Burmese Nobel Prize Winner Aung San Suu Kyi Has Turned Into an Apologist for Genocide Against Muslims
The longtime prisoner of conscience now leads Myanmar and defends her government’s abuses, including killings and gang rapes, against the country’s Rohingya minority.
AUNG SAN SUU KYI IS ONE of the most celebrated human rights icons of our age: Nobel Peace Laureate, winner of the Sakharov Prize, recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, an Amnesty International-recognized prisoner of conscience for 15 long years.
These days, however, she is also an apologist for genocide, ethnic cleansing and mass rape.
For the past year, Aung San Suu Kyi has been State Counselor, or de facto head of government, in Myanmar, where members of the Rohingya Muslim minority in the northern Rakhine state have been shot, stabbed, starved, robbed, raped and driven from their homes in the hundreds of thousands. In December, while the world focused on the fall of Aleppo, more than a dozen Nobel Laureates published an open letter warning of a tragedy in Rakhine “amounting to ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.”
In February, a report by the United Nations documented how the Burmese army’s attacks on the Rohingya were “widespread as well as systematic” thus “indicating the very likely commission of crimes against humanity.” More than half of the 101 Rohingya women interviewed by UN investigators across the border in Bangladesh said they had suffered rape or other forms of sexual violence at the hands of security forces. “They beat and killed my husband with a knife,” one survivor recalled. “Five of them took off my clothes and raped me. My eight-month old son was crying of hunger when they were in my house because he wanted to breastfeed, so to silence him they killed him too with a knife.”
And the response of Aung San Suu Kyi? This once-proud campaigner against wartime rape and human rights abuses by the Burmese military has opted to borrow from the Donald Trump playbook of denial and deflection. Her office accused Rohingya women of fabricating stories of sexual violence and put the words “fake rape” — in the form of a banner headline, no less — on its official website. A spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry — also controlled directly by Aung San Suu Kyi — dismissed “made-up stories, blown out of proportion.” In February, the State Counselor herself reportedly told the Archbishop of Yangon, Charles Bo, that the international community is exaggerating the Rohingya issue.
This is Trumpism 101: Deny. Discredit. Smear.
Photo: Romeo Gacad/AFP/Getty Images
It was all supposed to be so different. In November 2015, Myanmar held its first contested national elections after five decades of military rule. An overwhelming victory for Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) and former political prisoner, was going to usher in a new era of democracy, human rights and respect for minorities. That, at least, was the hope.
The reality has been very different. Less than a year after taking office, Burmese security forces launched a brutal crackdown on the Rohingya after an attack on a border outpost in Rakhine killed nine police officers in October. The northern portion of the state was sealed off by the military and humanitarian aid was blocked, as was access to foreign journalists and human rights groups. Hundreds of Rohingya Muslims are believed to have been slaughtered and tens of thousands driven across the border into Bangladesh.
This is only the latest chapter in the anti-Rohingya saga. The Muslim residents of Rakhine have been subjected to violent attacks by the military since 2012 and were stripped of citizenship, and rendered stateless, as long ago as 1982. The 1-million odd Rohingya Muslims live in apartheid-like conditions: denied access to employment, education and healthcare, forced to obtain permission to marry and subjected to a discriminatory “two-child” policy. “About 10 percent are held in internment camps,” according to Patrick Winn, Asia correspondent for Public Radio International. “The rest are quarantined in militarized districts and forbidden to travel.”
The standard Western media narrative is to accuse The Lady, as she is known by her admirers, of silence and of a grotesque failure to speak out against these human rights abuses. In an editorial last May, the New York Times denounced Suu Kyi’s “cowardly stance on the Rohingya.”
Yet hers is not merely a crime of omission, a refusal to denounce or condemn. Hers are much worse crimes of commission. She took a deliberate decision to try and discredit the Rohingya victims of rape. She went out of her way to accuse human rights groups and foreign journalists of exaggerations and fabrications. She demanded that the U.S. government stop using the name “Rohingya” — thereby perpetuating the pernicious myth that the Muslims of Rakhine are “Bengali” interlopers (rather than a Burmese community with a centuries-long presence inside Myanmar.) She also appointed a former army general to investigate the recent attacks on the Rohingya and he produced a report in January that, not surprisingly, whitewashed the well-documented crimes of his former colleagues in the Burmese military.
Silence, therefore, is the least of her sins. Silence also suggests a studied neutrality. Yet there is nothing neutral about Aung San Suu Kyi’s stance. She has picked her side and it is the side of Buddhist nationalism and crude Islamophobia.
In 2013, after an interview with the BBC’s Mishal Husain, Aung San Suu Kyi complained, “No one told me I was going to be interviewed by a Muslim.” In 2015, ahead of historic parliamentary elections, the NLD leader purged her party of all Muslim candidates, resulting in the country’s first legislature without any Muslim representation whatsoever. Like a Burmese Steve Bannon, she paranoiacally speaks of “global Muslim power” being “very great” — only 4 percent of the Burmese population, incidentally, is Muslim — while conspiratorially dismissing reports of Buddhist-orchestrated massacres in Rakhine as “Muslims killing Muslims.”
This is a form of genocide denial, delivered in a soft tone and posh voice by a telegenic Nobel Peace Prize winner. Genocide, though, sounds like an exaggeration, doesn’t it? Pro-Rohingya propaganda, perhaps? Yet independent study after independent study has come to the same stark and depressing conclusion: genocide is being carried out against the Rohingya. For example, an October 2015 legal analysis by the Allard K. Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic at Yale Law School, found “strong evidence… that genocidal acts have been committed against Rohingya” and “that such acts have been committed with the intent to destroy the Rohingya, in whole or in part.”
Photo: A.M. Ahad/AP
Another report published in the same month, by the International State Crime Initiative at Queen Mary University of London, concluded that “the Rohingya face the final stages of genocide” and noted how “state-sponsored stigmatisation, discrimination, violence and segregation … make precarious the very existence of the Rohingya.”
Aung San Suu Kyi, argues Maung Zarni, a Burmese scholar and founder of the Free Burma Coalition, holds “genocidal views towards the Rohingya” because “she denies Rohingya identity and history.” Genocide, he tells me, “begins with an attack on identity and history. The victims never existed and … will never exist.”
The State Counselor, from this perspective, is not simply standing by as genocide occurs; she is legitimizing, encouraging and enabling it. When a legendary champion of human rights is in charge of a government that undertakes military operations against “terrorists,” smearing and discrediting the victims of gang rape and loudly denying the burning down of villages and forced expulsion of families, it makes it much harder for the international community to highlight those crimes, let alone intervene to halt them. In recent years, in fact, Western governments have been rolling back political and economic sanctions on Myanmar, citing the country’s “progress“on democracy and pointing to the election victory of Aung San Suu Kyi and her NLD.
Politicians and pundits in the West, observes Zarni, long ago adopted Aung San Suu Kyi as “their liberal darling — petite, attractive, Oxford-educated ‘Oriental’ woman with the most prestigious pedigree, married to a white man, an Oxford don, connected with the British Establishment.” Belatedly, the West’s journalists, diplomats and human rights groups “are waking up to the ugly realities that she is neither principled nor liberal,” he adds.
It may be too little and too late, however. Around 1,000 Rohinga are believed to have been killed since October and more than 70,000 have been forced to flee the country. Yet Aung San Suu Kyi continues to shamelessly tell interviewers, such as the BBC’s Fergal Keane last week, that there is no ethnic cleansing going on and that the Burmese military are “not free to rape, pillage and torture” in Rakhine. Is this the behavior of a Mandela… or a Mugabe?
“Saints should always be judged guilty,” wrote George Orwell, in his famous 1949 essay on Mahatma Gandhi, “until they are proved innocent.” There is no evidence of innocence when it comes to Aung San Suu Kyi and her treatment of the Rohingya — only complicity and collusion in unspeakable crimes. This supposed saint is now an open sinner. The former political prisoner and democracy activist has turned into a genocide-denying, rape-excusing, Muslim-bashing Buddhist nationalist. Forget the house arrest and the Nobel Prize. This is how history will remember The Lady of Myanmar.
Top photo: Aung San Suu Kyi arrives at the polling station to cast vote during Myanmar’s first free and fair election on Nov. 8, 2015 in Yangon, Myanmar.
It is impossible for me to separate one group of people who are being harmed and killed by governments (theirs and ours) from another group who is experiencing similar horror. When I read this article the groups of people that I know allowed a flash of sound & image of Palestinian conflict experiencers, and more personally, Palestinian people I have known. Nepal, Haiti and Japan earthquake survivors images quickly came remembering the experience of being in Nepal during the earthquakes. The I began separating the earthquake victims from the government abuse victims in these different places. The victims of natural events are perceived as different from the victims of torture & murder. Then I thought about the Haitian charity response and so the Haitian people were the victims of both natural disaster and corruption Clinton Foundation). My question to my higher conscious then became why do we unite to provide for the victims of a natural disaster but only have ‘shock & awe’ moments for the victims who are crying out as their tribe is being wiped from the record? As we use social media to share information which is urgent & important what more can we do? I want to know why we can express our emotion about a ‘foreign’ leader and deny the ineptitude, deliberate shredding of our constitution illegitimacy of our own government (Bush, Obama, Trump). Then I came to the next stop on my medicine wheel in my mental journey towards clarity and I asked the ancestors, in a prayerful way, what about the victims who had their water supply dumped by the government? (SRST and guests). The community that had its toileting facility removed from a community? (SRST) The government that blocked roads and prevented supplies from getting through? The corporation that sent in armed security to try and provoke a major incident, riot or accident. (Morton county, ND). What about the police and mercenaries allowed to shoot large groups of women, men, elderly and youth, poison the environment, incarcerate people, beat people and strip them naked, leave them outside in the cold – in cages, deny access to clean water, have military training exercises in their neighborhood, spy on the people, inject them with poison via vaccines, poison the air, the soil, the water? It is not just the Muslims in Burma. No, it is the Aborigines in Australia, the indigenous people everywhere who are targeted. Why, I asked myself. It is about the matrix, the land, ownership, control, greed, evil. We need to raise our vibration.
What I dont understand is why someone like Mehdi Hasan is given a podium at the intercept. If this atricle came from another writer, who was not an Islamist himself, it would had much more context.
It will be interesting to hear what Amnesty International has to say on that topic.
Aung San Suu Kyi has been a British intelligence asset since day one. No one should be surprised by this supposed “transformation.”
Makes sense, but any links to support that for those not knowing any better (like me) ?
Damn! Power must be more addictive than cocaine, a helluva drug.
I’ve been reading about her downward human rights spiral for a minute now. How do such highly educated people still end up promoting mentally lazy, tribal and racist ideologies?
Oftentimes, the leaders who participate in this behavior have experienced the exact same oppression firsthand. I honestly don’t get it.
1: American (South-Latin-North); 2: RBS (Russia British Scandinavia); 3: EUROPE AFRICA; 4: AIOP (Arab India Oceania Pacific). 4: AIOP: OP: China ::::: Myanmar!!!
I wouldn’t be surprised that the truth is somewhere in the middle. Rohingya, close to fundamental Muslims, are mostly illegal immigrants coming from Bangladesh. They are not innocent although most of NGO’s are blindly protecting them. Strange that the world always turns to favour Extremist Rohingya Muslims where in most of these cases it’s the Muslim community that refuses to integrate and has an agenda to conquer the world, by the sword if necessary!
Admittedly, at first, I was critical of Hasan joining The Intercept, but I vastly underestimated (or rather, was unaware of) his ability to write such insightful, well documented pieces. Again, he delivered. An important article about events that go unnoticed in the Western-Europan media.
Kissinger and Obama both received the Nobel Peace Prize. they were both war criminals many times over.
The award is a Ruling Elite propaganda tool. It’s utter bullshit and should be framed that way. It amounts to the canonization of a Ruling Elite puppet into a tool of oppression and murder.
Aung San Suu Kyi just seems to be yet another Nobel prize winner who has traded their soul for power.
Opposition is easy. Governing is hard.
Mr. Hasan
So far you have generated a paltry 65 comments on a thread dedicated to human rights. Calling Trump’s supporters racists pulled in 800 comments. This is a case study in the importance of human rights for the Russian-bots and far left wing commentators that visit the Intercept. They are here to bash America (and their allies).
Take her Nobel prize and throw her back in confinement.
Oh, NOs…another liberal establishment hero shown to have feet of clay.
She was a western puppet all along not a leader of the people but member of old Burmese elite as her family supported by monks mafia. She was a Burma Yeltzin a carrier of virus of neoliberalism to be spread in Burma millennia old culture and kill it. She paid generals off with GS money so they can be enslaved by the west.
She was martyr in house arrest, give me a break, supporting monks power and their wealth as organization and staffle enlightment in the political realm.
The Rohingya Identity – http://www.networkmyanmar.org/ESW/Files/Leider-Transmutations.pdf – a fusion of old and more recent settlers, mostly from Bengal. Pre-1785 (Burmese invasion of Arakan) they included Heins (captured slaves), Kaman (Shah Shuja), soldiers of fortune, voluntary migrants, Zerbaidis (mixed race) and individuals (going back to the 8th Century). 1785-1824 included loyal Muslims of Myedu in Burma. 1824-1948 (British rule) massive infusion of Chittagonian farmers and other Bengalis. Post-1948 illegal migrants from Bengal. Post-1824 legal and illegal migrants make up the greater majority of today’s Rohingya community
These miscellaneous and ethnically distinct communities now coalescing under the ‘Rohingya’ label for political protection, a synthetic term elaborated by Muslim scholars in the late 1950s/ early 1960s after much discussion from among a galaxy of R-terms including Rwangya, Ruhangya, Roewenhya, Rushangya, Rohwunhyar and many others. Rohingya chosen under pressure from Bengal Muslims. A new ethnicity, or at least one under formation, but very really all the same. Not to be confused with or in any way related to Buchanan’s ‘Rooinga’ of 1795 used by ‘old’ Muslim Arakaner settlers, outside Arakan only.
Rohingya identity thus a very complex issue, based on who arrived when, and from where. Previous military administration accepted both legality of all settlers prior to 1948 (Thein Sein to Guterres 11 July 2012) and granting of full citizenship to all their descendants, but never executed because of chicanery and obstructionism. Post-1948 settlers regarded as illegals, and alleged (and only them) to be ex-Bengal “Rohingyas”. Kamans alone struggling to keep their separate identity from the Rohingya juggernaut.
No discussion though on this historical narrative has ever taken place, except in esoteric scholarly forums. No R-term of any kind in use anywhere before 1948. No solution likely until these issues of identity are discussed honestly and openly.
They’re Bengali immigrants and they need to go back. This pet genocide western Muslims bang on about is a total myth.
That’s nice Herb, now back to gittin on wit yer sister. Come on Goober, those inbred kids aint gonna birth themselves.
Herb, be gentle tonight with your favorite pet dog, or is that just a rumor or a myth?
Assawlamualiakum wwbkt,
Thanks for your efforts. May Allah accept you deeds and intention. Ameen
Assawlamualiakum wwbkt,
Thanks for your efforts. May Allah accept you deeds and intention.
May Allah apologize for the atrocities perpetrate in his name by so called Muslims…. No one else will…. Oh except the Left… Ameen
Aung San Suu Kyi has spent half her life in jail and/or under house arrest, not know if today will be her last day. Her father was democratically elected, then assassinated.
Aung San Suu Kyi has literally dedicated her entire life to the preservation of Burma/Myanmar. I trust Aung San Suu Kyi a thousand times more than Mr. Hasan.
Then you are in denial.
Thank you, Aung San Suu Kyi, for another great lesson in why we should never venerate leaders.
People were enthralled by her. The archaic meaning of enthrall was “enslave”.
Aung San Suu Kyi’s father was murdered and she has spent half her life in jail or in house arrest (not knowing each night if she would be killed the next day) ALL for the sole purpose of preserving her small country.
Aung San Suu Kyi has literally dedicated her whole life to her country. I trust her a lot more than I trust you.
Mr. Hasan, it sounds to me like you are trying to get the media to brand her an Islamophobe, bigot, or racist in order to fit your own political agenda. Like I said, I trust Aung San Suu Kyi a thousand times more than I trust you.
This written should write a piece on Christian persecution in the M E . Let’s see if he virtue signals the same way as on this false flag piece. On another note this site should have a hyperlink to some of the most visited and trusted sites a site that literally won trump the election. The daily stormed.intercept and the daily stormed resister sites
“…ALL for the sole purpose of preserving her small country.”
It’s not exactly a small country:
-Roughly the size of Texas.
-Larger than any country in the European Union.
About the size of Italy and Germany combined.
Maps are deceptive. Check the square miles.
This article was interesting until it started using Trump to measure your negative criticism for Suu Kyi I almost forgot what this article was really about! I’m trying to recall any genocide in contemporary America Trump has denied, deflected and detracted…hmm…could not find any.
“Deny. Deflect. Detract” isn’t this Obama’s playbook as well? Deny, deflect, detract has been the Obama way since 2008! Oh but that’s the guy WE supposedly like so I guess he gets a pass. He’s the “coolest president” even though more Muslims have been systematically targetted and killed under his watch.
Look up the ethnicity of those killed by guns in America, then draw a series of dots between nationwide racism and decades of failure to implement tougher gun laws, along with racially discriminative justice systems.
In a long series of disillusionment & disappointments over ‘leaders’ with feet of clay in political re-education, Daw Suu has to be one of the most painful. I became enamored of her after seeing the movie “Beyond Rangoon” (1995); my first introduction to the Burmese dictatorship & Daw Suu. I followed her house arrest and travails with intense interest and, at the same time, became aware of the persecution of the various ethnic minorities in Burma. As her conditions were progressively improved the plight of the Rohingya Muslims was just beginning to appear in the western press and just as I was hopeful for Suu Kyi’s release & freedom, I was sure that would also bring her & her tremendous global following to advocate for the Rohingya as well. Clearly, that didn’t happen. Another painful lesson in political reality… sigh.
How to create a terrorist.
She was always a phoney…a convenient figurehread to beat up on the Burmese govt which was aligned with China and therefore a designated enemy. Once they ditched China and gave her a job the Establishment doesnt give a damn about Burma.
Exactly. It was all about China. If the US isn’t on about China, its Russia– so transparent.
Effectively summarized article and I imagine my colleagues at Burma Task Force would endorse this perspective.
After Aung San Suu Kyi was elected just over a year ago so many diplomats and policymakers told us to give her time. However privately many high level diplomats have been expressing great concern regarding her lack of independence from the military. Sad to say, the military repression against Rohingya in Maungdaw happened only five months in to her government’s term, and then for another six months she failed to rein in the military. Suu Kyi has yet to implement incremental reforms that Kofi Annan’s advisory commission has suggested; and her government has spurned the UN’s Human Rights Council request for an independent investigation, instead opting for white wash efforts locally.
While President Obama’s decision to throw away almost all sanctions in Septmber 2016 reduced US leverage, the ASEAN nations must and can do more and not fret overmuch about sovereignty when mass atrocities are being perpetuated. It is in their interest to address the root causes that threaten to destabilize the region through mass displacement. But like Bangladesh, planning to banish a half a million Rohingya to a remote island, it is easier for them to blame the victims.
Those who refer in their comments to radical Muslim movements do not know the 1 million Rohingya but are imposing a hateful & untrue frame on the situation. This plays into the hands of genocidaires and xenophobes wherever they may be. This also plays into the hands of those who burn refugee camps, as happened yesterday to a Rohingya refugee camp in India.
Finally it must be up to the people of Burma/Myanmar to recognize the rich unity that comes with pluralism fully embraced. Anung San Suu Kyi may not control all the government ministries, but she can support an energetic public education campaign that all ethnic and religious groups belong in Burma, deserve equal rights, and can work together. Why has she not yet done so?
Adem
http://www.BurmaTaskForce.org
“to recognize the rich unity that comes with pluralism fully embraced.”
What a joke !
Ask any of the populations, from Indonesian islands to the Algerian Berberes, who have “fully embraced the joys of “muslim pluralism””, with not much choice. They’ll tell you indeed how happy they are !
But as you said it, it ‘s UP TO THE BURMA PEOPLE to choose whether or not thy want to try to “rich unity”. I don’t blame them for saying no, as they can see what the final outcome of it is : domination or partition.
Absolute rubbish,you have no independent nor credible evidence to support your false statement.
The Muslim media world and Bengali Rohingya right groups put out outrageously false, fraudulent, and manipulative media with the intent to demonize and vilify the Buddhists of Rakhine State, the Buddhists of Burma overall, and even the Buddhist religion.
And surprisingly and tragically many Western activists and ‘Rohingya’ supporters believe it all !!!
That’s right what Myanmar government says . No need to probe Rohingya’s crisis by any person or group because Rohingya are not Myanmar Ethnic. illegal immigrants . We’ll never vow down to any country and always stand together with Myanmar govt !!
Mr. Hasan
Photosymbiosis writes:
“………For decades, the militant intolerant political brand of Islam known as Sunni Wahhabism has been promoted by the “US ally” Saudi Arabia and other Gulf State Arab countries from Africa to Central Asia to Southeast Asia. Who can really be surprised by the response of various countries who feel under threat from this religious-political agenda? And all this has been financed with petrodollars delivered by U.S. and European consumers of Saudi oil, let’s not forget. That’s what imperialism buys you: despotic dictatorships and fanatic terrorist groups……”
Now that is exactly how you should have framed this article.
That is one terrible and attempt at justifying genocide against Muslims. You are one disturbing degenerate.
Saudi Arabia’s involvement in financing terrorism is irrelevant to anti-Muslim persecution in Myanmar. Nor does it justify it or justify people’s desire to do so.
Thanks. I agree.
The author’s gratuitous swipes at Trump detract from an otherwise excellent article.
Mr. Hasan’s article is simply offering a comparative analysis of Aung San Suu Kyi and Trump’s nationalism, racism, and hypocrisy. It is an excellent article. I also would like to mention that I have been following the Rohingya’s plight for some time.
Mr. Hasan
This is a good article about human rights – just at the wrong venue. People who visit the Intercept are not interested in human rights, democracy, civil liberties etc. unless you can show that America is somehow involved. For example, if the anti- Rohingya racism in Myanmar can be attributed to Trump’s ban on Muslims from seven predominantly Muslim countries, you might attract some readers. If the title of your article was “Anti-Muslim racism promoted by Trump in the US leads to genocide against Rohingyas in Myanmar”, more people would weigh in on the article at the Intercept. Suddenly, they would care – just not because they care about Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar. Anti-Muslim animus is used as a hammer by the alt-left to criticize US policies. Israel is a great example. It’s about Zionism, colonialism and the unconditional support that the US gives to Israel, not about the Palestinians. The Palestinians are just an afterthought.
I thought you were already tuned in on this reality last week when you wrote about racist Trump supporters. My God, I’ll bet your article was a ratings boom for the Intercept!
Just another $$hit.
It is a disgrace of the International Community and “Noble Peace Prize committee” to award Aung San Suu kyi. Another Bashar Al Assad in the making!
THERE ARE MUCH MISUSE of the words ‘GENOCIDE’ , “SLOW BURNING GENOCIDE’ AND ‘ETHNIC CLEANSING’ these days.
World meida and some orgazations are falsely accusing the Buddhist Rakhine people of ‘genocide’ against the Bengali (‘Rohingya’) Muslims.
That is not even close to being a situation that can use the term ‘Genocide’.
The only true genocide in Burma was the 1942 Maungdaw Genocide – where Bengali Muslims (the term ‘Rohingya’ was unknown then) armed by the British to fight the Japanese in WWII did not fight the Japanese,
but instead, turned the weapons on the dominant, indigenous Buddhist Culture, killing 30,000 Buddhists in Maungdaw township alone, burned over 400 Buddhist villages, and sent 100,000 Buddhists fleeing for their lives
These are attempts by so-called Rohingya to cover their exaggerated and manipulative accusations against the Rakhine Buddhists in western Burma, with the inflammatory charge of: ‘genocide against the Rohingya Muslims’.
It is undeniable truth the so-called Rohinga aka Bengali originated from the near-at-hand Bengali land of over population and grinding poverty .
They are genetically identical to Bangladeshi(Bengali). Speak like duck, walk like duck and sound like duck is a duck. They are 100% Bengali.
The government of Bangladesh are actually encouraging Bangladeshi influx into Burma, there is no doubt that the government looks upon this phenomenon and makes no effort to prevent it. They only bring chaos and destruction to the host country like Burma… They are parasites to any civilized societies. They are only thinking to make population grow, relocating into other countries for the propagation of Islam.
Bengali (Rohingyas) Muslims do not respect the law of the host country Burma and insult Burmese culture.
According to the Islamic law, they have four wives and multi-kids system .
Their reproductive rate, which approaches 6.08/family although one sees families of 8-12 children. The reproductive rate of the Burmese is about 2.06 trending toward 2.
Their nasty cultural are greatly resented by the native Rakhine. The huge population increase has brought considerable pressure on limited resources in a poor, agricultural/fishing area and is the simmering source of resentment. These are the root cause of the problems. Salafi Islamic influence has increased considerably resulting in more mosques, Islamic schools, beards, threats and attempts to expand the Islamic influence, making Rhankine Buddhists feel unsafe in their own communities. As is true in many Asian countries, birth does not automatically confer citizenship. Parents have to be documented citizens but the Bengali Muslims have no documents. So, they are considered illegal aliens and resented.
Bengali Rohingya terrorists movement
https://vimeo.com/197702891
Bengali Rohingya Terrorist Network
https://vimeo.com/189597923
Your characterizations ” nasty cultural”, “do not respect the law and insult Burmese culture” etc.are disgusting. Focusing on the what the definition of genocide is beside the point. She is ignoring the actions of her military and is not permitting UN oversight.
This is the 21st century and no one should vilify another human being for their race, religion etc. The only reason it seems the US dropped sanctions is that a good supporter in Burma can keep a check on China.
Here in Toronto we have many many religions and cultures– bottom line we are ALL human beings with human rights.
BOYCOTT BURMA
Well, then, stay in Toronto, and let the Burmese decide who they want to let in their country and live with !
Well, finally someone who has some sense !!!
The situation in Myanmar is extremely complex and it is foolish to put Aung San Suu Kyi off like that.
Like you say, the Rohingyas are in Rakhine state. Have you heard that the Rohingyas are using the same brutal methods against the Rakhine ethnic group, that has lived in that area for hundreds of years? Rohingyas are not one of the many old ethnic groups that are present in Myanmar. They have come there and requested their own state.
Myanmar has been in a civil war for around 60 years. The Burmese military has systematically abused and weakened the Burmese population and has fought all ethnic groups with extreme brutality. Killing men, torturing, mutilating and raping women and children. Until TODAY, there is still fighting going on in Kachin state, Shan state, Mon state and occasionally in Karen state. NOT only against Rohingyas, agains ALL ethnic minorities. This is the way the Burmese law enforcement functions.
Yes, Aung San Suu Kyi has been a part of the current government for a year. Do you really think she can just inverse 60 years of military dictatorship? 60 years of systematic weakening of society? Until very recent years, only military officers could own a company. The biggest companies in Myanmar (major tax payers) are owned by military generals. The military and the police still have immense power, and if Aung San Suu Kyi is not being very careful with trying to decrease that power, she might not live much longer. The Burmese law enforcement treats Rohingyas like it treats ALL minorities. But western journalists seem to care only about the Rohingyas and accusing Aung San Suu Kyi.
In recent years, the situation in Myanmar has improved dramatically. Most of this is the legacy of Aung San Suu Kyi. Nobody has done more for a free and open Myanmar than her. But now she is in an extremely difficult situation. Between the still powerful military, with a president that seems invisible to the people and with everyone expecting that she would suddenly develop superpowers that enable her to change the whole situation within a year. Believing that is simply foolish.
I would highly recommend you to visit Myanmar and to talk to the local people. To Rohingyas as well as Burmese and other ethnic groups. I have been there for over a year and I still don’t understand the whole situation. But believe me, some internet research from a comfortable office in America doesn’t put you in a position to so heavily criticize a woman who has spent almost 20 years under house arrest, couldn’t see her dying husband, couldn’t take care of her sons but still kept going and fighting for her country.
If this is true, why is she saying anti- muslim things (ie BBC etc.)?
Thank you for your informative post.
Showing me a copy of a statement that these rapes didn’t happen doesn’t in and of itself prove they did. Yes, the government’s confusing text smells like bullshit to me (I especially like the one about the women who were invited to the meeting to testify but “escaped”); nonetheless, this story doesn’t allow me to build beyond the prejudices I had coming in.
My first comment – straight into the LATEST bucket.
Fuck this.
When I was growing up, I was taught that she was some kind of Human Rights SuperWoman. I watched reports about her on the BBC, and her husbands speeches.
Funny how everybody you are taught to admire, only ends up disappointing you.
You probably mean her father’s speeches. Aung San was the “father of modern Burma.”
Her husband is British, and I watched his speeches, receiving International awards on her behalf, on BBC World. I wasn’t really aware of her father’s role in Burma. Thanks for that info.
Ah. Generation gap. ;^)
I was only vaguely aware of her brother’s existence.
“Funny how everybody you are taught to admire, only ends up disappointing you.”
Such as when I learned that Gandhi was apparently a pretty hardcore racist. So it goes.
Hero worship is an investment in future disappointment.
Wachu gonna do when u discover Israel is behind a lot of the wars in the middle east. Cry. lol
Who said I had any heroes left?
I wonder what Bono thinks of her now….
Whatever MI6 thinks is what he thinks
Maung Zarni has been trying to get the word out about this and other inevitabilities of Suu Kyi’s political “apotheosis” since the media started pumping up the volume on this fairy tale.
He deserves more respect and recognition than he is likely to get from the people who have been making a living from shouting down and blocking out anyone attempting to inject a little reality into the way Myanmar’s “democratization” has been fantasized in the press and in the offices of NGOs from Mandalay to London and New York.
It should be pointed out that where the neoliberal hacks of the EU agreed to not use “Rohingya” when requested so by Suu Kyi, the Americans actually had the integrity to continue calling them by their chosen designation.
No doubt we will see that far more new investment has poured into Myanmar from EU sources than from American since the floodgates opened.
mehdi hassan you are a Shia Muslim. …what is more than that?
And you are a Sunni Muslim?
What’s your claim to fame buddy?
How does it feel to be just like the Saudis?
What’s it like to be an asshole?
What has Shiaism got to do with ethnic clensing? Mukh Mafi!
Why is that relevant to the article?
You’re either a muslim or not. Don’t bother us with your Shia and Sunni political nonsense.
You should even be ashamed of making such comments.
Aung San Suu Kyi has contracted Woodrow Wilson disease. This is when all your flowery language and fight for democracy hides a rotten core of bigotry for some minority(s).
“Woodrow Wilson Disease”. Well put.
terrific report.. hopefully it will reach the big media community and be well noticed and comprehended specially for the new generation to understand the implications that bring the lack of participation in each person country”s fairs to avoid these atrocities against humanity
I noticed with frustration the lack of support for the Rohingya by Suu Kyi
soon after her release from house arrest, but wasn’t aware of her complicity
in recent events; a sad hypocrisy caused by a combination of a desire for power and fear of reprisals from her own people if she altered course.
I wonder if a visit from the Dalai lama would force an unmasking of this
un-Buddhist like behavior. On that point, can we now call violent murderous Buddhists, Hindi, Christians, Muslims & Jews what they are – blasphemers?
The woman doesn’t fight for any human right.She is just an hypocrite carelessly labelled and awarded as human right activist while pursuing are selfish agenda.
Classic case of, it isn’t my people so I don’t care.
I mean, to be fair, being a Nobel Peace Prize winner or Nobel Laureate doesn’t really mean what I think most regular human beings would like it to mean.
Barack Obama, Aung San Suu Kyi, Al Gore Jr., Woodrow Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt, Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin, Mohamed Anwar al-Sadat, Menachem Begin, Henry A. Kissinger and Le Duc Tho have all been recognized as one or the other.
Don’t really think there is any coherent principles or standards being applied by the Nobel committee when they dole out the awards (at least in the “peace” division).
I mean Gandhi was nominated several times but never won. And while not a perfect human being–between him, the Dalai Lama and MLK Jr. (the latter two winners), I’d say Gandhi is the human being most historically recognized (other than Jesus assuming he existed and spoke and conducted himself as depicted) for his contributions to “peace” and non-violence globally.
Nevertheless, Aung San Suu Kyi is really not conducting herself well at all in this instance, which is really inexcusable.
Friendly reminder that Alfred Nobel was basically an arms dealer and a once-removed oil tycoon who created the foundation in his will (i.e. after he had no personal use for his massive fortune) to rehabilitate his image.
That’s not to say it hasn’t recognized many worthy people over its history, but let’s not pretend any of this is, per se, altruistic or worthy of admiration.
Thanks for that reminder.
Burmese Nobel Prize Winner Aung San Suu Kyi Has Turned Into an Apologist for Genocide Against Muslims
She got out of prison, looked at what’s trending in the Western civilisation. She saw the murderers, the invaders and white supremacists like G.W Bush and British Tony Blair*, Australian John Howard*, leaders from NATO countries, are being worshipped as heroes and richly rewarded.
Butchering a few brown skin Muslims, she is only following in the footsteps of the leaders of the free world!
* both are, just like our Burmese hero, recipients the Presidential Medal of Freedom
Good point. To spell out something important that I think you’re implying: when the more privileged parts of the West find it convenient to honor people, that kind of honor can help to corrupt even people who have a good record, leading them to modify their sense of what’s acceptable according to the standards of the Western political leaders who pass out awards.
Still, let’s not forget that Aung San Suu Kyi was born into a very powerful family in Burma, and it’s not as if she was any kind of innocent before encountering the West. Her mother, for instance, continued in a high-ranking position even after the Burmese military took over. If Aung San Suu Kyi hadn’t encountered Western influence, I’m sure she would still have done some bad things. So I don’t want to jump to conclusions: in general, some of the West’s influence on people is good and some is bad. But my hunch is that you’re right that honors like the ones given to Aung San Suu Kyi have bad influences as well as good ones, on the person being honored as well as on the public in the West where awards are given. Just honoring the most prominent is always kind of misleading. We need accountability as well as honor, and we can’t let these honors drown out the good that billions of lesser-known people are willing to contribute.
That needed to be said. Thanks for the article.
+1
The background here is a bit more complex than this article indicates:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/burmas-great-terror-moves-a-step-closer-as-taliban-urges-rohingya-to-take-up-the-sword-10319254.html
For decades, the militant intolerant political brand of Islam known as Sunni Wahhabism has been promoted by the “US ally” Saudi Arabia and other Gulf State Arab countries from Africa to Central Asia to Southeast Asia. Who can really be surprised by the response of various countries who feel under threat from this religious-political agenda? And all this has been financed with petrodollars delivered by U.S. and European consumers of Saudi oil, let’s not forget. That’s what imperialism buys you: despotic dictatorships and fanatic terrorist groups.
That’s an unfortunate way to characterize the situation, including as reported in your link. The Buddhist nationalists persecuting, slaughtering and raping the minority Rohingya are not just “some country” that “feels under threat” from some outside religious-political agenda.
Buddhist nationalism is as deeply pernicious as most other forms of hyper-nationalism. If Wahhabism is being peddled to the victims, and some seem receptive, this is not the least surprising — severely oppressed groups virtually always are receptive to violent ideologies in which to package resistance to their oppression.
The onus remains, however, on the oppressor. In this case, the Buddhist majority of Myanmar.
That piece you link to is ill-informed. It claims that places like Indonesia and India were “originally Buddhist countries”, and suggests that Thailand no longer is one.
The piece you link to is also too hard on those who rebel violently against oppression. I’m willing to accept that, when they really are being oppressed, when they have fully appreciated the resources of more peaceful approaches and have pursued these peaceful approaches with seriousness and patience, and when a sober and impartial person would see that peaceful approaches are more likely to lead to big disasters than violent rebellion would, then in that case Muslims, like anyone else, have a right to violently rebel (as the Declaration of Independence says). So before issuing a knee-jerk condemnation of anything labeled as “jihad”, you have to ask whether these criteria have been met. I think you too eagerly follow the article’s guilt-by-association when it tries to link the Rohingya to the Taliban and to “jihad”. The Taliban are known to be oppressors of others’ rights; the Rohingya are clearly oppressed and clearly not oppressors. It’s worth thinking about the Rohingya’s struggle and whether it should be peaceful or violent. But your comment takes the superficial, callous tone of those who blindly see “jihad” as their enemy and who see the Rohingya merely as part of that enemy bloc. People who think that way, who don’t even wonder how to become alllies to the Rohingya in the crisis that the Rohingya are experiencing, are bound to continue losing potential friends and gaining more enemies. Your comment takes the lazy, emotionally satisfying approach of saying how bad things are and dwelling on blaming others, rather than looking for how to contribute cooperatively to resolving the shared problems that a wider range of people have. When you sympathize with the problems that others are experiencing, regardless of whether they’re already labelled as your allies, you find you have more potential allies. And facing these problems together shows that the problems of your own that you were worried about really weren’t all that serious.
You mean the victims of persecution, terrorism, and genocide… are possibly listening to the words of militant radicals who promise they can protect them? My god, how utterly unprecedented.
… y’know, except in 1930s Germany. And the current situation in Palestine (you’d think -Israel- of all nations would’ve seen that coming?) And probably plenty of other instances in history that my lacking knowledge keeps me from knowing. Hell, this is the one specific solitary instance where the Qu’ran gives permission to make war and do all those things in those infamous “109 verses” that Islamophobes like to quote without any actual context as to who the “them” the verses refer to are.
Christ, it’s like critical thinking just doesn’t exist these days…
So true, but I wonder if the lack of critical thinking just gives them an excuse for their behaviour ” I didn’t know”
That article, while belonging to a recognizable genre of jihad-panic all too common in treatments of disparate situations around SE Asia, may just be the worst piece of journalistic garbage I’ve yet to read on Rakhine.
See also:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-myanmar-rohingya-idUSKBN1450Y7
“Myanmar’s Rohingya insurgency has links to Saudi, Pakistan – report”
No that doesn’t justify war crimes against a civilian population; but even-handed journalism honestly describes the root causes of conflicts.
Funny I can’t seem to find any similar condemnations of Saudi Princes on the The Intercept:
Google:
Your search – site:theintercept.com al-waleed bin talal – did not match any documents.
Pffftttt….
“even-handed journalism” doesn’t conflate what is and has been happening in Rakhine for a long time but particularly in the last decade with a development that may or may not have taken place in the past year or two… root causes don’t happen after their effects in our actual timeline…
As I said, there are a group of generally Islamophobic “jihadi-panic” mongers who see ISIS and Arab money under every bed here in SE Asia, discounting historical situations in favor of a one-size-fits-all ideological bid for yet another region to be opened up to American war-making.
Saudi Wahhabism is in conflict with ISIS Wahhabism, as the latter will not recognize the authority of the House of Saud, so it is misleading to say “the militant intolerant political brand of Islam known as Sunni Wahhabism has been promoted by the ‘US ally’ Saudi Arabia and other Gulf State Arab countries” – the Salafism is indeed brutal and similar, but the factional conflict regarding these “brands” (which you conflate) is precisely the reason for some of the awful messes in the region.
See: You Can’t Understand ISIS If You Don’t Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia
This is FAKE NEWS
and The Intercept is publishing the fakest of the FAKE NEWS