Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and Myanmar’s de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi have much in common beyond the spiraling Rohingya refugee crisis now plaguing both of their elected governments.
Both leaders are the daughters of fathers who spearheaded their countries’ respective struggles for sovereign freedom. And both lost those national founding fathers to untimely deaths before they could fully liberate and govern the nations they forged.
Hasina and Suu Kyi have fought bitter protracted struggles to restore democracy against repressive military juntas. As elected leaders, they both live under constant threat of conspiracies to unseat them, as they bid to varying degrees of success to tame their powerful militaries and disruptive religious fundamentalist forces often backed by men in uniform.
Yet the two daughters of independence heroes differ in important ways that has set them apart in the international eye.
The daughter of a diplomat, Suu Kyi was educated in India and in many ways is more British than Burmese owing to her ‘Oxbridge’ education. While popularly adored as a pro-democracy icon, her elite background has inhibited a common touch, a disconnect critics say makes her aloof and out of touch with her nation’s entrenched conflict and poverty.
While held in house arrest as a military political prisoner for 15 of 21 years, a period of non-violent resistance that earned her an almost saintly global reputation, she has taken a kid gloves approach to the military since winning elected power, partly out of political necessity but also born of the fact that her independence hero father Aung San helped to found the national armed forces.

Hasina survived the assassination of almost her entire family, and likewise spent years in India before returning to revitalize her father’s Awami League party and bring down the Hussain Muhammad Ershad-led military junta in a fierce street agitation, the likes of which South Asia had never seen.
She led the party to electoral victories in 1996 and 2008 and is now serving a third term. With a clear vision to lift Bangladesh to middle-income status by 2021, a leading role in women’s empowerment and a zero-tolerance for terrorism, Hasina has arguably saved her country from the jihadist destruction and instability seen in Pakistan. She has also been lauded for her deft balancing of China, India and the US.
Most importantly, Hasina has managed to keep the once all-powerful military under firm civilian control while taking stiff security measures to uproot Islamic extremist groups.
While there are occasional reports of unease among a section of Pakistan-trained officers who feel she is too close to India, there has been no open challenge to her civilian supremacy since the last military-backed caretaker was swept from power in December 2008 polls.
Hasina’s year-old ‘Tepid Punch’ counterterrorism drive, launched in response to the July 1, 2016 terror attack on a Dhaka café that killed 20 mostly foreigners, has netted 1,200 and killed 90 Islamic militants, a hard-knuckled campaign that has arguably prevented Islamic State from making deeper inroads in the country.

Suu Kyi, once a global pro-democracy darling, has so far failed in comparison. Myanmar’s autonomous military has undercut her signature national peace initiative through ramped up offensives against rebels in Shan and Kachin states.
It’s “clearance operation” against Rohingya rebels has also caused massive civilian displacement and amid widespread reports of human rights abuses has fast restored the pariah status Myanmar held during decades of direct and repressive military rule.
Analysts believe Suu Kyi’s inability to rein in her military could eventually cost Hasina her leadership. Hasina faces parliamentary elections next year and the refugee crisis promises to be a divisive issue as her government’s already thin resources are stretched to accommodate over 400,000 new refugees from Myanmar.
That’s brought the two woman leaders into personal conflict. Suu Kyi, despite her Nobel Peace Prize pedigree, has failed to restrain her armed forces from committing alleged mass atrocities against the Rohingya as part of so-called ‘clearance operations’ the United Nations has said amount to ‘ethnic cleansing.’ It’s unclear how many of the refugees her government is willing to take back in a citizenship “verification” process.
Sensing an imminent crisis, Hasina had earlier offered to launch joint military operations along their shared border areas from where Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army militants launched their fateful August 25 attacks. Myanmar’s apparent unwillingness to engage such joint action points to a military intelligence failure that has contributed to the escalating crisis.
Some analysts believe the Myanmar military’s abuses could lure global jihadists into the fight.

While Suu Kyi has come across as indecisive and even callous in her comments on the humanitarian crisis now centered in Bangladesh, Hasina’s heartfelt appeals for international aid, safe zones and Myanmar military restraint have been more in tune with international sentiments. She said during a visit to teeming Rohingya refugee camp that the situation left her “speechless.”
In muted comparison, Suu Kyi eschewed the United Nations’ General Assembly just as the humanitarian crisis reached a fever pitch.
While Suu Kyi’s hard line has resonated with certain nationalistic groups, it has simultaneously led certain commentators to suggest the Nobel Institute should consider withdrawing her peace award. At the same time, Hasina is now being nominated for the same prestigious prize for her exceptional leadership in combating climate change, frequent natural disasters and crushing poverty.
It will thus be a great irony if Suu Kyi’s inaction on the Rohingya crisis acts to eventually knock Hasina’s secular government from elected power, as the Islamic fundamentalist-backed political opposition seizes on the Rohinyga crisis to score religious and nationalistic points in an election season.
While Hasina has worked to restore a sense of national pride in Bangladesh, Suu Kyi’s handling of the same Rohingya crisis has diminished her image and legacy as a non-violent force for peace and good.
The impression from this article is like to blame it to Rohinyga fighters killing the uniformed people for the ethnic cleansing, other story is different the right to defend.The military were also killing the inocent people.Yes both leaders might want to work together becoming friends , if they had worked together Bangladesh army will be in Rakhine state could have prevented ethnic cleansing.The present of Bangladesh army can be a deterrent.But the damage is already done .
Ms Suu Kyi simply stated that:
-Prio 1: secure Rakhine state
-Prio 2: sorting out burmese citizens from those who are not.
Her statements to the press sofar were very considerate and very "asian". Level headed comments to level headed people.
Also, hardcore sunnism, that forces communities to engage militarly (officially or via terror groups) wherever sunni (perceived) identity and interests are endagered was there long before Suu Kyi (sorry for the twisted syntax).
The present crisis (where ARSA is flatly to blame) is no trigger for bengali hardcore sunnis, merely an excuse.
Tomas De Utrera The chances for sucess here look very good, actually historically one might say more than very good. On one side you have Burma’s Aung San Suu Kyi and across the table Bengladesh’s Sheikh Hasina. Two very exceptional women and exceptional leaders. Women make very good leaders as we have seen when a woman reaches the height of government they are usually more paticient and measured. Neither wants to follow in the footsteps of their fathers. Where men compete women cooperate if they follow their feminine instincts.
Strong female leaders in Asia are not many but they have always been very successful and have lead their countries toward civilized behavior by dominating reform minded (for the time) governments. The Great Queen Sunduk of Silla, today a part of Korea, is a good example. She was the second female sovereign in recorded East Asian history and encouraged a renaissance in thought, literature, and the arts in Silla. She also made the people turn their weapons into plowshares and imp;proved the farming meathods. She managed the military so as to aptly defend her small kingdom against larger rivals. in her fourteen years as queen of Silla, she used her wit to her advantage. When Baekje invaded, she sought an alliance with Goguryeo. When Goguryeo also turned on Silla, she strengthened ties with Tang China. She kept the kingdom together and sent royal emissaries and scholars to China. She is also credited with the initial formulation of a Korean chivalric code and sent young Koreans to China for martial arts training.
She favored Buddhism over other forms of thought and supervised the building of several Buddhist temples. She built the "Star-Gazing Tower," or Cheomseongdae, considered the first dedicated observatory in the Far East. The tower still stands in the old Silla capital of Gyeongju, South Korea. She also worked towards relief of poverty. She was followed by two more queens and in a way set the standard for feminine political thought in Asia.
Around the time of Queem Sunduk, (the 7th century AD) There rose in Tang China an equally powerful woman, the Empress Wu who had risen to the pinnacle of power in the imperial institution in China—a country which had evaded women’s participation in governmental affairs and early on emphasized the “family-state order” illustrated clearly in the warning of “the hen announcing the dawn”. An image of the female replacing the male as the power base of the nation. Empress Wu was greatly influenced by Queen Sunduk. If they had ever met the history of the world would be completely different today.
So the fight that Aung San Suu Kyi and Sheikh Hasina have is not with each other but with old ideas like their fathers’ had. Their fight is to control their respective militarys. It is against old ideas that they must fight to save their people. I believe they can do it if no one interferes with them.
Bangladesh is incapable of solving Myanmar problem without active help of her global partners who are apathetic to on going torture by Myanmar regime that needed the land for Chinese sponsred development for their Budhist population.Muslim refugees have nowhere to go!This is going to be a political battle ground in Bangladesh!