during the 2010 campaign, I’m going to throw it in anyway. You will awake in 2012 to find that Iran still does not have an atom bomb, and that won’t be because it has changed its mind about acquiring nuclear weapons. A careful reading of the public intelligence reports indicate that Iran is having a much more difficult time than it generally appreciated, in producing fissionable grade uranium. Western efforts at sanctions and sabotage have not been successful in influencing the Mullahs, but they have slowed down the program. There will have been no attack on Iran from either Israel or the US. As for Afghanistan, you will awake in 2012 to find that America has not disengaged from Afghanistan, and at best, there will still be 50,000 US troops fighting and losing their lives there. Even though those numbers will be down from what they were when you went to sleep, casualties will be high because our other allies, who have never been given sufficient credit for fighting there, will have left during your two-year somnolence, and we’ll do all the fighting.

Pretty Good Picture, Right? Well, you say, you paint a pretty good picture of America in 2012, okay, not great, but not so bad either, so I think I’ll have a peaceful two-year snooze. Right? No, wrong. We’re not the only game in town anymore. Irreversible globalization means that what happens in the rest of the world determines what happens in America as well. So, while you slept peacefully, China and the rest of the world were charging ahead, leaving America’s slow decline unabated. Two years have been wasted during which America’s serious long-term problems have not been addressed by the implementation of policies which would support America’s greatest resource, our people. It’s not a pretty picture at all. In fact, if you thought about it too much, you’d have a nightmare.

Wild Cards. There are many unpredictable things that could happen to change the picture for the worst, such as natural disasters, terrorist attacks, war, but the most likely one is a bond market shock. That shock will eventually occur, but there is no reason why it has to happen in the next 24 months. It will be triggered by some unexpected event such as a major state not able to refinance a bond issue coming due, or overseas owners and purchasers of our debt finally demanding substantially higher interest rates for US debt. If that happens, all bets are off and the picture will not be a pretty one.

Journalists Converge on the Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand to Cover the Election in Burma

Journalists barred from Burma assemble at the Bangkok FCCT to report on the election in Burma

Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand. November 7, 2010. Today, Burma is holding its first election in 20 years. Everyone agrees that it’s a faux election, that it’s anything but open and fair, and that the result will be to confirm in power, indefinitely, the dictatorial military regime, which has been governing Burma for most of the past 50 years. But, it’s still a big international story which is making the front pages of papers around the world and is today’s lead story on international broadcast media.

Veteran journalist and Burma expert Larry Jagan

monitors the election from the Bangkok FCCT.

I asked veteran journalist and Burma expert Larry Jagan “Why is so much media attention being given to a fake election controlled by the governing generals? Why isn’t it a big yawn and simply ignored?” Jagan answered that the election itself was something like a storm in a tea cup, but that its real importance lies in what will happen after the election. Jagan’s informed view is similar to that advanced by British Ambassador to Burma, Andrew Heyn, who told the FCCT on Thursday (November 4), that there does exist the possibility that the election might begin a long process of liberalizing change in Burma, which he characterized as the optimistic view, but that no one could predict with any degree of confidence what the secretive generals are up to. Jagan confirmed that most of the talk among reporters and others gathered at the FCCT today, was about the days after the election.

The international media have turned the Bangkok FCCT into a temporary press center because the Burmese regime has barred reporters, as well as election monitors, from entering Burma. Jagan explained to me that normally the press and broadcast media would be camped out at the election commission in Burma and would be going around to the polling places for interviews and to obtain information, but because that was not possible, Bangkok was the next best spot close to the action. Interestingly enough, Thailand has good communication links with Burma, so the reporters at the FCCT can call sources on the ground for information, and there are undercover reporters in Burma who can phone stories into Bangkok.

A reporter in Bangkok interviews the British Ambassador
to Burma via telephone to Rangoon

I saw a good example of this shortly after I arrived at the FCCT. A reporter selected by the assembled press was conducting a searching telephone interview of British Ambassador Andrew Heyn, who was in Rangoon and was able to provide some details of the mood among the Burmese on voting day, the turnout at the polls (light), and other information. The interview, called a “collective interview” by Jagan, was heard over the FCCT’s speaker system, and was able to be used by the assembled media in preparing their stories.

Also in attendance at the FCCT press center, in addition to the journalists, were representatives of NGOs active in Burma, Burmese activists who had fled Burma, and diplomats. By talking together and using each other as resources, the press was able to present as coherent reporting as possible of the election taking place just over the Thai-Burma border.

Aljazeera News Network, which has a better reputation outside the US than it does within America, had set up a temporary satellite TV studio at the FCCT from which it was broadcasting newsfeeds worldwide, with the Bangkok skyline forming the background. As one can well imagine, it takes a lot of equipment and personnel to make this happen, all of which appears so easy on screen. My thanks to Jeremy Custance, Aljazeera’s News Editor, Asia Pacific, for showing me around the Aljazeera setup, permitting me to photograph his operations, and taking the time to explain to me something of the workings of broadcast journalism.

As a non-journalist, I found the afternoon utterly fascinating. I admire the creativity of the news people in finding ways to obtain and disseminate information from a closed society whose leaders go to great lengths to control the press. In today’s digital world, thankfully, it is virtually impossible to prevent a total news or information blackout from even the most closed of societies.

The afternoon was not without a moment of humor. It was rumored, unconfirmed, that the Burmese generals were permitting a team of international inspectors in to monitor the election and testify to its legitimacy, headed by the ambassador from North Korea. Yes, North Korea. You read that correctly.

British Ambassador to Burma Addresses the FCCT on November 7, 2010 “Election” in Burma

Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand. November 4, 2010. In three days, there will be an election in Burma, the first in 20 years. Here’s a little background.

Burma has been ruled by a military junta for almost 50 years. It is an authoritarian, criminal regime which has impoverished the Burmese people and denied them any semblance of civil or economic freedom. Twenty years ago, the generals (that’s what the ruling junta headed by Than Shwe is commonly called) held an election. They were overwhelmingly defeated by the charismatic Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel peace laureate, and her NLD party. The generals ignored the election results and arrested Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been either in jail or under house arrest most of the time since then, including right now. Because the generals have been under intense foreign pressure, especially from the EU, to do something, two years ago they adopted a constitution, which called for elections in 2010. The constitution, while creating some democratic-looking institutions like a parliament, gives the generals the right to do anything they want, and enshrines them in power indefinitely. So, now, on Sunday, November 7, the first “election” in 20 years will be held in most parts of Burma.

The articulate, candid and charming British ambassador to Burma, Andrew Heyn, spoke to a packed FCCT on Thursday, November 4, about this weekend’s parliamentary election, which is a pretty big news story in this part of the world. He said, unsurprisingly, that the “election will not be free and fair.” A Thai academic, Thitinan Pongsudhirak, put it less diplomatically when he wrote earlier this week that the “electoral process and outcome will be an organized fraud.” Why, then, the international interest in the “election.”

The fact that the secretive generals are doing anything is itself big news. The election, in and of itself, represents change and leads to speculation about why the generals are bothering with the election charade at all, one camp believing that the aging generals need the new constitution to provide a mechanism for the military to retain control after the current crop dies, and, perhaps, this election marks the beginning of a liberating economic order like in China and Vietnam, where the economy opens up, but the ruling party keeps all political control. Right now in Burma, the generals own the economy.

Another reason why this faux election might become important, is that it does put in place an institution, the parliament, which might prove more difficult to control than the generals imagine. Under the doctrine of unintended consequences, the generals may have unleashed a process that, over long periods of time, tempers their brutality and hold on absolute power. This election does have an opposition party running called the NUP, but it is questionable whether it is truly an opposition party inasmuch as it has links to the military and is approved by the generals. At any rate, if the election is not rigged, this party could become a force for some change. By the way, the only true opposition party, the NLD of Aung Sang SuuKyi, is not in the election and its leaders are in jail.

Another reason for the interest in this election is that the world loves elections, no matter how flawed. We saw that in Gaza, where Hamas won a majority, then fought a war with Fatah and took over Gaza by force. The world still says that Hamas was “democratically elected.” The generals know this and will point to the 2010 election to show that they are moving Burma along a roadmap to democracy.

Ambassador Heyn’s main message was that we have to wait and see if any change at all develops over the coming months and years. An early indication will be whether Aung is released from arrest when her current sentence expires this month, after the election, of course. In the past, she’s just been charged with another trumped-up offense and kept in jail or under house arrest. Her release this time could be the first sign of some change. According to Ambassador Heyn, the pessimistic view is that the election is just a cosmetic veneer to continued military rule, while the optimistic view is that it could be a vehicle for change over long periods of time. The Ambassador is in neither camp; his advice is to just wait and see and look for signs pointing one way or the other.

My interest in Burma stems from my two visits there. It is a beautiful country with kind and beautiful people. My heart goes out to them. Anything, no matter how small, which relieves their suffering, would be a change from the past and most welcomed. Let’s hope.