RB News 

September 4, 2013 

Maungdaw, Arakan – An elderly Rohingya man was brutally beaten by a Rakhine man and two Rakhine women today at 10 am near Shwe Zar bridge in Maungdaw Township of Arakan State. 

A 65-years-old Rohingya man was on his way to Maungdaw downtown from Zin Pyaing Nyar village of Southern Maungdaw for medical treatment with his 60-years-old wife and 20-years-old daughter. Although the journey should be performed by car the family was walking as they can’t afford cost. On their way the elderly man was brutally beaten with sticks by a Rakhine man and two Rakhine women after passing the Shwe Zar bridge, and was knocked unconscious for more than 45 minutes at the location. 

His wife and daughter shouted for help from anyone nearby the bridge, but unfortunately no one from the Rakhine neighborhood was willing to help the man after the attack. A Rakhine was reported as arriving when the old man regained consciousness and said that the attackers were fools and asked the man not to be angry or vengeful for the attack. 

“Indeed they were not fools. Most of the Rohingyas avoid walking through that area as there are only Rakhines living there. But as this family can’t afford the money they were coming to downtown by foot and were beaten inhumanely.” a Rohingya resident from Maungdaw told RB News. 

“The old man is sick, so it is very painful for him. They arrived to the clinic in Maungdaw around 12 pm and left after he received treatment. As an old man, he also avoided reporting to police and left for his village.” the Rohingya man from Maungdaw added.

By Outlook India

September 4, 2013

India today handed over a cheque of USD one million to Myanmar for development projects in Rakhine state, which was hit by communal clashes last year.

Indian Ambassador to Myanmar Gautam Mukhopadhaya symbolically handed over a cheque of USD 1 million for construction of 10 schools in four townships in Rakhine State as India's contribution towards the reconciliation process between the two communities there, an official release said here.

After the clashes primarily between ethnic Rakhine Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims in northern Rakhine State, a commitment was made by External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid, during his trip to Myanmar in December 2012, to earmark USD 1 million.

It was India's contribution towards promotion of religious tolerance, communal harmony, peace and reconciliation between the two communities, the release said.

Following this pledge, the Ministry of Border Affairs, Myanmar, submitted a proposal for construction of ten primary, post primary, sub-high and affiliated middle schools in four townships viz. Sittwe, Maungdaw, Kyauktaw and Minbya of Rakhine state.

"India hopes this modest effort will advance government and international efforts to restore communal harmony and promote education among both communities in Rakhine State. The money will be released in accordance with benchmarks on the progress of work on the construction of schools and the objectives of the contribution," it said.

Given the neighbourly historical, cultural and religious links between the two countries, India attaches great importance to its ties with Myanmar, it said.

"Through this contribution and the development of the Sittwe port and river transport on the Kaladan river, India hopes to contribute to the all-round development of Rakhine state and strengthen the historical ties between state of Myanmar and the eastern states of India," it added.

By The Blade Editorial

September 4, 2013

Govt. is watching Asian nation’s overwhelming Buddhist majority persecute its small Muslim minority

The rebirth of respectability that Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, has enjoyed as it pursues democratization is at risk of evaporating. The government is standing by while members of the Asian nation’s overwhelming Buddhist majority persecute its small Muslim minority.

In such a poor country, being Buddhist provides the religion’s adherents with employment advantages in government and the military. An extreme Buddhist and nationalist movement called 969 has been attacking Myanmar Muslims, sometimes called Rohingya. The campaign includes burning villages, driving thousands into exile in Bangladesh and Thailand, and killing close to 100 people over the past year.

Whether or not this campaign can be called ethnic cleansing, it falls into the category of religious warfare. The 969 movement bases its name on Buddhist religious precepts and is led by a senior monk named Bhikkhu Wirathu.

Myanmar’s president, Thein Sein, who was received by President Obama at the White House this year, has praised the monk. He has let 969 thugs run loose instead of using security forces to bring the movement under control and end the persecution of Muslims.

As Myanmar took steps to shed its outlaw image, the United States and the European Union relaxed some economic sanctions they had imposed. President Obama now needs to contact Mr. Thein directly to tell him that Myanmar’s improved world standing is in jeopardy, and that he needs to impose law and order on the 969 movement before it destroys the country’s progress.

By Maung Zarni 

Asia Times

September 3, 2013

Over the past year, Myanmar has been plagued by neo-Nazi "Buddhist" racism and organized mob violence targeting the country's minority Muslims of diverse ethnic and historical backgrounds. 

At the very heart of Myanmar's Islamophobic campaign lies the state and its successive senior leaderships, which continue to operate within a concrete set of political economic relations wherein they pursue their typically sinister Machiavellian politics in defense of corporate, clique and personal agendas. 

Many country experts, watchers and journalists, as well as think tanks and international students of Buddhism, have offered various explanations for the violence. For some, the blame lies in new freedoms that the quasi-civilian government of President Thein Sein has bestowed on the country. Others have focused on the sectarian dimensions of the conflict. 

Some have identified uneven development and attendant communal disparities in wealth and income as the root cause. Of late, Buddhist textual analysts and culturalists have added another layer to the discussion of Myanmar's Islamophobia: canonical explanations looking at historical "Buddhist warfare" and textual justifications (or lack thereof) for the mass violence. 

To be sure, all of the above have enriched international understanding of the sudden and deeply troubling eruptions of mass violence against Myanmar's Muslims. However, they all fail to see the elephant in the room, namely the military-controlled state which has long institutionalized racism as its guiding philosophy. 

In contrast to global punditry on "Buddhist" terror, as Time magazine's cover story on the subject put it without problematizing the term "Buddhist" or putting it in quotation marks, even the relatively more astute Burmese on the street, better informed and more analytical than average, have guessed right the main culprit. 

That is, the various cliques of generals and ex-generals, and their instruments of power - the state and its security and propaganda apparatuses - have been directly and indirectly involved first in the "othering" of Muslim communities and then in the actual mob attacks against them, including the slaughter, destruction, looting and burning of Muslim communities and their sacred mosques. 

In one well-documented incident, security forces in the central town of Meikhtila and "Buddhist" mobs negotiated amicably the amount of time that would be allowed to the mobs - 30 minutes, they agreed - to complete their destruction of the town's 200-year-old mosque. A YouTube video file shows a group of state security officials chit-chatting over cigarettes with some of the anti-Muslim participants in the mosque's destruction while the senseless act was in progress. 

According to Burmese sources from Meikhtila and Mandalay whom this author interviewed during a recent visit to Kuala Lumpur, authorities in both Mandalay, the regional administrative capital with jurisdiction over Meikhtila, and the national capital of Naypyidaw chose not to rescue a group of 20-plus madrassa students who were eventually slaughtered in broad daylight. Both regional and national authorities were informed by panic-stricken Muslim leaders hours before about the whereabouts of the students, who at the time were hiding from a weapon-wielding "Buddhist" mob. 

Empirically, the state and its military leaderships are at the very least guilty of negligence. But local and global pundits commenting on the unfolding racist "Buddhist" campaign against Myanmar's Muslims have often mischaracterized the violence and racism against Muslims as simply "sectarian". The portrayal reflects a tendency to overemphasize society's role and to seek essentially cultural explanations for "Buddhist" mass violence and racism. 

To be sure, there are deep-seated prejudices among Myanmar's different communities. Yes, ethno-economic nationalism has long been a pillar of Burmese nationalism throughout both historical and post-independence eras. Yes, the primitive but popular understanding of "race" and "ethnicity" as immutable and blood-based - as opposed to fluid, imagined and manufactured - has played a role in the recent revival of nationalist fervor. Yes, Buddhism and violence have always been an empirical paradox and historical oxymoron. 

But it is really the state and its leaderships that have modulated, mobilized and facilitated multiethnic and multi-faith communities' prejudices against Myanmar's peoples of Chinese, Indian and mixed ethnic origins, as well as religious minorities. 

Over the past 50 years, successive military leaders - from General Ne Win to the recently retired despot Senior General Than Shwe - have not only played the race and faith cards as a matter of political and military strategy, but they have also enshrined "Buddhist" racism as a key foundational pillar of what is known to many as the Golden Land of Buddhists, reference to the country's many gilded temples and gold-colored, harvest-time paddy fields. 

Triggered by Thein Sein's official defense of the neo-Nazi "monk" U Wirathu, a recent special report by Reuters traced the origin of the 969 "Buddhist" racist campaign against Myanmar Muslims to the State Law and Order Restoration Council regime, the once ruling military junta presided over by the late Senior General Saw Maung. 

Specifically, the Reuters' report singled out the now retired director of religious affairs in the Ministry of Home and Religious Affairs as the individual who incubated and disseminated Islamophobic ideas in society at large with the blessing of Saw Maung. Meanwhile, new Burmese language analyses note the now officially retired Than Shwe, Saw Maung's successor, published an anti-Muslim and anti-Rohingya tract entitled "Myanmar's Broken Western Gate", a reference to the Rakhine State which borders on predominantly Muslim Bangladesh. 

Racism as law

Yet it was the late dictator Ne Win, the founder of Myanmar's modern military rule, and his Western-educated advisers, including the British and Dutch-trained lawyer and president Dr Maung Maung and the Australian-trained Rakhine historian Dr Aye Kyaw, who developed the current strain of "Buddhist" ethno-nationalism. It was informed largely by their own personal xenophobia towards Muslims, Christians, and Burmese of Indian sub-continent and mainland China origins, groups they referred to as "mixed-blood persons" or "impure breeds''. 

In his landmark October 8, 1982, speech to a group of his senior deputies and advisers tasked with drafting what later became known as the 1982 Citizenship Act, Ne Win spelled out his official justifications for enshrining racism in law and pursuing it as a matter of "national security''. His speech sheds light on the deeply racist nature of the Act, which in the wake of the pogroms against Rohingya Muslims last year has become a focus of international concern and controversy. 

As Ne Win made clear in 1982, "tayoke" (Chinese) and "kalars" (the local racist term for dark-skinned people of Indian origin or Muslims) cannot be entrusted with any important position in Myanmar's officialdom, including the bureaucracy and armed forces. As Ne Win unequivocally put it, all immigrants with foreign roots, referred to by him as "guests" and "mixed bloods", were in Myanmar due to the legacy of British colonial rule. 

In the case of those who came after the first Anglo-Burmese war of 1824, in which the Burmese were defeated and had to concede to the British the coastal regions of Tenessarim and Arakhine provinces, themselves Burmese colonies snatched through victorious military conquests over rival Siamese and Arakanese kingdoms, having settled in the country for over a century was not sufficient ground to be granted full-citizenship rights. 

As for those who came later but were already resident in the country before World War II, decades of permanent residency was more cause for suspicion than grounds for receiving full-citizenship, according to Ne Win's speech. "Their penchant for making money by all means and knowing this how could we trust them in our organizations that decide the destiny of our country?" the former dictator rhetorically asked. 

"We will therefore not give them full citizenship and full rights. Nevertheless, we will extend them rights to a certain extent. We will give them the right to earn according to their work and live a decent life. No more." In an Orwellian gloss, Ne Win exhorted his deputies to "have sympathy on those who had been here for such a long time and give them peace of mind''. 

From that fateful day in 1982, successive military government leaderships have as a matter of policy purged their power base - the 400,000-strong armed forces - of officers of Chinese and Indian ancestry, notwithstanding a few exceptions. 

Since Ne Win rose to power in a 1962 coup, the military-controlled state has pursued wave after wave of racist national initiatives for religious and cultural affairs, educational matters, and professional advancement, among other areas. 

Yet one contradiction in Ne Win's policies favoring "pure bloods" and "true children of the land" is that Ne Win himself could be characterized as "non-pure" ethnic Bama, as were many of his racist deputies and ideological heirs. Many were and still are of tayoke origins. For instance, the current union minister and top government "peace negotiator" Aung Min is of ethnic Chinese descent. 

The unfolding process of Myanmar's nightmarish slide towards "ethnic and religious purity" stands in sharp contrast with the multiculturalist perspective of martyred independence hero Aung San, the father of current opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, and his multiethnic and inter-faith comrades. 

On the eve of the country's independence from Britain in 1947, Aung San prophetically warned against mixing Buddhism, race/ethnicity and politics in the then soon-to-be independent Burma, as the country was then known. In opposing the idea of making Buddhism the official state religion of the country, Aung San articulated a secularist, multiculturalist vision for the country's future:

"We have had different faiths in our land since the founding days of the last Dynasty, Konbaung (1754-1885). We have spirit-worshippers. We have Catholics. We have proselytized Christians among the frontier ethnic peoples. Despite these religious and ethnic differences, they are all our people. It is not just the Buddhist Bama but these multi-faith and multi-ethnic communities contributed to the struggle against the British colonial rule ... If we pursue this bigoted path [of making Buddhism the state religion] that will surely lead to the disintegration of our tiny country." 

Yet in Myanmar's current system of governance, only avowed racists are rewarded, promoted and appointed to top positions. Several years ago, the former consul general at the Myanmar Consulate General in Hong Kong, ex-Major Ye Myint Aung, officially informed in writing members of foreign diplomatic missions that the Rohingya, whom he described as "ogres", were never a part Myanmar's fair-skinned Mongoloid peoples. 

The country's leaders later promoted him to the post of full ambassador and dispatched him to Geneva, where he now defends Myanmar's abysmal human-rights record at the UN Human Rights Council. 

In light of Ne Win's inaugural racist speech on the 1982 Citizenship Act, U Ohn Gyaw, Myanmar's then minister of foreign affairs, reacted in 1994 to the international community's concern about an exodus of 230,000 Rohingya that his government was forcibly driving out of the country: "It is a rubbish thing that people have left Myanmar. These people who are in the refugee camps in Bangladesh are perhaps from Dhaka, but not one single person has left Burma." 

Official lies

That has remained Myanmar's official line, or lie, that has been repeated internationally by the country's leaders, including as recently as July 2013. Consistent with the racist 1982 Citizenship Act, president and Nobel Peace Prize short-list candidate ex-General Thein Sein reiterated Myanmar's official racist view of ethnic groups as "aliens" and "impure bloods" during a speech at Chatham House in the United Kingdom. 

After delivering the beautifully written speech, designed to further push the liberal buttons on behalf of Naypyidaw's Western supporters in Whitehall and the White House, Thein Sein proceeded to commit yet another official act of Rohingya ethnocide, an act of erasure that the religious-ethnic community ever existed in spite of the mountains of official evidence to the contrary. 

The present neo-Nazi campaign conducted with virtual state impunity has ignited the fires of violent racism towards the country's Muslim minorities - of all "ethnic bloods", to borrow the racist generals' lingo. Official racism and its supporting 1982 Citizenship Act have become the main sources of "Buddhist" terror - as opposed to the provider of "peace of mind" for those with "impure bloods" and foreign origins. 

Societal racism and religious prejudice, of course, is not exclusive to the Burmese or Buddhists. However, what has become unique in Myanmar's ugly and violent racist attacks on Muslim minorities and the official ethnic cleansing of Rohingya is the extremely dangerous interface between religious-ethnic prejudices and the state's institutionalized racist policies. 

In advanced liberal democracies such as the Netherlands, Germany, and United Kingdom, among others, there are also neo-Nazi parties that disseminate their racist rhetoric through freedoms of speech, press and association. But their racism is no longer popularly acceptable or a popular political platform on which to win state power or keep a ruling party in office. In fact, in liberal democracies, neo-Nazi and extremist racist parties and figures are a tiny minority often confronted by the anti-racist majority. 

This is not the case in Myanmar. The majority ethnic Bama and Buddhists, including the entire pro-human rights opposition leadership of the National League for Democracy, specifically Aung San Suu Kyi, has been largely silent on the rising "Buddhist" racism. The silence of the majority has been devastating for the Muslims in general and the Rohingya in particular. 

The racist military leadership and its state organs have found anti-Islam racism a convenient diversion from its key strategic pursuits, including regime survival, political and economic primacy, refusal to address legitimate ethnic grievances, and fear of popular reprisal under a genuinely representative government. Myanmar's Muslims including the Rohingya are sitting ducks in this power play, with no credible international protectors, near or far. 

The Organization of the Islamic Conference, or OIC, is no China. That is, unlike Beijing, it has very little leverage with Myanmar's racist ruling generals and ex-generals. Iran is too preoccupied with its own problems at home and in the region. India, which intervened in and effectively ended the genocide of the Bangladeshi Hindu in the civil war of 1971 by West Pakistani military and militants, has a radically different policy priority in Myanmar, namely natural resource grabs for Indian commercial interests and curbing Chinese influence. 

It is, in the final instance, not the down-trodden society which has long been accustomed to economic and political uncertainties which is the primary culprit behind the rise of neo-Nazi "Buddhist" mass violence. Rather it is Naypyidaw's play on widespread uncertainties and insecurities and the racist state which generals and ex-general are presiding over that best explains the regime's documented involvement in whipping up ultra-nationalism among the country's "Buddhist" masses. 

For a regime that has opted to play the politics of liberalizing the economy while attempting to keep the political and institutional lid on its long-oppressed society, scapegoating Muslims and the Rohingya for the country's ills and the popular frustrations is far more strategically appealing and convenient than focusing on genuine democratization, ethnic reconciliation or the economic hardship of the bulk of the country's 50 to 60 million Buddhist and non-Buddhist citizens. No former military regime with mountains of skeletons in its closet and scattered on the streets will genuinely embrace democratic transition. 

The romanticizing of Buddhists as naturally and philosophically peace-loving people has complicated the international community's understanding of neo-Nazi "Buddhist" violence and Rohingya ethnic cleansing. Historically and empirically, Buddhists all over the world are as capable of pursuing home-grown ''final solutions'' to annihilate human communities that they have demonized and de-humanized as ''viruses'', ''animals'' or ''sub-humans''. 

No amount of debate or discussion about canonical Buddhism or historical examination of ''Buddhist'' violence or warfare will shed meaningful light on the recent mass violence committed against Myanmar's Muslims. Whatever the texts or claims of what the Buddha taught or said are of secondary importance. Rather, the political economy, history and social foundations of Myanmar's racist and violent contemporary society, influenced by Buddhist manifestations of temples, pagodas, monasteries, monks and rituals, is more relevant. 

Likewise, no analysis of the recent violence can be credible or accurate unless it examines through the prism of the dialectical interface between Myanmar's underlying racist society and the officially bigoted state that has mid-wived the birth of neo-Nazism with a "Buddhist" face. Thus, any attempt to address this two-fold problem must factor in both the military leadership and its unashamedly racist military-state and an unconscious society that talks the talk of Buddhism but fails to walk the philosophical walk. 

Maung Zarni (www.maungzarni.com) is Associate Fellow with the University of Malaya Centre of Democracy and Elections and concurrently a Visiting Fellow at the Civil Society and Human Security Research Unit, London School of Economics. He tweets @drzarni.

RB News 

September 3, 2013 

Buthidaung, Arakan – The local Rohingyas in Buthidaung Township in Arakan State said the township administrator ordered the local police to extort money from them. 

Buthidaung Township administrator U Than Shwe spread a rumor that there were illegal immigrants in the township. The police proceeded to search every house to check guests. The police ask “Is he attending training in another country?” if they find out someone is not at home. They arrest the one remaining at home and bring them to the police station. The locals said that police beat the arrestees and eventually demanded 200,000 to 300,000 kyats extortion in order to be freed. Reportedly, cases such as these have been happening everyday now. The poor arrestees who can’t effort the money got charged on false and baseless accusations. 

Moreover, the police are extorting from 100,000 to 200,000 kyats from the people who come to Buthidaung market without possession of travel permit from their respective village. A Rohingya said “Previously the Nasaka was robbing from us. Now the police are doing the same. They became licensed robbers.” 

Locals said that the township administrator U Than Shwe is executive committee member of Rakhine Nationalities Development Party (RNDP) and is getting monthly salary from RNDP. Furthermore, he will compete in the election for Member of Parliament post. 

Police officer Myat Htwe from Buthidaung police station is the most notorious police in the region. The people there had peace when he was attending the training somewhere outside of the town. Rohingyas are suffering again now, as he returned from the training. A Rohingya said that a Rohingya woman was raped and killed by that police officer Myat Htwe in 2007 but there were no action from the authorities against him. 

The below people were extorted the money by the police recently. 

(1) Nurul Ahmed, son of Shaker (From Ywama – Paid extortion amount 150,000 kyats) 

(2) Harun Rashid (From Ywama - Paid extortion amount 150,000 kyats) 

(3) Ghani (From Ywama - Paid extortion amount 50,000 kyats) 

(4) Ayub Khan, son of Siddique (From Ywama – Paid extortion amount 1,000,000 kyats)

(5) Lautful Hakim (From Quarter 7 – Paid extortion amount 100,000 kyats) 

(6) Hashim (From Quarter 7 – Paid extortion amount 60,000 kyats) 

(7) Shaker (From Quarter 7 – Paid extortion amount 80,000 kyats) 

(Thiha contributed in reporting)

RB News 

September 2, 2013 

Maungdaw, Arakan – For the past 20 years, Rohingya couples in Northern Arakan State who wished to marry, would have to seek permission from the Nasaka. That officially changed today. From here on, marriage permission for couples in Maungdaw, will be issued by the village administrators. This, after the Township administrator handed over the issuance authorization to them. 

Since the 1990s, the notorious Nasaka imposed many restrictions on the Rohingya people. They restricted marriage. They imposed a limit of two children per family. They issued travel restrictions amongst many other things. The Nasaka have recently been disbanded by the quasi-civilian government. Today, at the regular monthly meeting, the Township Administrator of Maungdaw told the village administrators that the marriage permit for Rohingya couples would have to be issued by the village administrator in each respective village. 

The Township administrator said the permit must be issued accordance these 4 points: 

(1) The bride and groom must be at least 18 years old. 

(2) They must be listed in the family registration papers. 

(3) They must not be listed in the Bangladesh "run-away" list. 

(4) They will ensure that they live in their village permanently. 

Previously when the marriage application was submitted to the Nasaka, it took over a year to process the application. Couples needed to bribe huge amounts to obtain the authorization. Most of the time, the Nasaka brought the bride to their office "to question her." Reportedly, many brides were raped. Many couples fled the country to escape this persecution. 

The villagers are worried that now the Rakhine village administrators will demand bribes for issuing the permit. However, they said it will be easier than before. At least it will be better than the inhumane disbanded Nasaka.

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”.