Organization of this Book
In the Introduction to Freedom From Fear and Other Writings, Dr. Aris discusses his organization of Aung San Suu Kyi's writings (and writing about her) into the three major parts outlined below. The first two parts of the book are in Aung San Suu Kyi's voice. The essays in the third part of the book are about her as is the last chapter in the second part, which contains the words of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, explaining its reasons for awarding her its Peace Prize in 1991.
The first part of the book--titled "The Inheritance"--is divided into 4 chapters: My Father, My Country and People, Intellectual Life in Burma and India under Colonialism, and Literature and Nationalism in Burma. Part two--titled "The Struggle"--is divided into 17 chapters: In Quest of Democracy, Freedom from Fear, The True Meaning of Boh, The First Initiative, Speech to a Mass Rally at the Shwedagon Pagoda, The Objectives, In the Eye of the Revolution, Two Letters to Amnesty International, Letter to the Ambassadors, The Role of the Citizen in the Struggle for Democracy, Battle Royal, Open Letter to the UN Commission on Human Rights, Dust and Sweat, The Need for Solidarity among Ethnic Groups, The People Want Freedom, The Agreement to Stand for Election, and The 1991 Nobel Peace Prize. Each of the chapters in the first two parts is prefaced by Dr. Aris' brief introduction stating the date and context in which Aung San Suu Kyi wrote. Part three--titled "Appreciations"-- is divided into 4 chapters: A Flowering of the Spirit: Memories of Suu and Her Family (by Ma Than E), Suu Burmese (by Ann Pasternak Slater), Aung San Suu Kyi: Is She Burma's Woman of Destiny? (by Josef Silverstein), and Aung San Suu Kyi and the Peaceful Struggle for Human Rights in Burma (by Philip Kreager).
The book was first published in English and soon translated into other languages. Aung San Suu Kyi is bilingual: her essays about her father, Burma, and the Burmese people were written in English. Her political speeches, interviews, and essays were in Burmese (she translated a few into English herself).
Part 1 is titled "The Inheritance." It has four chapters.
The first chapter in Part 1 is titled "My Father"
This essay first appeared in the 1982 Leaders of Asia series under the title "Aung San of Burma: A Biographical Portrait by his Daughter." As Aung San Suu Kyi notes, her father was assassinated two years after her birth. Unable to know him, she instead researched his life.
In 1915, thirty years after the Anglo-Burmese War had ended the monarchy and brought all of Burma under English rule, Aung San Suu Kyi's father, Aung San, was born. As a young child in a small village, he imagined magic tricks to dispel the British (or so his daughter related in her biography of him; she also wrote that he particularly admired his uncle, U Min Yaung, who--refusing "to be a subject of the Kalahs (foreigners from the West)"-- had led one of the first groups resisting the British (he was captured and beheaded by the British). Aung San did well academically--attending both the Buddhist and National Schools (the latter were founded in 1920, in response to the Rangoon University Act, which the Burmese saw as restricting educational access to all but a privileged few and so rejected, financing the schools by subscription).
In the 1930s, while attending the university, he changed its placid student union into a major political force. In 1939, he founded the "Freedom Bloc," a political party whose message was to support the British World War II effort--provided Burmese independence at war's end was promised: The British responded with mass arrests (those detained were later called the "Thirty Comrades"). Aung San responded by organizing nationwide boycotts and protests that completely paralyzed the British administration.
In 1941, he founded the Burma Independence Army (BIA) in Bangkok. The BIA later marched arm-in-arm with the Japanese into Rangoon: it was, Aung San later said, a mistake brought on not because of "'pro-fascist leanings'' but because of "'our naive blunders and petit-bourgeois timidity.'" After the Japanese took Rangoon, Aung San told them he had disarmed his army (but in reality he had told them to cache their weapons). Aung San led the resistance that drove the Japanese out of Burma (by then he was a national hero); the British returned to fight with the BIA. Later wounded, he came under the care of senior nurse Ma Khin Kyi: the two married in 1942 ("It has been said," her daughter writes, that ... in marrying Aung San, [she] married not a man only but a destiny").
After the war, the British wanted to try Aung San for treason--because of his short alliance with the Japanese--but his national popularity precluded their doing so (there were also the facts of the matter: The British had rejected his overtures--to work on their side in exchange for independence at war's end--by arresting him and the "Thirty Comrades;" he had led the resistance against Japanese occupation; they had come back to Burma fighting on the side of the BIA, his army). After resigning his military position, Aung San formed the Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League (AFPFL). Between 1945 and 1947, Aung San became known not just as a military commander-in-chief but as a skilled negotiator: He resigned his military position and devoted himself to uniting Burma's diverse ethnic groups. At an inaugural speech after a sweeping electoral victory in 1947, he cautioned people to not waste time blaming imperialism for their present ills but to move forward to practically solve them. On 19 July 1947, Aung San, then thirty-two years old, was assassinated--on the order of a former misguided prime minister, who was later tried and sentenced to death--along with most of his cabinet. The Burmese have since commemorated July 19th as "Martyr's Day.
One of Aung San's British adversaries was later to say that "His assassination deprived his country of the one man who might have been able to enforce discipline on his followers in the lawless years that lay ahead." The independent Union of Burma was born 4 January 1948. Aung San Suu Kyi's perspective on the details of her father's life are, perhaps, best summarized by her concluding sentence: "For the people of Burma, Aung San was the man who had come in their hour of need to restore their national pride and honor. As his life is a source of inspiration for them, his memory remains the guardian of their political conscience."
The second chapter in Part 1 is titled "My Country and People"
This chapter comes from a descriptive series intended for young readers (the series also included Bhutan and Nepal). Burma is a country bordering China, India, and Thailand: The eastern Himalayas form its north boundary; to the east is the Shan plateau (averaging about 3,500 feet above sea level); to the west are coastal plains and to the east, the delta of the Irrawaddy, Burma's main river, which flows north to south, emptying into the Andaman Sea. The Irrawaddy Delta It was the first part of Burma to feel European influence, which began in the 15th Century. The name of Burma's capital city, "Rangoon," was a corruption of its Burmese name, "Yangon." The generals changed "Rangoon" back to "Yangon," when they changed the country's name to the Union of Myanmar.
Rice, grown primarily in the central plains, was Burma's main export (and food staple). The first wave of people to enter the country were the Buddhist Mons (around 2000 B.C.); the second wave were the Tibeto-Burmans who came from the north around 900 A.D. (their descendants include the Chins, the Kachins, and the Karens); the third major ethnic group is the Shans, who arrived more recently, from the east and were joined in the 13th century by new waves of Thais fleeing the Moguls. Burma is a country where over 100 languages are spoken, Burmese foremost.
Burma's first contact with the west--Italian and Portuguese traders--occurred in the 15th century. During the next two centuries, the British and Dutch began arriving in increasing numbers along the Irrawaddy Delta. Although there had always been resistance, the first official Anglo-Burmese war did not break out until 1824; a third war began in 1885: it was decisive for the British. Under British rule--since some groups were easier to pacify than others--ethnic differences were emphasized. The 1920s saw the beginning of a new Burmese nationalism movement: its roots were in keeping the Buddhist religion pure of "foreign influences," but it grew more political. Throughout the 1930s, the Burmese were given a larger--but insufficiently large--role in governing themselves; students at Rangoon University became the voice for nationalism. Aung San Suu Kyi also examines how the Burmese language was influenced by British colonial rule.
The Burmese independence movement reached a turning-point in 1939, the beginning of World War II: The nationalists wanted to support the British in exchange for postwar independence; the British arrested them (those arrested were later called the "Thirty Comrades"). The Burmese hoped the Japanese would help them gain their independence. Aung San organized the Burma Independence Army (BIA) with the "Thirty Comrades" as its core. In 1941, the BIA marched into Rangoon beside the Japanese: the British were driven out. Although Burma declared itself independent at this time, it had "simply exchanged one foreign ruler for another." Aung San organized a resistance against the Japanese occupation. The British returned, this time fighting on the side of the BIA: in 1945, the Japanese were driven out. The British gradually ceded their authority and, when Aung San managed to "win the confidence of the Shans, Chins and Kachins," they formally granted Burma its independence, six months after Aung San was assassinated.
U Nu, who formed a new government, was not, over time, able hold together the diverse groups Aung San had brought together. In 1962, a coalition of military officials, led by Ne Win, overthrew the elected government of U Nu. The party of the generals was the Burma Socialist Programme Party (BSPP). The country has not flourished under military leadership. Aung San Suu Kyi concludes by describing the diversity of the Burmese people in greater detail. Although taken from descriptive narratives aimed at young people--like a travel guide--Aung San Suu Kyi's respect for her father shows here, too. This and the previous explicitly biographical chapter outline his legacy, both on the country called "Burma" and the woman named "Aung San Suu Kyi."
The third chapter in Part 1 is titled "Intellectual Life in Burma and India under Colonialism"
This chapter was first published in 1990 by the Indian Institute of Advanced Study. Aung San Suu Kyi thinks India the perfect country with which to compare Burma (since it, too, had a colonial past): The two differ in that Burma is predominantly Buddhist and India, Hindu. They also differ in the way the British incorporated them: for the former, colonization occurred in 3 clear-cut phases over 50 years and for the latter, gradually, over 200 years. Being primarily Buddhist, Burma had no major social problems: there was little social stratification; there was no caste system; women were equals.
Burma's populace was largely literate, because most had attended monastery schools. Aung San Suu Kyi quotes from several British sources to show the condescending stance they took towards their colonial subjects: one passage written in 1908 said that the modern Burmese "had adopted the luxuries but not the steadfastness of and high-souled integrity of the European, the lavish display of wealth but not the business instincts of the Indian, the love of sensuous ease but not the perseverance of the Chinaman."
She discusses the complexities of the different Burmese language groups, still distinct despite some inevitable blending over time. In India, an impassioned quest for understanding the alien other produced a generation of major philosophers, but, in Burma, people were largely indifferent to the British--but influenced by the Indian philosophers. A bigger change for the Burmese than the British themselves was the many Chinese and Indians who immigrated to serve as administrative functionaries. While Indians like Gandhi managed to synthesize thought and action, east and west, the Burmese continued their village life, slow to realize it was no longer sustainable.
Although leftist literature became widely available in the 1930s, the Burmese were not the ideal recipients since, in their society, there was little social exploitation, no extreme poverty, no elite: Consequently, in Burma, the nationalism movement began later and sprang more generally from the villages, from people like her father, whose own thinking, scarcely mature, was interrupted by World War II. Aung San Suu Kyi's knowledge of the intellectual traditions of the two nations is as extensive as her knowledge of the more than 100 languages spoken in Burma. This essay was published in 1990--after Aung San Suu Kyi had first been placed under house arrest. The book does not state when she wrote it (the latest date in the footnote chapter is 1983).
The fourth chapter in Part 1 is titled "Literature and Nationalism in Burma"
This chapter was first published by Tokyo University in 1987. In it, Aung San Suu Kyi notes that western influence on Burmese language and literature was obvious by the beginning of the 20th century: the nationalism movement was reflected in the literature. The disintegrating effect of British rule was first felt in lower Burma (Rangoon, on the Irrawaddy Delta, being the center of British rule): "The early years of British rule brought some material prosperity but the laissez-faire economic policy adopted by the government and the imposition of administrative and judicial institutions ... brought about ... unchecked immigration ... the opening up of large tracts of virgin land with its attendant need for capital, the financial activities of Indian money-lenders, land alienation, the monopolies exercised by European commercial firms, the import of foreign goods which diminished the market for indigenous products, the breakdown of the monastic school system ... all these circumstances combined to create forces which led to the disintegration of Burmese society" (p. 141).
However, political thinking in the country became increasingly organized during the 1930s but was stopped short by World War II. One way that a chaotic present influenced Burmese literature was the publication of numerous histories meticulously exploring the country's past. She concludes by noting that the biggest difference between Burmese and Indian literature is that, having been assimilated in the 19th century, the theme of Burmese nationalism emerged later. Similarly, the nationalism theme in Indian literature predates that in Burmese literature by over a century--because India was colonized over a century earlier.
The second part of the book is called "The Struggle"
The first chapter in Part 2 is titled "In Quest of Democracy"
This chapter comes from an essay Aung San Suu Kyi started--but was unable to complete before she was placed under house arrest 20 July 1989--that was about democracy and human rights (she had hoped to dedicate the essay to her father, "Bogyoke Aung San"). She begins by noting that the movement for democracy in Burma has been undermined in many places along the way. The Burmese are said to be unfit to govern themselves; the basic tenets of democracy are said to be an outside concept alien to Burmese culture. There is nothing new in justifying and perpetuating authoritarian rule by denouncing democracy as alien: Although conventional propaganda aimed at consolidating established power has been condemned throughout the modern world, "in Burma, distanced by several decades of isolationism from political and intellectual elopements in the outside world," people have had to realize this for themselves--and, as soon as they did, the movement for democracy began. For more than a quarter-century, the Burmese people were fed a pap of shallow dogma, but it did not blunt their perceptiveness. They are eager to study theories of "modern politics and political institutions," as well as thoughtfully consider what's due a civilized society. The popular response to such basic notions as "representative government, human rights and the rule of law" was spontaneous: "It was natural that a people who have suffered much from ... a bad government should be preoccupied with theories of good government." The Buddhist sangha have taken on their customary role as mentors, using traditional learning to illuminate timeless truths, but the conscious effort to make the timeless contemporary runs across all social strata, from urban intellectuals, to shopkeepers, to village grandmothers: "It was predictable that as soon as the issue of human rights became an integral part of the movement for democracy, the official media should start ridiculing and condemning the concept .... despotic governments do not recognize the precious human component ... seeing its citizens only as a mindless--and helpless--mass to be manipulated at will. It is as though people were incidental to a nation rather than its very life-blood ... official creed is required to be accepted with an unquestioning faith more in keeping with orthodox tenets of the biblical religions which have held sway in the West than with the more liberal Buddhist attitude: It is proper to doubt, to be uncertain ... Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing. Nor upon tradition, nor upon rumours ... When you know for yourself that certain things are unwholesome and wrong, abandon them ... When you know for yourself that certain things are wholesome and good, accept them .... The relentless attempts of totalitarian regimes to prevent free thought and new ideas and persistent assertion of their own rightness bring on them an intellectual stasis which they project on to the nation at large. Intimidation and propaganda work in a duet of oppression ... people ... learn to dissemble and keep silent .... There is no intrinsic virtue to law and order unless 'law' is equated with justice and 'order' with the discipline of a people satisfied that justice has been done. Law as an instrument of state oppression is a familiar feature of totalitarianism. Without a popularly elected government and an independent judiciary to ensure due process, authorities can enforce as 'law' arbitrary decrees that are flagrant negations of all acceptable norms of justice" (pp. 174-176)
Aung San Suu Kyi answers the questions of what went wrong in Burma and why it had not achieved its potential by saying "The Buddha said the four causes of decay were: failure to recover that which had been lost, omission to repair that which had been damaged, disregard of the need for reasonable economy, and the elevation to leadership of men without morality or learning:" Thus, in Burma, when democratic rights were lost to dictatorship in 1962, not enough was done to regain them (and so moral values deteriorated; the economy was badly managed and the country ruled by men without integrity). "Under totalitarian socialism, official policies with little relevance to actual needs had placed Burma in an economic and administrative limbo where government bribery and evasion of regulations" were the lubricants needed to keep the machinery of state and commerce running.
In 1988, the movement for democracy gave rise to hope of reversing the process of decline. Hope returns, because "fear is not the natural state of civilized man." Nor are the behaviors of the current regime natural: The Buddhist view of history teaches that the duties of kings include "liberality, morality, self-sacrifice, integrity; austerity, non-anger, non-violence, forbearance and submission (to the will of the people)." Few here do not realize that law and order have no intrinsic virtue unless 'law' is equated with justice and 'order' "with the discipline of a people satisfied that justice has been done." Law is an instrument of state oppression in totalitarian regimes. Without due process, "authorities can enforce as 'law' arbitrary decrees that are flagrant negations of all acceptable norms of justice." She concludes that "It is part of the unceasing human endeavor to prove that the spirit of man can transcend the flaws of his own nature." This is an extraordinary essay as it stands--one can scarcely imagine how it could be improved: She characterizes, in a single sentence, the quintessential difference between the rule of law in a democracy and under totalitarian rule.
The second chapter in Part 2 is titled "Freedom from Fear"
This chapter is the title essay of the book. It was published, in conjunction with the European Parliament awarding Aung San Suu Kyi the 1990 Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought (whether she wrote this after being placed under house arrest and receiving the prize is not stated). She was, obviously, not present at the formal ceremony in 1991: Within a week, translations of her essay appeared in numerous regional and national publications in over a half-dozen different languages.
It is not power, she begins this essay, that corrupts but fear: it corrupts both those wielding power and those subjugating themselves to it. She identifies four kinds of corruption: people deviate from the right path, first, because of desire (sometimes by pursuing bribes or gratuitously awarding those one loves with public funds). In the second form, people deviate out of ill will towards others. In the third, out of ignorance, because they know no better. In the fourth, people deviate out of fear: Of all forms of corruption, this is the worst, because it allows avarice to become deeply entrenched--despite an obvious lack of adequate economic planning, inept officials, a situation of increasing inflation accompanied by falling real income. Economic shambles was not though sufficient to spark "a traditionally good-natured, quiescent people--it was also the humiliation of a way of life disfigured by corruption and fear."
The students are protesting both the death of their comrades and a totalitarian regime's denial of their own right to life, condemning them to nothing but a meaningless present and a hopeless future. The student protests articulated a larger frustration, which grew and quickly self-organized into a nationwide movement. She notes, too, that the student protests were also strongly supported by some businessmen who--although they had learned to survive and prosper under the current regime--knew that a corrupt capricious regime precluded their having genuine security and a sense of fulfillment.
Those who would free themselves from the grip of fear must make the effort themselves, individually. It is not obvious how hard it is to remain uncorrupted in an environment where fear prevails (in contrast to states where the rule of law prevails). She notes that "Where there are no such laws, the burden of upholding the principles of justice and common decency falls on the ordinary people." In a world where "the unprincipled" dominate those weak and helpless, there is obvious need for a closer relationship between politics and ethics."
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations states that everyone "should promote the basic rights and freedoms to which all humans regardless of race, nationality or religion are entitled." As long as there are governments whose authority is founded on force, coercion--"rather than on the mandate of the people"--as long as there are those who place short-term profits above long-term peace, the declaration of human rights can only be partially realized (victims of oppression have none but themselves to defend their inalienable rights "as members of the human family").
A real revolution is a spirit born of a conviction that change is required. A revolution with only material aims merely changes official policies and so has little chance of succeeding. Without a spiritual revolution, the forces which produced the iniquities will remain. Consequently, it is insufficient to call for "freedom, democracy and human rights." People must be united in their determination to make sacrifices "in the name of enduring truths, to resist the corrupting influences of desire, ill will, ignorance and fear." As it has been said that saints are merely sinners who keep trying, so it can be said that "free men are the oppressed who go on trying."
Among the basic freedoms to which men aspire are freedom from fear--both as a means to an end and an end in itself. People must first liberate their own minds from apathy and fear: Jawaharlal Nehru once said that the essence of the teaching of Mahatma Gandhi was acting on the basis of fearlessness and truth. Fearlessness may itself be a gift, but it is the courage that can spring from it that is the more valuable, because courage does not allow fear to dictate behavior. Aung San Suu Kyi continues that it is the capacity for self-redemption that most distinguishes men from beasts: At the root of human responsibility is the urge to achieve perfection, the intelligence to act towards that end, and the will to follow its path. In a system which denies basic human rights, fear prevails in many forms. A particularly insidious form of fear masquerades as common sense and wisdom, "condemning as foolish, reckless, insignificant or futile the small, daily acts of courage which help to preserve man's self-respect and inherent human dignity." Such is the typical media portrayal of those not themselves. She concludes that concepts like truth, compassion, and justice are the only bulwark against "ruthless power." In summary, in this, the title essay of this volume, Aung San Suu Kyi details what she means by fear, what she fears about fear, and how, only, it can be triumphed against.
The third chapter in Part 2 is titled "The True Meaning of Boh"
This chapter is reprinted from a draft published by the journal Asian Survey (it had had the manuscript for several years; Aung San Suu Kyi intended additional revisions and wanted it reprinted in a volume dedicated to and about her father to "honor all those who stand for political integrity in Burma"). In 1942, a fledgling Burma Independence Army formed was formed by her father, Aung San, who came to personify the hope of a country "poised to realize its dreams of freedom" and became the subject of even popular verse: Aung San's reply then was that he had not yet earned himself a place in the history of Burma (a modest man, he had already led the Burmese resistance against the Japanese and was then negotiating with the British).
She writes that her father was raised in a Buddhist school and so would early have learned the concept of "creating an independent, self reliant nation out of a land devastated by war." Deceit and political guile would have been abhorrent to him, an insult both to his own code of integrity and other peoples. After having resigned his military position, his Anti-Fascist People's Freedom League (AFPFL) swept the elections of April 1947. Aung San vowed to resign if he lost people's respect; people believed him and in him. He was not, as he put it, his daughter wrote, a "political stuntman" who would unnecessarily put his country in turmoil (she quotes from a speech he delivered exactly 11 months before Burma gained its independence on 4 January 1948: "You know that I have never broken my promises"). Aung San's integrity and good will made him vulnerable to those with appetites for power. He was assassinated before Burma became independent. His daughter concludes this essay noting that some have said that, had her father paid as much attention to his own safety as he did to his dream of a free Burma, he would not have fallen victim to assassin bullets. But, were that so, he would not be Burma's Aung San, a leader embodying the strength of his nation.: In summary, "Boh" is the Burmese word for an army lieutenant in particular and military officers or commanders in general ("'boh' is also the Pali word for strength"). The word "bogyoke" specifically indicates the rank of major-general, but it came to be used--in the context of Aung San--to signify the father of the army, a strong and selfless leader. Aung San Suu Kyi clearly sets forth to honor her father: the only irony is that she had no need, the deeds of his short life speaking for themselves.
The fourth chapter in Part 2 is titled "The First Initiative'
This chapter comes from an open letter titled "The Formation of a People's Committee"--signed jointly by Aung San Suu Kyi and several other leading political figures--dated 15 August 1988. Although the government refused to discuss the document, it did briefly form a commission "to ascertain the aspirations of the people." The initiative itself was written by Aung San Suu Kyi (who prepared the English translation herself).
The format is a 13-point bulleted list: (1) People should act in accord with the laws of the country, and the government should respond to the people's lawful aspirations. (2) At an emergency meeting of the Burma Socialist Programme Party (BSPP) on 23 July 1988, Party Chairman Ne Win said he believed the bloodshed and disturbances in March and June could be interpreted to mean that people lacked confidence in the government and the single party behind it: He had proposed that a national referendum--a one-party or a multi-party system--be held. (3) Ne Win had earlier said that the good of the nation should come before the good of the party, an idea later rejected by the party congress. (4) This rejection makes many despair and feel apprehensive about country's future (and fearful of the shedding of more blood). (5) It is our goal to bring about peace and prosperity as well as to avoid further killing. (6) Based on the preceding five points, the following are offered as remedy: (7) The existing one-party system is not capable of reflecting the will of the people. (8) Chapter 4, Article 56 of the Constitution says that a special committees can be formed and empowered. (9) There is currently such a committee in China (and there had been one earlier in Burma). (10) It is requested that such a committee be formed, empowered, and allowed to freely disseminate information. (11) The preceding proposals are intended to bring government to reflect the will of the people in a peaceful manner "within the framework of the law." (12) It is "earnestly requested" that the authorities stop using force and release all political prisoners. (13) "In the words of the song that roused the patriotism of our people ... so is this proposal submitted with the good of future generations in mind."
In summary, although signed jointly, this was Aung San Suu Kyi's letter, expressing the issues with her customary economy: the points are clear and the logic inexorable. The concept of the rule of law is central to her document: people must abide by laws; government must respond to people's lawful aspirations. Also of central importance is her insistence that further bloodshed must be avoided and that the goal is making Burma a better place for future generations of Burmese.
The fifth chapter in Part 2 is titled "Speech to a Mass Rally at the Shwedagon Pagoda"
This chapter is from the speech Aung San Suu Kyi delivered to a mass rally at the Shwedagon Pagoda in Rangoon on 26 August 1988. This is the only one of the approximately one thousand speeches she delivered between August and July of the next year for which she formally prepared: She begins formally: "Reverend monks and people!" The purpose of this rally is draw world attention to the collective will of the Burmese people. She compliments the nation's students for having spearheaded this effort, sometimes at the cost of their lives. She asks her listeners to observe a minute's silence in honor of their fallen, then noting that it is the "unshakable desire to strive for a multi-party democratic system" that has brought them together today--and that the ongoing "national crisis could be likened to the second struggle for national independence." She stresses that it must be their goal to make democracy the common goal of the armed forces and the people. Of democracy, she says "It is an ideology which is consistent with freedom. It is an ideology that promotes and strengthens peace. It the only ideology we should aim for." She continues that people should not be disunited but strive forward together using "disciplined and peaceful means:" she appeals to the students to continue their work--and, again, for people to work to avoid a party-line rift with the armed forces. She also urges her listeners to bridge the gap between their older and younger members.
She then assures the students that she is herself not beholden to any politician and so none can ever force her to betray them. And, to the entire audience, she restates their common goal: multi-party democracy. She concludes restating their common cause: our demands are to demolish the one-party system, establish a multi-party system, and hold free and fair elections. This speech places Aung San Suu Kyi in an historic perspective: she introduces herself to a rally resulting from a national strike begun largely by young students: she is married to a foreigner; she is the daughter of Aung San. She credits the students--and appeals for unity among the many peoples of Burma, as well as between them and the military. She concludes emphasizing yet again that they must proceed non-violently.
The sixth chapter in Part 2 is titled "The Objectives"
This chapter comes from an interview with Karan Thapar--under the title "People's Heroine Spells Out Objectives"--dated 29 August 1988. The format is question and answer. The interview begins with a question about the current confusion about the status of human rights in Rangoon and Burma. Aung San Suu Kyi describes the situation as "very tense." The reigning government is virtually at a standstill, and groups of Buddhist monks and students have been self organizing into relief groups providing even medical aid to those in need. She says, "It is my aim to help the people attain democracy without further violence or loss of life." Her answer--to a question about what she meant by Burma's need for a "second" struggle for independence--is that the people demand multi-party democracy.
When asked about an offer recently extended by President Maung to have a special party congress on 12 September 1988, she says "too little too late" and that the Burmese people have already conclusively demonstrated their desire for a "multi-party democracy." When asked whether she will be satisfied only when the demands of the Burmese people have toppled the current government, she responds that it is neither a question of toppling nor of what she wants.
She answers the inevitable question about the anarchy falsely associated with spontaneous popular movements by stating that the Burmese people are becoming more self organized daily, making "arrangements for local security and planning more systematic demonstrations and strikes." When asked, Aung San Suu Kyi says that she does not see a particular role for herself in the future but that she will look for ways in which she can be most of service. She again reiterates that she sees no necessary division "between the army and the people" (and urges the army to maintain its integrity and not be used to serve the government's political ends). She states her total agreement with what her father had said earlier, that the army should keep out of politics.
She concludes noting that all people should fight to preserve their heritage, being careful though not allow themselves to lapse into bigoted shallow thinking. Here, Aung San Suu Kyi addresses the question about the fear of anarchy following a spontaneous popular uprising by contrasting how efficiently the Burmese people were working together with the ineptitude of the current regime. When the fist of an oppressive political and economic system is removed, many able people who thus far haven't had a chance to show their abilities, will emerge.
The seventh chapter in Part 2 is titled "In the Eye of the Revolution"
This chapter first appeared under the headline "Belief in Burma's Future" in The Independent on 12 September 1988--between the outbreak of the nationwide demonstrations beginning 8 August and the imposition of a new military rule on 18 September.
Aung San Suu Kyi confesses her "horror, anger, and sheer disbelief" as well as her "conviction that a movement which has risen so spontaneously from the people's irresistible desire for the full enjoyment of human rights must surely prevail." She continues that the will of the Burmese people has been suppressed for 26 years but that, now, since the police can no longer guarantee security, local "vigilante groups"--composed of Buddhist monks and students--have sprung up throughout the country, resolving problems which included the distribution of medical supplies in relief efforts. In contrast, the media have given much publicity to vandalism like looting and arson (in actuality, instigated by the government). She comments that it is "strange and horrifying" to see the Burmese people trying to preserve order while the government is trying to promote anarchy, its goal seemingly being to create maximum suffering for the people who have rejected it.
She continues that it is not the entire government but certain fringes within it that have orchestrated the "crude and often barbaric plots" directed against the Burmese people. She emphasizes the crudeness of these plots by later referring to "inept hardliners" desperate to save their positions whatever the cost. The Burmese people are oppressed by the government's Burma Socialist Programme Party (BSPP)--along with its senseless economic policies.
That oppression has helped unify the people (she believes that the only BSPP adherents left are those fearing for their positions and perhaps safety). Her attention then turns to the role of the army (independent of the government): it was her father, General Aung San, who founded the Burmese army--and afterwards continually warned against its being used as an instrument of tyranny in the service of oppression. She believes, along with many, that "the army is being led and misused by a handful of corrupt fanatics whose powers and privileges are dependent on the survival of the present system." She knows that there are many within the military who similarly object to being so used. She fears that the army might split into irreconcilable factions and so desires an early peaceful transition to a political system acceptable to the people which allows the army a "graceful exit."
Her response to those who asked her about her own involvement with Burma's movement for democracy is that, as her parents' daughter, it was inevitable (her father Aung San was assassinated when she was two, and the military government came to power in 1962, while she was in India, where her mother was the Burmese ambassador). She concludes these prepared remarks by noting "the inspiring role played by students in this national movement" and that, with their efforts, the future of a democratic Burma would be secure. Aung San Suu Kyi, despite the violence growing around her, again speaks for peaceful resolution as the only goal--but that a democratic Burma is not negotiable. She expresses awe, respect at the way people throughout her country and spontaneously self organizing: Their ad hoc efficiency is once again contrasted with the ineptness of the generals in power.
The eighth chapter in Part 2 is titled "Two Letters to Amnesty International"
This chapter comes from the two letters Aung San Suu Kyi wrote to Amnesty International, dated 24 September and 16 October 1988: The letters were intercepted by the military regime and and the next year printed as evidence in an official publication under a title which began: "The Conspiracy of Treasonous Minions."
In her first letter to Amnesty International, Aung San Suu Kyi proposes--despite military oppression so extensive as to preclude Amnesty International entering the country--a practical solution, a way the organization can make itself useful. She says that, in the forthcoming General Debate at the United Nations, the struggle for freedom and democracy in Burma would be advanced if many ambassadors mentioned their grave concerns about the wanton slaughter of unarmed demonstrators, children, and Buddhist monks occurring in Burma. She appeals to Amnesty International to bring the current situation--under Item 4 of the forthcoming meeting's Agenda--to international attention by encouraging as many ministers as they can to raise substantive concerns in their speeches about the current situation in Burma. She concludes that, should Amnesty International think of other avenues for expressing her message beyond those she mentioned, to pass it on.
She begins her second letter explicitly stating that human rights in Burma are currently being assaulted. Among the facts she cites are: "On 15 October over six hundred men, mostly young students, were seized by the armed forces as they sat in teashops ... in Rangoon;" other young men who could not prove they were civil servants were drug from their buses into military trucks (she believes they were taken to the front lines to fight--or be used as mine detectors--in one of the generals' wars against insurgents). She concludes that the involuntary conscription of young men has been known for several years--but that this is the first time it has occurred in "broad daylight in the streets of Rangoon for all to see." The beginning of Aung San Suu Kyi's first letter is in a sense ironic--human rights violations have made it impossible--too dangerous--for Amnesty International to investigate those violations. The immediacy of the danger is though underscored by the last sentence in her second letter: the generals are now so brazen as to round up the young men who don't work for them in broad day light in the middle of the city "for all to see."
The ninth chapter in Part 2 is titled "Letter to the Ambassadors"
This chapter contains an open letter she wrote dated 26 September 1988. Aung San Suu Kyi begins by asking that all ambassadors from countries recognized by the Burmese military press their foreign offices to address human rights issues in Burma under Item 4 of the General Debate during the forthcoming session of the United Nations Assembly (which was scheduled to begin the next day). She writes that she has made similar appeals to Amnesty International and the National Commission of Jurists and concludes that she thinks the previous weeks' wanton slaughter of unarmed demonstrators, school children, and Buddhist monks is a matter of "legitimate concern" for the international community. As with her other open letters, Aung San Suu Kyi wastes no words: her prose style is the same whomever she is addressing (she talks neither up to some and down to others but directly across to all). Her observation that the slaughter of innocents is a "legitimate" concern for the international community is acidic, intended to remain etched in the minds of those who read it.
The tenth chapter in Part 2 is titled "The Role of the Citizen in the Struggle for Democracy"
This chapter consists of excerpts from a speech Aung San Suu Kyi gave on 3 December 1988. She begins by telling her audience that, although she does not know what will happen, she believes that democracy in Burma is still possible. She also stresses the importance of maintaining a consistent presence, acknowledging the great work that remains to be done: people must continue doing what they believe to be right.
She notes that life expectancy in Burma under the dictatorship was about sixty, but that, under democracy, living conditions would improve and life expectancy might increase to seventy--which means that those youth in her audience had over fifty years of struggle before them: "Democracy is a gift one must nourish all one's life .... If each of you keeps in mind you have a responsibility for the welfare of your country, then we shall have no reason to worry that our country's health will deteriorate." Aung San Suu Kyi again emphasizes that everyone must work together, for democracy: loyalties and allegiances should not be to particular individuals or groups or be short-term.
The single long-term goal is multi-party democracy. This speech, in particular, underscores her message that citizens must commit to a lifelong struggle for democracy. This same theme--that democracy must be fought for to be obtained--occurs throughout her other writings but is nowhere else so clearly articulated. Like American Martin Luther King said, "Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor. It must be demanded by the oppressed."
The eleventh chapter in Part 2 is titled "Battle Royal"
This chapter contains a letter to the editor she wrote on 21 January 1989. It describes her trip to Bassein on the Irrawaddy Delta: she had begun her journey by boat and was "escorted" by a flotilla of troops. She arrived to a town whose streets had been blocked off and its residents told not to acknowledge her presence amongst them. Several members of her party were arrested. She concludes noting that Brigadier Myint Aung "will get a good run for his money." The backdrop of intimidation and the threat of physical violence against which she spoke are revealed here. It also underscores her determination: if the troops block the roads, the people will ride bicycles.
The twelfth chapter in Part 2 is titled "Open Letter to the UN Commission on Human Rights"
This chapter consists of a letter to the United Nations which, although undated, she wrote while harassment against her and her party mounted but before 20 July 1989, when she was first placed under house arrest (the UN did commence a confidential investigation of human rights in Burma the next year).
The format of her letter is a 10-item bulleted list. (1) She first describes the nature and aims of Burma's National League for Democracy. (2) She next notes that "Those working for democracy in Burma would distinguish between 'the rule of law' which would mean the fair and impartial administration of administrative rules" and "law and order which merely involves the enforcement of arbitrary edicts decreed by a regime which does not enjoy the mandate of the people." (3) Those who embrace the cause of human rights do not reject the rule of law and order but only the imposition of the will of a dominant faction. (4) If the law does not ensure that justice is done, the government "cannot be said to have either the moral force or the legal sanction necessary to elevate the status of mere edicts to the status of just laws." (5) The policy of the NLD has always been to respect and uphold all just laws and to "resist measures which attack the very foundations of human dignity and truth." (6) Many political prisoners are being held in Burma, charged with flimsy offenses, because they tried to uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Articles 19, 20 and 2 I); the NLD are been subjected to treatment inconsistent with Articles 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, I I and 12. (7) The NLD does not seek confrontation--"which can only bring more suffering on a populace already troubled by much political and economic hardship"--but understanding through dialogue. (8) "The authorities" are not willing to engage in dialog and ignore the will of the majority of Burmese people. (9) She hopes that the UN can help create conditions that allow people to express their views without fear of reprisal. (10) The people of Burma know they must pursue their own quest for democracy (but they look to the UN to recognize the justice of their cause).
This letter contrasts the rule of law with the arbitrary enforcement of rules by capricious rulers. Aung San Suu Kyi underscores the respect her party, the NLD, holds for the laws of governments whose legitimacy resides in their people. She articulates those chapters of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights that the Burmese government had already flagrantly violated. She concludes noting that, although she recognizes that the fight for democracy must be undertaken by the Burmese people, she hopes that the UN will acknowledge the justice of their cause.
The thirteenth chapter in Part 2 is titled "Dust and Sweat"
This chapter was taken from a letter to the editor Aung San Suu Kyi wrote dated "Rangoon, 14 April 1989." She refers to difficulties like facing the soldiers ordered to shoot her (a major countermanded the order at the last minute). She affirms that she thinks what she is doing is worthwhile--and that the Burmese people deserve more than SLORC's "inefficiency, corruption, and misuse of power." This letter is brief. Considering what you're doing worthwhile in the face of personal physical danger is one measure of courage, individual bravery--in stark contrast to the generals' "inefficiency, corruption, and misuse of power."
The fourteenth chapter in Part 2 is titled "The Need for Solidarity among Ethnic Groups"
This chapter comes from a speech Aung San Suu Kyi delivered at a pagoda in Myitkyina, Kachin State on 27 April 1989 (she later mentioned the enormous crowds attending this speech in a subsequent letter to the editor, noting that her greatest cross was not thinking herself worthy of the people's "trust and affection"). She begins by thanking the crowd for supporting her and the Burmese National League for Democracy,
She stresses that all the country's ethnic groups must work together to form a viable Union (and that it is only after this that "peace and prosperity" can come). Problems that preclude creating a unified front must be overcome: people must work together to live in harmony. She continues that she hears often that people are afraid. However, in those areas where people are courageously joining the movement, there are more political rights than in those areas where fear prevails: being fearful only invites more oppression; those wanting democracy must behave courageously.
By "courage" she means the courage to do what is one's right, even while afraid. Teaching by intimidation--in contrast to doing what is right--has become so commonplace that the government no longer even bothers trying to even superficially explain itself, instead using more threats to control. She states that it is her listeners' responsibilities as parents to teach their children by explaining to them, teaching them both justice and compassion as opposed to things that will divide them along linguistic or ethnic lines. She exhorts her audience to, by their earliest age, teach their children to understand the ideas of "Union" and national unity.
She cites the example of her own mother, who taught her both with words and by everyday example: In 1942, a senior nurse, Ma Khin Kyi, had a new patient, Aung San. They married and had three children. She became active in the nationalism movement after her husband's assassination (after which she was called "Daw Khin Kyi" (Aung San Suu Kyi's name, since her husband's death, is sometimes preceded with "Daw"). Daw Khin Kyi raised her children, like herself and her husband, as Buddhists; she raised them by example (house guests of diverse ethnicity were regulars in her home); she raised her children to remember their father's legacy. In one of her essays about her father, Aung San Suu Kyi writes that the army her father founded did not initially favor their commander-in-chief marrying (but that her mother rapidly changed their minds). Daw Khin Kyi was the Burmese ambassador to India at the time of the 1962 coup and remained in the position some yeas after (Aung San Suu Kyi was a teenager). It was the stroke that Daw Khin Kyi suffered in early 1988 that brought Aung San Suu Khi and her family--two sons and a husband--to Rangoon, at a time of mass protests and military reprisals. In December 1988, Daw Khin Kyi died at the age of seventy-six, about forty years after her husband, the legendary Aung San, was assassinated: and in the midst of the turbulent times that were propelling her daughter to speak out, becoming legendary in the "second" struggle.
It is not enough, Aung San Suu Khi goes on, to do nothing but vote on election day: the way ahead for free and democratic elections must be fought for to be won. She underscores the need for political involvement by pointing out that when she visited Myitkyina 30 years earlier as a child, there was no problem with electricity; now though there is not enough. She concludes her speech telling her audience that, to lead a full life, they must be willing to sacrifice for their country and realize that, despite ethnic and linguistic differences, they are "all comrades in the struggle for democratic rights."
In summary, Aung San Suu Kyi argues that people must act in order to lead a full life--and that those who put prosperity before political rights are doomed: The 40 years since Burma's brief period of independence, between 1962 and 1989, have brought decline, not prosperity. Teaching by intimidation--in contrast to doing what is right--has become commonplace. She stresses the need for peoples of different ethnic and linguistic backgrounds to work together towards democracy: It was partly for her work leading the diverse peoples of Burma together towards democracy that the Nobel Committee awarded her its Peace Prize in 1991.
The fifteenth chapter in Part 2 is titled "The People Want Freedom"
This chapter comes from an interview with Dominic Falder on AsiaWeek in July 1989. The format is question and answer. The host asks her what she thinks will happen after the elections, if there are elections. Her response is that "We don't know; this is the problem. Whoever is elected will first have to draw up a constitution that will have to be adopted before the transfer of power. They haven't said how the constitution will be adopted."
She continues that SLORC--the State Law and Order Restoration Council--can't be trusted to set up a democratically elected government, citing its refusal to enter into dialog with any that disagree with it as one example: "any organization totally under the thumb of a dictator can be described as poor." She also insists that economic development--SLORC's slogan--must be preceded by fundamental political changes, first respect for human rights.
She observes that the Burmese people have learned to be frightened, and that fright is a habit which can be unlearned. When asked whether she thinks "the authorities" will move against her, she responds that they already have. And, finally, that, once the people have thrown off their yoke of fear, their questions, after over a quarter century of oppression, will be numerous.
In summary, Aung San Suu Kyi cites the example of SLORC refusing to talk with those that disagreed with it as an attempt to silence them (herself at the forefront). SLORC's first attacks on Aung San Suu Kyi were personal: she observed bizarre sexual practices, was a "Communist" (or worked for the CIA), even once, she said, that she had "insulted the Lord Buddha." History was to prove her correct about not being able to trust SLORC with the elections (it ignored her party's overwhelming victory).
The sixteenth chapter in Part 2 is titled "The Agreement to Stand for Election"
This chapter consists of her written agreement to stand for election in May 1990 (she translated this agreement into the English version published in the book). Aung San Suu Kyi writes that, although she has been detained since July 20th 1989 for her political opinion, she was nevertheless submitting her papers to stand as a candidate in the forthcoming elections. Although the military regime later officially disallowed her candidacy, her party went on to conclusively win the election with over 80% of the vote. Her agreement concluded that she was submitting her application out of respect "to honour the courage and perseverance of the people who are striving for democracy; and from a desire to help fulfill the just aspirations of the people to the best of my ability."
The seventeenth chapter in Part 2 is titled "The 1991 Nobel Peace Prize"
The Norwegian Committee formally awarded Aung San Suu Khi the Nobel Peace Prize in October 1991 for "her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights." The committee observed that she was the daughter of Burma's Aung San, "showed an early interest in Gandhi's non-violent protest," and that her involvement with Burma's "second struggle for independence" began in 1988, when she became the voice of a non-violent democratic movement opposing a brutal military regime.
The Committee also commended her for her work at reconciling Burma's sharply divided ethnic groups. It also noted that, although the 1990 Burmese democratic election had resulted in a conclusive victory for her party, the military regime had ignored the election results. The committee concluded that Aung San Suu Kyi was one of the greatest examples of civic courage in Asia in decades. The Norwegian Committee awarded her that year's prize both in honor of her personal civic courage, her commitment to non-violent resistance, and her work unifying Burma's diverse ethnic and linguistic groups.
Part 3 is titled "Appreciations"
The first chapter in Part 3 is titled "A Flowering of the Spirit: Memories of Suu and Her Family" (by Ma Than E)
Ma Than E begins this essay stating that Aung San Suu Kyi's then 13-year-old son Kim accepted the 1990 Sakharov Prize in her honor. She reflects that, at least in part, Aung San Suu Kyi can be explained by her legendary father and being raised by her remarkable mother. She recalls, nostalgically, meals shared with Aung San and the "Thirty Comrades." Daw Khin Kyi reminded her children of their father's legacy, taught them by example, and raised them as Buddhists.
Aung San Suu Kyi had accompanied her mother to New Delhi, where reading became her preoccupation; she also spent a year in Algiers and was far more interested in its struggle for independence than attending the parties to which she was invited; she later spent 3 years working for the UN (during the period when Burma's U Thant was Secretary-General), after which she married and had two sons.
In 1988, Aung San Suu Kyi left London for Rangoon, to be at her mother's bedside: the military government had already slaughtered far more students than they did in Tienanmen Square a year later. Aung San Suu Kyi could not be silent in such circumstances: others may not have responded but Aung San Suu Kyi, being who she is, did act. This essay provides the best description of how Daw Khin Kyi influenced Aung San Suu Kyi: through a lifetime of example. It was, ironically, her illness that brought Aung San Suu Kyi back to Rangoon at a time of massive protests and arrests, not unlike those of her parents' youth.
The second chapter in Part 3 is titled "Suu Burmese" (by Ann Pasternak Slater)
Ann Pasternak Slater writes that she first met Aung San Suu Kyi when they attended St. Hugh's College at Oxford (their friends were primarily Indian and African). Later, as adults, the two became neighbors: she describes Aung San Suu Kyi as a talented, self disciplined young woman who, like the rest of her species, had her frustrations and triumphs. These are the words of a school friend and later adult neighbor. Of her many qualities, this friend writes, the one that stands out most is her egalitarianism. She concludes the essay with a line from Yeats: "'But one man loved the pilgrim soul in you.'"
The third chapter in Part 3 is titled "Aung San Suu Kyi: Is She Burma's Woman of Destiny?" (by Josef Silverstein)
Josef Silverstein asks how Aung San Suu Kyi--whom the New York Times had not heard of before 26 August 1988--could become the spokesperson for a popular democratic movement in a matter of weeks (in a country that had been dominated, in all ways of life, by a military dictatorship for nearly 30 years). The answer, to begin, he writes, is her name (the daughter of Aung San needed no introduction). Another part of the answer is that Burma has an egalitarian rather than sexist culture (there were no impediments to a woman's political aspirations--although, under the male military dictatorship, women's role in everything has diminished). Another part of the answer is her personal modesty: a shopkeeper who attended one of her rallies is quoted as saying "When we listen to the government leader, and then listen to her, I think every Burmese can agree about who is the better person."
In 1988, Daw Khin Kyi suffered a stroke and her daughter flew from London to Rangoon to be at her side (in the previous year, devaluation of the Burmese currency and brutally repressed student demonstrations had led to a succession of nationwide protests and strikes).
At first the government warned people away from her rallies; it then began attacking her personally, on occasion physically endangering her (as on 5 October 1988 when dozens of rifles were aimed on her alone); it put her under house arrest, cutting off her contact with the outside world. Who has the moral authority to demand freedom from Burma's self-selected leaders? Obviously, Aung San Suu Kyi. In summary, this essay makes the point that the government's inability to do anything but put her under house arrest attests to their fear. It also notes that their plan may backfire, because Aung San Suu Kyi--shut off from the world--now exists as an idealized figure, one who can do no wrong (because she is given no opportunity to do anything).
The fourth chapter in Part 3 is titled "Aung San Suu Kyi and the Peaceful Struggle for Human Rights in Burma" (by Philip Kreager)
Philip Kreager outlines her four core principles: (1) human rights for everyone comes first; (2) the only legitimate means are non-violent; (3) governments are based on principles not personalities; (4) great personal and collective self-discipline is required by all.
Although part of the Burmese nationalism movement, Aung San Suu Kyi was first to insist on universal individual human rights (it was not a position inconsistent with her father's view--it just took that view a step further). All of her rallies between August 1988 and July 1989 explicitly violated the official government policy on open meetings. By October 1990, only four members of the NLD remained at liberty. This author reminds the reader that Aung San Suu Kyi's legacy on the future of Burma is based on over a thousand speeches and interviews between August 1988 and July 1989.