New Era Dawns in Myanmar, CSIS

The author in front of the Union Parliament building, March 30, 2016. Source: Aung Din’s photo, all rights reserved, used with permission.

New Era Dawns in Myanmar

By Aung Din, April 1, 2016
http://cogitasia.com/new-era-dawns-in-myanmar/

 

It was March 30, a beautiful but extremely hot summer day in Myanmar. The sky above Naypyitaw, the secluded capital, was clear. The enormous parliament compound was filled with thousands of people and I was one of them. I had flown thousands of miles to witness the inauguration of U Htin Kyaw, the first elected civilian president of Myanmar in 54 years.

Thanks to Mann Win Khaing Than, the new speaker of the Union Parliament, I got a seat in the observation gallery of the Union Parliament meeting hall, where the inauguration was held. Thousands of people, who traveled from all over the country to attend this historic event, were sent to the dining hall next door to watch the event on a large screen TV. Millions of people were glued to TV screens at their homes and other public places. The people of Myanmar had waited for this day for a long time. We might be in different places witnessing this inauguration, but we all had the same feelings, honoring this day with great pleasure and missing our loved ones who had died during the long journey to democracy and human rights with great sadness.

The event was only an hour long. In the first session, President U Htin Kyaw and his two vice-presidents were sworn in before the Union Parliament speaker. Then the president left the room. It was the time for his cabinet ministers, including Aung San Suu Kyi, members of the Constitutional Court, and members of the Union Election Commission, who all were nominated by the President and approved by the Union Parliament last week, to be sworn in by the speaker.

Then President U Htin Kyaw came back and delivered his first presidential speech, which lasted about three minutes and in which he outlined the three policy priorities of his government: national reconciliation, internal peace, and the emergence of a constitution that will make the country a democratic federal union. After the speech, the president left to go to the Presidential Palace to officially accept power from outgoing president U Thein Sein, who refused to come to the parliament buildings. Then a nationwide celebration began.

I was one of the student leaders who organized the popular democracy uprising in Myanmar in 1988. I was also one of the thousands of political prisoners, arrested, tortured and imprisoned by the military regime for simply demanding human rights and freedom for the peoples. I fled the country when I was released from the prison, but I never stop working to support my colleagues back home. During the long and tortuous intervening years — which were filled with brutal oppression by the military regime, courageous and peaceful defiance by the people of Myanmar against tyranny, and tireless efforts by people in exile campaigning to increase international pressure on the military junta – I sometimes felt depressed and lost hope. Sometimes, I had a feeling that we were fighting a war that we could not win.

However, the situation in Myanmar has dramatically changed since 2011. The military regime has given up power, hundreds of political prisoners have been released, the “iron curtain” that isolated the country from the international community has been lifted, and restrictions have been relaxed.

The victory of the opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), in the November 2015 election, had encouraged us to believe that the permanent ending of authoritarian rule in Myanmar was possible. In February, I had seen my colleagues, veteran democracy activists who spent years behind bars for their commitment to the non-violence democracy movement, take their seats in parliament for the first time in 27 years. From March 30, the new civilian government, led by President U Htin Kyaw and under the guidance of Aung San Suu Kyi, has assumed power for five years. A new era in Myanmar has begun.

The new government still faces great challenges ahead. The military is still powerful and has authority to get involved in governing, law making, and defending the 2008 constitution. The country’s judicial system is still weak, unjust and corrupt, and the new president is not able to replace incumbent judges because the constitution allows them to serve more than one presidential term. The country’s economy is still controlled by the military’s economic enterprises and “crony” business tycoons.

Corruption is deeply rooted within the bureaucracy. The number of religious extremists and ultra-nationalists are on the rise. The use of illicit drugs among young people and narcotics trafficking are out of control. Although some ethnic armed groups signed the nationwide ceasefire agreement last October, many others refused to sign and armed clashes are continuing in some ethnic states, leaving thousands of peoples homeless. Yet the expectations of people about the new government are sky high.

To add into these challenges, the beginning of the new civilian government has not been perfect. The election of some parliamentary leaders, cabinet ministers, and a vice president raised concerns among the public due to their controversial backgrounds. The newly appointed ministers are old and fragile, 65 years and above. Relatively young, well-educated, and qualified party loyalists were left out of the government and parliamentary leadership positions. The influence of former speaker Shwe Mann in the selection of people appointed to high ranking positions is visible and disappointing to many. And many peoples are wondering how Aung San Suu Kyi will manage her four ministerial posts: foreign affairs, electric power and energy, education, and minister in the president’s office.

It is reasonable for Myanmar watchers to worry about the future of the country. However, I have a belief that my colleagues will be able to overcome these challenges with the spirit of national reconciliation and with the help of friends in the international community. They are seasoned soldiers of the democracy movement. They have already endured the burden of torture and imprisonment. They may not have governing experience, but they have a strong will to serve their best for their country. They also have a strong desire to improve their capabilities.

The people likely will not see economic and social development of the country right away, but they have already started to see some differences. The new government is much smaller than the previous one, and therefore will save millions of dollars for the country every year. The new leaders have refused to accept excessive privileges of office, such as several luxury cars, several assistants, several large houses, and several body guards, which normally come with their newly appointed positions. They donate significant amounts of their salaries to their party and for the victims of natural disasters.

The new leaders welcome constituents to meet with them without creating walls with gate keepers. They have traveled all over their constituencies and listened to the voices of their citizens. The people of Myanmar will be happy that those they have elected are not living in ivory towers, but living among them. The people clearly see major differences of morality and humanity between the previous power holders and the new ones. I believe they will not mind accepting the fact that their expectations will not be met immediately, as long as they are being treated as the masters of the country, for the first time in their lives.

Mr. Aung Din is a former political prisoner in Burma and currently lives in the United States. He serves as a consultant for Moemaka Multimedia, based in San Francisco, and as senior adviser to the Open Myanmar Initiative (OMI), a non-profit organization based in Yangon that promotes the right to information and education. See more information about OMI here.

The author speaking with U U Hla Saw, member of parliament from the Arakan National Party on March 30, 2016. Source: Aung Din’s photo, all rights reserved, used with permission.

Myanmar's Old Judiciary: A Challenge to the New Era of Governance (CSIS)

Myanmar’s Old Judiciary a Challenge to the New Era of Governance

By Aung Din
January 5, 2016
http://cogitasia.com/myanmars-old-judiciary-a-challenge-to-the-new-era-of-governance/

In February 2016 in Myanmar, the new Union Parliament will begin to exercise legislative power with newly-elected members. Myanmar’s new government will take administrative power in April. The National League for Democracy (NLD) party, led by Aung San Suu Kyi, won a landslide victory in the November 2015 election, so both the new parliament and the new government will be led by the NLD for a five-year term. However, the country’s legislative power will continue to be checked by incumbent judges, all of whom were appointed by outgoing President Thein Sein.

The 2008 constitution drafted by the military government set the length of terms for the president and legislators for five years. Many governing bodies appointed by the president and approved by the parliament also have five-year terms. However, the chief justice and judges of the Supreme Court are allowed to serve up to the age of 70 years, and those of the high courts of the states and regions until the age of 65. The average age of incumbent judges at present is about 60 and therefore most judges can serve at least two presidential terms consecutively, unless they resign from their positions, are found guilty of violating the constitution, or are unable to complete their duties due to illness or death.

During the recent election campaign, the NLD promised voters that it would bring about changes to the country. However, with 25 percent of seats in parliament controlled by the military, three important ministries and domestic agencies in the government controlled by the military, and all incumbent judges appointed by the former president controlling the judiciary, the NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi may not be able to change the country as much as she and the electorate wish.

Since President Thein Sein assumed office in 2011, he deserves credit for making positive changes in governance. Parliamentary Speaker Shwe Mann warrants praise for making the legislative bodies more active and productive. However, the country’s judiciary remains unchanged. Like under military rule, the judiciary is still corrupt, not independent, unjust, and under the influence of the Ministry of Home Affairs, whose minister is appointed by the commander-in-chief, not the president. In Myanmar, the police special branch, under the Home Affairs Ministry, represents the government in legal cases and puts pressure on judges to rule in the government’s favor. The attorney general, who is appointed by the president, has limited powers under the constitution and primarily supports the police and works to make sure that the government wins its cases.

On December 8, 2015, a parliamentary committee investigation into the judiciary submitted its findings to the Lower House. The committee reported that “a chain of bribery” is deeply entrenched throughout the judicial system. Because the constitution authorizes the president to appoint the chief justice, and the chief justice to consult the president for the appointment of other judges on all benches, a patronage network is unofficially activated with each appointment and judges at every level are under the influence of senior judges and the administration.

The investigation concluded that, “the people have been feeling insecure in their social and economic lives due to the lack of the rule of law. Only a judiciary system that is clean, independent, and just can protect the people — therefore democratic reform of the judiciary system is much needed.” However, the NLD government will not be able to implement these recommendations if it cannot overhaul the current judiciary system by replacing old judges with the new ones.

Generally, allowing judges to serve a longer term than the government is desirable and necessary for the independence of the judiciary if judges are seriously vetted by the president and thoroughly scrutinized by the parliament. However, in Myanmar, the parliament has no power to scrutinize judges nominated by the president. The constitution clearly stipulates that “The Pyidaungsu Hluttaw (Union Parliament) has no right to refuse the persons nominated by the president for the appointment of the chief justice of the Union and judges of the Supreme Court of the Union unless it can clearly be proven the persons concerned do not possess the qualifications prescribed for judges of the Supreme Court of the Union in the constitution.”

In the United States, the appointment of a justice for the Supreme Court can become an epic political battle. The president has to exert significant effort to vet a nominee to guarantee his or her personal history and qualifications. The U.S. Congress also investigates the presidential nominee to decide if he or she really deserves to hold a judicial position. The public is also deeply involved in helping Congress to make an informed decision.

In Myanmar, the confirmation process for judiciary nominees is too swift — no more than a week because the parliament only has to scrutinize the nominee for simple qualifications prescribed in the constitution, such as “a nominee must be an age between 50 and 70, have at least five years experience at a state/regional court or at least 10 years experience as a state/regional legal officer or at least 20 years experiences as an high court attorney, or be a person whom the president trusts as a prominent legal expert.” There is no room for the public to express its opinions on presidential nominees.

The judges appointed by President Thein Sein have run the judiciary with broad powers in Myanmar over the last five years, and unfortunately they will continue to rule the courts for at least another five years. Many people hope that Aung San Suu Kyi will find a magic formula to clean up the judiciary and reform corrupt court rooms, in order to make judges accountable for their decisions. Without an independent and impartial judiciary, Myanmar’s democracy cannot grow and blossom and Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD can be stymied at almost every turn.

Mr. Aung Din is a former political prisoner in Burma and currently lives in the United States. He serves as a consultant for Moemaka Multimedia, based in San Francisco, and as senior adviser to the Open Myanmar Initiative (OMI), a non-profit organization based in Yangon that promotes the right to information and education. See more information about OMI here.

To Support Myanmar Democratic Transition, U.S. May Need to Soften Policy toward Military (CSIS)

To Support Myanmar Democratic Transition, U.S. May Need to Soften Policy toward Military

By Aung Din, December 21, 2015 
http://cogitasia.com/to-support-myanmar-democratic-transition-u-s-may-need-to-soften-policy-toward-military/

 

Following the November 8 election, Myanmar’s political landscape has changed dramatically and the country is now stepping into uncharted territory. Both the National League for Democracy (NLD), which won a landslide victory, and the military, known as the tatmadaw and which ruled the country with an iron fist for decades, are about to do things they never have experienced.

Although the NLD won a landslide victory in the 1990 election, the party has never had a chance to hold power. Now, after 27 years, the NLD is going to govern the country. As the new Union Parliament will be dominated by the NLD and its allied ethnic parties, the tatmadaw representatives, who will be appointed by the commander-in-chief and take their allotted 25 percent of seats in parliament, will become an opposition group, a role in which the military has never served. The NLD and the military will have to govern the country together by sharing power, something neither side has done before. Myanmar’s military will have to recognize and respect a civilian president, who will be selected by party leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

At the start, the hope is that both the military and the NLD will try to work within the system of power sharing. However, sooner or later the situation may change.
The military’s leaders might choose one of the following options: (1) maintain the status quo, defend the powers of the tatmadaw outlined in the constitution, block the NLD government at every opportunity, revive the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), and try to return to power in the next election. Or (2) the military can stop paying respect to the NLD president, seize political power back from the civilian government by staging a coup and take the country back into international isolation. Or (3) it can accept gradual civilian rule over the military and give up political power over time.

Aung San Suu Kyi and her party may choose one of the following options: (1) try to force the military to give up power immediately and make herself president by using her popular mandate and amend the constitution. Or (2) she can seek to avoid confrontation and work closely with the military leaders to promote positive civil-military relations, which could convince the generals to leave power gradually according to their own schedule.

Which path each side will choose will depend on the pragmatism and wisdom of the leaders of both the military and the NLD. If they can work together, the country can be united, peaceful, and can prosper. If they choose to confront each other, the country could face chaos, disintegration, and deep recession.

The new government has to address a number of pressing problems. For example, the NLD cannot stop the decades-long civil war with ethnic armed groups and move the ongoing peace process forward without the help of the military. The two also need to work together to boost the country’s weak economy. Neither problem can be tackled if the NLD seeks to drive the military from power or if the tatmadaw chooses not to cooperate with the new government.

For the sake of the country’s future, Aung San Suu Kyi will need to establish positive relations with the generals. However, her efforts and diplomatic skills will not be enough if the United States continues to maintain its policy of disengagement with the military.
Many U.S. lawmakers still view Myanmar’s military as a human rights violator and will only move to lift restrictions when the tatmadaw agrees to work under civilian authorities, something which may not happen soon. Some members of Congress blame the military for the ongoing offensives against ethnic armed organizations in Kachin and Shan states. However, the military is not alone responsible for this fighting.

While Myanmar’s armed forces are continuously pushing ethnic troops closer to the border, the ethnic armed groups are trying to expand their areas of control inside Myanmar, some of which they have not controlled before. As a result, armed clashes are unavoidable. The military leadership is blamed for human rights violations in ethnic areas, but the armed ethnic groups are not innocent. These groups also impose heavy taxes on the local populations, recruit child soldiers, steal the property of their own ethnic minorities, lay landmines on farmland, and kill anyone they suspect of being a government informer.

Today, whether we like it or not, the military is a key stakeholder in the transition to democracy and national reconciliation in Myanmar. Engaging with the generals and encouraging them to fully cooperate with the new civilian government will help to build trust between the military and the new civilian politicians in Myanmar. As long as tatmadaw leaders are singled out as villains and excluded from engagement with the United States, they are unlikely to feel incentives to help make the transition smoother and make the peace process more successful. Their frustration with the United States may be directed at the new government and Aung San Suu Kyi.

This does not mean selling weapons to and providing combat training for the military. But the U.S. Congress should not discourage the departments of State and Defense from engaging the military by facilitating high-level visits, exchanging professional experience, assisting tatmadaw leaders in obtaining international exposure, and training some mid-level officers at U.S. military colleges.

Earlier, the hardline position of Congress against the military helped the democracy movement to endure hardship and survive brutal military rule. U.S. sanctions also denied legitimacy to the military regime, which was one of the driving forces prompting the generals to initiate the current transformation from the military rule to constitutional government. But today, the still-hardline position of many in Congress against the military may hinder Myanmar’s national reconciliation process, undermine the efforts of the new NLD government and Aung San Suu Kyi, and prompt the military to take measures contrary to country’s political democratization.

Mr. Aung Din is a former political prisoner in Burma and currently lives in the United States. He serves as a consultant for Moemaka Multimedia, based in San Francisco, and as senior adviser to the Open Myanmar Initiative (OMI), a non-profit organization based in Yangon that promotes the right to information and education. See more information about OMI here.

President Aung San Suu Kyi? Probably Not Yet (CSIS)

President Aung San Suu Kyi? Probably Not Yet

By Aung Din
December 15, 2015
http://cogitasia.com/president-aung-san-suu-kyi-probably-not-yet/  

Since Aung San Suu Kyi met on December 4 with former military dictator Than Shwe, who ruled the country from 1992 to 2010 and was the architect of the 2008 constitution, there has been widespread speculation that she could become president of Myanmar soon. These expectations were encouraged by a Facebook post the same day by Nay Shwe Thway Aung, a grandson of Than Shwe who facilitated the meeting, saying that Than Shwe accepted Aung San Suu Kyi as the future leader of the country and that he pledged to support her if she works for the development of the country.

Nay Shwe Thway Aung also posted the image of a 5,000 kyat bank note (just under $4), with the signatures of Than Shwe, President Thein Sein, and Aung San Suu Kyi on Facebook. Than Shwe’s signature is dated October 3, 2009, Thein Sein’s May 12, 2012, and Aung San Suu Kyi’s November 19, 2015. Aung San Suu Kyi also said that she reached an agreement with the former dictator, but without spelling out details.

Many observers interpreted Than Shwe’s gesture as giving a green light to the current military leaders to allow the amendment of the Section 59f of the constitution, which bars Aung San Suu Kyi from the presidency because her two sons are foreign citizens. At the same time, Aung Ko, a member of parliament from the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party, floated the idea that she could become president if Section 59f is temporarily suspended by the approval of the parliament with a simple majority vote. Many believe this might be feasible.

However, even it is true that Than Shwe authorized military leaders to amend Section 59f, the new parliament, which will take office at the end of January 2016, cannot amend the constitution immediately. According to the constitution, the first order of business for the new parliament is electing chairmen of both the Lower and Upper Houses. Next the Union Parliament will divide into three groups to nominate three vice-presidential candidates. Then the Union Parliament as a whole will serve as the Electoral College and select one of the three vice-presidential candidates to be president.

As a result, the new parliament must elect the president before it can consider amending the constitution at its first session. Also during the first session, the new parliament will be busy debating the 2016-2017 budget, which will be submitted by the outgoing government, and approving nominations for more than 200 Union level positions, including cabinet ministers, that will be submitted by the president-elect.

Even if the new parliament amends Section 59f with the support of the military in the next session, a national referendum is needed for it to go into effect. Amending this provision will be a long process and take several months, if not years.

In addition, how much influence Than Shwe still has on the military leaders and whether they will agree to make her president is also in question. The offices of both President Thein Sein and Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing said that they were not informed about the meeting between Than Shwe and Aung San Suu Kyi in advance. Presidential spokesperson and Information Minister Ye Htut said, “Let me tell you frankly, Senior-General Than Shwe is now retired. We have some respect for him as he used to lead us. But he doesn’t have the right to reverse the policies we are taking. If he [tried to], we would not accept it.”

The president’s office director Zaw Htay also told the Myanmar Review Journal that the president was not informed in advance about the meeting and that he never signed the 5,000 kyat bank note because it is against the law. Senior military officials told The Irrawaddy that the commander-in-chief and top military leaders were at Pyin Oo Lwin at the time of the meeting and they were not informed about it in advance either. One unnamed general from the military’s information unit said that Than Shwe is already retired and has nothing to do with the military.

The idea of temporarily suspending Section 59f is also a pie in the sky notion. The 2008 constitution does not allow suspension of its provisions either permanently or temporarily. Adding the provision for “temporary suspension” of the constitution would need to be added before it could be used.

Judging by the negative responses from the offices of the president and the military commander, it is clear that for Aung San Suu Kyi to become president depends solely on the goodwill of Senior General Min Aung Hlaing and current military leaders. It will take some time for her to build trust with the military leaders and get their support.

On December 4, before Aung San Suu Kyi went to see Than Shwe in Naypyitaw, Min Aung Hlaing delivered a speech at the Defense Service Academy in Pyin Oo Lwin, at which he spoke about the military’s participation in politics. He said “since democracy enhances one’s value, we will have to proceed with respect for the betterment of the country with a reciprocal arrangement.” By stating “reciprocal arrangement,”, Min Aung Hlaing made clear that as long as Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy party acknowledge the role of the military and treat it with respect, the military will respond with the same attitude.

Mr. Aung Din is a former political prisoner in Burma and currently lives in the United States. He serves as a consultant for Moemaka Multimedia, based in San Francisco, and as senior adviser to the Open Myanmar Initiative (OMI), a non-profit organization based in Yangon that promotes the right to information and education. See more information about OMI here.

Elections in Myanmar: Winners, Losers, and the Future

Regional politicians in Kayin State receive training on how to campaign in Myanmar’s November 8 elections. Source: Remko Tanis, used under a creative commons license.

Elections in Myanmar: Winners, Losers, and the Future

By Aung Din
http://cogitasia.com/elections-in-myanmar-winners-losers-and-the-future/

Before the November 8 election in Burma, or Mynamar, I predicted that the National League for Democracy party (NLD), led by Aung San Suu Kyi, would win the largest number of seats, but not enough to form the government. I also predicted that Myanmar’s ethnic parties would win majorities in their states and thus hold a strong bargaining position with the major parties for the upcoming presidential election, expected in February 2016. 

I was wrong. I underestimated the magnitude of anger and hatred of the people against the military and the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP). I also underestimated the popularity of Aung San Suu Kyi. The election result represents the people’s retribution against the military, which kept them under its boots for decades. 

The winners of this election are clearly Aung San Suu Kyi, the NLD, and the people of Myanmar. The losers are President Thein Sein, the USDP, the military, and the ethnic parties. The future of the country will be shaped by the NLD and the military, represented by Aung San Suu Kyi and Commander-in-chief Min Aung Hlaing.

The Winners:

Undoubtedly Aung San Suu Kyi is the biggest winner. All NLD candidates held her picture high, repeated her speeches, and praised her loudly to convince constituents to vote for them. They won because of her. Actually, it looks like she ran in all constituencies and she singlehandedly crushed all other candidates. This election was a referendum on Aung San Suu Kyi and whether she is trusted by the people to govern the country.

The people of Myanmar are also winners. They have quietly and successfully struck back against the military and the USDP in a non-violent way after decades of abuse, mismanagement, corruption, and human rights violations. 

The NLD, which was harassed and attacked by the military regime for the last 25 years, now has a chance to rule the country. As the majority party, the NLD will hold the chairmanship of the lower house and upper house and will be able to nominate two vice-presidential candidates. An NLD member will become the next president of Myanmar. All chief ministers of the 14 regional governments will be appointed by the NLD president. Twelve of 14 state and regional parliaments -- the exception is Rakhine State and Shan State-- will be controlled by the NLD. The NLD now has an opportunity to prove that it can govern the country. 

The Losers:

The military is the biggest loser. Military leaders expected to continue running the country for another 50 years with their carefully crafted 2008 constitution, using the USDP, the party of retired generals, as its political front. Even under this constitution, which allows the military to hold significant power in all of the country’s affairs, the military will not be able to exercise full control.

President Thein Sein also was handed a sharp defeat. Although the constitution does not allow the president to campaign for the party, he violated the rules and tried hard to convince the people that the USDP, under his leadership and with strong backing of the military, was the best for the country. Thein Sein made numerous tours around the country, together with Commander Min Aung Hlaing, during the campaign period. He even said in his last monthly radio speech that he would try to amend the constitution to allow all cities to be run by elected bodies in his second term, instead of township administrators who are employees of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Now, he cannot do any of those things.

The USDP comes away a big loser as well. Its representatives claimed that they were the ones who changed the country from dictatorship to democracy. However, the people expressed their views clearly through their votes, making clear they want change, not only in the political system, but also in who their rulers are.

Ethnic parties were defeated handily, except the Arakan National Party, which won a majority in Rakhine State. Most ethnic parties are divided within their ranks, conflicted with personal interests and rivalry, and proved unable to convince a majority of their constituents to trust them.

The Future:

The future of the country will be shaped by the NLD and the military, at least for the next five years. Although the NLD will be able to lead the legislature, the military still controls 25 percent of the seats in these bodies and it can block any attempt to amend the constitution. The president will have to work with the ministers of Home Affairs, Defense, and Border Area Affairs, who will be appointed by the commander-in-chief.

In the powerful 11-member National Defense and Security Council, which has the authority to appoint the commander-in-chief, the military already has a majority of six seats and is able to undermine the president’s agenda. In this power-sharing dynamic between the military and the NLD, the political future of Myanmar is uncertain.

Aung San Suu Kyi and Min Aung Hlaing will need to modify their mindsets to be able to accept each other, and only then “the two can tango.”

If Aung San Suu Kyi rushes to amend the constitution with an aim to reduce or abolish the powers of the military, tension and distrust will emerge on both sides, which could lead the country to chaos. If the military is not patient enough to engage Aung San Suu Kyi, and tries to find other ways to cling to power, the situation will be more dangerous. Both sides know well the danger of the extreme. Aung San Suu Kyi knows the risks and therefore she has requested dialogue with Min Aung Hlaing and Thein Sein. This is a smart move. Positive and productive relations between the two are critical for ensuring a peaceful political transition in the coming months. 

 

Mr. Aung Din is a former political prisoner in Burma and currently lives in the United States. He serves as a consultant for Moemaka Multimedia, based in San Francisco, and as an adviser to the Open Myanmar Initiative (OMI), a non-profit organization based in Yangon that promotes the right to information and education. See more information about OMI here.