The speech of the Buddha was without defect:

1. True, beneficial, and pleasing to others. This speech the Buddha used on many occasions.
2. True, beneficial, but not pleasing to others. This speech the Buddha used whenever it was necessary to correct those who were deviating from the path.

(www.abhidhamma.org)

“How good is his English?”

“It varies. Depends on whether he wants misunderstandings or not”

Venus with Pistol, Gavin Lyall( 1932-2003) .

On 28 June 2016, State Counselor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi met leaders of the 8 signatory ethnic armed organizations (EAOs) in Naypyitaw.

Bitter controversies have been aroused both among those who were there and those who were not, depending on how they interpret what she had said.

I have gone through the transcript several times in order to make sense of her words, most of which were clear and left no room for second interpretation. But the rest, especially when she was speaking about Panglong and the right of secession, were spoken as though her proficiency in Burmese had suddenly taken a plunge and she was groping frantically for the right words.

The following shoddily translated excerpts, I hope, may prove my points.

Here are those that are deemed non-debatable, and indeed praiseworthy :

• Worry comes from lack of faith. No worry is possible, if there is faith in success.
• When we are not on good terms, there is no peace. Peace is the natural outcome, when we are on good terms.
• Father said: if the ethnic peoples cannot be convinced in ten years not to want to secede, it’s because the government’s hopeless. (The right quote appears to be: If the ethnic peoples cannot be convinced in ten years not to want to secede, it’s because we Burmans are hopeless.)
• Federalism protects a country from separatism. It does not propel a country to separation.
• When there is sufficient guarantee of citizen’s rights, no one wants to secede.
• Whosoever wants to forge peace must avoid words displeasing to others as best possible.
• All have ownership to the Peace Conference, whether or not they have signed( the Nationwide Ceasefire Agreement )

And here are those that have been drawing arguments. I have not tried to do a word- for- word translation, only to paraphrase them. I hope I’m forgiven for taking such liberty.

• People ask what I mean by using the word “Panglong” for the Union Peace Conference? Does it mean it should be based on its original spirit, agreement and promises? What I would like to say is it’s not going to be based on the Panglong Agreement, which was concluded in order to achieve independence. On the contrary, I believe it must be based on the spirit of Panglong, which upholds Unity in Diversity.
• Secession was part of the promise given at Panglong, Some people are worried and have asked whether I would allow secession. My answer is when the decision is made to establish a union, it must be with the determination that we would make it an enduring one.

Please take a look at world history. Some countries that are granted the right continue to hold on together, while others that are not given it are breaking away from each other. Summing up, it all rests on whether there is genuine unity or not.

I hope I have not lost in translation the intended meaning of her words, unless she was deliberately trying to confuse us.

Granted I haven’t, the reader should now be able to make up her/his mind whether the peace process will go further under her leadership. At least that’s what I hope.