I wonder why can’t anyone find any document
indexed with keywords “Rohingya”, “Rohinga”
in the national archives of UK dated earlier
than 1960s. I understand British are very
meticulous in archiving documents. Burma, especially Arakan, was ruled as part of British India (which Bangladesh included) since early 1800s. And yet we cannot find
any document dated earlier than 1960s.
My conclusion is that Rohingya as a race
never existed contradicting what most of
their lobbyists claim.
What is your take on that? National Archive
below which you can search documents FOC.
Bangladesh discriminates against Shi’ites, Sufis and Ahmadi Muslims, who are often killed by Hizb-ut-Tahrir and other Islamic terrorist groups, as well as numerous Islamic vigilante groups directly aided and abetted by the government in Dhaka and not a word in the Press about Bangladesh’s horrific human rights situation. This has been the reason, along with natural migration, for the existence of the “Rohingya” in Myanmar. The mtDNA (and, please, don’t try and compare contemporary anthropology with Geertz. That died out years ago. All anthropology is molecular today) of the “Rohingya” is identical with any Bangladeshi from Bangladesh. The mtDNA of any of Myanmar’s other numerous ethnic groups do not match that of the “Rohingyas”.
The Rohingyas are Bangladeshi who have migrated into Myanmar, and Bengali Muslims from West Bengal who migrated into British Burma, which was regarded as a “backwater” by the British Colonial administration in Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta. The Rohingya have no ethnic and cultural ties to Myanmar. as easily evident in their Bangladeshi cultural habits; furthermore, thanks to a recent photo on Yahoo, we know see that some “Rohingya” are not all the quiet Shaf’i Sunni Muslims, that they have been traditionally. A photo showed several “Rohingya” women dressed in the very un-Bangladeshi Niqab and Burqa. This can be seen increasingly in Bangladesh as well. It is called ISLAMISATION, something the na├пve Left claims does not exist, or does and they support it (the postmodern dichotomy of the Leftist-Islamist alliance is a total betrayal of all liberal principles, none of which can in any way, shape or form, defend Salafi Wahhabism). Hizb-ut-Tahrir, Jaish-e-Islami, al-Qaeda and other groups are progressively turning Bangladeshis on both sides of the border into Islamic fanatics. A majority of Bangladeshis now support Shari’a Law and Hudud, and I doubt the “Rohingya” are any different. Given Malaysia’s quick progress from Shaf’i Islam to Hanafi or even Wahhabi Islam, the “Rohingya” might well find a home there; too bad they don’t look more “Malay”. Why should Myanmar be held responsible for Bangladeshi male incontinence with the condom ? It is not Myanmar’s problem that Muslim men next door can’t control themselves. It is not Myanmar’s problem that Bangladesh is the most densely populated nation on the planet, and some seek better lives in Myanmar. The claim that Buddhist Bamar are “forcing” Rohingya out is nonsense. There are still a million left in Rakhine State, and I see no Press coverage of the persecution of Arakhine Muslims (of Tibeto-Burman origin) by Bangladeshi “Rohingya”. Perhaps they just don’t have the right color to be sponsored by NGOs and armchair “radicals” in the Academy. U Wirathu made the cover of Time Magazine (most of you probably don’t remember that U Nu, Burma’s first democratic leader, also made the cover, around 1958-1959). This “Palestinisation” of the Rohingya is not about helping destitute people; if it was, the OIC could subsidise their exile in Muslim nations in 24 hours.
Instead of picking on Myanmar and snidely suggesting that DASSK is somehow a Burmese fascist, direct your energies to all the Islamic nations who talk a good game about the Ummah and brotherhood, but in a crunch, none of the Middle-Eastern or South Asian nations are to be found anywhere. There is a reason that Bangladesh does not want the Rohingya back (and “back” was used by the PM of Bangladesh). Bangladesh would be happy to offload 50 % of their population as it currently stands.
This is worth close attention in this context. In this document the Muslim League of North Arakan made a number of what might seem to be quite preposterous assertions about the historical origins of their community. But these assertions were only part of what the Council no doubt regarded as necessary ritual in their forlorn request at the time to secure greater control over their affairs.
There is firstly the required denunciation of British colonial ‘divide and rule’ policy, which the Council allege was responsible for setting Muslim against Buddhist, even culminating in the 1942 massacre of so many Muslims, and then Buddhists. Secondly you have the assurances of total loyalty and attachment to independent Burma, exemplified by the denial of any historical links whatsoever to Chittagong, whose culture is said to be totally separate from that of Muslim Arakan. This is highlighted by reference to the archaic language which they claim to speak, a mixture of Arabic, Persian, Urdu, Arakanese and Bengali. Finally there is the assertion that the Council speaks for “our people” – “Ruwangyas or Rushangyas” – who are said to be 95% of the local population.
Not for a moment do I suppose that the Council actually believed what they were writing. But no doubt they felt there were certain formulae which it was important to deploy in order to curry favour with their new masters, however remote these formulae might be from historical truth. They were no longer appealing to the White Raj, as they did in a similar, somewhat submissive appeal the previous year to Arthur Bottomley, British Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, but to the rulers of newly independent Burma, and they only said what they thought was expected of them. At the time the Burmese Government, while likewise not believing a word the Council said, would not have taken umbrage, for it only showed that the Council knew their place in the new Burma.
To achieve this, though most probably themselves of Chittagonian extraction, the Council have donned the mantle of the indigenous 50,000-strong Yakhain-kala, embracing and consuming them as their kith and kin, archaic language and all. An identity usurped.
It would have been somewhat galling to the Council had they known at the time that WH Drysdale, who had been evacuated to India with his wife and family in 1942, had been retained as a British expert in Special Branch after independence and was privy to the contents of their memorandum, and that the Permanent Secretary of the Burma Foreign Office felt that the paper need only be filed away under “Arakan Insurrection” after the Hon’ble Minister for Foreign Affairs had read. What the Minister for Home Affairs, or U Nu himself did with the petition is not yet known.
The mythology of the Council, alas, has persisted to this day. It is no longer folk-lore, but through constant repetition has become reality.
Excellently put! Where’s the Burmese humor now. We’re all mongrels whether we live in Burma or not. Stop all this fussing and fighting and get on with nation building. Ordinary Burmese actually enjoys mixing it up. The country is coming along for once, lets share mohingya with the Rhohingyas and move on.
Thanks Frank. Yes, I am aware of the points you raise but am unsure to what extent these historical wrongdoings are etched very strongly in the collective consciousness of Isarn people. I am well aware of the antipathy towards Bangkok, of which recent events have added to this antipathy, but Bangkok is still a far more powerful economic magnet than Vientiane and the latter will probably never replace Bangkok.
The Kokang also rendered indigenous, granted a substate in 1947, in recognition of assistance during the war, by the British colonial govt shortly before the assassination of Aung San and his cabinet enjoys a special region status like the Wa.
Yes, 60% of Thailand are Chinese-Thai and are smarter in general…rather its the first or second, etc. generation we still work hard to succeed at what we want…as oppose to lazy dark skin Thai which is the original Thai people.
This whole issue is just ‘storm in a teacup’. I heard from my mother who is a Bama Rakhine told me about 60 years ago, that Rohingyas are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. Anyway, there is an element of ‘Islamization’ going on, in Rakhine as in all over the world, Europe, USA, etc.
However, the underpinning cause, is the ‘One World Order.’
So, what can I say, just ‘Repent and Believe.’ As I’m a born again Christian, converted from Bama Buddhist to this very discriminated belief.
For those interested, Todung Mulya Lubis’ speech at the inauguration of IKADIN, which makes specific critical reference to PERADI, can be found here: http://www.ikadin.or.id/ikadin/?p=profile
While not claiming any great expertise in Indonesian legal affairs, my understanding has been that Mr Lubis’s longtime rival Hotman Paris Hutapea — he of the red ferrari, the first to be sold in Indonesia — had a hand in the 2008 PERADI decision, and that following this Mulya Lubis helped found another bar association, IKADIN (Ikatan Advokat Indonesia). This confers status that allows him to legitimately practice law under the national regulations cited here. Incidentally, IKADIN is a member organisation of the International Bar Association (IBA), alongside PERADI.
Has anyone – apart from Sindhi Limthongkhul,who swiftly got his come-uppence – done any more than Abhisit, to raise the spectre of the break-up of the Thai State, than Abhisit ?Thankfully the Crown Prince seems to have negotiated a way to avoid such potential disaster.
Hi,
I worked as a Burmese Interpreter in the States, and had a chance to help interpret for the Refugees from Burma. And guess what? Most of the people were said to be Burmese but all have very Muslim names the wives the children from the camp on the Burmese border but having not Burmese names ! Let truth be told!!
Please may I have the permission to post on my FB page of your very informed reply. Thank you.
“Palpable” might involve a certain degree of empathy with the local unspoken mores across the river. However, when I translated a local historian’s account of Lady Mo (Thao Suranaree) and in research for citations ran into lots of eye-witness accounts, and added to this the periodic Thai-Lao ethnic issues that you see occur in each country from time to time, you can be sure there is a sore spot in Laos for all losses to Siam, most especially when Vientiene was razed and artifacts, historical documents, and the Lao king Anuwongse, were all taken to Bangkok. None of this sits easily and the Lao people are just as proud as the Thai when it comes to heroes of the past and current nationalism. Palpable becomes very palpable whenever an incident pops up, like the earlier Thai movie director having to back off from producing a film about Lady Mo. Everything is pushed aside, albeit sensitively, when it comes to trade and money.
Good point. I am aware of the sterling work of SIL in descriptive field linguistics etc. However, in this little introduction we are basically looking at the state discourse on maps and ethnicities rather than that of private Christian universities. In fact, I believe the second map was generated with the help of Payap staff and reflects the official Payap/SIL position on Thailand’s ethnicities via Ethnologue. This raises the issue of whether the Payap/SIL position should reflect the “official discourse” or the “scientific discourse” – a problem I believe they do wrestle with internally from time to time.
Apisit should have left politic years ago. In fact a person who do not understand the real meaning of democracy does not deserve to be in politic at all. How many times have we heard from the Democrat Party concerning this matter? The Democratic Party will never stand up and fight like a man as far as they know that some powerful figures are backing them.
“..the notably insular Thai academic and public sphere”
You don’t even mention the linguistics program at Payap which has to be ranked number one for field linguistics of minority languages in Thailand.
Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL), which essentially runs the program, may be controversial for other reasons, but it is the leading force in minority language field linguistics worldwide. Having worked with graduates from this program, I can attest to there excellence in scholarship and in the language learning classroom.
I witnessed firsthand how little respect or funding they received for what could be reckoned “pure research” but it was not for reasons for nationalism, but rather administrators could not figure out any immediate way to translate their research into money, and that is where the problem in Thai education lies. (The university did not even have a mathematics department, but did have a cosmetics “science” department)
It is a Catch-22 situation if the gate is opened. It will keep on flowing and it will never stop. The way forward is to address the origins.
In Malaysia, the opportunists, mainly political, were rocking the boats. If they really want to do it, they can always stack them 1,000 on each level of 50 floors to house 50,000 in their own properties.
Historical:
They were originally brought into Burma from Bengal by the British in the 19th century to work in the plantations. Also, many came independently seeking for work. This was similar to what the British did in Malaya’s plantations. The next two waves came after the Burmese independence in 1948 and the East Pakistan War in 1971.
The British enlisted them and provided them with weapons as a defensive line against the Japanese if the British forces were to retreat in World War II. The British-armed were involved in the inter-communal violence in 1942 by attacking the Buddhists living there. This incidence could be the deep-seeded hatred of the Burmese authorities.
In 1982, the then government under general Ne Win enacted a law which denied them citizenship after Bangladesh declared them as non-nationals. It was a form of absolute punishment of what had happened. I am guessing that this is parallel to the US embargo on Cuba after the Missile Crisis in 1962. Yes, it was very dangerous to the world as it could have escalated into World War III. In both cases, when would the ‘punishment’ be repealed? It is very different today. The perpetrators are dying or have been gone.
The human traffic is different as they were not tracked down to be persecuted or killed. As such, it is proper for those who desire to live and work in another country to go through the proper channel and process to apply for entry formally to the target country. It is a lot better than risking life at sea with an indeterminate outcome and being a burden to transit countries.
The only problem is the country of their origin and it is the only one that can put it right. It failed to see its own as a very valuable resources. In the Malaysian context, those born in the country after 31 August 1957 are automatic citizens. In spite of what had happened, Malaysia signed a Peace Agreement with the terrorists in 1989 to give them a lifeline. They were given the choice to resettle in the country if they choose to do so. The main issue is still this: Does the country of origin wants to do it – a problem of its very own which is not a problem today?
People mean Rohingya are not indigenous when they say Rohingya are not ethnic in their limited English.
Unfortunately even the indigenous people’s colourful and distinctive costumes worn with pride merely contribute to the successive military or military dominated regimes’ propaganda showcasing of a happy union.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
@Derek
I wonder why can’t anyone find any document
indexed with keywords “Rohingya”, “Rohinga”
in the national archives of UK dated earlier
than 1960s. I understand British are very
meticulous in archiving documents. Burma, especially Arakan, was ruled as part of British India (which Bangladesh included) since early 1800s. And yet we cannot find
any document dated earlier than 1960s.
My conclusion is that Rohingya as a race
never existed contradicting what most of
their lobbyists claim.
What is your take on that? National Archive
below which you can search documents FOC.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
@ALL “ROHINGYA” GROUPIES:
Bangladesh discriminates against Shi’ites, Sufis and Ahmadi Muslims, who are often killed by Hizb-ut-Tahrir and other Islamic terrorist groups, as well as numerous Islamic vigilante groups directly aided and abetted by the government in Dhaka and not a word in the Press about Bangladesh’s horrific human rights situation. This has been the reason, along with natural migration, for the existence of the “Rohingya” in Myanmar. The mtDNA (and, please, don’t try and compare contemporary anthropology with Geertz. That died out years ago. All anthropology is molecular today) of the “Rohingya” is identical with any Bangladeshi from Bangladesh. The mtDNA of any of Myanmar’s other numerous ethnic groups do not match that of the “Rohingyas”.
The Rohingyas are Bangladeshi who have migrated into Myanmar, and Bengali Muslims from West Bengal who migrated into British Burma, which was regarded as a “backwater” by the British Colonial administration in Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta. The Rohingya have no ethnic and cultural ties to Myanmar. as easily evident in their Bangladeshi cultural habits; furthermore, thanks to a recent photo on Yahoo, we know see that some “Rohingya” are not all the quiet Shaf’i Sunni Muslims, that they have been traditionally. A photo showed several “Rohingya” women dressed in the very un-Bangladeshi Niqab and Burqa. This can be seen increasingly in Bangladesh as well. It is called ISLAMISATION, something the na├пve Left claims does not exist, or does and they support it (the postmodern dichotomy of the Leftist-Islamist alliance is a total betrayal of all liberal principles, none of which can in any way, shape or form, defend Salafi Wahhabism). Hizb-ut-Tahrir, Jaish-e-Islami, al-Qaeda and other groups are progressively turning Bangladeshis on both sides of the border into Islamic fanatics. A majority of Bangladeshis now support Shari’a Law and Hudud, and I doubt the “Rohingya” are any different. Given Malaysia’s quick progress from Shaf’i Islam to Hanafi or even Wahhabi Islam, the “Rohingya” might well find a home there; too bad they don’t look more “Malay”. Why should Myanmar be held responsible for Bangladeshi male incontinence with the condom ? It is not Myanmar’s problem that Muslim men next door can’t control themselves. It is not Myanmar’s problem that Bangladesh is the most densely populated nation on the planet, and some seek better lives in Myanmar. The claim that Buddhist Bamar are “forcing” Rohingya out is nonsense. There are still a million left in Rakhine State, and I see no Press coverage of the persecution of Arakhine Muslims (of Tibeto-Burman origin) by Bangladeshi “Rohingya”. Perhaps they just don’t have the right color to be sponsored by NGOs and armchair “radicals” in the Academy. U Wirathu made the cover of Time Magazine (most of you probably don’t remember that U Nu, Burma’s first democratic leader, also made the cover, around 1958-1959). This “Palestinisation” of the Rohingya is not about helping destitute people; if it was, the OIC could subsidise their exile in Muslim nations in 24 hours.
Instead of picking on Myanmar and snidely suggesting that DASSK is somehow a Burmese fascist, direct your energies to all the Islamic nations who talk a good game about the Ummah and brotherhood, but in a crunch, none of the Middle-Eastern or South Asian nations are to be found anywhere. There is a reason that Bangladesh does not want the Rohingya back (and “back” was used by the PM of Bangladesh). Bangladesh would be happy to offload 50 % of their population as it currently stands.
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
This is worth close attention in this context. In this document the Muslim League of North Arakan made a number of what might seem to be quite preposterous assertions about the historical origins of their community. But these assertions were only part of what the Council no doubt regarded as necessary ritual in their forlorn request at the time to secure greater control over their affairs.
There is firstly the required denunciation of British colonial ‘divide and rule’ policy, which the Council allege was responsible for setting Muslim against Buddhist, even culminating in the 1942 massacre of so many Muslims, and then Buddhists. Secondly you have the assurances of total loyalty and attachment to independent Burma, exemplified by the denial of any historical links whatsoever to Chittagong, whose culture is said to be totally separate from that of Muslim Arakan. This is highlighted by reference to the archaic language which they claim to speak, a mixture of Arabic, Persian, Urdu, Arakanese and Bengali. Finally there is the assertion that the Council speaks for “our people” – “Ruwangyas or Rushangyas” – who are said to be 95% of the local population.
Not for a moment do I suppose that the Council actually believed what they were writing. But no doubt they felt there were certain formulae which it was important to deploy in order to curry favour with their new masters, however remote these formulae might be from historical truth. They were no longer appealing to the White Raj, as they did in a similar, somewhat submissive appeal the previous year to Arthur Bottomley, British Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, but to the rulers of newly independent Burma, and they only said what they thought was expected of them. At the time the Burmese Government, while likewise not believing a word the Council said, would not have taken umbrage, for it only showed that the Council knew their place in the new Burma.
To achieve this, though most probably themselves of Chittagonian extraction, the Council have donned the mantle of the indigenous 50,000-strong Yakhain-kala, embracing and consuming them as their kith and kin, archaic language and all. An identity usurped.
It would have been somewhat galling to the Council had they known at the time that WH Drysdale, who had been evacuated to India with his wife and family in 1942, had been retained as a British expert in Special Branch after independence and was privy to the contents of their memorandum, and that the Permanent Secretary of the Burma Foreign Office felt that the paper need only be filed away under “Arakan Insurrection” after the Hon’ble Minister for Foreign Affairs had read. What the Minister for Home Affairs, or U Nu himself did with the petition is not yet known.
The mythology of the Council, alas, has persisted to this day. It is no longer folk-lore, but through constant repetition has become reality.
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
Excellently put! Where’s the Burmese humor now. We’re all mongrels whether we live in Burma or not. Stop all this fussing and fighting and get on with nation building. Ordinary Burmese actually enjoys mixing it up. The country is coming along for once, lets share mohingya with the Rhohingyas and move on.
Minorities and minority rights in Thailand
Thanks Frank. Yes, I am aware of the points you raise but am unsure to what extent these historical wrongdoings are etched very strongly in the collective consciousness of Isarn people. I am well aware of the antipathy towards Bangkok, of which recent events have added to this antipathy, but Bangkok is still a far more powerful economic magnet than Vientiane and the latter will probably never replace Bangkok.
Ethnic politics from the capital
The Kokang also rendered indigenous, granted a substate in 1947, in recognition of assistance during the war, by the British colonial govt shortly before the assassination of Aung San and his cabinet enjoys a special region status like the Wa.
The great defenders of race, religion and realm are capitalising on the Kokang war fuelled by anti-Chinese sentiment. The irony however is lost on those patriotic people who appear to have an extremely short memory of Wanbao, Kyaukphyu and the rest.
The Shinawatra family tree
Yes, 60% of Thailand are Chinese-Thai and are smarter in general…rather its the first or second, etc. generation we still work hard to succeed at what we want…as oppose to lazy dark skin Thai which is the original Thai people.
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
This whole issue is just ‘storm in a teacup’. I heard from my mother who is a Bama Rakhine told me about 60 years ago, that Rohingyas are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. Anyway, there is an element of ‘Islamization’ going on, in Rakhine as in all over the world, Europe, USA, etc.
However, the underpinning cause, is the ‘One World Order.’
So, what can I say, just ‘Repent and Believe.’ As I’m a born again Christian, converted from Bama Buddhist to this very discriminated belief.
Australia-Indonesia: the view from Jakarta
For those interested, Todung Mulya Lubis’ speech at the inauguration of IKADIN, which makes specific critical reference to PERADI, can be found here:
http://www.ikadin.or.id/ikadin/?p=profile
Australia-Indonesia: the view from Jakarta
While not claiming any great expertise in Indonesian legal affairs, my understanding has been that Mr Lubis’s longtime rival Hotman Paris Hutapea — he of the red ferrari, the first to be sold in Indonesia — had a hand in the 2008 PERADI decision, and that following this Mulya Lubis helped found another bar association, IKADIN (Ikatan Advokat Indonesia). This confers status that allows him to legitimately practice law under the national regulations cited here. Incidentally, IKADIN is a member organisation of the International Bar Association (IBA), alongside PERADI.
A happy end for Abhisit
Has anyone – apart from Sindhi Limthongkhul,who swiftly got his come-uppence – done any more than Abhisit, to raise the spectre of the break-up of the Thai State, than Abhisit ?Thankfully the Crown Prince seems to have negotiated a way to avoid such potential disaster.
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
Hi,
I worked as a Burmese Interpreter in the States, and had a chance to help interpret for the Refugees from Burma. And guess what? Most of the people were said to be Burmese but all have very Muslim names the wives the children from the camp on the Burmese border but having not Burmese names ! Let truth be told!!
Please may I have the permission to post on my FB page of your very informed reply. Thank you.
Minorities and minority rights in Thailand
“Palpable” might involve a certain degree of empathy with the local unspoken mores across the river. However, when I translated a local historian’s account of Lady Mo (Thao Suranaree) and in research for citations ran into lots of eye-witness accounts, and added to this the periodic Thai-Lao ethnic issues that you see occur in each country from time to time, you can be sure there is a sore spot in Laos for all losses to Siam, most especially when Vientiene was razed and artifacts, historical documents, and the Lao king Anuwongse, were all taken to Bangkok. None of this sits easily and the Lao people are just as proud as the Thai when it comes to heroes of the past and current nationalism. Palpable becomes very palpable whenever an incident pops up, like the earlier Thai movie director having to back off from producing a film about Lady Mo. Everything is pushed aside, albeit sensitively, when it comes to trade and money.
Minorities and minority rights in Thailand
Jon,
Good point. I am aware of the sterling work of SIL in descriptive field linguistics etc. However, in this little introduction we are basically looking at the state discourse on maps and ethnicities rather than that of private Christian universities. In fact, I believe the second map was generated with the help of Payap staff and reflects the official Payap/SIL position on Thailand’s ethnicities via Ethnologue. This raises the issue of whether the Payap/SIL position should reflect the “official discourse” or the “scientific discourse” – a problem I believe they do wrestle with internally from time to time.
A happy end for Abhisit
Apisit should have left politic years ago. In fact a person who do not understand the real meaning of democracy does not deserve to be in politic at all. How many times have we heard from the Democrat Party concerning this matter? The Democratic Party will never stand up and fight like a man as far as they know that some powerful figures are backing them.
Minorities and minority rights in Thailand
“..the notably insular Thai academic and public sphere”
You don’t even mention the linguistics program at Payap which has to be ranked number one for field linguistics of minority languages in Thailand.
Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL), which essentially runs the program, may be controversial for other reasons, but it is the leading force in minority language field linguistics worldwide. Having worked with graduates from this program, I can attest to there excellence in scholarship and in the language learning classroom.
I witnessed firsthand how little respect or funding they received for what could be reckoned “pure research” but it was not for reasons for nationalism, but rather administrators could not figure out any immediate way to translate their research into money, and that is where the problem in Thai education lies. (The university did not even have a mathematics department, but did have a cosmetics “science” department)
Rule-breaking and the Rohingya
…
It is a Catch-22 situation if the gate is opened. It will keep on flowing and it will never stop. The way forward is to address the origins.
In Malaysia, the opportunists, mainly political, were rocking the boats. If they really want to do it, they can always stack them 1,000 on each level of 50 floors to house 50,000 in their own properties.
Historical:
They were originally brought into Burma from Bengal by the British in the 19th century to work in the plantations. Also, many came independently seeking for work. This was similar to what the British did in Malaya’s plantations. The next two waves came after the Burmese independence in 1948 and the East Pakistan War in 1971.
The British enlisted them and provided them with weapons as a defensive line against the Japanese if the British forces were to retreat in World War II. The British-armed were involved in the inter-communal violence in 1942 by attacking the Buddhists living there. This incidence could be the deep-seeded hatred of the Burmese authorities.
In 1982, the then government under general Ne Win enacted a law which denied them citizenship after Bangladesh declared them as non-nationals. It was a form of absolute punishment of what had happened. I am guessing that this is parallel to the US embargo on Cuba after the Missile Crisis in 1962. Yes, it was very dangerous to the world as it could have escalated into World War III. In both cases, when would the ‘punishment’ be repealed? It is very different today. The perpetrators are dying or have been gone.
The human traffic is different as they were not tracked down to be persecuted or killed. As such, it is proper for those who desire to live and work in another country to go through the proper channel and process to apply for entry formally to the target country. It is a lot better than risking life at sea with an indeterminate outcome and being a burden to transit countries.
The only problem is the country of their origin and it is the only one that can put it right. It failed to see its own as a very valuable resources. In the Malaysian context, those born in the country after 31 August 1957 are automatic citizens. In spite of what had happened, Malaysia signed a Peace Agreement with the terrorists in 1989 to give them a lifeline. They were given the choice to resettle in the country if they choose to do so. The main issue is still this: Does the country of origin wants to do it – a problem of its very own which is not a problem today?
…
The Rohingya and regional failure
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-true-life-horror-that-inspired-moby-dick-17576/?no-ist
Ethnic politics from the capital
People mean Rohingya are not indigenous when they say Rohingya are not ethnic in their limited English.
Unfortunately even the indigenous people’s colourful and distinctive costumes worn with pride merely contribute to the successive military or military dominated regimes’ propaganda showcasing of a happy union.
The Rohingya and regional failure
Jungle law at sea:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3044584/Pray-Allah-ll-throw-overboard-Muslims-ordered-Christians-punctured-dinghy-African-migrants-sank-Mediterranean.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/indonesia/11611501/How-migrants-stranded-at-sea-off-Indonesia-resorted-to-stabbing-each-other-to-survive.html