Peace. A word that Merriam-Webster defines as “a state of security or order within a community provided for by law or custom’ or ‘freedom from civil disturbance.” The Nobel Peace Prize according to Alfred Nobel’s will, “shall be awarded to the person who in the preceding year shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”

Since 1901 the award has been bestowed to a person or organization almost every year. The 1991 recipient of the award was the current State Counsellor—also known as the Prime Minister of Myanmar,—Aung San Suu Kyi, for her fight for democracy and freedom. Suu Kyi’s refusal to condemn the atrocious Myanmar military for their actions during the Rohingya crisis has incited a huge argument worldwide about whether or not her Nobel peace prize should be revoked. Suu Kyi’s actions have recently been subject to worldwide criticism; and she has been stripped of many awards she had previously received. I believe her Nobel peace prize should be revoked because her act of silence and denial of the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya people does not exhibit or promote peace in any form.

One of the most important global symbols of defiance against tyranny in the 1990s, a promoter of peace and democracy in Myanmar and  role model for democracy , Suu Kyi started condoning the same violence she always despised. She turned a blind eye to the violence.

According to BBC, she did not even acknowledge the ethnic cleansing that was going on and went on to say “I think ethnic cleansing is too strong an expression to use for what is happening.” No one expected a person who was such a dedicated leader of peace to stay silent and be completely unresponsive to the ethnic cleansing that was taking place against Rohingyas in the Rakhine state of Myanmar.

When asked by BBC journalist Fergal Keane what she believes was leading up to the violence against Rohingyas her answer was “Fear on both sides.” She firmly believes it was fear of Rohingya militants that instigated the military to go burn down over hundreds of villages in the Rakhine state, rape Rohingya women and kill any Rohingya people they could find. (BBC)

Keane also asked her why she wouldn’t take any action and her reason was that “the issue is going to settle down on its own.” Myanmar’s Minister in charge of Border Security in Rakhine, Col Phone Tint told BBC correspondent Jonathan Head, “the destruction of villages was a deliberate strategy by the militants, aimed at forcing the Muslim population to flee to Bangladesh.” This is why some experts are saying she is not taking action mainly because she is afraid of losing the support of the majority of Myanmar in the next election; support of Buddhists that think the Rohingyas are illegal Muslim immigrants that don’t belong in Myanmar. This might explain why she is not speaking up against something the United Nations described as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing,” despite being a fierce promoter of peace.  

According to The Guardian, she also snubbed and obstructed UN officials who have sought to investigate the treatment of the Rohingya. Due to the fact that her government has prevented aid agencies from distributing food, water, and medicine to people displaced or isolated by the violence.

Continuous persecution and destruction of homes of Rohingyas by the Myanmar military led to more than 700,000 of Rohingyas to flee to Bangladesh. Although Suu Kyi claims these statistics are “huge iceberg of misinformation” it is hard to believe because satellite imagery shows how 288 Rohingya villages were totally destroyed. Many other pieces of information besides this also prove the same. Being silent about the atrocities carried on by the Myanmar military, denying well-documented evidence, and the obstruction of humanitarian aid, are all the things that show how Suu Kyi is condoning what the military is doing to the Rohingya people.  These are more than enough reasons why Suu Kyi’s Nobel peace prize should be revoked,none of her actions are those that should comprise within a Nobel peace prize winner.

While a lot of people wanted the Nobel peace prize committee to revoke Suu Kyi’s award, there are still some who support her. According to The Guardian, “So far Aung San Suu Kyi has been protected by the apologetics of those who refuse to believe she could so radically abandon the principles to which she once appealed.”

Their biggest excuses were: she didn’t want to jeopardize her prospects of election, that she doesn’t want to offer the armed forces a pretext to tighten their grip on power or that she has to keep China happy. (The Guardian) The Nobel peace prize foundation also said they won’t strip Suu Kyi of her award because of they (head of the foundation) said: “it made no sense to withdraw awards in reaction to events which happen after they were given.”

The Nobel committee should have responsibility for the prizes it awards and make some alterations to its rule that does not allow awards to be withdrawn. They should do so because Aung San Suu Kyi is not the first Nobel peace prize winner who has violated the very principles for which she was awarded. Barack Obama is one such example who should be stripped of his honor of a Nobel peace prize because of his programme of drone strikes, which slaughtered large numbers of civilians in North-West Pakistan.

If the Nobel committee does not revoke her award it will stain their image of being an organization that everyone, especially, advocates of democracy and peace look up to. If it were the Suu Kyi from the 1990s, she herself would have been revoking the Nobel peace prize from a person who is complicit in crimes against humanity.

A great democracy campaigner once remarked, “It is not power that corrupts, but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it.” It was Aung San Suu Kyi. It is that same person that is now surrendering to that fear of losing power and is according to her own words, a corrupted individual.

The Suu Kyi of the 1990s does not exist anymore. The same Suu Kyi that served 15 out of last 28 years in prison solely for the benefit of the people of her country, to provide them democracy, a better and peaceful future where violence would not exist. The current Suu Kyi is not the same and is a Nobel peace laureate turned into complicit of crimes against humanity. She is now indirectly (or maybe even directly) involved in ethnic cleansing of the largest Muslim minority group in Myanmar. She is the prime minister of a country where an ethnic cleansing is taking place, and she is doing nothing about it. This is more than enough of a reason to revoke her Nobel peace prize.