The Idea of Freedom in Burma and the Political Thought of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

Author(s): Josef Silverstein

Source: Pacific Affairs, Vol. 69, No. 2 (Summer, 1996), pp. 211-228
Published by: Pacific Affairs, University of British Columbia
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2760725 .
Accessed: 11/10/2013 04:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Pacific Affairs, University of British Columbia is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Pacific Affairs.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The Idea of Freedom in Burma
and the Political Thought of
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi
Josef Silverstein*

THERE is a serious political struggle in progress in Burma today which

turnson the idea of freedom. Since September 18, 1988, when the
militaryviolentlysuppresseda peaceful democraticrevolution,itsleaders,
organized as the State Law and Order RestorationCommittee(SLORC),
have ruled bymartiallaw.AlthoughSLORC alloweda freeand fairelection
on May 27, 1990 and the National League for Democracy (NLD) was
chosen overwhelmingly to forma newparliamentand establishdemocratic
rule, the decision of the people was ignored and the parliament was not
allowed to form. Instead, SLORC proceeded to perpetuate itsrule by
pressuringdelegates it selectedto a nationalconventionit formedto write
a constitutionit dictated,to insureitsgoals would be achieved.'
Do the Burmese people have the rightto decide how to be governed
and by whom, or do those who seized power by force have the rightto
constructthe politicalforms,make the rules and governas theysee fit?Is
freedom,in the broadest sense, a part of Burmese thoughtand tradition
or is it a relativelyrecent addition, claimed only by the Westernized
intelligentsiaand not bythe majorityof the people? Is freedomindividual
or collective?
These and other questions are not new; theywere raised during the
Burmese quest for independence and, later, in the struggle against
authoritarianismof both the Leftand the Right.When given the oppor-
tunitythrough free and open elections, an overwhelmingmajorityof
Burmese uphold the standardof freedomand popular rule againstthose
who would denyit.

* The original draftof this revised and updated paper was read at the Conference on the Idea
4-5, 1994.
of Freedom in Asia, held at the Australian National University,July
l "Statement of Daniel Aung, Member of SLORC's National Convention Panel of Chairmen and
Political PartyGroup on the Reasons whyhe leftthe Convention and came to the liberated area of
Manerplaw" (Manerplaw, May 1, 1994, Mimeographed).

211

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PacificAffairs

Today, there is a single dominantvoice in defense of freedomand a

returnto democraticself-rule.When Daw Aung San Suu Kyistepped for-
ward in August 1988, in the midstof the popular peaceful revolution,she
instantlybecame the leader who united the people in theirquest forfree-
dom and democracy.Fromthemomentshe movedintothe politicalarena,
she spoke unflinchingly to thosein powerand challengedtheirrightto rule
and denythe freedomwhichthepeople won fromthe Britishfourdecades
earlier. As the daughter of Burma's leader, Aung San, who broughtthe
nation to the edge of independence in 1947 onlyto be assassinatedbefore
achievingthatgoal, she appeared to havepickedup herfather'smantleand
was readyto lead Burma's second struggleforfreedom- thistimeagainst
the armyher fathercreated.
OnJuly20, 1989,Daw Aung San Suu Kyiwas placed underhouse arrest
and denied freedomto communicatewithfamily,political followersand
party,although no formalchargeswere filedand no trialwas held. Over
time,the termsofher confinement weremodified;onJuly10, 1995,she was
released and given the same limitedrightsother people in Burma were
allowed.
It is the thesisof thispaper thatthe idea of freedomin Burma has two
sources, one deeply embedded in Burma's religion and culture and the
other,ideas and values broughtto Burma bythe Britishrulersfollowing
theirconquest. By the beginningof the twentieth centurythe twostreams
merged and, today,the idea of freedomin Burma is a mixtureof the two
traditions.
A furtherargumentof thispaper is thatDaw Aung San Suu Kyi'sidea of
freedomis in the mainstreamof Burmese thoughtand, therefore,easily
understood and widelyaccepted by the people. From the outset of her
involvementin thepeacefulpoliticalstruggle,she offereda freshvisionofa
freeBurma where the people mightenjoy self-ruleand basic human and
civilrights.The Burmamilitary rulersand theirsupportersabroad oftensay
thatpoliticalfreedomis an alien idea withno rootsin Burma. But,as Daw
Aung San Suu Kyihas argued, the idea of freedomin Burma has itsroots
in the Buddhism,customsand traditionseven thoughit was not claimed
in itsown rightbeforethe adventof colonial rule.

THE ROOTS AND EVOLUTION OF DEMOCRATIC ASPIRATIONS

Theravada Buddhism, the faith of an overwhelming majorityof

Burmese,centerson a basic contradiction:all livingthingsare lashed to the
wheel of rebirthbut onlyman has the power and freedomto escape ifhe
accepts (1) the four noble truths regarding suffering,attachment,
impermanenceand escape and (2) theeight-fold path,thewayofsalvation.
"Each man has in him thepotentialto realizethetruththroughhis ownwill

212

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Freedom
in Burmaand Daw AungSan Suu Kyi

and endeavorand to help othersto realizeit."2The Buddha also taughtthat

men mustthinkforthemselvesand testthetruthofthingstheyhear and are
told as truth.3
At the same time,Burmese Buddhiststraditionallybelieved thatthe
socio-politicalsystemwas somethingtheycould not effect.Althoughthey
believed thateveryoneand everything was subjectto the law of imperma-
nence and change - a fundamentalassumptionof Buddhism- theydid
not speculate about alternativepoliticalformsin the secularworld.Since
theirthoughtsand actionswereconcentratedon activity in thisexistenceso
as to improvethose in the next, theyfound no reason to reflectupon or
concern themselveswith the political and social systemin which they
existed. Thus, Burmese Buddhistsnevermade the intellectualleap from
freedomin the religiousrealmto the political.
Burmese traditionincorporated the idea of a strongstate under an
absolutemonarch.ManybelievethatBuddhistpoliticalthoughtarguesthat
men originallylivedin a stateofnaturewheretheywerevirtuous,respected
therightsofothersand fulfilledtheirobligationsconsciously. However,over
time,theirbehaviordegenerated to anarchyand terrorand, to overcome
this,theyunited to elect one amongstthemto be kingand entrustedhim
with power to enforce the laws and maintain order. A good king was
just, humble,penitent,non-
"expected to be charitable,moral,sacrificing,
wrathful, nonviolent,patientand harmless."4
But once kingshipwas established, its holders assumed unbridled
authorityand theirpowerrested,not on contractand election,but on con-
trolof the military,
wealth,territoryand charisma.Obedience to the ruler
became a quasi-religiousduty.

2Aung San Suu Kyi,FreedomFromFearand OtherWritings (London: Penguin Books, 1991), p. 174.
3Winston L. King, A ThousandLivesAway:Buddhismin Contemporary Burma (Cambridge: Harvard
UniversityPress, 1964), pp. 117-18.
4 The "contract theoryof the State" in Buddhist thought is not to be confused withthe Western

liberal formulation. Whereas scholars, such as Balkristna G. Gokale, in "EarlyBuddhist Kingship,"

JournalofAsian Studies,vol. 26, no. 1 (Nov. 1966), pp. 16-22, advanced the argument that kingship
evolved from a decision of the community to raise one amongst them to uphold and enforce the
dhammaand the moral order, William Koenig, The BurmesePolity,1752-1819 (Ann Arbor: Michigan
Papers on South and Southeast Asia, No. 34, 1990), p. 71, offersa differenttheory. "The ultimate
source of sovereigntyin Burmese political thought could never have resided in the people because
the people were by definition immoral. The consecration oath of Burmese kings was actually a
pledged [sic] of loyaltyto dhamnma,wherein lay the ultimatesource of authority.The legitimacyof the
state was rooted in the enforcementof the moral law in society."

213

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PacificAffairs

In theorythestate,as a reflectionoftheking,was strongand controlled

fromthe center;in practice,it lefta greatdeal of room forindividualfree-
dom. Officeholding in Burma was dependent upon the king'swhim,and
a commissionto hold officecould come to an end at anytime,and certainly
withthe king's death. Each kingcould void all acts and ordersof his pre-
decessors; each change of kings saw an administrativebreakdown as
appointees had to receivenew commissions.5Each new ruleradopted the
systemof his predecessor as his own, and never thoughtabout how to
improveand make it more lasting.The Burma stateproved to be onlyas
strongas the kingwho controlledit.
Freedom in thesystemwas to be seen at thevillagelevel.Evenwhen the
systemwas under a strongking,hisrepresentative had limitedpowers- tax
collection,commandperformanceofservicesand adjudicationofdisputes.
In mostothermattersconcerningthe peoples' lives,he did not interfere.
Withonlyshortperiodsofstrongkings,thedirectauthority of themonarch
was feltonlysporadicallybylocal leaders and theirfollowers,especiallyin
areas lyingat greatdistancesfromthe palace; thisresultedin thevillagers
controllingmostof theirown affairs.
Although Burmese village societywas composed of twobroad social
classes, ahmudan- thosewho were obligatedformilitaryor otherservice
-and athi- thosewho paid rentforland and were obligatedforvarious
serviceswhichmightbe demanded bytheirpatronsor protectors, therewas
mobilitybetween classes and easy intermarriage.6Women enjoyed great
freedomin marriage,divorce,inheritanceand propertyownership.The
people werenot tiedto theland; and giventhefactthatthecountryside was
underpopulated,individualscould escape fromtoo demandingpatronsby
movingawayand swearingallegiance to a new protector.
The minorities,livingin the hills surroundingthe Burma heartland,
who accepted the nominal suzeraintyof the Burman monarchs,in fact,
enjoyed greatfreedomthroughcontinuingto governthemselvesin their
traditionalways,practicingand preservingtheirculturesand social institu-
tionsand using theirown languages.
In Burma, beforeBritishrule, freedomwas implicitin Buddhismand
explicitlypracticedbyBurmansand non-Burmansalikewithouteverbeing
extractedand claimed as an independentgood.

'Koenig, BurmesePolity,pp. 92-93; 103-07.

6 J. S. Furnivall, The Political EconomyofBurma, 2d rev. ed. byJ. R. Andrus (Rangoon: Burma
Book Club,1938),pp. 38-39.

214

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Freedomin Burma and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

THE GREAT TRANSFORMATIONUNDER BRITISH RULE

British colonial rule spawned a revolution in thought and action. It

introduced a whole new way of looking at politics and society. Because the
colonial system was concerned only with the here and now and not with
the hereafter,it challenged the fatalism of those who believed that nothing
could be done about this existence and concerned themselves only with the
next.
The British quickly proved that they were more efficient than their
indigenous predecessors in establishing and maintaining authoritarian
rule. Their system rested on important principles: that the state and its
rulers were of this world; that authoritywas based on power and not divine
inspiration; that the state and its officerscould be challenged when either
transcended the legal limits. The British did not come to Burma to intro-
duce Western ideas of libertyand freedom; those and other ideas entered
Burma as a by-product of their authority and concern for the rule of law,
property rightsand order.
The initial priorities of the new systemwere to provide strong adminis-
tration and domestic tranquilityin order to encourage investment, trade,
development of economic resources and profit.To run the state as cheaply
as possible, the Britishencouraged private investment,mainly fromEurope,
to develop and expand the economy and allowed Indians, with whom they
had worked for more than two centuries, to come to Burma and fill the
lower ranks of the administration, police and militaryand serve as money-
lenders in the villages and shopkeepers in the cities.
Church and State were separated; the British rulers, not wishing to
interfereor assume responsibilityfor an alien faith,cast the Buddhist clergy
adrift.7
Monastic education continued in the rural areas under the sangha
(order of monks). However, the knowledge and skillsimparted were largely
unusable for employment in government and business. To teach new ideas,
skills and language, the colonial rulers encouraged Christian churches to
establish schools and provide an English education. In addition to math,
science and the English language, the missionaryschools included the study
of British history, thought and institutions which exalted the political
success of the British in building a strong state at home and an empire
abroad. This was meant to inculcate respect for an appreciation of what
colonial rule meant.

I Donald Eugene Smith, Religionand Politicsin Burma (Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress,

1965), pp. 43-57.

215

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PacificAffairs

The Britishhad no intentionofmakingBurmansintoEnglishmenand

assimilatingthem.The colonial rulersrecognizedthattheyweredisplacing
a value and social systemwith which the majorityof the people still
identified,and thatnewWesternideas and practicesweredividingthelocal
population betweenthosewho adopted thenew and thosewho held tightly
to the old. To rallysupport forBritainduringWorldWar I, the colonial
governmenttriedto unite the contradictory ideas of loyaltyto empireand
patriotismto Burma througha policycalled the "ImperialIdea," but had
littlesuccess.8
It was in thisnew and changingcontextthatthe idea of freedomtook
on meaningfortheBurmans.Set in a legal and constitutional framework, it
theoretically applied to all: individual and group; ruler and ruled;
indigenous and alien. To use and enjoy it required knowledgeof the law,
the politicalsystemand experience.
While the Britishfound it convenientadministratively tojoin Burma
to India as a province,it quicklyworkedto theirdisadvantagepoliticallyas
the emergingBurman elite emulated the Indians in theirown demands
forpolitical reform,greaterparticipationin governance and more free-
dom. By 1923, Burma,like India, had a partiallyelected legislativecouncil
and ministersin the Governor's Council; under the 1935 constitution,
Burma was separated from India and given responsible government
whereinfourBurmansservedas primeministers.
Before the beginning of the present century,the new emerging
Burman elite began to use the politicalfreedoms,implicitin thenew insti-
tutions,in defenseof tradition.In 1897, it sponsorednonclericalBuddhist
schools with a Western-typecurriculum modeled afterthe missionary
schools. Early in this century it formed the Young Men's Buddhist
Association,on theWesternmodel of theYMCA,and launched a campaign
to reviveBuddhismamongstBurmans;and later,to campaignagainstdes-
ecrationofand disrespectforreligiousbuildingsand areas bynon-Buddhist
visitors.9
Between the First and Second World Wars, freedom and political
developmentwent hand-in-hand,but followedtwodifferent paths; while
theurban populationmovedin themainstreamofconstitutionalism, liberal
democracyand independence, the ruralpopulation moved in a different
direction - one which led back to the values and institutionsof the
precolonialperiod."0

8 During World War I, the British sought to promote the "Imperial Idea," by which the
contradictoryideas of loyaltyto empire and patriotismto Burma were united. See John F. Cady, A
HistoryofModernBurma (Ithaca: Cornell UniversityPress, 1958), pp. 195-99.
9 Maung Maung Pye, Burmain theCrucible(Madras: KhittayaPublishing House, no date), pp. 3-4.
lo For a good briefdiscussion of the local politics of this period and the division of the General
Council of Burmese Association into two groups, see Ba Maw, Breakthrough in Burma: Memoirsof
Revolution1939-1946 (New Haven: Yale UniversityPress, 1968), pp. 7-15; and Maung Htin Aung, A
HistoryofBurma (New York: Columbia UniversityPress, 1967), pp. 282-98.

216

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 in Burmaand Daw AungSan Suu Kyi
Freedom

The WesternizedBurmansin the mainstreamexercisedtheirfreedom

throughpartyformation,voting,participationin parliamentand a variety
of direct action activities. The younger Western-educated Burmans
expanded theidea offreedomthroughtheuse ofstrikesto achievepolitical
and social ends,theuse oftheBurmeselanguagein writingand publication
to reviveinterestand pride, the studyand adoption of Westernliterature
to acquire worldknowledgeand the mobilizationofworkersand peasants
for economic and social ends. Within this mainstream,the competing
ideologies of Europe - communism,fascism,nationalism,democracyand
others - found adherents and inspired the formationof local political
movements.The Britishtried to channel some of these developments
withinthe institutionalchangeswhichgave Burmansgreaterparticipation
in politicsand curb thosewhichtheysaw as a threatto theirrule and long-
termpolitical/economicinterests.
Freedom also applied to communication:speech,publicationand writ-
ing. Young Burman intellectuals formed the Dobama (We Burman)
movementwhichdemanded thatitsmembersbe addressedwiththe salu-
tation,Thakin(master);advocatedtherevivaland updatingof theBurmese
language; and quickly transformedthe cultural message to a political
nationalistone byadvocating,"Burmaforthe Burmese."I In addition to
newspapersin Burmese,Westernnovelswere adapted to Burman locales
and givena local veneer.They graduallygave wayto Burman stories,char-
actersand issues. By the end of the 1930s,novels,criticalof foreignrule,
modern Buddhistmonkswho cloaked violationofvowsunder theiryellow
robes and otherlocal subjectsindicatedhowwidespreadfreedomofspeech
had become.
Freedom in the mainstreammeant manythings- personal, social,
intellectualand political- and led to greaterparticipationbythepeople in
politicalorganizations,electionsand directaction outside the legal limits.
Together, theyreflecteda fundamentalchange in the popular outlook
towardpolitics.Man, theywere comingto believe,could effecthis political
conditionin thisexistenceand it did not depend upon his kharma.
A second streamof politicallyaroused Burmanslooked in a different
direction. Using their new-foundpolitical freedoms, they organized
WunthanuAthins(nationalistgroups), offshootsof the national General
Council of Burmese Associations, primarilyin the rural areas, against
corruption,taxation and other governmentand privateactivitieswhich
were seen as contrary to traditional Burmese/Buddhist values. They
rejected the emphasis placed on Westernpolitical developmentby their

" Khin Yi, TheDobama Movementin Burma (1930-1938) (Ithaca: Cornell UniversitySoutheast
Asia Program, Monograph No. 2, 1988).

217

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PacificAffairs

urban counterpartsand sought remedies to theirown problems - the

cultivationand sale of agriculturalproducts in an economic systemof
landlords,tenancy,moneylendingand theBritishsystemof taxationwithits
penalties of being displaced fromthe land under laws theydid not fully
understandand whichalwaysseemed to workagainstthem.
ManyWestern-educatedWunthanuleaders found themselvesmore in
tune withthe politicallyactivemonksthanwiththeirurban counterparts.
Contraryto the traditionalrestrictionson the sangha -not to become
involvedin politics- the GeneralCouncilSanghaSametggi, a politicalorga-
nization of monks,played a strongrole in the ruralareas, mobilizingand
agitatingagainst Britishrule and preaching a message thatcolonialism
threatened Buddhism. While their sermons and political activitywere
rejected by conservativemonks and Buddhist orders,theyfound a wide
audience amongstthe peasants,especiallyamongstwomen.Two in partic-
ular,U Ottama and U Wisara,gained national attention;theirarrestand
imprisonment onlystrengthened theirhold on theirfollowers,
and deathin
jail made themmartyrs in the nationalstruggleforindependence.12
Out of thismovementcame the mostdirectchallenge to Britishrule,
the Saya San Revolt in 1930. Led by an ex-monk,it sought to force the
Britishout and restorethe monarchy.Byusingmagic and amuletsand imi-
tatingsome of theroyalritualto claimtheformerthrone,therevolt,mainly
in central/lowerBurma, drewmodest rural supportand hardlyanyfrom
theurban areas. Itsfailuremarkedtheend ofinwardand backward-looking
movements."3
In theminority areas surroundingBurmaproper,thepeople continued
to live apart from the Burmans. While the latter moved along the
constitutionalline towardeventualdominion status,the Shan Stateswere
grouped together in a separate federation which reinforced the
perpetuation of traditional rule. The changes in education and the
opportunitiesto learn about and exercisepoliticalfreedomin the Burman
area were not available in the hill areas; there, traditionalpatterns of
behaviorexistedand onlythe sons ofchiefs,whowereeducated in Western
schools,acquired a different outlook.

CHALLENGES TO THE IDEA OF FREEDOM AND THE POLITICS OF INDEPENDENCE

The shortinterludeofJapanese controlof Burma lefta legacywhich

seemed to reversethe growingtrendtowardfreedom.Justpriorto the out-
breakof the PacificWar,whenAung San secretlyleftBurmato seek foreign
help in freeinghis country,itis believedthat,followinghis arrivalinJapan,

12 Cady, ModernBurma,p. 231; Smith, Religionand Politics,pp. 92-107.

'3 Cady, Modern Burma, pp. 309-18; Patricia Herbert, The Hsaya San Rebellion (1930-1932)
Reappraised(Melbourne: Monash UniversityCentre of Southeast Asia Studies, 1982), workingpaper
no. 27.

218

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Freedom
in Burmaand Daw AungSan Suu Kyi

he wrote"Blue PrintforBurma"whichconvincedhis hoststhathe shared

theirideas of a strongtotalitarianstate.
Whatwewantis a strongstateadministration as exemplifiedin Germany and
Italy.Thereshallbe onlyone nation,one state,one party,
one leader.There
shallbe no parliamentary [sic] opposition,no nonsenseof individualism.
Everyone mustsubmittosate[sic]whichissupremeovertheindividual.14
During the earlywar period, he was not alone in employingthe lan-
guage of fascism.Dr. Ba Maw,thewartimehead of state,included it in his
speeches and the Burma wartimeDeclaration of Independence. Withthe
approvalof hisJapaneseadvisors,it said,
The NewStateofBurma,is.. establishedupontheprinciple ofBurmeseunity
in one blood,one voiceand one leader.It wasnationaldisintegration
which
destroyed theBurmesepeople in thepastand theyare determined thatthis
shallneverhappenagain."5
When Aung San's essay is read togetherwith the total body of his
writings and speeches of boththewarand postwarperiod,itis clear thatthe
ideas in "Blue Print for Burma" were not central to this thought. The
wartimestatementsand writingsof Dr. Ba Maw,too, were a reflectionof
the times and a direct response to Japanese demands."6 There is no
evidence thatdictatorshipin place of freedomwas the desire of these and
otherleaders as a permanentconditionin Burma.
In 1944,Burmesemilitaryand civilianleadersmetsecretlyand formed
a revolutionaryorganizationand issued a manifesto.It had twoobjectives:
the expulsion of theJapanese and the writingof a constitutionfora free
Burma. They gave greatest emphasis to the building of a free society
whereinthe people would enjoy the freedomand rightscommon to peo-
ple living in free societies as well as fromtheir ancient traditions.The
manifestocalled forthe freedomsof person, speech and thought;it also
called for"freedomto followand developone's ownlanguageand culture."
It anticipatedsome kind of union withthe hill peoples bycallingfor"the

14 Aung San, "Blue Print for Burma," in JosefSilverstein,ThePoliticalLegacyofAung San, rev. ed.

(Ithaca: Cornell University Southeast Asia Program, 1993), pp. 19-22. See headnote about its
disputed origin. Dr. Maung Maung cited it as the theoretical basis for the militarydictatorshipthen
in existence in Burma. Maung Maung, Burmaand GeneralNe Win(New York: Asia Publishing House,
1969), pp. 298-99.
15 "Declaration of Independence of Burma," Burma,vol. 1, no. 1, (Sept. 1994) (Rangoon: The

Foreign AffairsAssociation). For the views on this by the man who said he wrote it, see, Ba Maw,
Breakthrough in Burma,p. 327.
16Thakin Nu, Burma UndertheJapanese: Picturesand Portraits(London: Macmillan and Co., 1954),
pp. 54-59; Ba Maw, Breakthrough in Burma,pp. 95-97; 279-82.

219

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Pa-cfic
Affairs

state to provide adequate safeguardsin respect of economic, social and

political interests of the minorities."'17
The wartimegoals offreedomand rightswererealizedfouryearslater,
in 1948, when a freelychosen constituentassemblywroteBurma's first
constitutionfortheirforthcoming independentstate.
The politicalactivityin the Burma heartlandimmediatelyafterthewar
was not matchedin the hill areas. But thewar had itsimpactupon the hill
minoritiesand theywereofdifferent mindsabout theirfuture.Some feared
the prospect of an independent Burma under Burman rule and sought
eitherindependence or continued Britishrule. In 1946, and again a year
later,severalleaders of differentminoritygroupsmet at Panglong,in the
Shan States,to discusstheirpoliticalfuture;at the second meeting,several
freelyagreed to join the Burmans in formingan independent federal
union.
The Karens were not among those who opted forunion. They tradi-
tionally feared Burman domination and looked to the British for
protection;theystillhad vividmemoriesof assaultsbyunitsof the young
Burma armyin 1942. During thewaryears,Aung San workedto convince
the Karensthatin a futureindependentBurma the twocould livetogether
peacefully,and the Karens could share power and enjoy equal statuswith
the Burmans. Despite his efforts, the majorityof Karen leaders opted out
of the proposed union. The question of the politicalfutureof the Karens
was not resolvedat the constitutionalconvention;and while the constitu-
tional authors leftthe issue of theirplace in independent Burma to be
resolvedafterindependence, Burma-Karenarmed conflictgrew.In 1949,
the Karenswentinto open revolt.
When Burma became a freenation in 1948, the idea of freedomwas
well established. The two traditionshad come together;fromthe pre-
colonial past, man inherited the idea that he was free to determine his
futuredestinybythe wayhe lived; fromthe colonial past he learned that
governmentwas not divinelyordained and unchangeable. Freedom to
achieve thingsin thisworldbecame as real as freedomto achieve themin
the next.

THE QUEST FOR UNITY AND DEMOCRACY: THE TRIUMPH OF DICTATORSHIP

Written in haste before resolution of socially divisive problems, the

constitutionincluded manycontradictionsgivingriseto unrest,revoltand
anti-freedom overthrew
forceswhich,eventually, it.It provedeasierto iden-
tifyand definethe idea of freedomthan to translateitintospecificpolitical
institutionsand processes.

l7 AFPFL, FromFascistBondage toNewDemocracy:TheNew Burma in theNew World(Rangoon: Nay

Win KyiPress, 1946 [?]), pp. 13-15.

220

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Freedomin Burma and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

Two issues suggest the dimensions of the problem. Freedom and

equality were expressed in the granting of religious freedom to all,
regardless of their faith; at the same time, the constitution declared that the
"State also recognized the special position of Buddhism as the faith
professed by the great majority of the citizens of the Union.""8 Many
Buddhists took this to mean that the faith should be given the status of the
state religion. In 1961, the parliament passed a constitutional amendment
carrying out this objective. But, instead of uniting the nation, it divided
the society because non-Buddhists saw the amendment as ending the
guarantee of religious equality and freedom. Even the passage of another
amendment, to assure members of other faiths that their rights and
privileges stillwere protected, did not heal the social wounds.
An even thornier issue arose over whether or not the ethnic minorities
and the Burman majority enjoyed equal political freedom and power. Was
Burma a federal or unitary state? In an address to the 1947 preconstitu-
tional convention, Aung San said, "In my opinion, it will not be feasible to
set up a Unitary State. We must set up a Union with properly regulated
provisions as should be made to safeguard the rights of National
Minorities."19
But shortlyafterthe Union of Burma came into existence, the Attorney
General said, while arguing a case before the Supreme Court, that Burma's
system of government was federal in theory and unitary in practice. His
statement only confirmed what many of the larger minority groups had
come to realize as theysought to preserve and protect their cultures in their
own areas against the policies of Burmanization emanating from Rangoon.
This led to misunderstandings, widespread revolt,calls for secession and the
creation of independent states. Misunderstandings and misinterpretations
such as these together with new anti-democratic, anti-freedom forces
threatened to destroy the new state and constitution.
On the political left,the Burma Communist partysought to overthrow
the government and erect a Marxist dictatorship; on the right, various
indigenous ethnic groups rose in revolt either to secede from the union or
gain greater autonomy in their historic areas. In addition, Nationalist
Chinese troops, seeking to find refuge from their Communist enemies,
entered Burma and refused to be disarmed or accept Burmese rule. To
defend against these challenges, the government turned to the militaryto
hold the nation together and protect it from its enemies instead of relying

18 ConstitutionalAssembly,The ConstitutionoftheUnion ofBurma (Rangoon: Superintendent,

Printingand Stationery,1948), no. 21 (1, 2).
19JosefSilverstein,Political Legacy, p. 158.

221

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PacificAffairs

on political means to achieve solutionsand voluntarycompliance.20The

Burma armed forcesmisusedmartiallaw in thewarzones and theiractions
clashed withthe constitutionally guaranteedfreedomsof the people in the
area. This undermined the public's faithin the federal systemand the
centralgovernmentin Rangoon. Worstof all, it laid the foundationforthe
belief amongst the members of the militarythat only theywere loyal
defendersof the constitutionand protectorsof the state,and theycame to
see themselvesas outsideand above the law.
Also duringthefirstdecade ofindependence,thereweremen in power
who used theirauthoritywithoutregardforthe restraintsand restrictions
embodied in the constitutionand the lawsof the land. Manyabused their
mandate to governbypassinglegislationwithoutadequate debate or con-
siderationof the rightsof the opposition,byinterfering withcivilservants
who triedto performtheirdutiesimpartially, and byusingpolice powerto
intimidatethe pressand public.
Offsettingthese and other abuses were the effortsofjustices of the
High and Supreme Courts to establish a traditionof due process and
protectionof the individualfromarbitrarygovernmentaction. In doing
so, theyruled against the government'suse of preventivedetentionand
other legal deviceswhichviolatedpersonal freedomin the state'spursuit
of itsgoals.21If the idea of freedomwas not upheld and implementedfully
in Burma's time of troubles,it was still the ideal forwhich most of the
politicaland intellectualleaders strove.
From independence until 1962, the constitutionalanchor held firm
and the Burma ship of stateresistedthe challenges to freedom.The man
who stood at the helm duringmostof the period and symbolizedthe ideas
of freedomdrawnfromBuddhistand Westernliberaltraditionswas U Nu,
the successorto Aung San and the elected primeministerduringmostof
the democraticperiod.
Nu's values and ideas were squarely in the mainstreamof Burmese
thought.Using Buddhist storiesand drawingupon the Buddha's teach-
ings,Nu soughtto explain how freeand democraticsocietiesworked,and
taughtthe people thatwhere government'spowerwas limitedand exer-
cised in conformitywith the law, man could fulfillhimselfboth as a
Buddhistand as a citizen.
For Nu, the rule of law was essential for the protectionof freedom.
There were twokindsof law,he once said:

20JosefSilverstein, "Politics in the Shan State: The Question of Secession from the Union of
Burma,"JournalofAsian Studies,vol. 18, no. 1 (Nov. 1958), pp. 43-58.
21 Winston Christian, "Burma's New Constitution and the Supreme Court," Tulane Law Review,

vol. 26, no. 1 (1951), pp. 47-59.

222

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Freedom
in Burmaand Daw AungSan Suu Kyi

Those thatguaranteethefreedomand equalityoftheindividual againstthe

stateand thosethatensurethatindividualfreedomis exercisedwithout
affecting
therightsand freedomofone's neighbours or theorderlyworking
ofsociety....
[T]hissenseoftheruleoflawmustbe createdinthemindsofboth
therulerand theruled,and theremustbe constanteffort to developitand
strengthenituntilitbecomesa partofourverylifeand thought.22
Nu contrastedvoluntaryobedience to law and forcedcompliance.The
freewaywas obedience to law; the forcedwaywas at the point of the gun.
In a democracy,he said, compliance was secured throughthe rule of law;
in a totalitariansocietyitwas gained byforceand fear.
In 1962, the constitutionalanchorwas cut loose. Freedom and limited
government gave way to order and discipline under a military-led
totalitariandictatorship.General Ne Win,who seized power,drewhis ideas
and valuesfromhismilitarytrainingundertheJapaneseand hisyearsas the
unchallengedleader of Burma's armed forces.
Until 1962, Ne Win's public statementsand those of the militaryindi-
cated thathe and the armed forceswere constitutionalists and accepted
democracyand civilianauthority.Followinga 1958 splitin the governing
party,whichthreateneda new civilwar,Ne Win accepted Nu's invitationto
forma temporarycaretakergovernmentto restoreand maintain order
while organizingand carryingout a new election. Speaking as a constitu-
tionalist,he told parliament,"we mustworkto establishwidespread and
effectiveenforcementof the lawsof the land.... In the performanceof this
task...my Governmentwillfullyrespectthe Constitutionalguaranteescon-
cerning justice, freedom and equality. The underlying policy of my
Government is that all those people who respect the Constitutionwill
receiveall the rightsand privilegesthattheyare entitledto. But,thosewho
break the law willbe severelydealt with.23
Four yearslater,thegeneraland thearmedforcesdropped all pretenses
of loyaltyto the constitutionand defenseof freedomas theyoverthrewthe
elected government,abrogated the constitutionand erected a military
dictatorship.The military rulers,noworganizedas theRevolutionary Council
declared,
Burma's"parliamentary democracy" has notonlyfailedto serveoursocialist
development weaknessesand loopholes,its
butalso,due to itsverydefects,
abusesandtheabsenceofa maturepublicopinion,lostsightanddeviated from
thesocialistaims.24

22
Burma Weekly Bulletin(new series), vol. 8, no. 50 (April 5, 1960), p. 459.
23
Is TrustVindicated?(Rangoon: Director of Information,Government of the Union of Burma,
1960), p. 548.
24 Revolutionary Council, BurmeseWayto Socialism (Rangoon: Ministryof Information, 1962),

para. 14.

223

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PacificAffairs

For twelveyears,the RevolutionaryCouncil governed withoutlegal

restraintsand withoutpopular consent.In 1974, it handed over power to
the partyit created and controlled,the Burma SocialistProgramparty,to
rule under a constitutionit wrote.The new fundamentallaw recognized
no inalienablerights;rights,whichweregranted,werelinkedto duties.The
militaryrulerssoughtto stampout freedomand, in thepeacefulrevolution
of 1988, the people soughtto reclaimit.

THE POLITIcAL THOUGHTOF DAWAUNGSANSuu Ku

The synthesisof the twotraditionsis clearlyexpressedin the essay,"In
Quest of Democracy."Writingin 1988, before her arrest,Aung San Suu
Kyifound nothingnew in the rhetoricof the opponents of freedomand
democracywho questioned the abilityof the people tojudge whatwas best
for the nation and condemned the liberal ideas drawnfromthe Westas
"un-Burmese."She argued thateven withoutthe sophisticatedtechniques
and methods of political and economic analysiscommon to the West,the
Burmese could find answersto the terriblepolitical and socio-economic
conditionsin Burma
byturning tothewordsoftheBuddhaon thefourcausesofdeclineanddecay;
failureto recoverthatwhichhasbeen lost,omissionto repairthatwhichhas
been damaged,disregardforthe need of a reasonableeconomyand the
elevationtoleadershipofmenwithout orlearning,
morality
and applythemto theirsituation.Put in modern terms,she said,
whendemocratic had beenlosttomilitary
rights sufficient
dictatorship efforts
hadnotbeenmadetoregainthem,moralandpolitical valueshadbeenallowed
to deteriorate
without tosavethesituation,
concertedattempts theeconomy
had been badlymanaged,and thecountryhad been ruledbymenwithout
andwisdom."25
integrity
For her,the 1988 peaceful revolutionwas an attemptbythe people to
act as the Buddha had taughtand take back theirrightto rule and reverse
the process of decline.
For Aung San Suu Kyi, the contradiction between Buddhism and
dictatorshipbeginswiththe question about the natureof man. Buddhism,
she argued, places the highestvalue on man who alone has the abilityto
attain the supreme state of Buddhahood. "Each man has in him the
potential to realize it." But under despotic rule, man is valued least, as a
"faceless, mindless - and helpless - mass to be manipulated at will."26
If man is endowed withreason and has the innateabilityto realize his
potential,then the politicalsystemand social environmentmustallow him
freedomto pursue thatend. For Aung San Suu Kyi,onlyin a democratic

25 Fear,pp. 167-79.
Aung San Suu Kyi,Freedomfrom
26 Ibid.,p. 175.

224

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Freedomin Burma and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi

society can man trulyexercise his freedom. Democracy acknowledges the

right to differas well as the duty to settle differencespeacefully.
The idea of law and order, she wrote, is frequentlymisused as an excuse
for oppression. In Burmese, the idea is officiallyexpressed as nyein-wut-pi-
pyar (quiet - crouched - crushed - flattened). Aung San Suu Kyi noted
that a prominent Burmese writerdrew the conclusion that this "made for an
undesirable state of affairs,one which militated against the emergence of an
alert, energetic, progressive citizenry."27She, on the other hand, equated
law withjustice, order and the discipline of a people, satisfied thatjustice
has been done. This could only exist, she argued, where the people's
elected representative made laws and the administrators had no power to
set them aside and replace them with arbitrary decrees. Drawing on
Buddhist precepts, she wrote that the concept of law was based on dhamma,
righteousness or virtue, not on the power to impose harsh and inflexible
rules on a defenseless people. Toward the end of the essay she summed up
the blend of the two traditions by saying that "in their quest of democracy
the people of Burma explore not only the political theories and practices of
the world outside their country,but also the spiritual and intellectual values
that have given shape to their own environment."28
Implicit in her writingsand speeches is the idea that freedom is a uni-
versal idea, which was given modern approval in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights by the UN in 1948. As she noted, Burma voted for the
resolution with no reservations and because it was consistent with the
thought and goals of the nation's founding fathers at the Anti-Fascist
People's Freedom League (AFPFL) preconvention meeting (1947), the
constituent assembly (1947) and the language of the constitution.29
But, forAung San Suu Kyi,freedom was more than constitutional guar-
antees, it was also psychological. In an address which, because of her
imprisonment, she could not deliver at the European Parliament, in
response to being awarded the Sakharov Prize forFreedom of Thought, she
spoke to the people of Burma who lived under corrupting military rule
since 1962. She wrote that,as important as the traditional ideas of freedom
are, man is not trulyfree if he lives in fear. "It is not power that corrupts
but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it and fear of the
scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it." Fear stifles and
slowlydestroys all sense of rightand wrong. Fear contributes to corruption;
"when fear is rife corruption in all forms becomes entrenched.""o

27 Ibid.,p. 177.
28 Ibid., p. 178.
29 Ministryof Information,Burma'sFightforFreedom(Rangoon, 1948). See AFPFL Preconvention
forthe original fourteenpoints (arts. 6, 7, p. 58); forthe actual Seven Points Directive Resolution, see
art. 4, p. 93.
3 Aung San Suu Kyi,Freedom fromFear,p. 181.

225

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PacificAffairs

Aung San Suu Kyidemonstratedher courage in the face of threatand

showedthatshe would not be intimidatedor made fearful.Itwas her model
of courage which sustained the people who looked to her forleadership.
Recallingsomethingher fathersaid in an earliertimeof troubles,
Democracy is the only ideology which is consistent with freedom. It is an
ideology that promotes and strengthens peace. It is therefore the only ideology
that promotes and strengthens peace. It is therefore the only ideology we
should aim for.31

She said that is the reason whyshe was participatingin the strugglefor
freedomand democracy.
Aung San Suu Kyihas givenmuch thoughtto the question ofwhether
or not the priorityof economic beforepoliticalgrowthis thewayto bring
happiness and democratic rule to Burma. Starting from the Burmese
saying, "Morality (sila) can be upheld only when the stomach is full," she
argued that the maxim was "hardlya faithfulreflection of what actually goes
on in human society."While conceding that the need to survive has driven
men to crime and immorality,"it is equally evident that the possession of a
significant surplus of material goods has never been a guarantee against
covetousness, rapacity and the infinite varietyof vice and pain that spring
from such passion."

Given that man's greed can be a pit as bottomless as his stomach and that a
psychological sense of deprivation can persist beyond the point where basic
needs have been adequately met, it can hardly be expected that an increase in
material prosperity alone would ensure even a decline in economic strife,let
alone a mitigation of those myriad other forces that spawn earthly misery.32

For Aung San Suu Kyi, true development involves much more than
mere economic growth.

At its heart there must be a sense of empowerment and inner fulfillment.This

alone will ensure that human and cultural values remain paramount in a world
where political leadership is often synonymous with tyrannyand the rule of a
narrow elite. People's participation in social and political transformation is
the central issue of our time.33

It is against this background that her recentlyexpressed ideas about for-

eign investment in Burma must be considered. Writing in Mainichi Daily
News of February 5, 1996 she said it was not yet time for foreign investment
in Burma. Instead, she argued, businesses should invest in democracy for
Burma if only for the sake of their profits. "Businesses that frame their

51
"Speech at Shwedagon Pagoda," Aung San Suu Kyi,Freedom fromFear,p. 200.
52
Aung San Suu Kyi, Toward a True Refuge(Oxford: Refugee Studies Programme with the
Perpetua Press, 1993), p. 17.
31Aung San Suu Kyi,Empowerment for a CultureofPeace and Development(Address to the World
Commission on Culture and Development, Manila, 21 Nov. 1994, Mimeographed), p. 10.

226

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Freedom
in Burmaand Daw AungSan Suu Kyi

investmentpolicieswitha viewto promotingan open securepoliticalsystem

based on confidence and credibilitywillfindtheyare also promotingan
open, secureeconomybased on confidenceand credibility whereoptimum
returnscan be expected byinvestors."
Aung San Suu Kyi believes that the resolution of all problems and
differencesis best achieved throughfreediscussionor dialogue.
I havealwaysaskedfordialogue....Butdialogueis nota debate.Therewillbe
disagreements and arguments.Dialoguedoes notinvolvewinners and losers.
It is nota questionoflosingface.It involves
finding
thebestsolutions
forthe
country.34

In expressingher ideas about freedom,dialogue and democracy,she

has said thatwhile thereis no one formof democracy,thatitwill have its
own characteristics in each countrywhereit exists,thereis a basic require-
ment that the people should be sufficiently empowered to be able to
participatesignificantly in itsgovernance."Withouttheserights,democra-
tic institutionswill be but empty shells incapable of reflectingthe
aspirationsof the people and unable to withstandthe encroachment of
authoritarianism. "35

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi'sleadership and political principleswere put

to the testin November 1995,when she pulled her party'srepresentatives
out of the national convention.In 1993, SLORC convened a national con-
ventionof hand-pickeddelegates to drawup the principlesforthe future
constitutionand directedthemto declare thatthemilitary shallhave a lead-
ing role in government.Despite the outcome of the 1990 election,SLORC
named only 15.34 percentof the elected representatives as delegates,thus
makingthema permanentminority in a bodywhichhad no legitimateright
to execute itscharge.
In addition to being underrepresented,based on the party'svote in
the 1990 election,Aung San Suu Kyigave six additionalreasonsforitswith-
drawal: (1) the conventionwas undemocraticand the rightsand freedoms
of thedelegateswereabridged;(2) theobjectiveand workingproceduresof
the conventionwere not drawnup in consultationwiththe delegates; (3)
papers offeredby delegates were censored and correctedin accordance
withthe wishes of the authorities;(4) decisions were announced before
issueshad been fullydiscussed;(5) decisionsweremade on detailsas wellas
broad principles;and (6) therewas no fixedtimetableforthe convention.
Because the workprocedures of the bodywere "not democraticand the
basic principlesforthe proposed constitutioninclude some whichare not
consonant witha true democratic state,"she called fora new approach,
dialogue, and for"all concerned tojoin togetherin mutualtrustand good-

14 BurmaNet, May 13, 1994.

Aung San Suu Kyi,TranscriptofAung San Suu KyiInterview,
35 Aung San Suu Kyi,Empowerment, p. 9.
Development,

227

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PacificAffairs

will to worktowardbuilding up a genuinelydemocraticnation in accor-

dance with the wishes of the people."36
This action put Daw Aung San Suu Kyiand her fellowleaders on a
collision course withSLORC; and while her statementand action were
denounced as traitorousand NLD delegates were dismissed from the
convention,the confrontationdemonstratedthatshe will speak out and
act withoutfear forprinciplesand ideas which have been central to her
thoughtand action regardlessofwhatthe militarymaydo to her.
The political thoughtof Daw Aung San Suu Kyiis not offeredas an
example of thatof a scholar or reflectivethinkerat workin the abstract.
Rather,itis presentedas an example ofa specialpersonwho,because ofher
name and family,gained an immediateaudience and, byusing language
and expressingideas thepeople understoodand relatedto,was pushed into
the leadership of the revolutionagainsttotalitarianrule. Despite the mili-
tary'seffortto isolateand silence her,theydid not erase her presencefrom
the mind of the people and theirloyaltyto her; her release fromhouse
arrestmade it possibleforher to re-form thebonds thatunitedthem.Aung
San Suu Kyi'sforthright criticismof SLORC's constitutionalideas and the
support of the people in her fearlessdefense of freedomand democracy
make it clear whyshe, and not her militaryopponents,is the one who rep-
resentsthe politicaltraditionof Burma.

CONCLUSION

The idea of freedomin Burma is not contraryto tradition;it has been

partof itfromtheverystart.Burmawas not frozenin timein thefaceofthe
Britishmilitaryvictoriesand the impositionof colonial rule. The Burmese
learned new meanings forfreedom fromthe Britishand the West,and
blended those new meaningswiththeirown beliefsand values. Bythe end
of WorldWar II, the emergentelite spoke of freedomand democracyto
an audience who understood and freelyfollowed in thatdirection. But
Burmawas not destinedto havean easytransition to politicalfreedom;even
afterindependence in 1948, several rebellions erupted challenging the
democracyand authorityof the constitution.
The effortsof the militaryrulers,since 1962, to root out the nascent
democracyof theirpredecessorsand create a totalitariandictatorshipwith
a population of "rice-eatingrobots"failed.The memoryof,and desirefor,
freedomremainedalivein themindsof thepeople. The student-ledpeace-
fulrevolutionprovidedthe means to release thosepent-upmemories;the
speeches of Daw Aung San Suu Kyireacquainted themwiththe meaning
of freedomand rekindledtheirdesireto recoverit.
March1996
NewJersey,
RutgersUniversity,

on theNational Convention
oftheNationalLeagueforDemocracy
36Aung San Suu Kyi, The Observations
(Rangoon: Press Conference Statement,Nov. 22, 1995).

228

This content downloaded from 206.212.0.156 on Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:06:58 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions