Heroine no more? |
After
more than a decade of inconsistent house arrests and persecution, Aung Suu Kyi
stood in parliament for the first time in April 2012. In a historic speech on
25th July, she stressed on equal rights for all ethnicities and how
that is pivotal to the materialization of a “truly democratic union”.
Ironically, as the woman addressed rows and rows of politicians in the
flamboyantly royal parliament house, ethnic strife continued to bubble between
religious groups in Western Burma.
Despite
escalating tensions in the region, Aung Suu Kyi has been avoiding the issue of
the Rohingya Muslims for long.
The
national reaction to the Rohingya killings has been shocking- the media has
fuelled and supported the expulsion of Muslims from the country, the apparently
peaceful monks have called for suspension of humanitarian aid to the Rohingya
community and even the President has asked for a ridiculous resettlement of
over 1 million Muslims to a third country.
Every
segment of Burmese society, from the lowest ranks to its echelons, seems to be
bathed in a shroud of extreme nationalism- or xenophobic jingoism- which has
sparked a hateful disapproval of non-Burmese (and some would say,
non-Mongoloid) races. The origins of this prejudice go back to the ruler Ne Win,
who denied citizenship rights to the Rohingya and practically brainwashed the
population into a paranoid sense of cultural superiority.
Aung
Suu Kyi is a nascent leader in a highly unstable, transitional democracy, so
she might have reservations over addressing such an emotionally intense issue
directly. Defying what seems to be the common mindset in the country could not
only damage her image but also prove to be catastrophic for her party in the
2015 elections.
Secondly,
it is important to remember that it has only been a year since Kyi has been
granted political freedom and just 5 months since she first stepped into the
Parliament. The President is still closely associated with the military
junta-which dominates the parliament- and it is hard to assess how far the new
leadership will pursue democratic reform. Moreover, the President still feels
threatened by the media magnet, Aung Suu Kyi.
Consequently,
absolute political power still lies in the hands of the
general-turned-president and his military. The quasi-civilian government has
also sought to keep Kyi away from ethnic politics and even barred her from the
initial discussions about amnesty, with various ethnic groups. Any outspoken
condemnation of the Rohingya killings could seriously sabotage Aung Suu Kyi’s
relationship with the current leadership and thereby her chances of playing an
active role in national reconciliation.
But
it’s not all gloom and doom. The reasons above seek to explain, and possibly
justify Suu Kyi’s silence over the matter. Being a staunch admirer of the lady,
I believe there is still a reason for optimism.
Aung
Suu Kyi is a national icon and a global celebrity. Many Burmese worship her as
the instigator of a new era of stability in their troubled homeland. The moment
she steps out of her house, dozens throng around her as if she’s performing a
magic show. I firmly believe that if she chooses to speak out against the
ethnic violence, she will garner a lot of support and greatly influence public
opinion of the Rohingya community, regardless of their historical grievances.
As for her clash with the military, a woman who has so fearlessly questioned
the military in the past will not be afraid to do it again. The woman still
stands strong despite handling a multitude of hardships in the past- years of
house arrest, her inability to meet her dying husband and son due to her
activism and the brutal attack on her in 2003. Indeed, she has always stood for
the subjugated, and the Rohingya Muslims are no exception (hopefully).
Will the peacock, a symbol of resurrection and renewal mark a new era for the minorities of Burma? |