What immediately comes on your mind when you hear the name, Burma (Myanmar)? For most of the people especially foreigners, Burma is a country that has been ruled by one of the world’s most oppressive regime that never cares about its citizens. So is for its citizens, Burmese. Burma has been being ruled by the dictators (which itself synonymous with sociopaths) since 1962. In 1962, an ultra-nationalist, General Ne Win, who later came to be known as one of the world’s worst dictators, seized the power from U Nu’s government, the first and only ever democratically elected government in Burmese history and the dictatorships began.
Quite expectedly, Burma has become one of the poorest countries in the world from the richest country in South East Asia due to his isolationist policy and mismanagement of macro-economy. The people of the country which was once known as the bowl of rice faced famine under his reign. When politically oppressed and economically crippled people started to demonstrate, they were violently crashed down. There were student protests against his reigns in 1965, 1969, 1970 and there was a labour protest in 1974. Again in 1974 December 5, there was a huge students’ demonstration against Ne Win’s regime for not honouring the then UN Secretary General from Burma, U Thant. The protests continued in 1975, 1976 and 1987. Yet he defied all. But he had to step down in 1988 due to country wide uprising of public, students and monks altogether. Thousands of students and people merciless killed during his reign.
Besides, he carried out several attempts and operations against Rohingyas either to cleanse them or to depopulate their numbers. He killed thousands of Rohingyas and drove many more thousands out of the country. It helped him earn much appreciation from the racist segment of Burmese society at the critical times and to successfully divert the people's attention from the problems the country was facing. And not to forget anti-Chinese riot that took place in 1967 and continued throughout 1970s. The racial animosity and the riot against Chinese community in Burma was instigated and supported by the Ne Win's regime in order to divert public attention from economic crises such as the uncontrollable inflation, scarcity of consumer goods and ever rising prices of rice. Many Chinese were killed during the riot, some Chinese school girls were burned alive, looting and setting up fire to their properties.
In stead of trying to find out ways to fulfil people's demands and solve their problems, Ne Win, in his ego and delusional ideologies, brutally broke down all the protests that killed thousands of people, while imprisoning and torturing many thousands. He made people fight against people and a race against another until he stepped down in 1988. He lied to the world with the straight face about all the crimes against humanity he had committed. He left no stone unturned and no trick untried to put the world and international community in the dark.
After Ne Win had stepped down, the military coup led by Gen. Saw Maung took over the power. In 1990, in the most popular election of Burmese history, NLD had the landslide victory in the election. But the military kept holding on the power and ruling the country ignoring the results of the election. That caused great dissatisfactions among general Burmese people. Consequently, that led the Burmese regime face many political, economical and social crises which were threats to their retaining power. Like teacher like pupils, the then new military government followed the same footsteps, political games and "Divide and Rule Policy" to divert attention of the majority Burmese Buddhists, they created a new Rohingya saga in 1991-1992. Burmese Junta and Rakhine Buddhists carried out extrajudicial-killings of Rohingyas, increased the forced labours, tortures, rapes dramatically. Consequently, it caused a mass exodus of 0.25 million Rohingyas to Bangladesh and to other countries. Again, the regime's effort to cleanse Rohingyas was appreciated by ultra-nationalist Burmese people and could successfully continue holding power. Amidst the Rohingyas' outcry, Burmese regime shamelessly lied to the international community and put them in the dark by denying International Media getting access to the region and with the biased investigation of the Junta.
Besides, there were more brutal cracks down of student demonstrations in 1997, conspiracy to kill Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in Depayin in 2002, inhumanely breaking down of Saffron revolution in 2007 and the disaster caused during cyclone Nargis in 2008 due to Junta's denial of foreign humanitarian assistances. Despite all these, through all these years, they survived because of the strong back-ups of politically communist and economically capitalist China that wants to only exploit Burma's natural resources and turn it into a graveyard without any resources. More importantly, they survived through the means of lying as to their ideology that "Lies are the Basic Concepts of the Truths." The Burmese regime commits crimes again and again and lies again and again. They lie so much so that lying has become their second nature and it naturally comes to them.
Coming to the present situation in Burma, it no longer needs to tell the world what is going on in Arakan state, the western-most-part of Burma and Kachin state, the northern-most-part of Burma. In both parts, there are hot genocides going on. Kachins have long been struggling for the equal rights because they are treated inferiorly on account of their religion (Christianity), their race and language in an overwhelmingly Buddhists and Bama majority country. In an effort of Burmese regime to break ethnic armed resistances, they broke the decades-long treaty with Kachin Independence Army (KIA) and started the offensive war against KIA and innocent Kachin civilians last year and it is still going on. As a result, thousands of innocent Kachin civilians are displaced, many were killed and their women are being raped. As usual, the regime started lying about the situation and trying to cover up all their war crimes.
Then, the world and humanist segment of Burmese society started to pressure Burmese to end the genocidal war against Kachins. Besides, there were demands from Burmese people to end the Myitsone Damn project. There were farmers and labors demonstrating for their rights. The country was facing electricity and water crises, health problems and extreme poverty. More importantly, the regime was extremely worried of Daw Suu Kyi’s popularity among Burmese people. Amidst regime’s inability of solving these political and economic crises, they again saw Rohingya as their perfect political scapegoat as they had seen before.
The director of the president office, Bomuu Zaw Htay, through his facebook name “Muu Zaw,” started to racially instigate general Burmese accusing Rohingyas as illegal foreign Bengali invaders. Not surprisingly, it was followed by a so-called rape against Rakhine woman on 28th May 2012, a rape case which had no eyewitnesses. With no evidences, the three Rohingyas were accused for the rape case. Later, according to Burmese authority, the main culprit of the rape case committed suicide in the JAIL (which is hard to believe) and another two were sentenced to death. When, where and in front of whom was not revealed. I still wonder these three people actually existed on this earth!!! For the worse, the state media blamed Muslims or the followers of Islam for the rape instead of culprits or criminals.
Shockingly, on 3rd June 2012, 10 Muslim pilgrims, who were neither Rohingyas nor had any connections with the rape, were crushed to death on their way back from their religious efforts in Than Dway by 300 Rakhine hooligans at a place nearby an immigration office. The state media, for example, MRTV used a term “Kalar or Kular, a derogatory term for the people of south-Asian descends in Burma” in broadcasting the incident, which was a clear sign of racial instigation among Burmese. The actual violence against Rohingyas was started from Maung Daw on Friday, 8th June 2012, following Rohingyas’ refusal to disperse their congregational prayer for the 10 pilgrims killed.
Since then, Burmese military, Security Forces (Hluntin), Police and others in cooperation with Rakhine extremists have carrying out all kinds of violence against Rohingyas. Rohingyas, old, young, children, educated, uneducated, religious leaders all alike, are being arrested and subsequently killed. Their women including under-aged girls are being raped. Their properties are being looted and torched. Mosques were locked and destroyed using bulldozers and there have been no five times prayer and Juma’at prayer in the mosques for more than two months. Moreover, no Tarawih prayers in the month of holy Ramadan and no Eid prayer were allowed. If it is not the religious violence, then what is it?
Besides, there has been martial law declared in Arakan since June 10 that locked Rohingyas in their houses Rohingyas are lost almost their ways and access to foods and medicine due to the martial and boycott against them led by Rakhine Buddhist Monks. It has been already more than two months. Many of them every day are dying due to starvation. Shockingly, the martial law is only applied for Rohingyas and Rakhines are set free and can do any barbaric acts and all kinds of tortures against Rohingyas: stabbing, beating and looting etc. On one hand, the government and Rakhine extremists are committing genocides and carrying out ethnic cleansing and quite naturally on another hand, they have been lying and deceiving the world about the situation and trying to cover up their crimes against humanity through using the state media and social media like facebook and twitter. They are taking every step to put the international community in the dark by not giving permission to International Media, Independent Observers and humanitarian workers to get access to the place.
Recently, President Thein Sein claimed “the riot in the region is not religious but communal. International community and media are politicizing the matter,” while the fact that they have been instigating violence against Rohingya and propagating racial hatred among general Burmese people and to turn them against Rohingyas by using Buddhism as a tool is no longer needs to be explained. Government and Rakhine extremists accuse Rohingyas to be threats and dangers to Buddhism. So, Rohingyas need to be cleansed. What are all these if not lies?
Furthermore, President Thein Sein recently in an interview to VOA said “Bengalis (his own term for Rohingyas) have been living there for generations. We have been considering modifying 1982 citizenship law.” Is it not contradictory to his earlier statement to UNHCR Chief Antonio Gutterres “they are recent Bengali Immigrants and the only solution to the problem is to settle them in third countries?” Is not he an oxymoron? They are using members of Hindu society (who look like Rohingyas) and taking pictures and making video showing their daily activities to portray that the situation in Arakan has become peaceful and come to normality. Hence, no investigations are needed, no observers and media to sent and not even humanitarian assistances, at a time when they continuously committing crimes against humanity. Lying and deceiving again and again!!!
When UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights, Mr. Tomas Ojea Quintana visited Arakan, Burmese authorities prepare some hindus and few of their puppets from Rohingya community to meet and lie to him. Besides, he was not free access to meet people. The similar case happened with Turkish Foreign Misnister Ahmet Davutglo when he visited Arakan. The government vetted translator mistranslated and omitted words in the translation of a Rohingya’s words to him. The government pained the only reaming Masjid in the Sittwe (the capital of Arakan) town area and made him pray there.
Now President has set up an inquiry commission to investigate the ongoing crises in Arakan. How can one expect impartial investigations when the culprits who started this ugly racism and committed all these crimes themselves have taken charge of the investigations? A conflict which was started by the government themselves? I wonder who will be the ultimate sufferers as a result of this investigation when the people in the government itself are criminals. In fact, cheating is not new to the Burmese government. They are popular even among Burmese community for that.
On 17th August 2012, Thein Sein released an 18-paged statement in which he said “some political parties, monks and individuals incited extreme racial hatred and encouraged people to commit irrational racial attacks against Bengali Muslims (his own term for Rohingya Muslims).” But under the heading of religious affairs at point number 34, he said “Mosques, Islamic Schools and Religious scholars (Molvis) should be reduced within the boundary of law and legitimacy.” What is he trying to say? Is he indirectly saying that they will make every effort to eliminate Islam from Arakan gradually? When the criminal Rakhine extremists have become angry with the president’s statement, the director of the president office Bomuu Zaw Htay declared that it was not the opinion of the president but his analysis of different reports of different organizations, NGOs, INGOs etc. They are lying, aren’t they?
All in all, throughout Burmese history, different regimes have tried various political tactics to sustain their rules. Many of the times, they have become deeply unpoplar among the general people due to their brutal handlings of the situation. But this time, knowing the Burmese intolerance and endemic hatred towards other religions and races, the regime has successfully made Rohingyas as their political preys. In fact, the regime has earned many political gains by creating such a violence against Rohingyas. According to many analysts, they have successfully diverted public attentions from the poltical and economic crises they were having, depopularized Daw Aung San Suu Kyi among some segments of Burmese society and international communtiy, gained much required public supports, discredited international media and eventually implemented their fascist policy of wiping out of Rohingya Muslims .
There have been terrible man-made human catastrophes going on in Burma. As usual, the regime is lying and deceiving international community being sociopathic liars. But international communities should not fall into the trap of regime's lies. It is the high time for all of us to realize the crimes of these generation criminals and to bring them into international criminal court of justice (ICCJ) in an effort to stop the crimes on the earth forever.
Mohammed Sheikh Anwar is an activist studying Bachelor of Arts in Business Studies at Westminster International College Malaysia.
Dear respected Ms Yu Ko,
I am quite sad after reading the news (about the present Rakhine-Rohingya riots). I should be surprised and angry but I do not suffer much because since the news started earlier, I have already expected that these could happen and actually all these happen one after another as I have expected.
For those political pundits, the racial riots like the present Rakhine-Rohingya conflicts are not strange or unexpected wonderful events. Like all other dictators around the world, a group of Myanmar Military dictators are doing the same things repeatedly to hold on their power. Since 1962 Coup, “to hold on the power of military dictatorship” they have done to disunite the people by numerous “divide and rule” methods.
Myanmar people are divided politically, racially, religiously, economically, educationally and in all fields by using the various media, news, books, various entertainment platforms etc. Military rulers put wedges between the various strata and groups of Myanmar people to divide into numerous factions and sub-groups. The worse is that as the military dictators have successfully installed a deep seated mistrust and fear inside the hearts and minds of the people and they never trust each other anymore.
Even during the recruitment exercises for the rebels in the Ethnic Minority areas, instead of advocating to fight the Military Dictatorship, they wrongly used the propaganda to fight the “Maha Bama dominance system.” So they became the victims of suspicion, disunity and mistrust. These could weaken the people’s spirits of “Union-Nationalism” and “Panlong Unity” will. These brought in suspicions, frictions and tension between the Bamas and other ethnic groups of Myanmar. This is the result of the systematic propaganda used for the survival of a group of people in the military dictatorship regime in Myanmar.
There is no true democracy and human rights violations are practiced for more than 50 years in our country. (Exactly speaking it is 5 months more than 50 years.) For a 50 year old man, he has never even able to taste what democracy, freedom, human rights, equal rights, justice and fairness in his whole lifespan. Our citizens are hungry for democracy and human rights for many decades and we all are madly wishing and yearning for these universal values.
Ms Yuko’s Japanese and democratic people from other side of the world are all same human beings like our people. But are we lost and are denied of democracy? We are now living in the 21st century and in the age of globalization but our democracy is destroyed our basic principles of human rights are still violated in our country.
During the Saffron Revolution in 2007, the guidance of the Buddha’s religion: peace and loving-kindness were violently destroyed. People around the world know that we did not use any violence but just give the peaceful pronouncement and prayers of Buddha’s Dahhma and marched for peace only. We have been shot, some were killed and many were beaten violently and thrown into long term jail by the military government.
Because of that, Thomas Ojea Quintana of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights had spoken out clearly that it was the act against humanity.
Illegal Myanmar Military government had tried me with unjust laws and regulations and sentenced me for 68 years’ jail term. I not only lost the freedom but my health and education for about four years in the prison.
Present Government is flaunting the world that it is a legitimate government elected by the people of Myanmar and now is also pretending to look as if they are decently honest and innocent. But they are the same old Military Generals disguised as civilians by just leaving their uniforms in their closets and wearing the mufti (dress). But they have not changed anything even during this so called “Transformation period to Democracy” but they are used to their old habits of “Divide and Rule politics” which they have shown on the President’s interview with VOA Myanmar Section head. Once there appeared localized sporadic protests by the disgruntled people demanding their needs and requests for Human Rights and other Rights around Myanmar, the Military Generals conveniently created this Rakhine-Rohingya Racial and Religious conflict to divert the people’s attention.
This trick is a very simple and obvious one for as the Government had incited the monks to invoke hatred on its Muslim citizens on numerous occasions to create Religious Riots before. Now as there are “Metta Campaign for Peace” with the slogan for “peace and democracy” amongst different religions, it is difficult for the Military Dictators to start an Anti-Muslim Riots in the mainland Myanmar proper. So they turn to create an easy job of Rakhine-Rohingya Riots in Arakan State. (I am sad to see that) Military disguised “civilian” government is even supported by some people known as democracy activists.
Even if the initial problem of crime were true, they need to take action according to the criminal law. No need to play up the racial issue. Whether they are Rohingyas or Rakhines or Bamas or Shans, all must be treated equally under the law. Why highlight the Race in order to create a Racial Conflict? Why repeatedly reported and emphasize that only the Rohingyas are wrong. In Bangladesh, if any other races do crimes against Buddhist Marama Gyis or Marghs, Bangladesh government always used to take action on the criminals irrespective of race and religions.
I am very sad to know that some Buddhist monks joined these stupid demonstrations and campaigns discriminating against Rohingya.
We enlightened the whole world with the light of the Dharma in 2007. Do I need to explain the details of the words of Buddha: Ahintha, Metta, Dharma,Peace and Thitsa for all of you? I wrote a letter to the family about the Thima-Thatbeida and Banna Thima while I was in the jail. I just remember that the Thima-Thatbeida written by a Japanese monk was translated by a Myanmar lady journalist and published in the “Ah Twe Ah Myin” (Opinion) magazine in May 2010. I want to discuss with you if I have a chance to send its copy.
Ms. Yu Ko, as you know, my health is not so good and I need to rest a lot. Once released from the prison, I wish to write about my experience of the revolution, my prison experiences, my dark days there, about my lost of hope there and later about the current political conditions in our country. But I could not write all those desires and experiences into practice because of my ill health. May be I could write all these when my health is better. Even now I am trying to write this because my heart could not continue to bear (the injustices of the Rohingya Riots) although I am suffering from severe head ache. Please reply after reading my letter.
Respectfully
With Metta
Signed (26.8.2012)
Gambira @ Hlaing Bwa
Meikhtila Industralized Zone
26.8.2012
Translated by Dr. Ko Ko Gyi
By Flavia Krause-Jackson and Daniel Ten Kate
Seamstress Thida Htwe was walking home from her tailoring work on a remote Myanmar road in late May when attackers took the 27-year-old by knife point to a forest where they raped her, slit her throat, and took her gold jewelry before dumping her body in the mangrove trees.
Local Burmese, including Buddhist monks, distributed incendiary pamphlets about the crime, and allegations quickly spread among the Buddhist majority in Rakhine state that Rohingya Muslims were to blame, according to New York-based Human Rights Watch. The group based its report on the incident and its aftermath, which United Nations officials confirmed, on 57 interviews with both Rohingya and Burmese.
Six days later, as three Rohingya suspects sat in jail, a Buddhist mob stopped a bus in a nearby town and killed 10 Muslim men on board. Local police and soldiers watched without intervening, according to Human Rights Watch and UN officials. Within a week, President Thein Sein declared a state of emergency to quell riots that have killed 88 people and left villages in ruins.
The ethnic strife is complicating Myanmar’s evolving ties with the U.S. and Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, as authorities struggle with how to treat the Rohingya, a minority that’s denied citizenship in Myanmar and faces persecution in Asia similar to that of other stateless Muslim groups such as the Mideast’s Kurds.
‘Serious Issue’
“It’s a serious issue that will hurt Myanmar’s reputation in the long term,” said Jim Della-Giacoma, Southeast Asia project director for the International Crisis Group, a Brussels- based policy research organization. “If Myanmar wants to enter the fold of modern and democratic states, it needs to grapple with this very fundamental issue to give equal rights to all ethnic groups, all religious groups.”
The Rohingya’s status leaves them trapped doing unskilled, poorly paid labor in one of the world’s poorest nations.
While Myanmar has begun to attract companies such asVisa Inc. (V) and Coca-Cola Co. (KO) after taking steps toward democracy, the Rohingya’s plight has flummoxed both Thein Sein and opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Neither openly supports citizenship for the Rohingya, and Suu Kyi, though a democratic icon, skirted the issue on a European tour in June when she collected a Nobel Peace Prize she won during her 15 years under house arrest.
“They are very loath to discuss this issue directly, publicly and internationally,” Vijay Nambiar, the United Nations’ top adviser on Myanmar who visited the area immediately after the unrest broke out, said in an Aug. 6 interview in New York. “They see this very firmly as a refugee issue and an issue that the international community should solve and ‘take away these people.’”
Three Convictions
The three Rohingya suspects were convicted for the rape and murder, according to Human Rights Watch. One reportedly committed suicide in prison, and the other two were sentenced to death, the rights group said in its report. In contrast, there have been no convictions in connection with the killing of the 10 Muslim men “despite hundreds of witnesses to the attack,” according to the report issued last month.
Human Rights Watch says about 800,000 Rohingya live in Myanmar. The country, formerly known as Burma, has a population of about 64 million, according to the International Monetary Fund. Many Burmese consider the Rohingya illegal migrants from what’s now Bangladesh, according to Human Rights Watch, which says their presence in modern-day Myanmar predates the start of British colonial rule in 1824.
‘Potentially Destabilizing’
Thein Sein said in June that the violence spread because of “instigations based on religion and racism” and called on all people to show “a sense of wisdom” and “loving kindness” to halt the fighting. In July, he urged the UN High Commissioner for Refugees to accept Rohingya as refugees and resettle them in third countries -- a suggestion the UNHCR promptly rejected.
Even as the nation undertakes economic and political reforms, the tension among its more than 100 ethnic groups “remains a potentially destabilizing factor,” the Asian Development Bank said in an Aug. 20 report, “Myanmar in Transition.”
Spurred by increased foreign investment and commodity sales, Myanmar’s economy may grow as much as 8 percent a year over the next decade as inflation remains low and the government increases trade ties with neighbors China and India, according to the bank.
While U.S. President Barack Obama last month eased some sanctions that were placed on Myanmar’s former military regime, he’s still considering whether to waive an import ban that Congress voted to extend this month, partly due to concern about the Rohingya.
‘Ethnic Cleansing’
The 57-nation Organisation of Islamic Cooperation condemned the “ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the Myanmar government,” according to a statement released in May. The group, which includes Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria, called for the Rohingya to have citizenship and offered humanitarian assistance for Rakhine state.
Myanmar has gone on the defensive, forming a 27-member commission on Aug. 17 that includes Muslim leaders to investigate the violence. Authorities moved to halt the ethnic fighting as quickly as possible, the government said in an Aug. 21 statement, saying the clashes occurred “between two communities within a State of Myanmar following a criminal act.”
“We will not accept any attempt to politically regionalize or internationalize this conflict as a religious issue,” the government said. “Such attempts will not contribute to finding solutions to the problem, but will only complicate the issue further.”
Turned Away
Bangladesh, Myanmar’s predominantly Muslim neighbor, has turned away Rohingya trying to reach safety in makeshift wooden boats. Human Rights Watch says about 200,000 Rohingya live in Bangladesh, a nation with a population of about 169 million, according to the IMF.
In one account chronicled by Human Rights Watch in its 56- page report this month, a Rohingya mother of six said her five- year-old daughter died of starvation after Bangladesh authorities denied entry three times and left her floating under a hot sun in the Bay of Bengal for four days.
“Why should we allow them to enter our country?” Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed told Al Jazeera television in a July 27 interview. “It is not our responsibility; it is theirs. Bangladesh is already an overpopulated country.”
Bangladesh had influxes of about 250,000 Rohingya refugees from Myanmar in 1978 and in the early 1990s, followed by repatriation efforts “that were not wholly voluntary,” the UN’s refugee agency said in a December report.
Not Recognized
Ethnic violence against the Muslim minority there can be traced to the departure of the British after Burmese independence in 1948, the paper said.
A 1982 citizenship law grants nationality to people in ethnic groups that were present in the country before the British conquest. That law excludes the Rohingya, along with other minorities of Indian and Chinese descent that aren’t on a list of 135 official ethnic groups.
Myanmar’s recent moves to allow greater Internet freedom have exposed deep-seated hatred toward the Rohingya on social- media sites. Burmese bloggers refer to the Muslim minority as “dogs” or “black,” according to two UN human-rights officials who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter.
‘Absolute Denial’
When asked about Burmese attitudes toward the Rohingya, the UN’s Nambiar said, “There is a kind of scare that ‘these’ people from outside are coming over and taking over ‘our’ resources.”
“This has now taken a life of its own,” with “a large number of Burmese in absolute denial,” he said.
Thein Sein undoubtedly will face questions about the Rohingya when he makes his first appearance as president at the UN General Assembly in the final week of September, Nambiar said.
UN officials have told the president, directly and indirectly, “you have to take this head-on. It is incumbent on the government to do more to allay the fears, anxieties and suspicions,” he said.
Suu Kyi may be asked about the issue when she travels to Washington for a scheduled Sept. 19 ceremony in the Capitol Rotunda to accept the Congressional Gold Medal, which lawmakers awarded in 2008 while she was under house arrest in Myanmar. She is also scheduled to receive an award from the Atlantic Council in New York on Sept. 21. It will be her first return to the city where she worked at the UN Secretariat from 1969 to 1971.
Denied Citizenship
“We have to be very clear about what the laws of citizenship are and who are entitled to them,” Suu Kyi told reporters in Geneva on June 14. “All those who are entitled to citizenship should be treated as full citizens deserving all the rights that must be given to them.”
For a democracy icon who endured years in detention to protest an oppressive military regime, Suu Kyi’s equivocation on the Rohingya has drawn rare criticism.
“There are a lot of theories on why she is silent,” said John Sifton, director of Asia advocacy at Human Rights Watch. “The simplest and most plausible is that it does not win you friends.”
“I feel very sorry after reading the latest news. I don’t feel so much surprised as angry because I knew something like this would happen soon. One step leads to another. It is actually not so surprising for our country Myanmar, because neither people nor politicians have good understanding.”
The Military relies on conflict to stay in power
“The violence between Rakhines and Rohingyas in Arakan State is an example of how dictatorships all over the world use and rely on conflicts to stay in power. If all people were united, a military dictatorship could not survive. Division and enmity in the minds of the people only keep the military strong. Because of this, the military systematically uses division-and-rule policies on the grounds of nationality, religion, economic and education status, etc., to divide people, to keep the military ‘necessary’, relevant, and in power. So the Burmese people are kept separated in groups, each group for themselves, without unity or cooperation. Everybody lives in fear and distrust of the other. Everyone sees the other with a suspicious mind. With this pressure, the people are defeated.
Nationalism is used to the keep the military system alive
“The new freedom fighter groups were organized under a wrong system of a Burma nationalist policy. These national revolution organization systems are a mistake. They produce suspicions and tensions between Burmese and their fellow landsman. Furthermore, it is slowly destroying the meaning of ‘union’ until the ‘union mind’ will disappear. This is the situation that the Burmese military uses to keep the military system necessary and alive.
The thirst for human rights
“We haven’t had human rights or true democracy in our country for over fifty years. For the last fifty years and five months, an old man couldn’t get a taste of democracy, human rights, freedom, justice, or equality. Some people have not known any of these things their entire lives. This means we were so thirsty for human rights that we sometimes demanded them like fools.
“We are living in the 21st century now, in a time of globalization, but in our country the principles of human rights and democracy are terribly broken. So our understandings of Dhamma, Metta, peace, and human rights are very rough, and we are beaten, arrested, killed, and destroyed.
“Mr. Tomas Ojea Quintana, the UN Human Rights Commissioner, has said clearly that during the 2007 Saffron Revolution, crimes against humanity were committed. The illegal government acted against me with unjust laws and rules. I was sentenced by a judge to 68 years in prison. I lost my time, health, education, and freedom for the sake of my motherland. I spent nearly 4 years in prison. Everyone around the world knew that the people and monks were marching non-violently with love, Dhamma, and peace, and we didn’t have as much as a nail with us. But we were broken down very violently, beaten, shot, and killed.
“The same people who were ruling Burma then are now presenting themselves to the world as a legal government. They show themselves to be honest, polite, and clear. But nothing has changed in Myanmar, even in this changing period. The neo-military dictatorship has exploited and fostered a new national crisis, a religious conflict, the Rakhine-Rohingya conflict, for its own purposes.
“This is a very simple and effective strategy. It has happened several times in the past. There have been conflicts between Buddhist monks and Muslims before. They have been fighting each other, and the military dictatorship benefited from it. These clashes were encouraged by the military to keep the people separated.
“We had started a Metta campaign in our country with slogans for peace and democracy. The campaign includes members of all religions. But now, the Rakhine and Rohingya have turned against each other violently in front of the world. Even some members of the democracy movement have followed the threat of politics by the military regime and have changed sides.
The rule of law
“I want to say one additional thing. We need to count from the beginning. We only needed to judge with the rule of law those three Rohingyas who raped a girl. Rohingyas or Rakhines, Burmans or Shan, everybody must obey the rule of law. Why encourage racism, why create a crisis? Why blame only Rohingyas and put all of the purnishment on all of them?
“In Bangladesh, in a minority village on the border with Myanmar, several people were robbed by Bengali groups. The Bangladeshi government took effective action against the robbers with the rule of law, and a crisis was averted.
“I feel sad to know that some Buddhist monks have joined demonstrations and campaigns against Rohingyas. We already previously kindled a fire of Dhamma for everyone around the world to see in 2007. Do I need to explain in detail the meaning of the Buddha’s words, of Metta, Dhamma, peace, ahitha, thitthar, ageha, for everyone?
“As you know, my health is not so good, so I have been taking a rest lately. Actually, the past revolution experience was a very dark and hopeless situation inside the prison for me. I faced it, and survived this condition after I was released into the present political situation. I really want to write more about it. But I have to take care of my health first. In the future when I am better, I hope I can do it. Even writing this letter hurts my eyes and causes severe headaches. The deep pain inside my body is bad, but I needed to write and send this to you.”
The original letter was written in Burmese by U Gambhira (aka Ko Nyi Nyi Lwin) on August 27th to Ms. Yu Yu Ko. The letter was given to The Best Friend International e.V. for publishing. Special thanks for the first translation from Burmese to English by Ko Nyi Nyi Lwin, Tokyo.
Sources Here :
During the past week, the media spotlight has zoomed in heavily on rape. Everyone - from Salma Yaqoob to Laurie Penny - has weighed in on the subject. George Galloway sparked off the debate in the UK, with a video podcast describing the allegations against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange as "bad sexual etiquette." The feverish speculation ("Did he use a condom every time?") continues, with little in the way of resolutions.
What has seemingly been forgotten about, however, is a crisis of grave proportions on the other side of the globe. A crisis that features systemic violations of women's bodily integrity as its currency. As John Hemming MP pointed out in his blog, the Assange saga may be entertaining for the media, but there is another situation that warrants our urgent attention, on a continual basis: (http://johnhemming.blogspot.co.uk/).
Two months ago, as Burmese Nobel Laureate Aung San Syu Kii toured the UK to great acclaim, her countrywoman Amina (not her real name) met her death in the most terrifying way possible. Having been assaulted and held down by soldiers, Amina was gang-raped in the village of Pandaung Pin (Nalwborna Para) in Maungdaw, Myanmar. Since 8th June 2012, dozens of girls and women - some as young as twelve and barely acquainted with menstruation - have suffered the same fate. As a 27-year-old man told Human Rights Watch in July 2012: "They tried to snatch the gold jewellery she had, her earrings and her nose ring, but she didn't let them. Then they cut her ear lobe and her nostril with a knife to take it. When she tried to stop them, they tore her blouse open and then raped her. Twelve military and Nasaka [Myanmar's border security force] entered two houses and they raped the women."
Nobody knows the names or faces of these women, or the fact that they come from one of the most under-reported minorities in the world - the Rohingya.
The Rohingya constitute an ethnic and linguistic minority group, who profess Islam as their religion and are related to Chittagonian Bengalis. Based in Myanmar's Northern Rakhine state, their number is estimated at 725,000 or about 80% of the total population of that area (UNHCR). They have faced many years of discrimination at the behest of state authorities, which led to thousands of refugees fleeing to Bangladesh during 1978 and 1991. The role of Bangladesh has come under scrutiny once again (due to the latest clashes), but it has adopted a closed border policy. In any case, Rohingya women get a rough deal in the existing refugee camps, where they are also likely to suffer from sexual violence.
Back in Myanmar, rape has been used as an age-old weapon of war. Many Rohingya men have been killed or put into concentration camps, handing security forces further opportunities to assault women from the inside out. This, in turn, enables them to expunge the men who are still alive. The upshot is the kind of damage which will reverberate for decades, long after the restricted-access cameras have stopped rolling and the bloggers have stopped blogging.
There are additional dimensions to the problems faced by Rohingya women and girls (as cited in the Arakan Project's submission to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women in October 2008). The social norms imposed on them by their own milieu have long since excluded them from decision-making on community matters. Divorced women and widows are ostracised, and once again, find themselves vulnerable to sexual violence. While arranged marriages operate with a reasonable degree of success, forced marriages are not uncommon, and are sometimes initiated for the purpose of trafficking.
The longer this crisis - and its attendant implications for women's autonomy - lasts, the more intractable it seems. However, there are two measures that would get the ball rolling. Firstly, the international community should increase pressure on the Myanmar Government to repeal its 1982 Citizenship Law, as this has effectively rendered the Rohingya stateless. Any new legislation must comply with international human rights standards, including Article 9 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (which establishes equal citizenship rights for women). Secondly, further evidence needs to be collected, in the form of victims' testimonies and presented at the UN Committee Against Torture. The late Professor Rhonda Copelon, a personal heroine of mine, was instrumental in re-characterising rape as a form of torture in international law. As Co-Founder of the International Women's Human Rights Clinic at City University New York, she made tremendous strides for sexual violence victims in Haiti and Iraq, among others. It is high time the abuse of the Rohingya women was treated with the same urgency, regardless of their citizenship status in a country they have existed in since (at least) the 15th century.
Tehmina Kazi,Director of British Muslims for Secular Democracy
LONDON - Al Mustafa Welfare Trust (AMWT) Chairman Abdul Razzaq Sajid has said that his charity organisation is working for int’l humanitarian relief and disasters and he has approached UK PM David Cameron to take a stronger stance over the killing of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar. He urged the UK govt that killing of Rohingya Muslims was a matter of basic human rights which cannot be ignored, says a press release. Sajid said in a statement on Wednesday that on the request of Al Mustafa Welfare Trust, Muslim Charities Forum (MCF), an umbrella of leading Muslim charity organisation in UK, has written a letter to the PM David Cameron.
and requested him to end the plight of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar and Bangladesh. Sajid said that plight of the Burmese Rohingya has taken a significant turn for the worse following violent clashes with Rakhan community in western Myanmar.
Government restrictions on humanitarian access to the Rohingya community have left over 100,000 displaced people in desperate need of food, shelter and medical aid. Malnutrition rates in the northern Arakan state where some 800,000 Rohingya lives are far above the global indicator for a health crisis and are likely to further deteriorate as international NGOs have been forced to leave the area. Meanwhile, the tens of thousands of Rohingya that fled to neighboring Bangladesh to escape the brutal attacks have ended up as unregistered refugees with little access to aid or assistance.
The Bangladesh authorities have refused to help the refugees and have ordered several international charity organisations to cease essential humanitarian aid operations. Conditions in campsites where Rohingya are stationed are atrocious, with disease rampant and standard of living extremely poor.
Source here
 |
| Much has been said about Suu Kyi's stance on the Rohingya, who are denied citizenship by Myanmar [EPA] |
Suu Kyi's silence on the Rohingya does not necessarily reflect a cold heart, but shows that she has become a politician.
Washington's ambassador to Myanmar hinted last week that the US may have a new foe in the reforming dictatorship. Derek Mitchell, whose appointment this year marked a significant warming of relations between the two countries, spoke of the vile fallout from sectarian unrest in June that has overshadowed Myanmar’s reform efforts.
Challenges to the establishment of a democracy there are now "broader than what our traditional concern is, which is the system, or the government, or the military", Mitchell told the Wall Street Journal. Pointing a finger at the volley of abuse aimed at the Rohingya minority, who were pitted against Rakhine Buddhists in protracted rioting, Mitchell explained that the job of diplomacy had now become more complicated.
"This had to do with the deep-seated intolerance that seemed to be within the society writ large. So I think that's where the deep disappointment came. And it creates a division between them and us to a degree."
Suu Kyi's silence on the Rohingya
The "them" in question is the feted democrats whose decades-long struggle for equality in Myanmar had won them international admiration. But their reputation has begun to unravel over the past three months as they became party toa campaign of vilification against the stateless Rohingya, the Muslim untermensch of western Myanmar whose own harrowing story was forever peripheral to the wider narrative of Myanmar's quest for democracy.
The "them", however, must also include Aung San Suu Kyi, who will visit the US in the coming weeks to accept a belated Global Citizen Award and talk politics with top Washington officials. Much has been said about her stance on the Rohingya, who are denied citizenship by the Myanmar government and are considered one of the most persecuted minorities in Southeast Asia. Their plight appears, on the surface at least, extraneous to Suu Kyi's vision of a democracy, and she refuses to speak their name in public.
That may sound like a strong charge, but she has consistently shirked questioning on her position. While her silence on the Rohingya does not necessarily reflect a cold heart, it does show that she has become a politician. With that too, she becomes a figurehead to be challenged like any politician should be, but the air of sacrosanctity surrounding her remains, and continues to be unhelpful. In its place, consistency should be applied - last week Myanmar activists decried new media laws that bar criticism of the country’s political machine, of which she is now a part of. The democrats who have fought for free media, but attacked those who challenge Suu Kyi, should recognise this contradiction.
What lies behind her silence? When pressed on the subject in the wake of the June rioting, she talked of a need to "clarify" citizenship laws and urged the government to grant equal rights to "all ethnic minorities". It was deliberately vague and diversionary - Rohingya are not considered an ethnic minority by the powers that be in Myanmar, meaning she quietly avoided angering her supporters.
Essentially, if she does take the moral high ground and pushes for citizenship for the Rohingya, she risks losing a huge number of votes come 2015. Not only will she upset the Rakhine population who reluctantly share the volatile western state with the Muslim minority, but also further inland and abroad. Many inexplicably see the Rohingya - quarantined though they are in a pocket of coastline on the periphery of Myanmar - as a threat to their wellbeing and allege they are illegal Bengali immigrants, and even terrorists.
There is also the very real danger that with an issue so hot-blooded as the fate of the Rohingya, she could lose chunks of her support base to military hardliners who oppose granting the Rohingya citizenship, regardless of whether their other policies impede democratic progress or not. The intensity of hostility towards the minority group has been so fierce as to make this a distinct possibility.
Consequently, an argument could be made that Suu Kyi is pushing for the "greater common good" - i.e., biding her time until 2015 when she can cement more progressive policies - but many, myself included, will claim the means do not justify the ends. Indeed, she touched on that broader philosophy herself in her Nobel Prize acceptance speech in June, when she spoke of the tens of thousands of Kachin refugees lacking aid in Myanmar's north: "Is the cost of meeting the needs of refugees greater than the cost that would be consequent on turning an indifferent, if not a blind, eye on their suffering?" Do the benefits of silence then outweigh the political costs of placing demands on the future of the Rohingya? Her reluctance to speak out provides something of clue to that.
Sein's record on the Rohingya
Now contrast Suu Kyi with President Thein Sein, a man who during his term as prime minister under Myanmar's former junta was party to attempts to cleanse the ethnically diverse border regions of "the other". In a report for parliament this week, and seen by AFP, he writes: "Political parties, some monks and some individuals are increasing the ethnic hatred [towards Rohingya]. They even approach and lobby both the domestic and overseas Rakhine community."
To be sure, Thein Sein's record on the Rohingya is far from exemplary - in July, he lobbied the UN to help resettle all 800,000-odd Rohingya living in Rakhine state abroad, a move that drew accusations that he was attempting a mass deportation. One can also make the argument that he is buying international support and has otherwise shown apathy towards ethnic minorities. Regardless, however, this report goes further than any politician in Myanmar has so far done by highlighting a current of animosity and a concerted attempt by members of the Buddhist community, including the revered monks, to kindle enmity.
This is much needed. Observers who attempted the same were attacked by many in the pro-democracy movement, while foreigners were branded "neo-colonialists" and told to keep their noses out. Not surprisingly, the leading Rakhine political party, whose leader Dr Aye Maung recently responded to the "trespassing" Rohingya with calls for Burma "to be like Israel", will challenge the report.
Thein Sein isn't playing the same political game as Suu Kyi, given he is already in office and probably doesn't want to stay on beyond 2015. He also knows that the unrest does nothing to help Myanmar's image as an emerging hotspot for international business, and needs to demonstrate a degree of attentiveness to the situation.
But the contrast between his statement and Suu Kyi's exemplifies the transformation she has undergone since being elected to parliament and the bind she is now in. Hillary Clinton has already lamented the difficulties for the Nobel Peace Laureate in "balancing ideals and aspirations" now she is a politician. Peter Popham, a journalist and biographer of Suu Kyi, eloquently noted last week that, "it is only when you are wandering in the wilderness of dissent that you can be everybody's darling".
Now with that wilderness receding behind her, Suu Kyi must answer to the demands that accompany her ascent to parliament, and possibly the top seat in three years. Although one can fully understand why Myanma put so much faith in her during the years of trickery and abuse by the junta, there are few things more dangerous than a deified politician in whose inviolable hands lay key decisions about the future of a country and its people. The taboo surrounding criticism of her must be dispelled.
Her visit to the US next month may be an opportunity for international figureheads like Clinton to constructively press Suu Kyi on the Rohingya issue; to help her find a platform in that fraught middle ground between ideals and aspirations on which Suu Kyi can return to the values she has espoused over the past 24 years. Failure to do so could further blur an increasingly unclear line between Myanmar's heroes and villains.
Francis Wade is a freelance journalist and analyst covering Myanmar and Southeast Asia.
Follow him on Twitter: @Francis_Wade
 |
| Ambassador Obaid Salem Al Zaabi, Permanent Representative of the UAE to the United Nations |
Geneva: The UAE condemns the violations of the rights of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar and the recent acts of violence against them which included killings, threats and displacing innocent people and burning down their houses and villages, according to Ambassador Obaid Salem Al Zaabi, Permanent Representative of the UAE to the United Nations and other International Organisations.
The UAE, represented by Shaikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Foreign Minister, was the first country to call the international community to take steps to protect Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslims and stop violence against them through supporting initiatives by OIC and calling the UN Human Rights Council to hold an extraordinary meeting on Rohingya Muslims human rights, Al Zaabi said at a meeting for the Ambassadors of the member countries of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Geneva on Tuesday to discuss human rights in Myanmar.
At the meeting, the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Antonio Guterres gave a presentation on the humanitarian situation of Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslims.
The UAE Ambassador also said the UAE backs a decision by the OIC’s 4th extraordinary summit in Makkah, Saudi Arabia which was held on August 14, to set up a contact team to study the issue of Rohingya Muslims.
Makkah summit is the fourth emergency conference to be convened by OIC since it was formed in 1969.
Source : Gulf News
[Author’s Note: Keynote speech delivered at the International Conference on “Contemplating Burma’s Rohingya People’s Future in Reconciliation and (Democratic) Reform,” held on August 15, 2012 at the Thammasat University, Bangkok.]
As a conscientious global citizen of our planet, I have been writing for the past 32 years since my days as a university student on a plethora of issues, which include history, culture and civilization of the peoples of the South Asia and the Middle East. I have also studied and written on international politics, human rights and terrorism. In my decades of studies I have not found a people that are more persecuted than the Rohingyas of Myanmar, or what used to be called Burma.
It is, therefore, necessary that we learn of this greatest tragedy of our time so that we can work towards finding a lasting solution to it. On a personal level, I consider it to be a privilege to be able to speak on the plight of this persecuted people in front of an audience that care and want to stop their misery. I take this opportunity to thank the organizers, esp. Mrs. Chalida Tajaroensuk (People’s Empowerment Foundation), Mr. Salim Ullah (JARO or Arakan Rohingya Organization-Japan) and Mr. Anwar Burmi (Rohingya National Organization in Thailand) for inviting me to this international conference. My thanks are also to the university administrators, and faculty, staffs and students of the Political Science department of the Thammasat University, Bangkok, Thailand for hosting this much-needed event. Thank you all for joining us here, esp. those who came from different parts of the world (e.g., Japan, Canada, USA, Myanmar, Malaysia, Australia, Bangladesh, Cambodia and Singapore).
I have come here not to debate but to discuss. I have come here not to talk as an expert on Arakan but to speak as a human being who cares deeply about our humanity. After all, what is more important than being an intelligent and rational person who can think, analyze and offer solutions that bind us all together on common themes that go beyond our identity as a race or an ethnicity?
The great Persian poet Shaykh Sa’di (1231-1291 C.E.) wrote:
“Adam’s sons are body limbs, to say;
For they’re created of the same clay.
Should one organ be troubled by pain,
Others would suffer severe strain.
Thou, careless of people’s suffering,
Deserve not the name, “human being”.”
[Tr. H. Vahid Dastjerdi (Mashriq-e-Ma'rifat)]
I would like to believe that we care and want to stop the suffering of the persecuted Rohingya people. As such, we deserve the name “human beings.”
International Laws on Fundamental Rights
Who would have thought that in our time, some 64 years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the world community to guide its behaviors and actions we would see so much of intolerance and persecution of peoples based on their race or ethnicity? The Preamble of UDHR reads:
“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,… Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms, Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge, Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.”
There are 30 Articles of the UDHR, starting with “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights…” The second one reads: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status…” When it comes to the Rohingya, ladies and gentlemen, not a single one of these rights is honored by the Myanmar government. These unfortunate people are denied their right to citizenship while the 15th Article clearly states: “(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality. (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.”
The preamble of the United Nations says, “WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and ….”
And yet, the Myanmar government, being a member of the United Nations, denies citizenship right to the Rohingya people. By doing so, it is committing a terrible crime.
What’s wrong with Burma Citizenship Law (1982)?
The Burma Citizenship Law (1982) states:
Chapter II – Citizenship
3. Nationals such as the Kachin, Kayah, Karen, Chin, Burman, Mon, Rakhine or Shan and ethnic groups as have settled in any of the territories included within the State as their permanent home from a period anterior to 1185 B.E., 1823 A.D. are Burma citizens.
4. The Council of State may decide whether any ethnic group is national or not.
The name Rohingya was deliberately expunged from the list of 135 national races (which includes 1 Burman major race plus 7 deputy races plus 127 sub-races) of Burma, thus, opening the door for all types of discrimination. [A comparison with the 1948 Union Citizenship Act, as shown below, would reveal that the 1982 Law altered the word Arakanese to Rakhine, thus effectively excluding the minority Rohingyas of Arakan from their shared national status. Similarly, the word ‘ethnic’ was put in place of ‘races’.] Because of their racial and religious ties with the people of Bangladesh – living on the other side of the Naaf River, they are treated as if they have migrated from there since the days of British annexation of Arakan in 1826 C.E., after the First Anglo-Burman War of 1824-26. Forgotten there is the historical evidence that the ancestors of today’s Rohingyas have lived in Arakan from time immemorial (see the history books written by experts like Professor Abdul Karim, Dr. Moshe Yegar and many others).
Interestingly, the author of this highly discriminatory law during the military dictator Ne Win era was (late) Dr. Aye Kyaw, a Rakhine academic who was a key figure in the formulation of racial policy of the ANC (Arakan National Congress). Through this ‘criminal’ law, Dr. Kyaw ensured virtual elimination of the Rohingya people from his native Arakan, where they comprised roughly half the population (i.e., 47.75% according to the estimate of Dr. Shwe Lu Maung in 2005).
As I have noted elsewhere ANC’s doctrine is Rakhine neo-Nazi Fascism, which espouses superiority of the Rakhine race over all other races in Arakan. [See the book – The Price of Silence: Muslim-Buddhist War of Bangladesh and Myanmar, A Social Darwinist's Analysis by Shwe Lu Maung alias Shahnawaz Khan, DewDrop Arts & Technology, USA (2005), pp. 232-244.] Interestingly, Dr. Kyaw had no moral bite to deny the Rohingya of their due share in citizenship while he himself became a naturalized U.S. citizen. He and many of his Rakhine racist followers (including Aye Chan, Khin Maung Saw), of course, did not have to prove ancestral ties of more than 160 years for acquiring citizenship in their adopted countries, something that they demanded that the Rohingyas and many other minorities must now do to be eligible for such rights! What hypocrisy and what a grave crime to rob an entire people!
Note that according to the draft constitution for the Arakan state, formulated by the ANC, “The citizenship of the Republic of Arakan shall be determined and regulated by law. The citizen of Arakan shall be known as Arakanese. Buddhism shall be the state religion. Only the Arakan legal entities and citizens of Arakan nationality shall have the right to own land.” Since the Rohingyas are classified as Arakan Bengalis they will be subjected to a second class citizenship with no right to run for office or own land. It is an apartheid policy of exclusion, discrimination and marginalization of the Rohingya, who are derogatorily called the Kula (Kala) much like how the Afro-Americans were treated in the USA as the Black Niggers.
As noted by Dr. Shahnawaz Khan (Shew Lu Maung), the Rakhaing neo-Nazism is not an isolated small group, but it is a widespread phenomenon led by the umbrella group ANC and supported by most of the Rakhine intellectuals and professionals. The tactics of the ANC and hate provocateurs like Aye Chan, Aye Kyaw and Khin Maung Saw include the total marginalization of the Rohingya people by fomenting fear that if they are not “contained (or eliminated)” as a ‘virus’ they would take over the state. Some of the members openly state that “Save our land even as Hitler if necessary … instead of losing out in foreign hands,” “put the Rohingyas in a concentration camp under UN supervision or settle them in a third country,” “mono-ethnic and majority race should control almost all so that the country can be developed easily,” “there should be no compromise on rights of ethnic Rakhine who is the descendant of Tibeto-Burman tribes (and not Bangali or Indo-Aryan),” “we inevitably have to compose our nation similar to Israel,” and “If Rohingya is to be recognized as indigenous race, any one who claims himself should take DNA test… If his DNA is different from those of the Bangali, he or should be accepted as ethnic Arakan citizen. If not, he should be chased out to Bangladesh or anywhere else away from our land.”
Such utterly racist and hateful comments are enough to prove the Fascist leanings of many of the Rakhine leaders. Funny that racist Aye Chan’s father is Haradhan Barua (Bangali Magh) and mother is an ethnic Rakhine. I wonder if Mr. Chan, who had once again rather conveniently excused himself from defending his ‘influx virus’ thesis against us, would have passed the DNA test required by his fellow racists!
The Question of being Indigenous to Arakan
Are the Muslims of Arakan who identify themselves as the Rohingya indigenous to the soil of Arakan or Burma? Our studies show without any shadow of doubt that they are indigenous, something that has also been accepted by many historians (even within Burma, pre-dating the Ne Win era) and the founding fathers of the Union of Burma. Sao Shwe Thaike who led and organized the Panglong conference in March 1946 famously said, “If the Rohingyas are not indigenous, nor am I.” In 1946 General Aung San assured full rights and privileges to Muslim Rohingya Arakanese as an indigenous people saying: “I give (offer) you a blank cheque. We will live together and die together. Demand what you want. I will do my best to fulfill them. If native people are divided, it will be difficult to achieve independence for Burma.”
Under the First Schedule to the Burma Independence Act 1947, the Rohingya were considered citizens of the Union of Burma. “1. The persons who, being British subjects immediately before the appointed day, are, subject to the provisions of section two of this Act, to cease on that day to be British subjects are the following persons, that is to say -
(a) persons who were born in Burma or whose father or paternal grandfather was born in Burma, not being persons excepted by paragraph 2 of this Schedule from the operations of this sub-paragraph; and (b) women who were aliens at birth and became British subjects by reason only of their marriage to any such person as is specified in sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph.”
Under Annex A of the Aung San-Attlee Agreement, 27 January, 1947, the Rohingya are citizens of the Union of Burma: “A Burma National is defined for the purposes of eligibility to vote and to stand as a candidate of the forthcoming elections as a British subject or the subject of an Indian State who was born in Burma and resided there for a total period of not less than eight years in the ten years immediately preceding either 1st January, 1942 or 1st January, 1947.”
Under Section 11 of the Constitution of the Union of Burma (1947), as shown below, the Rohingya are citizens of the Union of Burma: 11. (i) Every person, both of whose parents belong or belonged to any of the indigenous races of Burma; (ii) every person born in any of the territories included within the Union, at least one of whose grand-parents belong or belonged to any of the indigenous races of Burma; (iii) every person born in any of territories included within the Union, of parents both of whom are, or if they had been alive at the commencement of this Constitution would have been, citizens of the Union; (iv) every person who was born in any of the territories which at the time of his birth was included within His Britannic Majesty’s dominions and who has resided in any of the territories included within the Union for a period of not less than eight years in the ten years immediately preceding the date of the commencement of this Constitution or immediately preceding the 1st January 1942 and who intends to reside permanently there in and who signifies his election of citizenship of the Union in the manner and within the time prescribed by law, shall be a citizen of the Union.
The Nu-Attlee Agreement (1947), signed between Prime Minister U Nu (Burma) and Prime Minister Clement Attlee (Great Britain) on Oct. 17, 1947 on transferring power to Burma was very important as to the determination of the citizenship status of the peoples and races in Burma. Article 3 of the Agreement states: “Any person who at the date of the coming into force of the present Treaty is, by virtue of the Constitution of the Union of Burma, a citizen thereof and who is, or by virtue of a subsequent election is deemed to be, also a British subject, may make a declaration of alienage in the manner prescribed by the law of the Union, and thereupon shall cease to be a citizen of the Union.”
The Section 10 of the 1947 Constitution of the Union of Burma also states: “There shall be but only one citizenship though out the Union; that is to say, there shall be no citizenship of the unit as distinct from the citizenship of the Union.”
Article 3 (1) of the Union Citizenship Act, 1948 (original statement, and amended up to 1957) reads: “3. Any person:- (a) who was born in any of the territories which, at the time of his birth, was included in His Britannic Majesty’s dominions; (b) who had resided in any of the territories included in the Union for a period of not less than eight years in the ten years immediately preceding either the first day of January 1942 or the fourth day of January 1948; (c) who is of good character; (d) who has not done any act prejudicial to the security, peace or interest of the Union; and (e) who is not disqualified as defined in section 2 of the Union Citizenship Act, 1948, may apply to the officer in the district in which he resides for a certificate of citizenship.”
[As can be seen by comparison with the amended version of 1960 (see below), the original statement did not have the “indigenous” racial criterion for citizenship.]
Article 3 (1) of the Union Citizenship Act, 1948 (as amended up to 1960) states: “For the purposes of section 11 of the Constitution the expression “any of the indigenous races” of Burma shall mean the Arakanese, Burmese, Chin, Kachin, Karen, Kayah, Mon or Shan race and such racial group as has settled in any of the territories included within the Union as their permanent home from a period anterior to 1823 A. D. (1185 B.E.).” [Author’s note: Arakanese meant all residents of the state of Arakan, e.g., Rohingya and Rakhine.]
Article 4 (2) of the Union Citizenship Act, 1948 (as amended up to 1960) states: “Any person descended from ancestors who for two generations at least have all made any of the territories included within the Union their permanent home and whose parents and himself were born in any of such territories shall be deemed to be a citizen of the Union.”
These two categories of people and those descended from them are automatic citizens who did not require applying to court for naturalization. Rohingya are for all intents and purposes Arakanese and they are also a racial group who had settled in Arakan/Union of Burma as their permanent home from a period anterior to 1823 A. D. (1185 B.E.).
The Rohingyas were not subjected to any laws related to Registration of Foreigners before or after Burma’s independence such as the Foreigner Act (Indian Act III, 1846), the Registration of Foreigners Act (Burma Act VII, 1940) and the Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1948.
During colonial administration Rohingya representatives were elected from North Arakan as Burmese nationals from the national quotas.
The Rohingya people exercised the right of franchise (the right of citizenship and the right to vote) in all elections held in Burma from British colonial rule up to the present such as, 91 Department Administration election (1936), Aung San’s Constituent Assembly election (1947), all elections during parliamentary rule (1952, 1956, 1960), Ne Win’s BSPP (Burma Socialist Programme Party) constitutional referendum and election (1974) and SLORC military multiparty election (1990), military SPDC’s constitutional referendum (2008) and its multi-party election (2010).
There were Rohingya MPs. Minister, parliamentary secretaries, professionals, doctors, engineers, lawyers, academics, civil and military officers, and others who ran for the public offices. It is noteworthy that citizens whose parents hold FRCs (Foreign Registration Cards) are not allowed to run for a public office.
The parliamentary government (1948-1962) had officially declared Rohingya as one of the indigenous ethnic groups of Burma. The declaration from Prime Minister U Nu said: “The people living in Maungdaw and Buthidaung regions are our national brethren. They are called Rohingya. They are on the same par in status of nationality with Kachin, Kayah, Karen, Mon, Rakhine and Shan. They are one of the ethnic races of Burma.”
As can be seen, the Rohingyas were accepted as indigenous to Arakan by all Burmese government that preceded Ne Win. Yet, they were rendered stateless through the highly racist 1982 Law.
What’s wrong with the Burma Citizenship Law of 1982?
As duly noted by Mr. Nurul Islam of ARNO, a lawyer by training, Burma Citizenship Law of 1982 is the most restrictive citizenship law in the world promulgated by late dictator Ne Win’s BSPP regime on October 15, 1982. It violates several fundamental principles of international customary law standards, offends the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and leaves Rohingyas exposed to no legal protection of their rights. It is conflicting government’s obligation to fulfill the rights of the child as stipulated by Article 7(1) of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 which states that the Child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right to a name, and to acquire a nationality. The Burmese government ratified this convention in 1991 and is obliged to grant citizenship to Rohingyas.
Note also that the 1982 Citizenship Law violates:
(1) Article 24(3) of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966 also states, “Every child has the right to acquire a nationality.”
(2) Article 9 of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEADAW), 1979.
(3) Article 5(d) (iii) of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination 1965.
The 1982 Law promotes discrimination against Rohingya by arbitrarily depriving them of their Burmese (Myanmar) citizenship. The deprivation of one’s nationality is not only a serious violation of human rights but also an international crime.
The law continues to create outflows of refugees, which overburden other countries posing threats to peace and security within the region. Of the Rohingya Diaspora an estimated 1.5 million now live in Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, UAE, Thailand, Malaysia, India, Indonesia, USA, UK, Republic of Ireland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, and any other place they can find a shelter. The Rohingya refugee crisis with their boat people has become a regional problem of international dimension.
In his report to the United Nations in February 1996, the Special Rapporteur on Burma Professor Yozu Yokota stated, “Muslim population of Rakhine (Arakan) State was not recognized as citizens of Myanmar under the existing naturalization regulations and they were not even registered as so-called foreign residents …Their status situation did not permit them to travel in the country…They are also not allowed to serve in the state positions and are barred from attending higher educational institution.”
He recommended: “The 1982 Citizenship Law should be revised or amended to abolish its over burdensome requirements for citizens in a manner which has discriminatory effects on racial or ethnic minorities particularly the Rakhine (Arakan) Muslims. It should be brought in line with the principles embodied in the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness of 30 August 1961.”
Another 16 years have passed by since 1996, and a new regime, headed by a retired general, purporting to be reform-minded has been sworn in, and yet the apartheid 1982 Law remains intact in Myanmar. A new pogrom has started and the suffering of the Rohingya continues. In July of this year, President Thein Sein said Rohingyas were not an ethnic group of Myanmar and asked the UN refugee group to help solve their problem by taking over responsibility for the Rohingyas in refugee camps or by sending them to third counties. Simply put, his government does not want them in Myanmar.
The 1982 Citizenship Law sanctions an apartheid policy, which epitomizes neo-Nazi Fascism. As I see, it is a blueprint for elimination or ethnic cleansing of ‘other’ races. Period! The United Nations define ‘Ethnic Cleansing’ as: “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.”
Thus, the latest pogrom against the Rohingyas of Myanmar is a continuation of that policy of total elimination of the Rohingya people, one way or another.
New ‘Myanmarism’
Since the days of military dictator Ne Win, the successive Myanmar regimes (military or quasi-civilian) have learned to exploit racial and religious sentiments to persecute minorities and non-Buddhists. As correctly noted in an earlier Karen Human Rights Group report, their power is rooted in the deep racism that has permeated Burmese society since its beginnings; not only the racial supremacy complex which many Burmans are brought up with, but the racism of the Karen against the Burmans, the Burmans against the Shan, the Shan against the Wa, the Wa against the Shan, the Mon against the Burmans, the Rakhine against the Rohingyas, the Burmans against the Chinese, the Christians against the Buddhists, and everyone against the Muslims. The list goes on and on, and the military has always exploited it to turn people against each other and thereby increase its hold onto power.
The government propaganda continues to encourage a blind racist nationalism, full of references to ‘protecting the race’ — meaning that if Burmans (the majority Bamar people) do not oppress or eliminate other nationalities or races then they will themselves be oppressed, ‘national reconsolidation’ – meaning forced assimilation (through Burmanization and Buddization), and preventing ‘disintegration of the Union’ – meaning that if the Army (Tatmadaw) falls then some kind of ethnic chaos would ensue destabilizing the state. The regime has perfected this art of Myanmarism since the days of General Saw Maung who was handed down power after the bloody crackdown of 1988. [The same recipe of containing the minority Rohingya is followed in the Rakhine state by the majority Buddhist Rakhine.]
The traditional Myanmarism has been Buddhism and militarism since the days of King Anawrahta (ca. 1044-1077 C.E.). The new Myanmarism is a toxic cocktail of ultra-nationalism and religious fanaticism (or religio-racial ultra-nationalism, as coined by Dr. Shahnawaz Khan) as coded in the Lauka-thara-pyo, which is the skeleton of the Buddhist political theology (based on the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha).
If the old one was dirty and ugly, the new Myanmarism is dirtier and uglier. In this, the ends justify the means; lies and deceptions are all too natural and acceptable strategies to rule and govern. It is a feudal recipe for disaster, which shuns pluralism, diversity and multi-culture – the very trend-setters for progress in our time. The 1982 Citizenship Law thus provides the very justification for the Myanmar regime towards elimination of the minority races like the Rohingya.
-
ဇြန္လ ၁၇ ရက္ ၊ ၂၀၁၂ Source: guardian.co.uk ျမန္မာျပည္သစ္အတြက္ အနာဂတ္မွာ ေအာင္ျမင္မွာလား၊ က်ရွဳံးမွာလားဆိုသည္ကို ညႊန္ျပေသာ စမ္းသပ္မွဳ တစ... -
MP U Shwe Maung Explained on Amendment 1982 Citizenship Law on 25 July 2012. MP U Shwe Maung explained on amendment of 1982 Citizenship Law... -
ရက္စြဲ – ေမ ၂၉ ၊ ၂၀၁၂ သို ့ အယ္ဒီတာ၊ နိရဥၥရာ သတင္းဌာန နိရဥၥရာ သတင္းဌာနမွ ေမလ ၂၉ ရက္ေန ့ ထုတ္ျပန္သည့္ ရမ္းျဗဲတြင္ အသက္ ၁၆ ႏွ...
-
Read letter here Read history of Rohingya here Download letter PDF here Download History of Rohingya PDF here credi... -
RB News March 31, 2018 Minbya, Arakan State : On March 30 morning, a Prayer Leader or Imam was brutally beaten and injured by a Rakh... -
More than 40% of people living in Burma belong to one of the military-ruled nation's different minority groups. The government recognis...
-
လူသားတိုင္း ရသင့္ရထိုက္ေသာ ရပိုင္ခြင့္၊ ခံစားခြင့္ မ်ားကို လူမ်ိဳးဘာသာမေရြး ရရွိသင့္ပါသည္။ သို႔မွသာ Human Rights – (လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး) ကိုတန္ဖို... -
12/07/2012 Joint press release HUMANITY GONE ... -
Even if the Rohingyas were not native to what we call Burma today, our birthplace, the inhuman and inhumane treatment of nearly 1 million Ro...
-
ဇြန္လ(၅)ရက္ေန႔ မြန္းလြဲ တစ္နာရီဆယ့္ငါးမိနစ္ခန္႔က ရန္ကုန္ျမိဳ႔ ဆူးေလဘုရားအ၀ိုင္းအနီးရွိ ပလီေရွ႔တြင္ ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းစြာဆႏၵေဖာ္ထုတ...
Popular Posts
Threatwiki
Amartya Sen: Burma's "slow genocide" of Rohingyas
Watch Professor Amartya Sen speak on what he calls Burma's 'slow genocide' of Rohingya, Harvard, 4 Nov 2014
