Mon 14 Nov 2011
Filed under: Opinion,Other
Recently, foreign media have stated that there are two groups in Myanmar politics, hard-liners group and soft-liners group. They even named who are hard-liners and who soft-liners. Media usually highlight hard-liner to have incorrect attitude and soft-liner to have correct attitude.U Nu, leader of Clean AFPFL during Parliamentary Democracy period, was seen as a soft-liner. U Nu, to win the support of Buddhist Myanmar people, the majority of the voters, promised the designation of Buddhism as the state religion of Myanmar. And the majority of the people supported U Nu. Leader of Pa-Ma-Nya-Ta U Thein Pe Myint, however, did not support the idea of designation of Buddhism as the state religion, believing that so doing would lead to conflicts between Buddhist Myanmar people and other races that practise other faith and result in disunity among national brethren. Viewed as a hard-liner, U Thein Pe Myint faced tough times in the elections. U Thein Pe Myint, who is also a writer, wrote “Tat Phongyi” novel with a view to purification and long-existence of the Sasana; however, his work produced an adverse effect, provoking public outcry. In the election, Clean AFPFL won landslide victory whereas Pa-Ma-Nya-Ta Party led by U Thein Pe Myint suffered great defeat.
U Nu’s decision of designation of Buddhism as the state religion made Christian Kachin nationals go underground. It was the root cause of armed insurrection of Kachin nationals, which brought about uncountable loss of lives and properties of national people till now. Looking at this case, the political maneuver of U Nu who was supposed to be a moderate leader is proved to be wrong whereas the political attitude of U Thein Pe Myint can be concluded that it was correct and honest.
Bogyoke Aung San, U Thein Pe Myint and Thakhin Than Tun established Burma Communist Party in the independence struggle. After Myanmar had regained her independence, Thakhin Than Tun followed armed struggle line to bring Burma Communist Party to power. U Thein Pe Myint, however, preferred to peaceful and non-violent political approach and thus described by Thakhin Than Tun as peace preacher. Thakhin Than Tun is a hard-line communist whereas U Thein Pe Myint is a moderate communist. At length, the armed revolutionary road led Thakhin Than Tun to his doom, assassinated by his subordinate in the Bago Mountain Range jungles. Moreover, the nation and its people were hit hard by internal insurgencies. The political attitude of Thakhin Than Tun did not stand up to righteousness and honesty. We have learned that the political attitude of moderate U Thein Pe Myint who practiced unity and peace approach is proved to be right and correct.
U Kyaw Nyein, comrade of Bogyoke Aung San, was seen as a hard-liner. Columnist Moegyo, in 29-5-1958 issued Burma’s Era Newspaper, wrote like this: “It is said that AFPFL is divided not by different political views but by personal hatred within the leadership. No reason I have to deny this argument. As far as I am concerned, it is the split between humans and ogres.” Moegyo was a supporter of Clean AFPFL led by U Nu. He meant U Nu is a human and U Kyaw Nyein an ogre.
Just after the independence, Home Affairs Minister U Kyaw Nyein ordered to detain Thakhin Than Tun and leaders of Burma Communist Party. However, the order was leaked due to a traitor and thus Thakhin Than Tun and leaders of the BCP could flee and go underground. Had the plan of U Kyaw Nyein been successful and Thakhin Than Tun and leaders of the BCP been detained in time, the severe civil war would have not broken out and there would not have been massive loss of lives and properties of Myanmar citizens. Honest and righteous is the hard-line political attitude of U Kyaw Nyein to detain Thakhin Than Tun and leaders of Burma Communist Party.
Working in politics in the interests of the nation and the people, matters harmful to the interests of the nation and the people must be strongly opposed. Especially, matters posing threat to the interests of the ordinary people must be strongly opposed with peaceful approach. Matters contributing to the interests of the nation and the people must be welcomed with soft-line attitude. This is correct political attitude.
Today, foreign media are naming who is hard-liner and who is soft-liner, in fact, it is the disguised attempt to sow dissension between Myanmar politicians and Myanmar citizens and among Myanmar politicians. Actually, politicians can neither take hard-line nor soft-line on everything. They are to act on situations, in consideration of the interests of the nation and the people. Politician who does like this has honest and righteous political attitude. Politician who takes soft-line when the situation calls for firm decision and hard-line when the situation calls for moderate approach, to win public support for himself and his party in other words for own political interests, does not have honest and righteous political attitude.
To put it in a nutshell, Myanmar citizens no more believe the groundless argument of foreign media designed to cause discord naming who’s who in Myanmar politics. Today, Myanmar politicians and the entire nation, for the interests of the nation and the people, are joining hands in establishing the modern, developed, democratic nation with honest and righteous political attitude, pleasing the citizens who welcome with cheering and clapping.