Review of Aung San's past and Maner

[aungsoe@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Dear Dr. Ne Oo AND fellow freedom-lovers:

Firstly, i want u to know that i have no desire to suppress ur political 
views on  Burma.  
*   Nevertheless, i should not remain quite blind to ur wrong             
historical assumption about the peoples' revolutions against          
fascist jap imperialists, white colonialists, and domestic            
dictatorial regimes.  
*   The reason why i am replying this letter is to remind u of            
the consequences of generating misconceptions about the               
pepoles' historic movements in the international community            
becasue of your airy views which are obviously and heavily            
based on political propagandas and leaflets available in ur
     vincinity.
*   I have no desire to escalate the ongoing exchagne of heated           
words between radicals and non-radicals who advocate the same         
cause.

General Aung San
================
In ur analysis on gen. aung san's role in political decision-making 
during the anti-facist/colonialists movements, u assumed him to be a 
person who didn't stick to his principles.  U said his aimed destination 
for seeking help is Chinese communists and finally ended up with the 
facist japs.

At that time aung san was around 26.  The whole Asia was in flame.  
Danger to life at the time was much imminent than ours. Also, the 
options open for him that time were fewer than ours.  He had to either 
collaborate with or get killed by the japs.  Young Aung San chose the 
first option. He was promised by japs to liberate burmese pop for "asia 
for asians" was their propaganda.

Young Aung San collaborated with japs. But i doubt that aung san 
wouldn't make this dicision just to save his life at the expense of 
people's lives and property if he were able to forsee the ruthlessness 
of jap-forces that followed right after brits fled burma in 1943.
Age and situation are the major factors that influenced in his 
decision-making for receiving jap's military assistance.  It was opposed 
by most Thakins and other liberal revolutionary patriots.

However, the mature aung san at the age of 30 got to reverse his 
wrongful actions and plans and drove the jap forces in 1945.  His 
colleagues and people simutaneously revolted against japs.  We 
celebrated marked movement by celebrating it as "resistance day" in our 
age.

To conclude gen. aung san's war actions,
*   Aung San did mistake
*   Aung San had to mend it.

Who sacrificed in recorrecting a one man's wrong political decisions and 
initiatives?
*   Peoples (all nationalities)
*   Their leaders, Thakins and other patriots, who were not necessary     
in good terms with Aung San's political visions but did forsee     that 
Japs would bring a mass-destruction to their country.

My assumption is that political decisions must be cautiously weighed 
with the possible implication of public cost and risks.  It is the 
unvoidable obligation for every wise leadership. It is not his or her 
right to make wrong political decisions at the cost of people's lives 
and prosperity.

"WRONG REPRESENTATION OF THE OPPRESSED MUST BE CORRECTED AT ANY COST."

MANERPLAW AGREEMENT
===================
Carefully review the copy u received at ur office from the DAB.
The emergence of this agreement solely rooted in the "prevaling" 
security concerns among the MPs for their living in the jungle.  Our 
group didn't endorse it.  The essence of Manerplaw agreement, according 
to our night and day discussions within and without our group, was to 
secure "coexistence between the ethnic rebels and non-ethnic NCG 
(non-NLD ethnic MPs had not been included in the government in at that 
time)."  According to the agreement, every ethnic state in future burma 
will have an autonomous government and its own armed force, independent 
from the federal union government.

Please review the federalistic formations of state governments and armed 
forces in India, Germany, the United States of America.  Armed forces 
are placed under the union governments.  Their movement and deployment 
are dictated by the union defense ministers in effectively dealing with 
external aggressions and domestic armed resistence.  These defense 
ministers' commands are just the follow-ups of the national 
assemblies/parliaments.

My point here is that the future union of burma can not be built on 
suspicions between the states and the unions, between the majorities and 
minorities.  It should be bulit on the absolute unity if we don't want 
to have any civil wars in future.

Contrary to the above-mentioned concept of unity building, NCG committed 
to an unenforceable agreement with our ethnic armed rebels, giving 
impratical, yet dangerous promises.  The Manerplaw agreement, if it were 
enforced, will definitely ignite future civil wars between the union 
govts and the state govts because it is rather a suspion-oriented 
agreement than unity-oriented.

As a new generation, I myself is a mixed nationality of at least four 
ethnic bloods.  I will never let my nation to disintegrate and bleed 
again. Because my nation is my soul and my body.

"MANERPLAW AGREEMENT WAS AN ANTI-UNITY AND ANTI-INTIGRATION ACT OF THE 
NCG IN COLLABORATION WITH SOME FOREIGNERS AGAINST THE UNION OF BURMA."

An Unconditional Debate is open for this assumption.

CONCLUSIONS
==========

*  The new generations of Burma will not blindly follow and accept the    
wrongful actions and committment of the leaders.
*  The new generations of Burma are well aware of their preceeding       
generations' mistakes and achievements.
*  The new generations of Burma will not tolerate any form of    
repeating of any mistakes by any individual and group.
*  The new generations of Burma will not tolerate any form of    
exploiting the preceeding generations' sacrifices and achievements    by 
any individual and group.
*  The new generations of Burma expect the fellow citizens to evaluate    
the political processes with their "revolutionary caution" and know    
where their leaders are leading them to, and the consequences they    
will have to experience.
*  The new generations of Burma recognize the senior citizens around    
the world, who have been fulfilling their natural obligation for    
liberating the Burmese population from the cluthes of military    
dictatorship and for installing a just and civilized governance in    in 
future Burma.
*  The new generations of Burma are not anti-indigenous people because    
we are the children of two or more ethnic ancestries.
*  The new generations of Burma will not tolerate any political    
design which aims at dividing national solidarity and territorial    
integrity of the nation.

ASSURANCE
=========
*  I am an ordinary citizen of Burma and have no desire to participate    
in future governance of Burma.
*  My contribution to the ongoing struggle for democracy and human    
rights in Burma comes from my self conscience as a dutiful citizen.
*  I will not vow to any pressure of any threat or praise for my       
actions and thoughts.
*  I will never threaten or harm any civilized and righteous people of    
Burma.
*  I will pay my life to terminate any individual and group that      
threaten the nation's long-term unity and integrity.
*  I will terminate any individual and group, who instill    the 
corruptive practices and thoughts to the Burmese society.

MY PRAYERS
==========

*   May my parents and your parents, fathers and and mothers of Burma,     
know that their sons and daughters are on the righteous path to       
freedom and democracy.
*   May our colleagues in arm-conflict zones and prisons be free from     
natural and inhuman tortures.
*   May our parents be free from fear.

My Revolutionary Salute to the fallen martyrs of the 8888 Uprising.


Humbly,

Illiterate Aung Soe (BKK)

PS:  Some Quotable Quotes for U, Dr. Ne Oo, and NCG:

*   Mistakes are a fact of life.  It is the response to the error that     
counts. (Nikki Giovanni)
*   The people who make differeneces are not the ones with the     
credentials, but the ones with the concern. (Max Lucado)
==========================================================

/* Written Sun 21 Jun 11:00am 1998 by drunoo@xxxxxxxxxxxx(Dr U Ne Oo) in 
igc:reg.burma */
/* -------------" The Activists and Advocacy Pt.2 "--------------- */

COMMENTS ON ACTIVISTS AND ADVOCACY, PART-2.

TWO DISCIPLINES FOR POLITICAL ANALYSIS
**************************************
Broadly speaking, there are two disciplines for analysing politics:
one based on studying behaviour and attitude of political elites and
the other focusing on behaviour, beliefs and political formation of the 
masses--known as Political Sociology. To understand the political
behaviours, one will need fair knowledge of both disciplines.
To my observation, majority of Burmese activists use the method of
analysis that are more akin to the former discipline. The latter
approach, political sociology, is much more helpful in understanding
political policies and political behaviour of the masses, such as
movements. One of the reason some Burmese tend to attack personal or
personality, probably, is because they have not acquire understanding
principally of political policy and issues, i.e. political sociology.
(Also observed is that the professional political institutions,
only in a desperate position, may choose to make personal attack
on their opponents which considered to be the "dirty politics".)

ASPIRATION OF MASSES AND DOING POLITICS
***************************************
Doing politics is not simply about debating issues in public in
order that the best debater should get his/her own way. Nor all
politicians/activists can simply do things whenever they've got
elected/supported by the public. A formally elected politician or a
"self-appointed" political activist may only carry out actions that
are believed to be in consistent with the aspiration of masses.
Whether such action being a correct one would be a measure of the
ability of leadership as well as how truly a leadership reflect the 
aspiration of the masses. However, it is a silly thing to say to a 
political activist, in our case of Burmese dissidents, to be the 
self-appointed leadership for a simple technical reason.

For the population under siege, such as the people of Burma, the
political activists must rely on various means, i.e. predicting and
theorising, in order to gauge the will of the population. It is the
nature of dissident politics that political activists must evaluate
the will of their population mainly through indirect means. Burmese
activists, accordance with their own interpretation of Burmese
society, must simply represent themselves as delegates of the
oppressed masses to engage in the struggle. The question of whether
their actions and interpretations are right one for Burma will have
to be judged by the history.

THE RIGHT TO STRUGGLE: GENERAL AUNG SAN
***************************************
Under most circumstances, the political dissidents have  to
make decision, mount campaign and engage in struggle, on behalf of
the oppressed. For example, in Burma's struggle for independence
from Britain, General Aung San did not seek to consult -there was no
need - with the oppressed Burmese whether they wanted to be free
from Britain. In 1940, Aung San secretly went to China trying to
establish contact with Chinese communists. Later, due to
circumstances, he accepted the help from the Japanese. From this
history for independence, we can also see that those engaged in
struggle must make decisions according to prevailing circumstances.

THE RIGHT TO REBEL: SAYA SAN
****************************
We can also look at 1930's Saya San peasant-rebellion as an example.
The British authorities' view on 1930-peasant rebellion was that
Saya San wanted to be a King therefore he rebel the British
government. This assessment, which seems to have made merely based
on the attitude of political elites, is certainly inaccurate.
In the 1930s, we know that the Burmese rural communities had been
under severe social and economic stress, primarily because of the
British government introduction of land tax, land tenure and Indian
money leaders etc. Such social discontent was forming to become a
rebellion and Saya San, as a political leadership, had to lead such
rebellion. Saya San, in his time, probably look to the monarchy as
an alternative system to British administration. Therefore, it is
wrong to suggest Saya San rebel the British because he wanted to be
a King.

As the two examples above showed, the political leadership may
emerge primarily as a reflection of the aspiration of the masses. 
It is also obvious that the leadership must initially struggle without 
full knowledge or consensus view of the majority masses regarding 
their causes. Present day analogies of the leadership in struggle, 
in this context, are too numerous to mention.

LEADERSHIPS: SELF-MADE IMPORTANT PEOPLE ?
*****************************************
At this point, a crucial question must be asked why some Burmese
dissidents choose to confront the government, at great personal
sacrifices and risks, while the rest of expatriates rather stay
quiet ? Are these dissidents simply making themselves "important" or
the rest of expatriates community so cowered by SLORC/SPDC
intimidation ? Part of the answer lies in the beliefs and attitudes
of political leadership.

Most Burmese dissidents have spoken out against the government in
public primarily because of they have the political views and beliefs.
Although we (Burmese) all have grown up in the same socio-political
environment, only those who acquired such political views and
outlooks will likely to form a political belief that the need to
strive for political change. Not everyone in the community, though
can generally distinguish goods and bads of politics, will acquire
such political views and political outlooks. Only those who came to
form the political beliefs will be leading to carry out the political 
actions. (A note of caution: the above argument is generally for the
people who are engaged in the so-called revolutionary politics. In a
well-established political systems, where political success is usually
associated with fame and fortune, the driving factors for people
doing politics can be much more complex and can be other than their
beliefs, however.)

In conclusion, as above two historic examples show, the political
leaders and leadership must rise up to serve the aspiration of the
masses. This conclusion is true regardless of those people, i.e.
the activists and leaders, themselves are aware about the fact that 
their values and aspiration are intimately connected to that of the
masses. How well a leader/leadership reflect the aspirations of
masses will be as a matter of judgment made by the course of events.

CONSENSUS VIEWS AND LEADERSHIP
******************************
To my understanding, good political leadership is not about carrying
out the tasks that are of simple majority opinion, though the majority
aspiration has to be an influencing factor. For example, Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi's decision in 1988-89 to resist the military regime in a
non-violent means is a form of political leadership. At that time,
the public emotions against the regime was running high and Suu Kyi,
as a leader, could have easily persuaded to resort to violence if
she were to listen to the consensus-majority views. However, her
insistence that the public must not use violence in resisting
dictators has proven her leadership ability (the total success for
this decision of leadership, of course, is still need to be proven.)

We can also look at the NCGUB as a case study on political leadership.
The decision to form a federal union for Burma in December 1990 by
those MPs, The Manerplaw Agreement, can be seen as an act of political
leadership. At that time, and at present still, many Burmese inside
Burma, especially of our generation, do not have an imagination of
how the ethnic political problem with democratic aspiration may be
combined together to reach a solution. The Manerplaw Agreement have
paved the way for peaceful co-existence of ethnic minorities and
majority Burmans (time, again, is still needed to prove this fact).

Whereas the Burmese political leadership have chosen definite path
to peace and democracy, it would all depend on our ability to
materialize these final objectives. Such objectives will only be
possible to achieve by mutual understanding and cooperation amongst
all democratic forces.

With best regards, U Ne Oo.

/* Endreport */
___________________________________________________________________
!                     drunoo@xxxxxxxxxxxx                         !
!          http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~uneoo              !
!                    ***** NOW ALSO ON *****                      !
! http://freeburma.org/ (A one stop homepage for all Burma info.) !
-------------------------------------------------------------------






______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com