I've always been strongly on the side of non-violence. Also, I think that if you use the wrong means, the ends themselves get distorted.

To be forgotten, is to die a little.

We must all work together if we are all to live together in unity and harmony.

After I was released, people used to keep asking me, 'what's it like to be free? And it was very difficult for me to answer. I'd always felt free. As far as my state of mind was concerned, I didn't feel any different...People ask me about what sacrifices I've made. I always answer: I've made no sacrifices, I've made choices.

The main aim of the [political] dialogue should be to resolve the problems of the nation, not to find who is the winner and who is the loser. That's not what it's all about. It's to try and find an answer that is acceptable to all parties concerned, which would of course require some give and take.

I can say with absolute confidence that the general public of Burma would be very little affected, if at all, by sanctions. So far, the kind of investments that have come in have benefited the public very little indeed. If you have been in Burma long enough, you will be aware of the fact that a small elite has developed that is extremely wealthy. Perhaps they would be affected, but my concern is not with them but with the general public.

My attitude to peace is rather based on the Burmese definition of peace - it really means removing all the negative factors that destroy peace in this world. So peace does not mean just putting an end to violence or to war, but to all other factors that threaten peace, such as discrimination, such as inequality, poverty.