THE ROAD TO LIBERTY:

A Dissertation About Aung San Suu Kyi and

Her Fight for Democracy in Myanmar

In partial fulfillment for the requirements in Political Science 11

For the first semester of academic year 2009-2010

Submitted to:

Ms. Lovely Entoma

Submitted by:

Vincent Joseph Estorque Cesista

University of the Philippines

Third Quarter, 2009

 Table of Contents

Page

Chapter I: The Problem and Its Setting

Introduction 1

Rationale 1

Significance of the Study 2

Statement of the Problem 3

Objectives 4

Scope and Delimitation 4

Chapter II: Dissertation’s Frameworks

Theoretical Framework 5

Conceptual Framework 7

Chapter III: Methodology – In Depth Discussion and

Analysis of the Study

The Life of Aung San Suu Kyi in the Political

Spectrum 8

International Recognitions 12

Socializing Agents that Shaped Aung San Suu Kyi’s

Political Behavior 13

Chapter IV: Study Summary

Conclusion and Generalization 17

References 19
Rationale

Democracy is a body of ideals practiced by some states in lieu of the classical absolute monarchy

and authoritarianism that are believed to hamper the rights of the people. The global society is aware on

how peoples from different parts of the world fight for their rights to attain a democratic state. United

Nations has recognized efforts from different non-democratic countries and in return has helped these

states and/or nations through diplomatic, economic or military aids to reach the empowerment that these

peoples are longing for. The global political arena knows how democracy could be a catalyst of change

for nations that need reforms and for dictators that should be ousted. United States of America is known

to be a major lobbyist of democracy in the world and has done several decisions that have been pivotal

points of the histories of a lot of countries: i.e. The democratization of Iraq in the first wave of 21 st

century.

Union of Myanmar, a republic that was faced with waves after waves of political and societal

turmoil caused by hegemonic states such as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

and what is then known as the Imperial Government of Japan. After the war, Myanmar was liberated

through the efforts of some student-activists of those times. Here comes the problem, since there was no

ultimate authority in Myanmar like the power United Kingdom has used, conflict started to rise from

every corner of the country due to leaders grabbing powers against one another. Never mind that military

rule has started to corrupt the very essence of democracy that was supposed to be received by Myanmar

out of its so-called ‘liberation’. We shall furthermore treat this topic’s background in a more in-depth

discussion and analysis in the succeeding chapters.

Despite the military-fortified political havoc happening in Myanmar, people pushing for a full

dressed-democracy were either out of the streets or lobbying in political arenas locally and

internationally. We know how Aung San Suu Kyi calls for the unity of people of Myanmar to bloodlessly

fight the existing military government. We also know how the government tried to stage assassination
plots against her as many times as they could – but all of these plans failed. With the blind belief that the

fight for democracy would be easily ended, Aung San Suu Kyi was placed in house arrest for many years

by Myanmar’s government.

This paper would create a triangulation between the Union of Myanmar, Aung San Suu Kyi and

the concept of Democracy. We shall discuss how the principles of democracy were clearly ignored by the

military government structured in Myanmar and how Aung San Suu Kyi, despite the threats in her life

and blur future for a democratic achievement, still fight against the repression caused by her own

government. Also, we shall take into consideration how the People of Myanmar believed that Aung San

Suu Kyi is the catalyst of change that they should believe in that would alter the face of history forever.

Despite Aung San Suu Kyi’s capability of staging a full-blown war against the government, she has

always been true to her ideology of achieving democracy in ways that wouldn’t require violence.

Significance of the Study

As a student of political science, the researcher believes that the study and application of

democracy in different set-ups should be well-understood. The case of Myanmar is a very good avenue

for the discussion on how people of a military government call for a change of system in favor of a

democratic rule. Using a macro point of view, we would be able to see how the case of Aung San Suu Kyi

called democratic advocates around the world to extend help through either direct or indirect pressures. It

is important for us to know how United Nations and other democratically-inclined states such as United

States of America acted toward this issue concerning Myanmar.

This work is especially significant to people studying governance and government structure.

Through this paper, we shall then see how social construction could change the face even of governments

with strong military power holding the people in their throats. With this study, we would be able to know

how a government should adjust to the demands of the its people and the international community.
 Also, this study helps instructors of different political science fields on the level of understanding

of students, of around the reporter’s age, to comprehend international political issues such as the case of

Aung San Suu Kyi. There are times that instructor-student relationship is infringed due to miscalculations

of the prior to his/her students’ capability of grasping deeper topics such as this one.

Lastly, the readers would see how Kay Lawson’s theory is applied in the case of Aung San Suu

Kyi. We shall later on analyze the different factors that made Aung San Suu Kyi such a democratic

advocate in Myanmar amidst oppression of the military regime.

Statement of the Problem

This research work aims to provide a full-blown discussion and backgrounder on the case of

Aung San Suu Kyi and the government of Myanmar. Moreover, this study seeks answers to the following

questions:

1. How Aung San Suu Kyi has become a catalyst of Democracy in Myanmar?

2. What are the factors that made her a democratic Advocate? (Using Kay Lawson’s Theory)

3. What are the reactions of the international community especially of the United Nations and the

United States of America toward the issue?

4. What conclusions and recommendations will the researcher present to this issue’s conflict

resolution?

Objectives of the Study

The goals of this study are the following:

A. Provide a complete background of the conflict in Myanmar where Aung San Suu

Kyi is involved.
 B. Supply a fully developed discussion on all sides of the said topic and;

C. Offer a rational and logical ways to achieve conflict resolution

Scope and Delimitation

To materialize the goals of this study, the researcher has set-up parameters in which this research

paper shall revolve.

We shall only dwell on information and related articles that concern our topic of discussion. The

researcher made sure that only those data associated with Myanmar and Aung San Suu Kyi’s fight for

democracy in her country will be tackled in this paper. Also, we should not forget the reactions of

different parties around the globe especially those that are known to be lobbyists of democracy.

Aside from notes that are recognized by the author to be part of other academic researches and/or

given facts, rest assured that all opinions, analyses and discussions are from the researcher alone, and they

exist in these pages and nowhere else.

 Chapter II

DISSERTATION’S FRAMEWORKS

Theoretical Framework

The theory of immobility of fragmentation - The main theory that Hartz aims to purvey is that European

migration to other territories led to the formation of fragments of Europe that consequently adopted the

political system of the migrants at that said to be their political culture. The European revolution, as the

historically inclined should know, went through divergent phases which were reflected in the fragments.

These fragments of Europe, whether they came into being during the period when Europe was feudal,

radical or liberal, would remain stagnant after the separation from the motherland. In other words, unlike

Europe, these newly formed systems would not experience the type of alteration that Europe did. Instead

the system would in turn develop into the permanent political culture of that new society. Hartz termed

this phenomenon as the “immobilities of fragmentation”. (The civic culture revisited by gabriel a.

almond and sydney verba (eds.)

While making this paper, the researcher was faced with the question that, what makes people of Myanmar

so democratically inclined that despite the military regime that they are under, some of them would still

try to push for the absolute retention of the rule of law. The author of this study started to look at the

historical side of this case study. Myanmar was then under the British occupation and also, at a very short

period of time, with Japan to achieve their liberty. Question, what were the values given by Great Britain

to the people of Burma? Perhaps, the theory of “immobility of fragmentation” answers this confusion.

When Britain colonized Myanmar, the prior has probably left the influence of liberty, equality and

fraternity that simply leads to democracy; Even though we cannot well observe that Britain during their

occupation of Myanmar was teaching these values, this phenomenon could be historically supported by

the liberalization of most of British colonies toward democracy. This could be a possibility why U Aung
San (Suu Kyi’s father) had the same struggle for liberty at about six decades ago. Indeed, the colonizing

whites could have left a democratic psyche amongst Burmese.

Political Socialization Theories by Kay Lawson and Fred Greenstein – These are two different theories

with different approaches toward the same body of idea – how people have developed their political

behavior. Kay Lawson may well argue that socialization is a lifetime process and is continuous.

Greenstein does not refute the idea of time in Kay Lawson’s theory. However, he made a more detailed

explanation on how time could be a big factor on shaping one’s political behavior. He divided this by

saying that there are macro and micro factors that could interfere to a person’s political identity. He also

argued that history could be a very good socializing agent.

These theories fit the topic that we have in hand. First of all, it is true that because of her environment or

what we call as socializing agents, Aung San Suu Kyi has developed her political identity. Without these

agents, most probably Aung San Suu Kyi would have not been the woman we know today. People cannot

just argue that Suu Kyi’s mindset is because she is the daughter of Burma’s prominent freedom fighters;

but political scientists could well squabble that because of the things around her, Aung San Suu Kyi

became the the Aung San Suu Kyi that we know.

There have been a lot of peace advocates, freedom fighters and statesmen that we know: Mahatma

Gandhi, Martin Luther, Winston Churchill and many others. Maybe, just maybe, the timing was just right,

that like the rest of these prominent figures, Aung San Suu Kyi lives in a time and place where heroism is

needed. Since she has the prerequisites of being an absolute peace advocate, the environment just

provided a spark for that Nobel Laureate figure in her to come out. This is how environment is so

powerful in making the true identity of people go out.