In the new contract, Myanmar Wanbao, UMEHL, and the government specified new profit-sharing of the project by allocating 51% to the Myanmar government, 30% to Myanmar Wanbao, and 19% to the UMEHL. On the other hand, the investors have to use one million US$ for corporate social responsibility and two million US$ for the annual environmental preservation [Mizumo, 2016. P. 113]. Yun Sun noted that “the investigation committee for the Letpdaung copper mine project, which she (Aung San Su Kyi) chaired, approved the continuation of the joint venture despite opposition from local residents and Myanmar society in general… her position (or rather lack of it) has made her, at the minimum, an acceptable Myanmar politician for China.” [Yun Sun, 2015].

On 13 March 2013, Aung San Su Kyi visited local residents again, shortly after her commission published a final report. At the same time, the villagers did not stop their protests, rather intensifying them more provokingly. She faced emotional counter words from the villagers like during her first trip76, but this time they became more depraved and the government responded with tight security for her. The villagers also delivered their opinion that they did not want relocation and compensation, and they were not going to stop until the project shuts down totally [Charltons, 2015. P. 4].

In November 2013, police officers and villagers clashed again in the Myanmar Wanbao’s headquarter, near the Letpadaung Project. The police used rubber bullets for antiriot shotguns, and nine police officers and five activists were wounded [Win Zaw Latt, 2013]. However, the villagers and activists still commented on environmental pollution and unfair salary for local workers, relocation and compensation processes for their land. Before the Letpadaung Investigation commission, Myanmar Wanbao reimbursed 550,000 MMKyats77 for an acre. Later, according to the commission’s suggestion, Wanbao agreed to provide additional compensation for an acre between 700,000 and 1,25 million MMKyats [Maung Myoe, 2015. P. 38].

Back then, the author worked as a reporter, and visited the project on two times interviewing locals and activists. When he reached out to Myanmar Wanbao, they explained every detail of the Letpaduang project. The company sent journalists to meetings between villagers and company officers to examine how the company officials proposed CSR programs to local community. However, the author interviewed villagers and activists. The author asked, “If you need urgent development for your community, and, even, you know that you can produce valuable bronze from Letpaduang Mountain, what will you do?” The local activist answered that “We will not produce any copper or bronze from the Letpadaung Mountain, even we do not have anything to eat. We do not need any development if we have to destroy the Letpadaung, and we are going to enjoy its beauty until we die.” Therefore, we could clearly understand that the local residence feeling on the project.

When Myanmar Wanbao tried to start the project in December 2014, they faced vocal protests from the villagers again. Finally, the tension reached the highest point, after the police opened fire, and one villager, Daw Khin Win died on the spot. It received attention from international and local activists [Kivimäki, 2016]. According to Amnesty’s research paper, there was preannounced lack of environmental concern and management in the mine. In May 2016,