I recently had the opportunity to accompany my parents, U Aung Nyein and Daw Than Than Nu — candidates for the Democratic Party (Myanmar) — on their campaign activities in the cities of Mandalay and Yangon. It was a decidedly low-budget affair, and involved a large pickup truck loaded with a handful of young volunteers, and adorned with posters and the party flag. The truck would stop frequently, and the candidates and volunteers would distribute pamphlets and manifestos, and chat with potential voters. I had already heard positive reports of the public’s reactions from my parents, but what I saw in those three days surpassed my own expectations.
The vast majority of people in these constituencies, which cover both urban and rural districts, were either ready to vote, or were seriously willing to consider voting. When a candidate stopped in front of a house and spoke with its occupants, people from neighbouring houses would gather around to listen, and ask questions – these ranged in content from practical issues (“Where’s the nearest polling station?”) to questions of affiliation (“Are you associated with the NLD?”) to policy matters (“What will you do about political prisoners?”). People voluntarily approached candidates as they passed by, and in quite a few cases, stated that they had already decided to vote for their party, because they saw it as being the ‘cleanest’ on offer. Many asked for extra pamphlets, to take back to their friends and neighbours, or chased after candidates or volunteers, because they had not yet received a pamphlet.
Everywhere we went, people were open, approachable and willing to help by, for instance, pointing out the best way to reach clusters of houses situated away from major roads. Candidates were frequently invited into people’s houses for tea, and were told how wonderful it was that they were taking some action to try and change things. Buddhist monks, who were barred from voting, also assured the candidates that they were doing the right thing. It was particularly heartening to see that voters who received pamphlets, in almost all cases, carefully read the material detailing the candidates’ backgrounds and the party’s policy stance.
Picture 1: An election campaign truck and volunteer
Picture 2: Women in a Burmese village reading election pamphlets
These are not the words and actions of a populace that considered the elections to be a waste of time, and that regarded all participating candidates as stooges of the military regime. The recent election result cannot possibly reflect the wishes of Burmese voters, but that is a matter separate from the issue of boycotting the polls. The Burmese people are well aware of the track record of the government, and are smart enough to know that the recent elections would have been neither free nor fair. They were also under no illusion that they would wake up to the dawning of democracy on 8 November 2010. Nevertheless, people from all walks of life — the urban and rural poor, city businessmen, university students — spoke words of encouragement to my parents as they toured their constituencies, because they saw the elections as a small window of opportunity to a better future.
“If you’re poor and you’re sick, you just wait to die”, is what many citizens will tell you, while also voicing grave concerns for the future well-being of their children. It is this bleak reality that gave many candidates the conviction that participating in the elections was better than doing nothing until a fully-fledged democracy miraculously appears. I believe that the fate of a nation of 50 million is far too important to rest on the opinion of a single person, whether that person be a military general, or an internationally-recognised political prisoner. There is nothing surprising or undesirable about the fact that several voices — often in harmony, in that democracy is a common goal — are now offering to represent different sections of the Burmese population.
The student leaders who played a pivotal role in the 1988 pro-democracy uprising made great sacrifices to try and achieve a better future for the people of Burma. Many are still paying a heavy price for their vision. The pro-democracy forces participating in the 2010 elections also made a different kind of sacrifice: they staked everything they had, even their credibility in the eyes of their own people, to pursue an equally noble vision. For them, taking a chance, even if it failed to amount to anything, was preferable to inaction, for it is apathy and inaction that will ultimately serve to legitimise continued military rule.
Aung Si is the grandson of U Nu, Burma’s first democratically-elected Prime Minister. He currently resides in Canberra.


Elections are like gold dust in Burma, and the people are always very keen whenever a chance to vote presents itself. The difference however between the one previous in 1990 and the last one was clearly seen by the majority of the people. This does not mean they will not welcome another chance in a few years’ time.
I should hope to see Aung Si pick up the banner to continue the fight when his mother decides to retire from what little politics she’s been able to engage in over the decades of military rule. I am sure the dawning of a pluralistic society in our country is not far off despite the generals. The more the merrier, let a hundred flowers bloom and all that. Good luck.
Quality comment or not?
1
2
Aung Si BTW is a wonderful name – the victory drum. Were you named by your grandfather? I wonder if you also have a brother called Aung Moung – the victory gong.
Quality comment or not?
1
4
Daw Than Than Nu definitely is light-weight compared to her father U Nu the greatest politician modern Burma has ever seen.
In the 1960 elections U Nu didn’t need the campaign trucks nor the volunteers. What he needed only was his beaming photograph on the ballot-box for his faction Clean AFPFL.
In most towns and major villages where the voting took place the Stable AFPFL faction with the heavily visible support of Ne Win’s Army had not only bought the votes but they also used the army trucks to ferry the whole village to the pooling booths in nearby towns and they even fed the peasants before the votes.
They thought they had the votes of seemingly ignorant peasants firmly in their pockets.
But to their dismay the poor peasants especially the older ones, once they came down from the lofty army trucks and inside the booth, sat down in front of U Nu’s photo, kowtow (shit-kho) to it, at the same time calling U Nu aloud The Future Lord Buddha, and put their ballots into U Nu’s box.
Despite all their promises to vote for others. Despite the money they took before for that promise. Despite the fact that they had to vote under the bayoneted-rifles of the soldiers guarding the booth.
That scene was repeated hundred of thousands of times all over rural Burma and the result was U Nu’s landslide victory.
Quality comment or not?
1
1
Thanks for sharing your 2010 election experiences. It certainly is refreshing to hear a voice from the younger generation. Were he alive today, Bagyi Nu will be very proud of you as Daw Than Than Nu and U Aung Nyein are.
The older generation of democracy- seeking Burmese remain lamentably poised on the edge of a cliff separating statements and proclamations from tangible results. Hopefully, they will yet manage to negotiate the chasm.
“The pro-democracy forces participating in the 2010 elections also made a different kind of sacrifice: they staked everything they had, even their credibility in the eyes of their own people, to pursue an equally noble vision. For them, taking a chance, even if it failed to amount to anything, was preferable to inaction, for it is apathy and inaction that will ultimately serve to legitimize continued military rule.”
Hegel said: “”Genuine tragedies in the world are not conflicts between right and wrong. They are conflicts between two rights.”
Sadly, the kerfuffle between ” to boycott” camp and ” to participate” camps was a totally uncalled for conflict. It was not between good and evil but between one-sided positions, each of which embodies some good.
Conceivably, both sides could have orchestrated a conflict-free, planned action while still holding respective positions.
Quality comment or not?
4
1
“Hegel said: “”Genuine tragedies in the world are not conflicts between right and wrong. They are conflicts between two rights.”
Thank you Ko Kyaw Nyein
New Mandala unlike The Irrawaddy or almost every ‘western media’ has not espoused and promote the black/white, right/wrong sentiment among it audience.
May be the embargo aspirants will now cease denigrating others like Ko Thant Myint-U and here in New Mandala’s own Ko Hla Oo.
A wishful thinking no doubt, given the unconscionable amount of profits involved in present quagmire of Myanmar in Limbo.
Quality comment or not?
1
2
From what I saw the Democratic Party won a lot of support among what I would call “the educated elite”: upper middle class urban residents. They won over the local media, that’s for sure, and certainly were perceived as the “cleanest” viable alternative to the USDP. There were also those who would have supported the NLD but were ideologically opposed to the NDF and instead backed the Democratic Party as a middle path. Of course, this doesn’t necessarily translate into votes. While the result – three seats won from 47 candidates – was disappointing, it wouldn’t have been too surprising and the test now is whether they can stay the course. I also felt those who participated in the election from the democratic parties were making a sacrifice. For those behind the Democratic Party, their credibility in the eyes of the public seemed to mean more than winning on November 7, which was something I really respected.
Quality comment or not?
2
0
Ko Kyaw
“whether they can stay the course. I also felt those who participated in the election from the democratic parties were making a sacrifice. ”
If I may, not just a sacrifice but a constantly life threatening ones without the protection afforded to the lady with such as “Nobel Peace Prize”.
If they truly represent the segments of the population that voted for them they have nothing to fear in their assertions for that segment. You know the loyalty of supporters in Myanmar can be.
I am quite sure they will not cower to the SPDC.
The only fear is they will be bought out by “the have” ie present established power that be, since being in a” have nothing” for so long.
Thanks to the concerted damages of the west policy and SPDC.
Quality comment or not?
0
1