| >At best, you could call AASK an apologist for military. Ah yes, then shes definitely not responsible...irony off. >>she took the podium on Wednesday at the United Nations’ highest court to defend her homeland against accusations of genocide, arguing that there had been no orchestrated campaign of persecution. >>Instead, she insisted that what foreign observers have called an organized, years-long campaign of atrocities against the Rohingya has been exaggerated and misconstrued. 2019/12/11
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/11/world/asia/aung-san-suu-k... 2018/07/07
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/07/world/asia/myanmar-rohing... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_genocide |
She had no involvement in the military’s decisions in Rakhine state. Yes, she defended the perpetrators at ICJ, either as part of a political strategy of reconciliation with military, or because she just felt like defending them because she secretly likes what happened. You guess which explanation is more likely.