Burma Watchers Ponder Junta's Reason For Activist's Release

by Marwaan Macan-Markar

The move has sent Burma's watchers into overdrive trying to elicit political clues about the thinking of Rangoon's strongmen.

The release of Nobel laureate Suu Kyi is fueling speculation about what kind of political dialogue will emerge between the junta and Suu Kyi's National League of Democracy, not to mention what it presages for Burma's future.

No major political change followed Suu Kyi's first release from house arrest in 1995, after six years under house arrest.

Her second house arrest took place in 2000, after she defied the junta's ban on her leaving Rangoon and tried to go by train to Mandalay.

"It is never easy to figure (the junta's) next step," admits Soe Aung, one of the many exiled Burmese in Thailand closely watching events at home. "We have been following the statements of government officials, hints in the local media and what is happening in Rangoon," he adds.

"You have to watch closely," explains Aung, a director at the Bangkok-based Network for Democracy and Development in Burma. "The government knows how to twist and control the mind of people through rumors."

The dissection of political events in the last weeks has also taken into account details such as who goes in and out of Suu Kyi's lakeside residence in Rangoon, the cleaning of the area outside her home after months of neglect, the sprucing up of the NLD offices, and the unusually high number of visas given to foreign journalists to enter the country.

Positive signs of the release of the 56-year-old Suu Kyi emerged in early April, when seasoned Burma hands began noticing a shift in the attitude of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), as the government is known, toward the country's most famous political prisoner.

In the fourth week of April, after his seventh trip to Rangoon, UN special envoy Razali Ismail, who brokered the landmark talks between Suu Kyi and the junta that have been going on for a year now, publicly hinted of "important developments" in the coming days.

Media reports noted how Razali really seemed upbeat this time. On Friday, yet another clue emerged through the release of several NLD officials from prison.

This Southeast Asian nation has been under military dictatorships for the last 40 years, with the current junta -- lead by Gen. Than Shwe, Gen. Maung Aye and Lt.-Gen. Khin Nyunt -- taking over power in 1988.

The junta called for general elections in 1990 after a bloody crackdown on protesters in 1988 when hundreds were killed. But it refused to transfer power to Suu Kyi's NLD party after the NLD triumphed at the polls.

Burma watchers have been watching a string of unexpected events and statements from Rangoon since early March.

The most dramatic was the Mar. 7 arrest of four members of Burma's "untouchable elite" -- the son-in-law and three grandsons of former dictator Gen. Ne Win, who had ruled the country for 26 years.

"That came as a surprise. No one thought it possible that the country's most powerful family could be ousted this way," says Zaw Min, a member of Burma's Democratic Party for a New Society living in exile here. "There was no sign, no hint."

Teddy Buri interprets that event as a reflection of a crisis within the ranks of the military rulers. "It was a sign that in many ways showed that the army is very fractured, that one powerful faction has been eclipsed," adds Buri, head of a group of Burmese parliamentarians in exile.

But towards the end of March, Buri's interpretation was put in check by the presence of Shwe, Aye and Nyunt -- the troika of power -- at an event to mark the 57th anniversary of Burma's armed forces.

The official line at that time was the government had arrested Ne Win's kin to stall a coup they were planning, which included abducting Shwe and military officials and then taking control of the country on the anniversary.

"There was so much cloaked in secrecy that a clear reading of the events was difficult," says Aung of the Democracy network. "The same goes for sensing the people's reaction, since there is a culture of fear."

Hence, those like Aung had to gauge the public mood though indicators like newspaper sales after the Mar. 7 arrests. "All the newspapers sold out; that is unprecedented," he explains. "But there was no one celebrating in public after reading the news."

Another subject of close scrutiny was Rangoon's stance during this period toward a European Union delegation and Razali's planned visit in March.

While the junta welcomed the EU delegation and said that the aborted coup would not hinder its talks with Suu Kyi, Rangoon asked Razali to delay his trip due to the coup. Razali eventually made it to Burma in late April.

"Clearly there was something wrong," says Min. "We had to look for reasons why they asked Mr Razali to delay his visit -- lot of tension internally in the army or that sections of the army wanted to use the coup to foil the reconciliation talks."

Similar scrutiny for clues and reasons followed Rangoon's decision in April to ban all foreign trading firms in order to protect local business.

Burma's neighbors wasted little time in condemning the move, since it violates the policies of the Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which Burma is a member, and hurt ASEAN investments.

Likewise, Buri, the exiled parliamentarian, and others also took note of Rangoon's decision in March to enable the International Labor Organization (ILO) open an office in Burma. It came after the junta had dismissed the ILO's charges on Burma's use of forced labor.

Such political detective work will continue as long as Burma remains cloaked in secrecy, says Buri. This is bound to be the case despite Suu Kyi's release.

Adds Buri: "It is natural in a society that is closed, where the media is controlled, schools controlled, no freedom of expression."