Aung San Suu Kyi “pivotal” for change in Myanmar, Burmese exile says
by Dario Salvi
Tint Swe, member of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma, underscores the strength of the pro-democracy movement, stronger now after 20 years of military regime. Recent changes in the country are “interesting”, but he suspects that they are just another way for the military to stay in power. Only pressures from the international community can bring real change.
Rome (AsiaNews) – United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has welcomed the release of about 200 political prisoners from Burma’s prisons as part of President Thein Sein’s general amnesty for more than 6,000 inmates. However, the UN secretary general said that he hoped to see an early release for the more than 2,000 people still held in the nation’s prisons for crimes of opinion. The latter include journalists, pro-democracy leaders and other figures involved in the 1988 student protests, as well as Buddhist monks.
Within Burma, there are more sign for cautious optimism. In recent days, reports indicate that the president has signed a new labour law that the International Labour Organisation deems a huge step forward. It replaces the Trade Unions Act of 1962 (year in which the military took power), which banned all trade unions. Now Burmese workers would be able to strike with three days warning in the private sector and two weeks in the public sector.
In order to better understand political developments in Burma, its perspectives for democracy and its place on the international scene, AsiaNews has interviewed Tint Swe, member of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), set up by refugees who left Myanmar following the 1990 elections won by the National League for Democracy but never recognised by the military junta.
After fleeing to India in 1990, Tint Swe has lived in New Delhi since 21 December 1991 where he works as a doctor and is the Council’s point man on South Asia and East Timor.
Here is the interview he gave to AsiaNews:
What is your opinion about recent developments in Burma?
Recent developments in Burma are interesting, indeed. Relaxation on restrictions, meeting with Aung San Suu Kyi, and releasing political prisoners are welcome. However, those released should not have been arrested in the first place. Media restrictions created problems for the regime and so were relaxed. Sidelining Aung San Suu Kyi proved counterproductive for the junta and so ultimately, it was decided to find an alternative way. None of these so-called positive moves is the result of dictators changing their mind and heart; they are instead an attempt to stay in power by other means.
In a near future, will Aung San Suu Kyi have a politically "active" role in the country or in public office?
Aung San Suu Kyi will not only be politically active in the future, but she is pivotal in current changes. However, she is different from many others who are vying for positions of power. She works for the good of the nation and of her people. She never backed any of the wrongdoings of the military regime. For instance, she did not accept giving up on the 1990 election results, not because of her party’s victory, but because it represented the people’s legitimate choice, expressed in a free and fair election. It is up to the people to decide who should serve as a statesman or not. This does not necessarily mean that she is working to gain a political position for herself.
What are the reasons for the recent steps taken by the government?
The track record shows that the regime does not work for the good of the country or the people but for their own sake. New moves have the same intent. Halting the dam project kills two birds with one stone. Those who opposed are satisfied and the president gains on that score. China is appeased with compensation. But that money will not come from the wallet of the president but from poor people who will be taxed more. The high profile release of prisoners is merely temporary relief. Everybody can be rearrested at any time and be sentenced to prison for whatever length. As for the ASEAN presidency, member states will decide. If more demands come from ASEAN, more good news will follow. This simply shows that constructive policy does not lead to regime change but that the latter can enact change when forced into it. Likewise, if the West continues asking for genuine reform, more changes are sure to come. The appeasement policy failed.
China is Burma’s main economical partner. Do you think the government is looking for other countries with whom to trade?
Burma’s regime played the China card without a long-term strategic vision. It is dangerous for the country. To some extent, the generals tried to balance it but it has been too late and, more importantly, the army cannot achieve a balance alone. Without a political force that genuinely represents the majority of the population, it is impossible to achieve the national interest.
Do you believe that Burma’s political leadership is serious or will it cheat again?
History tells us that military regimes are not serious about change. This quasi-military administration may or may not be different from those of the past. It will take history decades to evaluate current events. So it is unwise and dangerous to give full credit to this new government right now.
What role, if any is Than Shwe playing nowadays in Burma? More freedom seems to be connected with his departure from a public role in the country.
General New Win’s successor, Senior General Saw Maung, put aside Ne Win and then let him die disgracefully. Senior General Than Shwe removed Saw Maung and let him die from a nervous breakdown. Why doesn’t Thein Sein go against Than Shwe? All dictators build their own power base and, if necessary, the old boss must be eliminated.
How do you see Burma’s future?
The country is coming out of its darkest days. Praise should not go either to President Thein Sein or to the new parliament. All positive developments are the outcome of all those who made sacrifices and worked hard. The pro-democracy forces are growing qualitatively as well as quantitatively. Twenty years of harsh tyranny could not weaken that force. The future of Burma depends on them, not on those working in Naypyitaw.
Within Burma, there are more sign for cautious optimism. In recent days, reports indicate that the president has signed a new labour law that the International Labour Organisation deems a huge step forward. It replaces the Trade Unions Act of 1962 (year in which the military took power), which banned all trade unions. Now Burmese workers would be able to strike with three days warning in the private sector and two weeks in the public sector.
In order to better understand political developments in Burma, its perspectives for democracy and its place on the international scene, AsiaNews has interviewed Tint Swe, member of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB), set up by refugees who left Myanmar following the 1990 elections won by the National League for Democracy but never recognised by the military junta.
After fleeing to India in 1990, Tint Swe has lived in New Delhi since 21 December 1991 where he works as a doctor and is the Council’s point man on South Asia and East Timor.
Here is the interview he gave to AsiaNews:
What is your opinion about recent developments in Burma?
Recent developments in Burma are interesting, indeed. Relaxation on restrictions, meeting with Aung San Suu Kyi, and releasing political prisoners are welcome. However, those released should not have been arrested in the first place. Media restrictions created problems for the regime and so were relaxed. Sidelining Aung San Suu Kyi proved counterproductive for the junta and so ultimately, it was decided to find an alternative way. None of these so-called positive moves is the result of dictators changing their mind and heart; they are instead an attempt to stay in power by other means.
In a near future, will Aung San Suu Kyi have a politically "active" role in the country or in public office?
Aung San Suu Kyi will not only be politically active in the future, but she is pivotal in current changes. However, she is different from many others who are vying for positions of power. She works for the good of the nation and of her people. She never backed any of the wrongdoings of the military regime. For instance, she did not accept giving up on the 1990 election results, not because of her party’s victory, but because it represented the people’s legitimate choice, expressed in a free and fair election. It is up to the people to decide who should serve as a statesman or not. This does not necessarily mean that she is working to gain a political position for herself.
What are the reasons for the recent steps taken by the government?
The track record shows that the regime does not work for the good of the country or the people but for their own sake. New moves have the same intent. Halting the dam project kills two birds with one stone. Those who opposed are satisfied and the president gains on that score. China is appeased with compensation. But that money will not come from the wallet of the president but from poor people who will be taxed more. The high profile release of prisoners is merely temporary relief. Everybody can be rearrested at any time and be sentenced to prison for whatever length. As for the ASEAN presidency, member states will decide. If more demands come from ASEAN, more good news will follow. This simply shows that constructive policy does not lead to regime change but that the latter can enact change when forced into it. Likewise, if the West continues asking for genuine reform, more changes are sure to come. The appeasement policy failed.
China is Burma’s main economical partner. Do you think the government is looking for other countries with whom to trade?
Burma’s regime played the China card without a long-term strategic vision. It is dangerous for the country. To some extent, the generals tried to balance it but it has been too late and, more importantly, the army cannot achieve a balance alone. Without a political force that genuinely represents the majority of the population, it is impossible to achieve the national interest.
Do you believe that Burma’s political leadership is serious or will it cheat again?
History tells us that military regimes are not serious about change. This quasi-military administration may or may not be different from those of the past. It will take history decades to evaluate current events. So it is unwise and dangerous to give full credit to this new government right now.
What role, if any is Than Shwe playing nowadays in Burma? More freedom seems to be connected with his departure from a public role in the country.
General New Win’s successor, Senior General Saw Maung, put aside Ne Win and then let him die disgracefully. Senior General Than Shwe removed Saw Maung and let him die from a nervous breakdown. Why doesn’t Thein Sein go against Than Shwe? All dictators build their own power base and, if necessary, the old boss must be eliminated.
How do you see Burma’s future?
The country is coming out of its darkest days. Praise should not go either to President Thein Sein or to the new parliament. All positive developments are the outcome of all those who made sacrifices and worked hard. The pro-democracy forces are growing qualitatively as well as quantitatively. Twenty years of harsh tyranny could not weaken that force. The future of Burma depends on them, not on those working in Naypyitaw.
.png)
See also
