The release of the world's most famous political prisoner, Aung San Suu Kyi, from 15 long years of house arrest marks a new beginning in Myanmar's struggle for democracy. The military junta held sham elections (the usual trick military dictators in Pakistan have been using to prolong their stay in power) on November 7, barring Suu Kyi's party, National League for Democracy, from participation, and managed sweeping victory for the pro-military Union Solidarity and Development Party.
And a week later, it decided to release Suu Kyi, apparently in the hope that a democratic façade would diminish people's anger and dismay, and deflect international criticism. But it is a vain hope. Suu Kyi is the daughter of Myanmar's independence hero, Aung San. Unlike some of the hereditary politicians in South Asia, she never prepared as an heir to her father's political legacy.
Instead, she had settled abroad with her English husband and two children, until 1988 when she returned home to look after her ailing mother. That is when the country's old military dictator Gen Ne Win died and a new junta took power, creating a possibility for reform. She decided to stay on to fight for democracy and helped found National League for Democracy.
The new military rulers put her under house arrest, offering her freedom if she left the country, which she refused. While she remained imprisoned her party contested elections the junta held in 1990, winning 80 percent of the seats in parliament. Upset to see the result, the military rulers nullified the election outcome and put Suu Kyi under house arrest.
Some have compared the Myanmar leader's recent release to that of Nelson Mandela, who was freed after 27 long years of imprisonment to preside over transformation of South Africa. What is common between the two leaders is that both refused to make any compromise on the principles they stood for, though there are vast differences both in the nature of hardships they endured (she in the comparative comfort of a home, and he under extremely harsh conditions of a notorious jail), and the situation at the time of release. When Mandela came out, South Africa's apartheid regime had conceded defeat.
He presided over transition to a free and democratic South Africa - the task he performed in an exceptionally admirable and smooth fashion. Despite her much welcome release at home and abroad, Suu Kyi still has a tough battle ahead of her. She is ready for the fight, clearly defining the lines of confrontation. Addressing thousands of cheering supporters soon after her freedom, she told them not to be afraid and to join her in the struggle for change.
She also averred that freedom of speech is the basis of democratic freedoms, and that "democracy is when the people keep a government in check." Military regimes have little patience for such democratic notions as freedom of speech and the people's right to keep governments in check. Suu Kyi's call for "struggle for change" is like showing a red rag to Myanmar's military junta. Meanwhile international community, led by the US, has been exhorting the country's neighbours, especially India, to step up and play a role to end military rule.
Notably, Myanmar is a resource rich country. Its two powerful neighbours, China and India, have strong interest in its oil and gas reserves. China, of course, has a different philosophical view of democracy as a preferred system of governance. But India, which prides itself on being the world's largest democracy, is unwilling too to alter its policy of engagement with the junta.
Be that as it may, the experience of other countries, including our own, shows that it is ultimately the people who replace an oppressive military rule with democratic system of governance. It may take time for the people of Myanmar to bring about the change they crave, but change is inevitable.