In November 2010, Aung San Suu Kyi, leader
of the National League for Democracy and a Nobel
Peace Prize laureate, was freed from years of
house arrest amid a tightly choreographed
transition from military to democratic rule.
Eighteen months later, her NLD won 43 out of 45
seats up for grabs in parliament in democratic
by-elections, winning Suu Kyi an elected seat in
parliament after her party's boycott of the 2010
polls.
The 2010 elections, widely derided
as rigged and unfair, were won overwhelmingly by
military-backed candidates. While Suu Kyi's strong
victory at the subsequent by-elections underscored
her still strong popularity, the fact that she and
her party were allowed to run after being
officially banned reflected positively on
President Thein Sein and his widely lauded
democratic reform drive. [1]
Suu Kyi was
an inspirational opposition leader during the dark
days of military rule, from
which she emerged as a symbol of freedom and
democracy. She spent 14 out of 20 years under
house arrest over that period. But as the country
begins to look towards new elections and greater
democracy in 2015, questions previously unheard of
are being raised about whether Suu Kyi would be
well-suited to serve as president.
As
national leader, Suu Kyi would have to manage more
than 135 groups that are highly divided along
ethnic and religious lines. Failure to meet
persistent calls for greater autonomy in ethnic
minority regions would undoubtedly undermine her
historical legacy as a champion of national unity
and reconciliation.
As the daughter of
independence hero Aung San, Suu Kyi has long been
associated with her country's fight for freedom.
Aung San's interim post-independence government
entered the Panglong Agreement in 1947, a deal
that granted full autonomy to "frontier areas"
occupied by ethnic minority groups. He was
assassinated that same year and the agreement was
never implemented, providing the initial spark for
many of the ethnic insurgencies that have inflamed
the country for decades.
Suu Kyi famously
followed in her father's footsteps by making her
first potent political appearance in August 1988
in front of the Shwedagon Pagoda, Myanmar's most
sacred Buddhist shrine and the site where Aung San
made a famous pro-independence speech in 1946. In
the lead up to and after the military's 1988
bloody crackdown on street demonstrators opposed
to military rule, Suu Kyi emerged as a clarion
voice in favor of democracy.
She and her
party swept 1990 elections, but the military
annulled the results and maintained power through
iron fist rule. Although Suu Kyi had the chance to
leave and reunite with her family overseas, she
stayed in Myanmar (or Burma, as it is also known)
and endured years of harassment and detention
while mounting a non-violent struggle for
democracy.
When asked if she ever
considered leaving, including after what was
widely viewed as an assassination attempt on her
motorcade in 2003, she responded in an interview,
"I never thought there was a choice. I never
thought of leaving Burma. I always thought that as
long as there was one person who believed in
democracy in Burma, I had to stay with that
person." [2]
During her years under house
arrest, Suu Kyi's discourse always spoke in favor
of change through peace and non-violence. In a
1996 interview, Suu Kyi described her views on
politics through non-violence: "I do not believe
in an armed struggle because it will perpetrate
the tradition that he who is best at wielding
arms, wields power... That will not help
democracy."
More recently, according to
NLD spokesman Nyan Win, Suu Kyi "has remained a
devoted Buddhist who from the beginning admired
the principles of non-violence and civil
disobedience espoused by India's Mahatma Gandhi.
[3] Her passion for non-violence won her a Nobel
Peace prize in 1990, when her party won an
election that was never recognized by the junta."
For decades, Suu Kyi has symbolically and
elegantly represented opposition to military rule
and in the name of freedom support for the cause
of persecuted ethnic minorities. She was named the
"Lady" in part for her ability to win the trust of
ethnic groups through her non-violent message and
for speaking out forcefully against the human
rights violations perpetuated by the military in
conflict zones.
Yet if Suu Kyi wins the
presidency in 2015, she will face huge challenges
and obstacles in maintaining this exalted stature.
As national leader, she will need to be seen as
satisfying the demands of a multi-ethnic and
divided population while simultaneously working
with a parliament that reserves 25% of its seats
for military officials who have strongly opposed
autonomy for ethnic regions.
Rather than
serving as a pro-democracy icon, as president she
would head what would still most likely be a
military-dominated political system. As a
parliamentarian, she has already been perceived by
some to compromise on principle by taking a more
middle-of-the-road position on important national
issues, including ethnic conflicts.
In
recent months, Suu Kyi has been subjected to
unusually sharp criticism for her perceived as
limp response to conflict in Rakhine State, where
Buddhist Rakhine's have clashed violently with
Muslim Rohingyas. In an interview with the New
York Times in September 2012, Suu Kyi said, "I
know that people want me to [speak on the issue],
they want strong and colorful condemnation, which
I won't do, because I don't think it helps."
She said that "I've always spoken out
against human rights abuses but not against a
particular community... If you condemn one
community that makes the other community more
hostile towards that community." Suu Kyi said she
believes that the solution to the conflict should
be based on rule by law that promotes ethnic
reconciliation. "It must be based on sound
citizenship laws," she said. [4]
Her
reactions, or lack thereof, to the escalating
Kachin State conflict have also sparked widespread
criticism, including from among her once erstwhile
supporters. Neng Seng, a Kachin human rights
activist, wrote a recent article in the Huffington
Post entitled "I Feel Betrayed by Aung San Suu
Kyi", in which she described her frustration and
disappointment with the lack of action by her
previous idol.
"She [Suu Kyi] remained
silent over serious human rights violations
committed by government army soldiers, including
attacks against civilian populations,
extrajudicial killings, sexual violence ... Aung
San Suu Kyi's principled stance and moral example
once inspired me…you cannot be neutral, cannot be
silent, in the face of such terrible abuses,
because silence and neutrality enables those
abuses to continue... I feel angry, betrayed and
sad." [5]
The Irrawaddy, one of Myanmar's
respected liberal newsmagazines that historically
often portrayed Suu Kyi in a favorable light,
recently wrote, "As long as Suu Kyi continues to
avoid taking any meaningful stance on the very
real issues that plague [Myanmar], the
'democratically united' country that she spoke of
in her speech will remain as elusive as ever." [6]
As an elected politician, Suu Kyi will be
unable to appease and please all constituencies in
her sharply divided country. As a parliamentarian,
she has already been required to make tough
choices with limited budgets, undeveloped
infrastructures, and restricted capacities. As in
any democratic system, there have been sharp
disagreements within her own party, with some
feeling she has been too engaged with the
military-dominated government and others feeling
she has not done enough.
For Myanmar's
military and military-associated politicians, such
criticism is less problematic after facing blame
for decades of mismanagement and corrupt rule. But
the once almost universally popular Suu Kyi has
much more to lose when she fails to please her
former backers and supporters, including in ethnic
minority areas.
It should be remembered
that responsibility for the assassination of Suu
Kyi's father, Aung San, was placed on a political
rival, former prime minister U Saw. It was Aung
San's popularity and worldwide recognition for his
leadership in ending British colonialism that led
to the political divisions that motivated his
death. Today, recognition for the exceptional
democratic advances made under Thein Sein's
presidency have sparked similar political
competition and jealousy, within both the military
and opposition party.
Suu Kyi's legacy as
a great opposition leader is already secure,
witnessed in the outpouring of sentiment and
support she has received from the global community
during recent overseas trips. But would she be
able to achieve the same recognition as Myanmar's
national leader if elected as president in 2015?
To be sure, Suu Kyi faces major obstacles
in her personal transition from pro-democracy icon
and symbol of freedom amid oppression to
mainstream politician in a quasi-civilian,
military-dominated political order. How she
handles that transition and manages her once
spotless image over the next two years will
largely determine her electability amid
fast-changing expectations in a fast-changing
Myanmar.
Billy Tea is a
Research Fellow at the Pacific Forum CSIS. His
research interests include conflict prevention,
conflict management and regional cooperation;
Chinese foreign policy in Asia; and security and
defense relations between Asia, Europe and the
United States. He holds a BA in Political Science
from UMASS Amherst and a MA in War Studies from
King's College London.
(Copyright 2013
Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights
reserved. Please contact us about sales,
syndication and republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road,
Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
