Outside of her home, the unrest of the Burmese continued to bubble up. The government is confronted with another uprising in 2007 known as the “Saffron uprising.” Led by a large number of monks and students, the protest itself was hard put down because the government couldn’t blatantly kill monks as it did civilians. Russell writes that “The Asian economic miracle had swept over its skies leaving it untouched by late twentieth century development. In August, the ruling junta, the intimidatingly named State Peace and Development Council, had removed subsidies on energy and fuel, causing a spike in food and transport costs and instant hardship for Burmese people already living on the margins of survival.” (Russell 2015) She also notes that in
…show more content…
After a huge Cyclone, Cyclone Nargis, had decimated parts of Burma, the government refused to respond to the crisis. Despite an estimated 138,000 deaths - they actively turned away foreign aid and launched no effort to attempt to help the survivors in any way. Russell writes poignantly that “After Burma’s biggest catastrophe in more than a century, the humanitarian worker were the survivors themselves.” (Russel 2014) After increased pressure from the UN and China, they finally allowed foreign aid. Lastly, she notes “But the regimes efforts were little, and late. It’s dereliction of duty would not be forgotten, and many Burma watchers believed that the leadership’s signal failure to deal with the disaster helped to contribute to the demise of military rule – at least in this, it’s most autocratic, merciless …show more content…
After all, if everything were alright, they wouldn’t be comparable at all to Sisyphus. 2012 also saw the rise of the nationalistic Buddhist movement known as the 969 movement. Led by Buddhist monks against Muslims, the conflict has been incredibly violent leading to tens of thousands Burmese Muslim refugees. Russel writes that “The loosening of authoritarian control can always, it seems, give rise to unexpected consequences. In Burma, new freedoms had rekindled animosities and prejudices that military rule had appeared to keep in check.” Even Aung San Suu Kyi has been largely silent on the subject, leading some to call the Rohingya Muslims the most oppressed people in the world. They will continue to have to combat the various ethnic strife found throughout Burma. Some scholars, such as Brian Joseph, suggest the creation of a multi ethnic state claiming that “To support Burma’s transition to democracy, Burma must begin the difficult task of building a truly multi-ethnic state, and this effort must begin by acknowledging that to be Burmese does not necessarily mean to be Burman, speak Burmese, or practice Buddhism.”(Joseph 2015) While there is no doubt that this would be the ideal solution – it might be impractical. Daniel Chirot and Clark McCauley write “Suffice it to say that virtually all contemporary specialists of this subject believe that modern nationalism has made demands on its people for greater cultural
After a huge Cyclone, Cyclone Nargis, had decimated parts of Burma, the government refused to respond to the crisis. Despite an estimated 138,000 deaths - they actively turned away foreign aid and launched no effort to attempt to help the survivors in any way. Russell writes poignantly that “After Burma’s biggest catastrophe in more than a century, the humanitarian worker were the survivors themselves.” (Russel 2014) After increased pressure from the UN and China, they finally allowed foreign aid. Lastly, she notes “But the regimes efforts were little, and late. It’s dereliction of duty would not be forgotten, and many Burma watchers believed that the leadership’s signal failure to deal with the disaster helped to contribute to the demise of military rule – at least in this, it’s most autocratic, merciless …show more content…
After all, if everything were alright, they wouldn’t be comparable at all to Sisyphus. 2012 also saw the rise of the nationalistic Buddhist movement known as the 969 movement. Led by Buddhist monks against Muslims, the conflict has been incredibly violent leading to tens of thousands Burmese Muslim refugees. Russel writes that “The loosening of authoritarian control can always, it seems, give rise to unexpected consequences. In Burma, new freedoms had rekindled animosities and prejudices that military rule had appeared to keep in check.” Even Aung San Suu Kyi has been largely silent on the subject, leading some to call the Rohingya Muslims the most oppressed people in the world. They will continue to have to combat the various ethnic strife found throughout Burma. Some scholars, such as Brian Joseph, suggest the creation of a multi ethnic state claiming that “To support Burma’s transition to democracy, Burma must begin the difficult task of building a truly multi-ethnic state, and this effort must begin by acknowledging that to be Burmese does not necessarily mean to be Burman, speak Burmese, or practice Buddhism.”(Joseph 2015) While there is no doubt that this would be the ideal solution – it might be impractical. Daniel Chirot and Clark McCauley write “Suffice it to say that virtually all contemporary specialists of this subject believe that modern nationalism has made demands on its people for greater cultural