Episode #137: Mission of Burma
A lifelong Czech diplomat and currently Ambassador to Austria, it may be surprising that Jiří Šitler begins this interview by declaring that he grew up determined never to spend a day working for any government. Growing up under Communist rule, Šitler was turned off by any idea of government service. Instead, he turned his time to studying medieval history, which took him to Germany and Italy.
In 1993, the Czech “Velvet Revolution” was well underway. The newly-elected president, Václav Havel, was looking to bring people who were well versed in history and language study, and who had no background in the country’s past Communist regimes, onto his team. Šitler fit the bill and was asked to join the new government; after some hesitation, he accepted. For the next four years, he dealt with press and foreign policy issues for President Havel’s office. Then in 1998, he was given the weighty task of negotiating terms for German compensation of Czech citizens who had been victims of forced labor and Nazi war crimes. Ultimately, some 80,000 Czech benefited from his efforts.
Asia came to dominate the next phase of his diplomatic career. Besides this government work, he had found the time to enroll in a Thai language class for a few months at the School of Oriental and African Languages, which he wryly noted gave his government the impression that he was an “Asian expert.” Then after his successful negotiations regarding compensation, he was given, “as a kind of reward” in his words, the Ambassadorship to Thailand. This led to further ambassadorships in Laos, and Cambodia, and eventually the post of Director for Asia in the Czech Foreign Ministry.
Through these diplomatic postings, Šitler began getting involved in Burma-related issues. But another dynamic was that President Havel was sympathetic to the growing Burmese aspirations for democracy. Šitler explains that Havel felt that Czech freedom had been gained through the help of friendly countries and organizations, and so now it was time for his country to reciprocate. “His idea was that now when we actually established democracy in our country, we should do the same to others. So human rights promotion was one of the anchors, or one of the main guidelines for our foreign policy.”
Around this time, Havel was contacted by Michael Aris, the husband of Aung San Suu Kyi, asking for Havel’s assistance in helping get his wife nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Their efforts were successful. After Aung San Suu Kyi was awarded the honor in absentia (being under house arrest at the time), the correspondence between the two leaders continued until Havel’s death in 2011. Šitler describes an interesting incident that highlights the level of their mutual respect, in which he himself played a part. Apparently, Havel had noticed that Aung San Suu Kyi always wore a flower in her ear. He wanted to one day present a rose from the Czech Republic to her, but they were never able to meet in person. During Havel’s funeral, Šitler saw that flowers had been placed on the coffin; with permission, he took one, and enlisted the help of a Czech artist to encase it in glass. This was personally presented to Aung San Suu Kyi after she gained her freedom.
Šitler acknowledges that at the time of Havel’s death, Aung San Suu Kyi was still seen as a human rights icon, but that her image would lose a lot of its luster after her tepid response to the Rohingya genocide. When asked about how Havel might have viewed her trajectory as a leader, Šitler responds that he can’t predict what a great leader like Havel would have done. Havel might well have appreciated the challenging and complex political landscape that the Burmese leader had to navigate. “He knew that you have to make compromises… and respect political realities.” Šitler also notes that the military had more power during these years than some observers were aware, and that Aung San Suu Kyi was never in full control.
Interestingly, there are more ties binding these two, unlikely and far-away countries than Havel’s friendship with “The Lady.” Burma’s 1988 democracy movement came just before the USSR dissolved, and during those years, many thought that the Burma and Czechoslovakia were part of a handful of countries around the world collectively inching their way towards becoming free nations. But Šitler points out that one can’t simply make an easy comparison between them, judging one because it did not become a free society while the other did; after all, as Gorbachev was losing his grip on the USSR’s satellite states, the military regime in Myanmar had an iron grip on Burmese civil society. “The Czechs didn't succeed because they were better,” he says by way of contrast. “They were just more lucky.”
In May 2001, Šitler was appointed the Czech Ambassador to Myanmar, presenting his credentials to then-dictator Than Shwe. Because the Czech mission was so explicitly focused on human rights and democracy, the Burmese regime was openly hostile at times. At one point military intelligence attempted to fabricate a “grassroots” campaign against Havel, which included the drafting of hundreds of fake letters from Burmese youths condemning the Czech leader’s attempts at intervention.
Although Šitler left his post in 2005, his thoughts never strayed too far from the Golden Land. He was active in finding ways to provide relief following Cyclone Nargis in 2008, and has worked with Dave Eubank of the Free Burma Rangers over the years to facilitate aid. He also closely followed the transition period in the decade that followed. “It was a very promising period, and we had hopes,” he notes. “Yet it was very clear to us from the beginning that there were limitations given by the fact that the Constitution gave a lot of power to unelected military leaders, but at the same time, there was a lot of space which didn't exist before.”
And throughout this whole time, the Czech government has continued to help the Burmese people in a variety of ways, from trying to strengthen civil society to providing former political prisoners Czech travel documents and even citizenry, such as the current NUG representative in Europe, Linn Thant. Since the coup, however, Šitler explains that many of his colleagues simply don’t know what they can do, whereas there was much more clarity and immediacy around the Russian invasion of Ukraine. “There's always some discussion about providing weapons [to the resistance movement in Myanmar] like it's done in Ukraine,” he says, “but besides this kind of theoretical debate, how could it be done? Technically, this is not a neighboring county. So even if a debate would lead to a conclusion that something like that would make sense, how could we do that? So I think there is a certain level of helplessness, because we simply don't know what to do.”
Stressing that he is speaking personally and not in his official capacity, Šitler feels there is a very compelling case for providing weapons to the resistance. “We see that people need it for self-defense, right? The military is attacking civilians, both in the cities and also ethnic regions,” he notes, adding that the Tatmadaw already benefits from imported arms from Russia and elsewhere.
Like many foreign allies, Šitler has been heartened by the solidarity he has seen among democracy activists, even as he’s been horrified by the level of violence the military has used against its own people. Yet he also sees a silver lining in such atrocious acts, as “it also expresses the level of desperation they are in. They may be feeling as though they are losing the grip. So there is a certain hope in that.”
Looking towards the transition to a post-Tatmadaw society, Šitler is uniquely well-positioned through his foreign policy experience to analyze the road to reconciliation. Yet, he explains that there is a very big difference between Myanmar and his own past work in post-WW2 and post-Communist Europe: reconciliation in the latter case involved interactions between countries, and in Czechoslovakia itself, there were many laws passed that formed the basis for how matters got settled and the country moved forward, and the Czech government could be somewhat flexible in how they dealt with Communist functionaries who had contributed to the past oppressive government.
Regarding this latter point, Šitler says, “In the Burmese case, for military commanders who massacre civilian population, they shouldn't be pardoned, and there should be at least some measure of justice there,” he says. “But at the same time, you need to move forward somehow. So it's all always a question of measure, right?” Šitler also explains that the process of recompense in the Czech citizens’ case did not happen overnight, but involved many steps, starting with historians who agreed upon a shared version of past events, and culminating in many long and tense negotiation sessions. So even if the pro-democracy forces were to triumph in Myanmar tomorrow, it would still take a long time for all the dynamics at play to be resolved and work themselves out.
Although Šitler has traveled the world through his role as diplomat, his experiences in Myanmar stand out above all else. “This incredible commitment to the cause of freedom and democracy where people are risking so much, and still fighting and risking their lives, spending decades in prison,” he says. “So it was this kind of admirable commitment to the cause. And despite the circumstances and despite the odds, they are quite admirable, and combined with this lack of hate. People just wanted to be free, but it didn't necessarily mean they hated the adversary. It was like the thoughts and approach of Václav Havel but in another part of the world.”