• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Ethnic cleansing in Burma


cimon9999

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2009
Messages
879
A sad, shocking yet familiar video from the guardian on the situation in Burma.

At least 130 Burmese refugees drown in shipwreck | World news | guardian.co.uk

Some of those now fleeing their homes were Burmese Muslims from the officially recognised Kaman minority. "It's the first time that we've seen the Kaman targeted. That's very worrying," said Mabrur Ahmed, of Restless Beings, a UK-based human rights group.

The UN estimate there are 800,000 Rohingya in Burma. Although many have lived in the country for generations, they are considered illegal immigrants and face widespread hostility.

In June President Thein Sein suggested the best solution to the violence was that the UN resettle Burmese Rohingya outside the country.
St. Suu Kyi is curiously silent on the issue:

The iconic international image of Burma's charismatic opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi is rapidly losing its lustre as she maintains her silence on the continuing violence in her country's westernmost Rakhine State.
I don't suppose the oil companies have much to say either:

“Myanmar is very under-explored,” said Managing Director D.K. Sarraf of ONGC Videsh Ltd., the Indian oil company’s overseas unit. “We think there are large reserves of both oil and gas that are yet to be found,” Sarraf said by phone from New Delhi. “We expect intense competition for assets there.”
Even democracy activists in Yangon, Myanmar’s biggest city, refuse to acknowledge the Rohingyas as Burmese citizens. Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader, has said she does not know if they are or not. Thein Sein, the reform-minded president, said in June that the only solution was for the Rohingyas to relocate to another country. Shocking as this sounded to many foreigners, to most Burmese, and virtually every Rakhine, it was no more than a simple statement of fact.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,628
Twitter
Deiscirt
Both sides of this conflict agree on one thing. That the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma. It's very sad for the people born into that community. What a hand to be dealt.
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
21,046
Both sides of this conflict agree on one thing. That the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma. It's very sad for the people born into that community. What a hand to be dealt.
So are they in favour of being of massacred and deported? Please explain.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,628
Twitter
Deiscirt

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
21,046
You said all parties agreed the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma (even though that's where they are from). Where should they be in your opinion?
 

TheMushyStuff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 2, 2010
Messages
2,530
Both sides of this conflict agree on one thing. That the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma. It's very sad for the people born into that community. What a hand to be dealt.
That's a bit like saying Irish shouldn't be in Nortern Ireland because the Brits took over. Rohingya are native population to the region and has been since the 8th century.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,628
Twitter
Deiscirt
You said all parties agreed the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma (even though that's where they are from). Where should they be in your opinion?
That's because The Burmese don't want them in Burma and the Rohingya don't want to be in Burma. I am not sure what mental route you took from there to get to "they [the parties] are in favour of being of massacred and deported"
 

Global Justice

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 4, 2011
Messages
13,520
That's a bit like saying Irish shouldn't be in Nortern Ireland because the Brits took over. Rohingya are native population to the region and has been since the 8th century.
Not ironic that the colonial-imperial Brits played a role in the tribal/nationalist antagonisms in Burma?
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,628
Twitter
Deiscirt
That's a bit like saying Irish shouldn't be in Nortern Ireland because the Brits took over.
Nah, its more like saying the Rohingya don't identify with the Burmese state and the Burmese State doesn't want to include the Rohingya. Which is the case.

Rohingya are native population to the region and has been since the 8th century.
Well, that's problematic. Because the "Rohingya" has become a general catch-all term used to refer to muslims in that part of Burma (They Rohingya exist elsewhere too). Arab settlement goes back to the 8th century, but most of the "Rohingya" (itself a disputed term) arrived there as Bengalis in the 19th Century when the muslim population in that part of the world trebled due to the varying shennanigans of the British empire. This explains why many Burmese view them as Immigrants (I am not saying I share that view).

In any case, I can only sympathise with anyone born into such a situation.
 

sparkey321

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,385
Rohingya are native population to the region and has been since the 8th century.
No they haven’t... Where did you hear that crap ?

If you are referring to the group or Muslim Arabs that were shipwrecked back in the 8th century they live in a completely different area and do not call themselves Rohingya.

The bulk of the current community known as the Rohingya are from Bangladesh and other surroundign countries and not Rohingya at all. The true Rohingya are probably settlers from Bengal who were encouraged to move into the region by the British.

For decades if not longer there has been friction between the Rohingya and the ethnic Rakhine often turning to violence. In the bad old days it was suppressed by the regime in Myanmar but since things have opened up you have been hearing about it.



As for Suu Kyi she has not been silent on the issue at all. Far from it.

She has always strongly supported the Rakhine who are considered one of the 7 racial groups that are considered to constitute the Burmese population. If she even hinted otherwise her entire support base in Myanmar would disappear.

To most Burmeese the issue isnt that the Rakhine are oppressign and attacking the Rohingya its that the Rohingya its that the Rohingya have been oppressing the Rakhine and they are convinced that Muslims from surrounding countries have been sneaking across the borders where as they are Muslim they are incorporated into the Rohingya and are breeding like rabbits. They are afraid that it will become a Muslin stronghold within Burma.

Before people start screaming at me I have never been in the region or spoken to Rohingya or Rakhine but I have been to other parts of Myanmar and spoken to a number of Burmese on the topic. Its a complicated issue and wrongs have been done on BOTH sides and current oppression is wrong.
 

TheMushyStuff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 2, 2010
Messages
2,530
Nah, its more like saying the Rohingya don't identify with the Burmese state and the Burmese State doesn't want to include the Rohingya. Which is the case.
You are talking about Burma now a state like North Korea for years who has abused not only its own people but ethnic minorities too.
Also a state that removed the nationality of its own people.
Well, that's problematic. Because the "Rohingya" has become a general catch-all term used to refer to muslims in that part of Burma (They Rohingya exist elsewhere too). Arab settlement goes back to the 8th century, but most of the "Rohingya" (itself a disputed term) arrived there as Bengalis in the 19th Century when the muslim population in that part of the world trebled due to the varying shennanigans of the British empire. This explains why many Burmese view them as Immigrants (I am not saying I share that view).

In any case, I can only sympathise with anyone born into such a situation.
The problem with that idea is that they don't speak Bengalimand they certainly did NOT arrive with the British.
Rohingya people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rohingya people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
10,628
Twitter
Deiscirt
You are talking about Burma now a state like North Korea for years who has abused not only its own people but ethnic minorities too.
Also a state that removed the nationality of its own people.
That's right.

The problem with that idea is that they don't speak Bengalimand they certainly did NOT arrive with the British.
Rohingya people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rohingya people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The origins are disputed. And their origins are not material to the comment I made (to which you initially responded). The Burmese don't want them. They don't want the Burmese and I feel sorry for anyone finding themselves in that position.
 

TheMushyStuff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 2, 2010
Messages
2,530
The origins are disputed. And their origins are not material to the comment I made (to which you initially responded). The Burmese don't want them. They don't want the Burmese and I feel sorry for anyone finding themselves in that position.
Origins do matter to the people because it in the land they are settled in.
So maybe they should have a separate state or at least self autonomy like the Kurds have.
 

Glaucon

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 13, 2012
Messages
8,308
Where is Aung San Suu Kyi in all of this? She appears to have gone mysteriously quiet......
 

sparkey321

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,385
You are talking about Burma now a state like North Korea for years who has abused not only its own people but ethnic minorities too.
Also a state that removed the nationality of its own people.


The problem with that idea is that they don't speak Bengalimand they certainly did NOT arrive with the British.
Rohingya people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The problem is that term has come to mean all musilms in the region.
 

sparkey321

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
1,385
Where is Aung San Suu Kyi in all of this? She appears to have gone mysteriously quiet......
Thats not true.

She has consistently supported the Rakhine who are considered one of the 7 racial groups that are considered to constitute the Burmese population. If she even hinted otherwise her entire support base in Myanmar would disappear.
 

TheMushyStuff

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 2, 2010
Messages
2,530
The problem is that term has come to mean all musilms in the region.
That is the problem, no one looks at the ethnic groups within the regions.
 

gijoe

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
15,419
Interesting to note that the 'Noble Peace Prize' winner and general darling of the liberal left Ann San Sun Kyi is staying silent on this and her party locally are providing tacit support for the deportation of Muslims out of Burma.....oh what a tandled web we weave.....
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
21,046
That's because The Burmese don't want them in Burma and the Rohingya don't want to be in Burma.
So why are they there then? Is it because they come from there?
 
Top