An Ignoble Laureate

Here in Trondheim we were granted some extra time to reflect on the year that was, as a dog managed to do the impossible and stop time in its tracks. Well not quite, as the calendar did turn, but the rockets had to wait. In this moment of reflection, before the commotion of gunpowder and colours heralded the coming of a new year, I was struck by the thought that 2017’s most controversial character was not found in Washington, but rather in Naypyidaw. Aung San Suu Kyi, the lauded freedom fighter of the world has had a deservedly hard fall from grace for her failure to stop the ethnic cleansing happening under her nose.

Suu Kyi was born into greatness, from parents of importance in Myanmar. Her father is recognised as the architect of the secession from British rule. Her mother, an acclaimed politician and diplomat in the newly formed nation, held positions such as the ambassador to India. After graduating from Oxford, Suu Kyi rose to prominence in the 1988 uprising in Myanmar. She co-founded the National League for Democracy then, in 1989 she found herself under house arrest, where she was held for 15 years. Despite this, she refused to leave the country and stayed to fight for democracy, even after being offered release if she were to leave. She quickly became the symbol of a freedom fighter in Burma, and globally. This lead to her being honored with awards such as the Rafto Prize in 1990, and the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991.

Fast forward to 2012, we start to see cracks appearing in the surface of this hero. Suu Kyi refused to take a stance in the Rakhine State riots, and said to a reporter that she did not know whether the Muslim, Rohingya minority could be regarded as Burmese citizens. This repeated itself in 2015, and has progressed to a crescendo into the current situation. Suu Kyi’s role in legitimising the atrocities against the Rohingya has resulted in global criticism towards her, and rightfully so.

But do her actions credit a withdrawal of her awards? Should the Nobel Committee retract her award? As the world watches on, her obstruction of foreign aid, and her enabling of the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya makes this question important to raise. Will having tarnished laureates such as Suu Kyi delegitimize and devalue the Nobel Peace Prize in the future? These are questions that we also raise in regards to the Student Peace Prize. What makes a legitimate laureate? Are these awards granted on the basis of work that has been done, of a battle fought? Or do such honors come with the expectations of further work towards a better and brighter future? We would say that being appointed these honours comes with aspects of both sides. Accolations of good work, but also with a responsibility of continuing the struggle for a better world.

Suu Kyi’s name is forever tarnished, and will always be mentioned in regards to her failure to act in the face of injustice. The Nobel Committee now has an important task in reacting to her role in the injustice faced under her watch. Fellow Peace Prize Laureate Desmond Tutu wrote to Suu Kyi in an open letter «If the political price of your ascension to the highest office in Myanmar is your silence, the price is surely too steep». The award comes with a responsibility, which Suu Kyi is failing to live up to.

Let’s finish off with a quote. «It is not power that corrupts, but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it.» Who said this? Aung San Suu Kyi.