ADVERTISE | DONATION
Irrawaddy CONTACT US|FAQ
BURMESE VERSION | VIDEO





COMMENTARY
Threatening Suu Kyi’s Health
By KYAW ZWA MOE Tuesday, May 12, 2009


COMMENTS (13)
RECOMMEND (282)
FACEBOOK
TWITTER
 
MORE
E-MAIL
PRINT

Here’s a relevant question that no one has raised yet: is the Burmese junta deliberately manipulating events in hope that Aung San Suu Kyi will die from natural causes, which—in this case—would not be natural at all? 

That’s not possible, you say? The ruling generals in Naypyidaw see the 63-year-old pro-democracy movement leader as an “enemy of the state.” They believe she’s the No 1 enemy, the leader of the “destructive elements” that have sabotaged “the peace and stability of the country”and threaten their rule. 

So, is it out of the question that the generals would be happy if Suu Kyi died by natural causes or was physically impaired? They can’t assassinate her because of the counterproductive reaction from the international community, even from such loyal allies as China and Russia. But they can ensure that her medical treatment is lacking or dispensed at a minimum level.

You can judge for yourself regarding the incidents that unfolded last week at her lakeside house at No 54 University Avenue. Actually, the house is not a real home for the Nobel peace laureate. For 13 years, it’s been her prison.

Suu Kyi now has low blood pressure; she is dehydrated; she has difficulty eating. In short, she is ill again, but on Thursday her primary physician was barred from visiting her for a routine medical checkup and detained for questioning.

Another doctor treated her with an intravenous drip on Friday. Following her request and demands by the National League for Democracy (NLD), she was allowed to return on Saturday and Monday.

"We are worried about Daw Suu's health,” said NLD spokesman Nyan Win last week.
“Authorities should allow free access of her doctor to give Daw Suu the required medical treatment."

If you look at these and earlier incidents in light of basic humanity, law and human rights you can see a pattern of willful negligence by the regime. Of course, in Burma the local population is used to neglect. 
 
The fact is that Suu Kyi has been detained illegally for 13 years, with no just cause and only the minimum of proper medical treatment, which could lead to an early death or a premature loss of physical strength.

This month is more critical than ever for the junta. Suu Kyi’s lawyer, Kyi Win, said that according to the law, she should be released on May 27, the date marking six years since May 2003 when her NLD motorcade was attacked by a junta-backed mob in upper Burma and she was detained. 
 
Suu Kyi’s lawyer is right, but the generals redo their own rules and laws, using them like a rubber band—to stretch and shrink at will.  

For example, Suu Kyi was detained for the first time in 1989 under 10 (b) of the State Provision Act, under which a person could be detained under house arrest for a maximum of three years under the existing law. But one year later, the government changed the law to a maximum of five years. Suu Kyi was detained at that time until 1995, a total of six years.

This is a critical moment for the generals, since they plan to hold a national election in 2010. If Suu Kyi is free, it greatly complicates the election. In 1990, the junta held an election while Suu Kyi was under house arrest, believing the state-backed National Unity Party, formed by former members of the dictator Ne Win’s Burma Socialist Programme Party, could win the election. Instead, Suu Kyi’s NLD party won by landslide.  

If a healthy Suu Kyi is free prior to the 2010 election her most loyal supporters and the general public will return to the political activism of 1995 and 2002 when she was free.

In light of that, you should expect the generals to find a way not to release Suu Kyi, in spite of their own law.

So what now? Several options could play out during the course of the next year.

The junta’s rubber-band law could find a way to keep her under house arrest. Or perhaps Suu Kyi does develop a serious illness, effectively limiting her leadership ability.

Or, if the regime does release her—somehow seeing a political gain in that act—it could always fabricate a new reason for her arrest, as it did in 2003.



COMMENTS (13)
 
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.
 

plan B Wrote:
21/05/2009
"It may prove easier to change the regime rather than its mind."

You might have made more sense if you put your personal yet unproven allegation aside.
From your response I can definitely conclude that you have no contact with the real suffering of Burmese beyond the refugees that you have taught English to.

Careful with other's country's future. Getting ahead of your very limited command of the real country situation does a disservice.

Did not this article today by Aung Zaw
(http://www2.irrawaddy.com/opinion_story.php?art_id=15687)
echo my realistic sentiment, which has been maligned by your ilk as "boot licker" and such?

Your claim beyond email assertion of SPDC poisoning you for "rocking the boat" is still wanting. At best it make you an "important" target; at worst, it still detracts from the real issue here--the "kangaroo court proceeding" going on against Aung San Suu Kyi.

Eric Johnston Wrote:
20/05/2009
The regime clearly does not seek to kill people for teaching English, and this was never suggested. So why would someone dispute an assertion that was neither made nor implied? Perhaps to distract attention from the main issue, which is the possibility that DASSK's illness is deliberately induced.

"...you do a disservice to the real agenda of providing solutions to change the SPDC's mind."

An unknown person (possibly linked to MI?) e-mailed me 7 or 8 years ago in a similar vein. Don't rock the boat, he cautioned, as it will make it difficult for DASSK to negotiate a settlement with the regime.

It may prove easier to change the regime rather than its mind.

(Despite Plan B's assertion, on 8th April, that "this government...is here to stay")

Eric Johnston Wrote:
19/05/2009
The goal of those who commission the poisoning is presumably death, in such as a way as to arouse least suspicion. Temporary incapacity provides them with only short-term relief from pertinent criticism.

When dealing with big-time dangerous criminals of this kind there should be "no holds barred."

plan B Wrote:
18/05/2009
Eric Johnston,

The last time I was in Mae Sot, there were at least a dozen organizations that had falangs teaching English to the Burmese refugees.

For the love of facts and reason I cannot imagine why poisoning YOU was a priority in the SPDC’s agenda. In the absence of any facts, please do not implicate the SPDC by innuendo.

The urgent matter at hand is “the trumped-up charge by SPDC against Aung San Suu Kyi.” By announcing your unproven allegations and inciting rabid anti-SPDC elements, you do a disservice to the real agenda of providing solutions to change the SPDC’s mind.

Obviously, your laudable concern is not beyond teaching English. So please provide facts so as not to blur the situation by introducing an inappropriate “poisoning” theory. Please focus on facts, not innuendos.

Moe Aung Wrote:
17/05/2009
Eric,

Sorry to hear about that awful experience of yours which could have killed you.

ASSK used to be allowed food/meals brought in daily by her supporters/friends until last year. If she has since been getting groceries, etc. only from an official source, one dreads to imagine what could have been going on. They do badly want to 'retire' her now from 'ill health', and might even cause her demise from 'natural causes'.

Eric Johnston Wrote:
17/05/2009
Lead and arsenic?

Personal experience shapes beliefs. Mine:
In December 2004, a Thai official sent an intermediary with a warning that "they" were trying to poison me. By "they" were clearly intended some or other Burmese with whom I was working (as a volunteer English teacher). My understanding then and now was that, for lack of personal motive and because "their" intention was known to Thai intelligence, this was not the settling of a personal score. But an order received from elsewhere.

The warning was heeded half-heartedly, with nearly disastrous consequences. Illness took weeks to appear and only became critical six months later. According to the doctor in France who cured the worst of the symptoms, these were "consistent with a slow poisoning by repeated small doses of something like arsenic". However ill-health persisted for a further 18 months when clinical tests in Chiang Mai revealed heavy-metal poisoning.
Draw your own conclusions.

Moe Aung Wrote:
15/05/2009
Okkar,

"The SPDC cannot protect her if she gets attacked when she is traveling to various parts of the country."

Like the fox guarding the chicken you mean. I'm sure we all feel indebted for such kindness and consideration. Depayin was a great example.

"Also, we should think about allowing her to retire due to ill health"

Fancy that! How thoughtful of you! Don't worry, your bosses are working on it.

Eric,

I'm sure you are aware that the Israelis have trained the Burmese military intelligence (MIS). People have questioned the lead and arsenic content in the drinking water and food.

Eric Johnston Wrote:
14/05/2009
How does the SPDC treat "ordinary" people? So, for removing "undesirables" why not actively promote illness, incapacity and eventual death - by introducing traces of toxic substances into food or water? Precedents? -Sao Shwe Thaike and others.

The thought occurred to me, and was expressed in private correspondence, over two years ago after seeing a photo of DASSK (meeting Gambari). A panel of medical experts should examine the possibility that political prisoners are being deliberately and slowly poisoned, bearing in mind that definitive proof may be hard or impossible to obtain.

The Israelis are believed to have, on occasion, used a poison that causes death by apparently natural causes and leaves no trace detectable by known methods of analysis. Needless to say, this remains a suspicion. There is no proof.

Okkar Wrote:
13/05/2009
Suu Kyi is under house arrest for her own protection, just as a child is kept away from knives and sharp instruments. Suu Kyi is a danger to herself and those who around her. The SPDC cannot protect her if she gets attacked when she is traveling to various parts of the country.

Also, we should think about allowing her to retire due to ill health since she will not be able to make sound decisions while suffering from her health conditions.


an old sea dog Wrote:
13/05/2009
Than Shwe did not care about the dying of a million or two more Myanmar people after Nargis; why should he care about Daw Suu? She is just another Myanmar person for him.

Moe Aung Wrote:
13/05/2009
"They can’t assassinate her. But they can ensure that her medical treatment is lacking or dispensed at a minimum level."

They've done both to an awful lot of people. I'm not sure however if they can afford to martyr her either way, by commission or by omission, but they certainly want her out of the picture, and a house arrest is neither here nor there, rather messy in the long run.

She's a strong-minded woman in a frail and aging body. If ill health also takes its toll, no-one will be happier than Than Shwe, but then again he's likely to go first. It's a case of who will succeed either of them in the event to lead their respective camps effectively.

The NLD none the less must be prepared for the worst case scenario. A house on one post cannot stand any better than a house of cards.

plan B Wrote:
13/05/2009
That's all we need! A stupid foreigner giving perfect justification to SPDC continuing more paranoia inspired acts.

George Than Setkyar Heine Wrote:
13/05/2009
Not the enemy of the state, the enemy of Than Shwe only.

Than Shwe will be a monk killer only under the shadow of Daw Suu in history.

He has the blood of people murdered at Depayin on his hands, not to mention an attempted murder rap on Daw Suu on May 30, 2003, thus earning two nooses around his neck!

Hence, he cannot let democracy or rule of law come to Burma. So he has to hurry up with his 2010 farce to save his hide, while hoodwinking the global community with a semblance of legitimacy at the same time.

Daw Suu is standing tall in his way today.
He is over 80 and ridden with disease.
Daw Suu is only 63 and in relatively good health .

Thus, he has to "take down" Daw Suu before 2010 and he hits the grave also.

The people of Burma and international community are also under an obligation to protect Daw Suu before it is too late. Today she is under the shadow of death, engineered by Than Shwe, who is refusing to dispense much-needed medical personnel and assistance.

More Articles in This Section

bullet Sizing Up an Icon

bullet Fighting Corruption Begins at Home

bullet Future of Exiled Burmese Media

bullet How Much Freedom Does Burmese Media Enjoy?

bullet Five Days in Burma

bullet Turning Burma into Next Asian Tiger No Simple Task

bullet With Suu Kyi On Board, Is Burma Finally Moving Toward Real Change?

bullet The ‘Rule of Law’ in Burma

bullet New Doors are Opening in Burma

bullet A Good Beginning to the New Year






Thailand Hotels
Bangkok Hotels
China Hotels
India Hotels

Donations

Home |News |Regional |Business |Opinion |Multimedia |Special Feature |Interview |Magazine |Burmese Elections 2010 |Archives |Research
Copyright © 2008 Irrawaddy Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved.