Ethnic Cleansing in Myanmar of Muslims
LAST spring, a flowering of democracy in Myanmar mesmerized the world. But now, three months after the democracy activist Daw Aung San Suu Kyi won a parliamentary seat, and a month after she traveled to Oslo to belatedly receive the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize, an alarm bell is ringing in Myanmar. In the villages of Arakan State, near the Bangladeshi border, a pogrom against a population of Muslims called the Rohingyas began in June. It is the ugly side of Myanmar’s democratic transition — a rotting of the flower, even as it seems to bloom.
Cruelty toward the Rohingyas is not new. They have faced torture, neglect and repression in the Buddhist-majority land since it achieved independence in 1948. Its constitution closes all options for Rohingyas to be citizens, on grounds that their ancestors didn’t live there when the land, once called Burma, came under British rule in the 19th century (a contention the Rohingyas dispute). Even now, as military rulers have begun to loosen their grip, there is no sign of change for the Rohingyas. Instead, the Burmese are trying to cast them out.
The current violence can be traced to the rape and killing in late May of a Buddhist woman, for which the police reportedly detained three Muslims. That was followed by mob attacks on Rohingyas and other Muslims that killed dozens of people. According to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, state security forces have now conducted mass arrests of Muslims; they destroyed thousands of homes, with the impact falling most heavily on the Rohingyas. Displaced Rohingyas have tried to flee across the Naf River to neighboring Bangladesh; some have died in the effort.
The Burmese media have cited early rioting by Rohingyas and have cast them as terrorists and traitors. In mid-June, in the name of stopping such violence, the government declared a state of emergency. But it has used its border security force to burn houses, kill men and evict Rohingyas from their villages. And on Thursday, President Thein Sein suggested that Myanmar could end the crisis by expelling all of its Rohingyas or by having the United Nations resettle them — a proposal that a United Nations official quickly rejected.
This is not sectarian violence; it is state-supported ethnic cleansing, and the nations of the world aren’t pressing Myanmar’s leaders to stop it. Even Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi has not spoken out.
In mid-June, after some Rohingyas fled by boat to villages in Bangladesh, they told horrifying stories to a team of journalists whom I accompanied to this city near the border. They said they had come under fire from a helicopter and that three of six boats were lost. Some children drowned during the four-day trip; others died of hunger. Once in Bangladesh, they said, the families faced deportation back to Myanmar. But some children who had become separated from their parents made their way to the houses of villagers for shelter; other children may even now be starving in hide-outs or have become prey for criminal networks. Border guards found an abandoned newborn on a boat; after receiving medical treatment, the infant was left in the temporary care of a local fisherman.
Why isn’t this pogrom arousing more international indignation? Certainly, Myanmar has become a destination for capital investment now that the United States, the European Union and Canada have accepted the government’s narrative of democratic transition and have largely lifted the economic sanctions they began applying after 1988 (measures that did not prevent China, India, South Korea, Thailand, Singapore and multinational oil companies from doing business with the Burmese). Still, when Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton visited Myanmar late last year and welcomed its first steps toward democratization, she also set down conditions for strengthening ties, including an end to ethnic violence.
The plight of the Rohingyas begins with their statelessness — the denial of citizenship itself, for which Myanmar is directly responsible. Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi, though not as powerful as the military officers who control Myanmar’s transition, should not duck questions about the Rohingyas, as she has done while being feted in the West. Instead, she should be using her voice and her reputation to point out that citizenship is a basic right of all humans. On July 5, the secretary general of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, appealed to her to speak up to help end the violence.
To be sure, Bangladesh can do more. Its river border with Myanmar is unprotected; thousands of Rohingyas have been rowing or swimming it at night. But even though Bangladesh has sheltered such refugees in the past — hundreds of thousands of Rohingyas live here now, legally or illegally — it has been reluctant so far this year to welcome them, out of fear of encouraging an overwhelming new influx. Already, such fears have aroused anti-Rohingya sentiment among some Bangladeshis, and initially Bangladesh’s government tried to force the refugees back without assisting them. After some villagers risked arrest by sheltering refugees in their homes, the government began to offer humanitarian aid, before sending them back on their boats. Bangladesh should shelter the refugees as it has in years past, as the international community is urging.
But the world should be putting its spotlight on Myanmar. It should not so eagerly welcome democracy in a country that leaves thousands of stateless men and women floating in a river, their corpses washing up on its shores, after they have been reviled in, and driven from, a land in which their families have lived for centuries.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/13/opinion/ethnic-cleansing-of-myanmars-r...
-------------------------------------
Maybe if the scenario were reversed and Muslims were the one who were killing the Buddhists, the whole world would collaborate to stop the spread of Islamic terrorism against the followers "the peaceful teaching of Buddhism". If the massive killing of innocent civilians from the Muslim minority in Burma doesn't move people to act, I don't know what would?
forgive my ignorance about this. but are the rohingyas originally from burma? i don't think they're ethnic burmese.
if the latter is the case, then that probably explains it. they're a completely different ethnic group (whose people just happen to be muslim). in some non-immigrant countries, citizenship is not a birthright but is instead inherited through bloodlines. the british allowed a lot of people from the subcontinent to settle on their lands. they may be thinking of them as overstaying unwelcome visitors. burma was an old kingdom and there were requirements for certain people to be one of their own. it seems like they have been against muslims since time immemorial. it will take a while for them to accept people that were not originally considered to be their countrymen.
'The Burmese under the British rule felt helpless, and reacted with a "racism that combined feelings of superiority and fear."' - wiki article on rohingyas
i'm only basing my thoughts on what i read in wikipedia so far so i really don't know much. this does not make the killings right, but i want to try to understand why they are doing these things.
that said, it will be a long way to go before a solution can be found. the country is still a mess and things are only starting to look up. aung san suu kyi was just recently freed and elected. change cannot happen overnight. we should not expect too much. it's still a failed state in many ways.
lol human rights sounds funny
The world should wake up and do something about this. It's a human disaster and they shouldn't be left to be oppressed by their state.
The article raises an interesting point. Citizenship is a basic human right and Aung Su should be pressed on this. I agree she should give her support. The governments of the GCC, including Qatar should also step up and give the Palestinians born in their country citizenship as well. Leaving them stateless and abusing this is a denial of their human rights.
The plight of the Roghinyas is truly devastating to say the least. Having come from a country torn by ethnic conflicts and civil wars, I feel their ache. It's shocking then how people(and I don't mean any ONE nation here) who can make a difference and help them are turning a blind eye to their cries and suffering. Shameful!
i like the media , Muslims r terrorist but now were r they when the muslims r being killed
I am not sure about this one, however Qatar is doing something at least. Besides, we didn't preach anyone about something we only do when we see the needs of our interests.
I am praising Qatar for helping.
With Qatar's effort there will be no need for the US to get involved.
Well, so what if they are spending the money and diversifying investments? I know again for a fact Qatar is helping.
Why are we talking about investments and Valentino in this thread? You are just deriving away from the point here, which is no int'l consensus to act and help the people.
What does one religious believes has to do with this? If you believe in afterlife or you are just being sarcastic here, that doesn't change the fact that 1- The int'l community is still silent about what is happening in terms of ethnic cleansing 2- The "Greatest nation" in the world is watching because they don't have any interest there, therefor, they are not pushing any resolution at the very least to condemn what is happening and take serious steps
I mean money to spend buying fashion houses and shops and hotels. If they have $800,000,000 to spend on buying Valentino then of course they have a few extra million to help these guys.
Good on Qatar for helping, they deserve praise for their efforts.
True Qatar has money and Qatar is heavily investing in different countries. But Qatar IS helping, and we are not talking about investments here, we are talking about multilateral efforts
That's not exactly an 'investment', fubar, it's a charity, and the return only comes in the afterlife!
Qatar has buckets of money to spend on all sorts of investments.
Why spend so much on their military if not to provide support in exactly these situations?
Forget the US, there is no reason why Qatar can't get involved if it wanted to help their fellow Muslims.
The US needs the approval from the UN Security Council. As you know, Russia and China both have the veto right. There is no chance that the Security Council will approve any action. If the US does it without the consent of the SC, the world will AGAIN accuse them of interfering. So, it's clear why they don't do anything.
Unfortunately, sad but true.
However, I don't want things to shift that way as well. It's really heartbreaking to see people murdered and mascaraed like this, and on the other side, we don't want the Muslims to retaliate and destroy their country (it's their country too.
I feel sorry for the people in Myanmar, I really hope the UN would speed up their efforts to end this.
These so called police of the world, they will not help to the country that no benifit at all, only those oil rich country is priority for them.
The world (media) will awaken up only after the Rohingiyas start destroying buddhist heritage sites. Just see how the media was awaken and covered the stories about Mali when the Mali Heritage sites were being destroyed. No body knew about what has been happening to the people of Mali for so long only after world heritage sites are destroyed the world has awaken upto the threat of the so called "Islamists" . Thats the state to which humans have evolved. Suffering of thousands of humans, be it Myanmar, Dafur, Somalia, Palestine, Srilanka is easily ignored by the world but we great humans cannot stand to ignore the destruction of world heritage sites. The whole world condemned the acts of destruction of these sites.
Because the US, has always set the example in the past. Rwanda, Kosovo, etc.. all led by the US.
Additionally, few countries are sending aids individually,(including Qatar) no multilateral efforts are done here and that's the problem
Why should any assistance be led by the US specifically?
What's to stop Qatar or Saudi Arabia or any other country from leading humanitarian efforts?
See, no one wants a military intervention, I don't want it either. At least just increase the efforts and set the boundaries with the government to stop the massive killing. One country can't do it all, especially if the international community or the UN is not making any efforts.
Oh yeah people have every right to get mad when the US start bombarding innocent civilians, and invade countries under false premises because the CIA and people in the gov't are too lazy to do their homework.
Also, I am not talking about invading here, I am talking about an international efforts led by the US, cuz I am not expecting anything from China nor Russia, putt8ing into consideration their long history of all sorts of violations.
Whilst I am sorry for their plight, i do not agree that intervention is the answer.
The simple fact of life is that ALL countries act for their own self interests. This is why the plight of the Uighurs and these people is not being taken seriously.
Qatar can't just send troops, or any other country can act alone, it needs to be done through an international effort.
Speaking of which, how about the greatest country in the world, the US, the country that promotes the spread of democracy and peace, the United States; I guess the US can't get the international community to act, oh wait,there is no oil or people to enslave :)
Maybe the US is just too sick of being accused of invading countries and killing people, so it's going to see if anyone else in the world has the courage of their convictions to help out?
You can't slag the US off for getting involved in one country, and then get upset when it doesn't get involved elsewhere.
And if it's that important to you personally, then join a charity and volunteer some time to help out there yourself.
There are missions from the red Crescent and other charities in Qatar to help the Muslims in Myanmar , I guess what I am curious about,the countries that has a long history of lecturing other countries about democracy and human rights, where are they now ?
Where are the Human Rights people now? Hybernating? What about the Islamic countries?
The mass killing of Uighur Muslims in China's Xinjiang region didn't motivate the world to act either.
Maybe Qatar can mediate a peace solution, or send troops?
Why should they leave their home, so they can be scattered in different country? And this is how you hold their government accountable? by giving them the right to kill and then just sent them somewhere else, so it will serve the purpose of wiping off a whole ethnic group, but instead of cleansing giving the status of refugees?
Additionally, KSA, Qatar and other countries are sending money and aids although that's not enough in my opinion, however it's better than the international community who is watching in silence.
another POS comment from the resident genius
Injustice ignorance and intolerance. may god help them.
The Rohingyas of Burma are trapped in their villages, with no way out. They crying at the Bangladeshi borders and waiting for the world to help them.
They are descendants of Arab settlers. Why doesn't Saudi Arabia open its borders and welcomes the long lost (Muslim) brothers?