N. A. LISTOPADOV

Doctor of Historical Sciences, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation

Myanmar Keywords:, Aung San Suu Kyi, NLD, parliamentary elections, democratic changes

For months, the world has been watching what happens to a frail woman living modestly in an old house on the shores of Yangon's Inya Lake. We are, of course, talking about Do Aung San Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and a fighter for democracy in Myanmar for almost a quarter of a century.

Attention to Suu Kyi increased further when she was elected to the Myanmar Parliament in a legislative by-election on April 1, 2012. Together with the leader of the democratic movement, representatives of the National League for Democracy (NLD) led by her won in 43 out of 45 districts.

A LADY WITHOUT FEAR OR REPROACH

It would seem that this is a fairly ordinary event of a local nature. If not for two important circumstances. First of all, the fact is, of course, that 67-year-old Do Aung San Suu Kyi took part in the elections.

In 1991, she received the Nobel Peace Prize, which was followed by many other international awards. Her attention was not spared even by Hollywood - in 2011, the film about her "Lady" directed by Luc Bessonne was released on the screens of the world. And we should not forget that we are talking about Myanmar, which was ruled by the military for the last half - century - until March 2011.

It all started in March of 1962, when the Revolutionary Council led by General Ne Win came to power as a result of a military coup. Since then, the military regime has undergone various modifications, but the essence has remained the same: all the more or less important issues in the country were solved by officers. In Myanmar's loosely structured society, the army is the most cohesive and organized force, capable of imposing its will on other public institutions.

Until the late 80s of the last century, Suu Kyi led a quite prosperous life as a political scientist at her alma mater, the prestigious British Oxford, as the wife of the Orientalist and Buddhist scholar Michael Ayres. To be precise, it was more likely that she could be called a housewife, even if she was a scientist, raising two sons.

In 1988, a fateful year for both Myanmar and herself, Suu Kyi found herself in Yangon, almost by accident, to take care of her seriously ill mother. In the summer of 1988, a powerful wave of spontaneous popular movement against the authoritarian regime swept through the country, Not Fault for democracy.

Suu Kyi almost immediately became its leader, both because of her personal qualities: courage, willpower, education, intelligence, and the fact that she is the daughter of the national hero, the architect of Myanmar's independence, General Aung San, who died in July 1947 (by the way, Suu Kyi is the author of a very interesting biography of her father). Then, in 1988, the impulse to democracy was suppressed, and the military administration, which in the West was called the junta, came to power as a result of another coup.

Under the military regime, Burma was renamed Myanmar in 1989. The capital of Rangoon, which became Yangon, at the beginning of the new millennium moved to the city of Naypyidaw, built in an open field in the center of the country. The political system of the state did not change.

However, in 1990 the military allowed the holding of parliamentary elections. The Suu Kyi-led NLD also won by a large margin, but the military government never convened parliament. And Suu Kyi has become not only a heroic figure, but also a tragic one.

Of the last two-plus decades of her life, she spent 15 years under house arrest, separated from her family. Several times she announced multi-day hunger strikes. Fragile prisoner own-

in a small house on the palm-covered shore of Yangon Lake, Inya lost weight to a dangerous 30-plus kilograms. Attempts were made on Suu Kyi's life.

Her English husband, Michael Ayres, died of cancer in the UK in 1999 at the age of 53. Suu Kyi did not accompany him on his final journey, fearing that the military authorities would not let her back into the country. Of course, Suu Kyi could have left Myanmar at any time. The generals would be very happy about it. But she chose to remain under house arrest, believing that staying in her homeland would do her a lot more good than if she went abroad.

Their remaining sons, Alexander and Kim, grew up without a mother. But Suu Kyi became a mother to the Burmese people. At pre-election rallies, voters came with homemade posters that read: "Mother Su, we love you!". A song with similar words has become very popular. However, the thin, fragile Suu Kyi, always elegantly and stylishly dressed in the national Burmese clothes, with the same flowers in her hair, looks much younger than her years. Rather, it would have been more appropriate to call her sister. But, as they say, the people know better.

For almost a quarter of a century, the military has done everything it can to block Suu Kyi's involvement in politics. She was accused of having a foreign husband and children, as well as long-term residence abroad. Propaganda portrayed Suu Kyi as an agent of foreign influence. But it was all in vain. The Burmese, admittedly quite nationalistic for the most part, continued to believe her.

The current parliament was elected in November 2010 on the basis of the 2008 Constitution, which effectively established the leading role of the armed forces in the country (a quarter of the 664 seats in parliament are reserved for the military). The NLD, then led by Suu Kyi, boycotted the election, deeming it unfair. In response, the Government dissolved the League as a political party that refused to register for parliamentary elections. And the Union's military-backed Solidarity and Development Party won.

But still, the military regime has gone down in history, and formally Myanmar has become a country with a civilian form of government. In March 2011, U Thein Sein, who is considered a reformer, was elected president, a civilian, albeit a general in the recent past. A civilian government was formed. And the military handed over power to him. A month later, on April 1, 2011, the NLD was re - registered as a political party to run in the by-election, and Suu Kyi launched an active election campaign.

Meanwhile, the political situation in the country continued to soften. Political prisoners were released from prison, the media gained unprecedented freedom, trade unions began to operate, negotiations with insurgent organizations of national minorities intensified, and market reforms continued.

As a result of the April 1 by-election, Suu Kyi now sits in Parliament with her supporters. Of course, this does not fundamentally affect the balance of power in the legislature controlled by the pro-government party. However, the very fact of joining a tough, if not irreconcilable, opposition is very important.

THE ROLE OF GEOPOLITICS

Global interest in Myanmar is fueled by its important geopolitical location. The country, rich in natural resources, including gas and oil, borders two giant neighbors-China and India, and serves as a link between the regions of South and Southeast Asia. Myanmar is the shortest route to the Indian Ocean for the southwestern provinces of China and the northeastern states of India.

India emphasizes the extraordinary importance of Myanmar for Indian foreign policy in terms of countering Chinese expansion and strengthening ties with the ASEAN states.¹

Myanmar, which has been subject to harsh political, trade and economic sanctions by the United States and other Western countries for its suppression of democracy and human rights abuses, has grown very close to China in recent decades, as well as working with Russia, India and the ASEAN member States.

Washington believes that only a consistent democratization of the political system is necessary.

Myanmar's system will reduce Chinese influence in the country. That is why the Americans welcomed the changes in Myanmar and the launch of a dialogue between Suu Kyi and President Thein Sein in August 2011. In November of the same year, Barack Obama spoke with Suu Kyi by phone. And in December, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a sensational visit to Myanmar, meeting with both the authorities and Suu Kyi. It is not surprising that the Secretary of State, as soon as she learned the preliminary results of the vote, was quick to express satisfaction with their results.

In addition to X. Clinton, Myanmar was visited by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Prime Ministers of Great Britain and India David Cameron and M. Singh, not to mention the foreign ministers of a number of countries. All the visitors declare their readiness to invest generously in Myanmar, which is rich in natural resources, and to develop trade and economic cooperation with it, provided that democratization and dialogue with Suu Kyi continue.

In September 2012, Aung San Suu Kyi paid a visit to Washington, where she was received at the White House by Barack Obama and received the Congressional Gold Medal. Washington has lifted sanctions against Myanmar's President Thein Sein as a "reward" for democratic change in the country. At the same time, sanctions are still in place against Myanmar officials who "undermine the reform process, engage in human rights violations, promote ethnic conflict, or engage in trade in military products with North Korea."

But more importantly, in July 2012, the head of the White House signed an executive order allowing American companies to invest in the Myanmar economy, including the development of gas fields.²

After all, Myanmar, which is one of the least developed countries in the world, has been in self-isolation for too long, and then in international isolation, and is in dire need of accelerated socio-economic development.

By the way, a number of researchers generally question the effectiveness of Western sanctions against Myanmar, as well as against some other countries, since they primarily affect the country's population and degrade the structure of life support. ³ It seems that Suu Kyi's line of supporting and even tightening such sanctions was wrong.

Summer 2012 For the first time in more than 20 years, Suu Kyi has made a trip abroad that can only be described as a triumph. She was received as a queen in Thailand, Great Britain, Norway, Switzerland, and France. Political and public figures vied with each other to pay homage to the courageous heroine and express admiration.

Today's rigidly pragmatic world is in desperate need of moral, morally authoritative leaders committed to noble principles, not political conjuncture considerations. Do Aung San Suu Kyi is well placed to meet such aspirations. She has been compared to Nelson Mandela. She herself claims that Mahatma Gandhi and her own father, General Aung San, serve as models for her. It is clear that the West will not leave Suu Kyi without support.

It is only important that the transformation in Myanmar meets the interests of the Burmese themselves, and the country does not turn into an arena of intense rivalry between the world's leading players, primarily between the United States and China. To Suu Kyi's credit, she has a fairly sober approach to foreign policy issues. In particular, after the conversation with H. Clinton, she said that "Myanmar wants to maintain good, friendly relations with China, a very close neighbor, as well as with the rest of the world."⁴. Whoever comes to power in Naypyidaw, he or she will have to take into account the geopolitical realities that dictate the need for a balanced course in relations with China and India,

members of ASEAN and non-regional Powers.

It is difficult not to agree with Tan Myint U, a well-known historian and grandson of former UN Secretary-General U Tan, that the worst-case scenario for Myanmar would be to turn it into an arena of such a confrontation.⁵ Unfortunately, this cannot be completely ruled out, given the growing US ambitions in the Asia-Pacific region.

As for Russia, it seeks to maintain friendly, mutually beneficial ties with Myanmar, regardless of who rules this country, opposing external interference in its affairs. During the talks in Moscow between the Foreign Ministers of the two countries Sergey Lavrov and Wunna Maung Lwin in late February 2012, the Russian side confirmed "support for the course of reforms carried out by the new leadership of Myanmar aimed at democratizing the political system, building a market economy, and implementing an open multi-vector foreign policy"⁶. The main thing now for Moscow is not to be late in finding its place in the rapidly changing Myanmar.

WHAT AWAITS MYANMAR?

How will the political transformation process in Myanmar end? It is possible that the NLD led by Suu Kyi will win the next parliamentary elections in 2015. Be that as it may, she will have to negotiate and find a compromise with both current and retired generals. It won't be easy. Too much distrust and resentment has accumulated over the past quarter-century, and the opponents ' ideas about the future of the country are different.

Suu Kyi has earned a reputation for being uncompromising, tough, uncooperative, even stubborn. But what is good for an out-of-system opposition leader is not necessarily good for a parliamentary politician. However, in our opinion, Suu Kyi is aware of this, showing uncharacteristic flexibility in unprincipled issues. So, she finally agreed to take the oath of office as a parliamentarian, despite disagreeing with its text. Suu Kyi also says she believes President Thein Sein's intentions to reform the country are sincere. These are all encouraging signs, but nothing more. Ahead is a thorny path. We should not forget that not everyone in the armed forces approves of the reformist aspirations of the head of state.

A sore point is the problem of national unity. Fears of destabilization in multiethnic and multi-religious Myanmar, where the insurgency on the national fringes has not subsided for decades, are not without reason.

In June 2012, clashes broke out between Muslims and Buddhists in the Rakhine National Region bordering Bangladesh, resulting in numerous casualties. By the way, Suu Kyi refrained from making any significant comments about the sectarian confrontation, so as not to inflame passions. No one has ready-made recipes for solving such issues. In any case, Suu Kyi has yet to convert huge popularity into real action.

One thing is certain: change in Myanmar is long overdue. In the 1990s, as a Burmese translator, I had the opportunity to work with the long-term head of the military Administration, General Tan Shwe. A very reserved man, he considered himself a Buddhist soldier and repeatedly said that power is a burden for him and the country should ultimately be governed by a civilian government. It is possible that Suu Kyi, who has become a symbol of the struggle for democracy in Myanmar, will eventually lead a government of real change.

In general, Buddhism leaves a unique imprint on everything that happens in this country. In general, the military dictatorship here, in comparison with other states, was quite mild, without significant bloodshed and brutality. And the opposition, led by Suu Kyi, prides itself on strictly adhering to nonviolent methods of fighting for democracy and human rights.

Buddhism teaches that in this world nothing is permanent, everything is subject to inevitable changes. Eventually, the generals realized this truth. There are many other important precepts in Buddhism, such as the need for patience and tolerance. It is hoped that both the Buddhist military and Suu Kyi, who kept her spirits up through years of house arrest by meditating, will follow them.

-----

¹ The Hindu, Chennai. 3.03.2012, 9.04.2012.

² ITAR TASS, 19.09.2012.

^{Deo N.} 3 Sanctions on Myanmar. How they worked? // New Delhi, May 2012, p. 14 - 16."

⁴ The Hindu, 5.12.2011.

^{Thant Myint-U.} 5 Where China meets India. Burma & the new crossroads of Asia. London, 2011.

⁶ Website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. Myanmar Foreign Minister Wunna Maung Lwin's visit to Russia - www.mid.ru 401 - 29 - 02 - 2012.

Permanent link to this publication: