I think of my sister Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi every day. Her picture hangs on the wall of my office, reminding me that, thousands of miles away in Asia, a nation is oppressed. Every day I ask myself: have I done everything I can try to end the atrocities being committed in Burma? And I pray that world leaders will ask themselves the same question. For if they did, the answer would be "no", and perhaps their conscience will finally force them to act.
Humankind has the ability to live in freedom and in peace. We have seen that goodness has triumphed over evil; we have witnessed political transitions in South Africa, and elsewhere, evidencing that we live in a moral universe. Our world is sometimes lacking wise and good leadership or, as in the case of Burma, the leadership is forbidden to lead.
Aung San Suu Kyi has now been detained for more than 13 years. She recently passed her 5,000th day in detention. Every one of those days is a tragedy and a lost opportunity. The whole world, not just the people of Burma, suffers from this loss. We desperately need the kind of moral and principled leadership that Aung San Suu Kyi would provide. And when you add the more than 2,100 political prisoners who are also in Burma's jails, and the thousands more jailed in recent decades, the true scale of injustice, but also of lost potential, becomes heartbreakingly clear.
Like many leaders, Aung San Suu Kyi has had to make great personal sacrifices. It is cruel enough to deprive an innocent person of her freedom. Burma's generals are crueller still. They try to use her as leverage to make her submit to their will. They refused to allow her husband to visit one last time when he was dying of cancer. She has grandchildren she has never even met. Yet her will and determination have stayed strong despite her being kept in detention for so many years.
More than anything, the new trial and detention of Aung San Suu Kyi speaks volumes about her effectiveness as a leader. The only reason the generals need to silence her clarion call for freedom is because they fear her and the principles she stands for. She is the greatest threat to their continuing rule.
The universal demand for human freedom cannot be suppressed forever. This is a universal truth that Than Shwe, the dictator of Burma, has failed to understand. How frustrated must he be that no matter how long he keeps Aung San Suu Kyi in detention, no matter how many guns he buys, and no matter how many people he imprisons, Aung San Suu Kyi and the people of Burma will not submit. The demands for the freedom of Aung San Suu Kyi and all political prisoners of Burma grow louder and echo around the world, reaching even his new capital hidden in central Burma. Words, however, are not enough. Freedom is never given freely by those who have power; it has to be fought for.
The continuing detention of Aung San Suu Kyi and Burma's other political prisoners is a crime and an indictment of an international community that often substitutes the issuance of repeated statements of concern for effective diplomacy. The UN treats the situation in Burma as if it is just a dispute between two sides, and they must mediate to find a middle ground. The reality is that a brutal, criminal and illegal dictatorship is trying, and failing, to crush those who want freedom and justice. The international community cannot be neutral in the face of evil. That evil must be called what it is, and confronted.
Change is overdue to the framework within which the international community approaches Burma. Twenty years of trying to persuade Burma's generals to reform has not secured any improvement. Forty visits by UN envoys have failed to elicit any change. The warm embrace of the Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean) did not improve the behaviour of the regime towards Burma's citizens whether Christian, Buddhist or Muslim. The regime rules with an iron fist and those under its rule have suffered long enough.
Aung San Suu Kyi and her supporters have time and again offered to dialogue with the regime. They offered a path of reconciliation and non-violent transition. Even as Aung San Suu Kyi stood before the regime's sham court, facing five years' imprisonment, we heard her voice loud and strong. She said: "There could be many opportunities for national reconciliation if all parties so wished."
Burma's generals must now face the consequences of their actions. The detention of Aung San Suu Kyi is as clear a signal as we could get that there will be no chance of reform and that the regime's "road map to democracy", including the call for elections, in 2010, is an obstacle to justice.
A new report from Harvard Law School, Crimes in Burma, commissioned by some of the most respected jurists in international law, has used the UN's own reports to highlight how Burma's generals have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Burma's generals are criminals, and must be treated as such. Than Shwe should be held accountable for abominable atrocities: his soldiers rape ethnic women and children, they torture, mutilate and murder at will. In eastern Burma, more than 3,300 ethnic villages have been destroyed, more than in Darfur. Civilians are deliberately targeted and shot on sight.
Than Shwe spurned the compassion of those willing to provide assistance following Cyclone Nargis. Instead, he conducted a referendum and he declared his undemocratic constitution the victor while victims perished from the cyclone's devastation. These are war crimes and crimes against humanity. Than Shwe and the rest of the generals cannot be allowed to go unpunished. The UN must establish a commission of inquiry, with a view to compiling evidence for prosecution. Failure to do so amounts to complicity with these crimes.
An international arms embargo must also be imposed immediately. Those countries supplying arms to Burma are facilitating these atrocities. Countries across the world must declare their support for a global arms embargo, making it impossible for China to resist such a move at the Security Council.
Aung San Suu Kyi and the people of Burma deserve nothing less than our most strenuous efforts to help them secure their freedom. Every day we must ask ourselves: have we done everything that we can? I pledge that I will not rest until Aung San Suu Kyi, and all the people of Burma, are free. Please join me.
Desmond Tutu: my tribute to Burma's opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Verdict delayed in Suu Kyi trial
 Security has been tight in Rangoon in anticipation of
|
A court in Burma has postponed delivering its verdict in the trial of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
The court had been due to rule on the case on Friday, but the
verdict has now been delayed until 11 August.
The judges said they needed more time to review the case, according to Western diplomats in Rangoon.
Aung San Suu Kyi is accused of breaching the terms of her house arrest by allowing an uninvited American to stay in her home.
Despite international calls for her release, a guilty verdict has been widely expected.
Analysts suggest that the delay may signal a belated recognition on the part of the government at the level of anger over Ms Suu Kyi's prosecution.
Deflecting criticism?
Riot police surrounded the prison on Friday, following warnings in the local media that any protests against a guilty verdict would not be tolerated.
All roads leading to Insein prison - where the trial is being held - were blocked by barbed-wire barricades.
 |  
Timeline: Aung San Suu Kyi trial Profile: Aung San Suu Kyi |
But in the event, the streets remained quiet as news got out of the postponement.
The trial had initially been expected to last a few days, but has now dragged on for more than two months.
Analysts say the Burmese junta may use this trial to make sure the popular pro-democracy leader is still in detention during elections planned for early next year.
Her term in house arrest was about to come to an end when she was arrested on this latest charge.
Ms Suu Kyi's international legal counsel, Jared Genser, said the delay in the verdict was an attempt by the junta to deflect international criticism.
"It is in some ways a smart move - push off the verdict until the middle of August when numerous government and United Nations officials around the world will be on vacation," he told the French news agency AFP.
"But it remains to be seen whether this ploy will work or if anticipation will be heightened in the run-up to the issuance of the verdict."
Protests have been held demanding Aung San Suu Kyi's release
'Vision warning'
Ms Suu Kyi faces five years in jail if she is convicted of violating the terms of her house arrest.
She is accused of allowing American well-wisher John Yettaw to stay at her lakeside home in Rangoon after he swam there.
Mr Yettaw has said he swam to her home to warn her he had a vision that she would be assassinated.
Lawyers for Ms Suu Kyi have not disputed the events, but say she had no control over the situation and that the guards around her home should have kept Mr Yettaw away.
Her lawyers have also argued that the law she has been charged under is part of a constitution abolished 25 years ago.
Her Burmese lawyer, Nyan Win, said Ms Suu Kyi was "preparing for the worst", stockpiling books and medicines in anticipation of a long prison sentence.
Ms Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy won elections in 1990 but was never allowed to take power.
The 64-year-old has spent nearly 14 of the last 20 years in detention, much of it at her Rangoon home.
Maddox Jolie-Pitt [aka Rath Vibol], Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt's oldest son, turns 8
Maddox with mom Angelina (AP photo)August 5, 2009
Examiner
August 5 is Maddox Jolie-Pitt's 8th birthday, if you can believe it. Almost since the minute he was adopted by Angelina, Maddox has been in the tabloids and has certainly been leading a pretty cool life. Let's see what he's been up to for the past seven years, shall we?
Born in Cambodia, Angelina spotted him in an orphanage while as a Goodwill Ambassador for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. She had previously been in Cambodia while filming Tomb Raider and was taken with the country. Upon meeting Maddox, who was known as Rath Vibol, she applied to adopt him and it was made official on March 10, 2002.
At the time, Angelina was married to Billy Bob Thornton, but the two divorced and Angelina was granted sole custody. Angelina famously went on to meet Brad Pitt in 2005 and the two actors forged a relationship. It wasn't long before Brad adopted Maddox, along with Zahara, Angelina's adopted daughter from Ethiopia. They Jolie-Pitt clan has grown steadily since then, and now Maddox has even more siblings: Shiloh, Pax, Knox, and Vivienne.
Maddox has toured the world in his short life. Some of the exotic locales include India, Jordan, Namibia, France, Spain, Italy, Cambodia, the UK, and even recently went to Iraq. He spends part of his time in the Jolie-Pitt homes in New Orleans, France, Los Angeles, and New York. As such, he speaks French and Angelina has stated before that she wants him to learn about his Cambodian culture and plans to take him there frequently as he grows older.
The choices facing Burma's military
.
Burma's Senior General Than Shwe faces a dilemma
He desperately wants to keep his most influential opponent away from the Burmese public, yet he fears the uproar that will ensue if he keeps her locked up.
Than Shwe and his ruling generals have already procrastinated over Aung San Suu Kyi's latest trial. Most court hearings in Burma last a few days at most, but this one has been going on for more than two months.
Now they've stalled again, postponing the verdict until 11 August.
Unlike the other 2,000 political prisoners - whom the Burmese military seem to keep in jail without much thought for public opinion - it is evident that Burma's officials do not know what to do with this demure 64-year-old woman.
Revered and respected
Aung San Suu Kyi is not an ordinary prisoner. As the daughter of Burma's independence hero General Aung San, she was always going to command people's respect.
But as the rightful winner of the country's last democratic elections in 1990 - which the military refused to recognise - she gained credibility in her own right.
 John Yettaw's nocturnal swim gave the junta the pretext they wanted |
By imprisoning her for so long, the junta has unwittingly given her even more symbolic significance in the eyes of Burmese people.
"An aura has built up around her," said Maung Zarni, a research fellow at the London School of Economics. "The public view her as the conscience of Burmese society."
It is especially important for the military generals that Aung San Suu Kyi is out of the way ahead of the next elections, which they plan to hold in early 2010.
The polls are widely seen as an attempt to legitimise the regime by increasing its democratic credentials.
But in order for this to work to its favour, the generals need to make sure their allies win.
In the 1990 elections, the military miscalculated in a big way - they were trounced by Ms Suu Kyi's party, the National League for Democracy. This time they don't want to take any chances.
When an eccentric American swam to Ms Suu Kyi's lakeside house in his homemade flippers in May, he gave the generals the excuse they were looking for.
By accusing her of breaking the terms of her house arrest because she let her uninvited well-wisher stay the night, they finally had a reason to extend her detention and keep her safely locked away throughout the election process.
Risky strategy
But even if the junta find some tenuous legal reason to jail Ms Suu Kyi, or extend the terms of her house arrest, they know they will stoke intense public outrage.
|  The public view her as the conscience of Burmese society. 
Maung Zarni, Research fellow on Burma, London School of Economics |
Keeping behind bars a woman who is not only a Nobel Peace Prize laureate but also the world's most famous political detainee is a high-risk strategy.
Burmese people will be angry and upset if she is found guilty, but according to Mung Pi, who runs a blog site for Burmese exiles, the government knows there is not much that people inside the country can actually do to change things.
"A guilty verdict probably won't lead to large street protests, because people are still suffering from 2007," he said.
In September 2007 large-scale demonstrations led by monks - the most revered sector of society - were brutally quashed by the military, and the opposition movement is still said to be recovering. The generals know that, right now, their opponents do not have the strength to fight back.
 Than Shwe did not let Ban Ki-Moon meet Ms Suu Kyi on his trip to Burma |
"The opposition movement has the moral backing of the people, but it's whoever controls the streets, not the moral high ground, who matters," said Maung Zarni.
Coping with the indignation of the international community, though, is a different matter.
On the surface, it seems that the Burmese generals are completely intransigent when it comes to the demands of the rest of the world.
They have ignored recent incentives from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and refused to let UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon meet Aung San Suu Kyi on a recent visit.
They also remain resolutely unswayed by the constant pleas from celebrities and protest marches.
But there are times when the junta does listen to the outside world.
It belatedly reacted to criticism of its handling of the devastating cyclone last year, letting in foreign aid after initially saying it could manage alone.
And if the military really was oblivious to international reaction, it would surely not have bothered to plan elections - no matter how flawed those elections might be.
Chinese influence
The lengthy delays in Aung San Suu Kyi's trial are another indication that the recalcitrant generals can sometimes be swayed by foreign influence.
"The regime wants to take its time because of the mounting pressure it's under," a diplomat in Rangoon told reporters.
| The regime wants to take its time because of the mounting pressure it's under
Western diplomat in Rangoon |
It is still doubtful the military will take much notice of the West, though. The long years of EU and US sanctions mean that Burma has been thrown into the arms of China and Russia, as well as neighbouring Asian nations.
"When push comes to shove, they can afford to just ignore... what the West thinks. They're backed by China," said Justin Wintel, the author of a book on Aung San Suu Kyi.
And as long as they can rely on China and Russia to veto any major action by the UN Security Council, and their neighbours at the Asean regional forum to do little more than voice occasional disapproval, the generals probably feel there will be no serious ramifications to keeping Aung San Suu Kyi behind bars.
Which is ultimately why most analysts believe that Ms Suu Kyi will be found guilty; the negatives of having her free outweigh the positives.
But even if he does send her to jail, Than Shwe already knows that she is likely to remain his most potent opponent.
She may be out of sight, but someone as iconic as Aung San Suu Kyi will never be out of Burmese minds.
UN chief gambles on Burma breakthrough
 |
Ban Ki-moon in Japan - 1/7/2009
Mr Ban has been criticised for his unassertive style of diplomacy
The visit was requested by the Burmese government.
The generals are rarely graced by the presence of figures of Mr Ban's international stature in their bunker-like capital Nay Pyi Taw.
If the secretary-general gets nothing in return, he will be assailed by his detractors for being naive, for allowing the status of his high office to be used by a pariah regime.
Critics have already argued that a UN secretary-general's visit should be a prize, to be awarded after significant concessions have been made, not before.
But if Mr Ban's visit can revive a dialogue between the military and the opposition that has been dead for six years, he can chalk up the greatest achievements at the UN to date.
So what are his prospects?
Previous UN envoys have generally had little success in Burma.
Burma's rulers are prepared to sit in splendid isolation if they feel threatened by international pressure
Why is junta afraid of Suu Kyi?
Profile: Aung San Suu Kyi
The one exception was Razali Ismail, a distinguished Malaysian diplomat, who was appointed UN Special Envoy to Burma in April 2000.
He helped broker talks between the government and Aung San Suu Kyi that resulted in her release from house arrest in May 2002.
But after she was detained again a year later, Mr Razali was repeatedly denied entry to the country, and he resigned in frustration at the end of 2005.
His successor, Ibrahim Gambari, has led eight missions to Burma, but has little to show for them.
He arrived there right after the army's violent suppression of mass anti-government protests in September 2007, and thought he had been given assurances by Senior General Than Shwe that the military would be lenient with the protesters.
Since then, in a seemingly calculated snub to international opinion, military-dominated courts have imposed harsh sentences on hundreds of political prisoners.
Election risk
Ban Ki-moon's position as secretary-general may make it easier for him to deal with the notoriously reclusive and stubborn military ruler.
It may be that his oft-criticised unassertive diplomatic style strikes a chord with Than Shwe.
Mr Ban certainly seems to feel he has a rapport with him, a big claim to make after just one meeting over a year ago - but a claim nonetheless that few other international figures can rival.
Tunnel construction in Burma
|  |
In pictures: Burma's tunnel network
What we do know is that Burma's rulers are prepared to sit in splendid isolation if they feel threatened by international pressure - the networks of tunnels being constructed underneath the new capital, with North Korean help, are testimony to that.
But they do care about their legitimacy and respectability in the world.
Why else take the risk of holding elections next year, albeit elections which will leave the military in a dominant position?
Mr Ban must seduce them with offers of respect away from the comfort zone of their bunkers.
The few people who have any contact with top Burmese officials say they have been genuinely caught off-guard by the storm of international protest over Aung San Suu Kyi.
That the trial has been repeatedly delayed suggests they have concerns - dissident trials are usually rushed through with little due-process - so there is some willingness to acknowledge world reaction.
Dialogue test
Measuring the success of Mr Ban's mission will be difficult.
He may win the release of a number of political prisoners. Some will dismiss this as a mere token, but such concessions do matter.
Mr Ban has a list of those of greatest concern to the UN; some are being held in very harsh conditions. Dozens of political prisoners have died in custody over the years.
A protest calling for the release of leader Aung San Suu Kyi (24/05/09)
Aung San Suu Kyi's NLD party was brutally suppressed by the army
He almost certainly will not obtain Ms Suu Kyi's release. The real test will be what happens over the next few months - whether a real dialogue can be restarted with the opposition.
Another test will be whether next year's election can be made more inclusive.
At the moment the main opposition party, Ms Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy, says it will only consider taking part if the military government meets a series of demands including the release of political prisoners and changes to the military-drafted constitution.
As it stands, the election result is likely to be dismissed by many countries around the world as too unrepresentative and too tightly controlled by the military to be recognised officially.
Yet Than Shwe clings to the hope that the election will give his rule international legitimacy.
The election will, though, make meaningful changes to the arbitrary way Burma is ruled by a small cabal of military men.
If it can be improved, if the military can be persuaded to allow the opposition a greater role - these are very big ifs - it could offer the country a way out of its current dire predicament.
This is a prize Ban Ki-moon clearly thinks is worth pursuing.
Burma's suffering is also ours
Humankind has the ability to live in freedom and in peace. We have seen that goodness has triumphed over evil; we have witnessed political transitions in South Africa and elsewhere, evidence that we live in a moral universe. Our world is sometimes lacking wise and good leadership or, as in the case of Burma, the leadership is forbidden to lead.
Aung San Suu Kyi has now been detained for more than 13 years. She recently passed her 5000th day in detention. Every one of those days is a tragedy and a lost opportunity. The whole world, not just the people of Burma, suffers from this loss. We desperately need the kind of moral and principled leadership that Suu Kyi would provide. And when you add the more than 2100 political prisoners who are also in Burma’s jails, and the thousands more jailed in recent decades, the true scale of injustice, but also of lost potential, becomes heartbreakingly clear.
Like many leaders, Suu Kyi has had to make great personal sacrifices. The generals try to use her as leverage to make her submit to their will. They refused to allow her husband to visit one last time when he was dying of cancer. She has grandchildren she has never even met. Yet her will and determination have stayed strong.
More than anything, the new trial and detention of Suu Kyi speaks volumes about her effectiveness as a leader. The only reason the generals need to silence her clarion call for freedom is because she is the greatest threat to their continuingSuu Kyi co-accused 'in hospital'
John Yettaw
Like Ms Suu Kyi, Mr Yettaw faces five years in jail over his unsolicited visit
The American man on trial in Burma for making an uninvited visit to detained democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi is said to have been taken to hospital.
John Yettaw - who is thought to suffer from epilepsy - was admitted to the main hospital in Rangoon after having seizures, hospital sources said.
His condition was said to be improving, though he remains in hospital.
Mr Yettaw is on trial with Ms Suu Kyi, who has told the court the case was a test of the country's legal system.
Ms Suu Kyi made the remarks during final court arguments in the closed-door trial on 24 July, but they have only now been released in full by her opposition political party, the National League for Democracy.
She faces five years in jail for violating the terms of her house arrest by allowing Mr Yettaw to stay - on what her supporters and many observers say are trumped-up charges.
'Getting better'
Mr Yettaw was transferred from Insein jail to hospital overnight after having convulsions, an unnamed hospital source told AFP news agency.
"He is getting better now," the hospital worker was quoted as saying.
Mr Yettaw's lawyer, Khin Maung Oo, told the agency he was unaware of the incident but said his client had already been receiving treatment for diabetes, epilepsy and a heart complaint while in prison.
The verdict in the case against Mr Yettaw, Ms Suu Kyi and two women who lived with Ms Suu Kyi will not now be delivered until 11 August.
But, in the transcript of Ms Suu Kyi's closing arguments in court on 24 July, Ms Suu Kyi said the court's decision was already "painfully obvious".
Justice must be done and seen to be done, clearly and unequivocally
Aung San Suu Kyi
The choices facing Burma's military
"The court will pronounce on the innocence or guilt of a few individuals. The verdict will constitute a judgment on the whole of the legal, justice and constitutional system in our country," she said.
She said that in allowing Mr Yettaw to stay she had acted "without malice, simply... to ensure that no-one concerned should suffer any adverse consequences".
She told the court the charges against her could not be adequately assessed without a simultaneous assessment of the legality of her latest, five-year term of house arrest.
The 64-year-old has spent nearly 14 of the last 20 years in detention, and her lawyers have argued the repeated extensions to her house arrest are illegal.
They also say the law she has been charged under is part of a constitution abolished 25 years ago.
"Throughout, my lawyers have been scrupulous in their efforts to procure due process, which is critical to the rule of law.
"Equally critical is the principle that justice must be done and seen to be done, clearly and unequivocally," Ms Suu Kyi told the court, according to the testimony released by the NLD.
