|
|
|
|
|
by freeburma
1964 days ago
|
|
She is the leader of civilian government, which has no control of military. The military is not within civil control, legally. Civilian government has no power to order the military to do anything. She had two choices: 1) Say publicly that military are bad people, and erode what little power military affords NLD and fragile relationship between civilian government and military. Or 2) Have the press hate her for not saying words, and maintain the fragile understanding and peacemaking process with military. She chose the least bad option, in support of civilian rule, democracy, and peace building. Publicly condemning military for Rohingya doesn’t accomplish anything for anyone. |
|
"In 2012, she told reporters she did not know if the Rohingya could be regarded as Burmese citizens."
"However, she said that she wanted to work towards reconciliation and she cannot take sides as violence has been committed by both sides."
"State crime experts from Queen Mary University of London warned that Aung San Suu Kyi is "legitimising genocide" in Myanmar."
"Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a fellow peace prize holder, also criticised Suu Kyi's silence: in an open letter published on social media, he said: "If the political price of your ascension to the highest office in Myanmar is your silence, the price is surely too steep"
"In early October 2018, both the Canadian Senate and its House of Commons voted unanimously to strip Aung San Suu Kyi of her honorary citizenship."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aung_San_Suu_Kyi