Wow… Mr Derek Tonkin… You mention ‘DNA’… I never thought you would dare use it these days… Now, it shows you are a biological racist like Rakhine racists (Dr Aye Maung, etc.)! I dare say if Rohingya have Bengali DNA, Rakhine have some too. Look at many of their faces! They look Bengali too. Worshiping Buddha and wearing Burmese dress doesn’t subtract Bengali DNA from them. The best example is U U Hla Saw. He looks very Bengali indeed! And it is common knowledge in places like Yangon and Mandalay that Rakhines look Indian! Lol….
Based on section 44 such an order would not only be lawful, but even constitutional and final. However, just because it can be defined as “legal” it does not imply that it is “legitimate”.
I agree with you totally. Just want to point out that the Thai aristocrats or ammaart meant retransform (to feudal rule) when they say “reform”. It’s sad to find out that many Thais including some of my friends who are educated don’t really know their rights and they don’t really care. Many Thais from grassroots to educated middle class don’t really care about democracy as long as they have what they need to live, however meager.
So tomorrow, Prawit says, every family (non Amart) must supply at least one daughter to a serving soldier for sex – per se lawful – would you be in agreement as well?
I would prefer to say – They rule the Law. It is a more accurate description, since the coup Govt simply wrote the Law as they want it.
Tomorrow, if they dictate a Law stating that, every citizen must prostrate themselves every time the “PM” entourage passes – punishment for non compliance is jail time – it will still be the Law!
You and I may not agree to it, but it is the Law, so do we say “rule by Law” or “Rule the Law”?
This whole thing has to do more with race than with religion. Racism based on skin colour is of course, still quite rampant in Asia. However, that this particular group of very poor Muslims are singled out by the Burmese public in general as a target to project all their “pent-up rage against ugly illegal aliens” is quite intriguing, given that this flared up to this extreme form only over the last 3 years or so, starting with that incident where a Burmese girl was killed supposedly by some Muslim boys (who were executed almost without trial) near Kyaukphru (site of the Chinese naval base and oil/gas terminal). I would think that there is a master plan by some sinister political and economic groups in Burma who are instigating this extreme form of racism in order to deflect something that is perhaps even more menacing and threatening to the sovereignty of the country than citizenship rights for a “couple of wretched Rohingyas”. Go figure!
This is only part of the story. A purge is going on in Thai universities. For example, Dr Surakiart the Foreign Minister under Thaksin was recently sacked from his Professorship at Chulalongkorn University Law School (he is also an ex Dean of the Faculty).
This article is about Singapore and not about Monaco, so I stick to the topic. I don’t normally like people using cheap facile “tu quoque” arguments but I agree with you that Westerners with any ethical and moral values should boycott corrupt Singaporean banks.
I was told by a number of “white Westerners”, even students, who went to Singapore for some time, that there is a definite racial/social pecking order there. White people are normally treated much better than dark-skinned migrant workers and maids from places like Burma or Indonesia or Philippines in this “model Asian city state”, unless of course, you are a super-rich opium war-lord from Burma with money to launder like Lo Hsinghan and his clan. That is the hypocrisy and double-standards that I wanted to point out in my comment. Asking maids who are poor whether they would prefer to be even poorer than what they are is a morally despicable argument. I agree with you that the greedy morality of “making a quick dirty buck justifies everything” is not only a Singaporean thing, but we are talking about Singapore here and this mentality is blatantly obvious under all this squeaky clean, chewing-gum-free shiny fa├зade of a city with or without fancy F1 races. Soft moral power indeed!
Tocharian, congratulations on squeezing so many stereotypes of Singapore into a single paragraph. However, you may want to consider include Western countries in your list of ways Singapore has gotten rich. Vietnam War? Who hustled all that war materiel there? When Subic Bay closed where did the facilities go? Almost every major Western corporation used Singapore as an Asian HQ. And who made nearly all the hard drives in the early computers?
As for the maids, ask some of them where they would rather work – Singapore. There’s NO “trafficking” there, just the best pay possible in a sad and hard world market. If Singapore is to be condemned, look in the mirror first, Westerners. Sure, you have to keep your mouth shut in Singapore (where can you really open it anywhere in SE Asia?) – but you don’t get screwed economically quite so badly as in almost any other part of the world.
It is a complex question. This article provided some thoughts to it but again, I will be careful not to simplify it to just one issue of how is national race defined.
One question I have that I see relevant here is, that Muslims in Burma are also quite diverse. Not all of them were descendants of those who came from Bengal. There were some with bloodlines from Iraq and some from other middle eastern and Persian nations and India that had came to live centuries ago and during colonial times. There have been historical records of them as merchants and also servants or officials in Burmese courts. These group of Muslims do not identify themselves as Rohingya. And most Burmese people do not have problem with this group (except I think recently when now they get grouped into same label which is not fair for them).
It’s one thought of many to think about and not consider when trying to figure what it is about the identity Rohiingya that fuels so much hatred and hurt.
There are over 100+ Minor ethnic group that do not fit under any other heading. The insistent of Rohingyas as an ethnic group is historically and practically (Myanmar has a recognized 8 ethnic group) fraud with another secession.
So please do not pontificate w/o knowing the true ins and out of Myanmar.
This author do no justice to the already suffering Kalars within Yakhine with his slick pick of info/hist events.
Mixing Religions, race, ethnicity from which pick and choose to suit his refutation of Derek Tonkin.
Does SG Than Swe view anywhere near what this author is again making a point to debate on? The legitimacy of Rohingyas as an ethnic group.
Here we are not a crow accusing the other but rather a crow attacking an Eagle.
IMO Mr Derek TonkYet, is A FEW TRUE/NOT SELF SERVING, westerner ‘who has been on the ground’ i.e. KNOW VERY WELL FROM THE VANTAGE POINT OF THE RULING HIERARCHY, has already point out clearly the useless careless west legitimization of the Kala in Yakhine, then to vilify the the SPDC, as well as the futility of the concept.
Now a day in Myanmar:
1) Claiming to be a special race especially based on religion other than Buddhism is bound to incur general contempt from everyone else that are still similarly suffering from the west induced misery since the invasion and subjugation by the COLONIST.
2) If the Kalar in Yakhine are suffering from discrimination especially claiming other than Kalar the obvious thing to do is to integrate like other successful majotiry of Kalar in Myanmar instead of relying on this author claiming genocide, an outrageous concept.
Where was this author when Nagis wiped out 100,000 inhabitants of the delta and subsequent genocidal approach of the west that claim much more victims?
If the kalar in Yakhine are to thrive within Myanmar, two things need to happen:
1) Unequivocally recognize and accept Buddhism as the religion, and act accordingly.
2) Point out to the arm chair bleeding hear westerners with own agenda other than to the benefit of themselves that they need to understand the psyche of the ruling clique before advocating with a jaundice eye.
Yes, I agree; but his actions are “lawful” only in the sense of “rule by law.” By definition dictatorships are not governed by the “rule of law,” as section 44 of interim constitution you refer to so starkly reveals–a constitution written no less by the self-appointed NCPO leaders whose weapons grant them the ability to proclaim basic law by decree in the first place.
However you slice it, Prawit’s actions cannot be deemed consistent with “rule of law” because the “rule of law” no longer exists in post-coup Thailand. Also, “for the sake of reform” justifies nothing given that many countries have reformed their systems under the legitimate processes of “rule of law” rather the by orders or decree. The coup leaders ended that possibility when they unlawfully seized power.
‘The rights of minorities to self-identify is a central principle of international human rights law’ the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Burma said last July.
The law is now based on the 2014 interim constitution. It states in section 44 that for the sake of reform the NCPO can issue orders which are all lawful, constitutional and final. Thus, if Prawit was acting as representative of the NCPO, his action was per se lawful.
As Tsun Tsu pointed out: Never overestimate your own strength and never underestimate the strength of your adversaries. Prayuth is anything but foolish! In fact, so far what he and the NCPO did makes a lot of sense with regards to their agenda.
Once again the critical distinction between “rule of law” and “rule by law” spring to mind. When self-appointed leaders claim they rule in “accordance with the law” the reality is that they (and their defenders) can at best claim they “rule by law.” Ruling by law is easy for any set of leaders who control the military and remain unchecked by an independently created constitution or free institutions of any type. Dictatorial governments always “rule by law” as they issue laws and decrees and make incontrovertible interpretations of “the law” – that is, they issue “dictates” backed by the threat (and use) of state-based violence if such dictates are not followed.
The full irony is that the self-appointed leaders of Thailand today seized power with precisely the justification that previous elected governments were not following the “rule of law” but dictating “rule by law” through an elected parliament–-the so-called “parliamentary dictatorship.” It seems for the coup defenders that the “rule by law” is thoroughly intolerable at Time A, but is thoroughly justified at Time B. A glaring double-standard I would say. Is dictatorship desirable or not? I’m getting confused.
So, Lung, even if “genuine democracy” has never existed in Thailand as you argue, can we all agree that the “rule of law” and the expectation that rulers remain subject to limits is far preferable to the “rule by law” that affords boundless power to the self-appointed who hold power not from law but by virtue of their stock of weapons?
(Or, is it simply better altogether for self-appointed rulers to dictate that such questions are unlawful for the public to discuss? It’s a shame we can discuss it here on this forum but at “higher education” institutions in Thailand, students and professors are banned from exploring what the “rule of law” means in Thailand or anywhere else.)
82 years ago. Why are you in favour of regression? P.S. “Genuine Democracy” is yet to exist. Point taken …. but very poorly. Maybe Prayuth can deliver ‘happiness’ to oppressed people with a song? I know some more songs!
It is really only during the last two years that some of us seeking a practical solution to the appalling and continuing misfortunes of Muslims in Arakan have started to challenge the historical narrative propagated by the international Rohingya lobby.
You seem to be saying, Carlos, that most Muslims in Arakan today are of Bengali ancestry and that they have arrived in Arakan over the last four hundred years or so. I agree. We might even agree that this is true of over 90% of the present Muslim population. I think we would also agree that their Bengali DNA is no good reason to describe their present ethnicity as Bengali, and that the relatively recent emergence of ‘Rohingya’ as an ethnicity should be accepted.
As we are looking for practical solutions to the problem, we should be cautious of endeavours to deny this Bengali heritage. Thus Aman Ullah recently: “The Rohingya are a nation with a population of more than 3 million (both home and abroad) having a supporting history, separate culture, civilization, language and literature, historically settled territory and reasonable size of population and area.”
Such myths run counter to the known ebb and flow over the centuries of Muslim communities between present day Bengal and Rakhine State. It suggest attempts for political reasons to de-Indianize the Muslim communities in Rakhine State and to mould them without any historical justification into a single, homogeneous community with which all Muslims in Rakhine State are required to ‘self-identify’ themselves. This is not the way to resolve problems.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
Wow… Mr Derek Tonkin… You mention ‘DNA’… I never thought you would dare use it these days… Now, it shows you are a biological racist like Rakhine racists (Dr Aye Maung, etc.)! I dare say if Rohingya have Bengali DNA, Rakhine have some too. Look at many of their faces! They look Bengali too. Worshiping Buddha and wearing Burmese dress doesn’t subtract Bengali DNA from them. The best example is U U Hla Saw. He looks very Bengali indeed! And it is common knowledge in places like Yangon and Mandalay that Rakhines look Indian! Lol….
Singapore Grand Prix and soft power
Just wondering if the recent Singapore general elections, and presidential elections are indicative of changes in the way Singaporeans think?
Law and irony in Thailand
Based on section 44 such an order would not only be lawful, but even constitutional and final. However, just because it can be defined as “legal” it does not imply that it is “legitimate”.
Law and irony in Thailand
I agree with you totally. Just want to point out that the Thai aristocrats or ammaart meant retransform (to feudal rule) when they say “reform”. It’s sad to find out that many Thais including some of my friends who are educated don’t really know their rights and they don’t really care. Many Thais from grassroots to educated middle class don’t really care about democracy as long as they have what they need to live, however meager.
Law and irony in Thailand
So tomorrow, Prawit says, every family (non Amart) must supply at least one daughter to a serving soldier for sex – per se lawful – would you be in agreement as well?
Law and irony in Thailand
“can at best claim they “rule by law.””
I would prefer to say – They rule the Law. It is a more accurate description, since the coup Govt simply wrote the Law as they want it.
Tomorrow, if they dictate a Law stating that, every citizen must prostrate themselves every time the “PM” entourage passes – punishment for non compliance is jail time – it will still be the Law!
You and I may not agree to it, but it is the Law, so do we say “rule by Law” or “Rule the Law”?
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
This whole thing has to do more with race than with religion. Racism based on skin colour is of course, still quite rampant in Asia. However, that this particular group of very poor Muslims are singled out by the Burmese public in general as a target to project all their “pent-up rage against ugly illegal aliens” is quite intriguing, given that this flared up to this extreme form only over the last 3 years or so, starting with that incident where a Burmese girl was killed supposedly by some Muslim boys (who were executed almost without trial) near Kyaukphru (site of the Chinese naval base and oil/gas terminal). I would think that there is a master plan by some sinister political and economic groups in Burma who are instigating this extreme form of racism in order to deflect something that is perhaps even more menacing and threatening to the sovereignty of the country than citizenship rights for a “couple of wretched Rohingyas”. Go figure!
Law and irony in Thailand
This is only part of the story. A purge is going on in Thai universities. For example, Dr Surakiart the Foreign Minister under Thaksin was recently sacked from his Professorship at Chulalongkorn University Law School (he is also an ex Dean of the Faculty).
Singapore Grand Prix and soft power
This article is about Singapore and not about Monaco, so I stick to the topic. I don’t normally like people using cheap facile “tu quoque” arguments but I agree with you that Westerners with any ethical and moral values should boycott corrupt Singaporean banks.
I was told by a number of “white Westerners”, even students, who went to Singapore for some time, that there is a definite racial/social pecking order there. White people are normally treated much better than dark-skinned migrant workers and maids from places like Burma or Indonesia or Philippines in this “model Asian city state”, unless of course, you are a super-rich opium war-lord from Burma with money to launder like Lo Hsinghan and his clan. That is the hypocrisy and double-standards that I wanted to point out in my comment. Asking maids who are poor whether they would prefer to be even poorer than what they are is a morally despicable argument. I agree with you that the greedy morality of “making a quick dirty buck justifies everything” is not only a Singaporean thing, but we are talking about Singapore here and this mentality is blatantly obvious under all this squeaky clean, chewing-gum-free shiny fa├зade of a city with or without fancy F1 races. Soft moral power indeed!
Singapore Grand Prix and soft power
Tocharian, congratulations on squeezing so many stereotypes of Singapore into a single paragraph. However, you may want to consider include Western countries in your list of ways Singapore has gotten rich. Vietnam War? Who hustled all that war materiel there? When Subic Bay closed where did the facilities go? Almost every major Western corporation used Singapore as an Asian HQ. And who made nearly all the hard drives in the early computers?
As for the maids, ask some of them where they would rather work – Singapore. There’s NO “trafficking” there, just the best pay possible in a sad and hard world market. If Singapore is to be condemned, look in the mirror first, Westerners. Sure, you have to keep your mouth shut in Singapore (where can you really open it anywhere in SE Asia?) – but you don’t get screwed economically quite so badly as in almost any other part of the world.
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
It is a complex question. This article provided some thoughts to it but again, I will be careful not to simplify it to just one issue of how is national race defined.
One question I have that I see relevant here is, that Muslims in Burma are also quite diverse. Not all of them were descendants of those who came from Bengal. There were some with bloodlines from Iraq and some from other middle eastern and Persian nations and India that had came to live centuries ago and during colonial times. There have been historical records of them as merchants and also servants or officials in Burmese courts. These group of Muslims do not identify themselves as Rohingya. And most Burmese people do not have problem with this group (except I think recently when now they get grouped into same label which is not fair for them).
It’s one thought of many to think about and not consider when trying to figure what it is about the identity Rohiingya that fuels so much hatred and hurt.
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
There are over 100+ Minor ethnic group that do not fit under any other heading. The insistent of Rohingyas as an ethnic group is historically and practically (Myanmar has a recognized 8 ethnic group) fraud with another secession.
So please do not pontificate w/o knowing the true ins and out of Myanmar.
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
This author do no justice to the already suffering Kalars within Yakhine with his slick pick of info/hist events.
Mixing Religions, race, ethnicity from which pick and choose to suit his refutation of Derek Tonkin.
Does SG Than Swe view anywhere near what this author is again making a point to debate on? The legitimacy of Rohingyas as an ethnic group.
Here we are not a crow accusing the other but rather a crow attacking an Eagle.
IMO Mr Derek TonkYet, is A FEW TRUE/NOT SELF SERVING, westerner ‘who has been on the ground’ i.e. KNOW VERY WELL FROM THE VANTAGE POINT OF THE RULING HIERARCHY, has already point out clearly the useless careless west legitimization of the Kala in Yakhine, then to vilify the the SPDC, as well as the futility of the concept.
Now a day in Myanmar:
1) Claiming to be a special race especially based on religion other than Buddhism is bound to incur general contempt from everyone else that are still similarly suffering from the west induced misery since the invasion and subjugation by the COLONIST.
2) If the Kalar in Yakhine are suffering from discrimination especially claiming other than Kalar the obvious thing to do is to integrate like other successful majotiry of Kalar in Myanmar instead of relying on this author claiming genocide, an outrageous concept.
Where was this author when Nagis wiped out 100,000 inhabitants of the delta and subsequent genocidal approach of the west that claim much more victims?
If the kalar in Yakhine are to thrive within Myanmar, two things need to happen:
1) Unequivocally recognize and accept Buddhism as the religion, and act accordingly.
2) Point out to the arm chair bleeding hear westerners with own agenda other than to the benefit of themselves that they need to understand the psyche of the ruling clique before advocating with a jaundice eye.
Law and irony in Thailand
Yes, I agree; but his actions are “lawful” only in the sense of “rule by law.” By definition dictatorships are not governed by the “rule of law,” as section 44 of interim constitution you refer to so starkly reveals–a constitution written no less by the self-appointed NCPO leaders whose weapons grant them the ability to proclaim basic law by decree in the first place.
However you slice it, Prawit’s actions cannot be deemed consistent with “rule of law” because the “rule of law” no longer exists in post-coup Thailand. Also, “for the sake of reform” justifies nothing given that many countries have reformed their systems under the legitimate processes of “rule of law” rather the by orders or decree. The coup leaders ended that possibility when they unlawfully seized power.
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
‘The rights of minorities to self-identify is a central principle of international human rights law’ the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Burma said last July.
Law and irony in Thailand
The law is now based on the 2014 interim constitution. It states in section 44 that for the sake of reform the NCPO can issue orders which are all lawful, constitutional and final. Thus, if Prawit was acting as representative of the NCPO, his action was per se lawful.
Wisdom of General Prayuth
As Tsun Tsu pointed out: Never overestimate your own strength and never underestimate the strength of your adversaries. Prayuth is anything but foolish! In fact, so far what he and the NCPO did makes a lot of sense with regards to their agenda.
Law and irony in Thailand
Once again the critical distinction between “rule of law” and “rule by law” spring to mind. When self-appointed leaders claim they rule in “accordance with the law” the reality is that they (and their defenders) can at best claim they “rule by law.” Ruling by law is easy for any set of leaders who control the military and remain unchecked by an independently created constitution or free institutions of any type. Dictatorial governments always “rule by law” as they issue laws and decrees and make incontrovertible interpretations of “the law” – that is, they issue “dictates” backed by the threat (and use) of state-based violence if such dictates are not followed.
The full irony is that the self-appointed leaders of Thailand today seized power with precisely the justification that previous elected governments were not following the “rule of law” but dictating “rule by law” through an elected parliament–-the so-called “parliamentary dictatorship.” It seems for the coup defenders that the “rule by law” is thoroughly intolerable at Time A, but is thoroughly justified at Time B. A glaring double-standard I would say. Is dictatorship desirable or not? I’m getting confused.
So, Lung, even if “genuine democracy” has never existed in Thailand as you argue, can we all agree that the “rule of law” and the expectation that rulers remain subject to limits is far preferable to the “rule by law” that affords boundless power to the self-appointed who hold power not from law but by virtue of their stock of weapons?
(Or, is it simply better altogether for self-appointed rulers to dictate that such questions are unlawful for the public to discuss? It’s a shame we can discuss it here on this forum but at “higher education” institutions in Thailand, students and professors are banned from exploring what the “rule of law” means in Thailand or anywhere else.)
Law and irony in Thailand
82 years ago. Why are you in favour of regression? P.S. “Genuine Democracy” is yet to exist. Point taken …. but very poorly. Maybe Prayuth can deliver ‘happiness’ to oppressed people with a song? I know some more songs!
Rohingya and national identities in Burma
It is really only during the last two years that some of us seeking a practical solution to the appalling and continuing misfortunes of Muslims in Arakan have started to challenge the historical narrative propagated by the international Rohingya lobby.
You seem to be saying, Carlos, that most Muslims in Arakan today are of Bengali ancestry and that they have arrived in Arakan over the last four hundred years or so. I agree. We might even agree that this is true of over 90% of the present Muslim population. I think we would also agree that their Bengali DNA is no good reason to describe their present ethnicity as Bengali, and that the relatively recent emergence of ‘Rohingya’ as an ethnicity should be accepted.
As we are looking for practical solutions to the problem, we should be cautious of endeavours to deny this Bengali heritage. Thus Aman Ullah recently: “The Rohingya are a nation with a population of more than 3 million (both home and abroad) having a supporting history, separate culture, civilization, language and literature, historically settled territory and reasonable size of population and area.”
Such myths run counter to the known ebb and flow over the centuries of Muslim communities between present day Bengal and Rakhine State. It suggest attempts for political reasons to de-Indianize the Muslim communities in Rakhine State and to mould them without any historical justification into a single, homogeneous community with which all Muslims in Rakhine State are required to ‘self-identify’ themselves. This is not the way to resolve problems.