By Rose Foran

Huffington Post

November 11, 2015

(Photo: Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

YANGON, Myanmar -- This coming Sunday, Myanmar will hold its first "free" elections for 25 years, an event set to cement the country's status as one of the world's newest democracies. If all goes to plan, the poll will complete the country's recent transition from military to (partial) civilian rule. 

It is an exciting moment, not least as there is some hope that the leading opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), could win a landslide victory and reduce the grip that Myanmar's military-backed ruling elite retain over political life. In such an event, there is some hope that the NLD could work with the military, who are allocated a quarter of the seats in Parliament by law, to build on the reform program established by current President Thein Sein. 

But extremely serious allegations leveled against the state suggest all is not well in Myanmar. There is "strong evidence" that Myanmar has committed genocide against a largely Muslim minority known as the Rohingya, according to a recent report by a clinic of Yale Law School for Bangkok-based NGO Fortify Rights. Other reports and experts have warned that genocide may be on the horizon.

For decades, the Rohingya have endured abuse, statelessness and apartheid in the western edge of the country. Their plight was brought to the attention of the international media in 2012 when two anti-Rohingya pogroms led to mass displacement and hundreds of deaths. These incidents were described by Human Rights Watch as "crimes against humanity" undertaken as part of an ethnic cleansing campaign in which state agencies were allegedly involved. 

Earlier this year, attention was drawn again to the Rohingya when thousands of "boat people," among them many from the minority, faced starvation and abandonment at sea in trafficker's boats as part of what became termed " the Asian refugee crisis." 

But these events are only the most high-profile agonies that the Rohingya have been subjected to. The group have endured at least three ethnic cleansing campaigns since the late seventies, as well as decades of routine abuses at the hands of the state such as torture, rape and forced labor. Their basic rights have been slowly stripped away by state policy, culminating in total disenfranchisement and new laws designed to control births in measures enacted this year. Throughout this period, an unknown number of killings have taken place. 

It is in reference to this history of a cumulative campaign against the group by successive governments in Myanmar, not just recent events, that the charge of genocide is most cogently being argued. 

Unsurprisingly, the allegation has been challenged by state representatives. After a period of silence, spokesman Ye Htut told local publication Mizzima that the government "rejects the accusation completely," adding that the Yale report was part of an "an intentional plot" to destabilize parts of the country before the election.

The claim has also been dismissed by members of the NGO community working in Myanmar, some of whom were quoted in a piece published by The Straits Times this week, which asserted that genocide is "not the issue" for the Rohingya. The article, by veteran journalist Nirmal Ghosh, went on to cite think tank and aid agency sources who said they saw the charge as being incorrect and irresponsible. 

However, the case for genocide -- either on the horizon or in the present -- largely rests on an analysis not just of recent violence but of the cumulative effects of decades of state policy. What seems to be rejected by critics is an image of the situation that assumes that, because Rwanda-style mass killings haven't occurred, the allegation is untenable.

Addressing such criticisms, Matthew Smith, Executive Director of Fortify Rights, told me, "Genocide is a crime everyone thinks they understand. We've come to realize that many diplomats, UN officials and analysts don't understand the law of genocide, and we don't necessarily hold that against them."

"We often associate gas chambers and mass killing to situations of genocide, but elevating the crime to the most extreme examples is not necessarily helpful, and it's not required by the law of genocide," he continued. "Waiting for the appearance of gas chambers is precisely the mentality that has contributed to our world's repeated failures to prevent atrocities."

The term genocide inspires political sensitivity and institutional cowardice precisely because it carries with it legal obligations that most states, in theory, have to adhere to. Myanmar has become increasingly important to the West due to its strategic location in the U.S.-led "pivot to Asia." To use the charged term "genocide" publicly could seriously damage ties with Naypyidaw. 

However, it's one thing to mindlessly proclaim "genocide!" and advocate the ending of all forms of quiet diplomacy with the government of Myanmar in favor of a single-track confrontational approach. It's quite another to advocate for the continuation of such engagement while calling for an international commission of inquiry to investigate the claim. 

It is this latter approach that is recommended by the Yale paper. It's hard to see why it should not be adopted, unless one favors the option of simply doing nothing until the situation deteriorates into a full-blown human catastrophe.

By Hugo Swire

Huffington Post

August 28, 2015

2015 could be the most important year in Burma's recent history. The November general elections are the litmus test for the reform process which began in 2011. Successful elections would consolidate a remarkable, peaceful transition from dictatorship. They would bring an enormous amount of enthusiasm and goodwill from the international community, and potentially unlock an exciting time for Burma's economy. This would be a true legacy achievement for all those whose efforts have taken the country this far. 

I visited Burma for the third time a few weeks ago, as monsoon rains were threatening the floods that have since devastated parts of the country. I met senior figures from within the government, the election commission and the opposition. I stressed to all the need for the elections to be credible and inclusive. The world will be watching intently. 

Kerry McCarthy, speaking for the Labour party, argued on these pages last month that the British Government should reconsider its engagement with Burma in the light of human rights violations there. Quite obviously, with the elections a few months away, it would be the precisely the wrong time to do so. And while she was right in some of her diagnosis of the considerable human rights problems that remain in Burma, I was not at all convinced that she had serious answers as to how these problems, not least the situation of the Rohingya, should best be tackled. 

First of all, the diagnosis. I agree that there have been major setbacks in Burma's transition over the last year. We have seen a shrinking of the democratic space, numbers of political prisoners again on the rise, ongoing instances of sexual violence in conflict affected areas, and the introduction of potentially discriminatory legislation on race and religion. In advance of the elections, we have seen no progress on a deeply flawed constitution that guarantees the Burmese military a quarter of parliamentary seats yet denies National League for Democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi the opportunity to stand for President. 

Of all the human rights concerns in Burma, the appalling treatment of the Rohingya community remains the most worrying. During my visit I was determined to go to Rakhine State to see for myself the current situation, and to raise our deep concerns with the government. I was struck by how little things had changed since my previous visit in 2012, not least in the camps for the internally displaced. Indeed, I saw and heard first-hand that for many housed in these 'temporary' camps for the last three years, living conditions have appreciably worsened. For a community already struggling with a lack of basic human rights, the removal of 'white card' identity documents this year - and the prospect of disenfranchisement - has clearly been a moment of great distress. This is now having regional consequences, as we saw with the increasing numbers of Rohingya trying to make the perilous journey across the Andaman Sea in May and June. 

If we want to tackle these problems effectively and in the round, we need to think carefully. We have pressed the Burmese authorities repeatedly on the Rohingya's urgent needs - security, freedom of movement and a pathway to citizenship. We should be vocal and persistent in setting out both the moral imperative for these and the potential economic and social benefits of a better integrated community. We should maintain our efforts to get the rest of the international community and the UN engaged on this. But we must of course remain conscious that the Rohingya issue raises very strong feelings right across Burma. Broader reconciliation is likely to be a longer-term goal that will need patient encouragement and sensitive handling. We need to listen to the concerns of the Rakhine community, and where there are genuine issues we should offer our support. We already provide significant practical assistance to all people in Rakhine State - over £18m of aid since the violence of 2012. 

More broadly, I remain a firm believer that engagement is the best way to encourage forces of moderation and reform. We should not forget, after all, where Burma has come from. Since 2011, thousands of political prisoners have been released, a vibrant media has emerged from decades of absolute press control and a flourishing civil society scene has developed. You can see and feel this on the streets of Rangoon. The peace process, while not at all straight-forward, is closer to bringing a nationwide ceasefire than at any time since Burma's independence, and hundreds of child soldiers have been released. Millions voted in the 2012 by-elections, sending representatives to a parliament which has started to grow in authority - even if the ousting of Shwe Mann as USDP party chairman last week felt more like a reminder of times past. 

The UK is playing its full part in this. We have been involved in supporting preparations for the elections and the peace process. We have led the way on issues like the prevention of sexual violence in conflict, and I was proud to launch the International Protocol in Rangoon during my recent visit. We have a continuous dialogue with the Burmese authorities on the full range of human rights issues and play an active role in raising them up the agenda of the UN. Our aid has made a positive difference to the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, many of them among the very poorest. Along the way we have also promoted responsible investment. It is very reductive to imply there is some sort of binary choice between trade and human rights. Burma's politics will only succeed if its economy succeeds. Responsible trade can lead to much needed jobs, improve education and skills and give people a future. 

Some have questioned, in particular, our engagement with the military. I cannot see how Burma can make genuine political progress without the buy-in of the military, who remain a powerful force in Burma. Of course, our focus is to encourage them to take their rightful place in a democratic system; of course, we are not providing any combat support; and yes, of course, we use our engagement to raise what are real concerns around issues like sexual violence and child soldiers - I have personally discussed both of these with the Commander-in-Chief. But if we want the military to play their part in the reform process, it would be a mistake to think we could achieve this simply by isolating and criticising them. Aung San Suu Kyi, who has visited some of the courses we have run, is of the same mind. 

Around the UK, there is tremendous interest in Burma, and tremendous affection for it. I am continually amazed and impressed by the many stories I hear of individual links being forged between our two countries - from collaboration on a project to restore heritage buildings in downtown Rangoon, to the success of the UK-backed Literary Festival, to Paul Scully being elected as the first MP with Burmese heritage into the British House of Commons this year. I know there will be huge interest here in the elections in November. The international community must do everything it can to support the next milestone in Burma's remarkable journey.

By Azeem Ibrahim

Huffington Post

July 18, 2015

The Rohingya have been described as "the most persecuted minority in the world" by the United Nations. The following is based on extensive interviews conducted by the author in the Rohingya IDP (Internally Displaced Persons) camps in Myanmar earlier this year.

Adam is 34 years old. He lives in a 10 sq. ft. bamboo hut in the Thet Key Pyin camp for internally displaced persons (IDP camp) in Sittwe, Myanmar. Just over three years ago he used to be a construction worker, living a life of relative comfort in downtown area of Mansi Junction Village. But that may as well have been an entire lifetime ago. 

It was June 2012 when his pleasant, peaceful life was torn to pieces - along with the lives of 35-40,000 other people just like Adam. Their village was attacked on all sides by mobs of people. And not just thugs or gangs on the loose. Military and police too - entire local sections of Myanmar's security services. They burned down the houses and forced residents to leave. Some people wouldn't leave. Or couldn't leave in time. They were burnt alive. Some others who tried to resist the attack were hacked to death by the mobs. 

Why were Adam and his neighbors attacked? Simply, because they were born. Or to be specific, because they were born in the Rohingya minority ethnic community, in Myanmar. And this was not an isolated attack. Similar acts of violence flared all across the state of Arakan (Rakhine) in Myanmar that June. And again that year in October. And again a few months later. And ever since. Roughly twice every year since 2012, the state of Arakan goes up in flames. 

Not that these attacks have been out of the blue. The Rohingya have been at the receiving end of discrimination, hostility and occasional violent attacks ever since Burma (as Myanmar was previously known) gained independence from Britain in 1948. But the developments in the last three years - they are something new. 

We are in the middle of a full-blown ethnic cleansing campaign, and according to several of the most respected international observers, including UN bodies, the Rohingya are the group most at risk of genocide at this moment in time. Half of the Rohingya population of around 2 - 2.5 million has been displaced - the majority to neighboring countries such as Bangladesh and Thailand. This is what triggered the South-East Asian migration crisis we have heard about in the news. But over 150,000 Rohingya people have been internally displaced. Like Adam, they live in IDP camps. They cannot leave and they cannot find employment. They are under constant guard by security agencies, ostensibly to "protect them from further attacks" - in effect they are living in prison camps, where even Medicins Sans Frontieres have been banned from operating.

I recently returned from Myanmar, where I undertook research for my forthcoming book on the Rohingya minority. Whilst there, I had to ask: who is actually instigating these vicious attacks against the Rohingya? It is difficult to point the finger unequivocally to the government, even as there is evidence that at least some elements of the state administration have either enabled or even participated in certain attacks. And it is equally difficult to pin down any group or population, even as it is clear that many, many people in Myanmar are extremely hostile to the Rohingya.

But one name that repeatedly came up and in the case of which there is very little ambiguity is Dr Aye Maung, leader of the Arakan National Party (ANP), previously known as the Rakhine Nationalities Development Party (RNDP) . To put this into its proper context, the stated ideology of the ANP is to "represent the interests of Rakhine people in Rakhine (Arakan) state and the Yangon region". In other words, it is a self-declared ethno-centric, xenophobic and racist party. And they hate the Rohingya with a burning passion - for having a different color skin and most of all for having a different religion (Islam) .

One of my sources personally witnessed Dr Maung enter a restaurant in Sittwe in May 2012, only to storm out again furiously when he saw that the Rakhine locals were sitting and eating happily with their neighbors, "the Bengalis" (the term used for Rohingyas, in order to de-legitimize their existence in the country). Another witness in June of the same year saw about 10 people from Dr Maung's party distributing leaflets claiming that a Rakhine girl had been raped by Rohingya men and urging the Rakhine to protect their dignity.

As numerous villages were being burnt to the ground that June, in what appeared to be coordinated attacks, as evidence mounted of state complicity and suspicions arose that the ultimate strategy of the attackers is to force the Rohingya out of their communities into IDP camps where they would be at the mercy of their enemies, Dr A Maung told the BBC that "the Bengalis" (Rohingya) were burning their own homes and businesses. 

Dr Maung went on to be part of the investigation launched by the Myanmar government into the events of June, which started in October 2012. This investigation cheerfully concluded that "both sides are to blame", and no serious measures have since been taken to prevent a repeat of the atrocities, which accounts for the regularity with which they recur. 

Of course, Dr Maung is but one man. He may be the most visible political character in this odious spectacle, but there are many, many others. There are local leaders of the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party which are equally hostile to the Rohingya, such as Hla Maung Tin, Chief Minister of Rakhine state till 2014, whose "handling" of the situation in Arakan was so patently lacking that it forced the President of Myanmar to remove him - despite the president himself being no big fan of the Rohingya. To say nothing of leaders of the local military units, police, and the notorious border agency NaSaKa, which has long been in the eye of the UN for decades of human rights' abuses. And then there are a whole host of extremist Buddhist monk leaders who insist that the Rohingya pose a threat to the state because of their Muslim faith. Hence the reason why mosques are some of the more frequently targeted buildings for arson, when the attacks happen.

All these political actors, usually Rakhine Buddhists with some kind or other of axe to grind, have very much to gain by constantly victimizing and attacking the Rohingya. And by now the situation is to a large extent self-perpetuating. That is how we have come so close to genocide. The worry now is what happens if there is some kind of trigger - something that pushes the situation over the precipice from brutal violent and sustained oppression to outright calculated extermination. Today, Dr A Maung is still very much at the forefront of the situation. And he is looking to become Chief Minister of Rakhine. One cannot but shudder at what the consequences might be if someone like him and his associates are given free reign over the fate of the Rohingya. 

Dr Azeem Ibrahim is an International Security Lecturer at the University of Chicago and author of the forthcoming Rohingya: Inside Myanmar's Hidden Genocide (Hurst UK) 

By Eline Gordts

Huffington Post

May 23, 2015

By Mark Farmaner

Huffington Post

May 18, 2015

Thousands of Rohingya refugees from Burma lie starving in boats off the coasts of Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia. Dehydrated and desperate, they are forced to drink their own urine in sight of countries which should be offering them sanctuary.

Attention is rightly focussed on these countries for refusing to accept these refugees, and on the traffickers who abandoned them there. These countries must allow the boats to land and give sanctuary to Rohingya refugees. Action also needs to be taken against traffickers and the authorities which co-operate with them.

However, without tackling the root causes of this crisis, Burma's persecution of the Rohingya, there will be no long term solution.

The simple truth is that the government of Burma has a policy of trying to drive the Rohingya out of the country. Boat loads of trafficked Rohingya heading for other countries are exactly what they want to see. For President Thein Sein, this is a policy success.

Although President Thein Sein has been praised as a courageous reformer by much of the international community, since becoming President he has significantly stepped up repression of the Rohingya.

Two recent briefing papers by the Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK explain the twin tracks the Burmese government uses to try to drive the Rohingya from Burma.

One approach is the deliberate impoverishment of the Rohingya. Most attention now is on the appalling conditions in camps for internally displaced people who fled attacks in 2012, but for decades a policy of systematically impoverishing the Rohingya has been pursued.

"Increasing poverty and blocking economic development of the Rohingya is a deliberate and integral part of the Burmese government's Rohingya policy," states the Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK.

Their report describes the many ways in which the government applies this policy; "Restrictions on Rohingya travelling from some townships to others, and even within some townships, checkpoints on roads targeting only Rohingya which include body searches and extortion of money, restrictions on marriage through a tax fee requirement, arbitrary taxation on a wide range of activities, even including death of cattle, forced labour, land confiscation, arbitrary arrests and extortion for releasing the person arrested, almost no provision of government services such as health, education or infrastructure in Rohingya areas."

This policy of deliberate impoverishment has been very successful. Forty-four percent of the population of Rakhine State lives below the poverty line, almost 20 percent higher than the average in most parts of Burma. An irony is that the ethnic Rakhine population has also suffered greatly from the deliberate impoverishment of the Rohingya, and yet many blame the Rohingya, not the government, for their problems.

The second tactic used to try to drive the Rohingya from Burma is human rights violations and repressive laws. These have escalated significantly since Thein Sein became President.

The violence against the Rohingya in 2012, in which hundreds died and more than 140,000 Rohingya were forced to flee their homes, was stoked and encouraged for more than a year beforehand. Not only did the government not take action to prevent this, there was active state involvement in the violence, which Human Rights Watch has reported meets the criteria of ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.

President Thein Sein has asked the United Nations for assistance in deporting all Rohingya. His government has refused to take action against those inciting violence against Rohingya and other Muslims in Burma, and instead defended them. He has refused to conduct a genuine investigation into the violence in 2012. He has proposed a plan to more efficiently apply the discriminatory 1982 Citizenship Law against the Rohingya, which would result in hundreds of thousands of Rohingya being placed in what are effectively giant concentration camps, awaiting deportation. Most recently, President Thein Sein took away one of the last rights that many Rohingya did have, the right to vote.

The government and their sympathisers try to disown responsibility for many of these policies. They want them all to be viewed in isolation. Excuses used are that they are down to local authorities, the state government, local communities, corrupt officials, or badly trained police. You name it, there is an excuse for it.

The truth is though, that all these policies are part of a deliberate and systematic policy with the goal of making life in Burma so unbearable that Rohingya people leave the country.

The former Special Rapporteur on human rights in Burma has also identified this complex web of government policies being used to target the Rohingya. In a report in April 2014 he stated: "...the deprivation of health care is deliberately targeting the Rohingya population, and that the increasingly permanent segregation of that population is taking place. Furthermore, he believes that those human rights violations are connected to discriminatory and persecutory policies against the Rohingya Muslim population, which also include ongoing official and unofficial practices from both local and central authorities restricting rights to nationality, movement, marriage, family, health and privacy."

It's a policy that is working, as the boat loads of refugees off the coasts of Asian countries give testament to. The UN estimates that at least 130,000 Rohingya have fled Burma by boat since 2012. This figure only documents those leaving from northern Rakhine State and Bangladesh, and so is likely to be a significant underestimate. Most estimates put the Rohingya population in Burma at around 800,000 to one million. Since Thein Sein became President, it is possible that as many of twenty percent of the Rohingya population have fled Burma.

The current boat crisis is once again throwing a spotlight on the Rohingya. Those stranded at sea must be rescued and given sanctuary. So far neither local nor western governments seem willing to help do this, let alone address the root causes. President Thein Sein can rest easy. His policy of driving the Rohingya out of Burma is working, and not one country has the courage to call him out on it, let alone take action. He created this crisis, but he is not being held accountable.

By David L. Phillips

Huffington Post

April 29, 2015

Yangon -- Burma's President Thein Sein and ethnic armed groups recently endorsed a draft nationwide ceasefire agreement (NCA), which could bring an end to 60 years of ethnic conflict. The interim accord is the result of torturous negotiations over several years. However, the peace process is far from complete. Pressure on the parties is still needed for a final accord. Pressure from the international community is also needed to prevent Burma from backsliding on human rights.

Burma's military-led government initiated reforms in 2011. Reforms included releasing Aung San Suu Kyi, recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, from house arrest and legalizing her National League for Democracy (NLD). The West rewarded reforms by lifting sanctions. The World Bank and Asian Development Bank cleared its arrears, and the Paris Club agreed to a huge debt write-off, totaling $6 billion. Burma was welcomed back as a member in good-standing of the international community, assuming the chair of ASEAN in 2014.

However, Burma's reform process is faltering just as the country enters the stretch run leading to national elections in November 2015.

Many pro-democracy advocates have been arrested and suffered harsh treatment by the authorities. More than 400 political prisoners and activists remain in custody.

The Burmese military retains control of the laws and institutions it used in the past to dismantle the reform movement. Police applied excessive force last month to disband protests over an education bill.

Citizens are arbitrarily detained under the flawed Peaceful Procession Law, particularly farmers demonstrating against illegal land grabs.

The government has also backtracked on press freedom, passing laws curtailing an independent media, unjustly convicting journalists and editors, and intimidating publications over their content.

Constitutional reform is also lagging.

The 2008 constitution, promulgated by the military junta, provides the military with 25 percent of parliamentary seats. Since 75 percent is needed to amend the constitution, the arrangement gives the military an effective veto.

Article 59F of the constitution excludes anyone with foreign ties from becoming president. Since Aung San Suu Kyi's ex-husband and children are British citizens, she is blocked from becoming president.

Sectarian tensions have roiled Burma, drawing criticism from the international community. Ethnic Rohingya Muslims in Arakan State, on Burma's border with Bangladesh, are systematically repressed.

In 2012, more than 100,000 Muslim Rohingya were driven from their homes by violence. Last year's nationwide census did not permit Rohingya to self-identify as such, preventing at least 1.3 million from registering to vote. The 1982 Citizenship Law is deeply discriminatory.

An ultranationalist Buddhist group, the 969 Movement, has been stoking religious violence between Muslims and Buddhists. Its activities clearly contradict Theravada Buddhist teachings.

National legislation introduced in 2014 promotes Buddhism over other religions. It establishes state control over religious conversion, interfaith marriage, and family planning.

A trust deficit exists after years of suppression and dissent. The trust deficit is growing, as Burma enters a period of contestation and gets closer to elections.

The U.S. government has taken an incremental approach, emphasizing strategic patience. President Barack Obama said, "Burma is still at the beginning of a long and hard journey of renewal and reconciliation." Washington worries about being too strident in its criticism lest it galvanize dark forces that could undermine peace and progress.

The Obama administration's approach to Burma's reform process raises a broader question about America's role supporting political transition around the world.

Regime change can be a destabilizing event, especially when countries lack a strong civic society and democratic institutions. Incremental change is more easily managed. However, the increments of reform must be enough to satisfy the demands of people seeking freedom from dictatorship.

Burma is a test case for calibrating the right balance between dynamic transition and a more deliberate process that may succeed, albeit at a slower pace.

David L. Phillips is director of the Program on Peace-building and Rights at Columbia University's Institute for the Study of Human Rights. He heads Columbia's Myanmar Assistance Program.

By Stanley Weiss

Huffington Post

April 13, 2015

By Charles M. Sennott

Huffington Post

April 3, 2015

YANGON, Myanmar -- In a grand ballroom at a fancy hotel here, some 300 journalists and media executives from around the world assembled last week for an International Press Institute (IPI) conference headlined "On the Path to a Free Media."

But protests by local journalists at the entrance to the hotel and placards held up during the three-day gathering underscored that there are still some treacherous turns -- and a few dangerous potholes -- along Myanmar's long road toward establishing greater press freedom.

Myanmar, like many of its neighbors in Southeast Asia, is witnessing serious setbacks for those who hold out hope that a culture of free expression might be emerging.

A leading Burmese magazine, Mizzima Weekly, featured a cover story last week titled "Media Under Threat" and chronicled 20 instances in which journalists have been jailed since 2013. Reporters covering student protests in March were detained for days for trying to document a brutal police crackdown.

In neighboring Bangladesh, reports emerged this week that another dissident, secular blogger was allegedly hacked to death with machetes by Islamic students. It was the second such murder in the last month in Bangladesh, and many bloggers are reportedly fleeing or shutting down their sites.

In Malaysia, three editors and two executives with a news website called The Malaysian Insider were arrested Monday in what critics called a direct assault on press freedom.

In Vietnam, Singapore, Cambodia and Laos, "the situation of freedom of expression has stagnated," according to the 2014 index published by Reporters Without Borders. The index stated that free speech in Myanmar is "being watched with great interest."

In a region writhing with change and challenges to authoritarian rule, it seems that old habits of intimidation and murder of journalists still cast a shadow over hopes for democratic reform.

In Yangon, at the IPI conference, a scene played out that seemed to drive home the complex mix of hope and despair around the country's struggle for a free press and a new democracy.

Just as Myanmar's Information Minister Ye Htut was commenting Saturday on how far Myanmar had come since a few years ago, when a military junta tightly controlled the media, a man wearing a facemask stood up and interrupted him.

The masked man silently held a protest placard as cameras flashed all around him. The placard read, "Stop beating, arresting and imprisoning journalists!" At another time in this country, this expression of dissent would have likely gotten him arrested. Instead, the anonymous man held up his sign in protest and then quietly slipped away and left the hotel.

And on Friday morning, as the three-day conference got underway, a small group of local journalists assembled in protest handing out stickers that read, "Stop Attacks on the Media!"

Ye Htut seemed eager to respond to the protests by stressing that reform "takes time."

And, he added, "I would like to assure you Myanmar's reform process is unstoppable, and is moving forward."

But many of the local journalists attending the conference seemed unconvinced. While they agreed much progress has been made, they were very quick to add that there is still a very long way to go.

Even if they wanted to believe that the country was reforming in important ways, they were expressing concern that recent crackdowns and the arrests of journalists covering student protests were signs that the old ways of the military junta could be returning in Myanmar, also known as Burma.

Outside the conference, in the cramped but buzzing newsroom of the Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB), worked Khin Maung Win, deputy editor of the Democratic Voice of Burma.

"When we came back to this country three years ago, we had high hope that things would change," said Win, who heads up the daily operation of the independent news organization which he operated in exile in Thailand for more than 20 years.

"But last year alone there were a lot of incidents. One freelance journalist was arrested in broad daylight and taken to a military facility and killed during interrogation. And no one has been held accountable for this killing," Win said.

"Last year, 10 journalists were imprisoned, and one of them was ours," he said. "And 17 journalists are now standing trial. On the one hand, they give us freedom, but this freedom is under threat."

He added, "We acknowledge that there is some real change. We can now speak against the government with some limits, but the gains we have made are now very much under threat."

David Kaye, the UN special rapporteur on freedom of expression, was in Myanmar for the IPI conference and pointed out that there has been "a remarkable depth of change." But he also added the progress "can be hard to see" when there are journalists jailed and threatened.

He urged the government to immediately release all journalists in detention, saying it would be a significant demonstration of Myanmar's commitment to free speech as the cornerstone that it will need to put down in order to build a new democracy.

A test looms this fall, when Myanmar will hold national elections in which the opposition party of longtime dissident and Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi will participate, though she is still barred from running for president. Many international observers and local political analysts see the election as the first chance at a free and fair vote in Myanmar in nearly three decades.

Whether the government will permit a free press to confidently cover these elections and ask the hard questions could be a major factor in the result of the election. It could also impact international opinion on just how genuine Myanmar's steps toward democracy really are.

Soe Myint, executive editor of the Mizzima Media Group, who returned from exile in 2012 after 22 years working abroad as an opposition journalist, said the stakes are high.

"Myanmar is fast approaching a crucial test in our ongoing transition," Soe Myint told the IPI gathering. "Just how free and fair the election is deemed to be will greatly impact the social, political and investment climate in the country and significantly serve to stabilize or destabilize the reform process."

Charles M. Sennott, Executive Director of The GroundTruth Project, is a board member of the North American Committee of the International Press Institute. GroundTruth, in partnership with the New York-based Open Hands Initiative, led a reporting fellowship with 20 top, young journalist in Myanmar in 2012 and published a GlobalPost 'Special Report' titled "A Burmese Journey."

By Antonia Blumberg

Huffington Post 

March 22, 2015