23.07.2006
.
Join Democracy for Burma Alliance
.
.
The BIG QUESTION
In “Martyrs & Martyrdom” article in last week’s BURMA DIGEST, Dr. Sein Myint asked: _
"Since Bogyoke Aung San was assassinated and departed well before Burma’s Independent, it is rather difficult to imagine what he actually would do or likely to do in the post-Independent Burma political scenes. But if he has been still alive, what would the course of Burma’s political history be? A different one from the present scenario?"
Aung San died but his words still inspires us to our struggle for democracy and justice in Burma and in abroad. His words sound more like Martin Luther King. It is clear, if Aung San lived longer, his words would have found their expression in action which would have reduced much of the suffering of his people.
Aung San died as a martyr but he left us with an ideal road map. In his absence, Burmese people have suffered and miss him. But Burmese people now look forward with their living hero Aung San Sui Ki to implement Aung San's ideal into practice of a truly democratic Burmese society. For, Aung San said: _
“…we must labor together in the common cause which concerns all and affects everybody."
Certainly, Aung San feared that there will be spoilers and democracy would be replaced by dictatorship. But we know that if he survived he must have resisted the military and he must have resisted the military's xenophobia which changed the historic name Akyab into Sittwe, Arakan into Rakine state. Aung San as a democrat must have fought against declaration of the entire Rohingya people as non citizens. He would have fought against the plight of Karens (but again Burmese citizens) who live inhuman status and starve in jungles and in subhuman condition in Thai refugee camps, and Chins and the other refugees in China and India for years. Thus, Aung San rightly suggested that people have to be united for a common cause (justice be served) and continue with their democracy movement against oppressive rulers. I am sure, in his statement, he also suggested that the minorities have also responsibility to show love for their country and work for its prosperity.
Thus, the BIG QUESTION: In future, when the military regime's time comes to an end, (which is inevitable), will the Burmese democracy leaders follow Aung San's advice to serve justice or work half-heartedly and continue to have the old wine in a new bottle and have civil war back again? To avoid this, is it important that Burmese citizens have to the birth rights, the meaning of citizenship, human rights, and democratic representation.
The big question: Will there be any favouratism based on race, ethnicity and religion as the military did for decades? Then, to avoid the perils, is it important to educate the Burmese people in the benefit of tolerance, respect and in sharing the nation's wealth with their fellow citizens irrespective of race, ethnicity and religion? Surely, Aung San was not using a clever turning of phrases. The true understanding of his ideas of democracy and justice in Burma will replace poverty for prosperity.
To me, Aung San's democratic ideals for this great nation will only bring unity, as against the present alienation of minorities resulting in civil war.
Prof. Abid Bahar
......................................................
Comments
Raluca Enescu said _
Definitely, this is, indeed, THE BIG QUESTION, and I can say it from my
country's experience.
After establishing a democracy after long decades of dictatorship, the
most difficult thing ist to adjust mentalities that have been created to
function in the new regime. For example, employees who, under a
dictatorship (which is, by definition, a type of government likely to
develop a high level of corruption) have been used for 50 years not to do
their jobs unless they receive a bribe, it will take a long while to give
up this habit, after democracy is unsaturated.
Also, a key point in making a new democracy functional is transparency.
The fact that while some people risked their lives fighting against the
totalitarian regime, others collaborated with it, promoting injustice and
took advantage of the situation for their own benefit is something the
public must be aware of. The result of the elections held immediately
after the instauration of a democracy is most of the time crucial, and it
is hard for people who don't have the experience of democratic and
conscientious choice to make the right option, unless the information is
widely available to them.
In many recent democracies, countries that have been ruled by
dictatorships until the '80's or early '90's , especially,. there is an
ongoing debate which concerns imposing a so-called "lustration law" (from
Latin "lustratio"=purification; the "law of lustration" would mean that
those who held public functions during the dictatorship or those who are
responsible somehow of the regime's atrocities wouldn't be allowed anymore
to have political functions or ton participate in elections) I wonder what
do you think about this :-)
Anyway, obviously, a revolution that would bring an end to a dictatorship
is always animated by certain ideals; the main problem is, afterwards,
whether these ideals are able to turn into reliable and respected
pro-democratic values, which is, already, not only a problem of the
political leaders but mostly and more important, of each citizen of the
nation.
U Myo Nyunt said _
Prof Abid Bahar, it takes two to dance the tango. But the Burmese, the mass of common people do not dance the tango. We will always defend our national identity and our lives, from both internal and external threat and total domination. Remember our Bogyoke Aung San of Burma was a Nationalist that valued peace, co-existence and harmony between different races, religion, and regions that constituted Burma.
Dr. Habib Siddiqui said _
Such remarks of U Myo Nyunt are unfortunate and show that there is great
deal of mistrust between various communities that make up the Democratic
and Human Rights movement, pressuring to end the SPDC mis-rule of Burma.
Towards a federal nation building, some basics are in order:
A
national identity cannot be the majority identity in a state that has
several minority identities; nor can it be imposed on the minority. Only
when a framework is reached through consensus among various ethnic groups,
including the majority Burman, on what really ties all up to a federal
state can real progress be made. It is otherwise all illusion, and not
beneficial for unity in a multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-communal,
ethnically-diverse country, that is called Burma (or more specifically
Myanmar) today.
Your Comments here_
Request: If you can kindly volunteer to translate BURMA DIGEST English articles into Burmese, please let us know BDeditors@tayzathuria.org.uk .
Please download from http://www.tayzathuria.org.uk/BD.pdf a simple, portable and printable version of BURMA DIGEST and send it to all your Burmese friends.
.
Click here for This week’s articles
Last week’s English articles
Assassinations in Burmese Political Culture
Interview with Colonel Khun Okkar
An International Liability: Is There a Win-Win Solution?
A Visit to Moscow Museum in Mae Sot