Welcome to the first issue of the Journal of the Lao Houn Mai. Lao Houn Mai (roughly translated as the New Generation for Laos) was founded on 29^th April 1997 as an alliance between the Organisation of Laotian Students for Independence and Democracy, the Campaign for Freedom and Democracy in Laos, and the Lao United Freedom Organisation, with the objective of using international political pressure to force the Vietnamese military occupying forces to completely withdraw from Laos by means of non-violent international protest, and to reinstate democracy in Laos.

The objective of this journal is to disseminate information on the political situation in Laos in order to increase understanding in the world community of the terrible suffering which has been inflicted on the Lao people by foreign military interference - in particular from 1953 to the present - suffering which is now reinforced and entrenched by substantial support from the developed nations for the illegal Vietnamese occupation of Laos.

Articles shall draw attention to the ethnic genocide and the horrendous abuses of human rights committed by the occupying military forces, the widespread trafficking in dangerous substances such as heroin by the Vientiane regime, and the wholesale and flagrant disregard by the occupying forces of even their own laws let alone international law and the basic human rights of the Lao people.

In 1954 and again in 1962 the superpowers concluded international agreements which guaranteed the neutrality of Laos - yet in both cases the United States immediately intervened with a secret war run by the CIA and the American Ambassador in Vientiane. General Curtis LeMay claimed in 1965 that the U.S. military could win the war by "bombing the enemy back to the Stone Age", and the CIA later dropped more bombs on neutral Laos than were dropped on the whole of Europe in the Second World War. Laos is the most densely bombed region on the planet, and is littered with huge quantities of unexploded ordinance. All efforts of the Royal Lao government to negotiate a settlement between the right-wing, neutralist and left-wing factions were deliberately sabotaged by the CIA. It was this immoral interference and the large-scale corruption generated by the American billion-dollar programme that alienated most of the population and gave the Vietnamese the opportunity to manipulate the Lao and to install their troops throughout Laos.

Once the Americans pulled out of the region in 1975 the Vietnamese quickly consolidated their position in Laos, and by 1977 they were in total control.

On 17^th July 1977 the political leaders installed by Vietnam in Laos were forced to sign a Treaty (dated 18^th July by the Secretariat of the Vietnamese Communist Party) which transferred the whole of Lao territory to Vietnamese sovereignty. In late 1977 "678 Bureau" was set up under the overall command of General Tran Van Kwang in Tilien, Hanoi, to oversee the control of Laos under the Treaty signed in July. Eight full Divisions of the Vietnamese Army were then sent to Laos to guard each part of the country, because they were afraid that the Lao people who loved their country would rise up and fight back.

Divisions 530 and 600 were sent to guard Huaphan, Xieng Khuang and Phongsali Provinces; Division 396 was sent to guard Oudomsay and Luang Namtha Provinces; Division 324 was sent to guard Luang Prabang, Sayabouli, and Vientiane Provinces and the South of Xieng Khuang Province; Division 176 was sent to guard Bolikhamsay Province and the North of Khammouan Province; Division 967 was sent to guard the South of Khammouan Province and Savannakhet Province; Division 968 was sent to guard the North of Salavan Province and Champassak Province; and Division 632 was sent to guard the South of Salavan Province and Attapeu Province.

The total strength of these eight Divisions exceeded 50,000 men; in addition to this Military Advisors were sent to control the Pathet Lao soldiers who were assigned under Vietnamese command. The Vietnamese provided military training to the Lao military assigned to their command in many different fields. For example: 100 officers per training cycle were sent to train as Military Surgeons in Hadong, in revolving cycles; 300 Lao and Cambodian officers at a time were sent for flying instruction (Secret Code 400); 30 officers at a time were sent for training in Chemical Warfare at Seun Dong; 150 officers at a time were sent for training in Fire Cannon at Betong; and 150 officers at a time were sent for Tank training at Savarn May and Ving Fou. In addition to this, military Special Agent training schools were set up inside Laos in two locations, in Vang Vieng and Seno, under Vietnamese command.

In 1987 following major changes in the global political structures and the end of Soviet economic support for Vietnam, the Vietnamese ordered the Lao military under their command to announce the "New Economic Mechanism" to attract foreign investors and traders to combat the sudden loss of Soviet aid. From 1988 until the present time Vietnam has disguised the appearance of troops in most areas as labourers, in order to circumvent public international criticism. On 11^th November 1995 Vietnam signed a new Treaty with Laos to further enhance this arrangement, under the name "Labour Exchange Agreement".

Under the terms of the Labour Exchange Agreement, Vietnam sent their soldiers to Laos in the disguise of ordinary labourers; these labourers had trucks of their own, in
which they kept a wide variety of special weaponry for military action for any eventuality, and in this respect they followed the precedent of the Japanese military forces sent to various Asian countries in the region under disguise of businessmen shortly before the Second World War.

In order to facilitate the looting of the rich natural resources of Laos, the Army set up many regions completely closed to access under four different terms: Special Danger Zones, Protected Forest Reserves, Special Development Zones, and Boundary Zones. These special regions were used for maintaining Vietnamese military forces, scientists, and Vietnamese labour extracting the most valuable natural resources.

An example of this is near Muang Peu, in Houaphan Province near the border of Vietnam and slightly to the west of Luang Prabang Province. This region is extremely rich in gold, and all the richest gold deposits have been mined by Soviet and Vietnamese teams. The gold was cast into ingots and carried out of Laos into Vietnam. The region is marked as a Boundary Zone, and any outsider found entering this zone will be shot on sight.

In November 1996 the then Deputy Interior Minister General Som Kounlavong (now advisor to the Interior Minister Asang Laoly) sent news to the overseas Lao community that Laos� most infamous political prisoner Thongsouk Saysangkhi had died on 15^th October 1996 as a result of torture, and General Som called on political activist Mr Bounthanh Thammavong (President of the Organisation of Laotians for Independence and Democracy) to campaign for the attention of the world community because if the world community did not show sufficient interest then according to General Som the other political prisoners would be killed in the same way. Thongsouk Saysangkhi was formerly Deputy Minister of Science and Technology until shortly before his detention on 8^th October 1990 together with his colleagues Latsamy Khamphoui (formerly Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Forestry) and Feng Sakchittaphong (a senior official in the Ministry of Justice). All three men have an exceptionally high reputation as intensely patriotic men who for years have struggled to improve the quality of life of the rural poor of Laos. All three political prisoners were sentenced on 4^th November 1992 to 14 years detention at Prison Camp 07 situated at Sob Hao in Huaphan Province about 3 km from the Vietnamese border.

Lao Houn Mai responded with a vigorous campaign to raise awareness of the plight of political prisoners in Laos and the brutal oppression of the Lao people by the occupying Vietnamese military forces. We vigorously campaigned for the support of the developed nations and denounced the murder of Thongsouk Saysangkhi by the Vietnamese oppressors. After months of uncertainty about the full details of this affair we now have proof from Thongsouk Saysangkhi himself that this murder has indeed been initiated (but not yet completed) - but that not only Thongsouk Saysangkhi but all three political prisoners have been and still are the victims of this brutal attempted murder. A letter of appeal written and signed by Thongsouk Saysangkhi has been smuggled out of the prison camp and gives a most damning indictment of the efforts of the camp authorities to starve the three men to death by allowing them wholly inadequate rations of badly spoilt plain rice and insufficient water - and nothing else - in a deliberately brutal policy of day-by-day murder. For well over a year their families have been forbidden to visit them, all communication and outside assistance has been cut off, and daily they have been told that they are "only waiting to die" by their guards.

On 2^nd May 1997 Mrs Saysangkhi was finally allowed to see her husband - very briefly - in response to the intense international pressure to prove that he was still alive. Thongsouk was very seriously emaciated and in desperate need of medical treatment. All three men were extremely weak and in a similar physical condition to the inmates of Japanese prison camps at the end of the Second World War. During the 7 years of their detention the conditions to which they have been subjected have progressively worsened. Since 5^th March 1996 the prison camp authorities have on the orders of the Party Central Committee drastically tightened the screw in a desperate effort to slowly kill them - in a style typical of this brutally inhuman regime the Party initiated the gradual process of murder by starvation of the three men - a process that is still in progress at this very time. A graphic picture of this process is given in a letter written by Thongsouk Saysangkhi appealing to the leaders of the Central Party Committee to urgently stop this outrageous act; this letter has now been translated into English and is reproduced here in full. The letter was written compactly on very limited paper, and so some explanatory notes have been added for the aid of the reader.

For the last decade the developed world have at least in public remained almost silent about the genocide and horrendous breaches of human rights in Laos, a reflection in large measure of the pressures of foreign investment in exceptionally rich natural resources. It is now clear that the claim released in November 1996 by General Som Kounlavong that Thongsouk had already been killed through torture was a deliberate ploy of the Party Central Committee, designed both to prepare the world for the death of the three political prisoners and to test the reactions of the international community in advance. On the basis of the lack of publicity in the international media and the substantial support quietly provided by the governments of developed nations in recent years in return for allowing investment in extraction of gold, oil, hydroelectric power and many other natural resources, they hoped that the voice of the overseas Lao communities would not be heard by the world community at large in competition with news from so many other parts of the world such as Central Europe and Africa. However our vigorous campaigns ensured that sufficient international pressure was brought on the government in Vientiane to force them to permit Mrs Saysangkhi to visit her husband at Sob Hao for the first time in well over a year - even though only for 2 minutes - in order to establish that Thongsouk Saysangkhi is still alive. Nevertheless as long as the starvation diet still continues all three men remain the victims of ongoing attempted murder. The fact that they have survived so long is testimony to their exceptional resilience and resolute endurance; they are dying little by little, day by day. Ultimately they must succumb to this process of murder, unless the brutal and evil regime is forced through international pressure to end this outrage and release all three men to the free world so that they can receive the medical attention that they urgently need.

The three prisoners Thongsouk Saysangkhi, Latsamy Khamphoui and Feng Sakchittaphong have been isolated from the rest of the prisoners in a special double enclosure in order to ensure total isolation from the rest of the prison at all times. All other prisoners and all visitors to the prison have been very strongly warned against any attempt to make contact of any kind with the three men or to assist them in any way such as by giving them any food or medicines. This latter fact in particular emphasises the nature of the procedure as being specifically intended to starve them to death. Other prisoners who approach the enclosure risk increases in their sentences and other punishments. Any visitor or other prisoner approaching the 3 men also risks being accused of spying.

The men receive a small ration of plain boiled sticky rice twice a day. In 1992 they received a total of about 300g of rice per day plus a watery soup and some vegetables; since then the rations have been gradually and persistently reduced, and since 5^th March 1996 when the regime was particularly tightened against them they have been given only plain rice. The portions of rice have also steadily decreased since 1992, and the quality of the rice has also further deteriorated (the quality of rice in Lao jails is in any case poor) - sometimes the rice is so badly spoilt that it cannot even be eaten. (Sticky rice is generally more nutritious than ordinary rice and is the staple diet of the Lao; however sticky rice is subject to much more marked deterioration than ordinary rice and ultimately becomes extremely poor in nutritional content). They are allowed only 1 to 2 small pails of water per day (approx. 4 to 8 litres per person) and are not allowed access to any washing facilities, being locked in a small room 24 hours a day. The available water is not sufficient to enable them to wash themselves or their clothes or anything else.

Up until 5^th March 1996 they had limited resources which their families had managed to bring for them to enable them to survive on the poor sustenance provided by the prison, such as tins of fish, fish sauce, coffee powder, medicines, money, etc. On 5^th March all such resources were taken away, and from that date they were not permitted to receive any visitors, letters, medicines or parcels of any kind. The articles removed from their cell were taken to the prison camp office allegedly on the grounds that the items should be kept there on behalf of the three men; however the token access allowed to these items was so severely restricted as to provide little significant sustenance and can only be regarded as a symbolic effort to justify the guards� very feeble claim that the articles were being looked after for them on safety grounds. Their families continued to send letters, money and parcels of food and medicines despite the fact that they heard nothing at all and had no knowledge of whether the items were received or not or even whether the prisoners were still alive. All these letters were kept by the officer in charge of the prison camp, and all the resources were kept by the guards for their own use.

All access to medicines or medical treatment has been and still is completely denied. In addition to the starvation diet the three men have constantly received both physical and psychological torture throughout their detention, and again this continues. They are regularly told by the prison guards that "You are only here to wait for the day you die, and die through the most severe torture". It is a sad feature of this evil Vietnamese regime that those people who are regarded as the government�s greatest enemies are precisely those people who most fervently love their country and who are most dedicated to helping the Lao people. This fact is reliably borne out by the comparative treatment of different political prisoners in the Lao "re-education" camps which in 1977 held hundreds of thousands of officials of the Royalist government and military officers. Those officials who were seriously corrupt or who had committed serious offences were simply shot in the head and dumped in the mountains; the most serious torture was reserved specifically for those who loved their country the most.

Earlier this year in our campaigns we reported that Thongsouk Saysangkhi had been starved to death over a period of three days by the total withdrawal of all food and water at a time when he was already seriously weakened by 6 years of torture, under nourishment and lack of medical treatment, culminating in his death on 15^th October 1996. Whilst we now know that Thongsouk Saysangkhi is alive (as of 2^nd May), the information we have received has nevertheless conclusively shown that an attempt to murder both him and his two colleagues has been and still is being committed, and furthermore the manner of execution is even more cruel and inhumane than that which we had reported. At this time Thongsouk Saysangkhi, Khamphoui Latsamy and Feng Sakchittaphong are little more than ghosts living on borrowed time. Unless their lives are saved by urgent and public pressure from the international community then their execution will soon be complete.

The fact that they were still alive on 2^nd May is a testament to an almost supernatural resilience, resolve and endurance of Thongsouk Saysangkhi, Latsamy Khamphoui and Feng Sakchittaphong; nevertheless all three political prisoners are being starved to death, and even infinite resilience cannot hold back the advance of starvation against permanently inadequate nourishment. If this act of murder continues unabated then all three political prisoners must ultimately and necessarily succumb to starvation and die. The world community must not allow this outrage to continue.

Throughout the seven years from the 8^th - 9^th October 1990 up until now all 3 political prisoners together with their families, friends and relatives have made declarations, appeals, protests � to the highest authorities and to each level of authority of the Lao P. D. R. concerning all aspects of the conditions of our arrest, sentencing and imprisonment which disregard the law and basic human rights in an openly barbaric and arrogant manner, and the government fearlessly provokes the feelings of the people both in Laos and also overseas.

We urgently called for our unconditional release, and to conform to humane treatment of detainees. What an outrage that instead of taking heed of the appeals and of the just and righteous wishes of the people both in Laos and internationally, the highest authorities of the Lao P. D. R. the Party appointed by the gun responded by making the oppression yet stronger as the following examples illustrate:

1. From 5^th March 1996 to the present time the "3 political prisoners" have been kept in total isolation. Communication of any kind whatsoever with outside is completely forbidden at any time, including local villagers and other prisoners. This is enforced by locking us 24 hours a day in a special double barricaded locked room surrounded by its own locked fence, separated from all other prisoners.

Before, it was other prisoners who crossed the River Ma behind this fence to fetch provisions etc but now only the prison guards cross the river. As of 11^th January 1997 all 3 of us have become emaciated, seriously malnourished and exhausted � in particular Thongsouk Saysangkhi has become seriously infected and very seriously ill!

2. They have put up a notice prohibiting any person from speaking to us or assisting us in any way with any need:

3. Every day we are given nothing to eat except plain rice on its own twice a day. Over the last 7 years the rations of rice have been progressively reduced as much as they possibly can, and sometimes the rice is so badly spoilt that even that cannot be eaten.

4. When we are sick we have no access to doctors or medicines to treat the sickness.

5. We are labelled as "spies" and everything we say and ask for and do is used to turn everybody against us (including the guards themselves and the other prisoners).

6. They use posture and words, actions and behaviour which is wildly crazy, insane, vulgar, barbaric � for example:

The police forces frequently take up arms and surround the prison cell to inspect the prison cell without even allowing our presence (they first send us out to wash before bringing a substantial force complete with military weapons just to inspect the room where we live and sleep). To inspect the prison cell in this manner of itself breaks the law, yet even this is not enough for them � they then stage a theatre of "Lakorn talok" [dramatic farce] - they take knives to open tins and sabotage belongings, and other things from outside they confiscate as being "belonging to the authorities" � then having specially set out these things they bring a video camera which they use to film the confiscation of the "belongings of the authorities" in front of the 3 political prisoners.

7. In the 7 years from when we were arrested until now we

have been imprisoned under life threatening conditions. Prison Camp 07 is situated in the most remote part of Laos, and the access route is very difficult, especially in the rainy season 1996-1997 when the access route became impassable. Survival is only possible through persistent assistance from our families and friends, since the authorities take no responsibility for our lives as described above, and there is no other way. Furthermore the authorities further limited the sending of material assistance such as money, medicine and other things, and restricted visits as much as they possibly could. For example when material assistance is sent it is made to disappear, is rendered spoilt, delayed, and other things. In order to visit Camp 07 relatives must make an application to the Interior Ministry 2 to 4 months in advance -- a process full of restrictions, limitations, difficult obstructions, vile tricks and conjuring, completely lacking humanity and compassion.

8. Foodstuffs which had already been received at Camp 07 have been confiscated and deposited in the camp. Anything which arrived after 5^th March 1996 was withheld as described above; this plundering of spoils gives them an abundance of booty but even this is not enough - even those things which had already been received were taken away to be held by the Camp Committee (this is in accordance with what safety regulations? � food, utensils � have these become matters of safety?) For example:

9. The most unnatural and dangerous thing of all is to lock us up for 24 hours a day without allowing us to wash. The authorities have decreed that we are allowed just 1 to 2 pails of water per day shared between 3 people (approx. 4 to 8 litres per person per day). Who can survive under these conditions!!!!??? With this quantity we can do nothing. For example: wash our faces, wash our hands, cups and spoons, wash ourselves, wash dirty clothes; always used up, it is not enough for cleaning. In what way are items (8) and (9) required for safety?

From the actions which are briefly summarised in the nine abbreviated points above, I would like to ask the top leaders of the Lao P. D. R. from my conscience, best hopes, and sincerity:

If this is the case, do any of you still remember (if you are not already completely blind!!!) the teachings of the leading writer Maxim Gorki that:

In consequence of the state of affairs and the actions described briefly above, we sincerely demand in the strongest possible terms for conscience, compassion and justice as follows:

1. The immediate and completely unconditional release of all three of us, in accordance with the demands of the governments of the developed countries and the call of the people both within Laos and internationally; and full respect for the most fundamental and supreme principle of law:

2. There is a most powerful, urgent and most stringent requirement to turn around the very dangerous (because of being in jail) sickness of Thongsouk Saysangkhi. All three prisoners are very weak and their health must be strengthened with compassion and responsibility.

3. Urgently and completely stop the detention with physical torture and psychological torture against the dignity of humanity, and show complete and universal respect for human rights as guaranteed by the United Nations Charter of which the Lao P. D. R. is a full signatory.

Signed: Thongsouk Saysangkhi, Member of the Lao National Assembly who has been illegally imprisoned at Sob Hao.

Dated 14^th January 1997.

Send to:

1. This appeal was translated directly from the original signed manuscript and as far as possible I have aimed to represent faithfully the tone as well as the accurate meaning of the text.

2. A Lao prison camp is radically different from prisons in

many other countries, and in order to fully understand some of the points raised in Mr Thongsouk Saysangkhi�s appeal it will be helpful to understand some of the background to prisons in Laos. In all Lao prisons the food provided by the prison is basically no more than a minimal ration of rice. In the less onerous regimes there may be a watery soup available and sometimes a limited quantity of vegetables, but to a large extent the prisoners must make use of their own resources in order to survive by scavenging for whatever scraps they can find and depending on whatever opportunities might be available in each prison. This ranges from eating banana skins and insects to bribing guards to buy provisions from outside. Some prisons in the remotest areas have contact with local villagers, and so prisoners may have opportunities to buy from these villagers. Prisoners� families may bring tinned food and money to help them survive. Medicines are never supplied by prisons, and so mortality rates are high. Prisoners lucky enough to receive support from their families have much greater chances of survival and of obtaining medicines if they can be brought in time. Prison authorities take no responsibility for whether a prisoner lives or dies.

3. The Lao are renowned for their resilience and for their ability to survive in difficult times on a diet of sticky rice with very little else. Often a simple meal of sticky rice with "jaew" (a paste made from chilli, fish sauce, lemon etc) is considered adequate where a full meal is inconvenient such as when travelling; nevertheless this is obviously inadequate for long periods, especially where the quality, condition and

quantity of rice are all inadequate.

4. The Lao people (in contrast with the Vietnamese who have brutally controlled Laos since 1975) are by nature exceptionally compassionate people. Thongsouk Saysangkhi, Latsamy Khamphoui and Feng Sakchittaphong are well known figures highly respected by the people throughout Laos, and when one reads this appeal one is able to get a strong sense of the conflict between efforts of the local people to try to do what they can to help these three men in dire need where they can (despite strong repression and fear), and on the other hand the desperate attempts of the Vietnamese regime to completely isolate these three men from all sources of sustenance and all forms of psychological support in the face of their resolute resilience to death.

5. It has often been said that the three countries of communist Indo-China eradicated many of the senior officials of the pre-communist regimes by different methods: in Vietnam they forced desperate people out to sea in small boats; in Cambodia it was the Killing Fields. The method used in Laos was the so-called Re-Education Camp - prisoners were incarcerated under brutal conditions with hard labour and grossly inadequate nourishment; the weaker prisoners died quickly, while the more resilient prisoners weakened little by little year after year until they too finally died. Recent dissident from the Lao government Dr Phairot who defected to the United States in 1994 has revealed that between 1975 and 1994 over 90,000 prisoners were executed in prison camps - 3% of the 1975 population - often for nothing more than the accusation of being "anti-Vietnamese".

Information has just reached us of the recent murder of a Czech citizen by Vietnamese soldiers on the road between Vientiane and Luang Prabang and the abduction of his son by the Vientiane authorities. The father and son, who were both entomologists, had been visiting Laos as tourists, and travelled on the bus from Vientiane towards Luang Prabang on Route 13. For a wide variety of reasons this region has for many years been very dangerous, particularly between Kasi and Phou Khoun. Father and son alighted from the bus on this route, despite warnings from numerous people including the bus driver not to do so. They were attacked by Vietnamese soldiers, and the father was murdered. The body was seen on the roadside in the custody of the soldiers by an American nurse travelling from Luang Prabang to Vientiane, who raised the alarm at the US Embassy in Vientiane. However the soldiers have since burnt the body to destroy evidence. The son of the murder victim was taken in chains to Vientiane where he was put in jail at the infamous Samkhe Jail, and the Czech Ambassador was only able to secure his release through the mediation of the Cuban Ambassador and with the support of other members of the diplomatic community. News of the tragedy has been confirmed by the US State Department in Washington, who at the time received daily reports on the incident from their embassy in Vientiane.

The prompt burning of the body of the murder victim

emphasises the desperate desire of the Vietnamese military to destroy all evidence at all costs and thereby completely rules out any other arguments as to the cause of death such as accident or insurgency. The body was witnessed to be in the possession of the military by the American nurse and therefore it could not be argued that the destruction of the body was carried out to prevent it coming into the hands of the Vientiane government. Furthermore the fact that the victim�s son was taken to Vientiane in chains and jailed further confirms that the regime badly needed to eliminate his ability to disclose full details of the affair. It is certain that the son would have been murdered in Vientiane if the American nurse had not raised the alarm. The fact that mediation of the Cuban Ambassador was required to secure his release is also significant, Cuba traditionally being one of the closest allies of the regime. The release would almost certainly have involved an undertaking from the Czech government to suppress all information about the incident and in particular the son�s version of events, and a similar undertaking from the son himself. It is not yet known whether a ransom was paid.

Horrifying though this incident is it reflects many typical features of the actions and psychology of the criminal regime which has brutally controlled Laos since 1975, since the behaviour of the regime is in every respect that of a group of common gangsters and drug barons rather than that of a legitimate national government. Furthermore the legal status of the regime is not that of a legitimate national government as it is neither legally legitimate nor national: under the terms of the Geneva Agreement of 20^th July 1954, the Geneva Agreement of 23^rd July 1962 and the Vientiane Agreement of 21^st February 1973 all of which guaranteed the independence and neutrality of Laos the Vietnamese government in Vientiane is an illegal regime with no legitimate authority to govern Laos; and the authority under which power is exercised by those in ultimate control is the 17^th July 1977 Treaty (dated 18^th July by the Secretariat of the Vietnamese Communist Party) between the government of Vietnam and the puppets they had installed in Laos, which transferred the whole of Lao territory to Vietnamese sovereignty as a province of Vietnam and which has no legal validity. A few examples of similar recent events serve to emphasise this illegal status and show that the murder of the Czech citizen by the Vientiane authorities was not an isolated incident but no more than a small part of a very widespread pattern, news of which has been systematically suppressed by the governments of the developed nations in their attempt to promote their very substantial commercial interests and potential commercial interests.

The problems on Route 13 between Vientiane and Luang Prabang are many and long standing. Whilst the Vientiane regime invariably blames all attacks on the anti-communist insurgents the reality is that this accounts for only the smallest proportion of attacks mainly on military targets. A wide variety of more frequent causes include assassinations committed by the government on the pretext of insurgency, business conflicts and other personal conflicts, assassinations between rival drug trafficking gangs, assassinations related to disputes between Laos and Thailand, bandits with purely economic motives, and frequently attacks carried out by dissatisfied former Pathet Lao communist soldiers who have been retired early. Each of these groups has quite different targets, and it is noteworthy that the truck drivers who regularly travel this route prefer to drive at night so that they cannot easily be identified as targets; for example the insurgents mostly target only military targets, while rival gangs target specific individuals who can only be identified in daylight. Attacks almost invariably occur during daylight hours, and travel by night in the critical zone between Kasi and Phou Khoun is widely regarded as being safe.

On 30^th June 1996 the Toyota land cruiser of a Swedish forestry consultant working for the Swedish aid organisation SIDA in Luang Prabang was shot by Lao soldiers on this route. The soldiers are believed to have been drunk. AK47 bullets easily penetrated the thin metal and their trajectories covered most of the interior area of the vehicle. The driver was exceptionally lucky to escape with his life.

The French businessman and long-time resident Claude Vincent was murdered in December 1995, also on Route 13. The government as always blamed insurgents, but of the many potential reasons for the murder insurgents are the only explanation that can be almost completely ruled out. Among the most common explanations are government assassination and business conflict (although even in the latter case the government is again the prime suspect). Nobody with a significant understanding of the Lao political situation and the situation surrounding this attack seriously believes the government�s claims, and it is widely believed that the government is most likely to be responsible. The most likely reason is that he knew too much - Vincent had been resident in Laos for about 3 decades and had travelled almost all over the country. He had been a critical mediator between the French and Vientiane governments and enjoyed special privileges as a result, including the right to travel in Special Zones closed to most Lao as well as foreigners. However as a result of his very substantial travels in very remote parts of the country and his broad business interests he knew too many Vietnamese secrets, and was regarded as too much of a security risk. There is reason to believe that conflicting business interests with General Cheng Sayavong and the government may also have contributed to the decision to assassinate him.

In 1993/4 a series of attacks against the UNDP drug replacement project at Palavec left two Australian expatriates dead and was intricately related to efforts of the government to frustrate the project. The attacks were almost certainly carried out by forces working for General Cheng Sayavong, the right hand man of current Prime Minister Khamtay Siphandone and President of the infamous company Bolisat Phattana Khet Phoudoi or BPKP, a very powerful company owned by the Ministry of Defence which has wide-ranging monopolies in the Lao economy. General Cheng is known by the DEA to have been involved with the production and trafficking of narcotics ever since the Indo-Chinese war together with former Governor of Vientiane Province and Minister of Agriculture and Forestry General Sisavath Keobounphan, and is a major broker on the international markets of Burmese heroin on behalf of SLORC and the drug baron Khun Sa, as well as encouraging Lao ethnic minorities to cultivate opium.

The bridge across the Mekong River between Vientiane and Nongkhai in Thailand was built using Australian aid. The original cost estimate of the bridge was around 30 million Australian dollars, but the final total cost was over double that, mainly as a result of cheating by the Lao government (most notably a special change in the law which was deliberately not announced until after the aid agreement was signed, which required all contractors to have a joint venture with Lao partners; this resulted in very substantial increases in all the costs since all cost estimates had by agreement been based on open competitive tender). The bridge was designed by Maunsell-Sinclair-Knight, and the General Manager responsible for supervising the construction was Anthony Borchardt. When the construction was well under way a Lao senior government officer came into Mr Borchardt�s office and announced that he was going to take away all the project vehicles, with a value of about US$2 million. Mr Borchardt refused to allow this, as the vehicles belonged to the project and were required for the use of the project, and had been paid for by Australian taxpayers� money.

The government officer then went to the Australian Embassy and said that Mr Borchardt was causing difficulties to the relationship between the two governments. At one point he became very close to being deported. The Australian Embassy knew perfectly well that the government officer just wanted to sell the vehicles and put the money in his pocket; they readily admitted to Mr Borchardt that the officer had no right to take the vehicles and that it was a waste of taxpayers� money, yet instead of refusing to allow the theft of the vehicles the Australian Embassy very strongly criticised Mr Borchardt for making their work more difficult and generating friction, and specifically told Mr Borchardt that they did not care whether the $2 million of taxpayers� money was wasted. This particular dispute illustrates a very important point that is crucial to an understanding of the complex three-tier corruption that is taking place in the relationships between the Vientiane government and the aid donors: the diplomatic community in Vientiane are having an exceptionally comfortable and relaxed life, which as Mr Borchardt pointed out is a non-stop party. The Embassy were angry at Mr Borchardt for interrupting their party.

On 10^th August 1996 foreign investor Jonathan Brown was abducted by the Lao police in Luang Prabang on the orders of a Thai swindler Osai Phakphoumin (using the Lao pseudonym Thongsay Voravongsa and fake Lao identity papers) who had bribed officials of the Ministry of Interior and other ministries. Mr Brown was tied up with rope, his passport was stolen by the police, and he was sent by plane to Vientiane. An American tourist meanwhile alerted the Australian Embassy. On arriving in Vientiane Mr Brown was escorted off the plane by a party of police officers, when Australian Embassy official Ms Duan White arrived and came directly up to Mr Brown. At this point all the police fled, since they were afraid of a diplomatic incident, leaving Mr Brown still tied up with rope near the aircraft. Ms White untied the ropes and escorted Mr Brown to the Australian Embassy. By late afternoon the primary conspirator with Osai Phakphoumin in the Interior Ministry, Mr Malaithong, asked the Embassy to bring Mr Brown to a meeting at the Interior Ministry at 8.30am on Monday 12^th August. The Australian embassy had in their possession an extensive file of documentary evidence to show that Osai Phakphoumin (using his pseudonym Thongsay Voravongsa) and Malaithong had been attempting to extort US$300,000 from Mr Brown since January 1995. They also had a copy of a report prepared by the Foreign Investment Management Committee following a full investigation which concluded that Mr Brown was the victim of fraud by Thongsay Voravongsa.

Mr Brown asked to see the Australian Ambassador, and the Embassy informed him that he would be collected from his hotel at 8am in an Embassy car and driven to the Embassy for discussions with the Ambassador, following which he would be free to decide for himself whether or not to attend the meeting at the Interior Ministry at 8.30am. However the Australian Embassy arrived at Mr Brown�s hotel at 8.25am with the intention to hand Mr Brown over directly to the Interior Ministry without seeing the Ambassador. This was in spite of firm knowledge that he was in danger of illegal imprisonment by the Lao police to be held for a US$300,000 ransom and in direct conflict with their statutory obligation to protect him. Australia is the largest foreign investor in Laos, having invested many hundreds of millions of dollars since 1994. Fortunately Mr Brown had left two minutes before the Australians arrived.

Most foreign investors have problems with the government in Laos as a result of unwillingness to respect contracts and the government�s willingness to support and collaborate with swindlers. The majority of investors engaged in joint ventures with locals are at some stage cheated by their local partners, often following minor disputes. The local partner, who in most cases is not in reality ethnic Lao but usually Thai or Vietnamese or occasionally Chinese, then fabricates a case against the foreign investor and bribes the authorities to support him. Often the claims are so wildly ridiculous that it seems impossible to believe that anybody would take them seriously - however the Vientiane regime makes such a complete mockery of the legal process that rational arguments and legal arguments are completely irrelevant. A good example of this is shown in the official transcript of the trial of Thongsouk Saysangkhi, Latsamy Khamphoui and Feng Sakchittaphong which has been published by Amnesty International - in the case of Feng Sakchittaphong the court found in convicting him to 14 years detention that:

In other words it is not realistic to analyse the practice of law in Laos in legal terms - when judgements are based on an Alice in Wonderland mentality the outcome clearly bears no relation whatsoever to the proper merits of the case, being dependent exclusively on corruption. In most countries the fundamental purpose of a legal system is to protect and regulate society; in Laos this is simply not the case - the purpose of the legal system is exclusively to exploit and coerce society (it is for this reason that the Vientiane government has always resisted publicising its laws). Under these conditions foreign investors are easily manipulated, especially where they come from more law-abiding countries. A great many foreign investors have been cheated in this way, almost invariably with the active complicity of the government. Many have lost everything they have invested, usually with no effective means of redress. Several dozen have been deported or arrested and imprisoned illegally. Every year many dozens of Western investors and tourists have their passports illegally confiscated by the Vientiane government in order to prevent them from leaving the country. Certain immigration officials have boasted that they have many cupboards stacked full of such passports in each province. Many have had to escape by crossing the Mekong river in the same manner (and with the same risks) as the refugees of whom one million fled between 1975 and 1986; several have been caught on the Thai side by the Thai police and sent back with no recognition of human rights. One American investor had a wife of Pakistan ethnic origins but with Lao nationality, and of a highly unstable temperament; one day after a family dispute she had her husband arrested and put in jail. The only way the American Embassy could find to get him out was to falsely claim that he was wanted in the USA for serious narcotics offences.

The small investor is the most vulnerable in Laos, and is frequently deliberately manipulated by the government first encouraging him to invest, then if his business thrives he is then forced into bankruptcy leaving him to pack his bags and go home with nothing, while the state takes over the business he has created. If a business does not generate sufficient bribes for Party officials, then it will be simply bled until it closes down - the communist state has unlimited means for controlling the ability of businesses to succeed or fail. Thus nightclubs and other exploitative businesses are popular with the regime, while businesses which genuinely benefit the country are not. Ethnic Hmong who fled Laos as refugees and later returned as foreign investors have faced even greater difficulties owing to the blind hatred of the Hmong shown by the Vietnamese regime - any Hmong foreign investor whose business thrives is guaranteed to be forced to leave the country; the lawless regime in Vientiane never has any difficulties in finding a way to achieve whatever they want within Laos.

The most important feature of these abuses of most relevance to the Czech incident is the fact that the foreign diplomatic community have universally suppressed information about these cases, and in particular about the scale of the problem. As a result the Vietnamese regime have very reasonably concluded that they are free to do whatever they like: far from being an isolated outrage, incidents such as the Czech affair are an automatic consequence of the foreign policies of the developed nations towards Laos, and are simply a reflection of "normality" within the context of the Vientiane regime. It is for this reason that the Czech incident, tragic as it is, must be looked at not in isolation but in the context of a nation state controlled exclusively by gangsters entirely outside the legal process. As long as the developed nations continue their current policies of appeasement and clandestine support for the Vientiane regime such incidents, and indeed on a far larger scale the massive exploitation and abuse of the Lao people, will continue unabated.

An important legal case against the Vientiane regime is currently being initiated in the Federal Courts of the United States. Mr Donald Scott is taking an action on behalf of himself and various other investors against the Lao Peoples Democratic Republic for damages of US$60 million in what appears to be a relatively straightforward case of breach of contract in relation to some quite substantial investments in the hotel industry. After his company refused to approve an extra-contractual payment of US$200,000 to a government Minister which amounted in effect to a bribe Mr Scott was ultimately forced to flee the country after death threats and shots taken at his car. An interesting twist which is completely typical of the regime is that when Mr Scott�s lawyer recently visited Laos to try to negotiate the payment of his claims for damages he was told after explaining Mr Scott�s position in detail that the position of the Lao government was quite simply this: "We will not discuss anything at all in relation to Mr Scott�s claims until he returns to Vientiane in person to discuss his theft of US$200 cash which was in his office in the hotel at the time he moved in". No mention of this absurd allegation had ever been made before; nevertheless the lawyer immediately opened his wallet saying: "Here, I�ll give you the $200 right now. Do you think Mr Scott wants to argue over $200? He has more important matters to deal with". The Vientiane government however insisted that Mr Scott must return in person to discuss and apologise for the alleged theft before they would be prepared to discuss Mr Scott�s claims. Clearly Mr Scott is unlikely to return to Vientiane as long as his life is under threat.

On 15^th August 1996 Japanese tourist Mr Toshihiko Takase was drugged in the lobby of a hotel in Pakse in the south of Laos by two Pakistanis, and robbed. US$1000 cash, two cameras, and his passport were stolen. The main priority of Mr Takase was to get home to Japan as quickly as possible, but the Pakse police went to great lengths to obstruct this. The police had caught the two Pakistanis and claimed that they had found the two cameras, but not the passport or the cash. (This was obviously false because the Pakistanis had been caught on the bus to Vientiane early in the morning after the robbery and had no way of disposing of the cash and passport). The Japanese Embassy in Vientiane told Mr Takase that he must get a letter from the police to confirm that his passport had been stolen before he could be issued with a new passport to return home. However the police refused - they said they must "investigate the crime" first. They claimed that the Pakistanis had claimed that the cameras belonged to them, and therefore the police had to establish who the cameras really belonged to.

For about 5 days nothing happened except that the police came to ask questions every day. Mr Takase was forced to wait in the hotel every day, unable to do anything all day. He had very limited money, and was in a hurry to get back to Thailand to catch his flight back to Japan and return to work on time. He repeatedly told the police that he did not mind about the cameras or the money - he just wanted to be able to leave. Still the police refused to give him the letter he required. Eventually the police asked Mr Takase to try to remember what photographs he had taken on the film which was still in the camera, and what type of film it was: Mr Takase had arrived in Pakse from Thailand and therefore the photographs should be of the journey from the border at Chong Mek to Pakse. On the other hand the Pakistanis had arrived by bus from Vientiane, and so if the camera belonged to them then the photographs should be of the journey from Vientiane to Pakse. Another 3 days of waiting followed, with the police coming each day with more questions. By this time it became clear what the police were trying to do. They had caught the Pakistanis with the cameras and the cash and passport, and the Pakistanis had bribed the police to share the money in return for letting them go. There is a photographic processing shop just 3 minutes walk from the hotel which processes films within 2 hours, so there was no need to take so long. During those 3 days the police were taking the cameras back along the road from Vientiane with a new film to take photographs of the journey from Vientiane to Pakse - this required a long journey towards Vientiane and a long journey by bus back to Pakse. Clearly they intended not only to pretend that the cameras must belong to the Pakistanis, but also if that was the case Mr Takase must have been lying and so he would have been put in jail. Before he was released from jail his family would have to pay a substantial bribe - probably around $50,000 or more, depending how much they believed they could get.

Mr Takase therefore telephoned his mother in Japan from a public callbox. He told his mother in Japanese to find the receipts for the two cameras and urgently fax the serial numbers to the Japanese Embassy in Vientiane, and he told his mother what the police in Pakse were trying to do. He then told his mother to put pressure on the Japanese Embassy to support him - and at that moment the telephone line was instantly disconnected. He repeatedly tried to call his mother again but was unable to. All foreign incoming and outgoing calls in Laos, including faxes, are monitored by the Interior Ministry - all international calls have to go through Vientiane (fax calls are routed through a fax machine in the Interior Ministry which picks up and reproduces the fax machine call signals in each direction; frequently a message from overseas will be disconnected by the Interior Ministry from the Ministry to the destination, while the link to the overseas sender is still connected to the Interior Ministry. When the fax message is completed the Interior Ministry mimics the message normally sent by the destination to confirm that the message has been received OK). The following day the police came with the two cameras. Mr Takase identified the two cameras and confirmed that they were his. The film was taken out of the camera, and it was a Fuji 100ASA colour print film as Mr Takase had described to the police 4 days earlier. However he said that he recognised that it was not the same film canister, because of slight differences in the marking of the canister (he had bought his film in Japan while the film removed by the police had obviously been bought locally). Knowing that their plot had been rumbled, the police immediately said that they thought the two cameras belonged to Mr Takase without getting the film processed. Mr Takase still had to remain in Pakse a few more days waiting for his passport, and eventually left at the beginning of September after 2 weeks wait.

There are many foreign prisoners in Lao jails, mostly from countries in the region. The purpose of them being in jail is not to punish them for crimes, as in other countries, but to provide an income for the government in Vientiane. According to reports in mid 1995, there were at that time 42 foreign prisoners in Oudomsay jail in the North of Laos; the greatest proportion of these were Chinese. Many had not committed any crime - a Malaysian prisoner for example had been travelling in Laos, and had run out of money. He was arrested at Pak Beng and sent to jail. He was told to write to his parents and ask for 300,000 Kip as the price of his release. Where prisoners� families have not paid up the ransom within about 2 years the prisoner is shot in the head and dumped in the mountains.

In recent years many political prisoners have been murdered by lethal injections of a radioactive isotope that causes a delayed death; frequently the prisoner is already seriously ill after many years of detention in terrible conditions, and is finally sent to hospital for ostensibly humanitarian medical treatment - what is not so well known is that in reality they are sent to hospital to be murdered. The technique, developed in the Soviet Union, involves the injection of a small dose of a radioactive isotope, usually Strontium⁹⁰, which causes death by internal haemorrhage within a period of about 1 to 3 years. Death is slow and painful. Victims have included Thit Tan Sensouk, Thuck Chockbengboun, Phangthong Chockbengboun, Bounlu Nammathao, Sing Chanthakoummane, and Pheng Phongsavanh, all of whom were officials in the previous regime, and were murdered after 17 years imprisonment without trial. The technique appears to have been used very widely by the Vietnamese secret police; even the son of Prime Minister Khamtay Siphandone was killed in this manner - a pilot in the airforce, he had confided with a colleague in plans for a coup attempt. His father ordered his arrest; however the lethal injection was made without the Prime Minister�s knowledge. After a lengthy period of poor health the Prime Minister ordered that his son be transferred to a hospital in Nong Khai (Thailand) for treatment. In front of many witnesses he told his father that there was no need to go to Nong Khai - the doctors had told him that he had been given lethal injections which would kill him. The Prime Minister nevertheless transferred him to Nong Khai hospital, where he died from internal haemorrhage.

The various incidents described above are intended to put the Czech incident in a wider context. To try to understand what was really likely to be going on in this incident would be impossible without this wider context. There are many third world regimes that are corrupt and authoritarian with legal systems that are grossly inadequate and fraught with corruption; Laos however is fundamentally different - the additional element which is not appreciated by those who do not understand the regime well is the supremely surrealistic mentality in which they show no hesitation in relying on arguments that are so intensely ridiculous that Westerners have complete difficulty in believing that they are indeed making these absurd claims. Furthermore it is the absurdity of the policies of the developed nations towards Laos that gives the Vientiane regime complete freedom to indulge in their unrestrained fantasies and to get away with doing so, and in that respect the absurdity and gross immorality of the Vientiane regime is no more than a microcosm of the absurdity and gross immorality of the foreign policies of the developed nations in the context of the new post Cold War era.

Many would argue that the traditional mentality of the foreign policies of the developed nations, steeped as they have long been in intrigue and secret manipulation, are an inevitable consequence of the enormous financial value of international trade and market forces in the modern world; however there is a strong argument to be made that the ultimate effects of those policies are very often not only morally indefensible in their effects on developing countries, but also ultimately are against the interests of the national economy and the wishes of the electorate of the developed country. It is high time that the developed nations started to make their foreign policies more honest and accountable to their own electorates; not only would this result in policies towards underdeveloped countries which are more morally defensible and more just, but in the long term this can only be in the best interests of the economies of the developed world. With increasing movement towards freedom of information and civil rights in the developed world the old mentality is rapidly becoming a handicap.