Latest Highlight

RB Channel

(Photo: The Guardian)

By Fuadi Pitsuwan
May 27, 2015

MALAYSIA should use its prerogative as the Chair of Asean this year to call for an emergency summit-level meeting involving heads of state of Southeast Asian countries to come up with a workable strategy to address the region’s grave humanitarian crisis involving the Rohingyas from the Rakhine State of Myanmar and the Bangladeshi migrants.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak stands at a critical juncture to demonstrate to the world that Asean has the capacity to deal with its most pressing problem, or he risks the regional organisation becoming irrelevant in the eyes of the international community. At the end of this year he is to launch the much anticipated Asean Community.

Over the past couple of weeks, the plight of Rohingyas and the treatment of the asylum seekers from Myanmar and migrants from Bangladesh have captured the world’s attention at an unprecedented level, namely after the discovery of mass graves of the Rohingya asylum seekers and Bangladeshi migrants on Thailand’s border with Malaysia and the initial rejection of their dangerously flimsy boats by Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia. 

As human trafficking crew onboard jumped ship upon hearing the news of the Thai government’s crackdown on this illicit network, thousands more asylum seekers and economic migrants are still stranded in the Andaman Sea.

Debates within Asean countries on how to deal with the Rohingyas are as tense as the internal political divides in each country. None of the Asean countries see the problem as theirs to tackle. This is truly the “Tragedy of the Commons.” Myanmar authorities prefer to point to the root cause of the problem as far back to the colonial era when the country was under the British Empire, neglecting any responsibility now. In other Asean countries, human traffickers colluded with corrupt officials who facilitate these movements of the Rohingyas.

With an expected silence from Myanmar leadership, including Aung San Suu Kyi, the rest of the Asean and international community must jointly act to provide aid, in the immediate and, protection in the long term, for the Rohingyas. Considered by the UN as “one of the most persecuted” minorities in the world, the Rohingyas are asking for the world to stand for the most basic of human rights — the right to exist. 

Recent reports that Malaysia and Indonesia are willing to provide temporary shelters to those stranded in the Andaman Sea at the present and Thailand’s proposal to organise a meeting on Friday (May 29) with representatives from 15 countries are good initial steps to address the influx since the outbreak of the most recent round of crisis, but these will not be enough. The importance of this issue to the future of the Asean Community requires the summit-level attention with representatives from other stakeholders attending, including Bangladesh, another crucial player in this tragedy.

Unlike the South China Sea issue, where an external actor is engaged in a game of divide and conquer, the fate of the Rohingyas is about a people’s basic right to live. It is a problem that affects the entire Asean community and should be addressed as such. Asean has come a long way from its steadfast adherence to the principle of non-interference. Internal issues that affect other countries in the region have been brought up at various Asean meetings in the recent past. But Asean must push further to demonstrate to the international community that it can solve its most pressing regional problem in order for its future to hold any promise.

Solutions to the problem will not come easy and will require the leaders of Asean to act in concert and share responsibility. Malaysian, Indonesian and Thai leaders must admit their own negligence in regards to successfully combatting human trafficking, while Myanmar must admit that their treatment of the Rohingyas is a problem that is affecting the rest of Asean. They must stop playing what the Human Rights Watch has dubbed as a deadly game of “human ping pong.” Together, the leaders of Asean must work with other relevant states, particularly Bangladesh to locate potential countries of final settlement and to seek and secure financial and technical aid from international organisations. The leaders of Asean need to agree and present a common strategy on this issue.

It will take hard decisions on the part of the leaders. This may mean punishing and firing the officials in their countries who colluded with human trafficking gangs to send a strong message that human trafficking will not be tolerated. Impunity for state officials involved is absolutely unacceptable. Some relaxation of immigration rules to avoid life loss may be required. (Malaysia and Indonesia have announced that they would provide temporary shelters). It must involve holding national discussions on immigration laws and the rights of migrant workers.

Or further, it may mean coercing Myanmar (and Bangladesh) through diplomatic pressure and economic sanctions, collectively, particularly if the Thein Sein government refuses to play their part. And there are signs that the Myanmar leadership might cave in. Perhaps, it would take an Asean mandate to invoke Responsibility To Protect (R2P) to stop the persecution of the Rohingyas. 

The leaders have the capacity to come up with a creative collaboration like they did in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis in 2008 where Asean, the UN and the Myanmar government collaborated on the three-year long relief effort.

Whatever solutions may be required in the short and long term, the issue must be raised at the summit-level meeting and with utmost urgency to signify Asean’s willingness to take responsibility for what many international observers have already termed a genocide.

Malaysia, as Chair of Asean this year, has a choice to prove that the 48-year-old organisation — that is due to become an integrated market and set to become one of the largest economies in the world — commits to protecting humanity’s most basic right, the right to exist. If not, it risks making Asean a hobbled regional entity indifferent to systematic genocide in its own midst. 

The writer is a doctoral candidate in political science at the University of Oxford

Rohingya migrants sit in a boat off the coast of Indonesia before being rescued on May 20. (Photo: AFP)

By Mungo MacCallum
May 27, 2015

The Prime Minister says we mustn't, under any circumstances, encourage people smugglers. International law, the reaction of our neighbours, sheer humanity are all to be subordinated to this imperative, writes Mungo MacCallum.

Nope, nope, nope - the most negative and illiterate of all Tony Abbott's three word slogans.

His rejection of even the merest consideration of the complex, harrowing and indeed tragic plight of he Rohingya asylum seekers is more than an adolescent dismissal; it is frankly contemptuous, not only of his Australian constituency but of the wider world. It is, he says, a regional problem: presumably he regards the region as any part of earth which does not include Australia.

Many of the Europeans, already grappling with their own urgent and local issues with the boat people crisis, have expressed sympathy and a desire to help. Thailand has convened a regional conference, to which Australia will send a diplomat but not, at this stage, a minister - another calculated snub.

The nearby Muslim nations of Malaysia and Indonesia, having initially abandoned their neighbours, are now preparing to provide at least temporary rescue and shelter. Even the United States has offered to accept some of the far-flung victims. The source country Myanmar, which absurdly pretends that people who have been there for three, four or more generations should still be regarded as Bangladeshi immigrants unworthy of citizenship or rights, has finally taken some responsibility and undertaken a rescue mission of its own.

But Abbott's only response is flat denial. We mustn't, under any circumstances, encourage people smugglers. International law and convention, the reaction of our neighbours, sheer humanity are all to be subordinated to this imperative. Indonesia rather acidly pointed out that if you are going to sign international agreements you should honour them, but Abbott is unmoved.

His only concession to compassion, if it is indeed governed by that, has been a grant of $6 million in humanitarian aid. Given that it follows a $29.5 million cut in the budget of aid to Myanmar, it can hardly be called generous; moreover, it is not clear when or even how it can be delivered, given that the government of Myanmar steadfastly refuses to allow any amelioration of the poverty and degradation of the unhappy inhabitants.

Abbott has, of course, been applauded by his hard core supporters, notably by an approving editorial in The Australian; but then, The Australian would probably cheer him on if he announced plans to pull out the fingernails of asylum seekers with red hot pincers if it would enhance what he calls border security. For more reasonable people, nope, nope, nope is simply not a sufficient answer.

And the real worry is that it is a very Abbott answer: mindless aggression in the face of a difficult problem. No defence, just attack. This is the old Abbott, the man who brought you the 2013 election and the 2014 budget. He has, it appears, reverted to type; the near death experience of last February has been forgotten in the temporary euphoria of a couple of mildly favourable polls following the well targeted handouts from a mere week ago. He has, in short, gone back to his old self and resumed the habits of a lifetime - a lifetime that has always been risky and frequently reckless.

Given Abbott's knee-jerk and unqualified policy towards the Rohingya's desperation, it looks perilously like another captain's pick - certainly the continued emphasis on the need to deter people smugglers is established government policy. But the peculiar circumstances of the current crisis in the Andaman Sea surely should require a more considered and consultative process.

A more immediate worry has been the fiasco over the idea (now canned) of holding an inquiry over the conduct of the iron ore producers in the wake of the suspicion that at least some of them had pushed up their output in a move to drive down prices and put some of their competitors - Andrew "Twiggy" Forrest, but more importantly the Chinese - out of business, an idea which has caused confusion and consternation from everyone involved, and many others who have not been.

This was unashamedly a captain's call. Abbott's colleagues were nonplussed and the big iron ore producers - BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto - frankly appalled. This was a clear interference in the sacred free market, they spluttered. And some made the more salient point that it was fraught with unintended consequences: what if the inquiry found that there indeed been some kind of interference or even collusion? Would the government take action? Would it impose fines or even gaol sentences on the directors of the guilty companies? Would it consider the ultimate sanction - regulation?

The mere idea was unthinkable, and that being the case, why proceed with an inquiry in the first place? In practice, the mere resistance of the miners was sufficient to kill it off; we all knew what they could do to governments who annoyed them. And Abbott, of course, should have been perfectly aware of the futility of his thought bubbles before shooting off his mouth. But, once again, it apparently seemed like a good idea at the time - or at least a popular one, which these days for him is the same thing.

And the same can be said of his unilateral rejection of any changes to the tax lurks enjoyed by the super wealthy superannuants: not now, not ever. This is in the same category of his raft of 2013 pre-election commitments: a promise which is destined to be broken as it turns out to be simply too expensive, too damaging to fulfil. It may be a handy club to bash the Labor Party, which has already endorsed some modest reforms to its policy, and it will certainly please some of the greedier of his own backers and bankers, but is just not sustainable, either economically nor politically.

Perhaps, of course, it won't have to; the election will take care of it, and of him. In which case many will remember his years with the brief phrase: nope, nope, nope.

Mungo MacCallum is a political journalist and commentator.

(Photo: AFP)

By Jamil Maidan Flores
May 27, 2015

To some people, Filipinos especially, this is a case of déjà vu. It’s three and half decades ago all over again. At that time the boat people were Cambodians and Vietnamese. (Landlocked Lao refugees walked to Thailand.) This time they are Bangladeshi and Rohingya.

In response, the US State Department announces that the US is willing to accept Rohingya refugees as part of a way of addressing the crisis of stranded boat people in Southeast Asia. The US says it’s ready to take a leading role in any multilateral initiative to find a home for the suffering refugees.

Next comes word from the Philippine government that, as party to the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees, says it’s committed and obligated to extend humanitarian assistance to the asylum seekers.

The government spokesman refers to a precedent when the Philippines accepted Indochinese refugees who came by boat and other means to the Philippines after the end of the Vietnam War. Some 400,000 Indochinese refugees went through the Philippine Refugee Processing Center (PRPC) before they were eventually brought to permanent refuge in third countries.

One government spokesperson is quoted as saying in effect, “Bring all the refugees to us. We have the knowledge, the experience and facilities to take care of them.”

These mouthpieces have only a vague knowledge or memory of the humanitarian service rendered by the now-defunct PPRPC, but beyond that they don’t know what they’re talking about.

Apart from the Philippines offering to accept boat people, two countries to which thousands of asylum seekers have already found their way, Malaysia and Indonesia, have announced they will allow some 7,000 boat people stranded at sea to land on their shores. But this will happen under a strict condition: within one year these asylum seekers must either be permanently resettled in third countries or repatriated.

In effect, Indonesia and Malaysia are willing to serve as countries of first asylum for a limited period – one year. After the asylum seekers are certified to be genuine refugees and not jobseekers, they go to a second country of asylum to prepare them for their future new home.

Probably the Philippines is willing to be both a first asylum and second asylum country for however long it takes, provided it gets the same international support that it enjoyed while hosting the Indochinese (Vietnamese, Cambodians and Lao people) refugees between 1980 and 1994.

While there are similarities between the situation of the Rohingya boat people today and their Vietnamese counterparts in the 1980s, the differences are huge.

The US fought a war in Vietnam and lost, and therefore had immense responsibilities for those who fought and worked on its side, and who were left behind when it pulled out. That’s why it was willing to take in all its collaborators and sympathisers.

This is not the case with the Rohingya. They don’t have an effective third country advocate. There’s no strong and organised international effort to help them resettle. I’m not sure Myanmar will agree to an Orderly Departure Program like Vietnam did.

Vietnam received back its repatriated boat people as Vietnamese citizens. How can Myanmar do likewise if it doesn’t recognise the Rohingya as citizens of Myanmar?

Most of the Bangladeshi asylum seekers are probably economic refugees. That doesn’t mean they don’t deserve help. By all means an international effort to resettle the Bangladeshi and Rohingya boat people should be organized and funded. That will save many lives.

But in the case of the Rohingya, the only long-term solution is for them to be granted citizenship, and to enjoy the rights and opportunities available to all citizens of Myanmar.

That won’t happen until the thin lady sings – and sings the truth about the Rohingya and the injustice inflicted on them.

A Rohingya Muslim woman in Burma. New laws will enable the government to control family planning among minority communities. Photograph: Ye Aung Thu/AFP/Getty Images

By Sara Perria
May 27, 2015

Nationalist monks are behind new powers enabling authorities to ‘organise’ family planning among groups with high birth rates such as Rohingyas

Despite fierce campaigning by women rights groups and an international outcry, Burma has introduced a birth control law which opponents say is aimed at ethnic minorities. 

The controversial bill is one of four pieces of legislation driven by nationalist Buddhist monks who fear that the Muslim population is growing too quickly.

Under the law signed by president Thein Sein, governments of the 14 states and regions can request a presidential order so that local authorities can “organise” women to have a gap of 36 months between births.

The World Health Organisation recommends a similar policy to reduce child mortality. However, the law explicitly states that factors taken into consideration, as well as mortality rates and food shortage, can be “a high number of migrants in the area, a high population growth rate and a high birth rate”, that are seen negatively impacting regional development.

This has reinforced concerns of international observers that the law is aimed primarily at controlling birth rates of the Muslim community – which has been subject to birth-control policies in the past – and non-Buddhists more widely.

Burma’s attorney general Tun Shin, who is reported to be a London-educated Christian, will oversee the laws and will be supported by Khin Yi, a retired brigadier-general who was previously chief of police.

The Health Care for Population Control act does not identify any specific group within Burma’s web of ethnic communities and religions. But as the plight of thousands of Rohingya Muslim fleeing persecution unfolds, the US and human rights organisations have stepped up their criticism.

US deputy secretary of state Antony Blinken said at a press conference in Yangon on Saturday that he was “deeply concerned” about the four laws, that “could exacerbate ethnic and religious divisions.” He said the population law could be enforced in such a way as to undermine the reproductive rights of minorities. Blinken lobbied president Thein Sein about the law on a visit last week while it had already been “discreetly” signed.

“We are particularly concerned that the bill could provide a legal basis for discrimination through coercive, uneven application of birth control policies, and differing standards of care for different communities across the country,” the US State Department said.

Comments by extremist monk Ashin Wirathu, close to the Committee for the Protection of Nationality and Religion movement that inspired the laws, has fueled concerns. “If the bill is enacted, it could stop the Bengalis that call themselves Rohingya, who are trying to seize control,” he told The Irrawaddy, a local magazine.

“[The bill] was drafted for healthcare. The World Health Organization also advised a three-year interval between each child. Will it only be legal when women join the discussion? Did women have any participation in sharia law?” He added.

The three other laws would impose restrictions on religious conversion and inter-religious marriage and prohibit extra-marital affairs.

The final version of the bill was approved by the joint houses of parliament on 14 May following minor amendments submitted by the president. Members of Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy opposed the bill.

“Activists with a racist, anti-Muslim agenda pressed this population law so there is every reason to expect it to be implemented in a discriminatory way,” Human Rights Watch Asia director Brad Adams said, warning that the package of laws was “likely to escalate repression and sectarian violence”.

Rights groups complain that they have not seen the final text of the law but earlier drafts instruct authorities in designated “health zones” to “organise” married couples to practise birth spacing. The bill does not contain explicit guarantees that contraceptive use should be voluntary with consent of the user. It does not specify punishments either, nor does it mention abortion.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein, also expressed concern over the four bills as they moved through parliament in February.

“During an election year, it will be tempting for some politicians to fan the flames of prejudice for electoral gain,” he said, placing the legislation in the context of an unpopular quasi-civilian government facing parliamentary elections in November and unwilling to antagonise powerful lobby groups of Burma’s Bamar Buddhist majority.

One of the constant narratives of a hardline minority of Buddhist monks is that the ancient religion of Burma must be defended against an advancing tide of radical Islam, with the Muslim population growing more swiftly within the country and entering as illegal immigrants from without.

A report commissioned by the government after violent clashes between Buddhists and Muslims concluded in 2013 that “the extremely rapid growth rate of the Bengali population also contributed to fear and insecurity ... The growth was not only due to high birth rates, but also to a steady increase of illegal immigration from neighbouring Bangladesh”.

Khon Ja, a member of the Kachin Women’s Peace Network which is part of a wider group of women’s organisations trying to stop the law, said it particularly affected minority groups.

“The target is the Rohingya,” she said, referring to the Muslim minority. “But the law could affect anyone,” she added.

She is worried about the vagueness of the law and what punishments might be entailed. There are concerns it would be applied to pregnant women in prison, and whether they might come under pressure to have abortions.

Members of the Akhaya women’s group, which promotes education about sexual health, said they were sexually harassed on social media and even accused of “treason” for speaking out against the law.

Activists still hope that even after becoming law the government will fail to follow up with the specific directives that would activate the population controls. If Aung San Suu Kyi’s party wins the elections in November and is allowed to form a government they could then influence that process and clarify the law. However, a new government will not take office until next March 2016.

(Photo: AFP/Getty Images)

May 27, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR: Federal Govern­ment facilities and premises will be used to house the Rohingya mi­­grants in Penang, said Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

The Home Minister, who on Sunday challenged Penang to be the “champion of human rights it claims to be” by giving shelter to stranded Rohingya and Bangla­deshis, said yesterday they had come to this arrangement.

“It would be better if leaders who have been human rights champions translate what they have been calling for on the political stage and in the Dewan Rakyat into action instead of passing the burden to other parties,” he said.

Speaking at a press conference at the Parliament lobby yesterday, Dr Ahmad Zahid said his statement on Sunday was a humanitarian and not political one.

His statement came after Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng had asked for the migrants to be sheltered in Federal-owned land, saying the state lacked space and had not been consulted by the National Security Council.

Dr Ahmad Zahid said several lo­cations besides Penang had been identified as temporary sites for the stranded migrants and insisted that the DAP-led state take them in.

“We want to see the sincerity of the Penang government, led by DAP that are partners with PKR and PAS, who claim to champion human rights and are always asking the Government to adopt humanitarian policies.

“The Home Ministry and UNHCR have to take the necessary steps to find suitable, legal steps to house the Rohingyas in a third country. We know Turkey is willing to take them in,” he said.

In Alor Setar, NSC secretary Datuk Thajudeen Abdul Wahab said immigration depots would be used as a temporary solution to house the Rohingya migrants.

“The depot in Belantik is almost full but there are others in Penang.

“But we have yet to decide whe­ther to use or expand them or even build emergency centres,” he said on the sidelines of the Asean Re­gional Forum Disaster Relief Exer­­cise yesterday.

“Any temporary shelter will have to be in the northern part of the country to minimise the need to transport the migrants,” he said.

Thajudeen said it would be easier to move those already at the detention centre in Kedah to other facilities in northern states.

Malaysia and Indonesia recently agreed to continue humanitarian aid for about 7,000 migrants who are adrift in South-East Asian waters.



By Emmanuel Santa Maria Chin
May 27, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR — Aluminium cans as bowling pins, children playing in the rain, women peeling vegetables on the sidewalk, and little table-top businesses selling snacks and drinks. 

These are some of the daily scenes of the local Rohingya community that have sought refuge in the area surrounding the Selayang Wholesale Market. 

After a long day, they return to a shoplot unit consisting of six to seven rooms separated by thin plywood. Each room houses a family of at least four members and they all share two communal bathrooms. 

The children are not allowed to attend regular school as they lack proper documentation, and when they are old enough, they resort to doing odd-jobs to assist with the costs of their families. 

“This is all we can ever afford. So we have learned to share and live together,” said Nur Sahara Nur Mia, a 65-year-old Rohingya refugee. 

Nur Sahara and herdaughter, Golbahor Abu Tahir, 38, came to Malaysia to escape the persecution in Myanmar in 1988. 

They live together with Golbahor’s daughter, Hirana Yasin, 19, in a makeshift room together with six other children. 

“Living in Malaysia has been such a blessing as we no longer face hostility and our families do not have to live in fear anymore,” Nur Sahara said.

“So now I just look after my grand and great-grand children and try to get them to attend classes to learn to read and write.”

Hirana, who has learned to read and write with help from her friends in religious classes, said she hoped to finish school someday. In the meantime, she prepares and cooks sambal for a local business to make ends meet.

About 500 other migrants also live and work in the surrounding area, earning an average wage of RM30 a day.

Asked for their reaction towards the recently discovered mass graves of possible Myanmar migrants, they were all sympathetic but were not surprised by the discovery. 

“We are all willing to help, but there is only so much we can do. We will pray for their safety and wellbeing,” Galbahor said.



By P Prem Kumar
Anadolu Agency
May 27, 2015

Northern Penang and Kedah cite lack of space, crime rates in objecting to federal gov’t plan to host boat people for a year.

KUALA LUMPUR -- Two Malaysian states have rejected the federal government's request to provide shelter for migrants, hindering plans to accommodate Muslim Rohingya arriving in the country after being stranded in the Andaman Sea.

A source from the prime minister’s office who wished to remain unnamed as he was not authorized to speak with media said the northern states of Penang and Kedah both objected Sunday to hosting the migrants for one year.

Since early May, thousands of Rohingya – who have fled Myanmar in droves since 2012 - and Bangladeshis have been stranded with little access to food or water after Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand declared they would not allow migrant boats to land on their shores.

Last week, Indonesia and Malaysia agreed to offer temporary shelter to Rohingya migrants - but only if the international community agrees to then resettle them after one year. Both countries, however, said Bangladeshis from stranded boats would be returned to their country.

Kedah’s chief minister Mukhriz Mahathir sent a protest note to Prime Minister Najib Razak on Sunday, claiming the state has no space to accommodate the refugees.

"The protest note is expected to list the Malaysian police and Immigration Department's capability constraints to deal with the influx of illegal immigrants in the thousands," the source told Anadolu Agency.

Mahathir's Penang counterpart Lim Guan Eng also rejected the placement plan, citing high crime rates among Rohingya and other people from Myanmar in the island state. Police have linked recent unsolved murders in the area to ongoing sectarian strife in Myanmar.

Kedah has been faced with a flood of Rohingya and Bangladeshis since two weeks ago, when 1,158 migrants were arrested after landing at Langkawi island.

They have been moved in stages to the Belantik Immigration Detention Centre in the state’s Sik town.

Lim Guan Eng, meanwhile, said state land could not be used to house more people since Penang has been hosting 50,000 Rohingya over the last six years.

He also said Penang had to deal with crimes such as murder believed to have been committed by the Myanmar against the Rohingya and vice-versa.

"Penang has no space,” the chief minister added, refuting a recent statement by Police Chief Khalid Abu Bakar that the state should temporarily shelter the 7,000 Rohingya refugees who had fled Myanmar and were still adrift at sea.

“I have no clue where the Inspector-General found space in Penang, but no, we are not going to accept them," he insisted.

According to Bakar, Penang was a suitable location for temporary resettlement since its location in the north would render it easier to relocate the refugees elsewhere after a year.

The recent influx of migrants to the country’s shores comes after Thailand launched a May 1 crackdown following the discovery of more than 30 bodies in human trafficking camps along its southern border with Malaysia.

On Sunday, Malaysian media reported that mass graves had also been found in 17 camps on the Malaysian side, despite the government’s earlier denial of their existence.

Minister Zahid Hamidi expressed his shock to reporters, saying the camps in the border town of Padang Besar, northern Perlis state, may have been in the area for five years.

“A grave maybe has three, four bodies. But we don’t know how many there are. We are probably going to find more bodies,” he said.

Last year, both Malaysia and Thailand were downgraded to Tier 3 status in the U.S. State Department's Trafficking in Persons Report for not complying with the "minimum standards" to deal with human trafficking.

Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi speaks to journalists during a press conference at a parliament building Thursday, April 9, 2015 in Naypyitaw, Myanmar. AP Photo/Khin Maung Win

By Robin McDowell 
May 26, 2015

YANGON, Myanmar – An international gathering about the plight of Myanmar’s persecuted Rohingya Muslims boasts a star-studded cast, with three Nobel Peace laureates among those calling on the world to wake up to the unfolding tragedy.

But fellow winner and pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi will not be among them. She wasn’t invited.

During her 15 years under house arrest, Suu Kyi won admiration across the globe for her fiery speeches and scathing criticism of the military regime that ruled Myanmar, or Burma, at the time.

After her release in 2010, when ruling generals handed over power to a nominally civilian government, she won a seat in parliament.

The 69-year-old says she is a politician and that she never sought to be a human rights champion. Critics note she is carefully choosing her battles, in part because she has presidential ambitions.

In a predominantly Buddhist country of 50 million people, where there is much animosity for the 1.3 million Rohingya Muslims, Suu Kyi (pronounced “Suu chee”) has opted to remain silent, even as the world watched in horror while more than 3,500 hungry, dehydrated Rohingya and Bangladeshi migrants washed ashore in Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand this month.

The international gathering Tuesday at the Nobel Institute in Oslo, Norway, will feature video statements from Nobel Peace Prize winners Desmond Tutu, Jose Ramos-Horta and Mairead Maguire. Others, like philanthropist George Soros, who escaped Nazi-occupied Hungary, and former prime minister of Norway Kjell Magne Bondevik, will also speak.

They will focus on concrete ways to end the decades-long persecution of Rohingya – and the need to speak out.

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor,” Tutu, who won the 1984 Nobel Peace Prize for his opposition to South Africa’s brutal apartheid regime, says in his video statement. “If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.”

Myanmar’s transition from dictatorship to democracy has been a bumpy one.

Despite early euphoria about much-touted political reforms, the accompanying freedoms of expression had a dark side, lifting the lid off deep-seated resentment toward the dark-skinned Rohingya minority.

With hard-line Buddhist monks fanning the anger, machete-wielding mobs started taking to the streets in 2012, killing up to 280 people and forcing another 140,000 into crowded, dusty internment camps. They have little access to school and adequate health care, nor can they move around freely, paying hefty bribes if they want to pass police barricades, even for emergencies.

The government insists they are illegal migrants from neighbouring Bangladesh and has denied them citizenship, adding to the desperation that sparked an exodus of an estimated 100,000 Rohingya in the last three years. Authorities refuse to identify them as “Rohingya” and use “Bengalis” instead. Suu Kyi also avoids the term and generally refers to them as “Muslims.”

The website for the three-day Oslo conference says the popular daughter of Myanmar’s late independence hero, Aung San, shares the “anti-Rohingya” sentiment of much of the population, something she had denied, but with little vigour. Aase Sand, of the Norwegian Burma Committee, one of the event’s organizers, said there was never a plan to invite her or to ask for a videotaped statement.

Suu Kyi has in the last two years actively campaigned to change the constitution that bars her from the presidency because she was married to a foreigner. With elections slated for the end of the year, the Oxford-educated opposition leader realizes she herself won’t be contesting the upcoming vote. Still, her National League for Democracy Party will be, and it’s expected to do perform strongly.

Suu Kyi has been playing a delicate balancing act. She has been careful not to rile the military, which still wields tremendous political power, with a quarter of the seats in parliament and veto power over changes to constitutional amendments. She also realizes she – and her party – risk public backlash if she speaks out in defence of Rohingya.

Suu Kyi, a member of the Burman Buddhist elite, bristles when foreign media or rights activists ask her why she has so far failed to denounce religious bigotry in Myanmar, whether against Rohingya or Christians from the Chin and Kachin minorities, who have also long been subjected to threats, intimidation, and discrimination.

She did not respond to questions from The Associated Press, but reiterated her position in an interview with Canada’s The Globe and Mail last month that the problems in Rakhine state – where almost all the country’s Rohingya live – are based on fear and perceptions of being a minority.

The Rohingya feel threatened by the Buddhists in Rakhine, while the Buddhists fear the Muslim world’s wider backing of the Rohingya.

“Those who criticize me for not condemning one side or the other – they’ve never said exactly what they hope will come out of such condemnation,” she told the paper. “You’re just taking the moral high ground for the sake of sounding good – it sounds a little irresponsible.”



May 26, 2015
Oslo, Norway

Ladies and Gentlemen,

First and foremost, I would like to express my gratitude to the organizer of the conference for giving me an opportunity to represent OIC and talk about the Rohingya issue. After undertaking the responsibility as the OIC Special Envoy for Myanmar then I realized how complex and daunting the task is. InshaAllah, with Allah SWT guidance and continuous support from all parties, I am confident there is light at the end of the tunnel.

The Rohingya issue especially the crisis at the sea in South East Asia is so urgent that more must be said, more thought must be given and most importantly, short, mid and long term actions are taken and formulated. 

Those I have interacted or engaged with agree that the situation in Myanmar is serious and needs urgent attention. Let me at the outset say that the ongoing problem is not only about religion or ethnicity but human rights and identity crisis that the government had refused to address or admit.

I like all of us to remember, today we can sleep sheltered and safe tonight without the threat of a mob breaking down our doors or burning our homes. However, the Rohingya who also share this world with us are denied these fundamental rights, and suffer on a scale that no human must be allowed to suffer, especially children, women and elderly people. They are no different from us except for the circumstances of their birth. In these difficult moments it is our shared responsibility to reach our open hands to them.

This intolerance is not irreparable as prior to this the different communities had lived in peace and harmony. It is with patience, tolerance, kindness, that we can break this cycle. In the intelligence as well as diplomatic world we must be able to read the minds of the people we are negotiating with and devise our strategies accordingly. 

The argument that the Rohingyas are not indigenes but illegal immigrants from Bangladesh is unacceptable because who in his or her rightful mind would like to illegally migrate from a third world country to another third world place where they will face persecution as well. 

As we know the Rohingyas are indigenes ethnic community of Myanmar who has been there for generations and were excluded from the list in 1982, thus becoming stateless all of a sudden.

The list of ethnic groups of 1982 is not by an ‘Act of Parliament’ but rather an ‘Executive Order’ by the President of the Union at that time. If the Union Government is sincere in resolving the issue now, they can do it by another ‘Executive Order’. But it will require a strong political will which we feel is lacking at this time. They are adopting the ‘Wait and See’ policy for the time being. Or at least until the next general elections. 

This whole drama of excluding the Rohingya and other Muslim communities form the list is to push the Muslims out of the political scene of Myanmar and make Myanmar purely a Buddhist state, but how an entire population can be exterminated altogether, which according to some estimates is almost one third of the total population of Myanmar. There is hardly any ‘Purist’ state on the entire planet consisting of only one race or religion. 

Besides that, the solution they are considering to segregate the Rohingyas, put them in Camps and get them to agree to register themselves as Bengalis is in in fact not a solution. The problem, though may not be seen as such by Myanmar Government is that it may be the best way for the government to indirectly encourage them to migrate somewhere else. 

Against the background of political and social changes in Myanmar since 2011 and sectarian conflicts in Rakhine in 2012 and other parts of Myanmar in 2013, religious movements which the state tightly controlled in previous decades have become prominent and more vocal against the minorities. Among them, the most prominent one is the Buddhist nationalist movement led by “Ma-Ba-Tha”. Both Ma-Ba-Tha and 969, which is a constituent association of the former, have widely popularized the claim that Buddhism is under threat from Islam and Islamization.

These trends have caused and contributed to human rights crises, gender-based discrimination, statelessness, segregation, refugee flows and other threats to security, posing challenges to Myanmar’s transition to democracy and upcoming elections. Moreover, these trends threaten regional stability and could exacerbate violence and polarisation along religious and ethnic fault-lines. Such pattern could seriously undermine the establishment, sustainability and credibility of the ASEAN Community, including economic integration and regional economic development. This unwanted home environment has forced many Rohingyas flee Myanmar to find a basic living environment elsewhere.

Since then, more than one million Rohingya who remain in Myanmar have seen their situation deteriorate to the point that over the last two years, as many as 100,000 Rohingya have fled Rakhine state on unseaworthy boats with hopes of reaching Malaysia or Thailand but often put them in the hands of vicious human traffickers including death. These people are not migrants seeking job or economic opportunity but leaving their motherland due to suppression, fearing abuses and killings. 

Largely unwanted at home and by Bangladesh and faced with increasingly precarious conditions in Rakhine, the Rohingya boat people have changed their destination from Bangladesh to other neighboring countries in the 2000s and have often fallen prey to regional human trafficking networks. However, unfortunately, the Bangladeshi joined the Rohingyas and created immigration threat to those countries. Likewise, the “new boat people” are not really welcomed in Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia.

Moreover, whenever those neighboring countries urged the Myanmar Government to take responsible of these boat people, Myanmar officials expediently respond by claiming that those so-called Rohingya who land on the shores of Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia are not from Myanmar or that their Myanmar citizenship must be scrutinized first before Myanmar take responsibility for them. This has effectively created a dilemma for Myanmar’s neighbors and ASEAN. Increasingly precarious conditions of Rohingya in Rakhine and complete rejection of them as fellow Myanmar citizens by the majority of the people in Myanmar will likely mean an ongoing influx in the number of Rohingya boatpeople seeking asylum in neighboring countries over the coming years. 

The Government of Myanmar should be held responsible and to undertake concrete and positive steps to put an end to all acts of violence, human rights violations and discriminatory policies against the Rohingya, such actions will only tarnish Myanmar’s image and acceptability in the region and internationally. 

The plight of the Rohingya warrants serious attention and action as they continue to suffer under the current circumstances which could pose a security problem for the region.

I also think with cautious optimism, patience and perseverance there is a fair chance of resolving the issue.

To conclude, given the complexities of the ongoing problem in Myanmar, it is only natural that we weigh all options carefully and in a pragmatic manner to achieve the desired outcomes. We need to strategize the best approach to correct negative perceptions through regular contacts and engagements. In this respect, a closer collaboration with state and non-state actors is definitely necessary. We need both “soft” and “constructive” approach to connect all parties for an amicable solution.

I strongly believe that it is a delicate balance that we are searching for: we must continue to respect the principle of sovereignty and at the same time fulfill our responsibility to protect and give the help and support to those thousands who have made pleas to the international community and who are losing hope as they wait on our decisions. 

Thank you.



May 26, 2015
Oslo, Norway

I would like to send a message of solidarity and support for the Rohingya people of Myanmar. Rohingyas are indigenous people of Burma, living in their ancestral homes. All they ask is to restore their citizenship that was taken away by the military government. It is morally wrong to treat them as non-citizens on their own lands.

The plight of the Rohingyas in Myanmar has worsened since 2012. Right now they feel they have 2 equally risky options- to stay and die in Myanmar or leave by boat. According to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. Approximately 53,000 Rohingyas including women and children left Myanmar and Bangladesh by boats bound for Thailand and Malaysia in 2014.

The international community needs to support the delivery of basic humanitarian aid to the Rohingyas. Right now, that humanitarian aid is not reaching them. The Rohingya are the only ethnic group in Burma whose struggle is peaceful, without any arms, and it’s time the international community recognized and supported their nonviolence struggle for their basic human rights.

We want the European Union, ASEAN, and the International Community to recognize the suffering of the Rohingya people, and the fact that they're experiencing crimes against humanity at the hands of their own government. We want the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya people to end. This is an important basis for any real peace talks and engagement with the Myanmar government.

I am joining with other leaders in making this call, including my dear friend and colleague Archbishop Desmond Tutu. We as the International Community have a responsibility to stand for the rights of the Rohingya people and to speak out to save their lives. We hope that action will be taken so that they can find their place in their country, in their society and that Burma will move forward to find real peace for all its people. 

Thank you very much. Maired Maguire. Thank you.



May 26, 2015
Oslo, Norway

Hello peace lovers, colleagues, and friends. I'm sorry to have to address you electronically. One of the pitfalls of old age is that travel becomes somewhat tricky. Thank you for the opportunity to say a few words of encouragement and solidarity as you settle down to apply your minds to solving one of the most enduring human rights crises on earth. 

The credit that is due to the government of Myanmar for reforms undertaken over the past couple of years does not blind us to the ongoing disavowal and repression of its ethnic minorities, the Rohingya population in particular. A country that is not at peace with itself, that fails to acknowledge and protect the dignity and worth of all its people, is not a free country. Freedom is indivisible. All must be invited. All, a part. 

The Rohingya people were not consulted when the British drew the Burmese border on the map. With those strokes of a pen, they became a borderland people; people whose ancestral land traverses political boundaries. Burma's post colonial government elected in 1948 officially recognized the Rohingya as an indigenous community, as did its first military government that ruled from 1962 to 1974. 

Manipulation by the military of ethnic minorities in the west of the country dates back to the late 1950s. At first, the military sought to co-opt the Muslim Rohingya to quell the Buddhist Rakhine after Rakhine separatists had been crushed. The military turned only Rohingya. In 1978, the Far Eastern Economic review described the Rohingya as the victims of Burmese apartheid. 

A few years later, a citizenship law left the Rohingya off the list of indigenous people, describing them as Muslim immigrants from neighboring Bangladesh. In the context of rising anti-Muslim sentiment in Myanmar, many Buddhists, particularly in Rakhine State regard the Rohingya as illegal immigrants. More than 100,000 Rohingya are trapped in internment camps. They may not leave “for their own protection.” They hold only temporary identity cards. In February, they lost all voting rights. 

The government of Myanmar has sought to absolve itself of responsibility for the conflict between the Rakhine and the Rohingya, projecting it as sectarian or communal violence. I would be more inclined to heed the warnings of eminent scholars and researchers including Amartya Sen, the Nobel laureate in economics, who say this is a deliberately false narrative to camouflage the slow genocide being committed against the Rohingya people. There's evidence they say that anti-Rohingya sentiment has been carefully cultivated by the government itself. 

Human beings may look and behave differently to one another, but ultimately none of us can claim any kind of supremacy. We are all the same. There are no natural differences between Buddhists and Muslims. It is possible to transplant a Christian heart into a Hindu chest and for a citizen of Israel to donate a kidney to a Palestinian. We're born to love-- without prejudice, without distrust. Members of one family, the human family-- made for each other and for goodness. All of us! 

We are taught to discriminate, to dislike, and to hate. As lovers of peace and believers in the right of all members of the family to dignity and security, we have particular responsibilities to the Rohingya. 

2015 is a big year for Myanmar with both a referendum on its constitution and a general election on its calendar. Even as we seek to encourage the country to build on the reforms it has started, we have a responsibility to ensure that the plight of the Rohingya is not lost. We have a responsibility to hold to account those of our governments and corporations that seek to profit from new relationships with Myanmar to ensure their relationships are established on sound ethical basis. 

We have a responsibility to persuade our international and regional aid and grant making institutions, including the European Union, to adopt a common position making funding the development of Myanmar conditional on the restoration of citizenship, nationality, and basic human rights to the Rohingya. 

Over to you. Thank you and God bless you all.



May 26, 2015
Oslo Norway

I feel much saddened by the events taking place in Myanmar today. I was very instrumental in getting Myanmar to become a member of the ASEAN, the regional grouping of Southeast Asian countries. Myanmar, geographically, is definitely a part of Southeast Asia, and its exclusion would be contrary to the idea of South East Asian unity. But now, we find that Myanmar is not treating its own people the way we treat Myanmar.

We did not want Myanmar to be excluded but Myanmar today is taking action to expel the Rohingyas, the Muslim part of this population who have been there for the past 800 years or so. They have always been regarded as citizens of Burma before, and since Myanmar is a continuation of Burma it should accept these people as its citizens. 

Now Malaysia also has a lot of people from other countries who have settled here in the last 200 years or so. We decided that they have a right to be citizens of Malaysia, to be given political rights, and to be allowed to train and carry out business in Malaysia. We regard them as our citizens.

Unlike Malaysia, we find that Myanmar does not even want to recognize the Rohingyas who have been there all this while as its citizens. This is grossly unjust on the part of the government of Myanmar. I had expected that those who benefited from our struggle to get Myanmar to release (for example Aung San Suu Kyi) that they would realize that oppression by the government is something that is intolerable; and yet few people from Myanmar have risen to the occasion to defend the rights of the Rohingyas who after all are citizens of Myanmar.

I hope that the international community would focus its attention on the problem of the Rohingyas who are Muslims, but they are citizens of this Buddhist dominated country. They should live and be allowed to live in Myanmar without oppression. There should be tolerance of peoples of other religions.

Again I would like to mention that in Malaysia, although the majority of the people are Muslims, we have treated people with other faiths with consideration and we have given them rights to become citizens of Malaysia and to benefit from the laws of this country. I hope that the international community would focus on the problem of the Rohingyas who today are being forced to flee in ships to other countries and many of them drown in the sea because they were not able to get good ships to carry them to other countries.

This is a human tragedy and I do hope that the international community would help these unfortunate people of Myanmar who have been discriminated against in a way that is not becoming of a country that aspires to become a democratic country. I thank you.



May 26, 2015
Oslo, Norway

Hello. This is Jose Ramos-Horta speaking from New York. I regret not being able to be in Oslo at this time of this very timely, extremely important gathering as Myanmar moves towards elections and hopefully consolidation of democracy, freedoms, rule of law.

I'm very familiar with Myanmar, although I could not claim to be an expert. For those of you who might not know much about my past activities or background, I first went to Burma then when hardly anyone paid much attention to Myanmar in July of 1994. I went there crossing the border from Chiang Mai and I went to Manipur. There with some colleagues I conducted an international human rights and diplomacy training program for students, activists, many of whom I know today are back in their home country in Yangon, very much engaged in this process in Myanmar.

If today we can talk about one of the most neglected people in the world, one of the most forgotten, I would say it would be the Rohingya of Myanmar. We are all human beings in this planet. Myanmar is a mosaic of ethnic groups. It is a mosaic of cultures, of values, of different experiences. A crossroad from Asia, with many influences. 

The Rohingya seem to have the least of rights, the least of privileges as citizens of Myanmar, as human beings. There have been extraordinary abuses, humiliation, killings, expulsion of Rohingyas from their ancestral land. Whether they have been there for thousands of years or a few hundred years or if they were there only some generations ago, they still have rights as people of Myanmar because they were born there in Myanmar. They have been living there for generations regardless of how long; thousands of centuries they have been there. 

I do not wish to lecture any group in Myanmar. I do not wish to lecture authorities in Myanmar. I know the process of transition from dictatorship to democracy is a complex, tortuous, unpredictable long one. We must all contribute to create a climate of dialogue, mutual acceptance, and maybe move towards a road map leading to a Myanmar that is politically open, pluralistic, and that is embracing of all its ethnic and religious communities.

However, I know that this is easier said than done because there are suspicions, there are prejudices. That's what leaders are all about. Leaders at the community level, leaders at the national level who must embrace each other; who must act with compassion, with wisdom; who embrace everyone including the Rohingyas so that Myanmar can be a shining example in Southeast Asia and in Asia in general.

Again, I wish to pay tribute to all those in Myanmar who for generations have struggled for freedom, for democracy, until today when you are on the eve of free general elections. I'm hopeful that all will be able to participate; the Rohingyas, the Muslim communities and everyone, in an atmosphere of freedom, of no question, of no threats. When the election results come it will be a new promising beginning for Myanmar, a further step in the consolidation of democracy in your beautiful country.

I wish you all success in this conference and as always I pray to God Almighty and the Merciful to continue to bless the great people of Myanmar with wisdom, happiness, and prosperity.



May 26, 2015
Oslo, Norway

Greetings, everybody. I regret I can't be there in person. I have been a supporter of Burma's democracy movement since 1993. For most of that time, the prospect of change seemed remote, and I felt increasingly discouraged. Then, in 2010, quite suddenly, or so it seemed, the ruling military junta decided to abandon absolute authoritarian rule. The world was stunned. My engagement in Burma during those dark days taught me an important lesson. Sometimes it's necessary to support a lost cause for a long time just to keep the flame alive. That way, when the situation changes, groundwork for progress has already been laid. As I speak to you today, I find myself again growing discouraged. Making the transition from military rule to a more open society is not easy, and in many ways the government of Burma has made real progress in its reform efforts. I fear that many of these reforms are not sustainable, because they have not yet been institutionalized. 

It's also true that political and economic power remains mostly concentrated in the hands of a privileged few who monopolize the revenue from Burma's abandoned natural resources. The most immediate threat to Burma's transition is the rising anti-Muslim sentiment and officially condoned abuse of the Rohingya people. That has occurred under watch of the current rulers in Naypyidaw. From private conversations with progressive Burmese officials, I know that some in power genuinely want to see a Burma where all are treated equally, but these officials also fear the potential of extremist violence from the small but powerful group of religious radicals. These extremists have created a tinder box that could blow up the entire reform process. The government must confront these extremists and their financial supporters. 

In January when I visited Burma for the 4th time in as many years, I made a short visit to Sittwe, the capital of Rakhine State in order to see for myself the situation on the ground. I met with state and local readers and both Rakhine and Rohingya populations, and also talked to internally displaced persons and those mostly Rohingya living in a section of Sittwe called Aung Mingalar, a part of the city that can only be called a ghetto. In Aung Mingalar, I heard the echoes of my childhood. You see, in 1944, as a Jew in Budapest, I too was a Rohingya. Much like the Jewish ghettos set up by Nazis around Eastern Europe during World War II, Aung Mingalar has become the involuntary home to thousands of families who once had access to healthcare, education, and employment. Now, they are forced to remain segregated in a state of abject deprivation. The parallels to the Nazi genocide are alarming. Fortunately, we have not reached a stage of mass killing. 

I feel very strongly that we must speak out before it is too late, individually and collectively. The Burmese government's insistence that they are keeping the Rohingya in the ghetto for their own protection simply is not credible. Government authorities have tried to reassure me. They say things are under control and not as bad as reported by outsiders who they claim don't understand the local culture or the long and complicated history of Rakhine State. I understand that half a century of living in isolation under repression can make a population vulnerable to intermediation and exploitation in all sorts of ways, but I also know that most of the people of Burma are fair-minded and would like their country to be a place where all can live in freedom. 2015 is a crucial year for Burma; a tipping point, in the words of Yanghee Lee, U.S. Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar. With the prospect of democratic changes to the 2008 constitution and the holding of free and fair elections, meaningful reform could take hold. 

As a longtime friend and supporter of Burma, I hope for a positive outcome for all the people of the country, but where I once felt a great sense of optimism, I am now filled with trepidation for the future. I hope those in power will immediately take the steps necessary to counter extremism and allow open society to take root. In the lead up to the elections, it's crucial that official acts should be taken to counter the pervasive hate and anti- Rohingya propaganda on social media and the racist public campaigns of the 969 movement. The promise of Burma as a flourishing and vibrant open society is still within reach. It's up to Burma's leaders and people whether this promise is fulfilled.

Photo: Christopher Olssøn Copyright:2015 © littleimagebank

Ladies, Gentlemen, Reverends and Sayadaw,

Thank you very much for giving me an opportunity to make an urgent appeal on behalf of fellow Rohingya peoples back home in Burma, and in diaspora. 

I’m Daw Khin Hla, a Rohingya woman born in Arakan State of Burma in 1953. Until I left from Burma, I worked as government middle school teacher. I was born in Burma, a native of Arakan soil – just like my ancestors who lived from cradle to grave – as the indigenous people of our land – now sandwiched between present-day Burma and present-day Bangladesh.

Today I would like to appeal to you to help restore our nationality, full citizenship and basic rights as humans in the country of our fore-fathers and –mothers in Burma. 

First, how were we in the past? How are we today? And how did we get here – as a people with a distinct identity who are being punished if we say we are ‘Rohingyas’. Do people not have the right to identify as so-and-so ethnic community? 

Following our country’s independence from Britain in 1948, we the Rohingyas did not need to apply for citizenship. We WERE considered officially as full citizens of the newly independent Burma. We were officially recognized as a distinct ethnic group living along cross-national borders and indigenous to our own ancestral land, just like any other indigenous ethnic groups you find along Burma’s long and porous borders with India, China, Thailand, and Laos.

When the first post-independence government of Prime Minister U Nu took office in 1948, my grandfather, a self-identified Rohingya, applied for the Union of Burma citizenship as he thought he needed to as power now rested with the new government. The relevant line-ministry replied in writing that he didn’t need to apply as he belonged to an indigenous ethnic group of the multi-ethnic Union of Burma.

When I was a young, student we Rohingya children had full access to schooling; we enjoyed full freedom of movement; we could move from one neighborhood to another, from one village to another, from one town to another and from one state to another within Burma. There was not even the idea – let along a national policy - of severely restricting our marriages, childbirth or family size. 

But all this had changed when General Ne Win, well-known for his violent streak as a person and xenophobia – towards Christians, Muslims, Europeans, Indians, Chinese and so on. He considered anyone who looked different, believed in a different god, or talked different as completely ‘untrustworthy’. Indeed anyone deemed ‘un-trust-worthy’ is perceived as a threat to nationality. 

So, in a little over a decade since he became military dictator, the military government of General Ne Win launched many violent operations against us the Rohingyas. The first large-scale campaign to drive us out of our own ancestral land began in February 1978. Under the disguise of immigration check – widely known as Na Ga Min or King Dragon operation - what was essentially a counter-insurgency campaign aimed at anyone who was not Buddhist and Burmese from strategic border regions. - was launched. Because we the Rohingyas have had a single demarcated geographic pocket – as opposed to being spread out and scattered across we were singled out for persecution since. 

One of the measures General Ne Win’s government, with a push for anti-Rohingya Rakhine nationalists, was the passage of 1982 Citizenship Act. The Citizenship Act stripped us of our nationality status and erased our ethnic identity. 

After the racially motivated law came into effect in the fall of 1982, hundreds of thousands of Rohingyas who had held national registration IDs were issued Temporary registration cards or “White Cards” so-called. A few months ago, the Burmese government de-recognized the White Cards and confiscated them, rendering the Rohingya people absolutely without any semblance or proof of their legal standing as Burmese citizens and lawful residents in our own country. Today, nearly 1 million of my fellow Rohingyas people, have absolutely no legal existence as a people. Thousands of my own fellow Rohingyas live in ghetto-like conditions where armed guards stand, ready to shoot and abuse. And yet the government of Thein Sein tell the people the Rohingyas are kept in these neighborhoods and camps ‘for their own protection’. Over the last nearly 40 years the level of restrictions, repression, abuse and deprivation has progressively increased. When foreign NGOs and researchers describe Rohingya neighborhoods as ‘vast open prisons’ – or refer to them as ‘21st century concentration camps’, they are not exaggerating. 

Burmese central government has imposed measures to regulate, control and restrict every single aspect of life for the Rohingyas as a human community: freedom of movement, choice of marriage, access to schooling and health clinics, place of worship, opportunities to grow food or hold employments, and even the right to identify ourselves as Rohingya ethnic people. Everything we do has to be approved in writing by the authorities. The approval is obtained only by bribing local authorities. Indeed the Burmese regime and its officials have learned to turn our oppression into a profitable business. We have been subject to chronic waves of violence, both by the anti-Rohingya Rakhine nationalists and by the state security troops such as police, border guard force and regular army and navy. Our people live in constant and profound fear of not knowing where the next meal would come from, when the next wave of mass violence awaits or whether who will die or who will live on our own ancestral soil.

The Rohingyas are fleeing out of fear of death and destruction at the hands of the local Rakhine nationalists and central government’s troops. They are fleeing conditions of life on the land of their birth that they know are meant or design to destroy their lives, their communities, their children. They are fleeing extreme, systematic and decades-long repression and policies designed to erase our identity, our physical and legal existence – in our own ancestral land. 

Some of you will recall that like the African dictator Ide Amin of Uganda, General Ne Win’s military drove hundreds of thousands of Chinese and Indians out of Burma in his 26-years in power. This is the same Ne Win regime that has instituted a long-term policy to destroy our Rohingya community on our own ancestral land. The present government of ex-General Thein Sein is simply continuing the Burmese military’s policy of Rohingya destruction. In fact, President Thein Sein and his government deny persistently that we the Rohingyas are a part of Burma, in the face of irrefutable and official evidence of our ethnic identity. He reportedly and officially proposed to the UN to expel and resettle more than 1 million of our Rohingya people in 3 countries, or build a UN-financed apartheid in our own land. I was very much saddened to hear that this ex-General Thein Sein was nominated – and even short-listed – for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2013. I thank the Norwegian Nobel Committee for wisely choosing not confer him the supreme honor and recognition which he definitely didn’t and doesn’t deserve. 

In the last 3 years, UN has estimated that 150,000 Rohingyas – including mothers with new born babies - have fled the country under President Thein Sein’s watch. Since 1978, Burmese military governments have terrorized our community so much so that today almost half the total population of Rohingyas have been forced to settle across the world, including here in Norway. It is the other half – over 1 million – who are being subject to central policy of destruction. 

No one wants to leave home, especially the homes and the land where they were both; but when the Rohingyas do taking their infants and elderly relatives, they are fleeing for their lives. 

On behalf of my fellow Rohingyas who are stranded in dangerous high seas with no food or water, dying slowing in vast ghettos with no adequate food or medicine, I appeal to you today to stand with us in our darkest hours of needs. Norway is considered around the world a special country, small but influential promoter of peace and reconciliation around the world. I would like to direct my appeal to the Norwegian people and the government that as you engage with my country of birth, diplomatically, commercially and politically, please put the sufferings of our people on your policy priorities. I know that Norway considers Myanmar or Burma as one of the ‘focus’ countries important to Norway and Norway is involved in supporting “peace process” in Burma. I appeal to the Norwegian public and leaders that we too deserve a life in peace, a life where we are allowed to call ourselves by the name we choose, a life where our new born are not denied nutrition or legality. Lastly, I appeal to the world’s fellow humans to lend us a hand of compassion so that our people no longer suffer from cradle to grave. 

I thank you from the bottom of my heart. 

May God Bless you all.


    • Rohingya Exodus