BY MIKE LILLIS
Some Democrats are
wondering whether Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese human rights advocate and Nobel
laureate, should be stripped of her Congressional Gold Medal, the nation's
highest civilian honor.
Congress voted
unanimously in 2008 to present Suu Kyi with the award. A decade later,
lawmakers are questioning whether the honor should be revoked over Suu Kyi's
reticent response to Myanmar's brutal campaign against the Rohingya, a minority
Muslim group targeted by the country's military.
Suu Kyi, now Myanmar's
democratically elected civilian leader, has faced intense international
backlash over the violence, which the United Nations has deemed “acts of
genocide.” Just this week the Smithsonian’s Holocaust Museum in Washington
rescinded a prestigious award named after another Nobel Peace laureate, Elie
Wiesel.
“Whether it’s that
she’s been complicit, or that she’s just been silent, what she hasn’t done is
be vocal enough. So it’s been very, very disappointing, because I had great
admiration for her,” said Rep. Ro Khanna, a liberal California Democrat who
said he’s hearing concerns from a number of constituents with roots in the
region.
The Myanmar leader's
silence in the face of the violence runs in stark contrast to the persona she
built over the course of decades as a pro-democracy advocate and human rights
champion who spent 15 years under house arrest at the hands of the nation’s
repressive military junta.
It’s also led some
lawmakers on Capitol Hill to weigh the merits of rescinding Suu Kyi’s Gold Medal
award, presented just over five years ago, in an effort to compel her to voice
an aggressive public rebuke of the military attacks against the Rohingya.
Khanna said he’s
“open” to the notion of revoking Suu Kyi’s Congressional Gold Medal, suggesting
the issue should be explored by a bipartisan caucus founded by the late Rep.
Tom Lantos (D-Calif.).
“Maybe that’s
something to explored to the Lantos Human Rights Commission, and to have a
hearing on it, and to have a hearing on her role,” Khanna said.
Rep. Ami Bera
(D-Calif.), a physician and member of the Congressional Asian Pacific American
Caucus, said he’s also amenable to stripping Suu Kyi of the congressional award
if she doesn’t take a stand.
“If that’s what it
takes to get there,” Bera said. “As a Nobel Peace Prize winner, she should be
speaking out much more against the atrocities that are taking place right now.
I mean, she does have the bully pulpit."
“We’ve got to send
her the message that she ought to be speaking out and trying to moderate the
government and military response here.”
To be sure, there
seems to be no concerted push in Congress to revoke Suu Kyi’s Gold Medal. And a
number of lawmakers were quick to note the difficult political position she’s
in, straddling efforts to manage a civilian government and steer the country
toward a more robust democracy without sparking a revolt from the formidable
military elite who still yield outsized authority over public policy — and who
could potentially knock her from power.
“There’s great
tension — that could easily break into something else — between the military
and the civilian government she’s trying to shepherd, so this is a very delicate
balance. None of that excuses silence. But it does put it in context,” said
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), who has visited the region. “It’s a very, very
tenuous and delicate balance. And she’s at the heart of it.”
Still, the
frustration in Suu Kyi’s diffident reaction to the Rohingya crisis, even among
her most ardent congressional supporters, is mounting to a point of
exasperation.
Rep. Joseph Crowley
(D-N.Y.), who sponsored the 2008 bill granting Suu Kyi the Gold Medal, said
he’s “desperately sad” about the Rohingya’s plight, urging Suu Kyi to find her
critical voice in the name of “moral clarity.” Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) —
wondering aloud “what happened to our hero?” — said the Suu Kyi’s failure to
confront the violence has eroded her revered reputation around the globe.
“That can take power
from you, too,” Eshoo warned.
And Connolly
emphasized that even the tough political constraints on Suu Kyi have their
limits in the face of systemic dislocation and mass killings.
“You’ve got to call out
genocide. If you’re a human rights activist, you can’t have carve-outs,” said
Connolly. “There hasn’t been talk of revoking [the Gold Medal], but it would be
very useful to remind her of how she got it.”
The comments are a
far cry from the ones coming from lawmakers just a few years ago. In 2012, when
Suu Kyi was officially awarded the Gold Medal in a moving ceremony beneath the
Capitol Rotunda, congressional leaders from both parties turned out with words
of glowing admiration. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), now the majority leader,
praised her "hidden, luminous heroism.” House Democratic Leader Nancy
Pelosi (Calif.) hailed the Nobel laureate’s “unwavering commitment to peace.”
And Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who was imprisoned himself during the Vietnam
War, lauded Suu Kyi’s "implacable resistance" during her lengthy
house arrest.
“Aung San Suu Kyi
didn't scare worth a damn,” he said at the time.
The Rohingya crisis
has changed the tone of the debate and the views of her prestige. In October,
as hundreds of thousands of Rohingya refugees were streaming into Bangladesh,
Suu Kyi addressed the crisis by condemning the “unlawful violence,” but also downplaying
her government’s culpability. Myanmar, she said, “does not fear international
scrutiny.”
The global outcry
was far-reaching, and a number of institutions around the globe have already
penalized Suu Kyi’s reaction by rescinding humanitarian honors they’ve granted
her in years past.
Irish lawmakers, for
instance, pressured by the rock bank U2, voted in December to revoke Suu Kyi’s
Freedom of the City of Dublin award. And this week, the Holocaust Museum
followed suit, rescinding its Elie Wiesel Award.
While Congress may
not be at the point of publicly rebuking her by revoking the congressional
medal, a growing number of lawmakers appear sympathetic to the gesture.
“I’m not unmindful
of the challenge for her, but you’ve got 700,000 or 800,000 Rohingya who are at
enormous risk,” said Connolly. “And you cannot be silent given your profile
internationally.”