Comments on: Silent outrage as Daw Aung San Suu Kyi remains locked up

By: Anne Coulthurst

Anne Coulthurst — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 07:49:24 +0000

Where Virginia Moncrieff errs is that she does not appreciate that the Lady has now become, to the Burmese majority, the personification of their country.

As for sanctions not working, some assessment at the rockface disagrees. A particular Burmese view insists that if prestigious western goods were to be denied to the military’s families and friends then political rapprochement would be quite rapid!

By: RaymondChurch

RaymondChurch — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 07:35:22 +0000

What role did the then USSR and China play in supporting the white regime in Sth Africa. It surely is drawing a long bow comparing the two regimes (Burma & SthAfrica) and their supporters?
But I am prepared to take a history lesson if it proves anything. Sanctions against Burma hurt who? The Generals, The Judges, the army, the secret police or the Burmese people living in poverty. Did Sth Africa get inundated by storms and floods with the loss of thousands of lives, utter misery and despair as the Generals sat back in luxury and did sweet fa, forbidding the majority of aid to enter the stricken areas. Two completely different cicumstances. No decent thinking person agreed with aparthied or Mandela being imprisoned, but Suu Kyi will be dead and buried if the world keeps along the same path it has trod for the past nearly 2 decades.

By: Ian McMahon

Ian McMahon — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 07:09:52 +0000

What Raymond Church said.
Particularly his designation of the section beginning “But perhaps more quietly, another debate continues to be played out …” as rubbish.
Substitute South Africa for Myanmar and Nelson Mandela for Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and it’s the same sort of mealy mouthed “pragmatism” that was once trotted out in a bid to undermine sanctions against Apartheid.

By: RaymondChurch

RaymondChurch — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 06:44:35 +0000

I’m with you Anne and Liz

By: RaymondChurch

RaymondChurch — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 06:42:24 +0000

As usual we get the howls of indignation from the leaders of the so called civilised democratic world, whenever Aung San Suu Kye has her house arrest extended. That China and Russia call the tune in the weak kneed UN is an indictment on the gutless spineless attitude of the not so major powers in the world game. The US, the UK, The UE , and the wimps on Burmas back and front doorsteps in Asia and here in Australia. Are we so dependent on trade with China that we are too scared to tell them to f off until this woman the legitimate leader of her country and the millions of Burmese who support her are released from the tyranny and poverty they are forced to endure under the despot generals who should be despatched with a bullet to the head.
I dont ever recall Russia and China being taken to task in a meaningful way by the almighty democracies. Just more useless sanctions which at the end of the day achieve nothing.

How long would it take China and Russia to agree to eliminate these military bastards if the world said join us or accept trade sanctions. Of course it is a big call. This situation demands a big call. How long would those two dictatorships cope with trade embargos from their biggest wealthiest countries. Not long. It takes courage and guts to stand up to these supporters of the Burmese military, it is to our continued shame the world does nothing meaningful.

Incidently to the author of this rubbish…But, perhaps more quietly, another debate continues to be played out — should Daw Aung San Suu Kyi be the focus of Western government’s Myanmar policies?

It’s an argument that, for most of the past 20 years, has been unthinkable, bordering on sacrilegious.

“No matter how great her sacrifice, the future of one country cannot revolve around the actions and ideas of one person,” Virginia Moncrieff wrote in The Huffington Post last month. “What has happened to this extraordinary woman is of course criminal. But there are 48 million other Burmese people and they cannot continue to be held captive while the international community listens to, and complies with Daw Suu’s policies of sanctions.”

I believe the Burmese people want her released and would support any move to bring it about. They just need our help.

By: Anne Coulthurst

Anne Coulthurst — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 06:21:44 +0000

Call me cynical, but the long-suffering Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and poor, wretched Burma will forever languish just so long as the West, including Australia, values its commercial interests with China more highly. Our crocodile tears will continue, along with those for Darfur, Zimbabwe, etc.

By: Jim Reiher

Jim Reiher — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:49:36 +0000

I really like your posts Liz45. I certainly agree with your concerns (on more than one issue it seems).

By: Liz45

Liz45 — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:41:41 +0000

I recall during the horrific incidents of violence that we witnessed in the past by the military regime in Burma, that the then Howard Government contributed to the training of the ‘police’ in Burma. I’d like to know if that is indeed a fact, and if it’s continuing under the Rudd Government? If so, it should cease immediately. I object to any of Australia’s recources contributing to this cruel and vicious regime! Otherwise, our protestations are a joke!

By: Jim Reiher

Jim Reiher — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 04:17:43 +0000

It is a brave writer who attempts to say that other forms of government might work … at least satisfactorily….or at least enough… so lets not jump up and down about the benefits of democracy. Especially when it has to do with oppressed democracy workers, like Aung San Suu Kye.

I wonder if democracy’s lack of spine in tackling climate change, has anything to do with a growing off-handedness about democracy generally?

I have heard so many people say:
- “Democracy should be able to deal with climate change, but it probably wont.”
- “Politicians in a democracy are more interested in serving the interests of their big donors, instead of doing what really needs to be done - like with climate change, but also in other areas”.
- “Democracies are led by leaders who are always thinking short term, the next election, how many votes will be mustered or lost… that they have no time for serious long term planning that actually costs something in the short run”.
- etc

With that kind of thinking being said these days, it is not all that hard to become less committed to democracies. They are just one of many types of flawed government systems right?

But the alternatives are not pretty. Virtually every option other than flawed democracy, is much worse for their people.

It is time to think again about the importance of democracy and not be clouded by democracies failings (as big as they can be at times… like now… with really fighting climate change).

Burma would be better off under a genuine (imperfect) democracy. It would be miles ahead of the current military regime that allowed tens of thousands of their own people to perish by forbidding foreign aid during recent crises. It would be much better than the current system that slaughtered peaceful Buddhists in the streets when they protested peacefully against corruption in government. It would be much much better than one of the worst governments currently on the face of the earth.

And some people seriously want us to pretend we can forget all that and deal with them like any other imperfect government in the world? No. There is a line that must be drawn somewhere. And the current military government of Burma has definitely crossed that line.