I imagine the Chinese government would not like her that much. And her calls for people to think for themselves would not be understood over here by many.

I tried to talk about her in my English corner. The topic was "Heroes". Out of 40 students, not one of them had ever heard of her and I'm not sure they even knew of the country Myanmar.

I ended up saying Michelle Yeoh played her in a movie last year. Then I had to explain who Michelle Yeoh was by telling them she's a Malaysian actress who was in a Jackie Chan movie.

I talked to my wife about her a few months ago after she was released from prison. She was vaguely aware of who Aung San Suu Kyi was, but my wife really didn't have too much of an opinion on her or what she was doing. Her concerns had to do with the role the US had played in her release. The way she sees it the US was trying to check Chinese political and economic interests in Burma by offering the government there aid and stronger economic ties to the US. At the time she believed that the US was primarily trying to isolate China by depriving it of a potential ally, and that the US over stepped it bounds by getting them to release their political prisoners, there by dictating a portion of Burma's domestic policy. I think that part of it is that many Chinese see democracy in the developing world as a liability, where as Westerns see it as a force for stabilization. It's part of the reason why China has, in the past, continued to lend its support the likes of Muammar Gaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, or Slobodan Milosevic long after they became international pariahs.

Interesting topic. I asked a few Chinese about 'Watchman Nee) aka Ni Tuosheng and there was nothing.

Nee is one of the most highly respected, highly influential Christian philosophers and thinkers and really considered a 'martyr' in the West. He has an epic library and recently has been a kind of 'revival' in the USA. 

Yet, even many Chinese Christians didn't seem to know much about him or what he had done or written. In some ways, I could better understand how many Westerners don't know him. But it seems like Chinese would know one of their most influential countrymen in the world?

I found this post by chance.

5 years on and the Rohingya are being 'ethnically cleansed' according to the UN (not an organisation i have much confidence in) but nevertheless thousands of people are being forced out of Myanmar.

Aung San Suu Kyi

is apparently doing nothing in the country she is now de-facto leader.

just goes to show all the BS done in the name of religion

As a Chinese , I think no

To understand Aung San Suu Kyi you start with her father Gen Lin, the well received national leader in Burma in his time.

'Her father, Aung San, founded the modern Burmese army and negotiated Burma's independence from the British Empire in 1947; he was assassinated by his rivals in the same year. '   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aung_San_Suu_Kyi

What is not known or downplayed (as with wiki in recording this part) is her father's assassination was arranged by the British government, carried out by Gen Lin's rival, U Saw (who the British sentenced to death later on that year, around Christmas). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_Saw

Politics, politics, politics......

It was Churchill's time but not Churchill's call. He was against it and said, after Lin's assassination, 'we still need someone there to stand for our interests'.

Suu Kyi was two years old in 1947 when her father was killed. This two years old carried the family crest.

As the saying goes the rest is history, including her going to UK (Oxford Uni) to study, marrying Michael Aries (a Brit) who was a scholar of Tibet.

Her recent not 'saving' the Rohingya Muslims and refugees is possiby a result of her deep connections with both the British and American administration, her response is basically, 'they are not my people'. Her devotion to the Burmese people though is unquestionable, as can be seen by her refusing to leave Burma to visit the dying Aries (1999) and her two sons in UK on the condition that she never returns to Burma.

Politics, politics, politics.......

@Scot  I am posting this as a seperate response so the "string (sting is more like it) of pearls" map shows up clearly.  This map is important.

Myanmar is India’s gateway to Southeast Asia and could be the required impetus to realize India’s Look East Policy.  http://thediplomat.com/2014/08/the-strategic-importance-of-myanmar-for-india/

Burma’s significance in this is as a conduit for Middle East oil bound for Chinese refineries.  https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/burma/why-burma-is-of-growing-importance-to-china.html

http://m.authorstream.com/presentation/khinmamamyo-1095409-strategic-importance-of-burma/

Oil and gems (how about a string of pearls?).....Myanmar these days are important to the panda country, primary for its access to the Indian Ocean, paving ways for economic and military defence and attacks. The last article presents a good analysis of the current situation.