Investors shouldn't ignore human rights abuses in Burma, but nor should they stay away – change will come from within

It is hard to reconcile the urgent flurry of foreign investment in Burma with the pictures of blood-stained roads and burning schools that attest to the sectarian and religious violence against its Muslim population.

The country's great economic promise and the strident political reforms of the last two years contrast sharply with the continuing human rights violations of its government. The McKinsey Global Institute estimates that the likes of Unilever, Coca-Cola, Citibank and Ford will pour $100bn of foreign investment into Burma before 2030.

Many believe that until the military government is held to account, global corporates should stay away. But the victims of these abuses will be better served by foreign investors entering the domestic market than ignoring it on moral grounds. The challenge for those companies clamouring for a foothold in this frontier market is investing that money in a responsible way that not only generates profit but enhances the rights and wealth of Burma's people.

The reward for enduring the regulatory maze and reputational risk of doing business in Burma is a slice of an economy with undoubted growth potential. Sandwiched between India and China, Burma is richly endowed with water, arable land, timber, gemstones, and a working-age population of 46 million that is urbanising and currently 70% less productive than the Association of Southeast Asian Nations average. All of that adds up to a projected 6.5% annual GDP growth rate.

Nonetheless, it is surprising that large global brands are falling over themselves to set up in a country currently playing host to what Human Rights Watch calls genocide. The Burmese government refuses to accept Rohingya Muslims as citizens, despite their having inhabited Rakhine state in northwest Burma for many generations, and is attempting to forcibly remove them from the country. In the past two years, an estimated 250 Rohingya have been killed and 100,000 displaced by sectarian violence, with video evidence suggesting the military and police are loathe to intervene.

Undoubtedly great progress has been made; just a few years ago there were thousands of political prisoners in jail, no democratic elections and no freedom of speech. But the plight of the Rohingya aside, human rights violations seem likely to change in character rather than disappear as the country opens up further. The UN special rapporteur suggests a shift towards different types of abuses in a changing economy, including land confiscations, development-induced displacement and other violations of economic, social and cultural rights.

There is also a reputational risk for corporates associating themselves with past abuses. The extent to which the government is entwined in current commercial structures means that doing business in Burma relies on opaque local connections and relationships with government on some level, many of whom can be linked to violations prior to the end of the military regime (President Thein Sein himself was referred to in US dispatches for "cracking down" on the 1988 pro-democracy uprising, as a commander in army).

Fortunately there are mechanisms in place to help companies meet the challenge of investing responsibly in Burma.

In July, America's Burma Responsible Investment Reporting Requirements came into force. They oblige US companies spending more than $500,000 to publicly report on workers' rights, corruption and contact with government. This approach to the repeal of sanctions is new and may prove to be a model for other nations in encouraging continued political reform and promoting transparency of CSR obligations.

In July, the EU readmitted Burma to a scheme allowing it to benefit from lower duties on exports, having been satisfied by the International Labour Organisation of improvement in forced labour conditions.

The UK has an entrenched interest in Burma, one of its former colonies. The Department for International Development recently spent £600,000 setting up a Responsible Investment Resource Centre in Yangon. Foreign Office minister Hugo Swire has consistently allied the humanitarian agenda to trade negotiations.

There is momentum from within Burma too – the new Foreign Investment Laws have now been pored over by international law firms and are ready to be tested. The government has also let the currency trade freely, allowed trademarks to be registered and acceded to the New York Convention on international arbitration.

It is right to restrict those investors who would willfully ignore sectarian violence, engage corrupt officials or employ unjustly cheap labour. But it is wrong to suggest that any investment in Burma implicitly endorses a unethical regime and that foreign investors should stay away altogether until things improve. It is through the engagement of the international business and diplomatic community that Burma will emerge from the economic pallor and political oppression that has hampered its development over the past 50 years.

Coca-Cola has set up a bottling plant outside Yangon that will employ 2,000 local people, pay them well, engage local manufacturers and distributors and vest an interest in improving the infrastructure of their supply routes. It will share knowledge and best practice with its local partner Pinya Manufacturing, test the Responsible Investment Reporting Requirement mechanism, use and scrutinise local legislation, develop new finance structures with local partners and press the government to give it the transparent information it require to satisfy its own disclosure obligations as a New York-listed company.

Some may see Coca-Cola's programme to help Burma women gain access to business skills and financial services as a PR stunt, but at least their CSR responsibilities are leading the marketing agenda rather than catchy taglines.

There will undoubtedly be challenges, but the process of dealing with such challenges will make the nascent systems and controls more robust and the government developing them more accountable for its actions as it comes to embrace the advances that the process engenders.

There are many incremental steps required to take Burma from a nation of great promise fettered by human rights violations and poverty to a vibrant democracy with a socially and economically empowered workforce. Leveraging the capital and expertise of global companies by offering them a viable platform from which to do business in Burma will make those steps easier. Were we to deny the use of that platform because the government currently abuses human rights, we would risk plunging the country back into the darkness that allows those abuses to thrive. Foreign investors in Burma should tread carefully but boldly, and effect reform from within the arena.

Dominic Hammond is Global Manager at St Bride's Managers and specialises in alternative investments.

By Ko Naing (Technological University) 

RB Article

September 2, 2013 

August 21st 2013, Yangon International Airport 

Mr. Tomas Ojea Quintana, the UN human rights envoy has just completed his ten day visit. He delivered the brief of his findings at the press conference before he left from the Yangon International Airport. He expressed his gratitude towards the Burmese government for inviting him to survey the human rights situation there. Though the government had invited him for visit, on August 19th, a day before completion of his 8th visit since he was appointed as a UN Special Rapporteur in 2008, a plot was made to attack him. This happened on the way to an IDP camp where the Muslim victims of the March 2013 violence in Meikhtila were caged. He was fortunate enough to stay free from harm but abandoned the plan to visit the camp that held the Muslim victims. He did point out that many Rohingyas in Northern Rakhine were arbitrarily arrested in connection to June 2012 violence. They were being tried in flawed trials. Many were sentenced to high imprisonment on false accusations. At the time of Mr. Quintana’s visit to Buthidaung jail, prominent Rohingya arrestees were locked up in a separate room, barring him from seeing them. 

August 21st 2013, Buthidaung Township Court 

There were more security police than usual around the court. A long queue of the closest and dearest to the detainees were waiting outside the court to catch a glimpse of their relatives being transported to the hearing verdict. Embarkment and disembarkment from police vehicle was unrecognizable. The heads and bodies of the detainees were covered by raincoats. 

Despite the fact the sympathizers waited there for so long, the security police threatened them to get away. They were eventually brought in groups of 5-7 people, to a waiting room inside the court. The Maungdaw district judiciary head was to give the verdict on the alleged and fabricated cases, in the connection with June 2012 violence. 43 detainees were sentenced for life and long term imprisonment on fabricated and false accusations by Rakhine Buddhists. This, on the same day that Mr. Quintana was delivering his findings on of his ten day visit at Yangon International Airport. In this court hearing, 3 Rohingyas were sentenced to life. There were 26 sentenced to 7 years. The remaining were sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. The 3 Rohingya from Baggona village who were sentenced for life are: (1) Zubair (2) Salim and (3) Yahya. 

June, 2012. How Rohingyas were arrested. The cases against them were fabricated and formulated. 

Rohingya community leaders were arrested at the meeting they were invited to attend. It was in NaSaKa head quarters. Some were chased and hunted in the villages. Like hunting animals in the forest. Others were just arrested while passing by the combined forces. All were transferred to the police station the next day. At that time, they were loaded into trucks like commodity bags. One upon the other. All of their limbs and bodies tightly tied up to send to Buthidaung jail. There, they were fed on dirty floor. Made to eat like animals. They were tortured to the highest extent. They were kept bare bodied. Exposed to the cold water of the rainy season for long hours in the nights. Some died while the authority tortured them, to forcefully get a confession for the crimes. 

From different villages, Rakhine Buddhists were trained to bear witness against Rohingyas. The Rohingyas were categorized into groups of 20-30 members. The cases against them were also numbered. The trials were going on for long time. On every date of a trial, Rakhine Buddhists were summoned to court for witnessing. During interrogation in the court, the Rohingyas’ witnesses were verbally threatened by the Government lawyers. There were occasions that the statements of witnesses from the Rohingya side were misinterpreted and maligned. Ignoring the evidences and witnesses from the Rohingya side, they were all sentenced to life and long time imprisonments. Rohingyas from Northern Maungdaw were sued for the involvement in the torching in Mawrawady, Southern Maungdaw. One can imagine how illogical and cruel it is? 

May, 1991 Southern Maungdaw 

A quite wide farm land in Hoonetaw village (Chinkharli) was confiscated. Rohingyas were ordered to build 10 houses with the support of six villages in southern Maungdaw. Roads were also made. The environment was cleared and made living friendly. The village was then named Mawrawady Sanpya Village. The in-charge was Captain Ke Ba Than, from Hlun Htain Battalion, based in 4-mile Maungdaw. 

Cattles belonging to Rohingyas were not allowed to set foot on that area. If they did Ke Ba Than and his pupil would fine the owner more than 5000 Kyats. Later Ke Ba Than died of a stroke. His pupil broke his leg in an accident. Later, he was expelled from the service due to corruption. 

The Rakhine Buddhist families were boarded in readymade homes, all made by Rohingyas. Nearby Rohingya farm land was confiscated and Rohingya had to do from everything for them. From cultivating land to growing paddy. Even getting the rice ready for cooking. 

Later 20 more families were settled. They at least 2 families from Bangladesh. They can speak and write Bengali very well. At the very beginning there was no school for their children to go to. It was in the primary school of Chinkharli where their children attained the primary education. 

Years gone by, Rakhine Buddhist families were settled on confiscated Rohingya farmland till it became a village of more than 120 families. Even poor Buddhist families in nearby villages like Alaythankyaw, settled themselves in Mawrawady. Such Sanpya villages were settled in different parts of Northern Rakhine State by the special program laid down by the Government. This saw at least 30% of settlers were imported from Bangladesh. Some of their Google images were shown below. 

Conclusion 

These model villages were settled on Rohingya farmland. Rohingyas built houses for them. Rohingyas cultivated their confiscated lands for them. Rohingyas helped in their everyday financial problems. Even Rohingyas leased money to Rakhine Buddhists in prior two crop seasons. The camps full security forces were there in every Model (NaTaLa Sanpya Villages). Rohingyas were never safe from their harassment. Looting and robbing have increased since its settlement. When reporting of such incidents to the authorities, Rohingyas were counter punished. After the violence of 2012, looting, robbing and extorting money have increased to the highest extent. The social environments have been polluted. Rakhine assumes that Rohingyas properties are their own. 

Besides all the harassment and disturbance, Rohingyas want to live peacefully in their homeland. Rohingyas were sentenced harshly. Buddhists were sentenced lightly. The number of Muslims punished were very high, while the number of Buddhists punished were very low. When Muslims houses were torched, the security forces just stood or even helped the mobs. When Buddhist houses were on fire, the security forces shot the Rohingyas. When Muslims houses were torched by the Buddhists mobs, forces said that they burnt their own homes down. When Buddhist houses were on fire, it was alleged that Muslim terrorist burnt them down.

When many Buddhists were imported, they settled in different villages. They are called an indigenous race of Myanmar. While Rohingyas Muslims have been living in the country for centuries, they are labeled as intruders. If 1982 citizenship law is to be implemented, it must affect all the people in Myanmar. Why only Rohingya? Implement the 1982 citizenship law first on Buddhists imported from Bangladesh and Chinese flowing into Myanmar. Then Rohingyas would be ready to abide by that law, though Rohingyas are indigenous race of the soil of Arakan.

By Dr. Maung Zarni

Kyoto Review

September 2013 Issue

Maung Zarni, a research fellow at the London School of Economics, argues that the best way to look at the current changes in Myanmar is through his “Three Insecurity Paradigms”, namely, national security, global security and human security. Zarni denounces the Thein Sein reforms as crude responses to the regime’s own needs and to the expectation of the world, with little account for the security of ordinary Myanmar people.

A “Three Insecurities Perspective” for the Changing Myanmar.

Changes in Myanmar over the past three years have indeed been dizzying. A cursory look at the turn of events since 201 in will persuade any doubters of the genuineness of the country’s transition. The question, however, is where it is transitioning to and how best to understand the transition?

After their visits to Myanmar, Thomas Carothers and Larry Diamond, two of the world’s leading scholars of democratization, reached a similar conclusion: Naypyidaw’s goals, definition and modus operandi of ‘democracy’ are at odds with the essence of a representative government.

Carothers likens Myanmar’s reforms with the Arab leadership’s top-down reforms in the decade prior to the violent Arab Spring. In his own words, “The steps taken by Arab governments were not democratizing reforms, rather they were carefully circumscribed efforts designed precisely to head off the possibility of true democratization by alleviating popular dissatisfaction with regimes.” 1 Diamond was more direct, “I think the transition is still very much in an early stage and it is not clear by any means at this point that electoral democracy will be the outcome of it or that electoral democracy is the intended outcome.” 2

But why is the international community cuddling the country’s ex-generals and generals and showering Naypyidaw with “aid packages” worth hundreds of millions of dollars in the name of the people, reforms and democratic transition? These global words of praise and aid for the reformists are taking place at the same time as the unfolding Rohingya’s ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, 3 the anti-Muslim mass violence by the “neo-Nazi Buddhist campaign” 4, the sharp rise in Kachin war refugees, and Naypyidaw’s widely reported complicity and responsibility? 5

The blunt answer is “global capitalism.” Myanmar’s generals have agreed to the externally assisted transformation of the country’s ailing political economy along free market lines in exchange for access to the emerging lucrative frontier economy. However, noteworthy is the fact that the full-scale reengagement of the liberal Western Myanmar is largely on Naypyidaw’s terms, a few concessions here and there notwithstanding. 6

Factually, through the typical eyes of the global capitalists, Myanmar is first and foremost a “resource brothel”, the hottest “frontier market” 7 and a strategic linchpin for respective “grand strategies” in the seemingly eternal game of Great Powers, on the rise or on the wane. Human communities as “markets” and “sources of resources and labour” have been a rather durable view of any country on earth with land, resources and labour since large-scale, technologically driven capitalist transformation was unleashed several hundred years ago. 

Fast forward to the World Economic Forum in Naypyidaw in June 2013, it was about the elite-led “democracy”, skilled “civil society” and a socially responsible corporate-assisted “free market”. But in essence, the international policies toward Myanmar are designed to extract optimal spoils out of one of the world’s last few remaining frontier markets; the other is North Korea. 

This June, former US Secretary of State Madeline Albright was seen drinking Coke straight out of its fat plastic bottle at a ceremony in Yangon where Coca Cola, one of her corporate clients for her Albright-Stonebridge Consulting Firm, 8 opened the first-ever bottling factory in Myanmar. 9 As Chair of the US National Democratic Institute, Albright was reportedly in the country to promote democracy, interfaith and to teach “the people who have never had a sip” how to drink Coke properly. But the Americans are not alone. 

Amidst the unfolding pogroms against the Rohingya and other Muslims and the documented complicity of the authorities at the highest level, 10 the Islamic state of Qatar has no qualms about co-winning and accepting multibillion dollar telecom contracts in Myanmar along with Norway. The official peace-mediators in Oslo have indeed secured a rather lucrative phone contract for its national Telenor from the 2012 Nobel Peace short-listed President Thein Sein, while the Kachins, the Karens, the Shan, the Karenni and the Mon are still waiting for the successful outcome of Oslo’s peace mediation. 11 Phones before peace! Telanor for peace!

Were Karl Marx alive, he would have defined the process Myanmar is undergoing–the pervasive land grab, resultant economic displacement, the working poor, filthy labour conditions, forced migration, violent conflicts, import of technology, new modes and lines of production, capital infusion, mega-development projects and so on—as a marginally cash-based economy dragged through the ruthless process of what he termed “primitive accumulation”.

Here, I propose that a new way of reading Myanmar that reflects critically on why Myanmar studies have been an Orientalist backwater, and recalibrating and updating a Braudellian approach which Victor Lieberman has argued for Southeast Asian Studies. 12 We need to zero in on the single most consequential ongoing global process, namely the capitalist transformation of Myanmar as a frontier market. For it is this process, more than any other factors, which affects both our research objects—the people and our research itself.

The perspective which I have found most empirically verifiable and suitable in explaining the dizzying array of changes is a security perspective which I call the “Three Insecurities Perspective”, namely, (traditional) national insecurity, global insecurity and human insecurity.

First, national insecurity straightforwardly refers to the permanent sense of insecurity of nation-states, which, at its crudest, is about the uncertainties with respect to “regime survival”. Second, global insecurity is defined as the overall sense of insecurities and vulnerabilities of the world’s economic and political order, which in turn rests on the security of the nation-states making up the world’s political economy. Third and finally, human insecurity refers to the absence of “the security of the individual and communities in which he or she lives as opposed to the security of the states and borders”. 13

In a nutshell, the proposed “Three Insecurities Perspective” argues that since the end of the Cold War, global capitalism has brought communities, the Environment and national political-economies into a single overarching whole in the process widely referred to as globalization. Here, the three discourses of in-security compete for primacy in policy making and practices. While talking about the rule-based, predictable international order, every nation-state is preparing for eventualities such as war. Driven by a profound sense of insecurities, domestically and internationally, even the United States is found spying on allies, citizens and rivals alike as shown by the latest PRISM scandal.

While all three are not necessarily mutually exclusive, the issue of vulnerabilities, such as refugees, internally displaced persons, and the unemployed, is typically placed on the policy backburners. The security and well-being of persons and communities are trampled upon, literally and figuratively, especially when the other two insecurity regimes—national and global insecurity regimes—team up to form an exclusive symbiosis out of strategic calculations and political expediency. This is why one often reads stories about how the policies and practices of states, 14 corporations, multilateral agencies and international financial institutions collectively contribute to the detriment of marginal communities and faceless human persons, their natural habitats and their access to livelihoods, safety, freedoms of movement, association and so on.

I believe the proposed “Three Insecurities Perspective” best explains Myanmar affairs (as well as other similar “national” cases) and reflects the country’s objectively verifiable realities. It also locates both the study of Myanmar and the country’s affairs within the context of the single most profoundly consequential process of capitalist transformation that the country as a ‘frontier market’ is going through.

Seen through this prism of insecurities, the country’s top-down democratic reforms are less about Myanmar’s democratization, but primarily about the country’s national ruling elite making an elite pact with the globalist capitalist forces, while morphing into a social class of their own, namely military-crony-capitalists. In this pact, the people open up their hotly sought after frontier market in exchange for normalization, recognition, legitimacy and access to capital and global market, and technology. Naypyidaw is opening the country up on terms agreeable and favourable to the country’s most powerful stakeholders—the military and its national insecurity regime. In this process, even the country’s most influential politician and global icon Aung San Suu Kyi has found herself on the global capitalist stage where she no longer controls the script, the staging, the tune or the lyrics.

The still unfolding case of the ethnically cleansed Rohingya Muslims presents itself as an empirical test case for the Three Insecurities Perspective. Despite the widespread abject poverty in Rakhine State where the Rohingya co-inhabited with the Buddhist Rakhines and recently marked by waves of mass violence, this area has become strategic and lucrative in the emerging capitalist economy of Myanmar—a strategic deep sea port, fertile agricultural land with potential for industrial agriculture, a fishing industry, a multibillion dollar special economic zone and the place of origin for China’s twin gas-and-oil pipeline.

In the civil war between East and West Pakistan in 1971, West Pakistani General Tikka issued a chilling order to his troops, “I want the land, not the people.” 15 Chillingly again, this time in Western Myanmar, the country’s national security regime may simply have reacquired the land, without the (Rohingya) people.

Without properly contextualizing Myanmar’s transition in the entangled web of this three insecurities outlook, our understanding of reforms, changes and democratization will remain half-baked—no less half-baked than a democracy being mid-wived by Naypyidaw’s national insecurity regime and the global insecurity capitalists.

Maung Zarni

Associate Fellow, the University of Malaya

Visiting Fellow, Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit

London School of Economics

Notes: 

1. Interview with Thomas Carothers, Irrawaddy, 7 May 2012 <http://www.irrawaddy.org/archives/3706> (accessed 1 July 2013).
2. Interview with Larry Diamond, Irrawaddy, 24 July 2013 <http://www.irrawaddy.org/archives/9883> (accessed 1 July 2013).
3. “All You Can Do is Pray: Crimes against Humanity and Ethnic Cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in Burma’s Arakan State”, Human Rights Watch, 22 August 2013 <http://www.hrw.org/reports/2013/04/22/all-you-can-do-pray-0> (accessed 1 July 2013).
4. Kosak Tuscangate, “Burmese neo-Nazi Movement Rising against the Muslims”, Asia Sentinel, 22 March 2013 <http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5276&Itemid=409> (accessed 1 July 2013). Also see, Maung Zarni, “Myanmar’s Neo-Nazi Buddhists Get Free Rein”, Asia Times, 3 April 2013 <http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/SEA-01-090413.html> (accessed 1 July 2013). 
5. “Special Report: Myanmar Gives Official Blessing to Anti-Muslim Monks”, Reuters, 27 June 2013 <http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/27/us-myanmar-969-specialreport-idUSBRE95Q04720130627> (accessed 1 July 2013). 
6. For a grounded, first-person analysis of the evolution of Western policies towards Myanmar over the past 25 years, see, Maung Zarni, Burma/Myanmar: Its Conflicts, Western Advocacy, and Country Impact, The World Peace Foundation, The Fletchers School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, 25 March 2013 <http://sites.tufts.edu/reinventingpeace/2013/03/25/burmamyanmar-its-conflicts-western-advocacy-and-country-impact/> (accessed 2 July 2013.) 
7. In a webcast roundtable on the country’s economy at the World Economic Forum on East Asia in Naypyidaw, June 2013, Chairman of the Shangri-La Dialogue and CEO of the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies bluntly put Myanmar as simply a lucrative frontier market where companies need to be even more informed about the country and its internal affairs than any foreign diplomatic mission. 
8. See Albright-Stonebridge Group at <http://www.albrightstonebridge.com/> (accessed 1 July 2013). 
9. “Coca-Cola Opens Myanmar Bottling Plant”, Associated Press, 4 June 2013 <http://www.komonews.com/news/business/Coca-Cola-opens-Myanmar-bottling-plant-210090851.html> (accessed 1 July 2013). 
10. For a grounded perspective on the interface between popular anti-Muslim racism and the state’s instrumental role, see, Maung Zarni, “Buddhist Nationalism in Burma”, Tricycle, Spring 2013 <http://www.tricycle.com/feature/buddhist-nationalism-burma> (accessed 1 July 2013). 
11. Burma Awards Lucrative Mobile Contracts”, BBC, 27 June 2013 <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-23078620> (accessed 1 July 2013). 
12. Liam C. Kelley, “Strange Parallels: Southeast Asia in Global Context, c. 800-1830, Volume I: Integration on the Mainland (Review)”, Journal of World History, vol. 17, no. 1 (March 2006), pp. 102-104 <http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/jwh/summary/v017/17.1kelley.html> (accessed 1 July). 
13. See, <http://www.lse.ac.uk/internationalDevelopment/research/CSHS/Home.aspx> (accessed 1 July 2013). 
14. The latest US attempt to address the issues of labour rights, the environment and corruption abroad needs to be watched closely as it is a rather novel approach opposed by the US corporations and US Chamber of Commerce. See, “U.S. Companies Investing in Myanmar Must Show Steps to Respect Human Rights”, New York Times, 30 June 2013 <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/01/world/asia/us-companies-investing-in-myanmar-must-show-steps-to-respect-human-rights.html?_r=0> (accessed 1 July 2013). 
15. “Interview of Major General Rao Farman Ali AKA: The Butcher of Bengal”, 13 March 2010 <http://etongbtong.blogspot.com/2010/03/interview-of-major-general-rao-farman.html> (accessed 1 July 2013). 

By Kavi Chongkittavron 

The Nation

September 1, 2013

BANGKOK: After a series of closed door discussions and numerous rephrasing by policy-makers including foreign experts, Myanmar has finally picked the theme “Moving forward in unity towards a peaceful and prosperous Community” for its engagement with Asean next year.

Like previous Asean chairs, the title reflects Naypidaw’s agenda and priorities when it takes up the grouping’s helm in 127 days.

The 10-word slogan, the longest ever in Asean history, was personally given a nod by President Thein Sein recently.

Earlier a few versions were put forward for consideration focusing on the centrality of Asean, economic cooperation and community building as well as political and economic reforms taking place in the past two years. The chosen theme was neutral and encompassing.

“It is very comprehensive,” said a senior Asean official who attended the Asean Economic Ministerial meeting in Bandar Seri Begawan, where Myanmar made the official announcement.

After the Asean leaders endorsed the 2014 chair in November 2011, Myanmar has studied the themes and performances of each Asean chair since 2008 when the Asean Charter was adopted.

That year, Singapore chaired Asean with an impressive theme “One Asean at the Heart of Dynamic Asia,” echoing the island’s desire to increase the grouping’s profile beyond South-East Asia.

Thailand succeeded Singapore with a major task to implement the new charter. Bangkok was true to its slogan, “Asean Charter for Asean People,” with packed programmes of civil society groups’ participation, which scared a few Asean leaders away.

Then came Vietnam with a simple theme: “Towards the Asean Com­munity: From Vision to Action.” It did not take long for the chair to find out that spurring common actions among the Asean members was an uphill task.

Indonesia took over Vietnam’s chair with a shoo-in goal, “Asean Community in a Global Community of Nations”.

As the only Asean member in the G-20, Indonesia wanted to be the Asean voice among the world’s most economically advanced countries. Asean’s position was uplifted. But it was temporary.

Last year, Cambodia’s messianic theme of “One Community, One Destiny” had the opposite effect. As the last country to join Asean (in 1999), the practice of the “Asean Way” had yet to sink in.

Cambodia should be credited for narrowing development gaps among the old and new Asean members but very few people took notice.

“Our People, Our Future Together” is the current theme advocated by the chair, Brunei. True to form and substance, every move the chair initiated is based on consultations and consensus.

The remaining four months would be smooth, paving the way for a conservative but holistic approach by the next Asean chair.

Myanmar has good reasons to be cautious with the role.

First, Naypidaw will serve as the chair for the first time – 16 years after its admission.

It skipped the 2005 slot due to domestic crisis along with pressure from the Asean colleagues. It does not want to adopt an “overtly” forwarding looking tone as it could sound a bit patronising.

Second, the theme must be topical enough to reflect norms and values as well as the inspiration of Asean and its peoples. In this case, Myanmar had to forego the so-called non-Asean elements related to their reforms.

Finally, it must also resonate well with the situation at home. The chair’s domestic condition would certainly dominate next year’s Asean agenda, especially the situation in Rakhine State and the fate of Rohingya people.

Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei would raise the issue. This time the chair cannot get away scot-free. Myanmar turned down the planned Asean special meeting on in October to discuss Rohingya issue, which was later cancelled.

Concerned Asean countries affected by the influx of Rohingya prefer a regional solution.

Much is at stake for Myanmar, especially its manner in handling sensitive issues with transnational and international impacts. It will serve as a barometer for the depth and scope of its ongoing three-year reforms.

As a latecomer, Myanmar is learning from the Asean experience. A few years after Indonesia turned democratic in 1998, it opened up and discussed internal problems with Asean.

At the recent Asean annual meeting, Jakarta reported voluntarily the human rights condition to the Asean Intergovernmental Commission for Human Rights.

Myanmar was relieved after the deadline for the Asean Community was later postponed to Dec 31, 2015.

That means the chair has an additional year to prepare the grounds for the Asean Community realisation, in which Malaysia will take charge. As the theme suggests, Myanmar now is confident that it can be a catalyst for the strengthening of community-building in Asean.

RB News 

September 1, 2013 

On August 31, 2013, Burmese Rohingya Association in Japan (BRAJ) held an event of Rohingya Language School opening ceremony under the patronage of Education Department. The reformed BRAJ has adopted 5 different departments to work toward the wellbeing and development of Rohingya community in Japan. The ceremony was conducted in two different sessions the afternoon session for children and evening session for adult. In the afternoon session 11 Rohingya children and 12 Rohingya gentlemen participated in the evening session. 

In the opening ceremony BRAJ General Secretary Mr. Syedul Amin explained about the history of Rohingya Language that Rohingya Language was first written in Arabic script in the year 1650 by Shah Alawal, the great poet of Arakan. Rohingyalish is the literature of the language spoken by Rohingya People of Arakan (Rakhine) State in Myanmar. The first Rohingya Language written was back to 350 years and used Arabic Scripts. Due to the long colonial period under the British rules, Burmese King occupation of Arakan and several internal conflicts the Rohingya literature could not have preserved for the upcoming generation. Since then many other scholars have tried to write the Rohingya Language using Arabic, Urdu, Burmese and Hanifi Scripts; the last one being the new invented by Eng. Mohammed Siddique Basu in the year 2000 with an intuitive idea to write Rohingya language using 28 Latin letters only. This new system of Rohingya literature has been recognized by ISO (International Organization for Standardization) on 18th July 2007. ISO assigned unique language code ISO 639-3 “rhg” to the language and listed among the world languages. 

And he said “Literature is both the foundation of human knowledge and the record of human experience.” The Rohingya people are lack of education, lack of knowledge and lack of experience it is just because of we are lack of literature. Later he introduced the new formulated Rohingyalish alphabets to the participants and distributed the printed copies of Rohingya Zuban Book 1 pages. All of them wholeheartedly accepted the Rohingyalish as their own language in the form of writing and pledge to learn making classes weekly. 

BRAJ team said “we are very much grateful and appreciate Eng. Siddique Saab for his noble idea, hard work and contribution for inventing this Rohingyalish for the people of Rohingya and we would like to appeal all Rohingya around the world to accept this language and learn it as soon as possible”.

By Chutharat Plerin

Phuket Gazette

August 31, 2013

PHUKET: The National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRC) yesterday confirmed that the report on the case of the Royal Thai Navy opening fire on Rohingya refugees off the coast of Ranong in February, will be concluded this month.

During the shooting, naval personnel allegedly killed at least two refugees fleeing arrest. 

The report will be handed over to Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra “as soon as possible”, the Phuket Gazette was told.

“Our investigation concerning the allegation of the Royal Thai Navy killing at least two Rohingya will be concluded soon. We’re endeavoring to finish it by the middle of September,” Dr Nirun Phitakwatchara of the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRC) confirmed to the Gazette.

Five months ago, PM Yingluck vowed in front of the international press that the incident would be investigated (storyhere). Since then, however, details of the investigation process have not been revealed and no deadline has been set for the completion of the investigation. 

“We are now working on putting all the evidence and information together in the report that will be handed over to PM Yingluck, in the interests of resolving the whole Rohingya issue in Thailand,” said Dr Nirun.

“In addition to the alleged killings, other issues have been included in the report, including the overcrowded conditions of Rohingya refugees in Thailand’s refugee shelters, the manner in which they are treated, and what country or countries they will eventually be transferred to,” he said.

“It has taken a long time to conclude the report because the Rohingya refugee issue is a big one and has many dimensions. We have sent our staff to a number of locations to collect as much information as possible for our investigation, in order to build up a dossier comprehensive enough to be handed over to the Prime Minister.”

Dr Nirun disclosed that suggestions to solve problems related to the Rohingya-refugee influx will be included in the report, but cautioned that he could not disclose any of these suggestions at present because the investigation is still incomplete. 

However, Dr Nirun did clearly state: “We are not trying to interfere with any national authority or apportion blame, especially towards the navy. 

“This is not just a national issue, it is a global one. The issue needs to be solved by several government departments working in the same direction.

“Policies need to be made to prepare for the problem we are facing, mindful that many more Rohingya refugees will be arriving on our shores. We don’t want this to become a chronic problem for Thailand.”

By Lawi Weng & Paul Vrieze

The Irrawaddy

August 30, 2013

RANGOON — An Arakan State court reportedly sentenced 76 Rohingya Muslims to lengthy prison terms last week for their alleged roles in an outburst of deadly inter-communal violence in Maungdaw Township in June last year, according to a human rights group and a local media report. At least seven were sentenced to life imprisonment.

The Thailand-based Arakan Project, which advocates for the rights of the Rohingyas, said a total of 76 Muslim defendants from Maungdaw Township had been sentenced at Buthidaung and Maungdaw township courts last week.

“On 20 and 21 August, Buthidaung Court sentenced 43 Rohingya detainees, all from Ba Gone Nar Village Tract in Maungdaw South, in relation to the June [2012] violence. Of them, 35 were sentenced to 17 years, four to 6 years and four to life imprisonment,” the group said in a draft report that it recently submitted to the UN special envoy on the human rights situation in Burma Tomás Quintana.

On August 22, another 33 detainees were scheduled to be convicted by the Maungdaw Court, Arakan Project director Chris Lewa said on Friday, adding that she was still finding out what the court had decided.

Burmese newspaper The Voice Daily quoted a local official as saying that the Maungdaw Court handed down three life sentences. “Three Bengalis who killed one monk were sentenced to life in prison. Ten people were sentenced to 10 years,” Arakan State Attorney General Hla Thein told the newspaper.

Arakan and central government officials refer to the stateless Muslim minority as “Bengalis” to suggest that they are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh.

The men were convicted for murder and a range of other charges related to the burning down of Arakanese Buddhists’ homes, a primary school and a health clinic in Kandayar and Mawyawaddy villages in Maungdaw Township in June 2012, according to The Voice Daily.

Arakan State spokesperson Win Myaing confirmed with The Irrawaddy that dozens of Muslim men had been sentenced last week, but gave few details. “We heard that the court sentenced them. But we do not have detailed information to talk about this case. This authority [to discuss cases] belongs to the court,” he said.

The Rohingya men spent more than one year in pre-trial detention in Buthidaung Jail before being sentenced. They are part a group of “hundreds of Rohingyas, including children and four humanitarian workers, [who] were arrested and detained for alleged involvement in violence in June 2012,” the Arakan Project said, adding that many had been tortured in custody.

On June 8, Rohingyas attacked Buddhist villages in Maungdaw Township, killing a number of villagers and torching homes. Waves of inter-communal violence subsequently spread through the state and by late October, 140,000 people, mostly Muslims, were displaced and 192 had been killed.

Human rights groups have accused government security forces of supporting the Buddhist communities against the Rohingya, and of carrying out arbitrary arrest and systematic and widespread rights abuses against the Muslim minority.

Lewa said last week’s sentences constituted a violation of the defendants’ basic rights. “None of these people had any fair judicial process and the sentences were extremely harsh. Some of these people were certainly not even involved in the [inter-communal] violence,” she said.

By comparison, Lewa said, “very few” Buddhist perpetrators of the violence were sentenced “and they received lighter sentences.”

Myo Thant, a Rohingya politician with the Maungdaw-based Democracy and Human Rights Party, said many Rohingya families in the Muslim-majority area in northern Arakan State had relatives in jail, but they are unable to communicate with them, let alone support them during their trial.

He said that his younger brother, called Kyaw Naing, had been sentenced by the Maungdaw Court on July 12 to 10 years imprisonment for alleged involvement in last year’s violence.

The family had been unable to hire a lawyer to aid his brother’s defense, he said, “Because they did not even inform our family when they sentenced him. My family still does not dare to speak out about this despite their understanding that the court sentencing of their son was not fair.”

Shwe Maung, a Muslim lawmaker from Buthidaung Township who represents the ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party, said arrests in Maungdaw Township were often arbitrary and court proceedings biased against Muslim villagers.

“There is no rule of law there because the victims cannot defend themselves in court,” he said. “The court only listens to one-side information and the victims have to suffer for this, as they cannot have a lawyer and their families cannot go to defend their people in court.”

RB News 

August 30, 2013 

Maungdaw, Arakan – Arbitrary arrests and abuses are continuing in Maungdaw Township of Arakan State by the local police according to locals. 

Yesterday at about 3 pm, 15 police led by Hla Myint and Maung Shay from Maungdaw police station raided a house in quarter number five. A Rohingya youth was brutally beaten at his house by the police and was then arrested. 

“We don’t know why he was arrested. He was brutally beaten by them at his house and was arrested. They beat him in front of his neighbors while they take him to the car. The Rohingya youth’s name is Mohammed Yasin, son of Mohammed Isaque, aged 22.” a local Rohingya told RB News. 

Furthermore, they raided another house at 5 pm. They searched all the things inside the house but didn’t arrest anyone from that house. 

Two police, Hla Myint and Maung Shay have been reportedly abusing the Rohingyas who are passing by their outpost after 7 pm. Their outpost is situated next to the government middle school in quarter number two. 

“The most two notorious police are Hla Myint and Maung Shay in Maungdaw. They are beating any Rohingya passing by their outpost after 7 pm. They are just beating the passers without any reason. Five Rohingya youths were brutally beaten by them and another 7 police on last Monday at about 8 pm, who are passing by their outpost. The youths were on their way back homes but they were beaten by those notorious police without any reason.” the Rohingya continued. 

After dissolution of Nasaka in Arakan State the local police are carrying on with the same job the Nasaka did. The plight of Rohingyas remains the same as before. Although the union government is well informed about the abuses committed by local authorities there has not been any action taken against torturing local Rohingyas by the local authorities.

By Bangkok Post

August 30, 2013

The government has agreed to hold about 2,000 Rohingya migrants in detention centres nationwide for another six months, Deputy Prime Minister Pracha Promnok said on Thursday. 

The migrants were originally due to remain in the centres for six months while the government assessed options for their relocation, but that initial deadline passed last month. The new detention deadline would now end in January.

The deputy PM, who oversees national security, was responding to an opposition request for details on the government's policy to deal with the Rohingya migrants.

The request was made during a parliamentary session yesterday by Democrat MP for Bangkok Samart Maluleem.

Mr Samart said more than 2,000 Rohingya were being detained at immigration detention centres. He said he was concerned by overcrowding in the centres.

Pol Gen Pracha said the Rohingya, most of whom travelled by boat to escape religious unrest in Myanmar's Rakhine state, had breached the 1979 Immigration Act.

The law allows immigration officers to detain them only at Immigration Bureau detention centres. However, some Rohingya women and children with health problems are being held at shelters operated by the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security. Pol Gen Pracha said the government was also concerned about the living conditions of the Rohingya.

He said the Foreign Ministry would use the detention deadline extension to hold talks with international organisations to explain the government's policy in caring for the migrants.

The ministry has already held talks with Myanmar and asked it to help repatriate the Rohingya. Myanmar, however, has expressed doubts about the origin of the migrants, saying it needed verification of their identities.

National Human Rights Commissioner Niran Pithakwatchara, who oversees the Rohingya problem, said he would ask the government next week to help provide the Rohingya with proper shelters and to raise the problem at an Asean forum.

"It is not just a Thai problem, it is one for all Asean countries," Dr Niran said.

Meanwhile, four Rohingya who earlier escaped from Singkhorn detention centre in Prachuap Khiri Khan's Muang district were apprehended in Bang Saphan district yesterday. Police said they were attempting to reach Malaysia.

By The Daily Star

August 30, 2013

Dipu Moni tells new UNHCR representative Stina E Ljungdel; receives credentials from new UNFPA representative Argentina Piccin

Dhaka yesterday reaffirmed its position that Bangladesh was already hosting a huge population of Rohingya refugees from Myanmar and could not take in more.

Foreign Minister Dipu Moni said this when newly appointed country representative of the UN refugee agency UNHCR, Stina E Ljungdel, presented her credentials to the former at the foreign ministry, said a press release.

Referring to her recent visit to the Rohingya camps at Kutupalong and Noyapara in Cox’s Bazar, the minister expressed concern about the socio-economic, environmental impacts that the country is facing because of these Muslim nationals of Myanmar’s Rakhine State.

Around 30,000 Rohingyas are sheltered in those camps.

Experts say the number of the Myanmar refugees living in Bangladesh will be no less than a few lakh.

In her talks to Stina, the foreign minister underlined that a durable solution for refugees and undocumented nationals from Myanmar lay in their voluntary repatriation to Myanmar and establishment of their rights in their motherland.

The government has introduced free education up to class VI, vocational skill training, computer training, and primary and secondary healthcare to prepare the Rohingyas for a productive life when they voluntarily return to their homeland, Dipu Moni said.

Stina thanked Bangladesh’s government for hosting a large number of these international refugees for the last 30 years with a highly satisfactory protection regime compared to many places in the world.

She highlighted that Bangladesh’s good work and best practices in hosting the refugees from Myanmar quite often go unappreciated when Bangladesh should receive commendations for maintaining peaceful refugee camps and voluntary repatriation of most of them before 2005.

Earlier in the day, Argentina Piccin, the newly appointed country representative of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), presented her credentials to the foreign minister.

During the meeting, Piccin praised Bangladesh for its extraordinary achievements in realising the health-related Millennium Development Goal 4 (MDG) on infant and child mortality and MDG 5 on maternal health.

She assured that Bangladesh would be a priority country for UNFPA’s new strategic plan for 2014-2017, through which the country would be allocated substantive budget to advance its health-related development agenda beyond the post-2015 development era.

(Photo: AP)

By Holly Atkinson

Bangkok Post

August 30, 2013

I am still haunted by the testimony I heard from a survivor of the March massacre of dozens of Muslims in the central Myanmar town of Meiktila. He told me how he saw his best friend, a boy of 13, doused with gasoline and burned alive by two Buddhist men who were part of an attacking mob, while police and community leaders watched from an embankment. 

This disturbing event is unfortunately one of far too many in Myanmar. The Myanmar government has failed to protect its Muslim minority population, including Rohingya, against an unprecedented wave of violence that has spread across the country since mid-2012. The lack of response on the part of the government has provided for a culture of impunity for perpetrators, increasing the likelihood of more human rights abuses.

Over the past year, my colleagues at Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) and I have heard from dozens of informants and eyewitnesses about horrific acts of violence in 18 locations across Myanmar. These attacks have resulted in injury, displacement, economic hardship and death. Over the past two years, entire villages have been burnt to the ground, children have been killed, schools and mosques have been destroyed, and upwards of 250,000 people have been displaced.

Not only have the Myanmar police and military committed acts of omission by standing idly by and failing to protect the victims, but they have also facilitated some of these crimes. During episodes of violence against Muslim communities, PHR documented instances of police directly attacking individuals, as well as firing their weapons into crowds. Such behaviour not only violates international police guidelines, but contributes to the climate of impunity, and has, without a doubt, enabled or encouraged the attacks. Simply put, there is little risk for people who attack Muslims.

Most of the violent episodes reveal a pattern: they begin with an "inciting incident", which then leads to the targeting of an entire community, not just the alleged perpetrator. The government, instead of protecting the vulnerable, has allowed such incidents to spread. For far too long, it has sponsored feelings of Buddhist nationalism and allowed the targeting of the most marginalised groups, instead of taking steps to protect them. Democracy leaders in the region have also been quiet on the issue of anti-Muslim violence.

The structural violence is still in place and could lead to additional attacks at any time. We are pleased that the UN special rapporteur on the human rights situation on Myanmar visited the country this month, and hope he will press for some much-needed reforms.

What does the Myanmar government need to do? It must create an atmosphere of tolerance, where the rights of all people, regardless of ethnicity or religion, are respected and protected.

The government must also thoroughly investigate these crimes and hold perpetrators accountable, including police and military personnel. It is also imperative for the government to urgently tackle the humanitarian needs of the Rohingya in Rakhine state. This means not only addressing issues of food, water, medical care, security and shelter, but also providing for a dignified future for the 100,000 Rohingya essentially imprisoned in the camps.

While there have been significant, and much welcomed, political improvements in Myanmar, these reforms should not be used to minimise the gravity of the deadly and systematic anti-Muslim violence that has gripped the nation.

It is time for the culture of impunity to end, and everyone's human rights to be respected.

The Myanmar government, civil society and the international community must stand together in order to end the violence, promote reconciliation, and secure the human rights of all.

Dr Holly Atkinson is volunteer medical adviser and past board president of Physicians for Human Rights (PHR).

By Richard S. Ehrlich

Huffington Post

August 30, 2013

(RNS) Buddhists are killing Muslims in Myanmar with impunity because the government failed to stop the attacks, New York-based Physicians for Human Rights reported amid fresh assaults that left more Muslims homeless.

During the past year, scattered clashes across Buddhist-majority Myanmar, also known as Burma, have left more than 240 people dead, most of them Muslims.

A mob of about 1,000 Buddhists burned more than 35 Muslim homes and a dozen shops on August 24 in Kanbalu in Myanmar’s central Sagaing Division after hearing rumors that a Muslim man sexually assaulted a young Buddhist woman, police told The Associated Press.

Police arrested a male Muslim suspect but refused the mob’s demand to hand him over, sparking its arson attack against his innocent Muslim neighbors, police said. The fires also destroyed a mosque.

“The Burmese government must make a concerted effort to allow an effective investigation into these abuses and hold perpetrators accountable,” the physicians group wrote in its report.

More ominously, the report concluded: “While such massacres are not sweeping the country at present, the brazen nature of these crimes and the widespread culture of impunity in which these massacres occur form deeply troubling preconditions that make such crimes very likely to continue.

“If these conditions go unaddressed, Burma may very well face countrywide violence on a catastrophic level, including potential crimes against humanity and/or genocide.”

The U.N. special rapporteur for human rights, Tomas Quintana, investigated Buddhist attacks against Muslims in another central town — Meiktila, in Mandalay Division — during a 10-day trip that ended on August 21.

Residents accused Quintana of bias against Buddhists involved in the Meiktila clashes, which occurred in March, and the government denied his claims.

Quintana’s experience gave him “an insight into the fear residents felt when being chased down by violent mobs.” Police allegedly stood by as angry mobs beat, stabbed and burned to death 43 people, he said.

Rakhine state’s Muslims describe themselves as citizens who are persecuted because they are minority ethnic Rohingya competing with Buddhists in the impoverished region.

Buddhist militants and the government insist the Rohingya are not citizens but instead are Muslim ethnic Bengalis who have illegally migrated from neighboring Bangladesh during past decades.

When Buddhists rampage and torch Muslims’ homes and businesses, driving them off their land, there are “multiple instances where police and/or the army attacked Rohingyas and other Muslims, or watched as they were attacked, instead of protecting them,” the physicians’ report said.

By Danish Refugee Council

Thomson Reuters Foundation

August 29, 2013

Tailor-made business grants enable IDPs in Myanmar’s Rakhine State to get back on their feet and resume livelihood activities. DRC’s recently launched livelihood programme will provide support to both Buddhist and Muslim communities affected by last year’s sectarian violence.

This week DRC delivered the first round of small-business grants to Buddhist IDPs displaced by the June and October 2012 sectarian violence in Myanmar’s Rakhine State. The violence led to the displacement of more than 140,000 people, both Muslims and Buddhists, across Rakhine State. The evident need for life-saving assistance continues. But as the IDP situation evolves from an emergency context to a more protracted displacement scenario, livelihood support will be a key element in providing economic opportunities for IDPs and other conflict-affected communities and decrease dependency on humanitarian aid.

"Many IDPs who used to be shopkeepers, craftsmen, trishaw drivers and petty traders lost all their assets in the violence. But they have not lost their skills – and with modest financial support they are able to re-start their businesses, provide for their families and spearhead early recovery," says DRC Project Coordinator Andreas Geertsen.

The small-business grants are awarded on a competitive basis providing equal opportunity to all IDPs, but supporting only the businesses with the best chance of success. Supported businesses include trishaw taxis, tea shops, small restaurants, and grocery stores – as well as production of snacks, rice noodles, and wooden furniture. A transparent selection process ensures that all applications are assessed according to objective criteria, including motivation, experience, cost-efficiency and quality of the business plan.

Buddhist IDP Ma Tin Chay is one of the grant recipients. The 43 year old single mother of 2 children used to prepare and sell fried vegetables for a living.

"But during the violence in June last year, my house was burned down and I lost everything" she says. "With this grant I can buy the items to re-start my business and support my family again," Ma Tin Chay adds.

In the coming weeks the business grant programme, funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), will be extended to the Muslim IDP camps, and DRC will continue to provide balanced assistance to both of the conflict-affected communities. The livelihood programme complements DRC’s other programmatic areas in Rakhine State, including shelter, WASH, non-food items, protection, camp coordination and camp management (CCCM). DRC has worked in Myanmar since 2009, providing assistance to people affected by conflict and natural disasters.