Namkham U Htun Aye, at the age of 50, became Chairman of the Shan State Affairs Council, set up by the 1962 coup leaders, the office he was to hold for the next 12 years.

A co-founder of the Shan State People’s Freedom League (SSPFL), founded before Burma’s Independence, he was, like many Shans at that time, a social democrat. “My father’s political objective was to remove the social and economic inequality between the over privileged feudalistic class and the underprivileged agricultural proletariat,” wrote the author who was his youngest son. “He thought that the Shan were never an integrated society because of class consciousness under the feudalistic order.”

He was elected in 1948 to the Chamber of Deputies where he served until 1960. Following the coup by Gen Ne Win on 2 March 1962, over the call for the amendment of the 1947 constitution into a federal one, he was appointed to head the Shan State Affairs Council. “Kyemon (The mirror) daily wrote that the general reportedly told my father to accept the chairmanship of Shan State, if he didn’t, he should commit suicide by hanging himself,” recalled the author.

“My father,” he continued, “was only a figurehead though.” It was the commander of the Eastern Region Command of the Burma Army who wielded the real power in Shan State.

Naturally, he got into “skirmishes on several occasions with the military,” of which three were described by the author:

Episode 1: The white grand old historic building on Taunggyi’s main road that had housed the State Legislative Assembly prior to the coup was taken and transformed into a college-girl-student hostel. “My father objected to this plan but he was powerless to stop it.” At the same time, “Some people blamed my father for his complicity in the act of transforming it.”

Episode 2: Toward the end of the 1960s, there was a shortage of rice in Namhsan, the former Tawngpeng State in the north, due to the restriction on transportation by the military. “Naturally, their representatives came to Taunggyi and complained to the chairman of the Shan State Council. My father went up to the region to get a firsthand account of the situation. At the extraordinary meeting between the Revolutionary Council and the chairmen of Shan, Karen, Kachin, Chin, and Kayah, my father stood up and spoke out about the critical condition and hardship the people had endured in the region. General Ne Win was furious. There was to be no one who died of famine under his rule, Burma even exported rice, he thundered. Of course, only good reports came up to the general and he was devoid of realities. My father held his ground with firmness.”

The next day, U Htun Aye was summoned by Ne Win’s second-in-command San Yu who told his boss “did not need any advice or suggestion from the outside.”

Episode 3: During the drafting of what was to become the 1974 constitution, U Htun Aye had disagreed with some articles in the draft regarding the status of states. “My father argued that downgrading the status of Shan State to the divisional level was is stark contrast to the Union spirit. The military remarked that my father was persona non grata and chose the head of Kachin State as chairman of the Advisory Committee (instead).”

He nevertheless did not escape being accused as a regime puppet even by the author. On that occasion, “My father slapped me hard across the face. He explained to me that he was involved in politics for the benefit of the people of Shan State and under the difficult and complicated circumstances; a subtle approach was needed in dealing with the Burmese authorities. This subtle strategy could not be interpreted as kowtowing. When the Shan had neither military nor financial clout, my father had to perform a delicate balancing act between the Burmese military and those who opposed outright.”

Throughout his tenure, he never forgot to remind both himself and others what he was. “My father always wore Shan trousers, a baggy pantaloon, and a Shan jacket, which was a Chinese-style jacket sans collar, and a Shan turban, which was a piece of silk to wrap around the head, whenever he attended state functions and dinners. Once he received a ready-made Burmese turban, which goes only with Burmese pasoe, or a man’s sarong. The military preferred him to come to the state banquets in Burmese costume, I suppose. No way would he go in Burmese garb. He gave it to a Burmese friend in  Mandalay.”

Following the adoption of the new constitution, Gen Ne Win became U Ne Win and was “elected” as president of the new socialist republic. The People’s Parliament, “set up to rectify all the decisions made at U Ne Win’s residence,” was filled up with representatives selected by the military.

288 pages Book Surge Publishing North Charleston,SC.USA

U Htun Aye was not among them. “He was appointed as Work Inspection Council member in Rangoon in 1974. My father did not want to accept the post but he did so for the sake of my sister and me; her senior years at the medical school and I was studying at the foreign languages school. He worked for a few years before he retired completely from public life.”

He passed away in 2002 at the age of 90.

After reading the book, I recalled what The Lord Buddha said in Anguttara Nikaya:

“These persons are found existing in the world:

* He who works neither for his own welfare nor for the welfare of others

* He who works for the welfare of others, but not for his own welfare

* He who works for his own welfare but not for the welfare of others

* He who works for the welfare of both himself and others

The person who works neither for his own welfare nor for another’s welfare is like a firebrand from a funeral pyre that serves no purpose either as fuel in a village or as timber in a forest.

This person who works for the welfare of others but not his own welfare is more excellent and exalted out of the two persons.

This person who works for his own welfare but not for the welfare others is most excellent and exalted out of the three persons.
He who works for the welfare of both himself and others is chief and best, topmost, highest and supreme.”

How then can we categorize Namkham U Htun Aye? And the upcoming Namkham U Htun Ayes who are being approached by the present junta to serve as candidates in the forthcoming elections, where can we place them?

I leave this decision to the reader.