ASEAN LEADERS ARE BARKING AT THE WRONG TREE WITH THE WRONG CAUSE AND WRONG OBJECTIVE

ASEAN LEADERS ARE BARKING AT THE WRONG TREE 

WITH THE WRONG CAUSE AND WRONG OBJECTIVE

 

ASEAN leaders are complaining about the convenient way to solve the Rohingya problem.

But for the Rohingyas or Burmese Muslims or Christian Chins/Karens/Kachins and Buddhist Mons/Shans/Burmese etc AND the NLDS  and political opponents and armed rebel groups_

Whether the SPDC would accept them back is not their main concern. What is the consequences after repatriation is their only problem.

Jailed? Tortured? Is the main concern for all but ‘Village arrest’ (for Rohingyas only) is the problem.

No democracy, no Human Rights, no political life, no respect for the Rights of religious minorities and Ethnic minorities is their main concern.

But the lack of development, economic problems back home are the most important fact for all of them.

There is no clear cut line to DEFINE OR CATEGORIZE THEM INTO POLITICAL OR ECONOMIC MIGRANTS. 

Continue reading

Grandpa of Jamal, a story about the Independence Hero (In Burmese)

 ဂ်မားတို႔အဖိုး

ေဇာ္မင္း ( လူေဘာင္သစ္ )

သူ႔မွာ ဗမာနာမည္ ရိွေပမဲ့ သူငယ္ခ်င္း အားလံုးက ငယ္ငယ္တည္းက “ဂ်မား” ဆိုေသာ အိမ္နာမည္ကိုသာ ေခၚၾကေသာ ေၾကာင့္ ဗမာနာမည္ကို ဘယ္သူမွ မမွတ္မိေတာ့။ ဂ်မား၊ နီတြတ္ႏွင့္ ကံသိန္းတို႔သည္ ႏွစ္တန္းေလာက္ ကတည္းက လည္ပင္းဖက္၍ ေက်ာင္းေနခဲ့သူမ်ားလည္း ျဖစ္သည္။

 

ဂ်မားမိဘေတြရဲ့ အသက္ေမြးဝမ္းေက်ာင္း လုပ္ငန္းက ဘဲေမြးျမဴျခင္း။ သူတို႔မိသားစုက အစၥလမ္ဘာသာ ကိုးကြယ္၍ အိႏိၵယႏြယ္ဖြား ေသြးေႏွာထားေသာ ရုပ္ေရ သြင္ျပင္ကို ပုိင္ဆုိင္ၾကသည္။

 

သူတို႔ရြာက လူအမ်ားစု သည္ မြတ္စလင္မ်ား ျဖစ္သည္။ ထိုရြာသားတို႔သည္ ေရွးဗမာ ဘုရင္မ်ား အဆက္ဆက္ လက္ေအာက္တြင္ အမႈထမ္းခဲ့ၾကေသာ ျမန္မာမြတ္စလင္ စစ္သည္ေတာ္ အႏြယ္မ်ားမွ ဆင္းဆက္လာ သူမ်ားလည္း ျဖစ္သည္။

Continue reading

Deafening silence from Malaysia regarding Myanmar Cyclone?

Deafening silence from Malaysia regarding Myanmar Cyclone?

 

First of all I wish to apologize if I am wrong.

 

If Malaysian Government had already sent the condolence note to Myanmar, I am sorry for writing this.

 

If Malaysian Government, GLCs (government Linked companies), NST, TV3, NTV7, RTM and NGOs (esp. government affiliated) had already started a campaign to help Myanmar, please accept my  apology for wrongly writing this posting.

 

If you all haven’t done anything, it is shame on you.

 

We don’t want a cent from you Kaisu Malaysia!

 

 

We know that we are not Orang Puteh (Whiteman) , no Arab blood and have no Malay-Indonesian blood. We are ALWAYS discriminated in your country.

 

Never mind if you do not wish to recognize the undocumented workers/migrants and asylum seekers.

 

During the great disaster in Myanmar, I hope if Malaysian government could do the followings to help us without spending a cent.

 

Please announce amnesty on all the Myanmar/Burmese undocumented workers/migrants and asylum seekers including those already in the detention camp. (At least if they could work and earn, they could help their families, relatives and friends.)

 

You could put a time limit for example six months to one year.

It is shameful that you are heartless to continue arresting and some of your agents are harassing them daily.

 

Dr San Oo Aung

 

17 Myanmar Illegal Immigrants Held In Kelantan

BERNAMA, RANTAU PANJANG, May 6 (Bernama) — The Anti- Smuggling Unit (UPP) Tuesday arrested 17 Myanmar nationals without valid travel documents in Kampung Kempas, Machang, as they were being smuggled into the country by a syndicate.

Kelantan UPP commander Mazlan Che Hamid said the Myanmar nationals, aged between 16 and 30 years, had been turned over to the Immigration authorities.

He said the van driver, a Malaysian, stopped the vehicle by the roadside and fled after realising that it was being tailed by UPP personnel at 4.30 am.

The UPP personnel had followed the van from Kampung Kedap here, some 40 km from Machang, he said.

— BERNAMA

What was I sent here (as an Indian) for ?

 What was I sent here  (as an Indian) for ?

Natalie Shobana Ambrose | in Malaysiakini 

Please read my heartfelt feelings, written below, after reading this article_

Persian poet Jalal ad-Din Muhammad Balkhi (fondly know as Rumi) wrote, “The human being therefore has come into the world for a specific purpose and aim. If one does not fulfil that purpose, one has done nothing.

When I was younger I remember wishing so hard that I wasn’t Indian. Many times I’d ask my mother if I looked like I was of mixed parentage – my mother’s straight to the point answer ‘Of course you look Indian. What else would you look like? Both your parents are Indian. ‘

Much to my disappointment, without a shadow of doubt – I was Indian. My attempts to not stand in the sun didn’t help me on the fairness graph either.

It wasn’t that I didn’t like the way I looked or my inherited ability to roll my ‘r’s’. I just didn’t want to be Indian because of the stigma of being Indian.

To me, being Indian meant that we were not the brightest lot, we were poor, didn’t have much of a future and enjoyed fraternizing around coconut trees singing songs to our heart’s content.

But that wasn’t me. I refused to be defined by society’s perception of Indians.

No matter how hard I tried not to be Indian, I was derogatorily called Tangachi (literally, little sister, but often denoting, cutie or ah-moi) and would be teased by students of other races attempting to speak Tamil (something only fellow Indians would understand).

I grew up not seeing Indians on TV unless on the news, – usually at a crime scene – and I grew up listening to radio adverts mocking the Indian accent. Surrounded by all these observations, who in their right mind would want to be Indian?

Anything but Indian I pleaded. Anything! It must have been quite an amusing sight but an even more common sight in today’s Malaysia.

I’ve grown up since then, and fully embrace my Indian heritage. But what about society?

Of course the likes of Aishwarya Rai and Shilpa Shetty, the glamorization of Bollywood moves and movies has helped in the acceptance of being Indian. But what does it mean to be a Malaysian Indian?

Always #3

 

Am I, Malaysian first and Indian second? Or am I, Indian first and Malaysian second?

The reality of living in Malaysia means that we are defined by race. Every application form we fill subjects us to define ourselves by race and the Indian box is always at its highest position at number 3.

It didn’t matter that my parents raised their children to believe that we could be anything we wanted to if we really wanted to, because society dictated otherwise and the law makes sure we remember our ‘standing’ in the country. Always #3, nothing more.

I remember clearly being defined by race from a very young age. I remember while in primary school, my class teacher (who I thought was a very nice Malay lady) told the whole class that I looked like her maid.

Not a very clued-in child, I thought, well her maid must be very pretty. Little did I realise what had just happened. Of course, when I got home and spoke of my day to my mother this compliment turned into the bitter reality of class-fuelled racism. I had been indirectly told I was #3 in the scheme of things!

I never understood what I had done for someone whom I respected – and my teacher of all people – to treat me in such a manner.

In a perfect world, we would not see colour, but the reality is we do see colour and we interpret and place judgments – good or bad based on our biases, socialization and upbringing.

Maybe if we acknowledged that racism does exist in us, we might be better able to address it. It is a bit of a radical idea in harmonious unified Malaysia, but we all are biased to a certain extent. It’s just that some people are able to conceal it better than others – but it that doesn’t mean it doesn’t’ exist.

I’m not advocating racism, in fact the opposite. I’m looking for a solution. The first step to any recovery is acknowledging the problem, – if not what are we trying to fix?

We may have different likes and beliefs – but when does a preference become racism?

I believe it is when a sales person refuses to let you try on a dress because he thinks you can’t afford it. It is when a quota system limits you to the right of an education of your choice. Or when a job advertisement specifies what race, age and gender you should be before you can even apply.

It is when scholarships are limited by race and not test scores, it is when you have to pay more for the same house your neighbour has – on top of paying for your child’s education because there weren’t spaces left for your race in the public tertiary education system.

How then are we to love our neighbours?

When life is defined and limited to race, problems arise. When people are suppressed, repressed, bullied and forced to be voiceless a country suffers.

For today, we, as a nation may look well, but will Malaysia have a multicultural society to brag about in twenty years to come or would we have to scour foreign lands for sightings of Malaysians?

 Tolerating one another

 

 As a nation, our greatest asset is the fact that we are a multicultural people, and as the travel brochures would say ‘living in harmony with one another’. Or, as the Tourism Malaysia ad says, Malaysia – Truly Asia!

Somehow it has become a song we sing rather than a reality we practice. In many ways, it should read Tolerating One Another. After all that is what we do best – tolerate.

The very word advocates hatred. We should not have to put up with each other, rather we should embrace one another and strive to understand each other better …. not looking at race or religion.
The only way to do this is to spend time with each other instead of allowing our prejudice to distance us from one another.

It sounds very much like my moral classes back in the day. Maybe we should all hold hands and sing Kum-Ba-Yah or Rasa Sayang and sit around a bonfire and magically we will be transformed.

A huge part of me wishes I hadn’t spent all those years trying so hard not to be Indian. But an even bigger part of me hopes that young Indian children don’t feel like they have to apologize for being an Indian in Malaysia – for this is the only country they can call home.

Have migration enquiries to other countries increased in the last six months? I don’t think we need statistics to confirm it. As a young Indian living in Malaysia, why wouldn’t I embrace a country that allows me to be the best I can be without penalizing me for my race? As I ponder on RÅ«mÄ«’s words, I wonder to myself, will Malaysia allow me to fulfil my purpose or will I stay and achieve nothing.

Please read my feelings after reading the above article_

All the Indians and mixed blooded Indians are sufferring in Myanmar.

You still have here_

Indian MP, Indian Minister, IndianDeputy Minister, Indian Political secretries, Indian opposition leaders, Indian Judges, Indian Military officers, Indian Police Officers, Indian Ambasadors, Indian Immigration Officers – – -e.t.c.

You still have here_

Indian schools, Indian TV Channel, Indian Newspapers, Indian Radio Stations, Indian Journals, Indian Magazines, Indian Movie Theatre- – -e.t.c.

But in our Myanmar or Burma, sadly NON of the above could be found.

If your face have Indian features, dark skin, sharp nose, beard (shaved or not), whether you are Hindi or Muslim or Christian you are discriminated at each and every corner you turn!

Myanmar Military rulers are labeling all the Indians as guest citizens, ‘Kala’ or mixed blooded persons or not pure citizens. That, however, could not make us, or people like us, to become non Burmese Citizens. We are Burmese citizens no matter how some might disagree, or wish otherwise or decreed by force. Whether mixed blooded or not is not important in the eyes of the whole world but SPDC could not deny our right of 100% pure Burmese citizenship!

We, and all the other persons like us, not just those Indians, Chinese, Bengalis or Pakistanis although we are undeniably mixed blooded immigrants’ children or descendants of immigrants, but we are now full Burmese Citizens. No matter what some like SPDC racists or their cohorts might say contrary.

Our great grand parents and all the ancestors were loyal citizens of Burma and all of them were and are holding the Burmese National Registration Cards or ‘Ah Myo Thar Mhat Pone Tin Cards’. My brothers and sisters’ family members are holding those Burmese National Registration Cards but now the SPDC Apartheid Régime had ordered to issue the differently formatted cards for their younger children. It is curious when the parents and elder brothers and sisters are the same citizens as our Burmese Buddhists at least on paper but now only their youngest children are blatantly or brazenly discriminated as different from others and their own elder siblings.

This racial discrimination is practiced on not only Muslims but on Chinese and Hindis. SPDC National Registration officers decreed that if any one is not pure Burmese Buddhist, could not claim to be pure blood and all the Burmese Muslims must be recorded as mixed blooded persons. Whether correct or not, know or not, must be enlisted as mixed blooded Indian, Pakistan or Bengali. So it is blatant Racial Discrimination or openly practicing Apartheid practice of SPDC Junta.

We believe that no one has that right to practice the issuing of Apartheid certificate or new type of Registration different from other citizens to us. By doing so, SPDC is clearly starting to commit a Genocide offence.

We wonder how that single document would change their dreams or what would be their vision of their world or Myanmar excluding them or shutting out all of them from all the opportunities. It is our children’s turning points of their lives. SPDC ruthlessly had shown them who they are, why and how they are not welcomed in Burma/Myanmar. As our children journey into an uncertain future, they will struggle and grapple with their sense of their rightful place in this Myanmar nation.

The constant emphasis on differences by the narrow minded SPDC apartheid racists who could not see value in these children prevent them from seeing them as anything other than Burmese Citizens.

Our country’s diversity makes us who we are and what we are today. And though we Burmese Indian Muslims, Burmese Hindus, Burmese Indian Christians may be different but we all are almost completely burmanized culturally but I am sure when we dream we dream as Burmese only because we know Burmese, we love Burmese, and Burmese only is in our heart and mind.

Successive Burmese Kings had accepted us as their loyal subjects or citizens, after Independence U Nu’s government had accepted us. And General Aung San had even promised us: “I want to address the Indians and Chinese residing in this country. We have no bitterness, no ill will for them, or for that matter for any race and nationality in the world. If they choose to join us, we will welcome them as our own brethren. The welfare of all people of this country irrespective of race or religion has always been the one purpose that I have set out to fulfill. In fact it is my life’s mission.”

But sadly those illegitimate illegal SPDC Régime is practicing Apartheid committing the Genocide on all of us.

I could guarantee to all of our Burmese friends that we are all Burmese in our heart and we have no intention or imagination to even support the foreign countries believed to be the homeland of our ancient ancestors even if Burma is at war with them!

Please give back our children at least a chance to dream. Please do not shut off their future.

 

 

Troubling times

Troubling times

Modified and edited the original comment written By P RAMAKRISHNAN . He is Aliran president and this article first appeared in Aliran Monthly and reprinted in Malaysiakini.

I have edited and adapted to the Myanmar context from the original article P RAMAKRISHNAN . I hope that the P RAMAKRISHNAN  and Aliran  could understand and forgive us for this. They should even be proud that they could contribute a very good article for the fellow Myanmar/Burmese citizens

The silent majority must wake up and take a stand against chauvinistic Myanmar Military who are using race and religion to stir the cauldron. These are troubling times and we have every reason to be troubled. Race and religion seem to be running riot and upsetting the equilibrium of our lives and portending a dangerous future for Myanmar/Burma.

Race and religion can cause discomfort and disquiet. They can be a very potent force that can threaten and shatter our fragile unity, undo our common efforts to live in peace and harmony.

We have witnessed these many months how unscrupulous people have used the issues of race and religion for their selfish ends without any consideration for the welfare of the country.

It is indeed sad that more than half-a-century of nationhood has not produced a common citizenry. We are still compartmentalised into our ethnic identities in so many ways. Whether it is your birth certificate, National Registration card, application forms, registering for an examination, getting married – whatever you do in Myanmar – you are forced to identify yourself along ethnic and religious lines.

It is only when we apply for passports to leave the country that most of us can identify ourself as a Myanmars. But once we return Myanmar, we lose that identity.

We should not be subjected to this moral shame. It is demeaning and undignified that I should leave the country as a Myanmar and return home as an Indian mixed blooded (read migrant).

Why is it so difficult to forge a common nationhood?

Shouldn’t that be the natural consequence of independence?

Wasn’t that the dream of our forefathers that eventually we would evolve into a nation with a common destiny, remaining true to our  Country?

But that was not to be so. Selfish communal politicians and Military leaders made sure that it is in their interest to keep the various races and religions apart. They never stopped stirring the cauldron of hate; they made sure that intolerance and prejudice would be there at all times, smouldering and simmering.

Stirring the cauldron

It was only recently that we witnessed how extreme the situation has become. It was shocking that so much venom was spewed with such impunity in the General Ne Win’s BSPP party convention prior to the formulation of the new Immigration Law, which was termed as ‘the most racially charged Tatmadaw event in years, shocking many people who read the proceedings and the apple-polisher newspaper articles, comments and editorials calling the Burmese Muslims, “Kala dein” or spawns of Indians and “Mi Ma Sit_Pha Ma Sit”, in Burmese meaning BASTARDS.

No one intervened to stop them from expressing so much antagonism, anger and hatred. Nobody chided them for their unbridled tirade. But, on the other hand, there was much cheering and approval for what was said.

Clearly some of the things that were said were without doubt seditious. They had a tendency to inflame emotions and provoke passions.

Actually every human being is willing to risk lives and bathe in blood in defense of race and religion. Don’t play with fire Tatmadaw leaders. If you mess with our rights, we will mess with yours.

 ‘When tension rises, the blood of Jehadist warriors could run in our veins’. And Burmese Muslims’ thread of driving the cars full with petrol tanks and jerry cans into the Buddhists homes and set the whole city on fire as the revenge had made the Military leaders, agitators and provocateurs to stop their plan to create more anti-Muslim riots.

 ‘Don’t test the patience of the Burmese Muslims and don’t play with fire’.

Japanese Bushido Samurais believe that once ‘You have unsheathed the knife KATANA, you must use it’

It was so bad and shocking that the level of open debate on issues relating to race and religion was worryingly threatening Myanmar Muslims. But it appeared that we were helpless to put a stop to this very damaging rhetoric that had a field day in Myanmar up to the present!

Insensitive, irresponsible

The remarks are intolerably rude, crude and insulting.

The hate-filled sentiments at the assembly, was regrettable and the whole Burma/Myanmar is shrouded in an atmosphere of fiery and emotional sentiments, remarks that were more poisonous and unreasonable.

They could raise issues of race, religion and citizenship. That is every government or leader’s rights. But the Myanmar Military leaders should not attack or hurt the feelings of other communities while highlighting the problems of one particular community…You think it’s very clever, but it hurts people’s feelings…Don’t do anything that will provoke.

The unkind debates over the mixed blooded Kala Deins are the cause for concern for all of us.

But it should not be viewed as if only the Myanmar-Muslims were upset and angry with what transpired Myanmar. A vast majority of well-meaning Burmese, both Buddhists, true monks and non-Muslims, were aghast that the Myanmar Military Junta and Military Intelligence or MI could have descended to such an atrocious level. They were disappointed that a dominant ruling Military Junta leaders could be so insensitive and irresponsible in dehumanising and demonising the fellow Muslim citizens.

Religious ultras, opportunistic politicians

While the racial approach is being played contemptuously, the religious approach is gaining a frightening momentum. It is fanned by the ultra-conservatives and opportunistic Military Generals who are hell-bent on changing the way of life that we have been accustomed to. They have gone into top gear to bring about changes that will ultimately affect all those who disagree with them by denying the very rights that are guaranteed under the old constitution and the late General Aung San.

Knowing that it is Tatmadaw that dictates policies and sets the directions of the country, citizens have cause to worry. Military Junta’s decisions become national policies with no regard for the majority opinion at the national level.

It is difficult to comprehend the reasoning for this uncompromising stand. They proclaim that Islam is in the assault mode on Buddhism but produce no evidence.

We wonder how is it possible to have mature democracies in the uncivilised military dominated Myanmar.

How is it there can be so much tolerance and mutual respect elsewhere that seems to be lacking here?

No problem before

There were no racial problem nor tensions before 1930 when the Bamas used the Nationalistic Spirit against the Indians and Muslims as a smoke-shield to start a revolution against Colonial rulers, British. Actually most of the Burmese Citizens had accepted the, One God, Many Paths, reflecting the viewpoints of Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Science.

Since then, things have taken a dramatic turn for the worse. It has become so intolerable that what used to be a natural thing as wishing and greeting one another during festive occasions and even visiting houses were abandoned in some towns.

Time to wake up

If we take a careful look at the way things are evolving, it reveals a minority vocal group in influential positions in the Myanmar Tatmadaw and MI who are dictating terms and deciding policies against Muslims of Myanmar. And as long as the majority who disagree with them stay sullen and silent, things will not get better – it will only become worse.

That is why it is necessary for the majority of Burmese to realise that unless we get together and take a common stand against the forces that pose a clear danger to our ethnic relations and harmony, we stand to lose all that we cherish.

Well-meaning people must get involved in this effort all over the country and send forth a clear message that if the present Military Junta leaders do not change, then we must change them for the good of the nation. We must not hesitate but act seriously and bravely.

Let us draw strength and hope from this saying:

‘It is from the numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped.

Each time a man stands up for an ideal or acts to improve the lot of others or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centres of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.

Don’t cry for me grandpa, Minister Mentor

Don’t cry for me grandpa, Minister Mentor

  

There is a Burmese saying_

Kyaw poo dar_khan naing thee

Naar poo dar_ma khan naing”.

  • Most of the peaple could bear the heat on the back of the body (prefer to work hard even under the sun)
  • but could not stand the (heat/ pressure) in the ears (read: brain / stress / undue pressure from the boss).

Some of us could prefer to work hard but could not stand the mental torture, pressure, or stress.

Yes! Even our Prophet (PBUH) had taught us_

If you do not want to donate to a beggar, use polite words to apologize.

But never insult the beggar even after you donated a large some of money.

Getting / money or not is far less important than getting an insult.

Money goes into the pocket only but the insult goes deep into our hearts.

So feeding the human’s mental ego is sometimes more important than just feeding the mouths.

Successive Burmese Governments used to discriminate us as foreigners, migrants, mixed blooded persons, Kalas (Migrant Indians/Indians), Kala Dein (Indian descendent)  and “Mi Ma Sit_Pha Ma Sit”. (The words meaning Bastards used by the the Burmese Chinese General Ne Win on Burmese Muslims. I think he never look at his own BASTARD FACE in the mirror!)

Most of us emigrated (migrated out) and left Myanmar not because of economic reason. As the professionals we could earn enough to stay in upper-middle strata in Myanmar and could earn some respect not only from the non-Muslims but from the Monks and even from the Military authorities. We just hate the unfair general discrimination on our race and religion. (As all the Military leaders are corrupt, we could even do anything in Myanmar after paying bribes. If the payment is good enough we could even get their daughter’s hands.)

Once the governments could fulfill (actually all the government leaders wrongly thought like that! They think they had done favours on their on citizens but actually the people are the masters of the governments. Although the governments’ policy and guidance  are important, it is the people who really works hard to achieve every thing for the country. And the give the salaries, of cause from their tax money, to those political leaders.) the physical and psycological needs of its citizens_

Food, shelter, clothing, employment is important but should understand that they also should take care of their social, mental and psycological needs.

SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT FAILS BECAUSE OF THAT FAILURE>

Just read the following article.

Don’t cry for me grandpa Lee,

Goodbye and thank you

Excerpts from article by SEAH CHIANG NEE.  Singapore’s emigration rate, one of the highest in the world on a per capita basis, is a blow to the government.

YEARS of strong economic growth have failed to stem Singapore’s skilled youths from leaving for a better life abroad, with the number topping 1,000 a year. 

This works out to 4%-5%, or three in 10, of the highly educated population, a severe brain drain for a small, young nation, according to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew. 

Such high-end emigration is usually associated with less better-off countries where living conditions are poor. Here the opposite is the case. 

The future doesn’t look better, either, despite Lee holding out promises of “a golden period” in the next five to 10 years. 

The emigration rate, one of the highest in the world on a per capita basis, is a blow to the government, particularly to Lee, who takes pride in building up this once poor squatter colony into a glittering global city. 

They are people who abandoned their citizenship for a foreign one, mostly in Australia, the United States and Canada. 

The emigrants, mostly professionals, don’t leave Singapore out of poverty but to seek a better, less pressurised life.  

Lee recently said the brain drain is touching close to this family. 

Lee’s grandson, the elder son of Prime Minister Hsien Loong, who is studying in the United States, has indicated that he may not return.  

Over the years, the children of several Cabinet ministers have also made Britain or the US their home.  

Lee, aged 84, has often spoken on the issue with emotions, once tearing when referring to the losses.  

However, he has offered no reasons for the exodus beyond economic opportunities, although the government more or less knows what they are.  

Singaporeans who have or are planning to emigrate are given a host of 10 questions and asked to tick the three most important ones. They include the following: –  

> High costs of living 

> Singapore is too regulated and stifling 

> Better career and prospects overseas 

> Prefer a more relaxed lifestyle 

> Uncertain future of Singapore. 

Some liberal Singaporeans believe Lee himself, with his authoritarian leadership and unpopular policies, is largely to blame.  

Singapore’s best-known writer Catherine Lim calls it a climate of fear that stops citizens from speaking out against the government.

Globalisation, which offers opportunities in many countries like never before, is a big reason for the outflow.  

Many countries, including populous China, are making a special effort to attract foreign talent. 

Others who leave were worried about the future of their children living in a small island, and look for security and comfort of a larger country. 

The exodus is more than made up – at least in numbers – by a larger intake of professionals from China and India. 

“The trouble is many of the Chinese then use us as a stepping stone to go to America, where the grass is greener, Lee said. 

Some feel the large presence of foreigners, and the perks they enjoy over locals in military exemption as well as in scholarships, are themselves strong push factors.  

They see the foreigners as a threat to jobs and space, undermining salaries and loosening the nation’s cohesion. 

“I just feel very sad to see the Singapore of today with so many talented, passionate Singaporeans moving out and being replaced by many foreigners,” said one blogger. “I feel sorry for the future.” (Me too, for Myanmar.)

Lee recently made a passionate appeal to youths to think hard about their country. He said they had received education and opportunities provided by Singaporeans who had worked hard for it. 

“Can you in good conscience say, ‘Goodbye! Thank you very much?’ Can you leave with a clear conscience? I cannot,” he said.  

But many Burmese just need to say this even although they could not get the same kind of welcome from their host countries. Some need to work illegally, some as refugees and many professionals have to do the manual works. So you Singaporeans are luckier than us. Just leave the old grandpa enjoy his own great authority on new comers, or new immigrants.

 

 

Burmese Muslims requested the future leaders including the opposition leaders to grant the following Basic Human Rights

Burmese Muslims requested

the future leaders of Burma

including the opposition leaders

to grant the following Basic Human Rights

The following basic Human Rights should be granted to all the citizens including all the Muslims of Burma/Myanmar:

  1. Rights of unrestricted internal travel in the whole of Myanmar/Burma.
  2. Rights to travel abroad must be accepted by the government and to relax the strict present regulations on all Myanmar/Burmese citizens.
  3. Equal access to education at all levels including postgraduate studies, locally and abroad, according to meritocracy.
  4. Equal rights to all the government jobs and chance to be promoted according to meritocracy but not based on the Military experience or relationship.
  5. Equal rights to settle and work in any parts of Myanmar/Burma.
  6. Equal rights to serve and entitle for promotion to all the ranks in armed forces, Police, immigration, Ministry of Foreign Affairs etc.
  7. Freedom of religion, worship, religious publications, building and repairing of religious buildings and religious schools etc.
  8. Rights to allow participation in the election process and hold posts in all the levels in national and regional politics.
  9. Rights to hold the political and administrative posts in various level of government and its’ agencies.
  10. Freedom of speech and expression in any form of media is important. But freedom after speech is especially more important!

We all must recognize and implement:

  1. (i) The Status, Rights, protection, participation and representation of all the Ethnic Minorities.
  2. (ii) The Status, Rights, protection, participation and representation of all the Minority Religious groups.
  3. (iii) The Status, Rights and protection of the poor and downtrodden.
  4. (iv) Programme and implementation for the eradication of poor and general measures to increase the living standard of people. Handicapped people, youths, orphans, aged, disease inflicted people, homeless people, retrenched and unoccupied peoples’ rights and protection must not be ignored.
  5. (v) Majority got the right to rule. But they must respect, protect and guarantee the Minorities’ rights.
  6. (vi) Minorities must have the right of representation because the Majorities with their number of votes could totally monopolize all the good, lucrative and high places and positions, marginalizing the minorities.
  7. (vii) Majority must ‘sacrifice’ their absolute power by reserving some places and positions thus giving the Minorities the chance of participation and representation.
  8. (viii) Workers rights and adequate protection. Rights of forming unions, strikes, compensation, recreation, various benefits, pension and etc.
  9. (ix) On farsighted and fair distribution of investment policy in various fields of : Education, Research and Development, Science, Information Technology, Health, factories, Irrigation, Houses especially low cost houses and infrastructure projects.

There must be antitrust legislature to control the monopoly in each and every field.

We have to look, monitor and record at the –

  1. (a) Distribution of wealth and opportunity among the different groups depending on race, religion and political alignment, Political patronage- awarding government contracts, appointments, promotions, scholarships, land distributions, permits etc.
  2. (b) Rural development, Urbanization, squatter relocation and settlements.
  3. (c) Basic infrastructure facilities, water, electricity, highways, telephone, multimedia facilities, railways, seaports and etc. 

not to forget the most important basic issue of :

  1. (i) The Rights of Dissent and Disobedience of the people, parties, minorities and even among the Ruling Party (Party ordinary members, Central Committee Members, MPs and even Cabinet Ministers). Those individuals should not be forced or coerce to always toe the party line.
  2. (ii) We also wish to request that the minorities must have a say in the governance or at least the laws and rulings that are related or affected them.
  3. (iii) Democratic governments must accept that accepting the participation of minority races and religions is better than hatred, resentment, revolution, racial riots or civil wars.

 “Counting the ballots is better than cracking the skulls”.

We need the folowing undertaking by the future governments of Burma/Myanmar_:

  1. 1. “The people, whether Majority or Minority must have the right to disobey or resist the commands of the oppressive, authoritative or tyranny governments, if their commands trespass the limit and no longer serve their interests.
  2. 2. There must be enough check and balance. ACA (Anti Corruption Agency) or any organizations dealing with corruption must be independent from the administrative branch of Government.
  3. 3. Newspapers, TVs and all the media must be free and independent to probe and do investigative reports.
  4. 4. NGOs and other right groups must also be free to express their views. All of them and various reporters must have a free access to the government and the big companies as long as there is no real danger of espionage or national security. There is a danger of over protection and trying to hide under the name of national security to avoid exposure of the corruption.
  5. 5. There must be real separation of powers in the government. Administrative power of the head of the government should not let to be able to influence the Judiciary, Attorney General’s office and Legislative assembly.

In gist, the Rights we should get from the good governments are, Political, Civil, Human Rights & Economic Reform, including though not limited to:

  1. Freedom of speech.
  2. Freedom of association.
  3. True, full democracy.
  4. Separation of Powers between Government, Judiciary, Police & Military.
  5. Independent, competitive non-government media, free from government censorship or editorial restrictions.
  6. Full freedom of religious-thought, belief, expression & practice, including abolition of Government controls of religious affairs.
  7. The right of self-determination.
  8. The Rule of Law: The presumption of innocence until proven guilty; Trial by jury of peers; The right to a fair trial with appeal rights; The right to adequate & independent legal representation
  9. Non-discrimination by Governments, individuals or organisations on the basis of race, nationality, colour, religion, gender, marital status, political belief or affiliation, physical or mental disability.
  10. Religious & Political organisations must be permitted.

if I go into details of other Human Rights such as:

  1. (i) Detainees’ Rights: Prisoners’ Rights, POW’s (Prisoners of War) Rights, Political Prisoners’ Rights etc. Free from torture and inhumane treatments. Right to engage a lawyer, right to remain silence, right to defend one self in proper open court of law, right of access to medical care, communication with the love ones, rights to recreate and rehabilitate in the prison etc.
  2. (ii) Women’s Rights,
  3. (iii) Children’s various Rights,
  4. (iv) Senior citizens’ Rights, Handicapped Persons’ Rights, and various victims of diseases, HIV patients, Ca patients etc Rights.
  5. (v) Workers Rights; Workers Unions’ Rights, Foreign Workers’ (legal and illegal) Rights etc
  6. (vi) Foreigners’ Rights; Foreign temporary Residences Rights, visitors, tourists, Foreign Investors and Asylum or refugee seekers’ Rights etc
  7. (vii) Diplomatic Rights, Inventors’ Rights, Artists’ Rights, Patent Rights etc. etc…

A challenge to the PM of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai

A challenge to the PM

of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai

What a shame _ OIC, Dubai and UAE

for ignoring the majority

downtrodden world Muslims  

 

His Highness Shaikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice-President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai : “I like a challenge. When there is no challenge I feel sad,”

Shaikh Mohammad meets a German intellectual. He said interacting with literary personalities was more important to him than meeting politicians. He hoped cross-cultural cooperation would eliminate geographical demarcations.

Note: His Highness PM of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai, Shaikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoummay have done_

  • a lot for his people,
  • many for the Arabs (Palestinians and Iraq),
  • quite a lot for the western allies
  • but I think he had done very little for the majority downtrodden world Muslims who are living in non OIC countries
  • and almost nothing for the Muslims in Burma/Myanmar.
  • What a shame!

Please read the propaganda from Gulf News 9 February 2008 Many leaders promise, we deliver

His Highness Shaikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice-President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai, won over a distinguished German audience on Thursday when he said: “Many leaders promise, we deliver.”

Delivering a speech during a felicitation at the Free University of Berlin where he was honoured with a gold medal for his support and promotion of cultural exchanges between peoples of the two countries, Shaikh Mohammed received several rounds of applause from the gathering as he provided an insight into the UAE’s work culture and ethics.
The audience listened in rapt attention as Shaikh Mohammed, speaking in English, explained his philosophy of economics and how the UAE is today one of the world’s fastest developing nations. Shaikh Mohammed, on the second day of his two-day state visit to Germany, was received at the Free Berlin University by former German Chancellor and Chairman of the Arab-German Friendship Association Gerhard Schroeder, Chancellor of the University and staff.

“I like a challenge. When there is no challenge I feel sad,” he said explaining how the UAE managed to overcome hurdles and build up the infrastructure that is now the focus of world attention. Many people, he said, were sceptical when initial plans of what the UAE wanted to build and do were known. But later these people realised the wise economic decisions of the country.

Regarding democratic values in Arab society, Shaikh Mohammed told the audience that the “majlis” has been a central point in decision-making since times immemorial. He said this in the context of modern democracy. All decisions that affect society, he added, were taken after due consultations. “We have democracy embodied in our Majlis [council] where the Ruler meets people face to face. We have our own democracy, a free nation and people that are free to say what they want … Just as you cannot convince me to wear your suits in the UAE, I cannot convince you to wear my dishdasha in Berlin.”

But what drew resounding praise from the gathering was when Shaikh Mohammed informed the audience about the UAE’s multicultured set-up where more nationalities live under one roof than in any other country.

He said: “In the UAE all nationalities live in peace. And if the UAE can do it then why not other countries.” “Dubai and the UAE are models of human co-existence, so why can’t the world follow suit?”

Shaikh Mohammed told the audience about the challenges which began early with his ancestors from Baniyas tribe, facing tough challenges, while looking for water to quench their thirst, and for grazing to their cattle. “It was a great challenge due to severity of the desert and lack of the natural resources,” Shaikh Mohammed said.

Elaborating on the challenges faced by the UAE after its inception and its subsequent growth and prosperity, Shaikh Mohammad said: “We built a modern and peaceful society in the middle of the desert, with giant projects of international status …

But, he said, those challenges were met. In this context he particularly mentioned Jebel Ali port, the biggest in the region, Emirates airline, development nationwide and construction of cities whether locally or worldwide with UAE talent and management. With these words – received with a standing ovation – His Highness Shaikh Mohammad Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice-President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai, ended his two-day official visit to Germany.

Burmese Chinese

  Burmese Chinese

The Burmese Chinese or Chinese Burmese are a group of overseas Chinese born or raised in Burma (Myanmar).

Although the Chinese officially make up three percent of the population, this figure may be underestimated because of _

  1. intermarriage between them and the ethnic Bamar,
  2. and because of widespread discrimination against minorities (which compels many to declare themselves as Bamar when applying for birth certificate or national identification card).

The Burmese Chinese_

  1. dominate the Burmese economy,
  2. have a disproportionately high percentage of the educated class.

Generally, the Burmese Chinese in Lower Burma fall into three main groups:

  1. Burmese called eingyi shay, or let shay lit. long-sleeved shirts to Hokkien and Hakkas from Fujian Province
  2.  Burmese called eingyi to, or let to lit. short-sleeved shirts to Cantonese and Hakka   from Guangdong Province
  3. So Burmese sometimes called zaka, lit. mid-length sleeve to all the Hakka  from Fujian and Guangdong provinces.
  4. But Hakkas are further subdivided into those with
  5. ancestry from Fujian Province, called ein-gyi shay ha-ka
  6. and Guangdong Province, eingyi to haka respectively.

The Hokkien and Cantonese comprise 45% of the ethnic Chinese population.

The groups have different stereotypical associations.

  1. The Cantonese are commonly thought of as the poorest of the Chinese,
  2. the Hokkiens are generally wealthier,
  3. occupying high positions in the economy,
  4. and having connections to the government.

In Upper Burma and Shan Hills,

  1. the Panthay
  2. and Kokang, are speakers of a Mandarin dialect of the Southwestern Mandarin branch, most akin to Yunnanese.

Combined, they form 21% of Burmese Chinese.

Kokang are_

  1. mountain-dwellers
  2. and farmers
  3. classified as a part of the Shan national race, although they have no linguistic or genetic affinity to the Tai-Kadai-speaking Shan.

Muslim Panthay_

  1. are considered as separate local nationalities
  2. rather than a Chinese diaspora community.

The Tayoke kabya of mixed Chinese and indigenous Burmese parentage.

  1. The kabya (Burmese: mixed heritage) have a tendency to follow the customs of the Chinese more than of the Burmese.
  2. Indeed those that follow Burmese customs are absorbed into and largely indistinguishable from the mainstream Burmese society.
  3. A large portion of Burmese is thought to have some kabya blood,
  4. because immigrants could acquire Burmese citizenship through intermarriage with the indigenous Burmese peoples.

Culture

Politics

Now, we see the Muslims and Indians participating in the monks led peoples protesting. However, the Chinese seem to be curiously missing – in shape or form – within the context of the current protests.

Are they against the current protests or in support of the protests? Or simply indifferent to any of this since they already have a stronghold over Burma’s economy and anything that takes attention away from them would be positive?

Either way, the bigger question here is not a question of why aren’t the Chinese involved in these protest rather when will the Chinese get involved. The bottom line is why do the minorities, specifically the Chinese and the so called Indians or Muslims, continue to feel disenfranchised?

Language

  1. Most Burmese Chinese typically speak Burmese as their mother tongue.
  2. Those with higher education also speak Mandarin
  3. Those with higher education also speak Mandarin and/or English.
  4. Some modern educated use English.
  5. Some use, Chinese dialects/languages.
    • Hokkien is mostly used in Yangon as well as in Lower Burma,
    • while Taishan Cantonese and
    • Yunnanese Mandarin are well preserved in Upper Burma.

Conditions of Chinese-language schools_

  1. General Ne Win’s (1962-1988) banned on the Chinese-language schools caused a decline of Mandarin speakers.
  2. Chinese schools are growing again nowadays because of the increase in investors and businessmen from Mainland China and Taiwan, who uses Standard Mandarin,

Religion

Most Burmese Chinese practice_

  1. Theravada Buddhism,
  2. incorporating some Mahayana Buddhist
  3. and Taoist beliefs,
    • such as the worship of Kuan Yin.
    • Chinese New Year celebrations,
    • as well as other Chinese festivals, are subdued and held privately.
    • Clan associations are often the only places where the Chinese culture is retained.

The Panthay or Chinese Muslims practice Islam.

Education

The Burmese Chinese_

  1. place a high importance on education,
  2. a disproportionate big share with advanced (medical, engineering or doctorate) degrees. (SOA’s note: it is partly because Muslims are labeled Kala and denied the place for postgraduate educations. The Chinese not only escaped that kind of discrimination but they got the special privileges given by the Chinese blooded political, military and education authorities.)
  3. The number would be higher still had it not been for the longstanding ban on those without Burmese citizenship from pursuing advanced degrees.
  4. Nowadays, many wealthy Burmese Chinese send their children overseas for further studies especially in US, UK, Canada, Australia, Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore.

Names

The Burmese Chinese have_

  1. Burmese names
  2. and many also have Chinese names.

Names in various Chinese dialects are roughly transliterated into the Burmese.

  1. For example, a person named ‘Khin Aung’ may have the Chinese name of 慶豐 (pinyin: Qìngfēng), with ‘慶’ (pinyin: qìng) corresponding to ‘Khin’, and ‘豐’ (pinyin: fēng) corresponding to ‘Aung’.
  2. However, variations of transcription do exist (between dialects),
  3. and some Burmese Chinese do not choose to adopt similar-sounding Burmese and Chinese names.
  4. Because the Burmese lack surnames, many Burmese Chinese tend to pass on portions of their given names to future generations, for the purpose of denoting lineage.

According to publications of Longsei Tang, a clan association based in Yangon, the ten most common Chinese surnames in Yangon are:

  1. Li (李)
  2. Peng (彭)
  3. Shi (時)
  4. Dong (董)
  5. Min (閔)
  6. Niu (牛)
  7. Bian (邊)
  8. Xin (辛)
  9. Guan (關)
  10. Tsui/Hsu(徐)

Cuisine

The Burmese Chinese cuisine is based on Chinese cuisine, particularly from

  1. Fujian,
  2. Guangdong
  3. and Yunnan provinces, with local influences.
  4. Spices such as turmeric and chili are commonly used.
    • Pauk si
    • Bhè kin
    • Igyakway
    • Htamin kyaw
    • La mont
    • Mewswan
    • San-byoat
    • Panthay khaukswè
    • Sigyet khaukswè

History

  1. The earliest records of Chinese migration were in the Song and Ming dynasties.
  2. In the 1700s, Ming Dynasty princes settled in Kokang (the northern part of Burma).
  3. Chinese traders, however, traveled up to the capital city, northern towns on the Irrawaddy such as Bhamo.
  4. There was a Chinese community at Amarapura.
  5. Another wave of immigration occurred in the 1800s under the British rule.
  6. They came to Burma via Malaysia.
  7. When the Chinese Communists expelled the Kuomintang, many fled to Burma and Thailand over the borders of Yunnan Province.
  8. The Burmese government fought and removed the armed KMT and forced them to Taiwan; those who managed to stay prospered.
  9. The Chinese dominate the highly lucrative rice and gem industries.
  10. Many became merchants and traders owning both wholesale and retail businesses.
  11. The northern region of Burma has seen an influx of mainland Chinese immigrant workers, black market traders and gamblers.
  12. In the Kachin State, which borders China in three directions, Mandarin Chinese is the lingua franca.

 They integrated well into Burmese society because they, like the Bamar,

  1. were of Sino-Tibetan stock
  2. and were Buddhists,

Their success_

  1. is reflected in the Burmese saying, “Earn like the Chinese, save like the Indian, and don’t waste money like the Bamar”.
  2. They got the nickname pauk hpaw (lit. sibling).
  3. During the 1950s, Burma was one of the first countries to recognize the People’s Republic of China as a nation.

However, its own Chinese population was treated as aliens.

  1. The Burmese Chinese were issued foreign registration cards (FRC), which declared that they were citizens of China.
  2. A similar discrimination policy was set up for Indians.

In 1962, Ne Win led a coup d’état and declared himself head of state. Although a kabya himself, he banned Chinese-language education, and created other measures to compel the Chinese to leave.

  1. Ne Win’s government stoked up racial animosity and ethnic conflicts against the Chinese, who were terrorized by Burmese citizens, the most violent riots taking place at the time of the Cultural Revolution in China.
  2. When Ne Win implemented the “Burmese Way to Socialism”, a plan to nationalize all industries, the livelihoods of many entrepreneurial Chinese were destroyed and some 100,000 Chinese left the country.
  3. All schools were nationalized, including Chinese-language schools.

 Beginning in 1967 and continuing throughout the 1970s, anti-Chinese riots continued to flare up and many believed they were covertly supported by the government.

  1. Many Burmese Chinese left the country during Ne Win’s rule, largely because of a failing economy and widespread discrimination.
  2. The first government-sponsored racial riots to take place in Burma was in 1967, during General Ne Win’s rule. In the riots, the general populace went on a killing spree because of sedition and instigation against the Chinese by various government departments.
  3. The massacre lasted for about five consecutive days, during which thousands of Chinese died or were left dying in the streets of Rangoon. Some of the Chinese were thrown alive from the second and third floors of buildings in downtown Rangoon. The dead and wounded Chinese were hauled up unceremoniously and dumped onto army trucks and taken to ‘htauk kyan’ incinerators and the ‘carcasses’ were sent up in smoke.
  4. That showed the true bestial and cruel side of the character of the ruling Burma Military Junta. The only “crime” the Chinese committed was the wearing of Chairman Mao’s badges on their shirts.
  5. Latha Secondary School was torched by the henchmen of General Ne Win’s government, where school girls were burnt alive.
  6. Chinese shops were looted and set on fire.
  7. Public attention was successfully diverted by Ne Win from the uncontrollable inflation, scarcity of consumer items and rising prices of rice.

Today, the majority of Burmese Chinese live in the major cities of_

  1. Yangon,
  2. Mandalay,
  3. Taunggyi,
  4. Bago, and their surrounding areas.
  5. According to Global Witness, 30 to 40% of Mandalay’s population consists of ethnic Chinese.
  6. Although there are Chinatowns (tayoke tan) in the major cities, the Chinese are widely dispersed.

Notable Burmese Chinese

  1. Aung Gyi leading army dissident and Ne Win’s former deputy/co-conspirator in the 1962 coup
  2. Aw Boon Haw (Hakka) – Inventor of Tiger Balm
  3. Aw Boon Par (Hakka) – Brother of Aw Boon Haw
  4. Eike Htun (Kokang) – Managing director of Olympic Construction Co. and deputy chairman of Asia Wealth Bank, two large conglomerates in Burma
  5. Khun Sa (Kokang) – Major Southeast Asian druglord
  6. Khin Nyunt – Former Prime Minister (2003-2004) and Chief of Intelligence (1983-2004) of Myanmar
  7. Lo Hsing Han (Kokang) – Major Southeast Asian druglord
  8. Steven Law (also known as Tun Myint Naing; Kokang) – Managing director of Asia World Company, a major Burmese conglomerate and son of Lo Hsing Han
  9. Ne Win (Hakka) – Leader of Burma from 1960s to 1980s
  10. San Yu (Hakka) – President of Burma in the 1980s
  11. Serge Pun – Proprietor of Yoma Bank, a major banking chain in Myanmar and chairman of First Myanmar Investment Co. Ltd (FMI), one of Myanmar’s leading investment companies
  12. Taw Sein Ko (Hokkien) – eminent Director of Archaeology (1901-1915)
  13. Thakin Ba Thein Tin – Communist leader from the 1970s to the 1990s
  14. Maung Aye – Vice chairman of SPDC and Chief of Staff of Armed Forces
  15. Major General Kat Sein – former Minister of Health
  16. Dr. Kyaw Myint – Present Minister of Health
  17. Myo Thant – Former Minister of Information under SLORC
  18. Colonel Tan Yu Sai – Minister of Trade under Ne Win’s government
  19. Colonel Kyi Maung– NLD member (1989-2004) and Army Commander of Rangoon in 1960s
  20. U Thaung – Minister of Labour & Technical Science, Retired Legion and Ambassador
  21. Lun Thi – Minister of Energy
  22. Thein Sein – First Secretary of SPDC
  23. Kyaw Ba – General Formal Minister of Hotel and Tourism

Reference

Wikipedia

Ko Moe Thee Zone’s announcement regarding SPDC crony businessmen

Ko Moe Thee Zone’s

Announcement regarding

SPDC crony businessmen

 

Now, we see the Muslims and Indians participating in the monks led peoples protesting. However, the Chinese seem to be curiously missing – in shape or form – within the context of the current protests.

Are they against the current protests or in support of the protests? Or simply indifferent to any of this since they already have a stronghold over Burma’s economy and anything that takes attention away from them would be positive?

Either way, the bigger question here is not a question of why aren’t the Chinese involved in these protest rather when will the Chinese get involved. The bottom line is why do the minorities, specifically the Chinese and the so called Indians or Muslims, continue to feel disenfranchised?

mtz-1.png
mtz-2.png

Read more at Ko Moe Thee Zone’s blog  .

SPDC’s plan to persecute Muslims (in Burmese)

 SPDC’s plan

to persecute Muslims

 Taken from the Myanmar Muslim.Net

and Myanmar Muslim news

  #fullpost {display:none;} #fullpost {display:none;}

ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသား တိုင္းရင္းသားမြတ္စလင္မ်ားကို နအဖ စစ္အစိုးအရမွ ႏွိပ္ကြပ္ရန္ စီမံကိန္းမ်ား ခ်ေနျပီဟု စံုစမ္းရရိွေသာ သတင္းမ်ားအရ သိရိွရသည္။ သံဃာေတာ္မ်ား ဦးေဆာင္ေသာ စက္တင္ဘာ ေရႊ၀ါေရာင္ေတာ္ေရးၾကီးတြင္ သံဃာေတာ္မ်ားေနာက္မွ တခဲနက္ေထာက္ခံျပီး ပူးေပါင္းပါ၀င္ခဲ့ေသာ ျမန္မာမြတ္စ္လင္မ်ားကို စစ္အစိုးရမွ အခဲမေၾကျဖစ္ခဲ့သည္။

ျမိဳ႕နယ္အဆင့္ျပဳလုပ္ေသာ အစည္းအေ၀းတစ္ခုတြင္ လသာျမိဳ႕နယ္ မယကဥကၠဌ မွ ဘုန္းၾကိးေတြလုပ္တဲ့ဆႏၵျပပြဲေနာက္မွာ အဖ်က္သမားေတြ၇ိွတယ္။ အဲ့ဒီ အဖ်က္သမားေတြထဲ့မွာ ကုလားေတြလည္းပါတယ္။ ဘုန္းၾကီးနဲ႕ကုလားနဲ႕ဘာဆိုင္လဲ ဆိုျပီး ရင့္ရင့္သိးသီးေျပာဆိုခဲ့ေၾကာင္းသိရပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသား တိုင္းရင္းသား မြတ္စလင္မ္မ်ား အေနျဖင့္ သမို္္င္းတေလ်ာက္မွာ နယ့္ခ်ဲ႕ဆန္႕က်င္ေရး၊ စစ္အာဏာရွင္ဆန္႕က်င္ေရးတို႕မွာ လူမ်ိဳးေရး၊ဘာသာေရးခြဲျခားမႈ မရိွဘဲ တိုင္းရင္းသား ညီေနာင္မ်ားျဖင့္ အတူလက္တြဲတိုက္ပြဲ၀င္ခဲ့သည္မွာ ျမန္မာသမိုင္းတြင္ေရာ မ်က္ေမွာက္ေခာတ္ကာလတြင္ပါ အထင္အရွားျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
ေနာက္ထပ္ရရိွေသာ သတင္းမ်ားအရ မြတ္စလင္မ္ဆန္႕က်င္ေရးႏွင့္ ႏွိပ္ကြပ္ေရးအတြက္ နအဖစစ္အစိုးရမွ အဖြဲ႔တစ္ဖြဲ႕ ဖြဲ႕စည္းျပီးစီမံကိန္းခ် ေဆာင္ရြက္လ်က္ရိွေၾကာင္းသိရပါတယ္။ အဆိုပါအဖြဲ႕တြင္ ျပည္ထဲေရး၀န္ၾကီး ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ေမာင္ဥိး၊ ျပန္ၾကားေရး၀န္ၾကိး ဗိုလ္မႈးခ်ဴပ္ေက်ာ္ဆန္း တုိ႕မွ ဦးေဆာင္သည္ဟု သိရပါတယ္။ ၄င္းတို႕အေနျဖင့္ ဗုဒၶဘာသာ၀င္မ်ားႏွင့္ အစၶလာမ္ဘာသာ၀င္မ်ား အၾကားပ႗ိပကၡမ်ာ းဖန္တီးရန္ ေဆာင္ရြက္လ်က္ရိွေၾကာင္းသိရပါတယ္။ မဆလ၊န၀တ၊ နအဖ စစ္အစိုးရ အဆက္ဆက္တြင္ ႏိုင္ငံေရးအက်ပ္အတည္း ၾကံဳလာတိုင္း ဘာသာေရး၊ လူမ်ိဳးေရး ပ႗ိပကၡမ်ား ဖန္တီးျပိး လူထုကို အာရံုလြဲသည့္နည္းလမ္းကို အသံုးခ်ကာ ၄င္းတို႕၏ ထြက္ေပါက္အေနျဖင့္ အသံုးခ်ခဲ့သည့္မွာ အထင္အရွားျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
ျပီးခဲ့သည့္ေရႊ၀ါေရာင္ေတာ္လွန္ေရး အတြင္း၌လည္း မြတ္စလင္မ္ ဗလီမ်ားကို၀င္ေရာက္ ဖ်က္ဆီးျပီး ဘာသာေရး ပ႗ိပကၡ မ်ားျဖစ္ေအာင္ေဆာင္ရြက္မည္ ဟူေသာ သတင္းမ်ား က်ယ္က်ယ္ျပန္႕ျပန္႕ထြက္ေပၚခဲ့ပါတယ္။ သို႕ေသာ္လည္း ျမန္မာမြတ္စလင္မ္မ်ား အေနျဖင့္ ဗုဒၶဘာသာ၀င္ ဘုန္းေတာ္ၾကီးမ်ား၊ ျပည္သူမ်ားႏွင့္ ပူးေပါင္းကာ စည္းလံုးညီညြတ္စြာျဖင့္ နအဖ စစ္အစိုးရဆန္႕က်င္ေရးကို ေဆာင္ရြက္ႏိုင္ခဲ့သျဖင့္ နအဖ စစ္ဗိုလ္ခ်ဴပ္တို႕ အနာေပၚတုတ္က်ျပိး မြတ္စလင္မ္မ်ား အေပၚအညိႈးၾကီးခဲ့ ပါတယ္။
ေနာက္ဆက္တြဲအေနျဖင့္ ဆႏၵျပပြဲတြင္ ပါ၀င္ခဲ့ေသာ မြတ္စလင္မ္မ်ား၊ သံဃာမ်ားကို ေရခ်မ္းကပ္လွဴခဲ့သာ မြတ္စလင္မ္မ်ား ကို ဖမ္းဆီးကာ ႏုိင္ငံေတာ္ျငိမ္၀ပ္ပိျပားေရးမႈ ပ်က္ျပားေအာင္လုပ္မႈနဲ႕ စြဲခ်က္တင္ခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ဖမ္းဆီးခံရသူ မ်ားအနက္ စံုစမ္းသိရွိရသူမ်ား၏ အမည္မ်ားမွာ

-တာေမြျမိဳ႕နယ္မွ ကိုထြန္းျမင့္ေအာင္၊
-ဗဟန္းျမိဳ႕နယ္မွာ ဟန္ေဇာ္မင္းေအာင္၊
-သာေကတျမိဳ႕နယ္မွ ကိုေသာင္းထြတ္၊
-ေရႊေလွခါးမုန္႕ဟင္းခါးဆိုင္မွ ကိုႏိုင္မင္း၊
-၃၈ လမ္းမွ ကိုမ်ိဳးသန္႕၊
– ၃၁ လမ္းမွ ကိုညီညီေဇာ္၊
-၂၇လမ္းမွ ကိုမ်ိဳး၊
-မဂၤလာေတာင္ညြန္႕ မီးရထား၀င္းေန ကိုေက်ာ္ေက်ာ္ဆက္ ႏွင့္
-အထက္္ပုဇြန္ေတာင္လမ္းေန ကိုထြန္းထြန္းႏိုင္ တို႕ျဖစ္ၾကပါတယ္။ ၄င္းတို႕ကို နအဖ စစ္ဖက္လံုျခံဳေရးအဖြဲ႕(စရဖ -ေထာက္လွမ္းေရးဖ်က္သိမ္းျပီးေနာက္အစားထိုးဖြဲ႕စည္းခဲ့သည။္) မွ အရာရိွမ်ားမွ စစ္ေၾကာေရးစခန္းမ်ားတြင္ ႏွိပ္စက္ျပီးစစ္ေဆးေနေၾကာင္းသိရပါတယ္။
လက္ရိွေျပာင္းေရႊ႕သြားေသာ ၾကပ္ေျပးေနျပည္ေတာ္ သို႕၀န္ထမ္းမ်ား ေျပာင္းေရႊ႕ရာတြင္ လည္း ျမန္မာမြတ္စ္လင္ ၀န္ထမ္းမ်ားကို ေရႊ႕ေျပာင္းျခင္းမျပဳေၾကာင္း၊ ေနျပည္ေတာ္တြင္ ေျမ၊အိမ္ပိုင္ဆိုင္မႈတြင္လည္း ျမန္မာမြတ္စလင္မ္ ဆိုပါက ၀ယ္၍မ၇ေၾကာင္း၊ စီးပြားေရးလုပ္ကိုင္သူမ်ားအေနျဖင့္ ေျမငွားရမ္းျပီးသာ လုပ္ကိုင္ႏိုင္ေၾကာင္း၊ သိရိွရသည္။
သို႕ျဖစ္ပါ ျမန္မာျပည္သား တိုင္းရင္းသားမြတ္စလင္မ်ားအေနျဖင့္ ယုတ္မာေကာက္က်စ္ လွေသာ စစ္အာဏာရွင္ စနစ္ကို အျမစ္မွဆြဲႏႈတ္ျပိး ျမန္မာ့ေျမေပၚမွ သာမက ကမာၻေျမေပၚမွ ပါအျပီးတိုင္ပေပ်ာက္ေအာင္ တိုင္းရင္းသား ညီအစ္ကိုမ်ားျဖင့္ အတူလက္တြဲျပီး ေဆာင္ရြက္က်ပါရန္ တိုက္တြန္းလိုက္ပါတယ္။

mm1.pngmm2.png

[7-1-08.jpg] 

Person of Indian Origin outside India

Person of Indian Origin and

Non-resident Indian

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Please continue to read the full detail in Wikipedia.

  

A non-resident Indian (NRI) is an Indian citizen who has migrated to another country, a person of Indian origin who is born outside India, or a person of Indian origin who resides outside India. Other terms with the same meaning are overseas Indian and expatriate Indian.[citation needed] In common usage, this often includes Indian born individuals (and also people of other nations with Indian blood) who have taken the citizenship of other countries.

A Person of Indian Origin (PIO) is usually a person of Indian origin who is not a citizen of India. For the purposes of issuing a PIO Card, the Indian government considers anyone of Indian origins up to four generations removed, to be a PIO. [1]. Spouses of people entitled to a PIO card in their own right can also carry PIO cards. This latter category includes foreign spouses of Indian nationals, regardless of ethnic origin. PIO Cards exempt holders from many restrictions applying to foreign nationals, such as visa and work permit requirements, along with certain other economic limitations.

The NRI and PIO population across the world is estimated at over 30 million (not including Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan or Roma diaspora).

The Indian government recently introduced the “Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI)” scheme in order to allow a limited form of dual citizenship to Indians, NRIs and PIOs for the first time since independence in 1947. It is expected that the PIO Card scheme will be phased out in coming years in favour of OCI.

Contents

Pravasi Bharatiya Divas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please continue to read the full detail in Wikipedia.

The Government of India recognizes the first week of January as the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas (Hindi: Pravasi – Non-resident or diaspora, Bharatiya – Indian, Divas – day). The occasion is marked by special programs to recognize the contributions of NRI/PIO individuals of exceptional merit, felicitate NRI/PIO individuals who have made exceptional contribution in their chosen field/profession (Pravasi Bharatiya Samman (Hindi: NRI/PIO Award)) and provide a forum to discuss issues and concerns that people of the diaspora.

The event has been organized every year since 2003, and is sponsored by the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs and the FICCI (Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry). The 2005 edition was organized from 7th to 9th January in Mumbai.

 See also

Pravasi Bharatiya Samman

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Pravasi Bharatiya Samman is an award constituted by the Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs in conjunction with the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas, to honor exceptional and meritorious contribution in their chosen field/profession. The award is given by the President of India. Please continue to read the detail in Wikipedia.

Non-resident Indian and Person of Indian Origin

Total population
25 million
Regions with significant populations
Largest ethnic group
 United Arab Emirates 1,300,000
 Mauritius 855,000
 Trinidad and Tobago 525,000
 Guyana 327,000
 Suriname 175,000
Major ethnic group
 Nepal 4,000,000
 Malaysia 2,400,000
 Burma 2,000,000
 Saudi Arabia 1,500,000
 Kuwait 400,000
 Fiji 340,000
 Singapore 320,000
Minor ethnic group
 United States 2,200,000
 United Kingdom 1,400,000
 South Africa 1,160,000
 Canada 960,000
 Oman 450,000
 France 330,000 [1]
 Australia 235,000
 Netherlands 217,000
 New Zealand 105,000
 Philippines 80,000
 Germany 80,000
 Indonesia 60,000
 Jamaica 60,000
 Hong Kong 50,000
Language(s)
Indian languages, English
Religion(s)
Hinduism, Sikhism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism

RESPONSE OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ON PERSECUTION OF MUSLIMS IN MYANMAR

RESPONSE OF INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
ON PERSECUTION OF MUSLIMS IN MYANMAR

  

  1. On discrimination of Muslims in Myanmar.
  2. On the Anti-Muslim riots in Myanmar.
  3. On the undemocratic Myanmar Military Government.
  4. On discrimination and Ethnic Cleansing of Rohingya Muslims of Arakan State, Myanmar.
  5. On the Myanmar Migrants including Myanmar Muslims and Rohingyas.
  6. On the various Myanmar Refugees.
  7. On the Myanmar Citizens visa for various purposes, Social visit, Tourist Visa, Student    Passes, Work Permits, Employment Passes, Professional Passes, Dependent Passes  etc.
  8. On the Permanent Residence and Citizen applications.
  9. On the issue of taking tough actions on Myanmar by the ASIAN.
  10. On the investment and trade in Myanmar.
  11. On the opposing parties in and outside Myanmar.
  12. The stands and responses of the various media, NGOs, opposition leaders of foreign   governments, UN, Human Right Associations, ILO, Islamic Organizations and Amnesty    International etc.
  13. Myanmar citizens opinion on the international community including ASEAN.Myanmar Muslims opinion on the International Muslims and on Muslim governments of  ASIAN.
  14. Myanmar Military leaders opinion on the International community, west, ASIAN, Muslim   countries and etc.

Note: I had compiled these data and written this article since early 90’s. So although it may look as an old issues at the first look  but sadly they are still relevant at the present. International community and Muslim countries around the world and ASEAN are in the same stage of closing their one eye on the atrocities of Myanmar Military on the Muslims in Burma. Although after the photo-video evidence of the recent brutal crack down on the peaceful demonstrations of Buddhist Monks and the people, stood as the clear evidence of what the Myanmar Military would commit inorder to be able to continue grasping the ruling power. The worse is their remaining half opend one eye was also partially blind with greed of their self interest of investments in Myanmar.

The following is the news report taken from The Star April 5 1993.(Malaysia) in order to guess the Malaysian Government’s stand on the Muslim Refugees from Myanmar. 

Poser over status of Myanmar Refugees

By SHAHANAAZ SHER HABIB. 

KUALA LUMPUR-. 

It is difficult to believe that those coming from Thailand were genuine Rohingya refugees, said-Deputy Home Minister Datuk Megat.

Junid Megat Ayob said yesterday.“Rohingyas are from the western part of Myanmar. It is impossible for them to pass through themainland of Myanmar and through Thailand down to Haadyai and to Malaysia without being caught”.

Surely, if they are pressed by the government, they would have been caught in Yangon as theywere trying to come over,” he said.Megat Junid was commenting on the 4,800 Rohingya Muslim refugees, claimed by the UNHCRto be in the country.

“Those coming by boat to Penang from west Myanmar might be genuine Rohilngyas”, Megat Junid said. He was speaking to reporters after opening the Malaysia-China Friendship Association’s first annual general meeting.

To suggestions that there were over – 4 000 Rohingyas refugees in the country, Megat Junid said he had to determine if it was true. He said there were many who claimed to be Rohingyas to take advantage of the good times in the country.

They would be deemed as illegal immigrants and will be sent back to their country.

Megat Junid said there had been cases where the respective embassies refused to take responsibility for the illegal immigrants.

  1. In such cases, we will detain them,
  2. have them work in prison
  3. and earn their passage back to their country,” he said.

They would not be allowed to work legally in the country, he said.

Asked whether Malaysia was practicing double standards,

Megat Junid said it was not so as the refugees should “come in the correct way”

“The Bosnians proved they had been pressed and were real war refugees.

]But as for the Myanmarese who came  in through Haddyai, it is very difficult to say whether were war refugees”, he said.

He also said Abim or other associations could take up the Rohingya cause.

According to UNHCR acting representative for Malaysia and Brunei, Sten  Bronee, to date some 4,600 Rohingyas here had been registered with the UNHCR as having refugee status.To a question, Bronee said the Rohingyas worked illegally in the country to support themselves.

That was in 1993. We have to thank the Malaysian Government even for closing their one eye SOMETIMES, allowing our Rohingya brothers to temporarily stay and work illegally in Malaysia. But they are still not accepted officially by the relevant authorities here although there were repeated “official” rumours but still need to renew the pass at the UNHCR office every six months.

We here by want to thank UNHCR and ABIM for helping our brothers. They are just refugees and they accept the help from ABIM, because the responsible Malaysian Government Authorities like the Deputy Home Minister at that time had officially advised them, which could be seen in the above Newspaper report: The Star April 5 1993.(Malaysia).

But now that very powerful (at least his remarks reported above were cruel, false, ill advised and AGAINST the International norms as ILO could take action to any government using forced labour in detention centers.)  That Deputy Home Minister (believed to be acting like defacto Home Minister) lost his job, lost his parliamentry seat and also his new wife and is in ICU with terminal Prostate cancer.

Our brothers, Burmese Muslims and Rohingyas are like drowning person; if some one extended the helping hand, they no choice or have a chance to look at the face but to accept that. The most important and right thing to do is to hold the extended helping hand to get out of the water. So ABIM extended the helping hand and the Malaysian authorities advised the Rohingyas to accept that.

May we just refresh the events then with the newspaper reports.Let’s look at the another article published in_

 Berita Harian, 2 May 1997.

Report by Mohd. Shah Abdullah from Kota Bharu.

“Before Accepting Myanmar (Burma) into ASEAN”

Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia (ABIM) asked Malaysian government and ASEAN countries to study more from different aspects about the Burmese military junta’s behavior before accepting as a new membership.

ABIM’s president Asst.Prof Dr. Mohd Nur Manuty questioned about the very much unsatisfactory human right record of Burmese junta in general and its ill treatment on Muslims in particular. 

He mentioned that ABIM have the full information about the juntas role behind the recent razing of several mosques in Rangoon, Mandalay and other big cities in central Burma as well as the new exodus of Rohingya Muslims from Arakan State.

He also pointed out that the Burmese military junta didn’t respect the opinion of Muslim community and OIC( Organization of Islamic Countries),on the issues related to the Muslims in that country. 

“Whatever the good result will be (after accepting Myanmar into ASEAN), the ill fate of Muslims must be put into strong consideration “, he told to reporters after opening the ABIMs 24th. State Annual General Meeting in Kelantan.

ABIM was asked to comment about the American State Department spokesman Nicholas Bum recently lobbying ASEAN to put pressure on Burma and not to accept into ASEAN this year.  Burn stated that it would make more democratization process and better human rights record in Burma. 

However, Malaysian Foreign minister Datuk Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (now the PM of Malaysia)said ASEAN have the independent decision to bring Burma into the grouping and the American pressure will not effect it.

Also present at the meeting was YDP ABIM Kelantan Mostapha Mohammad, Deputy Secretary of the Kelantan State Kassirn Mohammad and Deputy YDP of Kelantan Islamic Affairs Council (MAIK) Datuk Ashaari Azmi Abdulla.  Dr. Mohd Nur said ABIM is not influenced by Washington’s policy but urging ASEAN to be careful about the human right record of Myanmar before attempting major decision.

According to Dr Mohd Nur, ABIM was called for a discussion with the Secretary General of Foreign Affairs on Myanmar issue earlier.  ” ABIM is ready to meet again and discuss more details with Malaysian Foreign Minister, Ambassador of Myanmar in Kuala Lumpur and ASEAN Secretariat about the Myanmar’s entry into the ASEAN.”

“We also believe that the Burmese military junta is hiding and misleading information related to the Muslims in Burma”.

Below is the another view of a Malaysian on the treatment of Migrants in Malaysia and Australia.

How are we different from Pauline Hanson?

By Verna Kanargaratnam.Kuala Lumpur. Star Newspaper. March 1997.

I AM compelled to agree with Stephanie Poh Shan Shan in her letter entitled Aussies are against racism too (Speaking Up, Feb 25).

I have lived in Western Australia for three years as a student and returned to Malaysia in 1994.  Since my return I have been back to Australia twice on holiday to visit my friends who are all Australians.

The current issue on the statement by Pauline Hanson has been blown out of proportion in our papers here.  During my visit to Perth last December, I asked my friends what they thought of her statement.  All my friends opposed it, saying it was unjust and unfair as most Australians are against racism.

Racism happens in almost every country and most often against the minority group. 

I find it really hypocritical of Malaysians who claim that Australians are racist when they themselves are racist.

  • Take for example the Indonesian and Bangladeshi workers in our country today.  There have been reports that there are_
  • too many of them so much so
  • they are jeopardizing the jobs of our local people. 
  • They have also been blamed for the increase in crime rate,
  • for spoiling our manpower market since they are willing to work for very low wages and longer hours, and the list goes on. 

Now, which profit-making company will not employ them rather than our locals if their profit margin can be increased?  It’s simple economic sense. Likewise, this situation also happens in Australia where Asians are a minority and quite willing to work below minimum wage. 

Hanson also states that the crime rate will increase if Australia is ‘swarnped’ by Asians which is not a very fair statement.  Her statement about Asians migrating to Australia is similar to what we are saying about immigrants from our neighbouring countries. 

So in what way are we different from Pauline Hanson?

From my experience, Australians in general are very warm people and I have lived with them for three years as a student with no racial problems.I also think it is very rude to go to a country and call its people lazy and stupid.  What right have we got to judge them on their own soil?  They have different priorities from Malaysians.  Just because Australians are not as materialistic as Asians does not make them any more lazy than we are greedy.Calling them stupid is a joke, because we willingly pay thousands of dollars for our children to be educated by these so-called less intelligent human beings.  Now, would you accept people who did and said such things about you with open arms?

So Malaysians, give it a break. If you really try, I am sure Australia won’t be as bad as you perceive it to be. Stephanie and I are living proof. 

 Let’s read this Bernama report printed in The Star, March 9, 1992. 

KUALA LUMPUR:

Malaysia has asked Myanmar to stop the oppression of Rohingya Muslims, many of whom have been forced to flee the country.

Foreign Minister Datuk Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said yesterday, that the refugees should be allowed to return to Mynmar with the promise that no action would be taken against them.

He said Malaysia viewed with grave concern the action that had been taken, particularly by the Myanmar military against the community.

The Foreign Ministry would convey Malaysia’s stand to Mr U Ko, the Myanmar ambassador here.

He said Malaysia would also inform its permanent representative in the United Nations to support any decision of the world body on the matter. “We have been observing developments following action taken against the community.”

Abdullah said_

  1. Malaysia did not think that its position meant interference in Myanmar’s domestic affairs because
  2. Myanmar’s action had burdened neighbouring countries
  3. and might disrupt stability in the region.
  4. He said Yangan should cease all actions against the Rohingya Muslims in order to stem the outflow of refugees from the country.

We hope that his eyes would not be blurred now by Malaysia’s investment and trades with SPDC.  

Newspapers reported that some 135,000 Rohingya Muslims from the Arakan province had fled into Bangladesh so far. The arrival of the refugees had worsened the economic and social problems of Bangladesh, which has a population of 111 million. An officer of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees said yesterday in Dhaka that Bangladesh would be faced with a “major disaster” unless the flow of the refugees was checked.      

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Mahathir Mohamad had said on Saturday that the plight of the Rohingya Muslims should be resolved immediately.

He said this after chairing a meeting of the Umno Supreme Council here. 

New Straits Times, Malaysia,

THURSDAY, MARCH 12,1992

Islamic nations slam Myanmar for  persecuting Muslims

NICOSIA, Wed. – The 46 nation Organization of ‘Islamic Conference (OIC) today condemned Myanmar for what it termed a campaign of repression and persecution against its Muslim community.

OIC secretary-general Hamid al-Gabid urged member States and foreign countries to provide “generous assistance” to Bangladesh where around 180,000 Burmese Muslims have taken refuge since December.

The OIC “strongly condemns the campaign of repression and persecution being waged by the Myanmar authorities and which is characterized by flagrant abuses of the human rights of the Muslim  Myanmar people,” he said in a statement.

The campaign, which Gabid said, was accompanied by “threats and intimidations” against Dhaka, had led to the exodus of more than 180,000 Muslims  known as Rohingyas to Bangladesh.

He said the OIC, based in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, has sent a mission to Bangladesh to study relief needs.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has appealed for US$27.5 million (MR-71.5) in emergency aid for refugees, who it says may number 300,000 by the end of April.

In Singapore, the Foreign Ministry expressed concern that the influx of Myanmar Muslim refugees into Bangladesh could lead to regional instability.

“The influx of large numbers of refugees from Myanmar into Bangladesh is creating a potential area of instability for the region and human suffering.”

Singapore hopes that the Myanmar authorities would take action that would allow the refugees to return home safely and thus defuse a potential source of regional in stability and tension,” a Ministry spokesman said in a statement.

In Islamabad, a Foreign ministry spokesman said Pakistan had conveyed its concern to Myanmar. “We have been in touch with the Myanmar Government,” he said, adding “we hope that the Muslim minority will be treated with sympathy and understanding and their freedom and human rights will be respected”.

Meanwhile, Bangladesh went on a diplomatic offensive and flew a group of 45  Western, Asian and Arab diplomats to the camps.

A Bangladesh Foreign Ministry official said the diplomatic visit was part of a Government plan to “internationalize the issue to force Myanmar to take back its nationals and guarantee their safety”.

“We are also seriously working on the possibility of calling an emergency meeting of the UN Security council to discuss the issue,” he said. – Agencies.    

The following is one of the best articles I have read in Malaysian Newspapers. We want to congratulate for her well-done research and bravery in writing the truth against the will of some people in authority. It was written in the_

Sun Newspaper on August 24 1996, by Sheryll Stothard. 

“Malaysia’s moral blackout”.

A media release I received last week ended with a quote from Cenpeace spokesman,Fan Yew Teng

“Last week, we had an electricity black out and our Prime Minister said he was as ashamed.

This week we have a moral black out and no one talks about it.”         

He was referring to the five day state visit of General Than Shwe, head of Burma’s- oh- sorry Myanmar’s SLORC.

As a Malaysian, I have to question the inconsistency in our foreign poicy as far as repressive leaders are concerned. 

As a taxpayer, I protest that some of my tax dollars have been spent on hosting representative from one of the most repressive immoral and backward “governments” in the world. I am not an activist. In fact, I frequently am irritated by the holier-than-thou exhortations NGOs are sometimes given to.  Yet, in this situation, I am sure I echo the feelings of many non-NGO, non-activist Malaysians as far as the SLORC is concerned.

Why do I feel so strongly about this? Why can’t I accept Asean’s poli-constructive engagement” with the SLORC.

For one thing, I cannot reconcile myself with Malaysia’s split I identity problem when it comes to human rights abuses in foreign countries. Flying in the face of established Western agendas over the last decade, Malaysia has been laudably vocal in condemning human rights abuses such as Bosnia, the Middle East, Chechnya and South Africa.

However that well-known Malaysian moral outrage tapers off into a whimper as we get closer to home. We dismissthe atrocities in East Timor even to the extent of saying that Malaysians  who get killed in the crossfire deserve it.  Indonesia is a member of the Asean and we cannot criticize our partners – which seem to be the underlying reason.

With Myanmar, we don’t even, have that excuse, however feeble.

Why invite Southeast Asia’s version of Radovan Karadzic as a state guest to our country?

  1. The economic reasons aren’t even compelling enough to warrant mention.  Surely, we’re making enough money economically in Vietnam, Cambodia and various impoverished African states.  Why Myanmar? 
  2. Take away the bleeding heart liberalist rhetoric of Western proponents of democracy. 
  3. Take away even the personality cult of Nobel Peace Prize recipient Aung San Suu Kyi.
  4. Take away the Western threats of economic sanctions. 
  5. Take away all that, even John Boorman’s silly movie Beyond Rangoon. 

What do we have?

The SLORC was formed in September 1988 and promptly declared martial law. 

This was just an academic continuance of the brutal regime of Ne Win and his military cronies who assumed power after a coup in 1962. 

Earlier in 1988, the army gunned down pro-democracy students and started a nationwide offensive against the country’s brightest- who were the only hope Myanmar had for a long time.

How can any one shoot their children?

Why bother to educate them and then gun them down like defenseless animals in the streets.

How can we accept this?

Why rave about Bosnia when we accept and condone the same in Myanmar?

What does that say about us.Malaysians are frequently referred and look up to by the international Muslim community as respected spokesman for the faith.

Yet we have invited a representative of a “government” responsible for the decimation of Rohingya Muslims in the Arakan area of Myanmar. Since the SLORC took over till 1992, over 26o,ooo Muslim Myanmarese have fled the country. Backed by the SLORC, a border development programme was introduced for the purpose of forcibly removing the Muslim population from the country’s north-western frontier. The SLORC says that there are 690,000 Muslims in the Arakanese area. Muslim groups and the Bangladeshi government calculate the population at 1.4 million. 

That’s quite a lot of Muslims for the SLORC to kick out rape, maim and kill.

I have been using the word “government” loosely in reference to the SLORC/SPDC. 

  1. Well, technically and morally I am wrong and so is anyone else who thinks so.
  2. In May 1990, the National League for Democracy won a landslide victory in Myanmar’s general elections, winning 392 of the 485 seats available, despite the harsh conditions imposed on the NLD and on Aung San Suu Kyi by the military.
  3. When it was time to hand over power to the elected government, the SLORC responded by throwing NLD-MPs into jail. 
  4. Many have been tortured and killed since.
  5. So whom have we invited to Malaysia and aligned ourselves to?
  6. The leader of military generals who are completely in their willingness to kill and enslave the people of Myanmar.

To businessman who has jumped on the bandwagon to Myanmar, some cautionary advice is in order. Even if you amoral, doing business with the SLORC is a huge investment risk. 

  1. You might initially make some money off a population enslaved by the SLORC.
  2. But enjoy the short ride while it lasts.
  3. If the SLORC/SPDC can decimate and kill its own people, it is unlikely that they will honour any agreement made with foreigners the moment higher bidder – whether Asian or Western turns up.
  4. Malaysians have a responsibility to ensure that our reputation for tolerance and moral integrity in this region is not compromised, The future of Myanmar is in the hands of Asean, not the West.  We are in the position to effect much needed change in that country. 
  5. In light of the SLORC’s history, “constructive engagement” is not the way to go. 
  6. We are not doing the people of Mvanmar a favour by inviting their leaders to our country to talk business.
  7. Instead, we have justified the oppression. 

And in the case of Malaysian companies doing business there, we’re just twisting the knife in deeper.

And for that, I am truly and deeply ashamed.  Surely, we are better than that.  Or are we? 

And the following is the response of the Thailand Newspaper.1.6.97.

THE NATION EDITORIAL. 

“SHAMEFUL FOR ASEAN TO EMBRACE BURMA” 

Asean will never be the same again. 

  1. By embracing Burma as a member it has itself become a pariah organization. 
  2. Coming as it does on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the founding of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the decision yesterday will have repercussions far beyond whatever Asean leaders may envisage. 
  3. It has indeed irreversibly damaged the organization’s integrity and setback some three decades of achievement.
  4. We firmly believe the applications for membership by Burma, Laos and Cambodia should be judged on their individual merits and readiness, just as it has always been in other regional organizations. 
  5. But still, these qualifications are secondary to their peoples’ desire for freedom and democracy.
  6. To accept Burma without any conditions is to ignore the aspirations of the Burmese people., who voted for Aung San Suu Kyils National League for Democracy (NLD in 1990.
  7. Why bless a regime that is clearly not legitimate? 
  8. A regime that is willing to go back on its word.
  9. From the beginning, the Burmese junta’s motive in bidding for membership of Asean was obvious a regional aegis to prolong its own repressive rule and to fight against Western pressure for openness. 
  10. By exploiting Asean’s strengths and weaknesses the junta leaders have been able to turn the membership issue into an East-West divide – Asean against the West.
  11. In the two years Burma has sought a closer rapport with Asean it has never lived up to regional or international norms of conduct and behaviour. 
  12. Now, Asean would like us and the world to believe that as a member of Asean, the Slorc leaders will be more enlightened, Open-minded and less oppressive.
  13. The Asean leaders’ decision yesterday was a triumph of evil over humanity. 
  14. There is a Thai saying that one rotten fish can spoil the whole basket of fish.

The biggest disappointment must be those Thai leaders who failed to play appropriate roles in leading Asean.  Partisan politics and self-interest on the part of various authorities completely destroyed the unanimity of Thailand’s positions and policies.  They will have to beat responsibility for the future of the Burmese people.Nonetheless, we welcome the decision to take in Laos and Cambodia, despite the political uncertainty in Phnom Penh.  Laos has been preparing for this eventuality the longest, knowing full well their inadequacies.  The Laotian and Cambodian peoples are supportive of their governments’ desire to join Asean.

Actually Thailand Newspapers_

  1. are independent
  2. and not the mouthpiece of the Thai government.
  3. They are usually critical
  4. but always give fair reporting in any subject about any country.
  5. They have a lot of dignity
  6. and command respect.
  7. Not only in reporting
  8. but comments
  9. and even sometimes predictions also done sometimes.
  10. They are famous for the investigative reporting,
  11. which is very rare and impossible to find in this part of the world.
  12. For example, the Nation published the full page article of Bertil Lintner, predicting that Ne Win will create an anti-Muslim riots in 1988, two months earlier than the actual happening.
  13. He had even predicted correctly that, that racial riots will backfire and the resulting snowball effect will cause the downfall of Ne Win.
  14. When compare to the news blackout regarding the Anti-Muslim riots of Burma in Muslim Asean countries, it was a very brave stand we all should applaud.
  15. We had sent the news to those “Muslim” newspapers, personally as well as by post- but they refused to publish giving the lame excuse as those were sensitive news for their countries. What a BULL SHIT, New Straits Times and Stars. The Stars decided it is not sensitive when their fellow Chinese were suffering in Indonesia during Anti-Chinese Riots.
  16. Although Thailand is a Buddhist dominant country, have a sizable population of Muslim population, situated very near and even shared a common border with Burma, they never cover up those racial riots against Muslims by giving lame excuse as a sensitive issue.
  17. They even published the colour photographs of the Buddhist Monks destroying the Mosques and tearing and throwing the Holy Korans.
  18. But the Asian Muslim newspapers cowardly blackout those even when offered the photos.

On 17th. Jan 1999 night on Malaysian NTV7’s Date line programme_

  1. we have seen a disgusting and a shameful comment from a Chinese Journalist from the Star English newspaper from Malaysia.
  2. We even want to vomit. While denouncing the foreign newspapers, he mentioned that even the Asean newspapers are the same and he especially picked the Thailand newspapers.
  3. He complained that the Thai newspapers keep on writing about Myanmar.
  4. What is wrong with that, my stupid “Syncophant journalist”?
  5. You have no right to comment about Thailand and Myanmar.
  6. You are disqualified to comment according to your “ASEAN SPIRIT”.
  7. Don’t interfere in our internal affairs.
  8. We know your very poor basic general knowledge when you comment to the CNBC that United States is a racially homogenous country!
  9. CNBC representative hit you back immediately with irrefutable proof that he himself is a “Black” and there are a lot of sensitivities to be careful in his country but they have to always reveal the truth.
  10. And you have stupidly said that there is no such thing as investigative reporting as far as you are concern.
  11. And you have shamelessly agree that your profession here is to support establishment. Don’t call yourself a journalist. You are just the propaganda specialist or advertisement section officer only.
  12. We don’t care your “duties” here, even if you refused to print the atrocities against the Muslims in Myanmar but please do not stupidly interfere or condemn the Thai newspapers’ good job of reporting of Myanmar.
  13. We hope you are not the victim of “turn over” by the Myanmar Military.
  14. Who knows, the carrot and stick can come from any-where. But fear and favour should not dictate a good journalist.

The previous youth leader although a Muslim, announced in the newspapers that he had recently came back from Myanmar and there were no Anti-Muslim activities there.

  1. He was later removed from office because of unrelated another reason but who knows, may be because of that sin against the religion.
  2. His deputy promised to head a team to go to Myanmar to probe the truth.
  3. But no official report came out when they returned.

In Islam, if some one commit a sin or wrong doing, we must respond in one of the three grades of responses, according to our Iman or Faith.

  1. If we have enough power, we have to physically use forced to stop that.
  2. If we are weak to use force, we have to verbally protest our displeasure and tell to stop that.
  3. If we are too weak and dare not open our mouth, at least we have to hate that act in our heart. This is the weakest Iman or Faith in Islam.This is our faith and is a mandatory in Islam.
  4. If we help the wrong doer by covering up, it is a sin not only according to the religion, but also committing a crime according to the human laws.
  5. If someone knows that another person is committing a crime and kept quiet, it is a sheer cowardice.
  6. But if his silence is for some hidden agenda or undisclosed benefits he could get from that person i.e. to save his personal interest he also is guilty and partially responsible for that crime.
  7. And we must consider the possible consequent mischief of, for example the repetition of that crime or progression into committing of more atrocities.
  8. If that person covers up and says that nothing is wrong, he is guilty for obstructing the justice.
  9. It is curious to note that not only the Muslim countries in ASIAN but also the remaining Islamic countries have failed to help the Muslims of Myanmar effectively.

OIC countries, leaders and all the Arabs are almost always busy with Palestinian-Israel and Iraq problems and infightings amongst themselves.

  1. But the Christian welfare organizations,
  2. Christian Western Countries
  3. and the “notorious” (more correctly famous for the Myanmar Muslims) George Soros (of Jew faith) are helping the Myanmar Muslims.
  4. Even the Rohingya leader Professor Zakaria had voiced his concern about those strange phenomena. He is rightfully worried about the possible consequences of the growing influences of those non-Muslim donors and helpers.
  5. No wonder not only the whole population of Myanmar peoples but the Muslims there hate all the governments of Asean.

Asean said that they were accepting the Myanmar as a country. But all these governments done all the dealings with the Military government. Myanmar peoples are neglected.

  1. Even among the Asean countries, ordinary civilian Myanmars are discriminated.
  2. Although we are Asean members we need visa to enter Asean countries. Visa exemption is for the cronies of the Myanmar Military government only.It is even more difficult to get a visa nowadays. Before joining Asean, Myanmars could enter Singapore without visa. Now we are Asean members, but we now need a visa not like other members.
  3. Although some Asean leaders especially Chinese Chauvinist  Singaporian leaders are shouting about meritocracy and some of them declaring that their law never look at the colour of the skin nor discriminate, Myanmars are denied the chances those great, fair ASEAN leaders have reserved for other foreigners.
  4. For them, white skin people from US and EU, rich people from Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Arabs and other ASEAN (except Myanmar) e.g. Thailand, Indonesia, Philippine, Singapore and Malaysia and some common wealth countries are important. All the facilities, favours and jobs must be reserved for them. Not for Myanmars, even if that Myanmar happens to be a Muslim and the host country is a Muslim dorminent country.
  5. Even Myanmar workers are not allowed to register at their Immigrations, except special approval on and off. Even among the illegals in the detention camp, the citizens of few most favoured countries are allowed to register and so legalized but not Myanmars. (In  80’s up to early 90’s but when Bangladesh refused contract to their oil company and awarded the tender of US oil company but Myanmar SPDC allowed their oil company to invest, they stopped Bangalis and started to accept Myanmars)
  6. In Singapore and Brunei, most of the Myanmar professionals are not allowed to register, although the same qualified person may be registered if sponsored by the Myanmar Military government or if they can show the registration from the west(although they got the degree from Myanmar Universities.)
  7. Even to get a student visa or to get a training post or to get a dependant visa, these governments made it difficult for Myanmars.
  8. Even in Singapore, Indian citizens and of course Chinese foreigners are treated much more favourably than Myanmars.
  9. And for the PR and citizenship applications there are discrimination laws or Rules and Regulations or Government secret Circulars in all Asean countries. Once we were surprised to be told by a cabinet Minister that there is a Cabinet ruling to be careful on Myanmars and there was no exemption even for Myanmar Muslim Professionals legally working here. But we have to be fair by recording here that almost all of the authorities are willing to extend their help to us unofficially.
  10. Myanmar Embassy told us that the mutual tax exemption agreement is for the government’s official business only. So what is the use benefit the ordinary Myanmars got by entering ASEAN.
  11. All of us know that the children and the friends of some of the ASEAN leaders got big projects and contracts in Myanmar.

Kim Dae Jung, former political prisoner and the former President of the Republic of Korea’s views told to the Asiaweek (Sourse Reitures)

  1. As the president of the Republic of Korea, I should not comment on the affairs of another country. 
  2. In the past, for example, I took great interest in the situation of Aung San Suu Kyi of Myanmar. 
  3. I sent letters and worked with Corazon Aquino [former president of the Philippines] through an international forum. 
  4. More than 100 Korean National Assembly members wrote a letter to the Myanmar government urging it to hold dialogue with Suu Kyi. 
  5. Nowadays, it is not easy to comment on such things.”
  6. There is concern, in particular among Asean’s older, more developed members, that letting in authoritarian countries such as Burma has damaged the groups ties with the West and endangers efforts to promote transparency and democracy.

‘Myanmar has provided a valuable lesson, that you can’t really change a country. Even though Asean tries to constructively engage Myanmar, the change has been too slow,” said Kao Kim Hourn, director of the Cambodian Institute for Cooperation and Peace think tank

‘Myanmar has damaged Asean but it’s in Asean’s ultimate interest to make sure it’s united – all 10 countries,” he said. , “That’s very important if Aean wants to play on the international diplomatic stage, be it engaging China, Russia or India.

Military-ruled Burma did join Asean last year despite objections from some of the group’s Western allies over its dismal human rights record and political suppression.  Laos also joined at the same time, bringing the group’s membership to nine.

The more liberal Asean members fear the conservatives could put the breaks on Political and economic reform and tarnish Asean with their political and rights problems.

“People like Thailand and the Philippines don’t want to create a situation in which they’ll be continually outnumbered by the hard-liners,” said Steve Heder of London University’s School of oriental and African Studies.

If Burma, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam line up on certain issues,

  • whether it’s human rights,
  • democracy
  • or international trade,

then the old Asean independence of action is severely compromised,” he told. 

People like Surin Sukhumbh and senior foreign ministry officials in the Philippines, they’re good  liberals who genuinely believe the way forward for the whole of southeast Asia is further democracy and transparency,” Heder said, referring to Thai Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan andhis deputv. Sukhumbhand Paripatra.

They don’t want to be dragged down by the  Khin Nyunts and the Hun Sens,” he said referring to Burma’s powerful military intelligence chief Khin Nyunt.

“If anything there’s been negative progress.” Heder said,  “Military intelligence is increasingly taking over. This is not what Asean envisaged.

Despite the costs, Asean has little choice but to try and manage its members’ political turmoil. The group says Cambodia’s membership is only a question of time.

“Asean should manage diversity,” said Kao Kim Hourn. “Burma has damaged Asean but it has been able to deal with that. If it’s a mature regional organization it can handle Cambodia.”

EU/ASEAN end impasse over Burma for now.

Since the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (Asean) inclusion of Burma in its regional grouping in July of 1997, the European Union (EID has cancelled bilateral meetings with Asean because of concerns over the Burmese government’s poor human rights record.  But for now, the impasse between the EU and Asean over Burma has passed, and the delayed 13th Asean-EU Meeting is planned to be held in Bangkok.Hand in hand with this decision to meet with Asean is not only the EUs renewal, but also strengthening, of sanctions against Burma.According to a Burma watcher, the meeting is a one-shot deal to work out the glitches of EU financial assistance to Asean, which has been put on hold because of the delay over Burma.

In addition to the previous sanctions, which include_

  1. a ban on visas to the Burmese leadership,
  2. the suspension of high level government visits,
  3. an arms embargo,
  4. as well as the suspension of non-humanitarian aid,
  5. the new sanctions ban entry visas for officials
  6. and transit visas for military authorities.Armed forces officers and members of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) will be forbidden to enter EU member countries to go on to third countries.
  7. Why should European airports or capitals be open to SPDC officials as a convenient stopping points –
  8. and shopping or tourism havens – on the way to meetings in New York or Geneva?” pondered one British-EU official.

This is the first response by any major non-Asian government to the recent deterioration of the political situation inside Burma.  SPDC actions have included the provocation of two highway standoffs between the government and the National Democracy League (NLD) of Aung San Suu Kyi, the arrests of hundreds of NLD members, and persistent attacks in the Burmese press against Suu Kyi.

Furthermore, the recent rejection of an EU proposal for senior EU officials to talk with NLD officials did not help the positions of EU advocates for engagement.“The Burmese basically said get lost, which strengthens the argument of those countries that want to see the sanctions toughened up”, said a senior EU diplomat.

The proponents for a tougher approach to Burma are Britain, Denmark, and the Netherlands.  However, the EUs position is hardly united as French officials opposed sanctions and Britain’s proposals for tourism restrictions.

It seems now that Burma is split over whether the decision to join Asean was a good idea.  It was originally thought to be a source of support but now it has become a source of pressure for reform from the outside. 

“Burma thought that Asean would serve as a shield to ward off foreign criticism,” says Josef Silverstein, professor emeritus of political science and a Burma scholar at Rutgers University in New Jersey. 

But it has only created further pressure from its neighbors.  The problem is that the rest of Asean feels it has to pressure the generals in Rangoon into mending their ways, so as not to jeopardize ties with the EU. 

“Asean has provided no shield for Burma, no protection not even a fig leaf”, says Silverstein.

The EU has modified its strategy for applying human rights pressure on Burma, so that it can engage the rest of Asean.  But, Burma’s future participation in EU dialogue will hinge on improvement in its human-rights record. 

But how long can the rest of Asean bear the burden for Burma especially in light of their seemingly reluctance to change. 

Perhaps Asean and the EU will be back to square one in eighteen months when the next conference is scheduled or, alternatively, a major change in Asean protocol.              

The Congressmen called for the immediate release of these and other political prisoners and noted that: “The prosecution, imprisonment and possible execution of these individuals for the legitimate exercise of fundamental political rights is an affront to the values of civilized nations.” 

Most Reverend Archbishop Desmond Tutu in his foreward to Burma, Country in Crisis, wrote,

“I asked to use this booklet to learn about Burma. And I urge you to turn that knowledge into action. In South Africa, we gratefully learned that the people’s voice raised is indeed a most powerful tool. It is time we raised our voices together to demand that our governments and the world community take effective action to bring respect for human rights and democracy to Burma.”

“Burma turned into a backwater hell”

NATION, Thailand’s independent newspaper,

THURSDAY, JUNE 18,1992.Sydney.

AN AUSTRALIAN judge yesterday called for western and Asian countries to overthrow the government of Burma, which, he said had turned the country into a mass, poverty-stricken concentration camp.

In an investigation of Asian refugee trouble spots, judge, Marcus Einfeld said he found in Burma mass atrocities, human fights violations and a government policy of exterminating Aids victims with cyanide injections.

Like Cambodia’s Pol Pot, he said, Burmese leaders “have turned Burma into a backwater hell and disguised it all as a pantomime of charming touristic folklore.”

There should be widespread at what was once a free and rich being turned into a mass poverty-stricken concentration camp.”

If the world had done to Burma even a fraction of what it had done to South Africa the government of Ne Win would not have been able to hold on, Einfeld said.Instead it had taken refuge in withholding official aid while allowing the private sector to hone in on the opportunities thrown up by a regime

“whose priority is the repression and vandalizing of peaceable and kind human beings,”

But he described the situation in Bangladesh, which had received 268,000 Burmese refugees as one of the most serious refugee problems in the world. Nevertheless, Bangladesh had developed a “generally” excellent capacity for disaster relief.Einfeld’s investigation was commissioned by the Australian refugee aid organization Austcare. The Australian branch of the International Commission of Jurists was also involved.

Apart from the brutality and repression, he said there was also evidence that to counter an Aids epidemic the government was killing infected people by injecting them with cyanide.

This was done “apparently in the vain hope of eradicating the disease“, which was growing out of control in Burma.“This monstrous policy dramatically manifests yet another reason why this regime must be removed.

The active intervention of Western and Asian Countries would be needed, he said, to overthrow the regime.

The Burmese junta is largely armed and supplied by China and financed by the drug trade, by democratic countries and by their commercial enterprises.

But he said up to now, businessmen of democratic countries were still operating “their peculiar brand of exploitative amoral-or immoral profiteering” in Burma.

There are hundreds of reports of atrocities and human rights violations, enforced slave labour and “rape on an appalling scale.

He had seen signs of the brutalities in the Arakan region, Einfeld said.“There are hundred of reported cases where women have been abducted and forced to carry heavy loads through mountainous terrain, raped repeatedly every night and fed almost nothing.”

THE STAR MONDAY March 16, 1992. Malaysia.

THE immense sufferings of the Rohingya Muslims should persuade the Malaysian and other Asean governments to address the one fundamental issue inMyanmar today – a harsh, haughty, dictatorship, obsessed with the perpetuation of its own power, whatever the costs and consequences.

It is a dictatorship, which has suppressed and suffocated the voice of its own people as few repressive regimes have done in recent times.

  1. Even after the people rejected the ruling junta through elections, which it tried so hard to rig, the junta has refused to surrender power to the people.
  2. The message from the masses could not have been clearer.  Though its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi was under house arrest, the National League for Democracy (NLD) won 392 out of 485 seats in Parliament in the May 27, 1990 elections.
  3. The junta sponsored, National Unity Party, on the other hand, obtained only 10 seats!
  4. After the elections, the junta began imprisoning the elected leaders of the NLD.  According to one source, in the second half of 1989 alone, 3,000 persons were imprisoned for political reasons.
  5. Even before all this, in September 1988, the military junta crushed a nation wide pro-democracy revolt with such brutal force that it shocked high level Yangon bureaucrats themselves. 
  6. It is estimated that about 12,000 protestors, many of them students, were killed mercilessly.
  7. Since January 1990 as many, as 500,000 people in different parts of Myanmar have been forcibly expelled from their homes and relocated in new areas, as part of the junta’s drive to weaken grassroots support for the NLD.
  8. The junta began a massive military exercise to break the back of minority rebellions, which have been going on for a long while.The Karens, a largely Christian minority, are now under tremendous pressure. 
  9. So are the Muslim Rohingyas.The plight of the Rohingyas then is part of a much larger problem.It is true that in some respects the Rohingyas are in a more desperate situation than most of the other victims of the junta’s repression.
  10. The Rohingyas were an independent people who ruled their own land, Arakan, for centuries until it was invaded and annexed by the Burmans in 1784.This is one of the main reasons why the Rohingyas have always resented what they regard as Burman colonization of Arakan.They allege that the military junta is trying to change the very character of their homeland by destroying entire communities, demolishing whole villages.
  11. In November 1990, for instance, 30,000 Rohingyas were uprooted from their villages.Many of these uprooted Rohingyas are regarded as ‘stateless’ by the junta, though they had lived in Arakan for generations.
  12. But the tragedy that confronts the Rohingyas and the people of Myanmar as a whole can only be overcome if the junta is made to relinquish power.
  13. For a start, Asean governments should demand that the junta transfer power to the NLD – ineffect, the legitimately elected government of the day.
  14. This will of course require the immediate release of Suu Kyi and other political, prisoners from the NLD. 

If the junta cannot be persuaded to act responsibly, then Asean governments should contemplate the following measures: 

  • THE cessation of all arms supplies to the junta, whether direct or indirect, from any source within the region. 
  • THE cessation of all forms of economic collaboration with, and assistance to, the junta emanating from both the public and private sectors in the region. 

In this concern, Thailand, in particular, should act with integty and honesty.In a nutshell, the time has come for Asean to act, for the people of Myanmar cannot wait anymore.

DR CHA.NDRA MUZAFFAR, Penang, Malaysia.

The following is the very strong article written in 1992, now the views, perceptions and reports become unbelievingly softer.

“Strangers in their own land”,

New Straits Times, March, 11, 1992. 

THE rulers of Myanmar have been afflicted with xenophobia for a long time, preferring that the country make-do and improvise with scarce resources and in seedy circumstances rather than risk infection by foreign ideas and influences. 

Now, their xenophobia has spread to encompass thousands of Muslim Rohingyas in the Western State of Arakan.  People who have lived in Myanmar for generations have suddenly been classified aliens. 

To encourage their leaving the country, soldiers have been torching homes, stealing property, and raping women, killing hundreds and detaining thousands.Myanmar has been denying the tales of atrocities, charging that they are fabrications of foreign enemies. 

Sounds like either xenophobic paranoia or a whitewashing of complicity.

Is one to discount hundreds of graphic eyewitness accounts of pillage and slaughter and mass graves? 

What explains the hurried exodus in the past three months or so of up to 170,000 refugees fleeing into Bangladesh? 

Would people, under no, compulsion, willingly give up home and field for life in refugee camps, subject to diseases and the charity of Bangladesh and international aid organizations?

There are also reports that Myanmar has put close to 100,000 troops in the border regions next to Bangladesh.  If one is not to see this as the prelude to war with Bangladesh (and there is no discernible reason for such an event), then one must see this large force as being emplaced to prompt a fleeing of the remaining “aliens” and to ensure they do not return to their homes.

The world has seen another nation shutting out the outside and; turning against its own people in a rampant fit of bloodletting. 

Cambodians still bear livid scars and memories of that ghastly dark time. One hopes the current situation in Myanmar is not a prelude to another grisly nightmare. It is one thing to send in troops to take on hill tribes who want separation and independence.

It could be argued that a government has the right to suppress separatist movements by force of arms.However, in the case of the Rohingyas, Myamnar seems to be persecuting an ethnic, religious community without even bothering to justify the violence by saying that it had anything to do with the Rohingya Solidarity Organisation (which does advocate armed insurgency to free Arakan).

Malaysia has chosen to maintain relations with Myanmar because it believes persuasion rather than isolation is a better course of action to influence events in the country.

Myanmar has clearly shown that it is prepared to go its own course without the support of other countries (though relying heavily on Chinese military supplies for its current spate of campaigns), so international ostracism is no real threat. 

One hopes Malaysia’s expressed concern over the reported persecution of the Rohingyas will influence the government in Yangon to re-consider its policies and practices.  Myanmar may feel that when it comes to the crunch, it does not need friends, but no regime can be maintained indefinitely by fear and killings. 

  • Sooner or later there will be an accounting. 
  • Professing to be Buddhists, the generals, should realize that.
  • It is alienating its own peoples.
  • It is alienating its neighbours. 
  • Are compassion and peace such alien concepts to the generals? 
  • What is the point presiding over a depopulated land?

Since 1992 the SLORC had accepted a Chinese offer to build a deep-water port on Hainggyi island at the mouth of the Bassein River. 

  • Defense analysts suggest that the island could become a base for the future Chinese ballistic missile submarine fleet.
  • Yangon had allowed China access to three islands off the Myanmar coast for signals intelligence :
  • Ramree island south of Akyab in western Arakan State,
  • Coco island in the Indian Ocean,
  • and Zadetkyi island or St Matthew’s island off the Tenasserim coast in the south-east. 
  • Satellite images indicate that a 45-metre antenna for monitoring radio traffic has been set up on Coco island.

Economic and military support for the regime has come from its Asian neighbours and near neighbours, primarily Thailand, China and Singapore.  China is Myanmar’s most important ally. 

Since 1989 more than a dozen economic and aid agreements have been signed between the two countries.Human rights have become an important test of attitudes to Myanmar.

In May 1991 the European Community (EC) foreign ministers condemned Myanmar’s human rights record, halted sales of military equipment and invited their Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN) colleagues to do likewise.

The ASEAN group refused to take this approach, preferring instead to pursue a policy of “constructive engagement” with Yangon. 

The chief focus of Western human rights concern hasbeen Aung San Suu Kyi, who, until July 1995, had been held under house arrest for more than five years.  The award of the Nobel Peace Prize to her in October 1991 gave her an even higher profile and, combined with the exodus of Rohingya Muslim refugees to Bangladesh and the annual offensive against the Karen rebels, meant that by early 1992 Myanmar was more isolated internationally than at any time since the 1970s. 

The Muslim countries of Indonesia and Malaysia condemned the junta’s treatment of the Rohingyas and ASEAN refused Myanmar’s request to attend its annual foreign ministers’ meeting in Manila.

However, in September 1992 Myanmar was allowed to rejoin the Non-aligned Movement, which it left in September 1979. 

Most foreign governments welcomed the relaxation in the SLORC’s policies from mid-1992.  US blasts Myanmar junta for rights abuses.

The Sun,

March 1, 1999.Bangkok, Sun:

An annual US government report on human rights has accusedMyanmar’s military authorities of condoning a range of abuses.

The Burma Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1998 said the people of Myamnar, especially women and children of ethnic minority groups, are subject to severe mistreatment.

“Citizens continued to live subject at any time and without appeal to the arbitrary and sometimes brutal dictates of the military dictatorship,” the report said.

There continue to be credible reports, particularly in ethnic minority dominated areas, that soldiers committed serious human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings and rape.

“Prison conditions are harsh and life threatening.“Arbitrary arrests and detentions for expression of dissenting political viewscontinued with increasing frequency in an effort to intimidate the populace intosubmission in the face of deepening economic and political instability”

About 200 opposition MPs had been detained since September and there weremore than 1,000 political prisoners in custody, it said.

Such accusations, made frequently by international human rights groups, arerepeatedly denied by the ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC).

The report said women and children of ethnic minorities were being forced toperform arduous manual labour for the military, harassed, raped and sometimessold as prostitutes in neighbouring Thailand.

“During tlfe SPDC’s anti insurgency operations, members of the military forcesare responsible for arbitrary killings, rape, village relocations, the destructionof homes and property, and forced labour inflicted on ethnic minorities,” it said.

The SPDC, formerly known as the State Law and Order Restoration Council,has ignored the results of the 1990 elections won easily by the National League fordemocracy under Nobel laureate Aung San Sun Kyi.In a rare press conference on Thursday,  Suu Kyi said that authorities she wasreleased from six years of house arrest in 1955 she was still unable to enjoy a normal life.

The International Freedom Act of 1998

Shack, John, Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights,and Labor before the Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate

“The International Freedom Act of 1998”, 5/12/98ABSTRACT –

The Honorable John Shack testified before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, concerning the work being done by the U.S. State Department to promote religious freedom around the world and to present its perspectives on Senate Bill 1868 (International Freedom Act of 1998). He emphasized that freedom of religion is a bedrock issue for the U.S. and its citizens, relating to the concept of democracy itself.

The present situation of religious persecution and violent intolerance toward minority populations in Burma …. is reviewed. Concerns about the proposed legislation are discussed with respect to the definition of religious persecution and how to provide incentives for improvement in the situations discovered. Throughout the world, the United States upholds human rights, including the principle that freedom of religion, conscience and belief is a universally recognized human right and fundamental freedom.

As President Clinton declared on Religious Freedom Day, January 16, 1998,

“We must continue to proclaim the fundamental right of all peoples to believe and worship according to their own conscience, to affirm their beliefs openly and freely, and to practice their faith without fear of intimidation.”

Freedom of religion is a bedrock issue for the American people and its government.

Indeed, the United States in large part was founded by people who fled religious persecution and intolerance. Their desire for religious freedom prompted the establishment of many of the colonies, where they wrote the principle into their laws and charters.

As the poet James Russell Lowell wrote, religious freedom was the seed that produced democracy.

Our country’s founders recognized the importance of religious freedom.

Thomas Jefferson called it “the creed of our political faith [and] the text of our civil instruction.”

He recognized the inherent link between religious freedom and freedom of speech, assembly, and association.

That is why he and the other Founding Fathers insisted on the prominent placement of freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights, as the First Amendment to the Constitution.  

If people lack religious freedom, other human rights violations, intolerance and violence are more prevalent

Mr. Chairman, it would be a mistake to regard religious freedom as a uniquely American value.

  • It is a concept basic to every one of the world’s major belief systems.
  • It also is an internationally recognized human right.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights recognize that all citizens have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

This right is inherent in the dignity of every human being.

No government can legitimately deny it, no matter what the justification, for it is universal, inalienable, and endowed by virtue of birth.

Unfortunately, however, there are some in the world today who refuse to recognize this fundamental right and who discriminate against, restrict, or even persecute those of other faiths.

Whether Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Jew, Hindu, Baha’i, or of another creed, believers around the world continue to suffer for their faith.   

Statement by Lim Kit Siang – Malaysia Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General, 29th November 1996.

ASEAN Informal Summit in Jakarta tomorrow should take serious note of the resolution by the UN General Assembly’s social, humanitarian and cultural committee deploring Myanmar for continuing violations of human rights

The application by the Myanmar military junta, State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), to join ASEAN is expected to be one of the main issues at the ASEAN Informal Summit in Jakarta tomorrow, especially as the Chairman of SLORC, Gen Tan Swe, has been invited to the Jakarta meeting.

The ASEAN Informal Summit in Jakarta should take serious note of the resolution by the UN General Assembly’s social, humanitarian and cultural committee on Wednesday deploring the continuing violations of human rights in Myanmar.

The UN General Assembly committee passed a resolution by consensus rebuking SLORC for

  1. suppressing opposition,
  2. using forced labour to build its economy,
  3. torturing prisoners,
  4. abusing women
  5. ]and conducting summary executions.

This resolution would be transmitted to the UN General Assembly for formal adoption next month, and by past practice, the General Assembly invariably reflects the stand taken by the committee.

ASEAN should advise SLORC/SPDC to-

engage in substantive political dialogue

  • with Aung San Suu Kyi
  • and other political
  • and ethnic leaders

for national reconciliation and democratic reforms.

However, the National Convention is no longer a legitimate process since the National League for Democracy (NLD) which won the 1990 general elections in Burma has suspended its participation in the National Convention.

The continuation of the present National Convention is a direct violation of the principle established in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that “the will of the people shall be the basis of authority of government”.

ASEAN’s “constructive engagement” policy must be one_

  1. where the ASEAN leaders can give constructive views to SLORC
  2. as to how it could return to the mainstream of the international community.
  3. It must not a blank-cheque to the Myanmar military junta to disregard international opinion
  4. by continuing with its violations of human rights against its people
  5. in return for opening up economic opportunities for ASEAN countries to exploit in Burma. (29/11/96)  

Media Statement by Lim Kit Siang

Call on Dr. Mahathir to exert pressure on SPDC to have genuine dialogue with NLD and ethnic minorities for greater political and economic reforms in Burma during his visit in Rangoon next week 

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad should exert his influence as a key leader in ASEAN on the ruling State Peace Development Council (SPDC) to have genuine dialogue with the leadership of National League for Democracy (NLD) and ethnic minorities to seek the best solution to the problems faced by Burma during his visit to Rangoon from 9th to 10th March 1998.

The Secretary General of NLD Aung San Suu Kyi has been calling for dialogue with the military junta for many years and has expressed her willingness to work with SPDC to solve the problems faced by Burma,

but the military junta has been ignoring her call and has shown its insincerity in its superficial dialogue with NLD last year

which purportedly excluded the key leaders of NLD, especially Aung San Suu Kyi, U Kyi Maung and U Tin Oo.

It is clear that there has been no improvement in the political and economic situation in Burma since it was admitted into ASEAN in July 1997.

The universities have been closed for more than 16 months, besides the continuation of human rights abuses in all parts of that country.

The only change made by the military junta after being admitted into ASEAN was the change of name from State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) to State Peace Development Council (SPDC) in last November

which brings no significant changes to the policies and system of that country.

The continuation of human rights violation and deterioration of economic situation in Burma after the admission of Burma into ASEAN shows to the international community that the Constructive Engagement policy of ASEAN has failed.

The Constructive Engagement policy with Burma has been seen as a lip service of ASEAN rather than a sincere engagement policy with the military junta of Burma in bringing betterment of social and political reforms to the suffering people of Burma.  (6/3/98)

Another Media Statement by Lim Kit Siang

DAP calls for a “constructive intervention” policy on inter-ASEAN relations Malaysia should support the Thai proposal to end the ASEAN policy of non-interference in one another’s internal affairs.

Thai Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan had proposed last month that Asean members, which traditionally avoid delving into one another’s affairs, should change this policy, adding that this would result in greater flexibility which would help Asean recover some of the clout it has lost due to the Asian financial crisis. Philippine Foreign Under-secretary Lauro Baja has said that the ASEAN foreign ministers, which will meet in Manila later this month, will discuss the Thai proposal. Baja also confirmed press reports that the Philippines was already taking a position of “flexible engagement” with Asean member Burma, aimed at helping avoid a political upheaval in that country. Malaysia should in fact go one step further to propose that ASEAN adopt a “constructive intervention” policy on inter-ASEAN relations. The first country for such an ASEAN “constructive intervention” policy to be put into practice is undoubtedly Burma, where opposition groups in the country had recently warned that serious social unrest was set to erupt in that country amid rising tensions with government forces. Burma’s military Government has lashed out at Thailand and the Philippines for “presumptuous” comments about its internal situation and warned their interference could damage ASEAN unity. Thailand, the Philippines and hopefully Malaysia should not allow such threats from steering ASEAN into the new territory of “constructive intervention”. (11/7/98)   ASEAN should learn from the failure of the “constructive engagement’ policy on Burma and craft a new pro-active approach to protect ASEAN’s international credibility by helping Burma embark on the road of democratic reforms and national reconciliation  Media Conference Statement – the launching of the book “From Consensus to Controversy – ASEAN’s Relationship with Burma’s SLORC” by Lim Kit Siang  It is most regrettable that despite the failure of ASEAN’s “constructive engagement” policy on Burma and widespread objections in the region, Burma would be admitted into ASEAN next week.In giving legitimacy to the repressive military junta in Burma, ASEAN stands the risk of undermining its international credibility and legitimacy, especially if the State Law and Restoration Council (SLORC) uses its new-found legitimacy to crack down on the National League for Democracy and Burmese opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi.It is very sad that on the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of Matyrs Day, Burma is no nearer to a new democratic beginning. On the contrary there are ominous signs that the Burmese military rulers might be setting the scene for a new wave of repression after Burma had been officially admitted into ASEAN next week.Two weeks ago, for instance, Lieutenant-General Tin Oo, one of the country’s four most powerful elements, warned that the military government had been watching “destructive elements” – SLORC’s code word for NLD and Aung San Suu Kyi – and would take action against them if they did not mend their ways.ASEAN governments must make it very clear to the SLORC leaders next week that admission into ASEAN is not a licence for gross violation of human rights and that although ASEAN countries do not interfere in each other’ domestic affairs, SLORC should not undermine ASEAN’s international image, credibility and legitimacy through a new wave of repressions against pro-democracy activists.In fact, ASEAN should learn from the failure of its “constructive engagement’ policy on Burma.The time has also come for ASEAN to give greater meaning to the regional grouping on its 30th anniversary by showing the world that South East Asian nations could not only become economic powerhouses, but also become human rights models.There is no more meaningful way to mark ASEAN’s 30th anniversary than the establishment of an ASEAN Commission of Human Rights to uphold human rights in the region and address regional concerns that Burma’s admission would be a setback for democracy and human rights, not only in Burma, but also for the other ASEAN nations.The ASEAN Commission of Human Rights should be an important plank of a “comprehensive ASEAN policy on Burma” to help Burma embark on the road towards democratisation and national reconciliation.(18/7/97)   OPEN LETTER to ASEAN Foreign Ministers meeting in Kuala Lumpur tomorrow to discuss the timing of full membership for Myanmar by Lim Kit Siang. 30th May 1997 Honourable ASEAN Foreign Ministers Myanmar’s membership in ASEAN  The human rights record of SLORC had worsened since it had acquired observer status in ASEAN. It had continued to defy the annual United Nations General Assembly resolution calling for democratisation and it had refused to co-operate with ASEAN countries to make a success of the ASEAN constructive engagement policy in the past seven years to achieve tangible or measurable progress in democratic reforms and national reconciliation.While ASEAN governments do not want to ostracise Myanmar, they should not reward SLORC for its poor human rights record by admitting it into ASEAN this year.The ASEAN Foreign Ministers should take seriously the warning of Aung San Suu Kyi in a videotape to ASEAN leaders that admitting Myanmar into ASEAN might trigger an increase in the SLORC repression of political and human rights.Suu Kyi said in the videotape that Myanmar under SLORC is not going to be any credit to ASEAN. But she thinks is the possibility that admission into ASEAN will make SLORC even more obdurate and oppressive than ever.”Just as any regional or international organisation which admitted South Africa in the heyday of the apartheid regime would rightly incur international opprobrium, ASEAN Foreign Ministers must be fully aware of the great damage to the international reputation of ASEAN if Myanmar is admitted without any improvement in its abysmal human rights record.Furthermore, Burma’s admission into ASEAN must be contingent on SLORC co-operating with ASEAN countries to make a success of the ASEAN constructive engagement policy to promote democratic reforms and national reconciliation.For the past seven years, ASEAN’s “constructive engagement” policy had been very one-sided, confining its contacts with SLORC, when the ASEAN governments should reach out to “constructively engage” with both SLORC and the pro-democracy forces led by Aung San Suu Kyi. The ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Conference should respond positively to the invitation by Sui Kyi in her videotape message that:“If ASEAN is truly interested in constructive engagement, it should try to engage with both sides in Burma, with the (regime) as well as the democratic opposition.“ASEAN should be engaged with the National League for Democracy as well, because we are the party, which was elected by the people in the democratic elections of 1990”. The ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ should seriously consider the hosting of a dialogue between SLORC and the pro-democracy forces led by Aung San Suu Kyi in the hope that such a dialogue under the auspices of ASEAN could help break the present political impasse in Burma and move Burma towards the road of democratisation and national reconciliation – and pave the way for Burma’s eventual admission into ASEAN.Thank you.Yours truly,Lim Kit Siang Parliamentary Opposition Leader Secretary-General, Democratic Action Party Malaysia (30/5/97)  Aliran’s Media Statement “Democracy Further Stalled in Burma”. Aliran views with deep concern the recent political stand-off between Burma’s opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and the country’s military junta. In the recent incident, Suu Kyi was prevented by the military from travelling freely in her own country to exercise her democratic rights and to meet her political supporters. This prompted her to stay put in her Toyota Mark II sedan as a mark of protest. The military regime’s latest action against her would have had serious implications for the health of the already ailing opposition leader. It also reflects the regime’s increasingly arrogant display of political barbarism. The political recalcitrance flaunted by the Burmese military regime makes an ugly mockery of the much-hyped ASEAN notion of “constructive engagement” and the zealously guarded policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of member countries. Fellow ASEAN member states must in no uncertain terms make it known to the Burmese regime that enough is enough and that Suu Kyi and her colleagues should be given their rightful democratic place in Burma. ASEAN as a regional group cannot afford to be seen as being selective when it comes to reprimanding nations that have breached international norms of justice and democracy. Unless ASEAN corrects itself in this respect, its international reputation will be jeopardised and, worse, it will be perceived as a group that doesn’t practise wha it preaches to other, especially those in the West; in short, it is often seen as a group that practises double standards. Dr Mustafa K. Anuar Asst. Secretary 30 July 1998.           

Roots of Burmese Muslims

Roots of Burmese Muslims 

There is definitely direct spread of Islam to this part of the world and Burma/Myanmar directly from Arabia and Africa continent. But I hereby wish to stress on the one root or SEED OF ISLAM that came to Burma from India.

Islam began in Asia in the 7th century during the life of Muhammad. The greatest number of adherents of Islam has lived in Asia since the beginning of Islamic history.

Islam was started on the Arabian Peninsula by Muhammad in the 7th century. Since then it began spreading rapidly. Till his death (in 632), Muhammad managed to unite the whole of the Arabian peninsular into one country with Islam as the official religion.  

Today most Muslims live in Asia. The majority of notable Muslim religious leaders are based in Asia. Asian countries with high Muslim population include: Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, India, Turkey, Russia, Yemen, Oman, and Qatar. One of the important 20th century figures that developed Islam was Muhammad Iqbal – a philosopher. Another important Asian Muslim was Abdullah Yusuf Ali, an Indian Muslim from Mumbai who translated the Qur’an to English. 

It is necessary for academic purpose because most of the Muslims in Myanmar are Sunni Muslims from the Hannafi sect. From the Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania, Turkey, Central Asia (break away countries from Russia), Afghanistan, China, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh most of the Muslims are from this same sect.  

Muslims from Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and Brunei are from the Shafi sect of Sunni. Shafi sect is known to be spread by the sea route.  

In contrast to this, Hannafi sect is known to be spread by the land route. Arabs propagate Islam directly to the Central Asia and Turky.

The Mongols, e.g. Gin Ghist Khan, although they are Buddhists employed the Muslim Turks and Central Asians and cause the spread of Islam to this part of the world. In this case, the saying, ‘conquerors are conquered’ need to be explained thoroughly.

The conqueror U Tar Tars took over Turkey, Iran and Iraq, and they killed the millions of men and children and married those Muslim women left behind. Their new wives strangely converted them into Islam and they accepted the Islamic cultures. So this is the living proof of the saying, ‘conquerors are conquered’.

And those Tar Tar/Turk descendents’ armies invaded Afghanistan, India subcontinent (future India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.) and established the Moghol Islamic Empire. So the Central Asia Muslims, Chinese Muslims, Yunan Chinese Muslims and Burma’s Chinese Muslims or Panthays and many of the Burmese Muslims are also their descendents. Even the Muslims in Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia got Islam from those Chinese Muslims.

islam-by-country-smooth.png  Distribution of Islam per country.

Green represents a Sunni majority

and blue represents a Shia majority.  

 Today, Islam in Mongolia is mainly practiced by the Kazakhs of Bayan-Ölgii aimag in western Mongolia. The U.S. Department of State estimates that Muslims form 6% of the population, or roughly 150,000 people. 

When the Mongol Empire broke up into four khanates, three of the four khanates became Muslim. These were the Golden Horde, Hulagu’s Ulus and Chagatai’s Ulus. The Yuan Empire also embraced Muslim peoples such as the Uyghurs. Although the court of the Yuan Empire adopted Tibetan Buddhism as the official religion, the majority of the ordinary Mongols, especially those who continued living in Mongolia proper, remained Shamanists.  

In 1257, Hulagu Khan amassed an unusually large army, a significant portion of the Mongol Empire’s forces, for the purpose of conquering Baghdad. When they arrived at the Islamic capital, Hulagu demanded surrender but the caliph refused. This angered Hulagu, and, consistent with Mongol strategy of discouraging resistance, Baghdad was decimated. Estimates of the number of dead range from 200,000 to a million. 

The Mongols destroyed the Abbasid Caliphate and The Grand Library of Baghdad, which contained countless, precious, historical documents. The city would never regain its status as major center of culture and influence. 

In 1401, warlord of Turco-Mongol descent Tamerlane (Timur Lenk) invaded Iraq. After the capture of Bagdad, 20,000 of its citizens were massacred. Timur ordered that every soldier should return with at least two severed human heads to show him (many warriors were so scared they killed prisoners captured earlier in the campaign just to ensure they had heads to present to Timur. 

Timeline of Mongol invasions            

  1. 1205–1209 invasion of Western China            
  2. 1211–1234 invasion of Northern China            
  3. 1218–1220 invasion of Central Asia (North eastern of Persia)            
  4. 1220-1223, 1235-1330 invasions of Georgia and the Caucasus (North and north western of Persia)            
  5. 1220–1224 of the Cumans            
  6. 1223–1236 invasion of Volga Bulgaria            
  7. 1231–1259 invasion of Korea  
  8. Mongol invasion of Europe            
  9. 1237–1242 invasion of Rus            
  10. 1241 invasion of Poland, Lithuania and Bohemia            
  11. 1241 invasion of Hungary            
  12. 1241 invasion of Austria and Northeast Italy            
  13. 1242 invasion of Serbia and Bulgaria            
  14. 1241-1244 invasion of Anatolia            
  15. 1251-1259 invasion of Persia, Syria and Mesopotamia            
  16. 1252-1472 Mongol military campaigns in Russia            
  17. 1257, 1284, 1287 invasions of Vietnam            
  18. 1258 invasion of Baghdad            
  19. 1258-1259 invasion of Galych-Volhynia            
  20. 1259 raid against Lithuania and Poland            
  21. 1264-1265 raid against Bulgaria and Thrace            
  22. 1274, 1281 invasions of Japan            
  23. 1274 raid against Bulgaria            
  24. 1275, 1277 raids against Lithuania            
  25. 1277 invasion of Myanmar            
  26. 1279 invasions of Southern China            
  27. 1281 invasion of Syria            
  28. 1285 invasion of Hungary            
  29. 1285 raid against Bulgaria            
  30. 1287 invasion of Myanmar            
  31. 1287 raid against Poland            
  32. 1293 invasion of Java            
  33. 1297, 1299 invasions of India            
  34. 1299 invasion of Syria            
  35. Mongol invasions of India(1222, 1241, 1257, 1292, 1298, 1306 and 1327)            
  36. Mongol invasion of Myanmar (1300)            
  37. 1303 Mongol invasion of Syria            
  38. 312 Mongol invasion of Syria  

Mongols were highly tolerant of most religions, and typically sponsored several at the same time. At the time of Genghis Khan, virtually every religion had found converts, from Buddhism to Christianity and Manichaeanism to Islam.

To avoid strife, Genghis Khan set up an institution that ensured complete religious freedom, though he himself was a shamanist. Under his administration, all religious leaders were exempt from taxation, and from public service. Initially there were few formal places of worship, because of the nomadic lifestyle. However, under Ögedei, several building projects were undertaken in Karakorum. Along with palaces, Ogodei built houses of worship for the Buddhist, Muslim, Christian, and Taoist followers. The dominant religion at that time was Shamanism and Buddhism, although Ogodei’s wife was a Christian. 

Turkic-Mongol military bands in Iran, after some years of chaos were united under the Saffavid tribe, under whom the modern Iranian nation took shape under the Shiite faith.

Meanwhile Mongol princes in Central Asia were content with Sunni orthodoxy with decentralized princedoms of the Chagatay, Timurid and Uzbek houses. 

In addition to the Khanates and other descendants, the Mughal royal family of South Asia are also descended from Genghis Khan: Babur’s mother was a descendant — whereas his father was directly descended from Timur (Tamerlane).

At the time of Genghis Khan’s death in 1227, the empire was divided among his four sons, with his third son as the supreme Khan, and by the 1350s, the khanates were in a state of fracture and had lost the order brought to them by Genghis Khan.

Eventually the separate khanates drifted away from each other, becoming the Il-Khans Dynasty based in Iran, the Chagatai Khanate in Central Asia, the Yuan Dynasty in China, and what would become the Golden Horde in present day Russia. 

The Mughal Empire was an important imperial power in the Indian subcontinent from the early 16th to the mid-19th centuries.

At the height of its power, around 1700, it controlled most of the subcontinent and parts of what is now Afghanistan. Its population at that time has been estimated as between 110 and 130 million, over a territory of over a billion acres (4 million km2) 

The classic period of the Empire starts with the accession of Akbar the Great in 1556 and ends with the death of Aurangzeb in 1707, although the Empire continued for another 150 years. During this period, the Empire was marked by a highly centralized administration connecting the different regions of India. All the significant monuments of the Mughals, their most visible legacy, date to this period. 

Mughal is the Persian word for Mongol and was generally used to refer to the Central Asians who claimed descent from the Mongol warriors of Genghis Khan. The foundation for Mughal empire was established around 1504 by the Timurid prince Babur, a descendant of Genghis Khan and Timur, when he took control of Kabul and eastern regions of Khorasan controlling the fertile Sindh region and the lower valley of the Indus River. 

Babur’s son Humayun succeeded him in 1530 but suffered major reversals at the hands of the Pashtun Sher Shah Suri and effectively lost most of the fledgling empire. When the Afghans fell into disarray with the death of Sher Shah Suri, Humayun returned with a mixed army, raised more troops and managed to reconquer Delhi in 1555. Humayun conquered the central plateau around Delhi, he was killed in an accident and succeded by the son Akbar.

Akbar (1556 to 1605) succeeded his father on 14 February 1556, while in the midst of a war against Sikandar Shah Suri for the reclamation of the Mughal throne. Thus, he was thrust onto the throne and soon recorded his first victory at the age of 13 or 14. Jahangir, the son of Mughal Emperor Akbar and Rajput princess Mariam-uz-Zamani, ruled the empire from 1605–1627.

In October 1627, Shah Jahan, the son of Mughal Emperor Jahangir and Rajput princess Manmati, succeeded to the throne, where he inherited a vast and rich empire in India; and at mid-century this was perhaps the greatest empire in the world. Shah Jahan commissioned the famous Taj Mahal (1630–1653) in Agra as a tomb for his wife Mumtaz Mahal, who died giving birth to their 14th child. By 1700 the empire reached its peak with major parts of present day India, 

After the invasion of Persia by the Mongol Empire, a regional Turko-Persio-Mongol dynasty formed. Just as eastern Mongol dynasties inter-married with locals and adopted the local religion of Buddhism and the Chinese culture, this group adopted the local religion of Islam and the Persian culture.

The first Mughal King, Babur, established the Mughal dynasty in regions spanning parts of present-day Pakistan and India. Upon invading this region, the Mughals inter-married with local royalty once again, creating a dynasty of combined Turko-Persian, and Mongol background. King Babur did this to create peace among the different religions in the region.

Despite preaching Islamic values himself, Babur focused on setting a good example for the Mughal Dynasty by emphasizing religious tolerance. The language of the court was Persian. The language spoken was Urdūn, which today has advanced into Urdu. Urdūn originated from Persio-Arabic formation, and took on various characteristics of Persian, Chagatai, and Arabic. Today, Urdu is the National Language of Pakistan and is spoken by most Indian Muslims. Religious orthodoxy would only play an important role during the reign of Aurangzeb Ālamgīr, a devout Muslim.

This last of the Great Mughals retracted some of the tolerant policies of his forbears. Under his reign the empire reached its greatest extent in terms of territorial gain and economic strength. I

slam first came into India in the province of Kerala during the lifetime of Prophet Mohammed himself. Prophet Mohammed is said to have sent messengers to the Roman (Byzantine) Emperor Heraclius, the Sassanian (Persian) Emperors Chosroes (Khushrau Parvez) and Yazdgard, and to the Kings of China and Kerala (in South India).

The Kings of China and Kerala are said to have received the messengers with great courtesy. King Cheraman of Chera dynasty of Kerala Voluntarily Converts to Islam in the 7th Century.  Tamerlane, a corruption of the name in Persian, Timur-i-Leng, meaning “Timur the Lame.”

The word Timur is Turkic for “iron”. He became the ruler of an empire that stretched from Delhi to Anatolia.  Timur was born in Kesh, fifty miles south of Samarkand) in 1336. His capture of Delhi in 1398 and became the Emperor of Hindustan. Samarkand, Timur’s royal city, celebrated its 2500th anniversary in 1970. It is an ancient site, located on the Zarafshan River, in modern-day Uzbekistan. 

BABUR, THE FIRST OF THE GREAT MOGHULS,was born on February 14, 1483 in Ferghana east of Samarkand. The name “Moghul” is a Persian variant of “Mongol”.  Emperor Babur (1483-1530), the founder of the great Mughal dynasty, was descended from both Genghis Khan and Timur. In 1504, Babur captured the Kabul, Afghan and India in 1524. Two years later, he defeated the Sultan of Delhi . Akbar (1542-1605) was the third and most famous Mughal emperor.  Babar established the Mughal dynasty which ruled from Delhi (and later from Agra) Between 1527 C.E. and 1690 C.E., the Mughals gradually expanded their hold over almost the whole of India. They ruled from 1527 up to 1857. The Mughal (and Muslim) rule was formally abolished by the British.  

The last Muslim Moghul Emperor of India, Abu Za’far Saraj al-Din Bahadur Shah and his family members and some followers were exiled to Yangon, Myanmar (Burma). The Mongols themselves were assimilated into local populations after the fall of the empire, and many of these descendants adopted local religions — for example, the eastern Khanates largely adopted Buddhism, and the western Khanates adopted Islam, largely under Sufi influence. The last Khan who was the ruler of South Asia, Bahadur Shah Zafar was deposed by the British after the collapse of the 1857 uprising and exiled to Rangoon where he lies buried. His sons were killed by the British in Humayun’s tomb, the burial place of their ancestor in Delhi. He died there and was buried in Yangon (Rangoon) on 7.11.1862. Now his burial site became a minor diplomatic clash between India and Pakistan. Both of them want to control the site now famous as a shrine and even some of the Burmese Buddhists used to go and pray there because Za’far Shar, as they known, was regarded as a saint.  

The first Mughal emperor Babur wrote in the Bāburnāma:            

“Hindustan is a place of little charm. There is no beauty in its people, no graceful social intercourse, no poetic talent or understanding, no etiquette, nobility or manliness. The arts and crafts have no harmony or symmetry. There are no good horses, meat, grapes, melons or other fruit. There is no ice, cold water, good food or bread in the markets. There are no baths and no madrasas. There are no candles, torches or candlesticks”. 

The Mughal period would see a more fruitful blending of Indian, Iranian and Central Asian artistic, intellectual and literary traditions than any other in Indian history. The Mughals had a taste for the fine things in life — for beautifully designed artifacts and the enjoyment and appreciation of cultural activities. The Mughals borrowed as much as they gave; both the Hindu and Muslim traditions of India were huge influences on their interpretation of culture and court style.  Nevertheless, they introduced many notable changes to Indian society and culture, including:

  1. Centralised government which brought together many smaller kingdoms
  2. Persian art and culture amalgamated with native Indian art and culture
  3. Started new trade routes to Arab and Turk lands, Islam was at its very high
  4. Mughlai cuisine
  5. Urdu and spoken Hindi languages were formed for common Muslims and Hindus respectively
  6. A new style of architecture
  7. Landscape gardening

300px-tajmahalbyamalmongia.jpg

A major Mughal contribution to south Asia was their unique architecture. Many monuments were built during the Mughal era including the Taj Mahal.

Acknowledgement 

Some data and photos from Wikipedia.