Myanmar rejects U.N. call for talks

yangon, myanmar -- Myanmar’s military regime rejected a U.N. statement calling for negotiations with the opposition.

The impoverished country’s main opposition party, however, urged the ruling generals to comply with United Nations demands for negotiations with pro-democracy forces and ethnic minorities, and the release of political prisoners.

State-run TV and radio issued a statement Friday saying that conditions in Myanmar -- a reference to the anti-government protests that were violently suppressed by troops late last month -- were not the concern of the outside world.

“Myanmar’s current situation does not affect regional and international stability,” said the statement, attributed to Col. Thant Shin. “However, we deeply regret that the U.N. Security Council has issued a statement contrary to the people’s desires.”

“The government of Myanmar will continue to implement the seven-step road map together with the people,” the statement said, referring to the regime’s plan that promises a new constitution and an eventual transition to democratic rule.

The process is supposed to culminate in a general election, but no date has been set.

The National League for Democracy, the major opposition party led by detained activist Aung San Suu Kyi, endorsed the Security Council statement.

“Since Myanmar is a member country of the United Nations and as the government has declared it would work with the U.N., we earnestly underscore the need to urgently implement the demands made by the Security Council,” the party said.

The Security Council issued its first statement on Myanmar, also known as Burma, on Thursday in an attempt to pressure the regime that has ruled the isolated country since 1988 to negotiate with the opposition.

The fourth-ranking member of the regime, Prime Minister Soe Win, 59, died Friday in a military hospital after a long illness. He reputedly oversaw a 2003 attack on Suu Kyi from which she escaped unscathed.

His death was unlikely to cause a ripple in the regime’s grip on power because of his lack of influence on policy-making.