But the Myanmar military junta did not respond to her request. It offered her permission to leave the country with no guarantee to re-enter. She could not take the chance. She has come to symbolise hope for her subjugated people. She had once written to her husband: ``I ask only one thing: that, should people need me, you would help me do my duty by them.'' He did. Even when told he was dying of cancer, he did not request her presence.

The junta tried to play on her emotions. She could go. But there was no assurance on her return. But she knew that the government wanted her out of the country. She declined the offer. She preferred to wait with her people. Her husband would not have wanted it in any other way. He had seen how the Burmese considered her theStatue of Liberty. She must play that role. The Statue of Liberty has no emotions. But it can symbolise them.

If she could not go, could she bring her husband to Yangon? She made every effort to do so. But the junta was cynical in its reply: she should use her `perfect health' to go to him in London and not `overburden' Myanmar's limited healthcare facilities. It went on denying her permission. And then came death to tear them apart. She bore the loss bravely.

The junta tried to cover its tracks and gave her permission to go to London for her husband's burial. But the Buddhists -- she is a Buddhist -- have their own way of expressing their grief. She prayed at home. She rejected the government's offer. She wanted no obligation. Instead, she released a statement: ``I am fortunate to have such a wonderful husband who has always given me the understanding I needed. Nothing can take that away from me.''Hers has been a long, arduous fight. She and Aris were married for 27 years.

But they rarely met in thelast decade. When the battle for democracy became fierce, the military junta would not give him a visa, nor give her permission to go to Oxford where he taught Tibetan Culture. The 1995 Christmas was the last time when the family was together, they and their two sons, Alexander and Kim. She has been under house arrest since. Though she is not allowed to meet anyone, her people know she is there. She represents their hope, a shaft of light in the otherwise dark, endless tunnel.

There was a time when the junta had promised to hand over power to the elected. People voted her National League for De-mocracy in a predominant majority, defeating the candidates of the State Peace and Development Council, the military establishment had fielded. But, after the defeat, the junta went back on its promise. It did not restore the assembly, nor did it part with power. Instead, it unleashed repression against Suu Kyi's supporters. Hundreds of them still languish in jail.

The atmosphere is that of the days of theEmergency in India. High-handed and arbitrary actions are carried out with impunity. Tyrants have sprouted at all levels. Desire for self-preservation has become the sole motivation for action. The ethical considerations inherent in public behaviour have become gradually dim. The fear generated by threat has become so pervasive that public servants act as willing tools of tyranny. People are so afraid that they have not even expressed grief over her bereavement.

She realises how an unending rule of hardships has made people withdraw into their own shell. But she is confident that they will one day come out to fight against the military junta openly. She feels the glow of their strength. She is not disappointed. What disappoints her is the attitude of the US, the UK and Europe. They have declared they will have no truck with the military junta. Secretary of State Madeline Albright has condemned Yangon more than once in recent months. But neither the US nor the UK nor, for that matter, any of the Wes-terncountries has stopped its businessmen or industrialists from currying favour with the military junta. She sadly sees them vying with one another in begging for more concessions, more contracts.

Indeed, the State Department has not gone beyond making some noises. In the case of Iran, America is uncompromising. But Yangon's suppression of democratic rights does not evoke that type of anger. Is fundamentalism, if that is the reason for Washington's anger against Teheran, worse than dictatorship? It appears that the new Western civilisation, with all its achievements, is less committed to freedom when it comes to money.

And what should Suu Kyi infer from close relations between democratic countries and the Asean? The latter has admitted Myanmar to its fold. Thailand has even officially sponsored the trip of General Than Shwe, head of the military junta. There was not even a whimper of protest from President Clinton or Prime Minister Tony Blair.

She does not expect anything from China, a dictatorship, andits strategic moves are understandable to her. It has helped the military junta instal naval surveillance equipment at Zadetkyi, near the Straits of Malacca along the Bay of Bengal rim. But Suu Kyi is unable to understand or appreciate New Delhi's official-level engagement. True, India wants to end the operation of hostile Nagas from Myanmar's territory. But, is the independence of the Burmese the price New Delhi has to pay? India has been their inspiration. Jawaharlal Nehru and Aung San, Burma's Mahatma Gandhi, were friends.

Suu Kyi expected much more from the people of India. They were all once part of the same continent which embraced Burma as well. The Burmese and the Indians had fought together side by side against the British colonial rule. And now there is not even a feeble protest, official or unofficial.

Strangely, the Indian Parliament has not even passed a resolution to condemn the subjugation of Myanmar. It looks as if New Delhi has got reconciled to the dictatorship at Yangon. Is it the casewith the other countries?

The Nobel Prize for her ensured that the world would recognise the struggle of her people. But self-interest seems to have got the better of commitment to democracy in the case of other countries. But she remains undaunted. Her husband's death has given her new resolve to carry on the fight, however compromising the attitude of other governments is. She only regrets that she does not wait for the telephone call any more. That sustained her confidence -- and links with the man who gave her all his strength as long as he lived.