The authoritarian regime always takes the attitude that 'we are totally in control and anybody who is in opposition to us has no place in the country and they are finished'. But what really impresses me is the courage of the people who have already been in prison and who continue to work for democracy.
獨裁主義政權的態度和看法永遠是:「我完全掌握了社會,任何站在對立面的人都在這個國家沒有立足之地,並且他們完蛋了。」而真正讓我留下深刻印象的是那些已經坐過牢卻仍為民主工作的人們的勇氣。
We want a system that will guarantee our rights so that we can live in security; so that we do not have to wonder from day to day what will happen to us if we do something that will annoy those in power. If you asked an ordinary Burmese why they want democracy the answer will probably be: 'I want to have the basic right to try to make a decent living for myself without being frightened all the time.'
我們想要一個能保證我們權利的體制,讓我們能安全地生活,讓我們不必日復一日地擔心因為做了什麼惹惱當權者的事情而遭遇不測。如果你去問一個普通的緬甸人為什麼他們想要民主,答案很可能是:「我想要基本的權利,讓我在不必時刻害怕的情況下試著過一個體面的生活。」
We are not the first people to have had to face an uncompromising, brutal power in the quest for freedom and basic human rights. I think we have to depend chiefly on the will of our own people for democracy.
我們不是第一個為了追求自由和基本人權而不得不面對不讓步、不講理政權的人。我認為為了民主,我們主要要基於自己人民的意願。
I think it is getting more difficult in this world to resolve things through military means. The fact that the authorities are so keen on attacking us in their newspapers indicates that they themselves are not depending on guns alone.
我認為在現在這個世界,想要通過軍事手段來解決問題已經越來越難。事實上,當局這麼喜歡在報紙上攻擊我們,已經表明他們自己也知道不能完全只依靠槍(軍事)。
I think the age has passed when the gun can solve problems and even the military authorities know that. Why are they using the pen if they think the gun can solve all problems?
我認為,可以用槍(軍事)來解決問題的時代已經過去,軍事當局也清楚知道。如果他們覺得槍(軍事)可以解決所有問題的話,為什麼還用筆呢?
In order, to build up trust there has to be openness and that is why democracy is necessary.
為了建立起信任,必須要有公開性,這也就是為什麼民主是有必要的。
Yugoslavia is a very good example of a country where there was not sufficient openness to resolve the problems between the Serbs and the Croats. They were not provided with a framework within which they could discuss their differences and so they ended up shooting each other. In Burma we badly need the kind of framework that will allow us to 'talk about' our grievances with out killing each other.
南斯拉夫是一個好例子,她沒有足夠的公開性讓塞爾維亞人和克羅地亞人解決他們之間的問題。他們沒有被提供到一個可以交流差異的體系,所以最終他們開戰了。在緬甸,我們非常需要一個能讓我們在不殺死對方的情況下,去“談論”心中抱怨和不平的體系。
It's not a question of 'how will democracy ever, achieve unity?', but 'how will we ever achieve unity without democracy?'
問題不應該是「民主究竟什麼時候能達到團結統一?」,而是「如果沒有民主,我們怎麼可能達到團結統一?」