Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: Ethnic cleansing in Burma

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    880
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Ethnic cleansing in Burma

    A sad, shocking yet familiar video from the guardian on the situation in Burma.

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

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

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

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

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

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

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member Kevin Parlon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    10,190
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Both sides of this conflict agree on one thing. That the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma. It's very sad for the people born into that community. What a hand to be dealt.
    "It is amazing how many people think that they can answer an argument by attributing bad motives to those who disagree with them." - Thomas Sowell

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member picador's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Béal Feirste
    Posts
    20,967
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Parlon View Post
    Both sides of this conflict agree on one thing. That the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma. It's very sad for the people born into that community. What a hand to be dealt.
    So are they in favour of being of massacred and deported? Please explain.
    The Empire's Over - Why Don't You Go Home?

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member Kevin Parlon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    10,190
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by picador View Post
    So are they in favour of being of massacred and deported? Please explain.
    Please explain.
    "It is amazing how many people think that they can answer an argument by attributing bad motives to those who disagree with them." - Thomas Sowell

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member picador's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Béal Feirste
    Posts
    20,967
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    You said all parties agreed the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma (even though that's where they are from). Where should they be in your opinion?
    The Empire's Over - Why Don't You Go Home?

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member TheMushyStuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The People's Republic of Cork
    Posts
    2,528
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Parlon View Post
    Both sides of this conflict agree on one thing. That the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma. It's very sad for the people born into that community. What a hand to be dealt.
    That's a bit like saying Irish shouldn't be in Nortern Ireland because the Brits took over. Rohingya are native population to the region and has been since the 8th century.
    “When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” - Socrates

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member Kevin Parlon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    10,190
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by picador View Post
    You said all parties agreed the Rohingya shouldn't be in Burma (even though that's where they are from). Where should they be in your opinion?
    That's because The Burmese don't want them in Burma and the Rohingya don't want to be in Burma. I am not sure what mental route you took from there to get to "they [the parties] are in favour of being of massacred and deported"
    "It is amazing how many people think that they can answer an argument by attributing bad motives to those who disagree with them." - Thomas Sowell

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member Global Justice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ulster - Unrepentant Fenian Bastard
    Posts
    13,504
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheMushyStuff View Post
    That's a bit like saying Irish shouldn't be in Nortern Ireland because the Brits took over. Rohingya are native population to the region and has been since the 8th century.
    Not ironic that the colonial-imperial Brits played a role in the tribal/nationalist antagonisms in Burma?

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member Kevin Parlon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    10,190
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheMushyStuff View Post
    That's a bit like saying Irish shouldn't be in Nortern Ireland because the Brits took over.
    Nah, its more like saying the Rohingya don't identify with the Burmese state and the Burmese State doesn't want to include the Rohingya. Which is the case.

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

    In any case, I can only sympathise with anyone born into such a situation.
    "It is amazing how many people think that they can answer an argument by attributing bad motives to those who disagree with them." - Thomas Sowell

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,385
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheMushyStuff View Post
    Rohingya are native population to the region and has been since the 8th century.
    No they haven’t... Where did you hear that crap ?

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •