Suu Kyi’s Silence Speaks Volumes

In a September 20 op-ed in the Global New Light of Myanmar, once a crude mouthpiece for the previous ruling military regime, now a more polished propaganda tool of the National League for Democracy-led elected government, a writer cajoled the military’s political party to build trust with the people through structural reforms and a changed mindset. The piece argued a strong military-backed United Solidarity for Development Party (USDP) was crucial for consolidating the country’s new democracy and an equitable balance of political power.

Aung San Suu Kyi’s NLD swept last year’s general elections, winning 86 percent of the parliamentary seats up for grabs in Myanmar’s first openly contested polls in over 25 years. While the military maintains significant power through a 25 percent bloc of appointees in parliament and autonomy over the powerful border affairs, defense, and home ministries, voters called clearly for a diminished military role in government. Many hoped on casting their ballots that a Suu Kyi-led government would prioritize truth and reconciliation for the crimes and abuses perpetrated over six decades of unchecked military rule.

Six months into her tenure as de facto national leader, Suu Kyi has arguably done more to appease than challenge military power, according to Yangon-based activists, journalists, and researchers. Significantly, Suu Kyi gave her approval to President Barack Obama’s decision to lift the remaining sanctions the U.S. imposed on the previous military regime’s gross and chronic human rights abuses during a high-profile visit to Washington. The sanctions were viewed as one of Suu Kyi’s few points of leverage vis-à-vis the generals as the two sides settle into a complex and still evolving power sharing arrangement.

The removal of sanctions will help kick start a moribund economy where the means of production, prime land holdings, and commercial concessions are dominated by military generals as well as their families and business associates. As U.S. investment starts to flow into the country, generals and their once-blacklisted cronies will benefit disproportionately from the infusion of modern capital, management, and technology, further strengthening their stranglehold on the economy. “They are rich and we are poor,” says one NLD stalwart who was held for over a decade as a political prisoner. “We just have to try to ignore it.” 

But how much longer can Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, suppress popular aspirations for truth, justice, and retribution while overtly plying the military’s interests? She has stifled those calls among her NLD parliamentarians in authoritarian fashion, both through a gag order on speaking with the media and permission requirements mostly refused by NLD headquarters to engage grassroots groups dealing with community, rights, and transitional justice issues. Her appointed spokespeople, meanwhile, have lashed out at probing scribes in a similar way to the outgoing military regime’s harsh censorship enforcers.

The Irrawaddy, an independent news site previously run from exile, reported that during a meeting on October 4 between NLD leaders and party parliamentarians, the former urged the latter against asking “difficult questions” during parliamentary sessions to avoid hurting the “image” of the party. Those marching orders appear to have stalled previous NLD calls for investigations into rushed privatizations of state assets and properties during the long post-election transition from USDP to NLD rule. Military-linked USDP politicians made clear that they would not cooperate with any such probe.

Suu Kyi’s imposed silence has been most deafening on the country’s ongoing ethnic conflicts, where rights abuses have continued apace during military offensives launched on her government’s watch. Rights groups monitoring the conflict in northern Kachin State have reported gross military abuses, including cases of rape, torture, and disappearance. Thousands of Kachins recently publicly protested against the military’s campaign, including aerial bombardment of civilian areas, and called on Suu Kyi as a government leader to stop the onslaught. Their calls for mercy have so far been in vain.

International attention is more focused on the deteriorating situation in western Rakhine State, where Suu Kyi’s reticence amid death and destruction has tainted her peace prize legacy. Ethnic Rohingyas have fled en masse, often on rickety boats in perilous seas, to escape sectarian violence some view as genocide. Many felt Suu Kyi punted on the crisis by appointing former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to lead an advisory commission looking into sectarian divisions. Shadowy attacks that killed nine police in Rakhine State on October 9 promise to further escalate the violence as the military deploys troops to fortify the area.

While the military maintains control over security-related ministries, many hoped Suu Kyi would leverage her strong electoral mandate to stop the wars and rein in military abuses. Her lack of executive power, however, was on full display when the military launched a new offensive in Shan State exactly coincident with the start of her ballyhooed 21st Century Panglong Conference peace process, an ambitious bid to end to over six decades of perpetual civil war. Without clear military support, the process so far has been more form than substance.   

To be sure, Suu Kyi needs to strike a fine balance with the military to consolidate recent democratic gains, implement political and economic reforms, and, above all, avoid a democracy-ending coup. Military leaders from the outset required assurances that Suu Kyi would not pursue criminal prosecutions for past crimes to share power peacefully. Suu Kyi said after the NLD’s electoral romp that the NLD would not adopt a “revenge mentality,” including against her former dictatorial adversary Senior General Than Shwe, who held her in house arrest for 15 out of 21 years and oversaw the violent persecution of her supporters. 

Suu Kyi’s diehard supporters believe she is playing an astute long game, whereby she lulls military leaders into complacency but finally delivers justice in a firmly rooted democracy. But as perceptions gather Suu Kyi is using her democratic mandate more to please the generals than achieve justice for their victims, she risks losing the support of those who fought for her freedom and held her up as a democratic beacon during the darkest days of military rule. Rather than urge the military to build trust with the people, Suu Kyi’s spin doctors would be wiser to suggest that with patience and restraint the past will eventually be addressed.