Earning respect.. (r)

[bina@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Dear S. Wansai,

Thanks for your thoughtful comments.  I am in complete agreement with almost all your ideas, this is how I also have been thinking.

I dont mind a great diversity of opinion on how to proceed.  Each method has its advantages and its weaknesses, and, as you pointed out, perhaps together all these efforts will create the change we want and need.  The sooner the better.

But I do require honesty from my colleagues.  My problem with Soe Than is that, while he roundly condemns the activists for resorting to the threat of violence after many years of oppression, he fails to acknowledge the daily  terror meted out to an entire nation by the SPDC.  I took this to be his insincerity.  

After reading some of his other postings, I got the idea that, although he is very bright, he is also very young, and it may just be his inexperience that makes him appear to disregard the criminality of the junta, rather than a personal involvement with the SPDC.  But not sure. 

Then again, maybe he is the son of a SPDC member or associate, living abroad?  Could he be one of Win Aung's kids?!  What a variety of political creatures in this zoo!

As for DASSK's non-violence, it is certainly her deeply held principle.  Like the Thai king, however, or the Dalai Lama, she is a moral leader and the symbol of her country, as well as being the current general secretary of the NLD.  As general secretary, she cannot tolerate violence under the NLD aegis, of course; but as the moral leader of the country, she can recognize and accept others who share her goals, but not her methods.  While condemning the violence of an embassy takeover on this occasion, she has, at other times, reassured those who bear arms for democracy that she will never abandon them.

Regarding the embassy, let us remember that although the risk of violence was there, it did not take place.  Of course, some say that violence must never even be threatened.  Others hold that while action against armed soldiers is acceptable, violence against innocents is where we must draw the line.  Still others claim that there are no innocents, that if you pay taxes, or do business, or "vote", your tacit compliance with authority makes you partner in its actions.  Finally there are those who feel justified in doing anything possible to get the perpetrator's attention.

The whole embassy incident reminds me of a Bible story about King David.  When he was a young man, David was a revolutionary who led his small force against King Saul's armies.  As the sides retired to their camps at night after hostilities, David took the opportunity to sneak into Saul's tent, and cut off half of his garment while he slept.

The next morning, David showed Saul the garment on the battlefield.  Realizing that there had been nothing to prevent David from killing him on the spot, Saul, instead of becoming enraged at David's audacity, understood his spirit, called off the hostilities, and began negotiations.  

Interior Minister Sanan did behave like a latter day Saul.  But the comments from the US and others show little understanding.  Although I am not advocating violence, frustrations are high, patience is thin, and there are so many embassies, offices, etc. in the world... Paying lip-service to democracy while doing business with dictators may become dangerous behavior in the 21st century.  

As always, I look forward to reading your analysis and opinions.

Yours, Indiana