Myanmar is about to be governed by a party, the National League for Democracy, which campaigned for change. But how much change are we likely to see, and what kind of change will they be? This is not only a concern shared by Myanmar’s civil society but one shared by the world, mostly Myanmar’s neighbours.
Myanmar is now being governed by an elected party after 58 years, but the elected heads and the party were not able to acquire complete stake of the government. In Myanmar’s parliament, 25% of the seats are for the military.
In fact, the security council’s major stakes are in the hands of the military. 70-year-old Daw Aung San Suu Kyi began her democratic journey after crossing a long uphill battle, manoeuvering the tight knots of the military in the process; but Suu Kyi has been rather cautious about every step she’s taken.
She has an absolute majority in the parliament, and, according to the Constitution of Myanmar, she could easily suspend clause 59(F) under the special power of the constitution, section 98. By suspending 59(F), Suu Kyi could make herself president, but she hasn’t.
Instead, she has opted for making compromises with the military establishment. Suu Kyi has no previous experience in running a democratic government. But she is a Western-educated lady, and knows well the histories of her neighbouring states, Thailand, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Pakistan.
Though Bangladesh is a close neighbour to Myanmar, and Pakistan belongs to the same continent, Thailand and Indonesia are the closest, ethnically, to Myanmar. Suu Kyi is well aware of the game of cat and mouse being played in Thailand -- in terms of democracy and a military rule, that is.
After 32 years of military rule in Indonesia, the country entered a democratic phase, with most of the stakes belonging to the military in 1998.
In Pakistan, democracy is sort of like the sun on a cloudy day: It’s fleeting. As if that wasn’t bad enough, a military establishment has created a sort of parallel government in Pakistan. While Bangladesh had overthrown a military rule 26 years ago, the military has not been able to gather any stakes in the government, but the politics of the country is still drenched in military culture.
So, these are the many examples presented in front of Suu Kyi. When Sheikh Hasina met Suu Kyi, she told her: “You have to go slow, you will not get all the democratic stake overnight.”
However, it’s not only the continued role of the military that has been a problem for the National League for Democracy government, but the expectations of the people, lack of efficiency in parliament members and ministers, ethnic groups, and poverty which also pose certain threats to Suu Kyi’s journey.
Nobody can now tell when Myanmar’s generals will give up their share of the stake in parliament, but it’s likely to happen shortly.
Indonesian generals took six years, Myanmar’s generals can take 10, so it may happen within Suu Kyi’s lifetime. But the pertinent question is: Can Myanmar produce good politicians within 10 years?
Ethnic groups are no small problem for Myanmar.
There are 135 ethnic groups in Myanmar, seven are big, and the rest are small -- 2 million people are not even recognised as citizens in Myanmar! Suu Kyi is closely following her father’s steps who, 69 years ago, reached an agreement with the leaders of all ethnic groups.
But he did not have time to run the country and was assassinated by the military only six months later. It is still rather uncertain how she plans to undo this Gordian knot. The biggest challenge for her now is the expectations of the people.
The reality is that the people of Myanmar do not know what a party government is and they most definitely don’t know what a democratic government means for their country and their living standards.
Managing expectations and reality is the key hurdle for Suu Kyi at this juncture.
With these crossroads, the uncrowned queen of Myanmar’s people has written a new chapter in the history of her country.
