Five months after Myanmar’s bloody crackdown on anti-government protests led by Buddhist monks, international efforts to foster political change in Burma are again at an impasse. Neither sanctions nor diplomatic engagement have succeeded in persuading the country’s long-ruling military regime to make any significant concessions, including the release of political prisoners such as Nobel peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.
Now, a decade after she made international headlines by publicly opposing Suu Kyi’s call for sanctions, Burmese author and painter Ma Thanegi-Suu Kyi’s former personal assistant-sat down for a rare and wide-ranging interview with Stanley A. Weiss, Founding Chairman of Business Executives for National Security, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization based in Washington, DC.
The 61-year old Yangon-based author of books on Burmese culture and cuisine speaks candidly about working with Suu Kyi, her years in prison, accusations that she betrayed the democracy movement, recent anti-government protests and the prospects for political dialogue between the junta and the democratic opposition.
Stanley Weiss: How did you get involved in the democracy movement in 1988?
Ma Thanegi: As a painter, I previously had no interest in politics. Under socialism, we were completely isolated. The Op Art [Optical Art] movement of the 1960s passed by without us even being aware of it. With state propaganda and censorship no one bothered to read the state newspapers, and I envied the press freedom of the West. The only jobs were at government offices and they went to people with connections.
I joined the movement because young people-school children-were at the forefront and I felt ashamed that I, as an adult, was sitting by the road watching them. After all the socialist years I wanted freedom of publication.
Stanley Weiss: You worked as Aung San Suu Kyi’s assistant?
Ma Thanegi: I helped her as a personal assistant in her home office-answering the phone, taking notes at meetings, traveling with her across the country. Those days were filled with high hopes, fun and optimism. Even when I recall the times of danger, I have no regrets.
Although I was a member of NLD [Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy], I was never directly connected to it; none of us were paid staff. But I am an artist, and office work is not for me. So I told Suu Kyi in 1989 that after the elections I would no longer work for her, but instead would be her eyes and ears in the real world.
Still, I had no idea then that the high hopes we had were the beginnings of unrealistic hopes after the 1990 elections were won, when everyone thought it would be easy to take over power just by demanding it. But even then I was realistic. I knew the NLD would need a lot of political finesse to get power after they won.
Stanley Weiss: But in July 1989 Suu Kyi was put under house arrest and many of her supporters, including you, were sent to prison. You were in Insein prison for three years?
Ma Thanegi: Living conditions were primitive, but treatment was nothing out of the ordinary-no mental or physical torture. Things were worse in the men’s quarters, I am sure. My guards were elderly, poorly educated women. They were friendly, not tough, and liked to talk about their families or movies they had seen.
Stanley Weiss: After your release you went back to work for Suu Kyi, but then parted ways?
Ma Thanegi: I was released in 1992, and after Suu Kyi was released from house arrest in 1995 I helped her with personal matters like going to the tailors and running errands. But in late 1995 the NLD [which had won democratic elections] had been demanding the transfer of power and walked out of the national convention, saying it was a farce and refusing to give the military 25 percent of seats in parliament. I disagreed and felt the constitution could be amended later.
Also in 1995 Suu Kyi called for isolation, although it was not yet a call for sanctions, which came later in 1997. I disagreed and spoke privately many times with her on this. I never believed, not for one second, that putting pressure that falls on the people is an effective or desirable strategy. When I told her that people will suffer, she merely said “It’s not true.” We argued so much I stopped seeing her. Then, in 1996, I spoke out against isolation in an interview with The New Yorker magazine.
Stanley Weiss: And after Western sanctions were imposed on Myanmar, you wrote articles in 1998 that were not only critical of sanctions, but of Suu Kyi personally, saying that her approach had “come at a real price for the rest of us.” Any regrets?
Ma Thanegi: No, I don’t regret it, because her voice and her views are all that matters in the NLD or in the world. She is the NLD-the one voice of the opposition. When you are trying to make a point and trying to pierce through the fog of happy illusions and flaky hopes-that, voila!, the military government is going to topple within months through western pressure-I needed strong words or my articles would have been a wishy washy thing ignored by all. No, I do not regret it.
Is it not a paradox that the pro-democratic movement should be asking for the people to be held economic hostage like this with sanctions-people they are supposed to help?
Stanley Weiss: But why so much criticism of Suu Kyi and the democracy movement when it’s the military regime that’s responsible for Burma’s isolation and economic despair?
Ma Thanegi: I was talking about sanctions, addressing that one issue, and it was not the government that asked for sanctions. By 1998 the entire world had been repeatedly condemning this government-nothing new to add by me. As it’s a military government, it’s a given that they are very controlling and rigid, not knowing anything about the running of the economy, over which they now have a monopoly, thanks in part to sanctions.
Stanley Weiss: How do you respond to critics who say you’re a sellout who parrots government propaganda?
Ma Thanegi: How do I respond? I don’t. I know I am not a traitor or a turncoat. I came into the political movement because I wanted to do good for the people. My loyalty lies with the people. Anything that hurts them, I will speak out against. I was raised by a tough mother. Neither the generals nor the screaming hordes are anything compared to her.
In Burmese culture people never criticize each other openly; they do it behind the back and, when confronted, deny it. They are not used to a person being straightforward like me, but I was raised to be so.
I live in a cheaply built flat in a low-scale housing estate near China Town and drive a 22-year-old car with some parts patched with Superglue. If I had wanted money and fame-with my connections to Suu Kyi and my fluency in English and knowledge of French and German-I would be getting a lot of funds and media exposure by working as an exiled Burmese activist.
Stanley Weiss: During one visit to the U.S., didn’t some activists confront you, calling you a “spokesperson for the regime?”
Ma Thanegi: Yes. But none of them addressed the issues; they just called me names or repeated that sanctions will bring down the government. After meeting them, I realized that I was wrong thinking that they should be informed of the true facts-how sanctions hurt the people-that they didn’t know. But they do know. But to be politically correct is what generates their funds and what generates free public relations images for western politicians. There have been many instances when an exiled organization or a publication-if it strays from the strict politically correct view-is warned by donors that funds will stop if they continue like this. This righteous politically correct attitude is costing us jobs and hurting people, who need to eat on a daily basis.
Stanley Weiss: But you acknowledge being a contributor to the Myanmar Times, which has been accused by the Committee to Protect Journalists of “merely presenting government propaganda”?
Ma Thanegi: I’m a freelance contributor. I never write about politics, only about food, culture, human interest or funny family or school stories. I interviewed then-Prime Minister Khin Nyunt in 2001 to open up the question about the HIV problem here that needs to be addressed. Every publication here comes under censorship, as does the Myanmar Times. It’s easy to label, not knowing the full picture here.
Stanley Weiss: What about the recent anti-government protests, led by Buddhist monks?
Ma Thanegi: Actually, they began not as a protest even, but as a means of calling attention to inflation. Within a day or so, political demands were made. I have no idea if the monks were instigated or thought the demands up on their own, but it turned into a political protest in the eyes of the government, and the crackdown followed. I feel very sad and depressed about it and wish that the situation could have been handled gently.
Stanley Weiss: Since the crackdown, the regime has met with Suu Kyi several times, allowed her to meet with NLD leaders, called for a constitutional referendum this spring and promised elections for 2010, but have barred Suu Kyi from participating. What, in your view, are the prospects for dialogue and reconciliation?
Ma Thanegi: By now, over the long years, there is so much mistrust for each other I see no way to achieve a dialogue even if they sit facing each other for hours on end. Many opportunities have been lost by both sides in the past. Setting aside, for the moment, the question of fairness, there was so much concentration on unrealistic hopes for the transfer of power at a snap of the fingers-or that the government would topple at any moment-that opportunities to talk of power sharing were lost.
If anyone is focusing on a “coming together” of the military and the NLD, it’s a pipe dream. People think that just because a government representative, U Aung Kyi, is talking to Suu Kyi that it’s about power sharing. But he’s only trying to get her “yes” or “no” to the four conditions for dialogue set by Senior General Than Shwe, for example, that if she renounces sanctions, etc., he would talk to her. There are no other issues that U Aung Kyi has to discuss.
In both the government and the opposition we have sycophants who lie to please their superiors. Those superiors need to find out reality by many means, not just from their followers.
Stanley Weiss: Will you vote in the upcoming referendum on the new constitution, which gives a lot of power to the military-25 percent of seats in parliament?
Ma Thanegi: I would vote “yes” because there is no alternative. It’s a step in the right direction. Some exiled activists say that accepting the constitution would give the regime “legitimacy.” But this government has been in power for 20 years, the United Nations and other countries accept them, and the activists are talking about legitimacy? If we refuse the military 25 percent of the seats, then it continues to have 100 percent power. As I said, amendments can be made later.
Stanley Weiss: What are your feelings today towards Suu Kyi, who has now spent a total of 12 of the past 18 year under house arrest?
Ma Thanegi: I wish with all my heart that I had been wrong, that the strategy laid down by Suu Kyi, who we love so much, was the right one. By now, though, my views against sanctions have proven to be correct. But it doesn’t matter that I’m vindicated. I am one ordinary person who matters little in the big scheme of things in my country.
People accuse me of criticizing Suu Kyi because I hate her or am jealous. But if I did not love her I would not have served her so well for months on end. She knows best how well I served her. You can be furious with a person you still love. She has high standards, high principles and a strong will. She will remain dear to the hearts of the people, always.
Stanley Weiss: What are your hopes for Burma?
Ma Thanegi: I hope that the technocrat layer will be strengthened, that administration runs smoothly without so much red tape, that any remaining civil war will end peacefully, that schools teachers will get a good grounding in English, that more school teachers will be employed and paid well, that inflation will be controlled, that we have more infrastructure in the remote areas and that there is a better life and more voice for the ethnic races. And more freedom of publication, that is what I hope for, always.
Facebook
Twitter
Soundcloud
Youtube
Rss
Thanks. I heard about Ma Thanegi but did not really know anything about her before reading this article. This is the sort of informative article that people need to read, that begins to give a face to Burma’s almost 50 million people, who you never hear about, because only a couple issues and stories are obsessively repeated over and over again.
0
0
some burmese are so easy to betray like Ma Thanegi. In my experience, they have no loyalty, faithfulness, and high principle like enthics people have. Believe me that most Burmese will do anything for money, power, and promotion. Even exile Burmese people who are educated people, have the same direction like regime. Burmese history have already proved their characters.For power, they will kill everybody even their own families. I am not Burmese hater, but in our minority experience, the most Burmese rightenous peson has still carve like fishing hook.I am not saying all people but mostly the same shit.
0
0
Dr Win Maung
I think nawnaw’s criticism of Ma Theingi is without any substance and most unfair. I am 74 years old medical doctor who work and live in london,England. I love and admired Ma Su for her sacrifice for the democracy for our country. I have met her husband at his home in Oxford,distributed Ma Su’s campaign videos and participated in Hyde park demonstrations.Therefore I was blacklisted by the government and couldn’t go back home when my father died. I was partially involved in the attempt towards her release in 1995. I am not a politician but I did my duty as a patriot because I believe in freedom and democracy,that’s why I supported Ma Su.That doesn’t mean I have always to agree with her. Her policy on tourists boycott and discouraging investment and encouraging sanctions are totally wrong. As president of charity organisation/NGO I have regular contact with ordinary people for the past12 years and have never met a single person who doesn’t want tourist to come. Because of sanctions and disinvestment, business declined and factories closed down with the result of families broke down, women go into prostitution and some commit suicide. Do I have to remain loyal to her blindly even after witnessing these these disastrous consequences? If you really believe in democracy try to understand between loyalty and slavery. Ma Theingi has every right to agree or disagree with Ma Su or Blair or Bush.It is her human right and I want to advice those who are unfairly accusing Ma Theingi to grow up.
There is no doubt about Ma Su’s sincerity for our country but ,though unintentionally, her action has caused a lot of pain and suffering among the poor. In Buddhism it is called bad Karma and no one can escape it’s responsibility. In Buddhist term what she is going through is due to her past deeds ( those who are responsible for her present suffering will have their turn in this life or in next life. Buddha said bad karma will follow you like a shadow). I had great expectation in Ma Su for great many years. Many people believed that government will buckle under international pressure as urged by her.
Now it is clear she lead us to war which has no chance to win but to prolong the suffering. In doing so she pushed Myanmar towards Chinese camp away from her western friends. If it were not for her Myanmar could have been as progressed as Vietnam at least and we could have had a new government earlier. I know many diehards are still sentimental about Ma Su’s high moral ground about ” Western style Democracy”,the prototype which will either not get it or not suited to us at present. So pragmatism is the reality that we have to accept .I am a Myanmar citizen and will vote for the new constitution.
By the way I have no business interest in myanmar or any serving relative in the army. I do not always agree with them I quietly tell them whenever opportunity arise. I am trying to help my country through NGO the Friends of Rainforests in Myanmar. Please visit our web-site http://www.formuk.org
Dr Win Maung
0
0
I first met Ma Theingyi in late 1996 and in all subsequent meetings felt that she was endowed with uncommon, commonsense.She is,above all else, a realist and with this,based upon a comprehensive knowledge of her country and its customs etc. has held to her opinions over the years and has, in the final analysis been proved right.She deserves to be listened to very carefully by ALL.
Burma’s future may well not be decided in any one ‘political generation’ but I feel sure that by degrees the emphasis is changing along with the macro status of Burma Vs China and India.
Ma Theingyi well have much more to offer her country as the years unfold.
0
0
The article and all the comments are sharp enough to seethrough their beliefs and hopes for the betterment of Burma. However, the issue of ‘sanctions’ has been a global debate since its development after Cold-War and not really easy to say ‘good’ or ‘bad’ without careful analyses. The debate is still going on and the history of sanctions is filled with both successes and failures. If you are really interested to find out whether sanctions ‘work’ in Burma’s politics, then you need to have an in-depth analysis of sanctions on Burma. In fact, according to Burma’s political economy, its relations with regional countries and the West played a critical role in defining the effectiveness of sanctions and its impacts on civilians. Although Theingi argued for impact of sanctions on vulnerable population, she did not provide the well-grounded and factual evidence of civilians’ pain and how the junta and its cronies managed the economy. Frankly, Theingi seems to be proud of her fluncy in English ( as she said) and knowledge of French and German (as she mentioned) and the claim she made as she could be a well-funded exiled activist pointed out that she even did not realize herself that real politics is not about language skills. As she mentioned during the interview, Aung San Suu Kyi always replied that ‘it’s not true’ that people would be suffered of sanctions. Suu Kyi simply replied whether it is true about impacts of sanctions and seemed she never explained Theingi about how sanctions work and its pros and cons. And apparently, Suu Kyi did not want to wast her time for ongoing acute debates about sanctions. Theingi needs to be done a proper research on sanctions if she wants to prove that sanctions on Burma’s junta are affecting vulnerable parts of the population. My answer will be ‘No, sanctions so far do not affect ordinary people of Burma’. It is not a personal opinion but the outcome of an analysis on sanctions and empirical results of Burma’s political economy under the military junta. And obviously, Burma’s politics is more complicated and cunning than any other political scenarios and Naw Naw is absolutely right about the nature and morals of Burmese activists and politicians. Burma’s politics need to be radicalised to achieve a significant difference. Dr. Win Maung should also read more books on sanctions and he should not say so as Theingi if it is for the only reason of going back to Burma as he is getting old in a foreign land.
0
0
Most young Burmese are unemployed and the number of prostitutions are growing inside the country day by day. Our society is quite a mess, students are suffering and they do not have any prospects for their future. It is obvious that we are walking on the wrong path. I agree with Dr. Win Maung, Daw Suu needs to change her attitude and work with the militatry regime to get rid of the economic sanctions. Let us forget about the politics for a minute. For the sake of our children, let’s work together. If we go on like this, nobody gains. Instead of demanding “free Aung San Suu Kyi”, why can’t we demand from the government for instance better postal and communication services and better education systems, etc.. which could make our lives better.
0
0
Nay Yu #5: “My answer will be ‘No, sanctions so far do not affect ordinary people of Burma’. It is not a personal opinion but the outcome of an analysis on sanctions and empirical results of Burma’s political economy under the military junta.”
Yes, well that all looks very impressive, but you give no information to back it up. So ultimately it’s hollow & meaningless.
Your bitchy remarks on Ma Thanegi’s language skills are as irrelevant as you say these skills are.
” …and he should not say so as Theingi if it is for the only reason of going back to Burma as he is getting old in a foreign land.” (What does this mean? ) Looks like your English skills could do with a bit of brushing up – are you, perhaps, jealous?
0
0
The only certainty about sanctions over the last 20 years is that they simply haven’t worked. Sure, the generals are angry, but that hasn’t made them buckle and bend. They are today even more stubborn, more recalcitrant and more hard-line than ever before. All because of sanctions. You don’t need to have a Ph.D in economics, nor even to be an expert on sanctions to see that. If a policy isn’t working, something else needs to be tried. But Western Governments are stuck because Daw Suu Kyi can’t and won’t change her mind. And because of that the generals won’t talk to her. It is all a vicious circle, and those who suffer are the Burmese people.
0
0
In 2006 I gave written evidence on sanctions against Burma to the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee. See:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldselect/ldeconaf/96/96we15.htm
Their Noble Lords, who included two former Chancellors of the Exchequer, Nigel Lawson and Norman Lamont, generally agreed with my view that sanctions had proved to be totally ineffective, and so they issued a firm recommendation to the British Government to review their policy and consider whether it was sensible to continue.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldselect/ldeconaf/96/9607.htm
The British Government later said they didn’t agree, but gave no good reason why. There was then a debate in the House of Lords, which gave the Noble Lords the opportunity to let off steam, but at the end of the day, despite all the evidence presented to them, the British Government did not change course.
0
0
To Land of Snarls: Although you did not mention your name, your comment is simply trying to response with few immoral and unethical language. It is unbelievable that you don’t even understand a simple English regarding my comment on Dr. Win Maung’s. For me, Theingi is nothing and ‘jealousy’ is for junta’s generals and its supporters, may be like you, who are afraid to show up with a name. It’s a shame. Beware that your head is agreed with your body. I hope you’ve seen chopped-off heads in ’88 uprising.
0
0
Sanctions against Burma’s junta might not work in the last decades but it is not true at all that sanctions affect ordinary people. Everyone in Burma and anyone who has been living in Burma for at least three to five years realize that how the businesses are running. What Burma’s junta need is a comprehensive sanctions adopted by UNSC.
0
0
I agree with Ma Theingi.
As a Burmese who has lived all my life in Burma , I have given up hope for NLD and ASSK. They have failed us and sanctions have failed us.
Some communications between East and West are seriously wrong.
We shall trust more on our own people and our neighbors than the Western leaders and Western activists.
I specialize in communications and know the insight of Myanmar people. They are still a bit far from what Daw Su thinks they are. She grew up abroad to understand this.
You need to fill this gap first. With investment and technology.
Do not sacrifice our people for your ambitions.
0
0
I don’t know who Nay Yu or it’s genda but I hope it is a male’s name.I was so busy therefore I couldn’t respond to his comment which I regard as unreasonable. He suggests I should read books to see that sanctions work. I have read thick text books all my professional life ,therefore I know what they are like. The fact is that by the time a book is published facts are already 10-20years out of date. If you really want to know more accurate facts stick to current journals. But personal experience with real people will give you real insight into the problem. I don’t what Nay Yu does but since 1995 I have been going back to Myanmar regularly once or twice a year and travelled extensively in the country mixing with people of different walks of life in rural and urban areas as well. Therefore I know what I am talking about. As a doctor I am a practical man and try to solve problems in practical way.When you are dealing with a bleeding patient you just arrest the bleeding to save life .You don’t escape into library to look for theory. I have seen with my own eyes the suffering of the ordinary people ,children with malnutrition and stunted growth; broken marriages;prostitution;children who can’t go to school or abandoned by their parents who can’t afford to feed them. I can still give a longer list of their suffering and these are ordinary people and not army officers whom sanctions are targeted. Not only me but our staff at Friends of Rainforests in Myanmar’s office in Yangon also have witnessed themselves as well. These woes of the poor are due to the combination of factors such as Ma Su’s recommendation of the boycott of tourism,stopping investment and isolation of Myanmar. Her recommendation was taken seriously by her western friends without realisation of the impact on the poor but not hurting the generals at all.Even if the west knew they won’t give damn to what happen to Myanmar’s poor. They are doing something as Ma Su suggests and be seen as politically correct,that’s all what they care. Some one like Nay Yu is very much like many of my psychotic patients who lack insight as they are overwhelmed with delusions.If we look at history sanctions have been applied to countries at different times and almost all failed to work. Myanmar is the biggest country in south east Asian peninsular region with vast natural resources most of them remained untapped . In south east Asia Myanmar has the largest potential to produce hydroelectric power of 38,000 mega watts. Bay of martaban is dubbed as second Libya in oil and gas deposit and only few plots have been exploited .That does stop Myanmar to become the number 10 biggest gas producer in the world. Out of approximately $300 annual income by tourism only20-30 percent goes to the government and the rest is spread around among the private business and ordinary people. As government is receiving in excess of $ 6-7+ billions from the sale of gas alone giving them surplus budget Ma Su’s idea of strangulating government by tourism boycott etc shows her poor knowledge of our country as well as lack of political wisdom. But the blind followers like Nay Yu are either unable to see the reality or too stubborn to admit defeat. Now we are going to have the opportunity to vote for the constitution.I have read and not entirely comfortable with some points but on the whole ,in my opinion, it is acceptable under the present circumstances and I will give yes vote.As many pragmatic and intelligent people are now saying “it is better to have an imperfect constitution than no constitution”. I entirely agree with them. Boycotting tourists and discouraging investment is crime against ordinary citizens and it hits the poor hardest. In Buddhism this kind of action is known as “Akusala or bad action” and who ever commits Akusala has to pay the price now or in next life. I live on the same road as Ma Su in Yangon. Whenever I passed her house I feel sad for her and wondered what kind of Akusala she has committed in her past life.
0
0
Dear Dr Win Maung,
i read your comment with great care, some of the fact you are pointing out is true, some of them is not, i am not the one who think that i am a doctor and know everything.
the problem is we are trying to find political solution not religious philosophy. After i read your comment, i realized that your idea is intellectually corrupt as well as politically correct idiot. no personal attack to you.
with respect to you
and also Dear Naw Naw,
i am not going to blame to you, some people like you are so negative and uneducated towards other ethnic or race, the world is enough to hate and mistrust. please try to read loads of book about geopolitic and social science. please
0
0
Dear Compatriots,
It is quite interesting to read your comments and hope you will find a way to get our country better. Posssessing different opinions is the human nature and then we will have opportunities to discuss or debate about issues which we are concerned. But, please bear in your mind that whatever we are discussing or debating is for the betterment of our country. I also wanted to participate in this talk and my opinion and suggesstion is sincerely not to attack anyone personally.
The issue of economic sanctions imposed by Western powers has been really a controversial issue so far. As Dr. Win Maung mentioned, sanctions failed in some countries but there are also significant progress in some other countries in the world. One thing about this measure is that the only alternative to sanctions is that of military intervention which would bring huge impacts on the people from both the sender and its targeted country. Dr. W Maung is right about Burmese people suffering from malnutrition, diseases and other social breakdowns such as prostitution and abandoned children.But all these tragedies are not caused by the sanctions imposed as there are other factors contributed. The government allowed to open night-clubs, massage parlours and other sexual hubs in big cities across the country and senior officials, from ministerial levels to even local head of authorities are enjoying with prostitutes and sluts from showbiz. This scenario is dangerously drive the country to become like one of its neighbour with famous for prostitution. It is happening in urban area but in ethnic regions, the junta’s troops has been used ‘rape as the weapon’ against ethnic minorities. What about education? Children can’t go to school because teachers are corrupted and children from poor family can’t afford to bribe teachers to enroll in the school. Even after enrolled in the school, children from poor family background are discriminated by the teachers and bullied by the children from official families. These incidents are true and wide-spread in the country. What about in the university level? Anyone can get a MA/MSc or even PhD if you can bribe a set of diamond necklace or other high-luxury facilities to the Head of the Department. In healthcare, hospitals across the country have no medications in stock and then anyone who wants to be treated at the hospital has to buy even the basic kits such as bandage from private pharmacies. But generals can get treatment in Singapore and it is a wonder how Burma’s Generals and government officials became millionaires. I am sure that most of government officials are not traditional businessmen. Ordinary people in Burma’s are suffering day by day but we also need to think about how government officials are getting rich in the last two decades.
And other commentators like Nay Yu should also provide explanations that why sanctions should be favoured and no impacts at all on ordinary people. One thing I agree with Yar Zar and Nay Yu is that whether it is updated or not knowledge is never expired and reading and getting more knowledge at least for basic framework is encouraged. However, sticking to facts is perfect for analysing current scenarios but the facts should be genuine, unbiased and impartial.
One last thing about Daw Suu Kyi is that if anyone who thinks she is not really wise should blame to institutions she studied and her parents. Then, should we consider that Bogyoke Aung San and Daw Khin Kyi did not bring their daughter up well? Oxford University should not be a top university in the world too?
0
0
I am currently completing an Open University course and have chosen Burma/Myanmar as my subject. This is a very emotive and complicated situation. I am only scratching the surface.
A.H.Jeff Hemmings
0
0
Jeff – You may find some useful material on http://www.networkmyanmar.org. I met Ma Thanegi in January.
Derek Tonkin
Chairman Network Myanmar
0
0
Jeff,
Glad to know that you are interested in Burma’s crisis. Just want to remind you that try to explore all the sources as much as you can. There are both pro-junta and anti-junta media you could find different views and bias. And watch out some people who voice for junta as the Burmese junta usually hires advocacy firms and individuals e.g. some scholars and journalists for counter-arguing the issues like ‘sanctions’. The junta is good in bribing and buying international megaphones for justifying their brutality.
Best,
Yeyint
0
0
Dear Jeff
Like Yeyint , I am glad to hear that you have chosen my country as your subject. As you ,quite rightly said,Myanmar is really an emotive and complicated subject. Unless you can see its problems objectively you are unlikely to get the correct answer. We are emotional people and emotion blinds us from seeing reality. If you want an unbiased view you should visit networkmyanmar website. I find Derek Tonkin has good insight on Myanmar and he’s totally unbiased. Moreover his predictions about my country’s political future usually comes true! I was born in colonial days , therefore,have seen different governments in my country and for the past 13 years I have regularly visited towns as well as villages even remote areas of the country. I have met and talked to people from different walks of life, therefore I have first hand knowledge of real Myanmar. And I am totally politically neutral in the sense that I don’t really care who rule my country either Ma Suu or U Than Shwe or whoever so long as there is peace,stability and some degree of freedom and fairness to all ethnic groups including minorities. This is what I found from the majority of Myanmars , 70 percent of them, who live in villages.It is fair to say that many of the things you hear or read from anti-government groups are true but what is lacking is acknowledgement of the improvements made by this government.This made the generals very crossed. If you read articles in networkmyanmar you will find many things which we took it for granted”because they are in the news”are not actually true. I am a Myanmar citizen. I was born as a Bamar and Myanmar citizen will die as a Myanmar citizen as well. I am a true practising Buddhist and I don’t need money, fame or position. When I go back home I will give free medical treatment to the poor, continue my charity work to help my country and practice meditation and prepare for next journey in Samsara. If the opportunity arise I will quietly tell the decision makers about the good and bad points of the western democracy. More importantly I will tell our young generation that they can built Shangri-la in our own country, not only in the west. Lastly I want to say that I really feel sorry for Ma Suu ( ASSK ). Even when she was in Myanmar she was brought up and overprotected for good reason. Then she left the country as a child, fell in love with Michael and married him. Before the marriage some Myanmar elders warned her about the marriage pointing out the position of her father but she totally cut off any contact with them . I came to London in 1976 and have been socially active among the Myanmar community ever since. She has never mixed with the Myanmars and I have never seen Ma Su except for a short glimpse in 1979 at Oaken Holt near Oxford when she came to meet the Mahasi Sayadaw. Therefore She has no real experience of dealing with Myanmars until she went to look after her mother in 1988. When the young man, who worked in the inner circle of Ma Suu, told me ” aunty Su will never understand our ( Myanmar’s) mentality even if she lives another 50 years in Myanmar. He’s a political exile in London. There’s no doubt she is a very nice lady with genuine goodwill for the country. But , being ignorant of the myanmar culture she went head- on collision with the generals leading to this personal tragedy and the tragedy of hundreds and thousands of young lives. She has failed as a wife, as a mother and and also failed 52 million Myanmars as a leader.That is the uncomfortable reality . As a human being it is a disaster not only for herself but also for many young and old Myanmars who rise up against the generals thinking that ” Daw Aung San Suu Kyi” will lead them to democracy. Many of the young people lost their lives because of her and many older ones lost their livelihood while world keeps on showering her with awards after awards. Now we have the constitution and election will follow in 2010. The chance of Ma Suu ruling Myanmar is from negligible to nil. I have supported Ma Suu since 1988 but as an environmentalist and Myanmar citizen I totally disagree with her boycott of the tourism and boycott of the trade as well. If she didn’t pull out of the national convention we should have had the same or better constitution much earlier and business and tourism would have been much better. What is the point of putting us through this hardship to come to the same conclusion? We all like democracy but imagine if Blair/Gordon or Bush did the same thing as Ma Suu did to us do you think people will still support them? Absolutely not ! You are more than welcome to contact me by email in person. I live in London and you can pop in any time in weekends, just let me know in advance.
best wishes
Dr Win Maung
0
0
I don’t agree with Dr Win Maung’s statement that massive 70% of Burmese sides with the generals so long as there is peace,stability and some degree of freedom and fairness to all ethnic groups including minorities.
Because there is no peace, no stability, no freedom, and no fairness to the minorities in our beloved Burma. Even the Burmese pride from extreme nationalism brought about by Ne Win’s coup earlier had already evaporated since the late seventies.
If there is such a group, they would mainly be the people who have economic advantages over the impoverished majority because of their close relationship with the ruling generals. Their percentage would be so low one can count with one’s fingers.
But, I do sympathize with Ma Theingi for her genuine opposition to the economic and trade sanctions against Burma. The sanctions not only hurt the ruling generals but it also hurt ordinary working Burmese. Maybe more to the people than the generals as the generals have money from the drug and gas sales, while people has no other alternatives to earn a living than work in the sanction-effected industries.
One particularly sad case against the sanctions is what happened to the textile industry after the sanctions. Many small and median sized cloth making shops employing hundreds of thousands of Burmese women and girls all over Rangoon are now long closed because of US and European sanctions.
Many of these decent working girls are now being forced into sex trade and many eventually end up in the neighboring countries’s sex industry. It is a real sad story repeatedly playing all over the country again and again, mainly because of the sanctions.
But, there must be a strong reason why Daw Su did take that hard line stance against the generals from the beginning. They even tried to kill her once. Please don’t forget Depayin massacre?
Also the massive exile group of 88 generation students, who witnessed or even personally experienced the army’s extreme brutalities, are now a major force in Burmese politics and they are the ones behind all the negative actions of western democracies against the Burmese generals.
With Daw Su’s incredibly long suffering on their side their group exile presence, even outside of Burma, is collectively more powerful than even U Nu when he unsuccessfully tried to topple Ne Win’s Socialist government.
The current sanctions will not go away until all the wrongs committed by the Burmese army against Daw Su and these students and the country as a whole are right again. Meanwhile, the poor Burmese will be plodding along, kept on going with their enormous suffering under a brutal military dictatorship.
0
0
Jeff
You can see from Yeyint’s comments the problems you are up against. His underlying assumption is that if you disagree with sanctions against Myanmar, you might well be in the pay of the generals. It is a good stick to beat anyone who is against sanctions. Frankly, I have never come across a single scholar or foreign journalist who is pro-junta, not a single one. But Yeyint clearly sees it important to perpetuate the myth of apologists and collaborators. It is the mentality of : “You are either with us or against us”. You are either pro-sanctions and anti-regime, or anti-sanctions and pro-regime.
He is right on one point, though, which is that the generals have in the past used lobbying firms in the US – nowhere else – to seek support for their policies. This would not be the first time that governments have done so.
Derek
0
0
Burmese oppositions usually encounters the remarks like they are holding ‘negative views’ or they are the people with attitude of ‘you are with me or with the regime’. To be honest, majority of the oppositions are fond of the truth, justice and freedom and that is what they have been fighting for almost half a century. Why we, the oppositions are still calling for sanctions against not Burma but absolutely against the junta? It is the only way to achieve a peaceful transition to democracy, the alternative is ‘the military action’ which could claim thousands of lives not only on the target but on the senders as well. For sure, huge impacts on the civilians when the military action is resorted. However, the only viable approach is widely criticised and then what the critics want Burmese people to do? Say ‘yes’ to whatever the regime says and do whatever the regime asks? Fully cooperate with the junta on oppression against innocent civilians who voice for rights and freedom?
We have to voice for the truth, we have the right to claim genuine tragedies across the country. If there are people who wants to say that the regime is right, they better go and see the refugee camps in Thai-Burma border and thousands of IDPs. Everyone can witness online for the junta’s brutality against ethnic civilians as there are videos and photographic evidences. Further, the junta don’t bother to kill even the foreign journalist as you would have known that incident in September, last year. How many political prisoners in Burma and how many has died in the torture chambers? We have factual evidences but not fictitious numbers.
In short, we want justice and freedom and we are ready to recognise if the regime genuinely wish for the reconciliation. But they need to prove by releasing political prisoners including Suu Kyi and reducing harassments on the dissidents first.
0
0
Yeyint, there aren’t simply two choices – sanctions vs military action. Aside from economic engagement, which could potentially raise the standard of living in Burma to the point where survival can be taken for granted and more grassroots political action would thereby be possible, there are many diplomatic options open that have barely been explored. It’s not so black and white.
I agree with Mr Tonkin, Dr Win Aung and Ma Thanegi — it’s obvious that sanctions have done more harm than good.
Incidentally I have met Ma Thanegi as well, John. Her preferred spelling of her last name is ‘Thanegi’ but if you were to transliterate it using the system you’re using it would be ‘Theingi,’ (as mayburma wrote) not Theingyi.
0
0
Val, how you or other anti-sanctions could prove that sanctions have done more harm to people in Burma? Surely, you and other critics will point out to the impacts on garment industry after US establishment of Burma Freedom and Democracy Act in 2003. Yes, thousands of female employees lost their jobs after BFDA came into effect and further as some observers claimed, many of them enetred into sex industry. Yet, there were wide discrepancies in the figures of unemployed from 30,000 to 100,000 0r 300,000. But even the highest figures still not representing majority of the ordinary people and could not be claimed as huge impacts on the civilians. What about the unemployed girls in the sex industry? No one encouraged them to go into sex industry and prostitution is not the only alternative for income in a country like Burma where majority of people live on the informal or gray economy. If the prostitution is sole opportunity apart from working in the garment industry or foreign firms, every single unemployed girl in Burma is in the risk of becoming prostitutes?Did every body know that OSS (Office of Strategic Studies) under the Defence Ministry of Burma played a critical role in organising petition against US sanctions and fabricating numbers of job-loss? Have you ever watched BBC hidden camera interview with an official from Garment Industry Association?
Just think about the ethnic girls as young as seven are raped by the Burmese soldiers while some of unemployed girls went for prostitution though various factors are contributed from moral characters to the junta’s blind eyes on the industry. Further, the junta promoted sex industry by allowing more night clubs in cities across the country and the scandals of high ranking junta’s officials with the sluts from show business are widely known.
It is unbelieveable that no one in this debate replies about the release of political prisoners and Suu Kyi for genuine dialogue.
Some people claim that civil society needs to be strengthened and living standard, as Val mentioned, needs to be promoted first. As long as the economy is in the hands of the junta, majority of people will not be able to build up a strong society. We support the US targeted sanctions significantly from 2007 after the bloody crackdowns in September. Do you still want to say that the businessman like Tayza, blacklisted by the US is an ordinary citizen of Burma?
What about diplomatic option? While the regional countries’ constructive engagement did not work for the last twenty years, thousands of people have been wiped out in their own land, villages relocated or destroyed, innocent civilians were brutally killed and young girls are raped and burnt alive or mutilated to death.
Should we still wait for another twenty years of diplomatic solution when one or two of ethnic minorites would have been entirely wiped off by the junta by that time?
0
0
“We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the oppressed. Sometimes we must interfere. . . there is so much injustice and suffering crying out for our attention . . . .,”
Elie Wiesel, 1986 Nobel Peace Prize Winner.
Which side is Ma Theingi on?
Maybe on the fence like so many faceless Burmese has fearfully done for many, many, long years now!
0
0
[…] Extracted from Stanley A. Weiss, “A First Step Toward Democracy?”, The International Herald Tribune, 23 February […]
0
0
[…] was released, she criticized Suu Kyi as well as the democracy movement as a whole. She responded in an interview in 2008: “I know I am not a traitor or a turncoat. I came into the political movement because I […]
0
0
[…] forward to more from these publications. Ma Theingi would be […]
0
0
Fast forward 2014. Amazing how the generals have triumphed over all the Westerners who pressed for sanctions, and all the Burmese who sat in their comfortable homes in the West, pressing for sanctions against their longsuffering Burmese who never left to go anywhere because they never had British husbands or wives. Amazing how empty-headed Aung San Suu Kyi has turned out now she has her liberty. All she can manage in her many speeches are human rights and rule of law. Nothing of substance BUT EMPTY platitudes. What mediocrity. She is also known to be arrogant and dictatorial in her own party, having sacked people who disagree with her. … Burma, you don’t need this shallow woman. You deserve a homegrown leader, free from British influence.
0
0
[…] Interview with Ma Thanegi – New Mandala […]
0
0