The Yadana Pipeline |
originally published by EarthRights International
EarthRights International’s new report, The Human Cost of Energy: Chevron’s Continuing Role in Financing Oppression and Profiting From Human Rights Abuses in Military-Ruled Burma (Myanmar), documents Chevron’s ongoing role in financing and profiting from the military regime in Burma. This is the first comprehensive report on conditions in the Yadana pipeline region since Chevron acquired Unocal’s interest in 2005, and documents the continued serious human rights violations by pipeline security forces, including forced labor, murder, rape and torture. The report also describes Chevron’s continuing legal liability associated with abuses in the pipeline region. (See ERI’s Press Release on the report.)
The Yadana Gas Pipeline Project represents the single largest foreign investment project in Burma and the single largest source of income for the Burmese military. Run by a consortium including Chevron, Thai company PTT Exploration and Production Public Company Limited (PTTEP), Total (operator), and the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE), the project does little to benefit the Burmese economy or its people.
Abuses including extrajudicial killings, torture, rape and extortion by pipeline security forces have dramatically increased since the Yadana Project was initiated in the early 1990s. Violations committed in furtherance of the project have included forced labor; forced portering, whereby villagers are made to carry arms and supplies for soldiers patrolling the pipeline route; and forced relocation of entire villages to clear the way for the pipeline and provide ready pools of forced laborers.
The influx of soldiers to the previously isolated region has also caused an increase in illegal hunting, logging, and wildlife trade. The Tenasserim region is one of the largest rainforest tracts left in mainland Southeast Asia, home to wild elephants, tigers, rhinos and great hornbills, to name just a few of the rare and important species that inhabit this region. It is also the home to numerous indigenous peoples, including the Mon, Karen, and Tavoyans. These peoples are experiencing the negative impacts of the environmental destruction as well as the human rights abuses that they must regularly suffer at the hands of the soldiers brought into the pipeline consortium partners, including Chevron and Total.
3 responses so far ↓
ccmoira // May 1, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Thanks for this article. I wasn’t aware that there were any American companies with such a presence in Burma (but of course America is everywhere, isn’t it?). Are you advocating that Chevron and others pull out? Is there some other solution here? How much pull would Chevron or Total have in this region to stabilize it?
I found this article: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/04/4303/
It, too, is critical of Chevron, and highlights the controversy surrounding its actions in Nigeria. Apparently, “Chevron has denied any part in any human rights abuses. Its executives argue that staying in troubled countries - even pariahs such as Burma - does more good than harm by employing locals and funding health and education programs.”
Of course, health and education programs are great if you have access to them and if you aren’t being forced to work impossible hours in horrible conditions, raped, jailed, beaten up and generally oppressed.
The article also questions whether Chevron leaving is the answer, suggesting someone else (China or India say) might take their place. I’m not really making any point here - these sorts of situations seem somewhat intractable. You obviously have your finger on the pulse so I guess I’m wondering about what you think.
I’m tempted to say that it’s hard for businesses to have a conscience in the way that people can as individuals. But, then, there are more and more businesses that are taking an ethical/eco-friendly/human-friendly approach.
jessamynb // May 4, 2008 at 10:53 am
Jeez, man…It feels good to know that someone actually reads my posts enough to respond..This is a first for me
To start off, I didn’t write this article, I probably should have made that more clear by putting a byline, but I posted it really fast because we had company arriving at the house….it’s something Anisha wrote. She’s the communications coordinator for EarthRights International and I’m on the mailing list for their e-newsletter. I think she wrote it, though it might have been someone else in the org.
As for what I feel…
Chevron is in a pretty powerful position in terms of this pipeline. It’s true that if they pulled out of Burma, someone else would take their place, but that would cost the Burmese military regime a LOT of time and money. If this pipeline is their primary source of revenue, as the EarthRights states, then I would say Chevron does have a lot of pull.
A few steps Chevron could take:
1. Stop using the Burmese military for security. Chevron could insist on using private, supervised security forces which would respect human rights in accordance with international law.
2. Allow independent third-parties (such as EarthRights, Human Rights Watch, and the UN OHCHR) to:
a. monitor the pipeline and document any human rights abuses that occur
b. allow victims and local individuals to make confidential complaints
3. Provide compensation to injured parties
You say (or are tempted to say
) that “it’s hard for businesses to have a conscience in the way that people can as individuals.” And yet what is a business if nothing more than a collection of individuals, each of whom know very well the difference between right and wrong?
I think EarthRights has done a pretty good job with their report. If you’ve got the time you should give it a look. It’s a 75-page PDF and I can’t say I’ve had the time to read the whole thing very thoroughly. You can access it through the link at the bottome of the main article.
ccmmoira // May 6, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Eeep. I have to be honest and say I probably won’t tackle the whole article. Anisha has a cool job - I’m totally jealous.
I’m glad to hear your thoughts on the matter and you make some good points - I stand enlightened
As for my equivocation regarding businesses - I still have some spark of idealism in me and hesitate to be too negative; at the same time I took a serious blow in 2004 and much of the wind was knocked out of my liberal sails. That said, I’ve probably become more liberal in the sense that I think government must curb the excesses of business because those involved in business can’t be trusted to do it themselves (absolute power corrupts, and all that).
I have to say I’m glad to be out of the US - though I’ll never be ashamed to be American, it feels good to get an outside perspective. This is especially true since my job in the States (for almost two years) was watching local and national TV news (including Fox - blech).
Now I listen to BBC World Service every day - relief. I recommend it.
Please please please keep stopping by my blog. I can’t promise you will be interested in everything I write about but I would value your opinion and input on world issues.
Leave a Comment