“Unwanted Anywhere”

Irrawaddy, APRIL, 2009 – VOLUME 17 NO.2 <!– , –>
The Rohingya remain one of the region’s most neglected ethnic minorities

FOR years, the plight of the Rohingya—a Muslim ethnic minority from the Burma-Bangladesh border—had been fading from world attention.

Then, earlier this year, it abruptly reemerged in the public eye following reports that the Royal Thai Navy had towed more than a thousand Rohingya boat people out to sea in engineless boats with little food or water.

A Rohingya migrant looks out the window of a police van while being transported from jail to he immigration police staion in Thailand’s southern province of Ranong in January. (Photo: AP)

A few hundred were rescued near India’s Andaman Islands and Indonesia’s Aceh Province, but many others were not so lucky, and are presumed to have died at sea.

In February, actress Angelina Jolie, who is also a goodwill ambassador for the UN’s refugee agency, drew even more international attention to the issue during a visit to Karenni refugee camps in Thailand’s Mae Hong Son Province.

Although she did not directly criticize the Thai authorities for their treatment of the Rohingya, she said: “As with all people, they deserve to have their human rights respected.”
The Thai government, suddenly under a harsh spotlight for its handling of the issue, has attempted to address the concerns of relief agencies and human rights organizations.

In Burma, however, the ruling regime has adamantly refused to recognize the Rohingya as one of the country’s indigenous peoples, adding fuel to a fire that other countries in the region are trying to contain.
Thailand has long been on the frontlines of Burma’s humanitarian crises, and in this case, it is particularly concerned about the implications of the Burmese junta’s policies.

Not only is Thailand host to an estimated 120,000 refugees and perhaps 2 million migrant workers from Burma, it also has an Islamic separatist insurgency raging in its southern provinces and fears that the arrival of thousands of stateless Muslims could further destabilize the situation.

The Arakan Project, a Thailand-based NGO which advocates for the Rohingya, estimated in June 2008 that more than 8,000 Rohingya had reached Thai shores over the preceding two years, sailing from the coast of Bangladesh to southern Thailand; from there, most traveled overland to Malaysia.
The majority of Rohingya who make this perilous journey are looking for no more than an opportunity to earn a living in a less hostile environment than the one they left behind in Burma. Some, however, seek asylum—a process that is fraught with obstacles.

Thailand and Malaysia are not signatories to the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 protocol, which define the rights of asylum seekers and the obligations of states to protect them.
Thus, although the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has representatives in Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur, the agency’s mandate is subject to restrictions imposed on it by the Thai and Malaysian governments.
Meanwhile, in Thailand, the current Democrat-led government has attempted to deflect some of the criticism it has faced for its handling of this issue by insisting that the international community, and especially regional neighbors, must share responsibility for solving the Rohingya problem.


To this end, Thailand discussed the issue with representatives of the UNHCR and ambassadors from Bangladesh, India, Burma, Malaysia and Indonesia, and raised it again at the recent summit of the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (Asean), which last year formally enacted a charter that obliges member nations to respect human rights.

At the Asean summit, Burmese Foreign Minister Nyan Win said the boat people would be allowed to return, but only if they identified themselves as “Bengalis” born in Burma, rather than as Rohingyas.
Observers suggested that the Burmese response was just a token gesture to avoid embarrassing Asean governments and to end any discussion of the root causes of the problem, which include widespread human rights abuses in northern Arakan State.
It is clear, however, that Asean cannot afford to let the Burmese generals simply sweep this issue under the rug.

Decades of neglect have turned the plight of the Rohingya into a regional issue, and any failure to address it adequately will only serve to undermine the bloc’s credibility.   

The Rohingya are the second-largest ethnic group living in Arakan State, after the ethnic Rakhine; in Maungdaw, Buthidaung and Rathedaung townships, in the northern part of the state, they are in the majority. But even though they comprise nearly 30 percent of the state’s population of 2.75 million people, they are often treated as if they don’t exist.

Goodwill Ambassador of the UNHCR Angelina Jolie smiles at Karenni refugee children during a visit to Ban Mai Nai Soi camp in northern Thailand. (Photo: AFP)

Ultra-nationalist campaigns initiated by the Burmese government, often with the support of local Buddhist communities, have long portrayed the Rohingya as interlopers from neighboring Bangladesh and India, arguing that they are just another part of the negative legacy of British colonial rule.
As part of the effort to drive them out of the state, the Rohingya are routinely subjected to human rights abuses, including forced labor, land confiscation and even restrictions on marriage. They are also frequent targets of extortion and arbitrary taxation.
In 1991, waves of Rohingya refugees fled across Burma’s western border to Bangladesh to escape oppression. About 230,000 of the refugees have since been repatriated under an agreement between Bangladesh and Burma, with the involvement of the UNHCR, while approximately 28,000 remain in two refugee camps in Bangladesh.
As part of the ongoing repatriation program, the Burmese regime has agreed to issue temporary registration cards to returnees. The UNHCR estimates that around 35,000 cards were issued in 2007, with an additional 48,000 issued between January and May of 2008.
But far from providing them with any sort of legal status, the registration cards have often served to reinforce discrimination against the Rohingya.

According to the US government’s 2008 Report on International Religious Freedom, for instance, Burmese authorities insist that Muslim men applying for the cards “must submit photos without beards”—an offensively discriminatory requirement intended to discourage registration.

With no hope of improvement in their situation, many Rohingyas continue to leave Burma, often via Bangladesh. But in their quest for friendlier shores, they often have to pass through Burmese territorial waters, putting them at risk of arrest under Section 13(1) of the 1947 Immigration Law, which prescribes penalties for illegal entry into Burma.
According to the Arakan Project, many Rohingyas who have been arrested in Burmese waters on their way to Thailand have been sentenced to up to five years in prison for illegally crossing the border. Such prisoners account for the majority of the jail population in northern Arakan State.

Rohingya boat people receive medical treatment at a temporary shelter in Aceh Province after being rescued by local fishermen on February 2. The all-male group of 198, who had not eaten for a week and who included a 13-year-old, was found floating in a wooden boat off the coast of Aceh after 21 days at sea. (Photo: Reuters)

Former inmates of these prisons say that Rohingya prisoners are fed only once every three or four days, and are often subjected to beatings. Little can be done to protect them from such treatment, however, because international agencies such as the UNHCR and the International Committee of the Red Cross currently have no access to jails in Burma.
For those who are pardoned and allowed to return to their home villages, the situation isn’t much better. They often find that their names have been permanently deleted from their household registries, meaning that they are constantly at risk of being arrested again.

“Since they are no longer administratively listed, many have been forced to flee to Bangladesh again,” according to Chris Lewa of the Arakan Project.
In Bangladesh, life is only marginally less precarious.

The Bangladeshi government divides the Rohingya into two categories: recognized refugees living in official camps and unrecognized refugees living in unofficial sites or among Bangladeshi communities.
The UNHCR provides basic services to around 28,000 registered Rohingya refugees living in the official Nayapara and Kutupalong camps, and Islamic Relief, a UK-based charity, supports a further 10,000 people living in an unofficial camp constructed in 2008.

But for most of the estimated 200,000 undocumented Rohingyas living in Bangladesh today, the only way to survive is by performing backbreaking labor that pays less than a dollar a day.

Now, with the impact of the global economic downturn hitting one of the poorest regions of Asia, many Rohingyas are growing increasingly desperate to find some way to support themselves and their families—forcing many to turn to brokers who, for US $300-450, arrange to smuggle them by boat to countries such as Malaysia and Thailand.


Most set off on this dangerous journey between November and April, when the seas are at their calmest.
Typically, they are given water and rice that has been cooked and dried for their one meal of the day. The traffickers, wary of naval patrol boats, order the migrants to pack into the small hold below deck and remain there; if they try to come out, they are beaten. Only after dark are they allowed up on deck to stretch and shower.

According to Thailand’s House Committee on Security, which has blamed international human traffickers for the recent massive influx of Rohingya boat people, some of those who were apprehended had telephone numbers they used to contact other Rohingyas who have already settled in Thailand and Malaysia.
This prompted Thai police to round up roadside roti vendors in Bangkok and cities in the predominantly Muslim south. Thai security officials say that many of the trafficked Rohingya sell rotis as a temporary job until they are ready for their departure to Malaysia.

Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia have all focused their efforts on cracking down on trafficking gangs, insisting that the Rohingya boat people are victims of unscrupulous criminals exploiting their economic desperation and not refugees fleeing persecution.

One problem with this approach is that it isn’t likely to end the exodus anytime soon. Observers say that endemic corruption in all of the countries affected by this issue  makes it impossible to stem the flow of people seeking a better life, especially when they have highly organized and well-financed brokers helping them.
In northern Arakan State, the border security forces readily turn a blind eye to human trafficking in exchange for bribes. Bangladeshi law enforcement agents also cooperate for a cut of the brokers’ profits. And for the right price, immigration officials in Thailand and Malaysia hand Rohingyas over to traffickers instead of deporting them across the border.
Meanwhile, Asean foreign ministers will have another opportunity to tackle the problem at the Bali Process meeting on April 14-15. The Bali Process brings together more than 50 countries and international agencies, including the International Organization for Migration and the UNHCR, for talks to discuss practical measures to help combat human trafficking in the Asia-Pacific region.


Beyond this, Asean may be counting on the precedent of the Cyclone Nargis relief effort to open up the possibility of greater cooperation between the Burmese junta and the international community on the Rohingya issue.
In March, Burma’s neighbors were given some reason to hope for the best.
After months of dragging its feet over the future of the UNHCR’s mandate to operate in northern Arakan State, the regime finally gave the UN refugee agency a green light to stay. In an echo of the junta’s post-Nargis reversal on allowing aid into the Irrawaddy delta following a visit by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last May, the decision was made only after a high-profile visit to Burma by Antonio Guterres, the head of the UNHCR.

But convincing the generals to accept hundreds of millions of dollars to help restore Burma’s agricultural heartland is one thing; persuading them to end a pattern of abuses against an ethnic minority with few friends anywhere in the region is another.

Unlike the situation in the Irrawaddy delta, the humanitarian crisis emanating from northern Arakan State is almost entirely of the regime’s making. Until Burma’s neighbors finally begin to address this fact, they can continue to expect more unwelcome visitors on their shores.

The Row over the Rohingya
Irrawaddy readers weigh in on a contentious issue
IN February, The Irrawaddy launched a new online feature, enabling users of our Web site www.irrawaddy.org to post comments on stories of particular interest to them. One subject has attracted far more attention than any other: the status of the Rohingya in Burma. Every news item and commentary on this topic elicited numerous responses; taken together, they give a sense of the range of opinions on this issue.
Some readers based their arguments on historical evidence, while others emphasized human rights considerations. But judging from the bulk of the comments we received, it was clear that race, religion and ethnicity were the major factors animating the debate over whether the Rohingya “belong” in Burma.
Few readers stooped to the blatant racism of the Burmese consul in Hong Kong, who infamously described the Rohingya as ugly, dark-skinned “ogres.” Some, however, evidently viewed the matter chiefly through the lens of race.

“A thorough DNA testing would reveal that these [people] belong to Bangladesh rather than Burma,” wrote one such reader, San Oo Aung.

For many other readers, the Islamic faith of the Rohingya was more of an issue than their genetic makeup. Although some, like Tin Win, recalled “ancient days when Muslims and Buddhists stayed together side by side in harmony,” many others painted a much darker picture of relations between followers of the two religions.
“For once, the regime is right,” wrote Pasquale. “The Rohingya are not Burmese. They are the fifth column for the Islamization of the land of Dhamma.”

“Be careful, Shwedagon Pagoda will disappear very soon,” echoed Mr True, who also accused The Irrawaddy and other exiled media of being “worse that the SPDC” for their supposed bias in favor of the Rohingya.

Just as controversial as the subject of race and religion was the issue of ethnicity. Many readers followed the junta’s practice of labeling the Rohingya “Bengalis.” Indeed, many voiced strong support for the regime’s refusal to recognize the Rohingya as an ethnic group.

“I dislike the junta, but I support it for [its position on the] Rohingya,” wrote Maung Myanmar, in response to a report on our Burmese-language Web site.
Such views (which were also common on the English version of The Irrawaddy) provoked a number of international readers to express concern about the attitudes of some Burmese who profess to espouse democratic principles.

“Aren’t we fighting so that human rights will be protected for everyone?” asked Pokpong Lawansiri, who identified himself as “a Thai advocate working for a Burmese cause.”
Hong Kong-based Luzhou similarly asked: “Do we not believe in justice, equality, non-discrimination? Do we not observe the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

“Even when the democracy struggle has come to a victory, and democratic government is established, without the right attitude, there will be no answer to the problem,” he added.
Several Burmese readers expressed sympathy for the Rohingya as fellow victims of military rule, but in some cases added that too much emphasis had been placed on their plight because of their religion and ethnicity. “Please do not forget the fact that the military government kills even Buddhist monks,” wrote Than Aung.
“Rohingyas deserve humanitarian aid as much as any other refugees. Focus should be on that and not on which ethnicity they belong to,” wrote Khin, who cautioned against “carelessly” accepting the claims of the Rohingya “out of sympathy.”
The most hotly disputed claims were those relating to the historical presence of the Rohingya in Arakan State. Historian Aye Chan was representative of those who strongly denied that the Rohingya have long had a place in the history of the once-independent kingdom of Arakan.

“It is obvious that the term ‘Rohingya’ was created in the 1950s by the educated Chittagonian descendants from the Mayu Frontier area (present day Buthidaung and Maungdaw Districts) and that it cannot be found in any historical source materials in any language till then,” he wrote.
As some readers pointed out, however, not all historians agree with this view.

“Dr Than Tun wrote that the Muslim title used [by] Arakan kings mentioned in the stone pillar of 1422 might be Rohingyas from the Mayu valley of the eastern Naf river and the western Kaladan river who have claimed their existence there for over 1,000 years,” wrote Maungmaung, referring to the findings of a well-known Burmese historian.
Notwithstanding the role of The Irrawaddy’s online comments section and other Internet-based forums, some readers complained that the real problem dogging this issue is the lack of open discussion.

Ahmedur Rahman Farooq wrote that “the Burmese pro-democracy government-in-exile was formally approached by the Rohingyas to arrange a debate over the issue under the supervision of international historians, but they have no guts to arrange such a debate because they know very well that such an initiative will permanently close all the doors for anti-Rohingya camps inside the pro-democracy movement.”

Burma’s Gaza?

Citizenship and land rights are hot issues in Arakan State MAUNGDAW, Arakan State—In a simple house on the edge of this small town near Burma’s border with Bangladesh, a Rohingya resident carefully adjusted his cheap Chinese-made radio. Six other Rohingyas also huddled around the radio, straining to hear its crackling broadcast.
“Here we go,” said 52-year-old Ahmed triumphantly. “It’s VOA reporting on what the international community is saying about the Rohingya issue. Listen carefully.”

A small convenience store in Maungdaw. (Photo: Min Khet Maung/The Irrawaddy)

Ahmed said he and his friends tune in nightly to Western broadcasts in the hope of hearing news about efforts by the international community and humanitarian agencies to pressure Burma’s military government to improve their living conditions.

In a teashop near Ahmed’s home, a small group of ethnic Rakhine people discussed the same issue—but from a different viewpoint. They were united in opposing any move to grant citizenship to the Rohingya people of Arakan State.
One man in his late thirties claimed the state and its majority Buddhist population would fall under the influence of Muslim Rohingyas if they became Burmese citizens. “They [Rohingyas] are like a virus,” he said.


Another man, in his early fifties, agreed. “Let’s hope the government doesn’t pay attention to international pressure,” he said. “The Rohingya are not among the 150 ethnic groups of Myanmar [Burma].”

His claim, supported by most Rakhine people and reflected in regime policy, is disputed by many scholars and historians, who trace the arrival of the Rohingyas in the Arakan region back to the eighth century.


Ethnologists say the Rohingya—far from being a homeless migrant people—are a distinct ethnic group derived from a bewildering ancestral mix of Arabs, Moors, Persians, Turks, Mughals, Pathans, Bengalis, Chakmas, Rakhine, Dutch and Portuguese.


For centuries, Muslim Rohingyas and the Buddhist Rakhine people of the Arakan region lived in harmony. They enjoyed the same rights, guaranteed by the 1947 constitution and the 1948 Citizenship Acts.

A Rohingya boy carries items to a local village near Maungdaw. (Photo: Min Khet Maung/The Irrawaddy)

Rohingyas were able to participate fully in post-colonial political life. They could vote and stand for public office in local and national elections, and they were granted Burmese passports and complete freedom of employment.
The 1962 military coup that brought Ne Win to power ended all that. Anti-Rohingya sentiments were allowed to fester. Race riots disrupted life in Arakan State.


“The Rakhine-Rohingya relationship was poisoned by the military junta,” said one moderate Rakhine historian in Maungdaw.
Denied protection by the Ne Win government and the current military regime, Rohingyas have been mercilessly exploited by many Rakhines, who are accused of treating the Muslim minority as a cheap workforce. The fiction that these dark-skinned people were illegal Bengali immigrants has been allowed to spread without much contradiction.

Discrimination against the Rohingya now permeates all levels of society in Arakan State, from local government departments to community life.

“The military government is systematically encouraging ‘divide and rule’ in our state,” said the Rakhine historian. “It can then exploit the instability it causes in order to rein in the people.”
Observers say the policy has inevitably fuelled racial tensions, leading to clashes between Rakhine residents and resentful Rohingyas.


Fear is said to reign not only in Rakhine towns and villages but also areas with Rohingya majorities—including Maungdaw Township, where more than 90 percent of the 493,000 inhabitants are Rohingya.

One other township in Arakan State has a large Rohingya majority—Buthidaung, where more than 80 percent of the 279,000 inhabitants are Rohingya.  

 

 

Building on Rakhine prejudice and exploiting social tensions, the current military regime has progressively tightened restrictions on the Rohingya, denying them not only citizenship but also the most basic rights.
Freedom to travel is severely curtailed, and permission has to be sought from local immigration departments for journeys even within Arakan State. Permits are issued for a maximum of 14 days.

A main street in Maungdaw. (Photo: Min Khet Maung/The Irrawaddy)

The travel restrictions make life difficult for the Rohingya on many levels, including education. The university in Sittwe, the capital of Arakan State, has no faculties for medicine or engineering, meaning that young people wanting to study those subjects must enroll at universities in Rangoon. But that option is denied Rohingya students, who have difficulty enough trying to cope with the discriminatory practices and bureaucracy of Sittwe University.


Some restrictions are patently racist—one, for instance, requires Rohingya couples to sign an agreement that they will have no more than three children when seeking official approval to marry.

Many Rohingyas hope the general election planned for 2010 could bring about a relaxation of restrictions or even an end to them.
For one young Rohingya, who graduated from university two years ago, citizenship is the most important right he would like to see restored. “If democracy is restored, then we must be given the chance to ask for citizenship,” he said.
Yet the Rakhine historian warned that social tensions could increase if the Rohingya are granted citizenship and land ownership rights.
“If the government does not solve the problem wisely,” he said, “ this could be a hot spot of the future—another Gaza.”

Plain Speaking

The Irrawaddy’s correspondent asked Rohingya and Rakhine residents of Maungdaw, in Arakan State, and a Burmese computer expert in Rangoon for their views on the Rohingya issue. All three interview subjects are 27 years old, and while they clearly don’t represent Rohingya, Rakhine and Burmese populations as a whole, their comments offer some idea of popular thinking in Burma
A young Rohingya man who helps out in his parents’ business was asked to describe his life in Arakan State.

I feel we’re confined in a box. I feel we’re treated as sub-human. I feel we suffer the worst human rights violations compared with our brethren [Burmese citizens] in other parts of the country who are experiencing the policies of this government. We all bear the brunt of this dictatorship. But I don’t know why other ethnic groups do not sympathize with us. This is the saddest thing.


Q: Why do you think this government does not recognize the Rohingya as an ethnic group?
A: I don’t know exactly why. But we do know that this government uses a divide-and-rule system in our state so they can rule easily. I also think the government fears our work potential and expansion strategy. As you know, we Rohingya are very hardworking, and our population could swell in a short time. I guess that in order to prevent our expansion and influence, the junta denies us our human rights, and removed our citizenship. Our fellow ethnic Rakhine people also think we’re hostile and aggressive. It may be true, sometimes. But it would be because of their discrimination and restrictions.


Q: What keeps you here?
A: Hope! Hope that one day we will get citizenship. I hope that at least in the near future, some restrictions will be lifted, easing our daily life, and improving our livelihoods.


Q: What do you expect from the 2010 election?
A: Democracy that guarantees our human rights. But only real democracy could make our dreams come true. If the government doesn’t want to give us citizenship, we will automatically understand that the democracy it restores is just half-baked democracy. The other half needs to be baked by ourselves. I don’t know, at least for now, how to bake that half. Taking arms or taking to the streets? Or what else?

A Rakhine employee of a Maungdaw engineering company was asked to define the Rohingya.
A: We don’t consider them as one of the ethnic groups of Myanmar [Burma]. They sometimes create problems against our Rakhine people without realizing that they’re living on our land. They’re also trying to occupy our lands, and also threatening our religion. We can’t allow them to do that. I personally see them as destructive to our state. They would certainly threaten all Burma. But we’re human. We have sympathy with anyone as long as they don’t harm our self-regard.


Q: How would you describe your “fear factor” in living alongside Rohingyas if they regain citizenship?
A: Don’t say our fear factor. We don’t fear them. What we worry about is the safety and security of our people in such Muslim populated townships as Buthidaung and Maungdaw. We have to take their safety into account. Our people there are only a minority and are vulnerable. If Muslims have citizenship and there is no law enforcement in our state, who will guarantee the safety and security of our ethnic group? If the Rohingya get citizenship, they will not stop there—believe me. They will demand a “special region.” We can’t give them Maungdaw and Buthidaung townships as a special region. Should the Rakhine be allowed to establish special regions where they live? Who would allow that? Tens of thousands of Burmese migrants are working in Thailand, but do you think the Thai government would grant them a “special region?”


Q: What do you think about stationing the Burmese army in Arakan State?
A: I think it’s good for us. It is thought that the army is here to guard us against hostile and aggressive actions by the Bengali immigrants. But don’t think we gladly accept soldiers on our land. I sometimes think about what my grandfather once said to us: our Rakhine [Arakan] State was once very peaceful before the army staged its coup [in 1962]. There were not many soldiers in those times.

But, after the coup, more and more soldiers were stationed here, and many problems arose between Muslims and Rakhines. My grandfather blamed the army. He said the government drove a wedge between us in order to rule more easily over us. I don’t know whether that’s correct or not. But, what I see with my own eyes is that our Rakhine State is not as developed as other states of Myanmar. We have very poor transportation and communication infrastructure. But, for the present, we have to have a military presence on our land, however inconvenient.  

Q: What do you expect from the 2010 election?
A: A government that will protect us from any invasion or expansion of illegal, hostile migrants. It’s very important to us. We’re worried that the next government will give citizenship to the Muslim people, without trying to keep law and order in our area. But, I’m one of those who support any government that undertakes humanitarian tasks that have to be tackled immediately.
A Burmese computer expert living in Rangoon was asked to comment on the Rohingya issue.
We cannot see this issue only from the humanitarian angle. I think it’s based on politics. Only after the military took power in the [1962] coup were there tensions and riots involving these two ethnic groups [Rakhine and Rohingya]. I think there were motives behind the government’s claim that the Rohingya are not an ethnic group. The government withdrew citizenship for the Rohingya in order to create problems within the state, which would help to shift the attention of fanatic Rakhine nationalists to concentrate on the Rohingya. As you know, the Rakhine people are famous for their nationalism. They love their ethnicity, their land, their culture so much more strongly than we love our own. The junta seems to abuse that. As a Burmese, one of the victims suffering under the iron heel of the military junta, I like to say we should be united. Our common enemy should not be Rohingya, nor any other ethnic group. Our one common enemy is the military government.

Q: What can be done to reconcile Rakhine and Rohingya?
A: I think the 2007 September protests helped to some extent to achieve reconciliation between Rakhine and Rohingya. I was in Sittwe at the time. The hair on my arms stood up when I saw four or five Muslims walking ahead of the monks. Their presence meant they would guard the monks who were marching for the sake of all people living in the country. That sent a message to me that when it comes to national interests and national causes, Rakhine and Rohingya are friends. We should not forget the momentum of the September protests.  At the same time, we should be fully aware of the junta’s divide-and-rule policy.

Q: Do you think it’s worrisome if the Rohingya people acquire citizenship?
A: No, absolutely not. I believe they would be good citizens. They would work very hard to develop their area and catch up with developed townships in other parts of the country. We should wait and see how the government solves this issue. If it sorts it out wisely, there will be no problem. The government should not pass the issue as it is into the hands of the next civilian government. This problem has been created by the present government, so it must solve it. The problem should not be a legacy for future generations.


Q: Do you believe a post-2010 government will respect the human rights of all ethnic groups?
A: I dare not hope so, because I don’t know how honest and humane the next government will be. This Rohingya issue would be the best example, I think, to understand how the next government will behave in other cases.

Rohingya not our problem, Burma tells Bali meeting

April 16, 2009 , www.smh.com.au 

 

A LASTING solution to the plight of Burma’s Rohingya minority remains elusive after Burma yesterday continued to deny they were its citizens or acknowledge they were persecuted.

Photo AFP

Burma’s police chief made the comments at the Bali Process meeting, a people-smuggling summit involving more than 40 regional nations and heralded as the forum that would address the Rohingya problem after several aborted attempts to tackle the issue.

The Rohingya came to global prominence this year when Thailand’s military was accused of towing the boats of as many as 1000 asylum-seekers out to sea and leaving them to drift at the mercy of the currents without adequate food and water.
Those incidents in January also refocused attention on Burma’s treatment of the Rohingya. Hundreds of thousands have fled to refugee camps in neighbouring Bangladesh or attempted the perilous sea crossing to South-East Asia.
Australia’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Stephen Smith, was among the leaders to hold talks with Brigadier-General Khin Yi, the deputy minister for home affairs and police chief of Burma (also known as Myanmar). Mr Smith pledged $3.2 million to aid programs for the Rohingya.

“Australia put to Myanmar all the human rights, democratic and rule of law issues that we have in the past,” Mr Smith said of their discussions.
“The response from the police chief was … the traditional response of Myanmar not to accept the notion of citizenship.”

Indonesia’s Foreign Minister, Hassan Wirajuda, said he and others at the summit had told Brigadier-General Yi that “social and economic problems” were behind the exodus of Rohingyas, some of whom have washed ashore in Indonesia’s province of Aceh. “Myanmar denied [the flight of the Rohingyas] was because of human-rights violations,” he said.

Asylum-seekers from Myanmar have said they suffer beatings by Burma’s security forces and had their property stolen while having punishing taxes levied on them.

Meanwhile, Thailand avoided scrutiny for its treatment of the Rohingya altogether after its foreign minister failed to turn up due to the political crisis in his homeland. He was represented by a deputy secretary from the Thai Foreign Ministry.

As well as towing out at least four boatloads of Rohingyas who had landed in Thailand, the Thai military is also accused of administering severe beatings to some of the asylum-seekers.
An ad hoc working group from Bali Process nations may address the Rohingya issue at a later date but any recommendations it makes will be non-binding.

Australia ups aid for Rohingyas

1) Australia vows more aid for Rohingya ($3.2m)
April 15, 2009, smh

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/australia-vows-more-aid-for-rohingya-20090415-a74n.html

 

2) Australia ups aid for Rohingyas  ($1.5m)

5 March 2009, bbc

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7925216.stm

 

"Australia vows more aid for Rohingya" 

 

Australia pledged more help for Burma's persecuted Rohingya people on Wednesday as Foreign Minister Stephen Smith pressed for improved treatment of the Muslim minority.

He met bilaterally with Burma's deputy minister for home affairs and police chief, Brigadier General Khin Yee, on the sidelines of the Bali Process meeting on people smuggling and transnational crime.
Mr Smith, who co-chaired the Bali summit, pressed the Burmese representatives on the Rohingya issue.

 

Advertisement: Story continues below

"Australia put to Myanmar (Burma) all the human rights, democratic and rule of law issues that we have in the past," he told reporters later.
"The response I got from the police chief was along the lines... of the traditional response of Myanmar to not accept the notion of citizenship."

The Rohingyas are denied citizenship in mainly Buddhist Burma and human rights groups say they face repression and poverty.
Thousands have fled the junta-ruled nation to neighbouring Bangladesh, while others have sought safety in other South-East Asian countries.

Their plight gained international attention earlier this year when Thailand's military was accused of towing hundreds of the refugees out to sea in poorly-equipped boats with scant supplies after they fled Burma.
Although the conference failed to agree on concrete solutions to deal with the problem of Rohingya asylum seekers, Mr Smith said the summit helped "focus" affected countries on the problem.
"It's an acute problem and I don't think anyone is under any illusions that this problem can be solved overnight, or in one season," he said.

Mr Smith announced Australia would provide an extra $3.2 million in humanitarian aid to Rohingyas living in Burma's northern Rakhine State, to improve their living conditions and give them better economic opportunities.

"Australia is concerned about the deteriorating living conditions and increasing marginalisation of the Rohingya people in Burma and in refugee camps in Bangladesh," Mr Smith said.
"Their already parlous situation has been exacerbated by poor rice harvests, the rising price of basic food items and enforced restrictions on their movements."

The conference agreed to establish an "ad hoc group" to intervene in regional migration crises and emergencies, at the request of affected countries.
During his opening address to the conference, Mr Smith said the circumstances driving people smuggling had changed and the region had to keep up.

"The current global financial and economic crisis may well also encourage more people to seek economic opportunities outside of their own borders," he said.

Earlier, Mr Smith welcomed news that Indonesia had agreed to extradite accused Afghani people smuggler Amanullah Rezaie who was arrested on Monday.
"I welcome very much the provisional arrest," he said.
"That particular individual is wanted for people-smuggling charges in Australia."

Rohingya Refugee Committee (ARRC) Letter to Malaysian PM

by Admin, 15 April 2009,

 

 page-1

page-2

 ..

Bali Process & Brutalities Against Rohingyas

source from congratulation letter to Malaysian the 6th Prime Minister by Arakan Rohingya Refugees Committee, 13 April 2009.

In the letter, Rohingya refugees in Malaysia congratulate the 6th Prime Minister of Malaysia and stated as below;

As we do remember that your role in time of United Malay National Organization (UMNO) Youth Chief in 1992, you had launched $26,500 fund for Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh, which was secured from movement members, organizations and individuals. Further in April 1992, the Malaysian Government arranged that all donations for Rohingya refugees, was sent to Malaysia Red Crescent Society for proper utilization under coordination of Ministry of National Unity and Social Development.

So, we do believe that you are keen to represent the plights of Rohingya refugees at both Bali Process and ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta (Indonesia) as better as possible in order to find a safe place for them rather sending them back to tyrannical ruler of Burmese military.

The letter also highlighted the brutalities faced by Rohingyas, currently. pl, kindly read here;

Last week, the gang of regime slaughtered at least 7 Rohingyas in village of Fokira Bazar and locked up the Grand Mosque of Ngakura village track under Maungdaw Township, instigating communal tension and at least 11 houses were burnt down in Buthidaung .

Township as well as killed a woman after rape and 4 other men brutally murdered in Akyab, while getting the list of entire households in Maungdaw north and seizing knives, iron rods and some other kinds of hard metal instruments.

According to latest news story publicized in the Daily Purbakun, on April 11, a Bengali Language Newspaper of Bangladesh, 10 arms trained youths from every Rakhaing village are supplied arms and swords and etc. to perceive large scale of massacre during  up coming water festival of Buddhists to be started from 13th, April,2009

Following the riots, at least 30 people killed and 25 young girls remain missing. Rohingyas from Akyab Township, Rathedaung Township, Naisadaung, Taung Bro, Dekibania, Bali Bazar, Kasarbil etc. villages of Maungdaw Township passing  their lives in critical situation. 6 houses in Taung Bazar and 40 houses in other parts Buthidaung were burnt in to ashes. A Rohingy village named Amla Para has been evicted to Maungdaw Township, while Amtoilla under Shweza Village tract of Maungdaw Towship was uprooted to unknown place.

At the same time the Grand Mufti and Rohingya Islamic Scholar Maulana Sayedul Amin was arrested, imposing restriction in Friday (Juma) prayer in Maungdaw Township.

In addition , the regime members also supplying acids, poisonous chemicals, swords, hammer, axes and some stranger types of metal weapons to Rakhaing (a non-Rohingya ethnic group of Arakan) community and new settlers from proper Burma in order to sweep out the Rohingyas from their ancestral homeland.

At present, tension has broken out at all across Arakan State, which may lead to an unexpected communal riot under the patronization Burmese military regime. The regime engineered such riot in 1942 to take control of Arakan under its rule and that resulted to die over hundreds thousand Rohingyas. Similarly in February 2001, while numbers of Rohingyas were brutally killed by the gangs of military and military themselves.

It is also noted that the regime is fencing all across Burma (Arakan)-Bangladesh border in order to stop escaping Rohingya people from slow burning genocides of the regime.

Therefore, your government’s role in Bali Process and ASEAN Secretariat meeting in Jakarta is very much important for the wellbeing of Rohingyas.

M’sia Striving To Resolve Rohingya Refugee Problem – Rais

April 08, 2009, http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v3/news.php?id=402684

KUALA LUMPUR, April 8 (Bernama) — Malaysia is taking measures through the Asean Secretariat to have the 15,001 Rohingya refugees repatriated to their home country of Myanmar or encourage third countries to accept them, the Dewan Negara was told today.

Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim said the Rohingya refugees in this country received various sources of assistance from Malaysians and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) as well as several third countries including Australia and Canada.
He was replying to a question from Senator Datuk Abdul Rahman Bakar.

To a supplementary question, from Senator Datuk Wira Syed Ali Alhabshee, on the diplomatic efforts of the ministry to enable Malaysia overcome the “serious” problem of the Rohingya refugees, Rais said the foreign ministry had notified the Myanmar government officially about the problem and that country had given several commitments through Asean.

“However, the Asean Secretariat has to gather data on the Rohingya before any specific action can be taken,” he said.

– BERNAMA

Rohingya provocative Article by Mohiuddin: In response to Berlin Khin Maung Saw’s 16 pages

- Rohingya provocative Article!

Written by Mohiuddin (aka)Maung Sein,

source from  http://www.mayupress.com/

[ Identification of an ethnicity is the right of a group of people who share common heritage, language, culture and history, living in a defined territory as a compact community for a countable period of time. No one or authority can impose their criteria, their Litmus test upon them by force or decree.

The Muslim population of Arakan who believe they are native people of Rohang /Mrohang (Rohingya name of Rakhapura/Rakhaing Prey) identify themselves today as the Rohingyas per their free will and aspiration. They want to be known by this name by others with due respect. It is their natural and basic right to live in peace and harmony with sister communities of Burma as loyal and worthy citizens of the soil of Arakan. There is nothing to interfere about or to discredit the Rohingyas with other names that they disapprove of by any third party or other national races including the Rakhaings. The ethnic identity name should not and cannot be a factor at all when determining the nationality or citizenship status in Burma].

For Burmese people, in general, and the Rohingyas, in particular, struggle for democracy and human rights have been a long and seemingly unending walk to freedom.. The symbol of our suffering is embodied in the fragile body of Aung San Sui Kyi. Her suffering is shared by her people and the international community. Even though she suffers in silence, Burma’s democracy movement leaders have developed the framework for a democratic institution building with the objective of establishing a democratic civil society that is based on human rights, justice, equality and peaceful co-existence for achieving peace and prosperity in Burma.

The goal of restoration of democracy in Burma is reflected in the policies and strategies of the NLD (National League for Democracy), the party which won landslide victory in the 1990 general election, the CRPP (Committee Representing the Peoples’ Parliament) and all other opposition democratic forces – inside and outside of Burma, including those who are engaged to remove the military rule by armed resistance of the patriotic revolutionary forces of various ethnic minorities fighting for justice and the right of self-determination in Burma .

In the past, we had a democratic government for a brief period. But it didn’t survive. The question before us now is not only how to walk to freedom but also how to sustain it. There is no easy solution to this vital question. For this, in the Arakan context, we need academic debates, research, seminars, symposium, dialogues and conferences that are open and inclusive, not only just within each community but also between communities through active participation in a friendly and engaging atmosphere. This is particularly true about discussions on Burmese democracy and the Rohingya question. Why? This is simply because of the fact that the struggle for restoration of Democracy in Burma is a complicated, multi-dimensional phenomenon. A genuine democratic movement simply cannot afford to be oblivious of the genuine rights and concerns of the various communities that live within its border. We have to assess the internal and external agents and mechanisms of change, understanding the cultural diversities of people with whom Rohingyas would interact as the co-citizens inside the Arakan and Burma. Bottom line: we have to develop an all inclusive, integrated and coordinated approach.

From the dismal record of democracy inside Burma, it is obvious that the concept of democracy and its benefits, allowing her people to enjoy human rights in social infrastructure development has not sunk in very well among her people. It is mainly because they are being bombarded with xenophobic propaganda fed by the long-serving military machine and its agents working as divisive forces that only help to strengthen and prolong military rule in Burma. Education along these lines, e.g., the deadly effects of xenophobia, is very important. Such humane education will strengthen the foundation for a multi-ethnic, multi-racial, and multi-religious Burma that we can all pride in.

For harvesting the fruit of democracy, as is obvious, such an education must begin with the leaders of the democracy movement. It is really praise-worthy and a matter of great pride for many of us to see the positive effect of that humane education amongst the students of the 1988-generation and the leaders of the Burmese democratic forces under the leadership of popular democracy icon Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and her NLD party. Yet, it is so disheartening to see today how prejudice and xenophobic thinking are keeping Burma backward.

Democracy is a government by the people in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected representatives. According to Abraham Lincoln, democracy is a government “of the people, by the people and for the people.” Democracy is not just a slogan. It is about living and bringing to fruition those lofty high ideals in the life of a nation so that the genuine concerns and legitimate aspirations of all its people, majority and minority – irrespective of their social and economic status within the society, ethnicity, color, race and religion – are met so that no one either feels discriminated or abused. In short, democracy is the institutionalization of freedom. It guarantees sovereignty of the people through a government that is based upon the consent of the governed, protecting minority rights, guaranteeing basic human rights and equality before the law, imposing constitutional limits on government, instilling social, economic and political pluralism, values of tolerance, pragmatism, cooperation and compromise for greater good of all.

These are the essential ingredients of a democratic state. In Burma, ‘democracy’ is a far cry! It is missing.

In this context, when we discuss about the problems and prospects of democratic development in Burma we see a naked and unambiguous disregard for basic fundamental human rights of their sister communities. This is noticeable in prejudicial, racist and hostile attitude of various communities towards each other. This is particularly true in certain ethnic group’s hostile attitudes towards the Burmese Muslims and the minority Rohingya people of Arakan that are part of the mosaic of estimated 54 million people that comprise today’s Burma.

It is a matter of great concern that most of the Rakhaings from Arakan ruling group, elites and intellectuals alike, openly deny the existence of Rohingya in Burma on racial prejudice, labeling them ‘illegal Bangladeshi immigrants’ and ‘non-nationals’ of Burma. Their hostile attitude mimics those of the military (SPDC) regime that likes ethnic conflicts and turmoil to persist and flare up in the western region of Burma. Nevertheless, it is comforting to know that except for the bigoted ultra-nationalists, most Rakhines are not anti-Rohingya.

Racial, ethnic and religious prejudice runs so deep in Burma that it is not so surprising to see hesitation on the part of some Burmese democratic parties to accepting and cooperating with the Rohingyas as fellow comrades in joint struggle for freedom, democracy and human rights in Burma. Fortunately again, except for a small group of misunderstood, misinformed or deluded individuals, not all Burmese democratic activists are anti-Rohingya. These are symptoms of Burma’s obstacle to democracy. Such anti-democratic thinking is against the concept of pluralism and multi-racial society. These are challenges to the values of tolerance and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Amongst the exiled Rakhine/Burmese leadership, lamentably, democratic parties like the ANC (Arakan National Council, formed by Rakhaing – exiles in India), ENC (Ethnic Nationalities Council, formed by exiles of many ethnic groups in Thailand), ALD (Arakan League for Democracy, the party that participated in the 1990 general election in Arakan winning 11 MP seats) also do not recognize Rohingya as an ethnic minority of Burma. Their attitude is not conducive towards development of genuine democracy in Burma.

In such a hopeless, truth-defying political landscape of doom and gloom, hatred and prejudice, when someone’s suffering is seen as other’s benefit, it is refreshing to recall that the genuine leadership of 1988 Generation students – ABSDF – came in support of the Rohingya people with due recognition of and respect for them. They embraced the Rohingya on broad-based political and democratic platform during and after Rohingya refugee exodus to Bangladesh. The ABSDF published a 22-page booklet in support of the Rohingyas.

In a nutshell, on racial and religious grounds, most of the Burmese ‘democrats’, except a few Burmese exiled groups and some Rakhaing individuals, knowingly or unknowingly refrain from or hesitate to accept the Rohingyas in their ranks and files. This type of chauvinistic, hostile and morally reprehensible attitude is no different than those preached and practiced by the BSPP/SLORC/SPDC military rulers against the Rohingyas. It is simply strengthening the hands and policies of the SPDC military junta and its tools of oppression for dividing the people of Burma along racial, ethnic and religious lines. Such an attitude of exclusion, as exhibited by many of so-called democratic leaders of Burma, is neither the way of democratic thinking nor does help thawing the Burmese-Rakhine-Rohingya relationship.

Suspicion and hatred of Rohingyas on racial and religious ground, and depriving them of their fundamental rights to survival as human beings with honor and dignity in their ancestral homeland is a crime against humanity. It is at variance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Those who want to exclude the Rohingyas in the mainstream democratic forces of Burma, particularly the Rakhaing democrats, raise the pretext that there is no ethnic group in Burma by the name of ‘Rohingya’. They claim that the Rohingyas are ‘illegal Bangalee (Bengali)’ people who entered Arakan during the British colonial period from 1824 to 1948 and, as such, they are not one of the nationals of Burma at all, but ‘foreigner residents’ and ‘stateless’ people.

In order to refute such malicious claims, I provide below the following facts:[1]

1. In the Burmese transliteration of the 8th century Anandasanda Stone Pillar inscription in the ancient capital city of Mrauk-U, the use of Rohingya words like Arakandesh (Arakan country), Raza (king), kam (job), etc., testify to the rich cultural heritage of the Rohingya people in Arakan. [Dr. Saw Tun Aung: Shittaung Phara Stone Pillar's Northern Side Inscription, Rakhine Welfare Association's 25th Anniversary Magazine, pp. 48-53]

2. Dr. Than Tun, the rector of Mandalay University and professor of history wrote, “The kings of Arakan had Muslim titles. The Muslim kings mentioned in the Kyaukza (stone plates or stones tablets inscriptions of 1442)[2] might be Rohingyas from the Mayu valley of the eastern Naf River (and the western Kaladan River) who claimed their existence of over thousand years. Their existence might be from the time of 1202 C.E. when their co-religious Muslims conquered Bengal, that is 800 years [ago]. It was written in the Kyaukza of 1442 that there were some Muslim kings of Arakan who were very friendly with the kings of Ava.” [Dr. G.H. Luce, "K’yan (Chin)" Mru and K’umi (N. Arakan)" Phases of Pre-Pagan Burma Languages and History, Oxford, SOAS, 1985-76-97; Dr. Than Tun, Kalya Magazine, pp. 27-28, 1994, August]

3. The British-Burma Gazetteers of 1879 stated: “Many Arab ships wrecked near Rambree Island of Arakan coast during the reign of Mahataing Sanda (788-810) and the crews and the traders of those ships were Muslims and they were sent to the Arakan proper and settled in villages, where the married local women.. … According to history, Islam came through the sea borne Sufis and merchants. These were testified by the darghas (shrines) which are dotted at the long coast of Arakan and Burma.” [p. 16]

4. The historian U Kyi wrote: “The superior morality of those devout Muslims attracted large number of people towards Islam who embraced it en masse.” [The Essential History of Burma by U Kyi, p. 160]

5. Zaya Kyaw Tin U Ba Shin wrote, “From 1430 A.D. Arakan was ruled by the Muslims.” [The Arrival of Islam in Burma, p. 5]

6. Francis Buchanan was a surgeon in 1795 to the British Embassy in Ava, the then capital of Burma. He wrote, “I shall now add three dialects, spoken in the Burma Empire. The first is that spoken by the Mohammedans, who have long been settled in Arakan and who call themselves Roanigya or native of Arakan.” [The Languages of Burma, Asiatic Researches (Calcutta), vol. 5, 1801]

7. The Time Atlas of the World History says, “Muslim kingdom of Arakan was independent in the 14th and 15th centuries.” [Time Atlas of the World History, edited in 1979 by Geoffrey Barraclough, p. 33]

8. The SLORC /SPDC Publication ‘Thasana Yongwa Htoonkazepo’ stated, “Muslims arrived and settled since last 1000 to 1200 years in Burma.” [The SLORC Publication 'Thasana Yongwa Htoonkazepo’ p. 65]

9. According to the 1947 Constitution of the Union of Burma, based on Aung San-Atlee agreement, “Every person who was born in any of the territories which at the time of his birth was included within His Britannic Majesty’s dominions and who has resided in any of the territories included within the Union for a period of not less than eight years in the ten years immediately preceding the date of the commencement of this Constitution or immediately preceding the 1st January 1942 and who intends to reside permanently there in and who signifies his election of citizenship of the Union in the manner and within the time prescribed by law, shall be a citizen of the Union. (Section 11, iv) Furthermore, the Constitution’s Citizenship Section 10 says, “There shall be but one citizenship throughout the Union.”[3]

10. The Union Citizenship Act, 1948 says: “Any person descended from ancestors who for two generations at least have all made any of the territories included within the Union their permanent home and whose parents and himself were born in any of such territories shall be deemed to be a citizen of the Union.” (Article 4.2)[4]

11. The First President of the Union of Burma U Sao Shwe Thaik acknowledged and announced that Rohingyas are an indigenous race and citizens of Burma, same as Shan, Kachin, Mon, Karen, and Rakhine.

12. Under the 1949 Residents of Burma Registration Act and the 1951 Residents of Burma Registration Rules, Rohingyas were issued Burmese NRC (National Registration Cards), which itself is a proof of their bona-fide citizenship and nationality since foreigners were excluded from the issuance of such cards. [The issuance of the NRC to Rohingyas was stopped by Ne Win military regime after 1962.]

13. The Registration of Foreigners Act (Burma Act VII, 1940)[5] did not require Rohingyas to be registered as foreigners, since they were regarded as Burmese nationals.[6]

14. The former Prime Minister U Nu made categorical statements concerning the Rohingya status. On September 25, 1954 at 8:00 p.m., U Nu made speech from the Burmese national Radio BBS (Burmese Broadcasting Services) stating, “The Rakhine State is situated towards the south-west of the Union. The Buthidaung and Maung Daw townships are included in the Sittwe Division of the Rakhine state. These two townships are bordering East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). The majority of the people in these two townships are Rohingyas who profess the Islamic faith.”

15. The former Burmese Defence Minister and Prime Minister U Ba Swe said at mass rallies at Buthidaung and Maung Daw on the 3rd and 4th of November, 1959 that “The Rohingyas are equal in every way with other minority races like the Shan, Chin, Kachin, Kayin, Kayah, Mon and Rakhine. They have lived in Myanmar Niang Ngan for ages, according to historical facts. They are of the Islamic faith. There is historical evidence that they have lived faithfully and harmoniously with other races of the Union.”

16. In his speech, Brigadier U Aung Gyi, Vice Chief of Staff at Maung Daw on July 4, 1961 at the ceremony of the resistance group who were fighting in the name of revolution since the independence of Burma stated that “Rohingyas are an indigenous race in Burma same as other ethnic groups such as Shan, Kachin, Karen, Mon and Rakhine.”

17. In recognition of the Rohingya as an indigenous ethnic minority, the Dean of Student Affairs, University of Rangoon, granted permission to organize and operate under the name of “University Rohingya Students Association” in 1959-61. [Note: foreign students could not organize under the Burmese Universities Act.]

18. The Parliamentary Democratic Government of U Nu allowed the broadcast of the Rohingya language program from May 15, 1961 to October 1, 1965 as per indigenous citizen’s program of BBS.

19. U Nu’s democratic government granted local autonomy to the Rohingyas and declared establishment of the Mayu Frontier Administration (MFA), a special frontier district ruled directly by the central government in the year 1961, May 30, which was abolished in 1964, on February 1, by Gen. Ne Win. [It is worth mentioning here that initially, General Ne Win recognized the Rohingyas as an indigenous race and citizen of Burma. (Dr. Shwe Lu Maung, The Price of Silence)]

20. The Encyclopedia Burmanica, published by the government in its Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 89-90, publication mentioned “Rohingya as an indigenous ethnic group living in northern Arakan.”

21. Rohingya Minister, MPs, Secretaries were given due honor and appropriate posts in the both the Houses of the Parliamentary Democratic Government in Burma from 1948 to 1962.

22. Rohingyas were recruited in army, navy and police forces as loyal Burmese citizens to defend the country and people of Burma from 1948 to 1962.

23. Rohingya political, social, educational, cultural organizations were duly recognized and approved by the proper Authorities for registration.

24. Rohingya ethnic cultural show was exhibited on the occasion of national parade of the National and Independence days.

25. The high school textbook on geography (1978) published by the Ministry of Education, Government of Burma, showed minority settlements in North Arakan where Rohingya people lived.

26. As Bona-fide citizens of Burma, the Rohingyas exercised their citizenship rights of votes and contested in all parliamentary general elections, held in Burma since 1936, including those in 1939, 1947, 1952, 1956, 1961, 1974, 1978 and 1990, and wining elections in their region. The participation in those elections, along with the assignment of the post of Health Minister in U Nu’s Cabinet further consolidate the indigenous status of Rohingyas and their citizenship or Burmese nationality.

27. The conspiracy to rob the Rohingyas of their inalienable fundamental rights of citizenship or Burmese nationality rights was initiated by the Ne Win’s Revolutionary Council at the persuasion of some Rakhaing ultra-nationalist and elite groups. [Dr. Aye Kyaw (now a US citizen) was one of the leaders of this group. He has written anti-Rohingya literary materials to misguide the Burmese people and military officers.] In site of such conspiratorial and xenophobic 1974 and 1982 citizenship laws – that were formulated by the BSPP/SLORC/SPDC rulers, they did not dare to bar the Rohingyas from exercising their rights to vote in Burma in the 1990 general election.

28. Burma Election commission and Immigration Departments recognized the Rohingyas as Bona-fide citizens by preparing the voter lists and granting and approving nominations of Rohingya candidates in the Multi-Party Democracy General Election of 1990. [In that election, the National Democratic Party for Human Rights (NDPHR) of the Rohingya ethnic people contested in 6 townships - Maungdaw, Buthidaung, Akyab (Sittwe), Mrauk U (formerly Mro-haung), Minbya and Kyauktaw in 9 constituencies and won 4 MP seats. The elected MPs were - U Kyaw Min (aka) Mohammad Shamsul Anwarul Hoque from Buthidaung Constituency (1), U Tin Maung (aka) Nur Ahmed from Buthidaung Constituency (2), U Ebrahim (aka) U Chit Lwin from Maungdaw Constituency (1) and U Fazal Ahmed from Maungdaw Constituency (2).] The approval of 9 electoral nominations from the NDPHR and other Rohingya candidates from other parties (e.g., Mayu Development Student Youth Organization (Arakan), led by U Kyaw Soe Aung and U Emtiyaz; National Ethnic Reformation Party led by U Khin Maung and U Shwe Bung Win, Amyothar (National) Party led by Rtd. Major-General (air) U Tun Kyaw Oo and Rohingyas, Indigenous Cooperation Party led by U Hussain Ahamed and U Fazal Kabir (alias) U Kyaw Thein in Arakan by the Burma Election Commission clearly shows that Rohingyas are not foreigners – they are neither guest citizens nor associate citizens. Otherwise those nominations would have been rejected on the basis of 1982 citizenship law.

29. The historian Moshe Yegar writes, “The Rohingyas preserved their own heritages from the impact of the Buddhist environment not only as far as their religion is concerned but also in some aspects of their culture.” [The Muslims of Burma: A Study of a Minority Group, p. 25]

It should be pointed out that in spite of their religious ties with Bengali Muslims, especially in the neighboring Chittagong area (Bangladesh), Rohingyas maintained certain distinctness from them.

1. Anthony Irwin writes, “The Musulman Arakanese, generally known as Bengalis or Chittagonians, quite incorrectly…. To look at, they are quite unlike any other product of India or Burma that I have seen. They resemble the Arabs in name, in dress and in habit. The women and more particularly the young girls have distinctive Arab touch about them…. As a race they have been here over two hundred years.” [Burmese Outpost, pub. Collins (London), 1945, p. 22]

2. The historian Moshe Yegar writes, “There is after all very little common – except common religion – between the Rohingyas of Arakan and the Indian Muslims of Rangoon or Burmese Muslims of the Shwebo district. These are different groups that do not identify with each other, do not share the same goal and aspiration.” [The Muslims of Burma: A Study of a Minority Group, p. 111]

3. U Thein Pei Myint, one of the most popular Burmese authors, writes, “Almost all Bengalis grow moustaches, Rohingyas do not keep moustaches. Wedding programs, marriage arrangements, feeding customs, foods and drinks are all different. Instrumental music, musical instruments and music, etc. are different. Hereditary festivities of boat-racing, paddy transplant competition, wrestling, riddles, bull-fight, buffalo-fight, etc., are held as Rohingya’s own traditional festivities. The culture of ‘collective labour volunteering’ exists among the Rohingya till today. Difference is more vivid in trade and profession. Haircutting, blacksmith, goldsmith, silversmith, laundry and shoe-making are very rare among the Rohingya as they conceive these are lowly and inglorious professions.” [From Myohaung to Paletwa, 1978 Ahte'tan Pinjin Zagabjei Le'jwei:zin (A high school Burmese textbook)

An oft-repeated argument by the Burmese chauvinists and Rakhine ultra-nationalists is that Muslims of Northern Arakan state participated, voted and became MPs in all general elections from 1937 to 1990 as Muslims and not as a Rohingyas.[7] I say: so, what? Are we not the same people? The British government recorded us along the religious line as Muslims. The Burmese government did not accept registration of political party bearing the name Rohingya during the political party registration process in 1989. Such government branding did not change what we are. We are the same people.

One must understand that ethnicity, indigenous or tribal status is not a factor or obstacle in the way of citizenship and nationality of Burma. One should be reminded here by the statement of General Aung San, the Father of our nation. Sixty years ago, during Panglong Meeting, in 11 February 1947, he said: “We have in Burma many indigenous peoples: the Karen, the Kachin, the Shan, the Chin, the Burmans and others… In other countries too there are many indigenous peoples, many “races.”… Thus “races” do not have rigid boundaries. Religion is no barrier either, for it is a matter of individual conscience… If we want the nation to prosper, we must pool our resources, manpower, wealth, skills and work together. … If we are divided, the Karen, the Shan, the Kachin, the Chin, the Burman, the Mon and the Arakanese, each pulling in a different direction, the Union will be torn, and we will come to grief. Let us unite and work together.”

When asked about the Rohingyas and human rights, the Democracy icon Daw Aung San Suu Kyi replied in recent BBC interview: “Democracy does mean pluralism and democracy means equal basic human rights for everybody. I am confident that we can build up a really strong and united Burma. The signs are all here. In some ways, the sufferings we have undergone together have built up a tremendous feeling of trust among each other. Our sufferings have united us. I think the world has opened up in such a way that different cultures are able to reach across to each other. We all live in the same country – we have lived in the same country for centuries and because we have lived together so closely, we have had our problems. You have more problems with your neighbours than with people who live very far away from you – that’s only natural. But I think we can also learn to be very, very good neighbours in the same way because we all live in this country we can learn to be very good and loving towards each other. We can learn to trust each other, we can learn to work together, we can learn to live together and I think that learning process has already begun.” (Daw Aung San Suu Kyi on Rohingyas in BBC interview)

From the speeches of Burma’s Founding Father General Aung San to his daughter, hope of future Burma, Democracy icon Daw Aung San Suu Kyi all members of national races and democrats from Burma should understand that there is no place for racism and ethnic prejudice in a future democratic Burma.

Identification of an ethnicity is the right of a group of people who share common heritage, language, culture and history, living in a defined territory as a compact community for a countable period of time. No one or authority can impose their criteria, their Litmus test upon them by force or decree.

The Muslim population of Arakan who believe they are native people of Rohang /Mrohang (Rohingya name of Rakhapura/Rakhaing Prey) identify themselves today as the Rohingyas per their free will and aspiration. They want to be known by this name by others with due respect.. It is their natural and basic right to live in peace and harmony with sister communities of Burma as loyal and worthy citizens of the soil of Arakan. There is nothing to interfere about or to discredit the Rohingyas with other names that they disapprove of by any third party or other national races including the Rakhaings. The name should not and cannot be a factor at all when determining the nationality or citizenship status.

Further evidences to Rohingya’s ancestry in Arakan are documented in the writings of famous historians like Hall, Harvey and Professor Desai who mentioned that the population of Arakan before the 10th century CE was of Indian stock, i.e., similar to Bengalis in Bangladesh today. As we know, over the last millennium, many of these Bengalis became Muslims. Similarly, many of the original inhabitants of Arakan that looked like their neighbors in today’s Bangladesh also became Muslims. They identify themselves as the Rohingyas.

It is also known that foreign trade of Arakan before the Portuguese arrival in the late 15th century was solely in the hands of Arabs and that there were many Arab colonies in Kyauk-La-Ga and Mrauk-U, the then capitals of Arakan. Due to the presence of these colonies and the ensuing intercourse of Arabs, many natives Arakanese became Muslims (The Muslims of Burma: A Study of a Minority Group by Moshe Yegar).

The most shining dynasty of Arakan was the Mrauk-U dynasty. It was founded by Naramikla (alias) Sulaiman (1403—1433 CE), who had lived in exile for more than two decades. He took military help from the Bengal Muslim King to restore his kingdom. From King Naramikla to Sandathudama in 1652 CE more than 15 Arakanese kings adopted Muslim titles and used coins bearing Muslim inscription. Even their judicial system was based along Muslim line. Many ministers, high-ranking officials, members of army were Muslims. Descendents of these Muslims commingled with former native people comprising today’s Rohingyas. (The History of Chittagong, Vol. 1 by Dr. S. B. Kunango, University of Chittagong)

There were thousand of captive Muslim settlements in Arakan during Mrauk-U dynasty. Magh (Atrakanese Buddhist) pirates and Portuguese slave hunters brought these captives to Arakan on a regular basis. According to Arthur Phayre, this population consisted of 15% of total population of Arakan.. (Travelogue of Father Manrique)

Arakan history is replete with the fact that during the dispute between Moghul Prince Shah Shuja, who took asylum in Arakan and Arakan king Sandathudama, in the early 1660s, Prince Shuja found a considerable number of Muslims to take side with him.

The British Official Mr. Paton’s Report in 1825 categorized the population of Arakan as 6:3:1, i.e., 60,000 Arakanese Buddhists, 30,000Arakanese Muslims, and 10,000 Burmans. This report shows that when the Great Britain occupied Arakan, there was 1 Muslim living there for every two Arakanese Buddhists. (A. C. Banarjee, The Eastern Frontier of British India, Calcutta, 1964, p. 351)

Towards our ancestral origin to Arakan, let me now submit some historic edifices of Rohingyas:

(a) The Sandi Khan Mosque in Minthaya Bying Village (Kawalong), Mrauk-U, was built by the Muslim Army that restored Narameikhla to the throne of Arakan in 1433. This mosque was partially destroyed by the SLORC (current the SPDC).

(b) The Musa Mosque, popularly known as the Maiz-zya Pal-lee, with its big pond in the eastern Mrauk-U in 1513-15.

(c) The Rakhine Ja-may Mosque at Shwe Daung village in Moulmein was built by the Muslim Army of Arakan during Arakanese King Min Raza Gri’s time (1593-1612).

(d) The Alam Lashkar Mosque with its ten ponds around it in Pan Myaung Village in Minbya township of Arakan.

(e) The Shwe Dah Kazi Mosque, which was built by Shwe Dah Kazi before 1780. [Note: Kazi died in Calcutta Jail after arrest during the First Anglo-Burma War, fighting against the British Occupation Forces in Minbra Township of Arakan.] The Kazi Mosque in Paik Thay Village is in Kyauktaw township of Arakan.

(f) The Bodor Mokam Mosque — built in the 18th century.. This is presently occupied as a military Cantonment.

(g) The Musa Dewan Mosque at Nazirpara, near the Muslim graveyard in Akyab.

(h) There was another mosque known as Nan-Oo Pal-lee in front of the old Palace in Mrauk-U, which was totally demolished by the SLORC, all in defiance of the 1972 UNESCO Convention.]

(i) All the settlements of Rohingyas in Arakan are located along the most important and fertile rivers of Arakan such as Meyu, Kaladan, Lae Myo, which testify to the fact that Rohingya settlements in Arakan are as old as history; hence, as one of the first settlers to the land, they could occupy the fertile areas of Arakan.

(j) There are many other proofs and evidences of Rohingyas’ ancestry and settlement in Arakan that I could have cited. However these are beyond the scope of discussion here.

As has been amply demonstrated above, Rohingyas are indigenous to Arakan. The anti-Rohingya campaign to deny their birthrights to the land of Arakan is wrong – both factually and morally. It is deceitful, malicious and hostile to the core.

It must be stressed further that the 1974 and 1982 Burma Citizenship Laws are products of unelected, usurping, dictatorial military junta that had neither the mandate to pass any law on the citizenship of Burmese multi-ethnic people nor the legitimacy to hold national convention to draw a new constitution for the legalization of the rule of the military dictatorship. These laws are illegal and unacceptable to the people of Burma including the affected Rohingyas of Arakan. Above all, these discriminatory laws are at odds with scores of charters and laws governing citizenship around the world. They vehemently undermine the human rights of the Rohingyas and at the same time have been posing a big impediment in the promotion of democracy not just within Arakan but in the entire Union of Burma.

Apart from such exclusionary racial and religious prejudices against minorities, factors that contribute to unease, suspicion, tension and hatred in a reminiscent of the Belfast scenario of the yesteryears, there is a plethora of factors that are also challenging to the democratic development in Burma. There are many inside Burma, from the SPDC military junta to selfish pro-junta business tycoons, who fear to lose power and fortune if democracy were to be established in Burma. Then, there are outside powers like China, India and Russia that benefit from trade and commerce with the military-run Burma. Shamelessly, they care less about genuine aspirations of the people inside Burma.

Democracy is about equality and rights, respect for dignity and sovereignty of people. Double standard is anti-thesis to democracy; playing racial or religious favoritism with a dominant group and oppressing a minority is not democracy.

The human rights violations faced by the Rohingyas include not only the denial of citizenship, but also forced labor, extortion by the members of law enforcing agencies (Nasaka), rape, abduction, severe restrictions on job, education, health and human services, movement and marriage, and practice of religion and culture – all signifying a total, abysmal absence of basic human rights. By any account, the Rohingya community is the worst victim of targeted harassment, torture and persecution.

If democracy movement leaders of Burma fail to face the challenges of inter-ethnic conflicts, human rights violation, xenophobia, intolerance, extremism, racism and increasing inequalities, such problems will continue to pose significant threats to peace and stability of Burma. They will not foster democracy, but secession or rebellion with every national/ethnic community trying to walk out of the Federation. They can also be, as has already been proven in the last century through the influx of Rohingya refugees to Bangladesh, destabilizing forces in South and South-east Asia.

The word ‘democracy’ cannot remain confined within slogans only. Understandably, if democracy awareness campaign is not undertaken during the course of democratic movement in Burma today, and if we do not bring these important but neglected issues to the attention of the fellow countrymen and the leading democrats, and fail to come up with honorable solutions that unite us all (from Rohingya to Rakhine, Shan to Mon to Burman to Karen, etc.) on an equal basis, I am afraid, even if today’s SPDC were to leave letting Burma celebrate democracy, our victory will be superficial and very short-lived. It won’t be too long that Burma became a failed democracy with a revisit of the brutal military rule.

Burmese democrats and educationists must, therefore, play a very progressive role in combating intolerance and racism. They must promote dialogue, understanding and respect of various communities that make up today’s Burma to bring about the much-needed changes in thought and actions within multi-ethnic institutional framework. In this endeavor, the present democratic leadership can exchange information, and discuss areas of concern, and, most importantly, initiate reconciliation at all levels of policy- and decision- making within and between rank and file of all groups and parties. The road to a future stable, peaceful and progressive Burma lies in mutual trust and respect between leaders and their followers and constituents.

In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, all members of the progressive Burmese democratic forces need to agree and accept that all individuals of Burma – born there (including those born of refugee parents outside), regardless of their ethnic or social background, religion or state of residence – are bona fide Citizens of Burma and must have the same basic human and democratic rights. They must demand a cessation of all hostilities and human rights violations against all minorities.. They cannot afford to be unmindful of the sufferings of all the communities that make the fabric of today’s Burma. This type of thinking will energize all minorities fostering a united movement for democracy inside Burma. It will aid in conflict management and resolution of the critical issues dealing with the Rohingyas and other minorities in Burma. It will also be a stabilizing force to sustain democracy. Let’s all work for that goal.

For further information Please contact:-

Mohiuddin (aka)Maung Sein, Tel:1-646-625-9407

President

Rohingya Concern International (RCI)

PO Box-567,NY-14213,USA

[About the Author: Mr. Maung Sein (alias) Mohiuddin Yusof is a human-rights activist. He served as the President of NDPHR (exile) USA from 2005 to 2008. He was also the Diplomatic Representative of ALD - exile-(Arakan League for Democracy) and ex-Coordinator of ALD-Liaison Office (Malaysia), one of the founding members and Chief Coordinator of Arakan Democratic Forces (ADF - Malaysia) under the leadership of Dr. Shwe Lu Maung (alias) Shahnawaz Khan (1997-1999), ex-Chairman and a founding member of the Organization of Displaced Rohingya Muslims (ODRM – Malaysia) in 1993-1999, Convener and ex- president of Arakan Peoples’ Freedom Party (APFP) in 1990, Ex-President of Rohingya Human Rights Organization (RHRO) in 1988, Ex-Vice President of Rohingya Muslim Welfare Association (RMWA) in 1987, former Secretary and EC member of Muslim Salvation Party (Tanzeem Khuddamul Musleemin) in 1973 - 1978.

Mr. Mohiuddin was also the chief Coordinator of the Organizing Committee of the First International Conference in Japan on the Problems of Democratic Development in Burma and the Rohingya people. He now lives in New York City, USA.

Mr. Mohiuddin is originally from Mrauk-Oo (formerly known as Mro-haung). He is the grand-son of U Shormuluk from Mrauk-U Township, where his family lived for hundreds of years in Mrauk-U until moving recently to Akyab (Sittwe). His lineage is from the aristocratic family of U Shormuluk in Mrauk–U who were the custodians of the ancient Sindi Khan Mosque (built in 1433) for more than 200 years. The historical mosque was demolished by extremist and ultra-nationalist Rakhaings under the aegis of SLORC/SPDC brutal military forces. His grand-father was also the Custodian of Nenn Oo Palli (Palace Mosque) of Alay-zay (Mrauk-U, ancient capital city of Arakan Kingdom), which was also demolished by anti-Muslim forces.]

——————————————————————————–

[1] For more details, see the article: “Rohingyas are not British Era Settlers: Summary of the Facts – From the Rohingyas of Arakan” by A.F.K. Jilani, 6 October 2006 , http://www.rohingya.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=61.

[2] Stone Plate Inscription” serial No. 963/20-23-804

[3] For details, see The Price of Silence by Dr. Shwe Lu Maung, DewDrop, USA (2005), p. 228-231; http://www.blc-burma.org/html/Constitution/1947..html#CITIZENSHIP.

[4] http://www..ibiblio.org/obl/docs/UNION_CITIZENSHIP_ACT-1948.htm

[5] http://www..blc-burma.org/html/Burma%20Code/lr_e_bc01_11.html

[6] It is worth noting that the Immigration Department of Arakan State keeps a diligent record of foreigners within the state. According to a report issued by Arakan Security and Administration Committee, only 1037 individuals were registered as foreigners in 1974. The Rohingyas did not belong in the list.

[7] The practice of registering Muslim population along the religious line rather than ethnic or racial line owes it to the British administrative policy, something that can also be seen in Sri Lanka , when registering the Tamil Muslim minority as only “Muslims.” The same practice was adopted by the British when recording the Rohingya Muslim population in Burma .