FEARLESS AUNG SAN SUU KYI
By Michele Manceaux Marie Claire Magazine (May 1996, Singapore Edition)

Aung San Suu Kyi is very much her father's daughter. Despite being confined in a dilapidated house and separated from her husband and sons for six years, the daughter of General Aung San, who was responsible for liberating Burma from colonialism, refuses to budge from her political position and her determination to bring democracy back to her country. She is fearless and the title of her book Freedom From Fear is an eloquent testimony to that. Recently freed from house arrest, the youthful-looking 50-year-old is now allowed to give speeches over the weekend to those who will listen to her. Michele Manceaux talks to her about her newfound "freedom" and her plans for the future.

Michele Manceaux: You were locked up in this house for six years. Now that you are no longer under house arrest, what has changed for you?
Aung San Suu Kyi: I'm so busy now I don't get enough time to read books which is what I miss most of all.

MM: Is that the only change?

ASSK: I still feel I am always watched. I don't go out very often although I am allowed to.

MM: During your house arrest, did you feel that you were leading an empty existence?

ASSK: No, because I used to lead a very disciplined life. Each day was very full. I could arrange my time-table so that I could read, listen to the radio, sew, and exercise. It was a very regulated existence.

MM: Did you manage to do all you wanted?

ASSK: I could not achieve all the things I wanted to do.

MM: What, for example?

ASSK: Learn French!

MM: What was the most painful time for you during these six years?

ASSK: The most painful part had nothing to do with me really, but with others. I knew that a lot of my colleagues were in prison. Then, of course, there were my own children who had to cope without a mother, but they lived in England, so I was not worried for them.

MM: Your sons were 10 and 12 when you were arrested. Did you see them at all during those six years?

ASSK: I did not see them for about two-and-a half years, after which they were allowed to come and see me.

MM: Were you forbidden from writing to them?

ASSK: No, I was not forbidden. At first we could communicate but a lot of the letters were censored by the authorities. They also emphasized that they were doing me a great favour by allowing me to write to my children. But I said I would not accept any favours from them and stopped writing. Then, two-and-a half years later, they asked my husband and sons to visit me.

MM: I am surprised you are allowed to receive foreign journalists. How do you explain it?

ASSK: It is my new status. I am now free.

MM: You were given the option of returning to England. Do you consider that you made a sacrifice by not going back to your sons?

ASSK: It was my own choice, and I don't look upon it as sacrifice because other people have made greater sacrifices. My colleagues and their family are at greater risk.

MM: Did your husband accept your choice without protest?

ASSK: We don't interfere with each other's beliefs and priorities. For example, my husband is an orientalist and a tibetologist. I have never tried to stop him from pursuing his interest, although sometimes it was quite exhausting following him around the Himalayas. I did what I could to help him and I think he adopts the same attitude.

MM: Do you think political struggles are more difficult for a woman than a man?

ASSK: I don't think so. Of course, they attack me no the grounds of my gender, but even if I were a man they would attack me on other grounds, so I think it would all come to the same to the same thing.

MM: Do you think a woman has to choose between her public and private life?

ASSK: It's the same choice for everybody, but I think tradition has always dictated that men are more free to do public work. Women are expected to do both but it's not so in my case because I live apart from my family, so in a sense, I don't have a private life.

MM: Would you say you are more concerned about society than individual?

ASSK: No, I have a great concern for the individual, but as it happens, my family is not here, so the individuals whom I am concerned about are my colleagues but as friends. In a way, my public and private life are the same.

MM: Are you given total freedom to communicate with members of the NLD(National League for Democracy)?

ASSK: I see them all the time. We have endless meetings.

MM: Have these militants ever been arrested?

ASSK: Some people who belonged to a dance group were sent to jail because they took part in a ceremony. But people are not arrested just because they come and see me. There is no law that says they can't come to see me.

MM: Would you be ready to be the head of the State?

ASSK: That is not up to me to decide. We are a democracy, so it is up to the people to decide.

MM: Would you be ready to spend the rest of your life as it is now, without any change?

ASSK: Life is always changing. I am ready to accept life as it comes.

MM: Are you a Buddhist?

ASSK: Absolutely.

MM: Don't you think that religions in general and this one in particular encourages people to be resigned to their fate?

ASSK: No, I don't think so. No religion encourages anybody to accept injustice.

MM: Are you anxious about your own security?

ASSK: No, because there is no point in being anxious.

MM: Is that a realistic stand to take?

ASSK: If you want to be realistic, you should think of J.F. Kennedy or Yitzhak Rabin who had the protection of the best security forces in the world. Yet, they were assassinated. So I am being realistic in not worrying; in fact, it would be unrealistic of me to think that I could accomplish anything by worrying. There is no way of guaranteeing any politician or anybody in this world against attack.

MM: You wrote a book entitled Freedom from Fear. Are you writing another one?

ASSK: No, I don't have the time at the moment.

MM: Do you get any help from foreign countries?

ASSK: Lots of foreign organisations support our movement but we do not have and official representative abroad.

MM: How do you view the opening of your country to foreign investors?

ASSK: Well, it has not been done in a way that will benefit the economy in the long run. The investors themselves will not benefit much from it. People want to come and invest because they think, "Well, this is a new place", but it is not really an open market economy. It is only open to some people. Burma is said to have become much richer in the last six years. What has happened is that a few people have got very rich. We've never had people in Burma who could spend $5 on a cup of tea. But at the same time, we've never have farmers who could not afford two meals a day. There is a small elite and a growing gap between the rich and the poor. In theory, the opening up of the economy should lead to the development of a strong middle-class, which should provide the foundation for a strong democracy. But in fact, the middle-class is getting smaller. Burma has declined in the past six years. The level of education has dropped. The situation in the hospitals is not much better. According to a United Nations report, Burma is ranked fourth among countries which spend more on defence than on health and education. The Burmese government spends 222 times more on defence that on health and education.

MM: What is your hope for Burma in the future?

ASSK: That we will have a proper political system that ensures the rule of law and that puts an emphasis on health and education. At one time, Burma was the fastest developing country in Southeast Asia. Newly independent countries used to look up to us. I am very confident that with the right political system, we shall once again be able to achieve that position.

MM: Do you think that democracy will ever be achieved?

ASSK: I think the will of the people to achieve a system that guarantees their rights is getting stronger and stronger. Also, the rest of the world is on our side.

MM: How do you explain you liberation from house arrest?

ASSK: I don't know the reasons behind it but it was certainly not out of affection for me.

MM: A French magazine has published a portrait of you and entitled the article A Light in the Night. Would you agree that you are a light in the night?

ASSK: I do not like to be thought of as anything more than ordinary person.

MM: How do you fell about being considered beautiful?

ASSK: A compliment as always pleasant to receive. But I don't place that much importance on it. I am very interested in promoting Burmese textiles and I would like to preserve the Burmese costume because I think it is really becoming. Girls here are starting to wear Western clothes. I am not against it because young people like to be modern. But I do want to preserve Burmese clothes such as the lungi (a ling shawl that is wrapped around the hips), because I really think it suits us best.

MM: How do you fell about Burma being renamed Myanmar?

ASSK: No one should be allowed to change the name of country without referring to the will of the people. They say that Myanmar refers to all the Burmese ethnic groups, whereas Burma only refers to the Burmese ethnic group, but that is not true. Myanmar is a literary word for Burma and it refers only to the Burmese ethnic group. Of course, I prefer the word Burma.

MM: Do you have any contact with the different ethnic groups?

ASSK: Within the NLD, there are many people from different ethnic groups. We are not just a Burmese ethnic party. We want a number of seats for members of the ethnic groups who, in general, still have some reservations about the goodwill of the Burmese, because the Burmese are the majority group. It is our duty to win their confidence and we cannot do that unless there is a situation where they can express their grievances openly and without fear. The only way you can resolve differences is by talking about them. If we want our country to be united and stable, we need people to express their dissatisfaction.

MM: The government wants to open Burma to tourism this year. How do you feel about it?

ASSK: Well, the foreign companies who build the hotels will benefit from it, but the people will only get tips from the tourists. Our country is beautiful, and I hope foreigners will come. But this year may be a little too son.

MM: Your sons are now 18 and 22. Do they intend to come back to Burma?

ASSK: I am sure they do. They may come to work, but definitely not to take part in politics.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TRANSCRIPT OF DAW AUNG SAN SUU KYI’S VIDEO ADDRESS TO THE GENERAL SYSTEMS PREFERENCES HEARINGS

Brussels, Belgium, 22nd September 1996 (VHS Pal copies available)
Produced by the IMAGES ASIA HUMAN RIGHTS DESK

The great majority of the people in Burma live in a constant state of fear and insecurity. Forced labour is only one of the fears with which we have to cope. If the European Union can do something to alleviate that one fear, that will be of great help to us. We have to struggle for our own cause. We know that it is up to us to achieve democracy, but in this day and age the help of the international community means a lot, and in the name of a common humanity we look to you to help us as far as you can.

Types of forced labour - portering.

This is a term which refers to people who are taken by the armed forces to work for them to carry their arms, their rations, and in many cases it has been clear they are used as human mine fields [sweepers]. They go ahead of the troops so that if there are any land mines, those land mines will blow up under them and therefore they clear the way for the troops. So portering is one of the worst feared things on Burma. People loose their health and even their lives if they are taken to do a stint of portering. And then, of course, there is the other kind of forced labour which is working on local projects. There in villages and in towns people are told you turn out on such a day and you help with building bridge, road, dike, and if they don’t participate in the forced labour projects they are fined.

Types of forced labour - Forced Labour Projects.

Practically all roads built by the government used forced labour. Roads, bridges, clearing of jungle - all this needs forced labour because there is no other way the government can get these done. And we do not have the kind of machinery that will enable us to get these kind of projects away quickly. So its human power that we need, man power, forced labour. Its very wide spread these days and it is being carried out systematically with the knowledge of the authorities (because it is the local authorities who organize these forced labour projects). Historically of course, we have had forced labour in Burma. I think, historically, there has been forced labour in almost every country where there is a government that is totally in control of the country and which can do whatever it likes with its people.

Can we talk about the Burmese practice of ‘Loke-a-pay’?

‘Loke-a-pay’ is just a euphemism for forced labour. Its not voluntary labour. It pretends to be voluntary labour but there is nothing voluntary about the kind of labour in which we have to participate under threat. I have actually seen slips of paper that the local law and order restoration councils distribute to the people in which they say you are "invited" to come at such and such a time to take part in such and such a project, and if you do not turn up you will be fined or there will be dire consequences. They are threats in this so called invitation. If they fine you because you do not go, it is no longer voluntary. If it is voluntary you go if you wish to, if you do not wish to go, you do not go. But its not like this at all; if you fail to turn up then you’re either fined or in some places you’re even arrested for a short time as a lesson to others.

Types of forced labour - Children

To your knowledge have young children or teenagers also been used as forced labour in Burma?

Yes, very much so and increasingly so, because the families are getting increasingly poorer, which means that the parents cannot get time off from earning their living so they send the children to take their place in the forced labour projects. As I mentioned earlier, if you don’t take part in a forced labour project you are fined. That is to say each house hold that fails to send one person to participate in a forced labour project has to pay a certain sum of money. And since the people are already so poor they can’t afford that sum of money so they send their children to take their place.

Village Act, 1907

Section 12 of the Village Act, 1907 states: If any person residing in a village refuses or neglects to perform any of the public duties imposed upon him by this act or by any other rule thereunder he shall, in the absence of reasonable excuse, the burden of proving which shall lie upon him, be liable, and therefore the penalties.

But what is important is that in this original Village Act it says ‘in the absence of reasonable excuse’, and such things as having to gather in the harvest, or needing to work on the fields would have been accepted as reasonable excuse. Nowadays this law translated in Burmese has left out the phrase ‘in the absence of reasonable excuse’. So under this law, the authorities are able to force the people in the villages to do anything they like and to punish them in accordance with the so called law. With respect to farmers, if you are taken away at a time when you should be sowing, or when be reaping, when there is something that you have to do on your farm its a disaster. But the authorities do not accept that. Its so brutal, its as if they do not seem to care or they do not seem to be aware of the fact that by forcing people to take part in their projects the are, in some circumstances, they are leading those people to starvation. They don’t feed them, mind you, people have to come to forced labour projects with their own food and their own water.

If you go into forced labour and you get sick are medicines provided?

No, nothing is provided; if you’re not getting food and water would you get medicines and bedding? You have to provide everything yourself. You provide the labour, you provide everything else. In some places, theoretically, you’re supposed to be paid for the labour that you provide but whether you are paid or not depends very much on the whims and fancies of the powers that be.

Forced labour: links to tourism

With the current ‘Visit Myanmar Year’ campaign that is being launched by the government, is it feasible that the tourism industry itself may be linked indirectly to beautification projects or the clearing of roads?

Well, I’d say more than indirectly. In some cases: very, very directly, especially when it comes to beautification because the want to make the country appear prosperous and pretty. So the roads have to be rebuilt, bridges have to be built, sites have to be cleared away. Of course this is not really forced labour, but I might as well mention in passing that people are removed from their old houses where they have lived for generations in order to clear the place up and to make it attractive for the tourists. So forced labour projects and the suffering of the people of Burma are more than indirectly linked to tourism.

Workers rights in Burma

I think there was a law which came out in 1964 and this is supposed to protect workers, but you know we do not have Trade Unions in Burma. So this law merely remains on the books. That law of course dealt with things like maximum hours, minimum wages, compensation for disability and so on, but this does not apply at all these days, and particularly it does not apply to factories which are run by foreign companies. Foreign companies run their factories in any way they like; there is nothing to protect our workers.

G.S.P procedure of the European Union

Can we just begin by your acknowledgment of the European Commission G.S.P inquiry into forced labour in Burma?

Yes, I do know that hearings have been going on and that the European Union has been taking an interest in forced labour in Burma for some time.

What potential impact might G.S.P sanctions have both upon the government and what possible negative impact may it have upon the common people in Burma?

It will not have much of an impact on the common people of Burma, but it will have an impact on those who are involved in business with foreign companies. Now those who are involved in business with foreign companies actually happen to be the most privileged group in the country. So our assessment is that it will only effect those who are best off and most privileged. It will not in any way effect the people who are really suffering. I’m sure that G.S.P P sanctions would play a very large part in hastening democratic reform in Burma, because I think too many people are ignorant of the fact that this regime looks upon any form of cog-operation as endorsement of their policies. So if they think that the Economic Union is prepared to co-operate with them in terms of trade, business, investment, even though they are oppressing their people, then their conclusion is that the Economic Union does not care what they do to the people so they will go on doing it and worse. We do not think that it is a good idea for anybody to co-operate in anyway with a regime which is mistreating its people like this. So to give preferential treatment to any government that is mishandling its people, that is totally ignoring the rights of its people, is to encourage injustice and oppression. So we think the Economic Union should take a good hard look at what is going on in Burma, and we would like them to understand that the people of Burma need all the help that they can get.