Editorial on the Washington Post (8

[zawzaw@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

More Than an Icon
Saturday, August 1, 1998; Page A14 

BURMA'S MILITARY dictators ended their latest standoff with democracy
leader Aung San Suu Kyi by the only means they know: force. She had driven
from her home in the capital toward a provincial city to meet political
colleagues, and troops had blocked her way. For six days, she waited in her
sun-baked car, peaceful but resolute. Then soldiers pinned her to the back
seat, ejected her companions and drove her back to Rangoon.

The regime's heavy-handedness, and its denial of Aung San Suu Kyi's basic
right to travel and meet with whom she chooses, drew condemnation from many
governments, as well it should. But to a large extent, even while seeking
to support Aung San Suu Kyi, these foreign ministers largely missed the
point. "Aung San Suu Kyi is an icon, whether you like it or not," New
Zealand's foreign minister warned Burma's junta, speaking for the United
States, Europe and others. "You've really got to give her a lot more
freedom, whether you like it or not."

An icon is an image, a symbol, a saintly or Christ-like figure. Aung San
Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace laureate and undoubtedly a profile in courage, has
become a symbol of democracy. But to treat her only, or primarily, as an
icon is to diminish her. For Aung San Suu Kyi, 53, is a political leader;
she heads the National League for Democracy, which won four out of every
five seats in a 1990 parliamentary election that the military regime still
refuses to honor.

The six-day standoff, and whatever comes next in this unfinished story,
needs to be understood in that context. Aung San Suu Kyi did not set out to
stage a protest or win world sympathy. She set out to do what political
leaders do: consult with colleagues. Burma's dictators have arrested many
of her associates, and they refuse to let others come to her, so she was
trying to reach them. No doubt she will try to do so again.

Treating Aung San Suu Kyi as an icon lets Burma's dictators off the hook of
negotiating with her as the legitimate political leader that she is. It
lets other nations express admiration and concern while ignoring the
substantive ways they are keeping her tormentors in power. For it is
contracts with America's Unocal Corp., France's Total, Singapore's and
China's arms merchants and other companies from Europe, Asia and North
America that allow the unpopular generals to hold on.

Recognizing that fact, the United States at least has banned new
investments. The European Union has yet to follow suit, and Southeast Asian
nations continue to advocate engagement. But engagement has produced
nothing, whereas multilateral sanctions -- as advocated by Aung San Suu Kyi
herself -- could have a real effect. Not only is Burma's regime one of the
world's most odious, profiting from press-ganged labor and the heroin
trade; but, unlike in most such cases, a legitimate, democratically
anointed alternative already exists.

Aung San Suu Kyi has called for Burma's elected parliament to convene by
Aug. 21. That is the pragmatic goal of a flesh-and-blood politician. The
Clinton administration and its allies should back it in pragmatic, concrete
ways. 

© Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company