Singapore: Burma’s Pal
Oct 8th, 2007 by Tian
All over the world, people are marching in solidarity with pro-democracy movement in Burma. Even in Malaysia, the police have been show rare kindness to allow continuous anti-junta protest gatherings in the capital city.
The authoritarian regime in Singapore is one of the few exception. The leaders of ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) have their sympathy with the Burmese junta.
In order to show its solidarity with Myanmar illegitimate military rulers, Singapore PAP government ordered the banning of any anti-junta public gatherings.
On Oct 8, a small group of Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) activists handed over a memorandum to the Burmese embassy. Later they went to the Istana (PM Office). They stood in front of the Istana attempting to submit a memorandum calling for Singapore to stop investment and arm deal with the junta.
The SDP even tried to take care of the sensitivity of Singapore’s special situation. The Party only sent four persons, and surely four cannot make an illegal assembly. The four in the Kamikaze team were none but the usual suspects: Gandhi Ambalam, Dr Chee Soon Juan, Chee Siok Chin and Mr John Tan.
The Singapore police shown less tolerant than the Burmese military. The Burmese junta waited for more than 2 weeks before they decided to crackdown. Singapore rulers leave nothing to chances. As Lee Kuan Yew advised his successors: “always nip in the bud”, crackdown must be swift and merciless and never wait till the fire spreads.
Singapore is such a good pal of the junta.
I am all for a bit of agitation saffron robes do turn me on and I used to aid and abet corruption in the Buddhist clergy partaking in superstitions such as ‘magic’ talismans/badges, ‘blessings’ and the occasional curse or two against my enemies. All for an exchange of a fair bit of money (cash usually). Not that any of these stuff worked but who can stand aside and watch monks (mainly novices disobeying their faith and their Sangha…) if they get their robes dyed a deeper shade of red when their military pit their bullets against the ‘magic’ talismans?
The protesting monks in Burma, may the Good Lord bless them, are quite a brave lot if you count that the main bulk of their lot are missing in the demos choosing to obey the order of their head monks not to go to the streets. Buddhism also forbid sacrificing of one’s life or other people’s lives for anything. Life is precious - one is not even allowed to sacrifice one’s life for others. Martyrdom is not ‘in’ with the Buddhists. The general idea is that when one sacrificed one’s life for something, one would be very dead and not able to enjoy the fruit of blocking bullets or collecting them on one or other’s behalf. Now, this is not good for the cause of democracy whatever that means to monks who have endured their miserable generals for over 40 years now (without foreigners giving a Bodhi leaf to that all along). Endurance is something quite ‘beautiful’ to the Buddhists - suffering is all part of Buddhism (even one with Burmese flavour). Transcendence, spirituality is what Buddhists are after and ‘worldly affairs’ is not their cuppa yak’s susu.
So why is the West (and others) cheering on the monks to a dangerous confrontation which has nothing to do with Buddhism? Does the West (and others) know what Buddhism is about and what the monks should want and what they ‘really really’ want?
While I am on the subject on monks and their type of liberation, I should ask why some people are so selective when it comes to cheering on democracy (whatever the bugger this may mean)? We have Iraqis, over a million of them massacred the last few years (while they are being liberated) and no one seem to sense any urgency to stop the continuing slaughter. Muslims and their clerics have staged massive demos to ask the US to piss off from their soil and yet the US has not done so. We have Palestinians since the late 40s suffering untold misery and violent deaths and yet we rarely see the kind of demo like these Burmese ones with the West (and some others) cheering from the sideline and demanding action (Haha - from China!). Why are the Burmese noticed? Is it because of their nice saffron robes? Is it because of China? Is it a distraction from worse failures on the part of the West?
Sending a small part of the Buddhist monkhood (compared to those who never marched) is not wise. Until (and if they are into ‘physical’ liberation nowadays) the Burmese monks are able to take a fair proportion of their brethrens with them, they would simply lose their lives for a cause quite abstract to Buddhism. Patience is the word - the novices must work hard and work on many many Burmese before they can produce the momentum that would topple their generals. Opportunism on behalf of any country is daft.
Why is Singapore’s SDP marching for Burma? I know Chee placed himself next to Suu Kyi for one of his books presumably to give his own path to liberation some kind of legitimacy/credence. That is fair enough for me but I have not noticed Chee saying anything about Iraq or marching against this atrocious and illegal Iraq war. Neither have I seen Chee marching for Palestine which would have been wonderful given the Singapore regime’s love for Israel. How come? Chee’s causes (and that of some others) seem to follow the US line or seem to want to grovel for their blessing(?)
It is all well and good cheering Burmese monks on but what about cheering on the others(too)? What about demonstrating or even lighting a few candles for the poor Iraqis and the poor Palestinians? There would be nothing that would please a Buddhist more than to see such gesture for others - even if they may only be Muslims or their cause have not been recognised by the US.
Come on, guys! Let’s not be two-faced about saving the world.
Let me briefly clarify a few things:
1. Buddhism is as ‘worldly’ as other religions. There have been a lot of examples of martyrdom in the practice of Buddhism. Even in recent events, monks in Vietnam, Thai, Korea, Tibet etc all heavily involved in political struggle.
2. I know Chee very well. He is just as concerned for Palestine and Iraq as for Burma. We had been in many international meetings for the cause. Just a reminder, Chee was the only politician in Singapore took up the issue of tudung for muslim students. He was fined S$3000 for criticizing the government’s ban on schoolgirls wearing tudung.
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61626.htm
3. The reason why there is an impasse over Burma is that the country has no oil that warrants US interest. Besides giving lip service of condemnation, USA and the West feel no urgency. If Burma has oil, the troops might have landed a few years ago.
That some ‘Buddhist’ (monks?) may do the martyr stuff in no way alter the fundamental fact that life is sacred in Buddhism. Certainly there were people in saffron robes torching themselves in Vietnam and there were protesting monks in Burma in the demos but if their action runs the risk of or actually causes deaths, it is questionable if we can call those people ‘Buddhists’. Buddhism forbids killing and that includes the ’supreme sacrifice’ (to some others) of giving up one’s life. If I were to accept that these people are Buddhists then I am also obliged to accept that the paedophiles, sex perverts and rapists among some priesthood are still, for example, Christians. I am also obliged to accept when the two Bushs (among others) when they said they are ‘doing the Lord’s will’ by bombing the living daylight out of others that that indeed is the case, God asked them to… Buddhism even forbid the killing of other sentient beings - even insects which would make it difficult to rid ourselves properly of the cockroaches among out politicians.
There certainly were monks who stood up against the US invasion of Vietnam and they ‘fought’ very heroically. As said, some even got themselves roasted to protest against the US. But what exactly did they achieve for Vietnam, themselves, or Buddhism? Absolutely nothing! They just got themselves killed and the US and their local stooges helped them further by snuffing them out through the ‘Phoenix Programme’ - the ‘targeted assasionation’ of its day, ‘Salvador Option’ and what you may. And killed and tortured and imprisoned in big numbers they were - monks, nuns and other Buddhists. The only way the US was finally ejected out of Vietnam was by the freedom fighters of Vietnam popping at them with guns. This kind of fight for freedom is frowned upon by the West - just look at the lack of support for those in Nepal. Fighting for freedom/liberation with arms had best be left to those who know better (eg. our uncle, Sam), the rest of the world must stick to ‘peaceful demonstration’ and ‘non-violence’. Go and bleat your hearts out to a regime and make sure the drama is seen by the West and Sam’s your uncle! - a regime collapses! Give a black-hearted and heavy-handed regime a meditating or begging monk or two and they will thump the living alms out of them the moment it is seem there is not a sea of demonstrators behind them. Which is exactly what’s happening in Burma right now, the monks are being rounded up and given their blessed pujas by the military. Which was also exactly what happened after Tiananmen…
Speaking of a sea of demonstrators behind a leader of a cause, I, too, ‘know’ Chee of the SDP. I have watched quite a few of the ‘demos’ he ‘led’ and watched them failed. They confirm for me the futility of such approach, one which has not at least a more than token group of dedicated following. In the last one I watched, there was Chee almost leading a dispersed ‘army’ of two and half including his sister and the ‘usual suspects’. The rest of Singapore was busy watching something else somewhere and even with the odd noise or two of ’support’ the ‘demo’ like all those others Chee ‘led’ inspired no one. Catering to foreigh media does not help the locals. After one or two little columns, the foreign media is back to other more interesting things (their bleeding celebrities, Bono, Geldof, moralising, and saving the rest of the world…). Singaporeans - of every 3 cab drivers I speak to, two would say they have no sympathy for Chee’s approach (Chee can hardly habla the lingo of the non-middle classes to put his case to… he is no Lim Chin Siong who scared the knickers off Papa Doc) and one cabbie would say he thinks Chee is a ‘gahmen’ plant (I am no gardener and I can only take it to mean something unflattering). My statistics cannot be universal for an academic but I do use a lot of cabs whenever I am in Singapore (and I am there a lot) and I am over the years reasonably satisfied I have a ‘universe’ of sort from the unpicked random taxi uncles and aunts. I also speak with a big lot of TanAhKows who are not cabbies and who have a toothpick to grind against Papa and Baby Doc.
For the spectators of the island ‘coliseum’. Chee’s hunger strike of last year was quite a let down - a no show. While the nasties among Singapore’s punters wished he would put his errrm non-existent money where his mouth was instead of taking liquid (ok in the game) to make his martyrdom genuine, I have all the time prayed that if one of them was to go first, it should be the Old Tyrant. Chee, instead capitulated even before the doctors could care less. I hope Chee would retire one of these days soon because there is firstly no support for him, he barks at the wind and serenades to the Western media - he cannot reach the masses with his inability to articulate to the ‘hempen home spun’ (the bulk of Singkies) they are rather tired of following his antics - just how many TanAhKows can understand his rather abstract shows and would give their chicken rice for those causes! Chee is no match for old Harry and his bunch of ass-smooching sycophants they are much loved by the people of the countries which Chee seems to play to. Singing to those abroad who egg on a protest from their armchairs and hired saffron robes ain’t gonna get the rice cooked. Unless there is oil for our beloved foreign saviours a proper show of support (invasion, regime change) ain’t gonna happen. And those who want to be part-time Gandhis can whistle into the cow’s ass and fantasise about deliverance until Kingdom comes.
Like for the Burmese monks, the Chinese students, and assorted others, no salvation is possible without a substantial support of the population. It does not have to be a massive support but it needs to be more than those we have witnessed in these countries. Short of such required support, any protest would be short-lived and really dangerous.They would also be useless. Wasting lives for such causes is both irresponsible and opportunistic … losing one’s life by risking it is also plain stupid and meaningless. Buddhism sees such acts as braving guns and starving oneself to death as problems with the ’self’, going on ‘ego trips’. Better do work on the good folks and bide time. With the proper foundation the time will come. Gambling on chance of a momentum to overthrow a regime, performing the drama of hunger strike, and so on are just not it. Lots of work needs to be done. For Chee the time may be up already. But that does not mean there are no others. There are. The last time I spoke to Chee, he was talking down to me without at least asking if I sell fried peanuts on street corners for a lviing - that kind of attitude does not go down well with most Ah Bengs.
That said, I cannot help not remembering the reaction of the Lao Baixings, China’s rural bumpkins, to the Tiananmen students ‘uprising’, those who carried out an almost hunger strike. A look at the well-fed ‘leaders’ told me that it was going to be a no-show. But the peasants showed their ignorance of the rather abstract idea of martyrdom of starving oneself to deaths by sending the poor students several lorry loads of free rice even though the strike was (quickly) over before the cargo arrived. There you go, holding one’s breath till one turns blue to influence a hardened regime (or solicit foreign sympathy) does not work with either side… it is the local folks you want to win over.
It would all be well and good but shaving one’s head and being Buddhist (or Christian lovenik) and attempting to effect regime change seldom work - that is why the West uses force of arm (’Shock and Awe’, for instance). And that is why negotiations with insurgents is often done requiring one side to ‘give up violence’ (surrender your arms). Old Chin Peng was wise not to play Santa Claus to the colonialists - he held on to his guns, stuck to his guns and stuck his guns up their rear ends.
I have yet to see Chee do a demo or two calling for Singapore to stop selling arms to Burma and to stop letting Israel use Singapore as a transit point for Israeli weapons to Burma. Chee can also do demos demanding Singapore stop supporting the US’s coalition of nobody to Iraq and to stop offering any physical support for the illegal occupation. Demos against the illegal and brutal occupation of Palestine should be held - this is very long overdue and Singapore is a bed-mate of fascist Israel. Chee can, if he really wants to, get up the snout of Papa and Baby by walking the talk. Talking and organising meetings only do not do the same. If there can be demos and noises for Burma, there can also be same for Iraq, Palestine etc - and long long ago. Singapore is a good freind of the Burmese junta, yes, but Singapore’s junta actually sends its good citizenship to Iraq in support of an internationally condemned invasion and occupation. We shouldn’t let Uncle Sam’s sensibilities get in the way of a good protest.