2022-09-10
As of Wednesday the Burmese democracy campaigner Aung San Suu Kyi will have spent a total of 20 years in detention in Myanmar, five of them since her government was overthrown by a military coup in February 2021.
Almost nothing is known about her state of health, or the conditions she is living in, although she is presumed to be held in a military prison in the capital Nay Pyi Taw. “For all I know she could be dead,” her son Kim Aris said last month, although a spokesman for the ruling military junta insisted she is in good health.
She has not seen her lawyers for at least two years, nor is she known to have seen anyone else except prison personnel. After the coup she was given jail sentences totaling 27 years on what are widely viewed as fabricated charges.
Yet despite her disappearance from public view, she still casts a long shadow over Myanmar.
There are repeated calls for her release, along with appeals to the generals to end their ruinous campaign against the armed opposition and negotiate an end to the civil war that has now dragged on for five years.
The military has tried to remove her once ubiquitous image, but you still see faded posters of “The Lady”, or “Amay Su”, Mother Su, as she is affectionately known, in tucked away corners. Could she still play a role in settling the conflict between the soldiers and the people of Myanmar?
After all, it has happened before. Back in 2010 the military had been in power for nearly 50 years, brutally crushed all opposition and run the economy into the ground. Just as it is doing now, it organised a general election which excluded Aung San Suu Kyi’s popular National League for Democracy, and which it ensured its own proxy party, the USDP, would win.
As with this election, which is still underway in phases, the one in 2010 was dismissed by most countries as a sham. Yet at the end of that year Aung San Suu Kyi was released, and within 18 months she had been elected an MP. By 2015 her party had won the first free election since 1960, and she was de facto leader of the country.
To the outside world it seemed an almost miraculous democratic transition, evidence perhaps that among the stony-faced generals there might be genuine reformers.
So could we see a re-run of that scenario once the junta has completed its three-stage election at the end of this month?
A lot has changed between then and now.
Back then there had been many years of engagement between the generals and an assortment of UN envoys, exploring ways to end their pariah status and re-engage with the rest of the world. It was a more optimistic era; the generals could see their South East Asian neighbours prospering through trade with the Western world, and they wanted an end to crippling economic sanctions.
They also sought better relations with the US as a counterbalance to their dependence on China, at a time when the Obama administration was making its celebrated “pivot” to Asia.
The top generals were still hard-line and suspicious, but there was a group of less senior officers keen to explore a political compromise.
It is not clear what finally persuaded the military leadership to open the country up, but they clearly believed their 2008 constitution, which guaranteed the armed forces one-quarter of the seats in a future parliament, would be enough, with their well-funded party, to limit Aung San Suu Kyi’s influence once she was released.
They badly underestimated her massive star power, and they underestimated how much their decades of misrule had alienated most of the population.
In the 2015 election the USDP won just over 6% of the seats in both houses of parliament. In the next election in 2020 it expected to perform much better, after five years of an NLD administration which had started with impossibly high hopes, and had inevitably disappointed many of them. But the USDP fared even worse, winning just 5% of seats in the two houses.
Even many of those who were dissatisfied with Aung San Suu Kyi’s performance in government still chose hers over the military’s party. This raised the possibility that she might eventually win enough support to change the constitution, and end the military’s privileged position.
It also ruled out the armed forces commander Min Aung Hlaing’s hopes of becoming president after his retirement. He launched his coup on 1 February 2021, the day Aung San Suu Kyi was due to inaugurate her new government.
This time there are no reformers in the ranks, and no hopes of the kind of compromise which restored democracy back in 2010. The shocking violence used to put down protests against the coup has driven many young Burmese to take up arms against the junta. Tens of thousands have been killed, tens of thousands of homes have been destroyed. Attitudes on both sides have hardened.
The 15 years Aung San Suu Kyi was detained after 1989, under conditions of house arrest in her lakeside family home in Yangon, were very different from the conditions she is being held in today. Her dignified, non-violent resistance won her admirers across Myanmar and around the world, and during the occasional spells of freedom the military gave her she was able to give rousing speeches from her front gate, or interviews to journalists.
Today she is invisible. Her long-held belief in non-violent struggle has been rejected by those who have joined the armed resistance, who argue that they must fight to end the military’s role in Myanmar’s political life. There is a lot more criticism of how Aung San Suu Kyi governed when she was in power than before.
Her decision to lead Myanmar’s defence against charges of genocide at the International Court of Justice over the military’s atrocities against Muslim Rohingyas in 2017 badly tarnished her saint-like international image. It had much less resonance inside Myanmar, but many younger opposition activists are now willing to condemn how she handled the Rohingya crisis.
At the age of 80, with uncertain health, it is not clear how much influence she would have, were she to be released, even if she still wants to play a central role.
And yet her long struggle against military rule made her synonymous with all the hopes of a freer, more democratic future.
There is simply no-one else of her stature in Myanmar, and for that reason alone, many would argue, she is probably still needed if the country is to chart a path out of its current deadlock.
[BBC]
Sadio Mane fired Senegal into the final of the Africa Cup of Nations with a 1-0 victory over seven-time winners Egypt.
The two-time African Footballer of the Year broke the deadlock in the 78th minute on Wednesday when he let fly from just outside the penalty area inside the bottom left corner after Lamine Camara’s initial effort was blocked.
It sparked joy and relief among the Teranga Lions’ fans in Tangier, where the 2021 champions – after beating Egypt in the final – had taken the initiative but struggled to create clear chances against the Pharaohs’ stubborn defence.
Senegal captain Kalidou Koulibaly will miss the title match – against either host Morocco or Nigeria, who were to play in Rabat later on Wednesday – after picking up a yellow card that meant a suspension and then going off injured in the 23rd minute.
Koulibaly was booked in the 17th for a tactical foul on Omar Marmoush. The captain was also sent off in the group-stage win over Benin and consequently missed the win over Sudan. His tournament was effectively ended when he had to be replaced by Mamadou Sarr because of injury.
Nicolas Jackson had fired over just before Senegal displayed more attacking intent. Habib Diarra and Pape Gueye also had efforts saved.
Tensions boiled over when Mohamed Salah fouled his former Liverpool teammate Mane, but Senegal coach Pape Thiaw and Egypt counterpart Hossam Hassan managed to cool tempers.
Senegal’s Habib Diarra was booked for arguing, however, meaning he will miss the final, too.
[Aljazeera]
United States President Donald Trump has said he has received assurances that the killings of anti-government protesters in Iran have stopped, as Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated there is “no plan” for executions by Tehran.
In comments that appeared to signal a more measured approach to the crisis after threatening to attack Iran, Trump told reporters on Wednesday that he had been told that the killings of protesters in Iran had stopped and that planned executions were halted.
Speaking hours after the US began to withdraw some personnel from an airbase in Qatar amid growing fears of a renewed US-Iran conflict, Trump said he had spoken to “very important sources on the other side”, and he would watch how the crisis developed, although he did not rule out potential US military action.
“We are going to watch what the process is”, he said, before noting the US administration received a “very good statement” from Iran.
In an interview with Fox News later on Wednesday, Araghchi said “there is no plan for hanging at all” when asked whether there were plans to execute anti-government protesters.
“Hanging is out of the question,” he said.
Reporting from Washington, DC, Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna said that the president’s comments on Wednesday signalled a softening of his tone towards Iran.
“It does appear that he’s still mulling over various options; he’s been briefed by his national security council, but these statements we’ve just heard do indicate a potential cooling down of the situation and President Trump backing away from the precipice of imminent action, which he has been threatening,” he said.
Sina Toossi, a senior non-resident fellow at the Center for International Policy, told Al Jazeera that Trump’s claim that he had received information indicating killings in Iran had stopped appears, on the surface, to be a “face-saving way” to avoid military intervention, though it does not entirely rule out such a conflict.
“It’s hard to take what Trump says seriously, but we do know that he’s had an aversion to getting sucked into big, open-ended military conflicts, and with Iran, that risk was on the table,” Toossi told Al Jazeera.
“This remark today suggests he’s looking for a face-saving way out, but I wouldn’t take it as 100 percent ruling that out,” he said, adding that Trump has a track record of negotiating with Iran while simultaneously threatening military action.
Trump has threatened Iran with military strikes in the past as a means of pressuring Tehran into greater alignment with US demands, and has said during the last week that a harsh response by Iranian authorities to the country’s protesters could result in US attacks.
Barbara Slavin, a distinguished fellow at the Stimson Center in Washington, DC, told Al Jazeera that Trump is “probably torn” when it comes to deciding what action to take against Iran.
She said that while the US president would like “another quick victory, I don’t think he wants to be involved in a protracted conflict in the Middle East that goes against all his instincts”.
She added that she expects Trump to carry out limited strikes that enable him to claim he fulfilled his pledge to “help” the Iranian people, without triggering “a wider escalation”.
Earlier on Wednesday, Britain and the US withdrew some personnel from the airbase in Qatar – Al Udeid Air Base, which hosts US troops and other international forces – after a senior Iranian official said Tehran had warned neighbours it would hit US bases if Washington strikes. A number of countries have also issued advisories for protecting their citizens in the region amid fears of a wider regional escalation.
Iran has said it is prepared to retaliate in the event of any US intervention.
The commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Mohammad Pakpour, has said that Iran is ready to respond “decisively” to its foes, Israel and the United States, which he accused of being behind the protests sweeping the country.
IRGC is at “the height of readiness to respond decisively to the miscalculation of the enemy”, said Pakpour in a written statement quoted by state television.
Pakpour went on to accuse Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of being the “murderers of the youth of Iran”.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi also told US broadcaster Fox News that his government is in full control after a deadly crackdown on protests that had spread across the country since January 8.
“After three days of terrorist operation, now there is a calm. We are in full control,” Araghchi told Fox News’ Special Report programme on Wednesday.
Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi said that people in the city and across the country are anxious because they have psychologically felt the shadow of war since the 12-day conflict with the US and Israel in June.
“Many people feel it, and it is creating anxiety about a possible new round of escalation, which would tangibly impact people’s everyday lives,” he said.
The protest started in December when shopkeepers took to the streets to protest a fall in the value of the local currency and the soaring cost of living, and quickly escalated into widespread anti-government demonstrations.
Iranian state television has acknowledged reports of a high death toll during the nationwide protests, quoting the head of the Martyrs Foundation as saying “armed and terrorist groups” are to blame.
More than 100 security personnel have been killed in two weeks of unrest, according to Iranian state media, while opposition activists say the death toll is higher and includes thousands of protesters.
The US-based Human Rights Activists News Agency has said that it has confirmed the deaths of more than 2,400 protesters, and more than 150 security personnel and government supporters.
Al Jazeera has not been able to independently verify the figures.
Iran is currently in the midst of a near-total telecommunications blackout, with monitor NetBlocks reporting on Wednesday that the shutdown had surpassed 144 hours.
Rights group Amnesty International said on Wednesday it reviewed evidence showing “mass unlawful killings committed on an unprecedented scale” in Iran over the past week, including against “mostly peaceful protesters and bystanders”.
“The evidence gathered by Amnesty International points to a coordinated nationwide escalation in the security forces’ unlawful use of lethal force against mostly peaceful protesters and bystanders since the evening of 8 January,” Amnesty said in a press release.
Verified audiovisual evidence depicted severe and fatal injuries, including gunshot wounds to the head and eyes, and security forces chasing and directly firing at fleeing protesters, the rights group said.
[Aljazeera]
From behind bars, Aung San Suu Kyi casts a long shadow over Myanmar
Senegal beat Egypt 1-0 in AFCON semifinal as Sadio Mane scores late
Trump says he’s been assured killings in Iran ‘stopped’
Let’s build a new Sri Lanka upholding harmony, mutual respect by protecting the religious and cultural rights of others- PM
Ambassador of the United States of America to Sri Lanka pays farewell call on PM
Bangladesh cricketers threaten boycott unless BCB director Nazmul Islam resigns
‘Dates have the highest sugar content to fight Coronavirus’
Sunday Island 27 December – Headlines
#SundayIsland 17th December – Headlines
Sunday Island – 28th March
Sunday Island Headlines – 21 March
Sunday Island – 21st February – Headlines
-
Business4 days agoDialog and UnionPay International Join Forces to Elevate Sri Lanka’s Digital Payment Landscape
-
News4 days agoSajith: Ashoka Chakra replaces Dharmachakra in Buddhism textbook
-
Features4 days agoThe Paradox of Trump Power: Contested Authoritarian at Home, Uncontested Bully Abroad
-
Features4 days agoSubject:Whatever happened to (my) three million dollars?
-
News4 days agoLevel I landslide early warnings issued to the Districts of Badulla, Kandy, Matale and Nuwara-Eliya extended
-
Business1 day agoNew policy framework for stock market deposits seen as a boon for companies
-
Opinion6 days agoThe minstrel monk and Rafiki, the old mandrill in The Lion King – II
-
News4 days ago65 withdrawn cases re-filed by Govt, PM tells Parliament