Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burmese Politics

8/4/2019 Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burmese Politics

1/4

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burmese Politics: Just like Rousseaus Stag

Hunt Analogy

By Saneitha Nagani

Personally, I have neither met nor spoken to Daw Suu to say that I knew her well. I knew her,

if at least I can claim to know her through her speeches on various occasions, her writings in books

and journals like Mainichi Daily News, and from a number of her interviews she gave to many media

outlets. I am never tired of listening to her Reith Lectures nor tired of reading her books The Voice

of Hope, Letters from Burma and Freedom from Fear not to mention other of her writings. Daw

Suu and George Orwell are the two writers who I hold in my heart very dearly. If Burma would not

have been in such a mess the world would have the opportunity to enjoy the writings of her more

that what we have now. Since she is a person with a very clear mind there is nothing mysterious

about her at all she was not a sophisticated person at all. She has been honest in everything she

does or did throughout her life. I consider her as being more of an ethnic than a Bama Burmese. Atleast, to me, she not a conventional Burmese with the common creed of being people with more

form than substance. As a person from an ethnic background whose father is also halfBama, I can

tell that the hallmark of a conversation with a Burmese is never an honest straight forward exchange

of ideas or opinions. They are more like probes into the other persons thinking - like the probes we

sent into deep space. Whatever good, an ideology or a system of government, if it landed into hands

of Burmese they would mostly turned into mush. For example, a religion like Buddhism, so simple

and straightforward to put into practice, became some kind of tool for Burmese military regimes

manipulation and propaganda; political ideology that is meant for social change and for the greater

good of many like socialism or democracy for instance became a vehicle for indoctrination and

mass mobilization. During U Ne Wins era they called it centralized democracy and under Senior

General Than Shwe they called it guided or dicisplined democracy from which ultimately the people

gets poorer, some became very rich, and the country would soon be either a wasteland or the 24th

Province of China.

If a usage such as mutha ma-par, linga -ma chaw (without lies a poetry can never be good) is

imprinted in their cultural traits, how can anyone have trust on our word. The Chinese state-owned

Power Investment Corporation (CPI) has found out whatever one wants to call it, memorandum of

understanding or agreement there is no guarantee that it will not be breached. Leaving the legality

or illegality aside by suspending the construction of the dam at Myithsone does not released

President U Thein Sein and his government of their responsibility. If some of the readers may

recalled that it was with his personal invitation extended to his counterpart in China, Premier Wen

Xiabao that companies such as CPI are there to do their pillaging and plundering in Burma. Just look

at paragraph on page 9 of the Talking Points prepared for him when he was then the Prime

Minister in Than Shwes military government by the Foreign Office (Ministry for Foreign Affairs

MOFA, also knownjokingly as Ministry for Family Affairs since the selection was based on whether

you are the sons or daughters or even relatives of the Central Executive Committee member when

there was a party like Burma Socialist Program Party (BSPP) and now it must be the children of the

ruling elite. At one stage, it was said that Than Shwe had a number of his daughters working in

overseas posts of their preference. This does not include the appointment of his son-in-law as


2/4

ambassador to China.) In contemporary history, countries have been invaded and occupied by

foreign forces at the pretext of invitation from the then governments of those countries.

When I thought ofDaw Suu and her fate in Burmese politics I was reminded of the lyrics from

Heymar Ne Wins covering of the song, Malei let-khat-than (the sounds of Maleis hands at the

loom). It was as if the song was a dedication to her. The complexity of the problems she has to

confront with sums up in the part of the lyrics where it mentioned, bethu, bethu wingar-hma chi-

gin-htwei shin-naing-pa ma-shin (who will be the one to untangled the tangled web). For Daw Suu it

is not just a matter of walking and chewing gum at the same time, it is more of the case of walking

the tight-rope while juggling at the same time. She not only has the military regime to confront with

while working towards national reconciliation and political reforms though peaceful means but also

has to confront with the so called democratic forces who are now accusing her of being sold out

and becoming a mouthpiece for the Thein Seins regime. [Statement put out by the Central

Committee of the Parliamentary Democracy Party on 3rd

October 2011 is my case in point.]

When the going was tough there was no one to walk in the shoes ofDaw Suu. She has to go through

with her isolation and house arrest all by her self. Even her cousin, Dr Sein Win and his colleagues in

the so-called National Coalition Government in Exile (NCGUB), were all on safe mode in perpetual

motion of non-action and just spending the funds provided to them in the name of the people of

Burma. Like South African Nobel Laureate Desmond Tutu said, Arent we lucky!Yes, arent we

lucky that the military regime did not hand-over power when the National League for Democracy

(NLD) won the elections with a landslide in the 1990. As a popular perception at the time was, If

you put the brand NLD on to a dog, let alone some personality that dog would won the seat for

Parliament. If that is the case then Daw Suu would have been in a messier situation. One does not

have to look far. Just look at how the African National Congress (ANC) has changed once Nelson

Mandela was no longer in charge. Of all the people Reverend Tutu would be the most apt person to

say that, Our government is worse than the apartheid government, because at least you were

expecting it from the apartheid government. We were expecting that we would have a government

that was sensitive to sentiments of our Constitution. He said it all about how changing a

government from apartheid government to black majority ANC led government is no guaranteed

for social justice or good governance.

When the suspension of the Myithsone dam project was announced at least President Thein Sein in

his letter to the Parliament mentioned that he made his decision on the basis that he was doing so

on peoples concerns. He said that, (believe it or not) Our government, being elected by the

people, has to take great consideration of public opinion (at least there are no polls in Burma).

Accordingly, we have an obligation to respond to the public concern with seriousness. Therefore, we

will suspend the Myithsone (sic) project during the term of our government. The things that were

not mentioned in his letter were on whose invitation that the companies from China were there in

cooperation with the money laundering process ofthe proceeds from drugs business of Steven

Laws Asia World part of the investments nor was it mentioned what would happened after the

term of his government. The very mention of their sensitivity to public concern in itself is like a

Catholic priest or a Buddhist monk talking about the joy of sex. To me, President U Thein Seins

belief that he was making that decision was based on the concerns of the people was more akin to a

suspect faking insanity to the prospect of a less harsh punishment. However, by faking his mental


3/4

state of mind he might no longer have any other choice but to keep on playing as a lunatic. Would

Daw Suu and others willing to play along?

Since the military functions on command and obey, superior officer and junior rank and file,

master and serf mentality how on earthcan a political system such as democracy thrives under

the military regime, in spite of that fact that more than a quarter of the Parliamentarian are in still in

uniforms? Its more like a soup without any flavors. Daw Suu, if not by choice but of expediency, has

to play along. Unlike South Africa, the ANC and Nelson Mandela she does not have the luxury of

either working in coordination with the democratic forces (if one can use such a term to call the

Burmese exile communities around the world) or enough trust to share her thoughts with. What a

joke to think that the National Coalition Government (NCGUB) might be the extended arm of the

NLD headed by her own cousin. When the military regime considered someone as a threat they

would not spare the month old baby to use as bait for the mother, a dissident on the run, to

surrender herself to the authorities. Could there be an explanation for the military regime to allow

the wife and family of the Prime Minister in exile, as well as families of the other members, to rejoin

with their husbands and fathers in the United States and elsewhere? I leave this to the readers

imagination.

Whenever Daw Suu has the chance she always emphasized on trust and unity. These are also the

rarest commodities in Burmese politics. She regarded trust building as a never-ending process. For

her it is a continuing process even between a democratic government and its peoples. Daw Suu also

mentioned about unity among the people. In one of her interviews with Bernard Krisher from The

International Herald Tribune at the commemoration of the Union Day that, I talk about the fact that

unity cannot be built without mutual trust and understanding, and there is no hope for peace or

prosperity unless there is unity. So you have to start with unity of a nation; that is the main message

of the Union Day itself.

In Jean-Jacques Rousseaus famous Stag Hunt Analogy it is only with trust on each other that the

scheme would work. Rousseau imagines a situation where several solitary and hungry hunters

existing in a state of nature where there is neither law, morality, nor government, happen to come

together (very much like the situation in Burma). Each of them recognizes that his hunger could be

satisfied by a share of a stag, and so they agree to cooperate to catch one. In Rousseaus words, If

a deer was to be taken, everyone saw that in order to succeed, he must abide faithfully by his post;

but if a hare happened to come within reach of any of them, it is not to be doubted that he pursued

it without scruple, and, having seized his prey, cared very little if by so doing he caused his

companions to missed theirs. The point of the story is that in conditions of anarchy, the hunter

who grabbed the hare could not feel confident that one of his fellow hunters would not do likewise

if it presented with the same opportunity, in which case he would go hungry. Given this predicament

the sensible thing to do is to behave selfishly and seize the hare.*John Baylis, et al in Strategy in

Contemporary World, Oxford, 2007, p22+.

Doesnt this remind you ofDaw Suuso called colleagues in the NLD? To me Daw Suu is like a person

who is going to be handed over a farm. The farm was covered with weeds. The crop her father

sowed turned out to be obnoxious weeds now. Pulling a vine here and pulling a vine there will bring

down the whole structure. Tilling the ground and hoeing the plough may need to be done. But at

least she know how some seeds are not fit to be sown and it will make her life difficult since she is


4/4

committed to organic farming and that will prevent her from using either pesticides or herbicides

to get rid of those that will hinder a good harvest. Neither should she use imported chemical

fertilizers. However, tempted it might seem, if it is the seeds of trust that she is going to sow. END

Documents

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burmese Politics