WHO KILLED AUNG SAN?
covering burma and southeast asia
Saturday, April 20, 2024
Magazine

ARTICLE

WHO KILLED AUNG SAN?


By The Irrawaddy AUGUST, 1997 - VOLUME 5 NO.4/5


COMMENTS (0)
RECOMMEND (484)
FACEBOOK
TWITTER
PLUSONE
 
MORE
E-MAIL
PRINT
(Page 2 of 3)

So the following evidence will be from those facts. Fourth evidence (a) About a week after the assassinations on July 25th, because of the rumours that the British government was involved, the pro-British U Nu government had arranged to announce the following notice. "The British Colonial government was not involved in this assassination and we, together with the British government, are trying very hard to discover a real culprit in the case". (b) But this notice was never released because of a report in the newspapers on 28-7-47. The report said that, "when Bogyoke Aung San and the group went to London in January ’47 to sign the ‘Aung San-Attlee Agreement’, U Saw and Thakin Ba Sein refused to sign. U Saw, with the aim to disintegrate the AFPFL, remained in England and received five hundred thousand pounds. Some of the capitalists from England gave large amounts of money to U Saw." (c) Because of these various reports about British involvement, it is clear that even U Nu’s government (who did not want to confront the British and wanted to protect them from various rumours) dared not announce the notice. Fifth evidence (a) Firstly, if U Saw was only seeking revenge, he should aim only at Bogyoke. But why did he kill the whole cabinet? (Seven other cabinet members, one secretary and one bodyguard, were also killed and only two cabinet members escaped.) So this was not only revenge, but beneficial for the new government and new cabinet members also. It’s very clear evidence. (b) U Saw hoped that after this assassination, the governor would ask him to form a new government. Kin Oung’s book reveals when U Saw was arrested, a seal bearing, "U Saw, Prime Minister" was found in his house. Most of the newspapers and BBC reported this fact. Then, who opened the way for U Saw to have such expectations? Wasn’t this a very big motive for U Saw to kill? Sixth evidence (a) Frederick Henry, U Saw’s lawyer from England was suddenly assassinated in his room. (b) F. Collins, a British private detective, after the assassination was also found dead and all of his papers were lost. Only from Kin Oung’s book do we know that they were killed. We never knew it earlier which makes it an interesting case. These two victims knew of the basic facts of the case, so they were killed to prevent a further leak. The killers were afraid some true facts of the case would leak. That’s why, they seemed to have killed these people. (c) These facts also arouse the suspicion that British were involved in the assassination. Seventh evidence It was said that after U Saw was sentenced to death, he tried to contact British officials, to help him escape. He approached U San Tin, "Prison-in-charge", and offered a large amount of money. U San Tin discussed this with U Tun Hla Aung, and arranged a plan to help him. From then on, U Saw tried to collect money and surprisingly found out that many British officials were connected to U Saw. In those letters, they had used code names and words. (a) The first person whom U Saw asked for money was Capt. Vivian. U Saw did not know that Vivian had been arrested at that time for issuing arms. Vivian wrote back to U Saw saying, "We can arrange everything for you. Why didn’t you contact a long man?" (b) The second person U Saw had contacted and asked for money was Mr. John Stewart Benglen from the British Counsel of Rangoon. (He was a British Diplomat, so politically more important). He was shocked to receive the letter which he destroyed and then ordered the police officer away. Afterwards, on 22nd, 23rd, August, U Saw sent some letters again to Benglen not only asking for money but also threatening him. Benglen never received these because after receiving the first letter from U Saw, he prepared to leave Burma. He left his house shifting to the Strand Hotel. While he was preparing his departure, U Tun Hla Aung asked U Kyaw Nyein, then the Home Minister, to arrest Benglen. U Kyaw Nyein reported to the Governor who asked for further evidence. The next day, U Tun Hla Aung went to Benglen, (before he left) and showed him U Saw’s letter. Benglen was so frightened and said that as a diplomat, he could not be arrested. On this, Kin Oung wrote, "In fact Mr. Benglen definitely knew how he was involved in the assassination of Bogyoke." U Tun Hla Aung only asked him to leave Burma for good. From that day (4-9-47) onwards, there were no clues to his whereabouts. (c) Vivian was the person who issued arms and ammunition to U Saw, so he was the most important person involved in the assassination. Benglen was also important as he was a diplomat. When Maj. Young was arrested and interrogated, it was found out that the connection between U Saw and Benglen was very much more than normal. From the fact that in a case of emergency, U Saw asked for money from these two important persons, we can conclude that the British were involved in the assassination. The last evidence When Karens withdrew from Insein in May 1949, Vivian followed them from Insein Jail. Until 1950, he was together with Saw Ba Oo Gyi near Kawkareik.


« previous  1  |  2  |  3  next page »

COMMENTS (0)
 
Please read our policy before you post comments. Click here
Name:
E-mail:   (Your e-mail will not be published.)
Comment:
You have characters left.
Word Verification: captcha Type the characters you see in the picture.
 

more articles in this section