From Information Sheet No.A-0849(I) 26,

posted to the Internet by the MYANMAR INFORMATION COMMITTEE

This office is presenting a Newsletter from Myanmar Embassy in Ottawa for

your information.

The View from the Embassy of Myanmar, Ottawa

Editorial

Re-defining the term " Humanitarian"

What is the humanitarian thing to do? one might ask. Is it sending a gravely

ill patient halfway round the world so that his healthy wife in Myanmar could

continue to practice her politics, OR is it asking her to leave local politics

for a while, fly to his beside so that he may not be deprived of his

environment, his sons and the high standard of medical care that Britain could

provide in this crucial phase of his illness. The answer seems to be simple

and straight forward, until some Western governments who are supposed to be

representing humane societies suddenly encourage the sick patient to do the

strenuous 7000-mile journey and calling it ' humanitarian", when in fact they

are placing his health at a greater risk. Any form of conventional wisdom

would expect the opposite to be true but that does not seem to be the politics

of the day as practiced by the big powers. Their definition of what is

humanitarian no longer means assisting a wife to visit a dying husband

especially if she happens to be a player in their political game. It has been

a perplexing and even mind boggling experience when the media, certain NGOs

and some governments start to request an entry visa for a Michael Aris even

before his wife, whom he is supposed to be visiting, have made such a request

to the authorities in Myanmar. Meanwhile they have been repeatedly stressing

the humanitarian need to have it issued urgently in case the patient dies. It

is becoming obvious that a lot of people outside are doing the thinking and

talking for Ms. Su Kyi at this stage. Even then is it not the utmost moral

obligation of civilised societies to make sure that the health and welfare of

a human being be not compromised for any reason, leave alone making him a

sacrificial lamb of a political game.

Besides, the Aris family in England has publicly pleaded that Michael's

illness "be treated as a family matter, with compassion, and not used for

political purposes". The masses of people in Myanmar, in their traditional way

of thinking, would find it odd that kindness and human values are being re-

defined to suit a political situation, and would whole heartedly agree and

sympathise with the ARIS family on this matter.

What is proper in the Myanmar tradition is that when a "yaung" ( the male

hair-do) is away and sick, the "sa-don" (the female hair-do) must follow.Now

is the time, they would expect, that the "sa-don" (Suu Kyi) follows the

"Yaung" (Michael) and be together with their sons enjoying each other, leaving

aside material ambitions, in the remaining days, hours and seconds before he

enters the twilight of this existence. A Myanmar wife owes this much to her

husband and father of their sons. This is humanity plain and simple. Why does

anybody want to change it?