Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma: A Strange Collection of Clear Victories by Kyi May Kaung

Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma:  A Strange Collection of Clear Victories by Kyi May Kaung - first draft written in Nov. 2012 - an edited version was published in International Gallerie -

During his historic six-hour visit to Rangoon, Burma, newly re-elected U.S. President Barack Obama mispronounced Aung San Suu Kyi’s name twice, calling her “Aung Yann Suu Kyi” – one almost saw Suu Kyi hiding her wince.
Yann means “reckless.”
Her real name is:
Aung San – from her famous father – the George Washington of Burma.
Aung = victory or victorious
San= strange, glorious or unique, rare or scarce.
Suu—her own given name, based on the day of the week on which she was born, and the name of Aung San’s mother, whose father was hanged by the British during the Saya San uprising of 1920.
Kyi – based on her mother’s name.
As Jack Healey, the former director of Amnesty International said, “We should learn how to pronounce her name correctly.”
Be that as it may, on Nov 13, 2010, a week after the rigged election, the junta released her from her third bout of house arrest, which had started from a roadside ambush – and is now known as the Depayin Massacre.
Daw Suu was truly between a rock and a hard place.  She cannot be blamed for having sent out feelers that she could help get sanctions lifted in exchange for being treated better by the junta, now hiding behind its front man, the so-called “moderate” PM turned president.

Thein Sein went to see her.   When Obama called her by phone this time last year, she had only to say “I trust him.  I think I can work with him,” for him to send Secretary of State Mrs. Hilary Clinton.  (See my poem in Foreign Policy in Focus, In the Garden by the Lake.)
This unleashed an unreasonable euphoria which has only now started to wear a bit thin as BBC 4 uncovers mass graves in Western Burma, where a genocide against the Muslim Rohingya community has been going on since June, even as Suu Kyi traveled internationally and gave impeccable speeches.  In the northeast of Burma, the junta, now in civilian dress, broke a 17 year ceasefire.
What are the Lady’s prospects?
One should note, she did not win a majority in the April 1 “April Fools’ Day” by-elections -- she won the majority of the few seats she and her party were allowed to contest.  Nevertheless, she campaigned all over the country and won – once again demonstrating her popularity.
But it is not about popularity, is it?
It is about what the junta allows to happen in Burma.
What seems to have happened is due to a coincidence of wants and needs by major actors:
Suu Kyi’s situation was a no-win one.
The junta itself was said to have been scared of what happened in the Middle East, and wanted an exit and an out.
The USA and Europe are in the throes of a major recession – the United States itself hugely indebted to China, which is holding the bulk of its national debt or treasury bills.  The foreign media and the Burmese exile media are compromised as they have apparently traded access for “doing PR for the junta.”
But the Lady is losing patience again – she said “Nothing will happen if the constitution is not changed.” She also said two days ago -- “The military is already the most powerful entity in the country.  We in the parliament (hluttaw) should not make decisions that increase its power.”
Her prospects over-all are not good. 
One can argue that they never were and I used to think she has a martyr complex.
She can surely win in 2015. 
But then, what?
Every day on Burmese language news from VOA and RFA, we see tearful farmers whose land has been taken by the thousands of acres by the junta cronies.  We see miners in equal desperation.  We see workers, each one a Fantine out of Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables, who sold her hair, her teeth and her body to stay alive.
Maybe the junta will let Suu win, and then let her “handle” these deep-seated structural and systemic (to do with the system) changes.
Then everyone will hate her.  Already there’s a growing chorus of those who think she did not speak up forcibly enough about the plight of the Rohingya.
Like all politicians, she will, when she comes to power, have to pay off supporters.  Then she can easily be accused of corruption as Benazir Bhutto was.
I don’t wish to sound flippant or disrespectful – she is one of my greatest heroes.
But some days I think she should leave and carve out a life for herself as an international figure who is deeply respected.
                                                         *