[Stanley A. Weiss is the Founding Chairman of Business Executives for National Security, a nonpartisan organization based in Washington, DC, and a frequent op-ed contributor to The International Herald Tribune. In his most recent article he explored the politics of sanctions against Burma and the danger of branding sanction opponents as apologists for the regime. His interview with Ma Thanegi was conducted for that article and is reproduced here on New Mandala.]
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.
15 responses so far ↓
1 jonfernquest // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:30 pm
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.
2 nawnaw // Mar 7, 2008 at 2:53 am
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.
3 Dr Win Maung // Mar 10, 2008 at 10:28 am
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
4 John Hinchliffe // Mar 11, 2008 at 2:30 am
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.
5 Nay Yu // Mar 12, 2008 at 1:30 am
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.
6 Thein Myint // Mar 12, 2008 at 4:57 pm
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.
7 Land of Snarls // Mar 13, 2008 at 12:12 am
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?
8 Craig Dunstable // Mar 13, 2008 at 4:52 am
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.
9 Derek Tonkin // Mar 13, 2008 at 8:28 am
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.
10 Nay Yu // Mar 14, 2008 at 2:54 am
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.
11 Nay Yu // Mar 14, 2008 at 2:57 am
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.
12 mayburma // Mar 18, 2008 at 3:00 pm
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.
13 Dr Win Maung // Apr 7, 2008 at 8:17 am
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.
14 Yar Zar // Apr 11, 2008 at 8:17 pm
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
15 Yeyint Aung // Apr 27, 2008 at 4:56 am
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?
Leave a Comment