Revisiting the political significance of Aung San Suu Kyi

Tuesday, 16 March 2010 13:27 Joseph Ball

(Mizzima) - For 20 years Burmese politics has remained relatively static, with the country’s principle opposition group seeking to right the injustice of the 1990 election, which presumably should have led to a government headed by Aung San Suu Kyi. Meanwhile, the anticipated 2010 election offers little to no hope of addressing the country’s most demanding fissures, be the polling free and fair or otherwise; the most important work to be done still lying in the relatively ignored arena of creating a shared understanding and appreciation for the direction of the country.

With the regime’s announcement last week of the Election Law, Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) unquestionably faces a critical fork in the road. The party is apparently confronted with either delisting Aung San Suu Kyi and other prominent detained leaders from the registry, or face liquidation of the party.

In all truthfulness, the Election Law and present predicament of the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi should have come as a surprise to nobody, and party directives and posturing well thought out in advance. Nevertheless, even at this increasingly late hour it is not impossible for the NLD to make inroads toward their overarching goals - and it starts with reconceptualizing the role and importance of its heralded figurehead.

It is naturally assumed that if Aung San Suu Kyi were forced out of the party it would be a victory for the junta and provide further legitimation of the junta’s apparent unilateral political process. Such a conception is inaccurate. Moreover, objection to the Election Law on the basis of rights, while maybe theoretically correct, offers no direction or hope for political reform. The current crisis surrounding Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD is not one of rights; it is one of strategic vision.

Aung San Suu Kyi’s political significance is arguably more important in 2010 than it was in 1990. But her significance need not lie in formally assuming the reigns of political power - as she herself has alluded to in various speeches. Rather, the notion of Prime Minister Aung San Suu Kyi as the imperative endgame has been greatly enhanced by rights groups and activists while The Lady herself sits in enforced idleness on the shores of Inya Lake.

If Aung San Suu Kyi is allowed a certain modicum in mobility and communication, her potential impact on the transformation of Burmese society need not necessarily be lessened - even if it means she is not formally associated with the NLD or the holder of high political office. As a figure looked to in bringing about long-awaited national reconciliation, it can even be argued that such a role would be eased if she were not leading the NLD.

This notion of Aung San Suu Kyi’s future political significance was recently bolstered with the news that she herself would be willing to accept the junta’s much maligned 2008 constitution if it were accompanied by free and fair elections; elections that would ensure the military’s continued dominance of Burmese society according to popular opposition jargon of the day.

However, the above sentiment would fit well with a role for The Lady as leader of national reconciliation, assisting in rebuilding the long-lost trust between competing organizations.

If the NLD as a party founded on principles and ideologies is to serve as a lasting bulwark in Burmese politics, it surely has to be bigger than the appeal of a single person; for it is the policies and ideas that withstand time, not the human body.

At present it is very much in doubt if the NLD as an institution maintains any significant mass support beyond urban centers and university campuses. My own ad hoc enquiries over the course of the last 15 years leads me to conclude that without Aung San Suu Kyi, the NLD as presently constituted would lose significant ground.

The NLD has committed, capable members beyond the shores of Inya Lake and the country’s penal system. If they can compete and win elected seats the party will persevere and I would suggest eventually be able to better solidify its political constituency. At the same time, if Aung San Suu Kyi is allowed to play an apolitical political role there can be little question that she will yet remain a key person in determining the direction of the NLD, which itself will always - with or without her - be associated with The Lady.

And as reconciliation is furthered and trust rebuilt, through the work of Aung San Suu Kyi as well as increased interaction between heretofore-disparate political personalities, the possibility for changes further afield regarding Burma’s political composition becomes increasingly likely. This is a possibility that presently does not exist, and will not come to exist via the continued announcement of demands made by the opposition and sympathetic voices in the international community.

It is high time for Burma’s democratic opposition to devise strategies respective of its constituent strengths (and weaknesses) and within the context of Burma’s ongoing political crisis.

The NLD desperately needs to rebuild its countrywide organizational capacity and Aung San Suu Kyi desperately needs to be actively involved in the country’s hoped for progress. While these two criteria are not mutually exclusive, they also need not perfectly overlap.

Aung San Suu Kyi can formally part ways from the NLD…a move that, if played correctly, can lead to the long-term benefit of both country and party alike. But it is a move that must be made irrespective of rights doctrine and legislation, and instead with respect to the existing strategic landscape.