Latest Highlight

RB Channel

Pope Francis walks at the end of a canonisation mass for seven new saints in Saint Peter's Square at the Vatican in 2016. Source: Reuters/Tony Gentile

By Max Walden
August 9, 2017

ACCORDING to Catholic media outlets, Pope Francis will undertake the first papal visit to Burma (Myanmar) in November, where he will focus on promoting the rights of the persecuted Rohingya Muslim community.

While news of the papal visit has not been officially announced, leaks from sources in the Vatican have confirmed a planned historical visit to Burma and Bangladesh, reported the Union of Catholic Asian News on Monday.

The Pope reportedly received a personal invite from Burma’s President Htin Kyaw, a decision which has led to an angry backlash among hardline Buddhist and ultranationalist groups on social media.

He will visit the capital Naypyidaw to meet with senior government figures before travelling to the country’s largest city Yangon, but will not go to the restive Rakhine State, where most Rohingya live.

While Burma and Bangladesh have relatively small Catholic communities, the Pope has long been a vocal critic of the Burmese government for its failure to protect Rohingya Muslims from violence and persecution.

Rohingya villagers watch as international media visit Maung Hna Ma village, Buthidaung township, in northern Rakhine state, Burma, on July 14, 2017. Source: Reuters/Simon Lewis

In 2015, the Pope called persecution of Rohingya akin to a “war” against Muslims in Burma.

More than 75,000 people are said to have fled across the Bangladeshi border since clashes with the military broke out in October 2016, leading to a harsh crackdown by authorities.

Earlier this year, he said Rohingya were “peaceful people, and they are our brothers and sisters,” calling for the Burmese regime to let them “live their culture and their Muslim faith.”

Pope Francis also created the first-ever Catholic cardinals for Burma and Bangladesh.

“The Catholic bishops invited Pope Francis before the 500th anniversary of Catholicism in Myanmar in late 2014,” Bishop Raymond Sumlut Gam told UCA News. There are roughly 700,000 Catholics in Burma.

“Some improvements have occurred such as diplomatic relations between Burma and Vatican plus the appointment of an apostolic nuncio.”

The Vatican established full diplomatic relations with Burma in May, after the Pope met with the country’s State Counsellor and de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

Crux’s correspondent in the Vatican first reported the possibility of Francis cancelling his planned trip to India in place of a visit to Burma and Bangladesh late last month.

Rohingya men are pictured at a fish market in Sittwe in Rakhine state, Myanmar, on March 2, 2017. Source: Reuters

June 21, 2017

NEARLY half a million people have fled Burma (Myanmar) as of 2016, making the Southeast Asian nation the eighth among the top 10 countries of origin for the world’s 65 million refugees.

The UN Refugee Agency’s annual Global Trends study, released on Tuesday, said the number of refugees from Burma rose to 490,300 by the end of last year, up from 451,800 in 2015.

It said Bangladesh continued to host the largest number of these refugees at 276,200, while 26 other countries with large numbers of refugees from Burma include Thailand (102,600), Malaysia (87,000), and India (15,600).

As at end-2016, 65.6 million people were forcibly displaced worldwide, the study said. This brings the total number of refugees to one that is bigger than the population of the United Kingdom. The study also said there was an increase of about 300,000 more displaced persons in 2016 than the previous year.

It noted that the pace at which people are becoming displaced remains very high with 20 people driven from their homes every minute last year on average.

In a statement on the study released in conjunction with World Refugee Day 2017, UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi said:

“By any measure this is an unacceptable number.”

“It speaks louder than ever to the need for solidarity and common purpose in preventing and resolving crises, and ensuring together that the world’s refugees, internally displaced and asylum-seekers are properly protected and cared for while solutions are pursued.”

In February, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said security forces in Burma committed mass killings and gang rapes of Rohingya in a campaign that “very likely” amounted to crimes against humanity and possibly ethnic cleansing.

OHCHR’s allegation came following the government’s crackdown in response to attacks by Rohingya insurgents on border guard posts on Oct 9, which left several hundreds dead and saw more than 75,000 Rohingya fleeing to neighbouring Bangladesh.

About 1.1 million Rohingya people are denied citizenship in Burma. This lack of full citizenship rights means they are subject to other abuses, including restrictions on their freedom of movement, discriminatory limitations on access to education, and arbitrary confiscation of property.

The government withdrew their so-called white cards two years ago as part of a plan to expel them from the country and cancel their citizenship under the 1982 law.

Many in the Buddhist-majority country view the Rohingya as unwanted immigrants from Bangladesh.

Belivers praying at the mosque of Bengali Sunni Jamae at Yangon on Myanmar. Source: Stefano Ember / Shutterstock.com

May 28, 2017

AS Ramadan begins, Muslims in Burma are increasingly restricted in where they can pray or study their faith, points out Human Rights Watch (HRW).

Using Thaketa Township in Rangoon as a case study, Richard Weir, a Fellow in the Asia Division of HRW, highlights the pressure on the Muslim community after the closure of the township’s two Islamic schools, or madrassas.

Both establishments were chained shut late last month after a Buddhist ultranationalist mob pressured authorities to close them. At the time, HRW called for the Burmese government to immediately reopen the schools, labelling the move a “craven capitulation to mob demands.”



Despite these appeals, the schools have not been allowed to reopen and some fear they will suffer the fate of other madrassas shut by the authorities, and stay closed.

Wunna Shwe, joint secretary general of the Islamic Religious Affairs Council, told HRW that closures like this are not uncommon in Burma, and that they also affect other minority religious groups, such as Christians.

“According to our experience, madrassas that are sealed or closed almost never open again,” Shwe said.

Muslims make up a tiny minority in the Buddhist-majority nation, with the percentage estimated to be in the lower single digits. But as the community grows, the places to safely practice their faith diminish.

Buddhist ultranationalist groups claim that the shutdowns are lawful as madrassa leaders signed a document in October 2015 agreeing not to use the schools for prayer. But residents of Thaketa Township told HRW that for several years they’ve received permission to pray there during Ramadan.

That, however, is no longer an option and Muslims are being forced to go further afield to overcrowded mosques – the closest is a 30-minute walk away – with staggered prayer sessions to accommodate everyone.

“It has been a long time since we have been able to build new mosques in this country,” said Kyaw Khin, head of a national Muslim group. “Others are destroyed in violence, and some are closed by the government.”

The Burmese government has placed harsh restrictions on the construction or renovation of religious structures, as well as limits on the practice of religion. These are just some of the elements of the systemic discrimination faced by Muslims in the country.

HRW called on the government “to allow all people in Burma to worship freely, including by reopening religious schools and protecting minorities from mobs.”

Until that happens, the people of Thaketa Township will spend this Ramadan walking several hours every day just to make it to daily prayers.

Firebrand Buddhist monk Wirathu sits in a supporter's home during a Reuters interview in Yangon, October 4, 2015. Source: Reuters/Soe Zeya Tun

May 5, 2017

FIREBRAND Buddhist-nationalist monk Ashin Wirathu has sparked concerns of religious clashes as he visits Burma’s troubled Rakhine State.

The ultranationalist anti-Islam campaigner, who has compared himself to Donald Trump and is labelled by some as the “Burmese Bin Laden”, arrived in the state where a million Muslims live on Wednesday.

“We are concerned about his trip because he always spreads hate of Muslims,” a Muslim leader in northern Rakhine told Reuters.

During clashes between Buddhists and Rohingya Muslim residents in 2012 which displaced 140,000 people, Wirathu went to Rakhine and delivered incendiary sermons, blaming violence on Muslims and calling for their deportation.

He is a senior figure in Ma Ba Tha movement of nationalist monks, which calls on its followers to boycott Muslim businesses in the name of “protecting race” and Theravada Buddhism in Burma.

Maungdaw police said they would provide security for the monk and his entourage during his visit, which the group claims is to “make donations” to Buddhist Arakanese villages. Wirathu’s party did not specify how long they intended to stay in the Rakhine.

The trip has stoked fears of emboldening hardline nationalists against the Rohingya, who they consider illegal immigrants and refer to as “Bengalis,” advocating that they be “returned” to Bangladesh despite living in Burma for centuries.

In March, the Arakan National Party led a rally against suggestions the Rohingya might be granted Burmese citizenship.

Under the country’s 1982 citizenship law, the minority group are not currently recognised as one of the national races.

Last Friday, Wirathu joined a group of around 100 monks and Buddhist nationalists who forcibly shut down four Islamic schools in Thaketa Township near Yangon.

The monk is also the head of the anti-Islam 969 movement. Wirathu told TIME magazine in 2013 that “you can be full of kindness and love, but you cannot sleep next to a mad dog,” referring to Muslim Burmese.

The UN has claimed that more than 1,000 Rohingya have been killed in the army’s operations in Rakhine, and at least 70,000 Rohingya have fled to neighbouring Bangladesh since late 2016.

A rohingya refugee boy looks on at Balukhali Makeshift Refugee Camp in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh April 12, 2017. Source: Reuters/Mohammad Ponir Hossain

April 14, 2017

BURMA has been identified as the third most at risk country in the world to experience a new episode of genocide, as annual rankings show civilian mass killings at the hands of government forces are on the rise worldwide.

A report from NGO ‘The Early Warning Project’ estimates the risk of deliberate killing of more than 1,000 civilians within a country by that country’s government or its agents, or state-led mass killing.

Alarmingly, the annual rankings also show a reversal in a decade-long trend of decline.

The analysis forecasts risks using public data and advanced methodologies built on 50 years of historical indicators in the hope of highlighting cases where there are early warning signs of potential mass atrocities.

For the third year running, Burma has made it into the top three, along with Sudan and Yemen. According to the data, Burma is already experiencing state-led mass killings, however, models indicate significant risk of a new distinct episode occurring despite the country’s progress towards democracy.

Increased violence against the Muslim minority Rohingya is behind the high ranking.

A UN report detailed how Burma’s security forces had committed mass killings and gang rapes against Rohingya during their campaign against the insurgents, which may amount to crimes against humanity.

The military has denied the accusations, saying it was engaged in a legitimate counter-insurgency operation, but this has been largely discredited by independent bodies.

Rohingya children gather at the Dar Paing camp for Muslim refugees, north of Sittwe, western Rakhine state, Myanmar, June 24 2014. Source: AP/Gemunu Amarasinghe

While the UN report stopped short of explicitly labelling the crackdown as ethnic cleansing, they expressed “serious concerns” that the attacks were a result of a “purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas”.

Bangladesh also appeared in the list, with the NGO ranking it 16th at risk in the world.

Starker political polarisation and a growing extremist threat, as well as an increasingly authoritarian government were given as reasons for the elevated risk of mass violence in the country.

Sri Lanka ranked 18 in the list, seeing a significant and steep increase in risk from the previous year that saw them in the 35th spot.

The report noted that this rise was surprising given the country’s political gains after an unexpected but ultimately peaceful transfer of political power via legislative and presidential elections in 2015.

Despite these positive developments, Sri Lanka was still deemed a risk due to its “history of mass killing and the continued salience of the ruling elite’s ethnicity”.

Pakistan and India also appeared in the list, ranked 9th and 30th respectively.

Cameron Hudson, director of the Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, warned of a dangerous influx of state-led mass killings across the globe and reiterated the importance of analysis such as this to fight against it.

“After a decade of decline, civilian mass killings by governments against their own people are once again on the rise,” she said.

“By combining the power of analytics with the growing body of social science around mass killing onsets, we hope to galvanise preventive actions to avoid these outcomes.”

Additional reporting by Reuters

An Indonesian protester holds a poster with a defaced image of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi during a recent protest in Jakarta against the Rohingya violence. Source: Reuters/Beawiharta

By Emma Richards
Asian Correspondent
March 15, 2017

THE plight of the Rohingya was brutally summed up by UN special rapporteur Yanghee Lee when she told of horrific allegations from the community of children being thrown into fires, people tied up indoors while their homes were set ablaze and last but not least, the violent raping of local women.

At the UN Human Rights Council on Monday, Lee also accused Burma of using bureaucratic means to “expel” the Rohingya minority from the country altogether.

The accusation of such unabashed brutality is the latest in a long line of accusations that reflect badly on Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who has led Burma since her party’s resounding election victory back in 2015.

Suu Kyi’s government rejected Lee’s bid to set up a Commission of Inquiry into the abuses and insisted its own national probe could uncover the facts in Rakhine, leading critics to believe not enough is being done to combat the problem.

As allegations of abuse in Rakhine state and ethnic clashes in Burma’s northern states mount, Suu Kyi is coming under growing international pressure to take action. But these calls have been for naught, as they are often met with silence and denial.

Regarded for years as a beacon of hope in a country torn apart by the struggle against oppression, could Suu Kyi, the once golden child of democracy, be losing her shine?

Early “golden” years

As the darling of the West, Suu Kyi courted almost unanimously positive press from the western media at the beginning of her political career.

Her powerful, unrelenting resolve along with her undeniable allure and storybook-like post-colonial upbringing made her revered around the globe. Hundreds of thousands attended her rallies at home and her collections of writing became bestsellers abroad, drawing mass global attention to her message.

Amnesty International made her a prisoner of conscience and Vanity Fair dubbed her ‘Burma’s Saint Joan’, labels repeated countless times in news reports and speeches across the world.

In 1991 she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in honour of her “unflagging efforts” and her resolve to strive for “ethnic conciliation by peaceful means”.

Then India’s prestigious Jawaharlal Nehru award for international understanding was given the following year.

Politicians lauded her with praise and she was often mentioned in the same context as fellow freedom fighters such as Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King.

While under military-enforced house arrest in Rangoon, reporters took great risks to speak to her, to hear her courageous story of resistance.

Portraits of her were seen all over the world, and celebrities clambered to jump on the Suu Kyi bandwagon.

It seemed there was no limit to her global popularity.

But there has been a notable shift in opinion of late amid mounting reports of rights abuses coming out of Burma, putting her status as exemplar of democratic values under threat.

Turning tides

Since the military launched a crackdown back in October following the death of nine policemen in Rakhine state, it is believed that 75,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled across the border to neighbouring Bangladesh with another 20,000 being displaced within Rakhine state, the UN reported. Claims of rape and murder, and accusations of ethnic cleansing, at the hands of the armed forces have been rife.

Rather than end this cycle of persecution and violence, Suu Kyi is being accused of pandering to Burma’s Buddhist majority in an attempt to court votes rather than assert her principles. She is also yet to visit the area, which has been sealed off under a military directive designed to keep out foreign aid workers and journalists.

While Suu Kyi has taken steps to set up several commissions to review the situation in the Rakhine state, their impartiality have been questioned.

UN rapporteur Lee has stated that she does not believe that they have discharged their investigative obligations and questioned to what extent the investigations will be prompt, thorough, independent and impartial. She has also accused them of not having a “robust methodology or policies in place to address key issues such as witness protection or documentation of evidence.”

Progress in northern Kachin and Shan states, which have seen rebel fighting for decades, has also been almost non-existent despite promises from the National League for Democracy (NLD) to make it a priority following their election victory, with the aim of achieving a nationwide ceasefire by February 2017.

Following the NLD’s peace conference in late August, the military ramped up attacks in Kachin, intensified operations in neighbouring Shan state and began a hunt for a rebel splinter group in southern Karen state, an area that had seen little fighting for years.

Thousands of civilians were displaced and reports emerged of torture, extrajudicial killings and indiscriminate shelling of villages, for which the army has long been notorious.

Suu Kyi’s muted responses to the allegations of killings and abuse have largely consisted of defending or denying the actions of the military.

“Show me a country without human rights issues,” she said in October, as reported by New York Times.

“Every country has human rights abuses.”

A few weeks later during a visit to Tokyo, she said, “We have been very careful not to blame anyone until we have complete evidence about who has been responsible.”

In response to the Kachin problem, Suu Kyi’s office issued a statement claiming that the “information is absolutely not true.”

Suu Kyi has repeatedly tried to downplay the accusations and the scale of the military operations in both regions, drawing condemnation from rights groups and leaders alike.

Amid the escalating human rights abuses, she is also cultivating a reputation for being above public scrutiny and highly anti-media.

And gone are the days of courting international journalists; Suu Kyi now rarely gives interviews to the Burmese press and carefully handpicks her encounters with international media. There is no regular questioning from MPs in Parliament and there has not been a proper press conference since just before the election 14 months ago.

Her government has also taken full advantage of the controversial Telecommunications Law that polices online defamation of the regime, jailing 38 people since her election victory in 2015.

Toeing the line?

Suu Kyi’s almost steadfast refusal to criticise the military now that she is in power, after being a vocal critic whilst in opposition, has raised the question – is she toeing the line or does she believe what she says?

As the civilian leader of the government, Suu Kyi shares power with the military. The army controls the vital cabinets of defence, home affairs and border affairs. Notably, these are the ministries that are running the anti-insurgency operation in Rakhine State.

Suu Kyi has in the past vowed to change this but so far no clear intent towards that has been displayed.

Given the military’s pervasive power, Suu Kyi is forced to work with the men in uniform, rather than against them. The relationship remains tenuous and there continues to be a substantial sources of friction, however, it is a relationship born out of necessity, said Larry Jagan, a former BBC World Service journalist.

“They are working closely together on the peace process, and understand they need each other for this,” he said.

This has led many to believe that Suu Kyi may be biding her time until she is able to curtail the military’s power and shift the balance of power in her direction.

Some believe, however, that Suu Kyi may believe what she says due to the source of her information.

Most of the information she receives on the Rohingya and northern states come from military leaders, leading to some analysts in Burma to believe the army may have convinced her that Rohingya in Rakhine are terrorists.

Her government advisers are also mostly former military officers, or veteran civil servants with firm beliefs about the superiority of Buddhist values over all others, they say.

This theory is supported by comments from U Zaw Htay, spokesman for Suu Kyi, saying she was “standing” with the military.

“She knows everything,” he said, “The military has been briefing her on every important issue.”

What now?

Once the lionised freedom fighter, Suu Kyi now finds herself leader of a country responsible for the most persecuted minority in the world.

“Aung San Suu Kyi was held as this Joan of Arc figure and was such a beacon of hope for the Myanmar people that, in any other country, she was almost bound to fail,” argued Andrew Jaggard of consulting firm Mekong Economics.

Many who admired her resolve throughout the years of house arrest, and those Burmese that believed she was the symbol of hope, remain disillusioned in her failure to act in the face of wrongdoing.

Perhaps Suu Kyi is laying the groundwork and biding her time until an opportunity shows itself to make real change. Or perhaps she is a cynical politician who is willing to put votes ahead of principles.

But as Harvard Law Professor Tyler Gianni told the New York Times:

“She says she is a politician [but] you can have politics and you can have protection of the civilian population at the same time.”

Ko Ni, a prominent member of Burma's Muslim minority and legal adviser for the ruling National League for Democracy, is seen during an interview in Yangon Jan 13, 2016. Picture taken January 13, 2016. Ko ni was shot dead outside the Yangon International Airport on Jan 29, 2017. Pic: Reuters

February 26, 2017

THE assassination of Ko Ni, a prominent legal adviser to the Burma (Myanmar) government was motivated by a personal political grudge and due to a larger military conspiracy, a minister said.

Police and Home Ministry officials said have wrapped up the investigation the Jan 29 shooting of the Muslim lawyer Ko Ni following the arrest of three men.

Investigators are now on the hunt for another suspect who is still at large.

Home Affairs Minister Lt. Gen. Kyaw Swe said although many aspects of the murder case still need investigation,the authorities now believed personal reasons and extreme nationalism led the suspects to murder him, the Associated Press reported.

“When we were investigating, we discovered it was a case of patriotism. This extreme patriotism … killed [U Ko Ni], according to our findings,” the minister said, as quoted by Frontier Myanmar.

Authorities declared the investigation over after the arrest of the fourth suspect — a former Military Intelligence official — earlier this month.

According to Frontier Myanmar, U Zay Yar Phyo, a former military officer, was arrested at a monastery in Yangon’s Tarmwe Township on Feb 3.

U zay is alleged to have planned Ko Ni’s death together with U Aung Win Khine, a former lieutenant-colonel who is still being sought by the authorities.

Police said Zay Yar Phyo is accused of hiring the gunman who killed Ko Ni.

Ko Ni, 65, died on the spot after a gunman shot him at point-blank range outside Yangon International Airport at about 4:30 pm on Jan 29. U Nay Win, 42, attempted to apprehend the assailant, but was fatally shot in the process.

The Burmese police arrested the gunman at the scene. Authorities said 53-year-old suspect is a Burmese national and the motive of the murder remains unknown.

The apparent assassination comes amid heightened tensions in Buddhist-majority Burma. The country’s State Counsellor, Aung San Suu Kyi, is under pressure over a heavy-handed security operation in an area of the country’s northwest that is populated mostly by Muslims.

Smith said U Ko Ni was one of Burma’s most prominent Muslim lawyers and a distinguished legal advocate for human rights.

In recent years, his work focused on improving Burma’s justice system and bringing laws in line with human rights standards.

As detailed in a Fortify Rights statement, “U Ko Ni was instrumental in facilitating the repeal the 1950 Emergency Provisions Act and amendments to provisions of the 2012 Ward or Village Tract Administration Law—two laws long used by the authorities to target human rights defenders and minorities.”

Burma's de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Pic: AP.

By Matthew Abbey
January 17, 2017

WHEN a video was uploaded to Facebook in early January showing unarmed men being beaten by police officers in Burma, the authorities were quick to arrest the four culprits after realising the world was watching.

The unarmed victims were a part of the Rohingya Muslim minority group, who for decades have faced government persecution.

Because of the government’s failure to address the plight of ethnic minorities, Burma’s de facto leader Aung Sung Suu Kyi has been routinely criticised by the international community. Although she is the country’s symbol of democracy, time and time again she fails to recognise the privilege of her ethnic Burman identity.

The villagers in the Rathedaung Township, where the beating took place, are no strangers to violence. What is depicted in the video is not unusual, but rather the treatment the Rohingya have come to expect. As the video shows, two officers, Pyae Phyo Thwin and Tay Zar Lin, whip and kick two unarmed men who sit passively on the floor among dozens of Rohingya villagers. Another officer, Zaw Myo Htike films the video as he passively smokes a cigarette, while Major Ye Htun Naing oversees the ordeal.

After the four men were detained by the Home Affairs Ministry and the Burman police force, Suu Kyi said in a statement that the police officers “will be punished”. But if it goes ahead, it will only be because Suu Kyi has bowed to international pressure.

U Zaw Htay, a government spokesperson, assured reporters in Naypyidaw that the government stresses the need to act within the limits of the law, but similar forms of abuse are widespread. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch regularly denounce the government for its treatment of the Rohingya, but the government deflects all criticism.

Even after Nobel Peace Prize laureates wrote an open letter labelling the treatment of the Rohingya as ethnic cleansing, the government gave scarce attention. The Rohingya are simply not a priority, with many not even recognised as citizens.

The international community rightly criticises Suu Kyi for failing to show support for the Rohingya, but few ask the question as to why she remains passive, especially as she is no stranger to political persecution. But the persecution levied towards Suu Kyi in prior decades was based on her activism, not her ethnic identity.

Suu Kyi has failed ethnic minorities because she fails to recognise her own ethnic Burman privilege. The Burman are the dominant ethnic group in Burma who make up two-thirds of the population. ‘Burmanness’, as a result, is a privilege bestowed upon the majority of the population. Because the majority of the population are benefitting, the plight of unprivileged ethnic minorities is ignored.

Burma is often viewed through an ethnic lens, but Suu Kyi fails to address the issue. A brief glance at past speeches in her book ‘Freedom from Fear’ (1991) is illuminating.

She once claimed; 

“We cannot have the attitude of ‘‘I’m Kachin,’’ ‘‘I’m Burman,’’ ‘‘I’m Shan.’’ We must have the attitude that we are all comrades in the struggle for democratic rights… Only then will we succeed. If we divide ourselves ethnically, we shall not achieve democracy for a long time.”


It’s a noble idea, but for the Rohingya who are systemically discriminated against based on ethnicity, ethnicity is important.

Remaining blind to privilege has allowed for institutional dominance to continue throughout Burma’s transition to democracy. As Burman civil society groups emerge, military operations in non-Burman states are on the rise. The space for the Burman is opening while the room for ethnic minorities is shrinking.

Racism cannot end without recognition of privilege.

As long as the Burman continue to turn a blind eye, ethnic minorities will continue to suffer. Burman privilege exists in this Southeast Asian nation in the same way that white privilege exists in the United States.

If Suu Kyi continues to ignore ethnicity, the Burman will maintain a superior status in the country under a façade of democratisation. In order for her to create a true democracy, racism against ethnic minorities must end. However, considering how Suu Kyi refuses to refer to the Rohingya by name, it may be worth waiting for a new government to form ethnic unity. 

Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi. Pic: AP.


By Zan Azlee
November 7, 2016

ONE Southeast Asian issue that gets a lot of news coverage is the issue of Burma’s (Myanmar) Rohingya, a group that is oppressed and who have had their citizenship stripped off since 1982, by the former military junta.

The exodus of this people for decades has now seen tremendously negative implications. Refugees, corruption, human trafficking, the sex trade, murder, rape and torture are all associated with this problem.

One of the on-going criticism in the region is about ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), the regional intergovernmental organisation, having a non-interference policy. Hence, they have not done anything about the Rohingya issue in Burma.

Readers who are unfamiliar with the Rohingya issue are urged to find out more. However, it would definitely be hard pressed to find any individual today who would have no knowledge of the issue at all.

Coincidentally, over the weekend, I attended the launch of a documentary film called ‘Bodies for Sale’ by Mahi Ramakrishnan, a journalist friend of mine who has been covering the Rohingya issue for years. The film, of course, was about the Rohingya exodus.

A question that was posed (by me!) after the screening is whether Aung San Suu Kyi, ever indicated that she was sympathetic with the plight of the Rohingya before her party, the National League of Democracy (MLD), took office.

Much has been said about Suu Kyi in the past year since she is now leading the country, and none of it has been positive. This is probably something the Nobel Peace Prize laureate isn’t used to.

Seen as a symbol of liberation and democracy, she is being accused of the total opposite now that her party, the NLD, has taken over the government in Burma. She is the country’s first democratically elected leader since 1962.

Suu Kyi had gone through tremendous sacrifice and suffering for her country. The whole world should be familiar with her house arrests over a span of 21 years. So she rightfully deserved the Nobel Peace Prize when she got it.

A Rohingya girl who was displaced following 2012 sectarian violence carries a baby at Nga Chaung Refugee Camp in Pauktaw, Rakhine state, Burma. Pic: AP.

But back to the negative criticism that has been, surprisingly respectful and polite, thrown at her in the past few weeks. Suu Kyi has been criticised for being silent and not taking action about the Rohingya issue that has been afflicting Burma all these years.

In fact, she has been reported to have advised the United States ambassador to Burma earlier this year not to refer to the term Rohingya to describe to the persecuted Muslim community.

A Myanmar government spokesman, U Kyaw Zay Ya, said that the government only recognises 135 ethnic groups within it’s borders and Rohingya is not one of them.

“Our position is that using the controversial term does not support the national reconciliation process and solving problems,” he was quoted as saying in the New York Times.

In 2013, I was in Burma shooting a documentary about how the military junta was slowly opening up the country to the world. I had long discussions with Khein Thurein, my fixer and local Burmese journalist, about Aung San Suu Kyi.

Thurein had told me that in Burma itself, she had always been criticised for not thinking of Burma as a whole country with a diverse society. One of the main criticisms was that she always only referred to ‘the Burmese people’ in her speeches and her writings.

According to Thurein, this angered the people because the Burmese are a specific ethnic group and whenever she used this term, it alienated the rest of the society.

Maybe, Aung San Suu Kyi is just a politician and she is playing to the political strategy that she has set out for herself and her party in order to gain and stay in power. She did say in an interview with CNN that she is first and foremost a politician and not a humanitarian worker.

This could just be a case where the whole world has projected a saint-like image of Suu Kyi that probably isn’t exactly accurate. Over the years, the international community has made her out to be the saviour of everything that it might not even be in line with her own plans.

Apparently, the NLD is quite an authoritarian party with it’s leader running it with sole control. But of course, the NLD government is only a year old and it might just be a little premature for us to judge them. And let’s hope that the illusion that is Suu Kyi does not fade.

Or maybe it already has.

Migrants including Myanmar's Rohingya Muslims sit on the deck of their boat as they wait to be rescued by Acehnese fishermen on the sea. Pic: AP


 By Francis Wade
Asian Correspondent
November 5, 2016

EVER since the 9 October attacks on police outposts in Burma’s Rakhine State led to the deployment of security forces to the region, numerous reports have emerged of rapes, arson attacks and extra-judicial killings of Rohingya. Those responsible for the initial attack, which left nine policemen dead, appear to have been Rohingya. Whether they came from Rakhine State or from Bangladesh, or both, is unclear.

But the response by security forces has been to place the entire area on lockdown as troops sweep through Rohingya villages searching for the militants. The government in Naypyidaw has roundly dismissed reports of abuses. “All are well convinced that the accusations of international media of violations of human rights of local residents during Maungtaw area clearance operations were intentionally fabricated in collusion with terrorist groups,” said a statement from the Ministry of Information. Aung San Suu Kyi — currently in Japan, despite the worst crisis faced by her six-month old administration — said on 3 November that security forces were abiding by the “rule of law”.



Independent journalists have been barred from traveling to the area of Northern Rakhine State where the security operations are underway. Instead, the Ministry of Information organized for a team of officials, accompanied by handpicked journalists working for state media outlets, to visit and provide reports to those media outlets that have been refused entry. This team would, it was noted in advance, “refute accusations on the alleged racial and religious persecution by the Tatmadaw”, the Myanmar army. It seemed the allegations of army brutality were being denied before any investigation had taken place.

Because the area is a black spot for independent media, the claims of abuses have been difficult to verify. They have however been numerous, and they chime with well-documented historic evidence of the military’s treatment of Rohingya, and ethnic minorities more generally. But the same denialism that surfaced after the 2012 violence in Rakhine State has again been on display. Human Rights Watch released satellite imagery showing Rohingya villages that had been razed following police and army deployment in early October. The Ministry of Information claims that Rohingya had burned their own homes for propaganda purposes.

All 33 Rohingya that were acknowledged to have been killed by security forces since operations began after 9 October were participants in the attack, the government said. Perhaps that was true — the information blackout means we cannot say either way. But we also know that punishment of Rohingya is always done collectively, and not on an individual basis. There is a penalty for being Rohingya, and it is manifested in a range of control measures — tight restrictions on movement, access to healthcare, and more — that is both acute, and unique only to them.

That had been a classic containment policy of the junta. Yet the mindset that feeds it — that an entire group is a single guilty party, with all individuals within it folded into one — appears now to inform the new civilian government’s approach to the crisis. The spokesperson for the President’s Office, Zaw Htay, stated on 27 October, nearly three weeks after the lockdown began, that the government was initially blocking aid to displaced Rohingya in order to flush them out of their hiding places and force them to return to their villages. There, the military would be able to investigate whether they participated in the attack. The government thus appears to have already determined that all Rohingya are suspects.

A Rohingya girl who was displaced following 2012 sectarian violence carries a baby at Nga Chaung Refugee Camp in Pauktaw, Rakhine state, Burma. Pic: AP.

While these reports may shock observers, there’s nothing really new in them. The abuses faced by the Rohingya at the hands of security forces, and indeed civilians, is decades old. What is rather more recent, and astonishing, is the way the military has been able to profit so effectively from this all. After Fiona MacGregor, a journalist with the Myanmar Times, published a report on allegations that security forces had raped Rohingya women, Presidential Spokesperson Zaw Htay attacked her on Facebook, calling the allegations false and irresponsible and deserving of legal action.

What came next was a flood of comments from Burmese calling for a case to be brought against her and her newspaper. Others who commented that the government should allow independent journalists in to assess the credibility of the accusations were rounded upon and accused of slandering the military. Several days later, after a phone call to the Myanmar Times from the Ministry of Information, MacGregor was fired.



There have been two major knock-on effects from the violence of 2012. The first, to which most international attention is directed, has been a dramatic worsening of conditions for Rohingya. Even those not confined to camps face an even more far-reaching spectrum of restrictions than before that have made them de facto prisoners inside their own villages and towns. But the second effect has been less noticeable. The violence has dramatically shaken up what had once seemed a clear and rational constellation of solidarities among the populace.

Prior to the transition, few would have seen any cause to rally behind the military, so universal was the loathing directed at it. But the Rohingya have been so successfully cast as a national threat that many in Myanmar are now speaking out in support of troops as they sweep through villages in the west. Journalists who report on military abuses, as they had done in the years prior to the transition — and who in return were lauded on the ground in Burma for illuminating its dark practices — are now pilloried as traitorous.

The about-face has been both rapid and astonishing in its implications. Any criticism of the military’s operations in Rakhine State is now seen as an attack on the nation, for the military is now the virtuous defender of the nation against the hostile Muslim presence there. The former junta over and again circulated propaganda to that effect, but it had always fallen on the deaf ears of a rightly cynical Burmese public. That seems to be changing, and this time largely at the behest of the public—the military itself has had to do very little in the way of PR.

A year ago MacGregor wrote a piece, published in the Myanmar Times, in which she spotlighted a telling clause in the ceasefire agreements being discussed between the Myanmar military and armed ethnic groups. The clause said that both parties to the conflict would “Avoid any form of sexual attack on women, including sexual molestation, sexual assault or violence, rape and sex slavery”. In including the clause, the military had effectively acknowledged its own long and sordid history of sexual violence against ethnic minority women. The piece went out without a whimper from either the management or the Ministry of Information. But the violence in Rakhine State is evidently its own unique beast, and it has dramatically changed how journalists are being forced to approach a military that the broad public in Burma had, not so long ago, always known to be beneath praise.

Myanmar leader Aung Sang Suu Kyi was bestowed the Harvard 2016 "Humanitarian of the Year Award" on Saturday. Pic via Facebook.


By Asian Correspondent
September 18, 2016

MUSLIM students and groups are protesting Harvard Foundation’s selection of Myanmar (Burma) leader Aung Sang Suu Kyi for the “2016 Humanitarian of the Year” award, saying she has done nothing to address the persecution of the Rohingya Muslim minority in her country.

Suu Kyi, who received the foundation’s Peter J. Gomes awardduring a ceremony in Cambridge Saturday, first gained international prominence as the General Secretary of the newly-formed National League for Democracy in Myanmar in 1990.
She later became one of the world’s most well-known political prisoners when in 1989 she was sentenced to 15 years’ house arrest due to her participation in anti-government protests. With the support of her country, she was later appointed to the newly-created position of state counselor, a role similar to that of a prime minister.

In 1991, Suu Kyi was honored with a Nobel Peace Prize for her “non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights”.

But since she claimed the reins of government in April, Suu Kyi has been heavily criticized by activists across the globe for failing to aid Myanmar’s Muslim minority – the Rohingya – who the United Nations calls one of the world’s most persecuted minorities.

In The Crimson, a Harvard College daily, Harvard Islamic Society director of external relations Anwar Omeish said the student organization felt the foundation’s selection of Suu Kyi for the award was “really jarring”.

“I think for us we see the type of rhetoric surrounding the Rohingya in Myanmar, the similar war on terror rhetoric that creates violence against people across the world and that affects us here,” she was quoted saying.

The report said Muslim students also planned to stage a protest during Suu Kyi’s visit, but it is not immediately known if this transpired.

Other organizations unaffiliated with Harvard voiced similar concerns over the award. The Burma Task Force USA, a group lobbying for an end to the persecution of the Rohingya, reportedly called and sent emails to the Harvard Foundation to protest the matter, The Crimson said, quoting media relations director Jennifer Sawicz.

“The message [this awards sends is] that our education institutions care far more about surface images than the complex truths.

“Yes, Suu Kyi did fight for democracy and that’s great, but this isn’t a democracy award, this is a humanitarian award,” Sawicz was quoted saying.



In its website and Facebook page, the group posted a statement urging its followers and supporters to contact the foundation, its director and the Harvard president, and flood Twitter with messages of outrage.

It also posted a laundry list of reasons why Suu Kyi was undeserving of such an award, saying among others that she has been “unconscionably silent on the plight of the Rohingya”.

Across social media platforms Facebook and Twitter, similar discontent was expressed by Muslims.

“@thecrimson why in the world, @Harvard is giving Humanitarian of the year award to #SuuKyi? What is the logic here?” asked Abdul Malik Mujahid who is Burma Task Force’s chairman, Huffington Post blogger and Chicago Iman.

“On the bodies of persecuted Rohingya,” another Twitter user, AKahn, Voice of America blog editor, wrote.

Suu Kyi’s government announced last month the formation of a nine-member advisory commission to resolve the “protracted issues in the region”, referring to religious and ethnic strife in the Rakhine state.

The council is made up of six locals and three foreigners – including former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan as its chair – a factor that has been fiercely protested by the Burmese.

Suu Kyi’s office said the commission will “consider humanitarian and development issues, access to basic services, the assurance of basic rights, and the security of the people of Rakhine”.

Rohingya Muslims have lived in the northwestern Rakhine state for generations but are denied citizenship because they are considered outsiders. More than 100 people, mostly Rohingya, were killed in clashes with the Buddhist majority in 2012.

Many Buddhists inside Burma prefer to call them ‘Bengalis’, arguing that the million or so members of the minority are mostly illegal immigrants and not a native ethnic group.

According to the Associated Press, the closest the government came to acknowledging the Rohingya was by saying that the commission will “examine international aspects of the situation, including the background of those seeking refugee status abroad.”

Every year, tens of thousands of Rohingya flee persecution in Burma and make perilous journeys in rickety boats to seek refuge in other Southeast Asian countries. Many, however, have perished in their pursuit of better lives, while others fall victim to human traffickers.

Newly arrived migrants gather at Kuala Langsa Port in Langsa, Aceh province, Indonesia last year. Pic: AP.

By Caleb Quinley
Asian Correspondent
June 10, 2016

THIS week marks the one year anniversary of the disastrous Andaman Sea migrant boat crisis. However, one year on, it appears not much has changed in terms of resolution. Following the events that took place last year, national and international human rights organizations have consistently documented a lack of protection regarding Rohingya refugees.

They unanimously urge for the discontinuation of arbitrary and indefinite detention of refugees and survivors of human trafficking — stating such consequences as a detriment and ultimately exasperating the already difficult situation. More so, they have pushed for an abolishment of the “push back” policy that exposes trafficking survivors and migrants to even greater dangers. Rights groups have tenaciously voiced that protection is still lacking and even more so that basic human rights are continuing to be disregarded.

“If Thailand continues approaching the issue of Rohingya refugees merely in the spirit of protecting the country’s face, its efforts will prove to be meaningless and the problems will persist,” said Papop Siamhan, Anti Trafficking Coordinator at Human Rights and Development Foundation (HRDF). “The best way to save face is by saving lives.”

Saving face is integral to Thailand’s intricate culture. Though owning up to these reoccurring abuses will ultimately have an even greater impact on the country’s international reputation. On May 1, 2015 Thai officials initiated a public acknowledgement of the existence of mass graves containing more than 36 Rohingya and Bangladeshi bodies. Soon after, it become clear that these were victims of human trafficking which immediately sparked outrage. In the following days more bodies were discovered, consequently causing traffickers to clear out and abandon their camps.

Not only were Thai officials found to be involved in trafficking networks, Thailand began a bitter clamp down on its borders, refusing Rohingya and Bangladeshi migrants and trafficking victims access or assistance. This directly triggered thousands to become stranded at sea causing an unknown loss of life. Human rights groups are highlighting that the protection of these individuals are of the utmost importance and should never be overlooked, urging Thailand to react appropriately.

The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRCT) hosted a forum in Bangkok Wednesday discussing the condition of Rohingya refugees and human trafficking survivors in Thailand one year after the boat crisis. Six other groups also contributed to the forum: the Coalition for the Rights of Refugees and Stateless Persons (CRSP), the Human Rights and Peace Studies Center at Mahidol University, the Migrant Working Group (MWG), Asylum Access Thailand (AAT), Fortify Rights, and the Human Rights and Development Foundation.

“It’s encouraging that Thailand has taken steps to combat the vast network of human traffickers that have long preyed on the desperation of Rohingya refugees,” said Mr. Siwawong Sukthawee of the Migrant Working Group. “But it’s not enough. Much more needs to be done to protect survivors. In many ways, the crisis continues.”

Over 170,000 Rohingya seek refuge from systematic abuses today due to religious persecution and violence in Burma (Myanmar). Migrants are commonly captured by transnational criminal syndicates where they have been documented sustaining abuse such as imprisonment and torture while being trafficked through hidden camps scattered in Thailand. Rescued survivors however are still victims of abuse while they are detained in IDC’s (Immigration Detention Centers). All six organizations have voiced their concern with the length that such migrants stay in these IDCs, illuminating the tragic possibility of indefinite detainment.

The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRCT) hosted a forum in Bangkok, Wednesday. Pic: Caleb Quinley.

The panelists discussed their support for a Cabinet Resolution that passed on March 15. If implemented, the resolution would allow witness protection to all witnesses in human trafficking trials and even legal status for those who have survived human trafficking in the country. Regardless of the support, the Resolution has not been seriously implemented.

In the past six months, 60 Rohingya refugees have reportedly escaped from IDCs in the south of Thailand. After receiving alerts from locals on the escapee’s whereabouts, Thai police made an attempt to re-arrest the Rohingya individuals. Police then fatally shot one of the men, failing the Rohingya once again. This most recent occurrence has led these organizations to take swift action calling on the Thai government to examine the incident.

“Thailand’s policies and practices towards Rohingya refugees are putting lives at risk and must be addressed immediately,” said Amy Smith, executive director of Fortify Rights. “The Thai government should ensure protection for Rohingya refugees and human trafficking survivors without delay.”

The organizations insisted that Thailand should protect human trafficking survivors, stop push back policies, grant protection for trafficking related witnesses, push for the Cabinet Resolution and end indefinite detention.

Caleb Quinley is a writer and photographer based in Bangkok, Thailand. His focus topics are politics, conflict, urban poverty, and human rights issues.


    • Rohingya Exodus