You've been detained for years and nobody can tell you when you'll get out. You are known by your number and you are a refugee, ALISON BEVEGE reports.
EVERY day you wake around 2pm.
Not because you're lazy but because it doesn't make a difference if your eyes are open or closed.
There's nothing to do and nowhere to go.
It was the same yesterday. Tomorrow and the day after will be the same.
You've been detained for years and nobody can tell you when you'll get out.
On November 7, 2010, on the occasion of Myanmar's first elections in 20 years, Amnesty International commented that the polls which had "presented an opportunity for Myanmar to make meaningful human rights changes on its own terms" were instead "being held against a backdrop of political repression and systematic violence." A year on, what is the state of play?
Reading the commentary of the past several months - much of it in this newspaper - is of limited help. That optimists and pessimists have emerged would normally be productive, except that these camps are more and more categorically opposed to one another. With few exceptions, Myanmar watchers of all stripes have increasingly dug their heels firmly into doctrinaire territory, unwilling to concede even the most basic (and often simply factual) points to the other side.
This has not only left the Myanmar debate in a polarized state, but more importantly has hindered the sort of clear, objective assessment on which the right human rights and other policy decisions depend. To a certain degree, this confusion is understandable since for years (if not decades) there was little room for nuanced thinking on Myanmar.
"To sanction or not to sanction" was one of the few points of contention, itself located within a broad consensus - certainly in the West and among much of Asia and the global South as well - that Myanmar was a (choose your adjective: political, economic, humanitarian, public health, educational, human rights ...) disaster on a bleak trajectory.
Since the elections last year, however, that trajectory has changed direction, such that it is no longer possible to interchange the litany of adjectives or speak of Myanmar - as many commentators still do - as a black-or-white situation. Nor is it advisable to do so. The human rights situation in Myanmar must be disaggregated, and addressed on that basis.
The qualified good
There is political and economic change underway in Myanmar, much of which could be to the improvement of people's civil and political, as well as economic, social and cultural rights. Those who deny this are simply not paying attention or are allowing their personal, political or institutional agendas to get in the way.
Aside from releasing pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest a week after the elections and a late April 2011 inaugural speech by President Thein Sein that promised increased political participation, for six months Myanmar's new government enacted few positive changes.
Since July however, a steady stream of new moves and policies has become apparent, albeit of greatly varying significance to the human rights situation. Other than the appointment of a National Human Rights Commission (discussed below), a guardedly positive development but whose focus is largely uncertain, almost all have been confined to the political and economic spheres and centers.
Myanmar's Labor Minister Aung Gyi has met four times with Suu Kyi, and Thein Sein has met her once in talks she described - in contrast to those with Aung Gyi four years ago - as a "positive development." She has twice been permitted to travel outside of Yangon, and unlike in May 2003 when government-backed thugs attacked her motorcade in Depayin and killed or injured over 100 of her supporters, her trips this year occurred without incident.
And contrary to declaring her National League for Democracy (NLD) political party illegal after it refused to register under new electoral laws in 2010, the government has invited it to reregister under amended provisions of those laws. These events show a small improvement in the freedoms of expression and association, particularly as they involve a former prisoner of conscience whose house arrest was illegally extended just months before last year's elections.
More significant, if still tentative, steps toward increased freedom of expression have come in relation to Myanmar's once robust media industry. In October, Radio Free Asia cited Tint Swe, director of the Press Scrutiny and Registration Division, as saying that censorship is inconsistent with democratic values and more political content has been allowed in recent months.
Again, enter Suu Kyi: previously strictly prohibited in the domestic media, her name and picture have been allowed to appear and for the first time in 23 years the authorities permitted her in September to publish her own piece in the Pyithu Khit News Journal. Internet restrictions have also been substantially reduced; the websites of both international outlets and those run by Myanmar exiles - almost uniformly critical of the government - are no longer blocked. The authorities recently signaled a lifting of a six-year ban on satellite television receivers as well.
While these changes improve freedom of expression in Myanmar in relation to both the transmission/dissemination and reception of information and mark a relaxation of draconian restrictions during (when the Internet was severed altogether) and after 2007's "Saffron" revolution, they are not supported by changes to the relevant laws.
Nor are they unqualified in practice. Not only did the authorities cut all political content from an exclusive interview of Suu Kyi by the Messenger News in September, but more seriously, on the day after UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar visited the country in August, former military officer Nay Myo Zin was sentenced to 10 years in prison for allegedly sending abroad a political document on how to achieve democracy.
One month later, Sithu Zeya, a young reporter with the exile-run Democratic Voice of Burma, already serving an eight-year prison term, had his sentence extended by a decade under the 2004 Electronic Transactions Law. Extensive legal reform in relation to not only the media but to freedom of expression generally is long overdue in Myanmar, and the persecution via prosecution of journalists should stop immediately.
Closely related to freedom of expression are the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, which in passing the Labor Organization Bill last month Myanmar took a substantial step toward promoting and protecting. The law allows workers to form trade unions - effectively banned previously under the 1962 Trade Unions Act - and to legally go on strike. The important matter of whether the unions will be independent of the government, however, remains to be seen.
In the same speech in which he promised increased political participation, President Thein Sein also pledged to fight poverty in Myanmar. This was a welcome message considering the government's initially obstructive response to Cyclone Nargis in 2008. Recent months have seen a mixed record in Myanmar, still weak on the humanitarian side, somewhat stronger but still with much room for improvement on development.
Currently, the humanitarian situation in Myanmar is especially grave in several ethnic minority states where armed conflict is taking place, as well as in Rakhine and Chin States where food insecurity is severe. Despite slow movement in the right direction, however, the government has kept in place lengthy and complex administrative procedures for obtaining travel permits both for those who already have a presence and for new humanitarian agencies seeking permission to work in the country.
In conflict areas, authorities have in some cases simply blocked any and all access to the tens of thousands of persons internally displaced by the fighting, especially those in camps on the Myanmar-China border. These practices should cease immediately.
At the same time, the international donor community needs to respond to the "humanitarian imperative" in Myanmar, especially by addressing people's lack of access to minimum essential levels of economic, social and cultural rights. In particular, this requires them to meet pledges made for relief and/or recovery after Cyclones Nargis (May 2008) and Giri (October 2010) so long as they are satisfied that distribution of humanitarian aid is provided transparently, is for the purposes agreed upon, and is based solely on need.
Organizations and local communities have also highlighted the need for a stronger international response to the humanitarian disaster in the latest conflict areas (near the Myanmar-China border). The rights of people whose lives have been devastated by these events should not be held hostage to politics by either Myanmar's new government or the international community.
Myanmar's development situation is slightly better but more complicated. Five years after the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria decided to leave Myanmar, partly on account of reported government interference, the new administration signed an agreement in November 2010 welcoming it back. This move, most positive in itself, should have the additional effect of allowing the Three Diseases Fund, which had filled the gap left by Global Fund, to focus more on other critical health care issues such as maternal and child health.
In July, the Myanmar government also raised substantially state pensions for nearly a million people, most of them poor, and announced plans to provide micro-credit for poor farmers. Last week it finished hosting a visit by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to discuss unifying its foreign exchange rate policy and lifting certain currency restrictions, something which could also be to the economic benefit of its cash-strapped citizens, and agreed to increase its assistance to migrants working in Thailand.
These initiatives should be acknowledged by the international community. At the same time, there are reasons for continuing concerns such that increasing international assistance and cooperation and lifting the restrictions under which multilateral agencies (such the IMF, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and the UN Development Program) continue to work in Myanmar should be matched by the government making additional moves of its own.
It should reallocate more resources to the social, educational, and public health sectors, which currently combined receives only about 5% of gross domestic product (GDP).
Myanmar should also utilize the estimated $5 billion in foreign reserves it has accumulated over the years, mostly from the sale of natural resources, toward advancing the economic, social, and cultural rights of its people. Last month on a bilateral basis Japan at least partly demonstrated this attention to Myanmar's domestic policies by citing unspecified "progress" in Myanmar in its reported decision to resume official development assistance there, which it had suspended after the Saffron Revolution in 2007.
Pessimists take note: politically and economically there are limited - but real - human rights changes taking place in Myanmar. While the government must do a great deal more, nothing in the way last year's elections were orchestrated suggested this would be the case a year on.
The categorically bad
Unfortunately, what many optimists disregard is that these changes are confined to Myanmar's political and economic centers. There is another story in Myanmar concerning a substantial portion of the civilian population that has been ignored, sidelined or outright dismissed by many since the story of the "qualified good" broke: serious human rights and humanitarian law violations in several ethnic minority areas.
The irony is that the event most often referenced in relation to the recent political and economic reforms - last year's parliamentary elections - is the same event that marked the start of this "categorically bad" development.
On the very day of the polls, ethnic minority Karen elements launched an attack on the Myanmar army in the border town of Myawaddy. March and June this year marked respectively an intensification of conflict with various ethnic minority armed groups in Shan State and the breaking of a 15-year ceasefire with the Kachin Independence Army (KIA) in Kachin State. Smaller conflicts continued or resumed as well in Kayan (Karenni) and Mon States.
While the civilian population almost always suffers in conflict zones, the critical difference in this fighting - for both the Myanmar government and the international community - is that civilians have been a target set of the Myanmar army. From Kayin (Karen) State (and bordering parts of Bago and Tanintharyi Regions), there are recent and credible accounts of the army using prison convicts as porters, forcing them to act as human shields and mine-sweepers.
In Kachin State, sources report extrajudicial executions, children killed by shelling and other indiscriminate attacks, forced labor, and illegal confiscation of food and property. And last week Amnesty International spoke with ethnic Shan civilians who recounted stories of torture, arbitrary detention and forced relocation.
As a result, there are roughly 30,000 "new" internally displaced persons in Shan State and a similar number in or near Kachin State (including a small number of refugees), in addition to approximately 36,000 internally displaced persons in Kayin State. In October, the Thailand-Burma Border Consortium reported that in the past year alone 112,000 persons were forced from their homes in Myanmar (to say nothing of the more than 150,000 Burmese refugees in Thailand and those in other neighboring countries).Nor are these ongoing human rights violations just recent or unprecedented. They recall the findings of an Amnesty International report published nearly three and a half years ago: extrajudicial executions, torture, arbitrary detention, forced labor, confiscation of land and food, and forced displacement of Karen civilians on a large scale, starting in late 2005.
Moreover, as that report's title indicated, some of the violations amount to crimes against humanity in eastern Myanmar and elsewhere in the country, as well as to war crimes. They are widespread and systematic, and they are pursuant to known attacks targeting ethnic minority civilian populations.
It is the ethnic minority situation where the gap between Thein Sein's words, in both his inaugural speech and with his meeting with Suu Kyi, and his actions is most apparent. Indeed, human rights violations are not confined to the conflict zones either, as reports of forced labor on a large scale in Chin and Rakhine States (usually targeting the Rohingya ethnic minority in the latter) indicate. Either a contentious policy division between the civilian government and the army has emerged, or no proper division between the two has in fact been established.
The exception proving the rule is the president's decision in September to suspend construction of the controversial Myitsone Dam in Kachin State. The project was fueling not only intensified hostilities but the forced displacement of Kachin civilians as well. Although the authorities have shelved their plan to have all ethnic minority armed groups become official Border Guard Forces, stated that refugees and exiles may return home, and engaged in talks with certain groups, these moves have not been accompanied by a cessation of the grave violations noted above.
This - and the fact that no one has been held accountable for them - is not acceptable. Yet beyond calling on the Myanmar government to immediately halt the violations, there is disagreement among observers as to what else, if anything, should be done. Since May 2010, Amnesty International has called on the United Nations to establish an international commission of inquiry into grave crimes in Myanmar as a means toward determining the facts, pressuring the army to cease targeting civilians and holding perpetrators accountable.
First and foremost, this commission (not a court) would inquire and investigate (not prosecute individuals) as to what has taken place in Myanmar's ethnic minority areas. It would be objective and impartial, looking at the policies and actions of all sides. Second, in carrying out its work, the commission might well convince the combatants to stop attacking and otherwise persecuting civilians, and deter them from doing so in the future. Finally, once the facts were established they could be employed in any number of ways - including but not limited to legal prosecutions - toward holding perpetrators of international crimes to account.
While Suu Kyi has herself clearly expressed her support for this initiative, arguments abound as to why it should not move forward. Most relate to its political viability, both inside and outside Myanmar, and its strategic advisability. None withstands scrutiny.
It is not a foregone conclusion (though risks becoming one should the international community abandon or give up on the idea) that a UN Commission of Inquiry would not have access to Myanmar. Even if it was denied, however, a similar 1997 commission by the International Labor Organization compensated for lack of access partly through the testimony of forced labor victims outside Myanmar and various experts, among them Amnesty International. Two years later, Myanmar passed a law prohibiting forced labor.
Indeed, a consistent argument for opposing a commission of inquiry is that it would not have "buy-in" from the Myanmar authorities. This view is supported by Article 445 of Myanmar's Constitution (as well as by decades of impunity) which codifies immunity from prosecution for officials for past human rights violations.
One caveat to this argument is the formation in September of a National Human Rights Commission. Some opponents of an international commission of inquiry in Myanmar have suggested that the national commission, which according to its chair is empowered to investigate complaints of human rights violations, might eventually fill the role.
This is most unlikely, however, considering its questionable composition (some members with a public record of denying human rights violations in the country), its doubtful level of independence from the government (appointed by the president), and especially its legal underpinning in the Constitution (Article 445).
Yet the lack of "buy-in" is precisely why an international commission is needed; if the Myanmar government was willing to initiate its own process of fact-finding and accountability (to say nothing of ceasing the ongoing violations), the UN would not have to. It is because of Myanmar's refusal to institute a domestic option, and not in spite of it, that the international community must step in.
"Must" in the case of international crimes is the operative word, because though there are options in how accountability can be established, accountability itself is not optional. Absent Myanmar's domestic "buy-in", it is the responsibility of the international community to ensure justice for the victims of crimes against humanity and war crimes in Myanmar. And an international commission of inquiry is the only option left.
To withhold support by citing political constraints (in the form of votes in the UN Security Council or consensus in the UN General Assembly), is both conveniently self-fulfilling and contradicted by the 16 nations that have thus far publicly signaled their support for such a commission. To claim that it is not the correct political strategy is to overstate the breadth and depth of recent human rights improvements, and to pretend that engagement and pressure are mutually exclusive. Both excuses are an abdication of responsibility to Myanmar's ethnic minorities.
Optimists take note: Any human rights changes in Myanmar's ethnic minority areas since last year's elections have been for the worse. While modest improvements in political and economic rights should be built upon, they should not come at the expense of ongoing international crimes or impunity for their perpetrators.
The plain ugly
In May, the Myanmar government released 77 political prisoners under a one-year reduction of all prison sentences in the country. In September, the first substantive act of the new Myanmar National Human Rights Commission was its publication of an open letter to President Thein Sein in three state newspapers calling on him to release "prisoners of conscience" who do not pose a threat to state or public stability. While 239 political prisoners were set free two days later (pursuant in fact to a parliamentary decision), the release exposed several ugly realities in Myanmar.
The first is that while the Commission's use of the term "prisoners of conscience" is welcome there is debate over how many political prisoners are actually being held in Myanmar. This fact was underscored not only by the mixed reaction both inside and outside Myanmar to the release - Amnesty International called it a "minimum first step" - but by subsequent contradictory statements by Ko Ko Hlaing, a senior political adviser to the president.
On October 19, he was reported as saying that there were "about 600" remaining prisoners of conscience in Myanmar but in an interview with the Irrawaddy magazine eight days later he conceded that he did not "have exact figures." He also said that differences may "depend on how people define prisoners of conscience and ordinary prisoners."
The government must clarify who they classify as political prisoners - and who they don't. As there are significant differences between the government's figures and those put forward by some opposition groups, the authorities should resolve this issue transparently and cooperatively. No political prisoner should be subject to an unjust prison term on account of a dispute over definitions.
While primary responsibility for resolving this issue rests with Myanmar, the United Nations should assist the Myanmar authorities in convening a panel, including the NLD, to ensure that all political prisoners are identified. Encouragingly, the International Committee of the Red Cross was recently authorized for the first time in years to conduct an international staff-led engineering survey in three of Myanmar's prisons, despite it not involving contact with detainees and so not amounting to a prison visit according to its protection criteria.
The second ugly reality, related to the confusion over political prisoner numbers in the wake of last month's release was an emphasis on "quality" over quantity. The unfortunate (if doubtless unintentional) implication in Suu Kyi's statement that "There still are a number of important political prisoners who need to be released as soon as possible", is that there are unimportant political prisoners.
This is not the case and cannot afford to be accepted as such by the Myanmar authorities. Indeed, the reverse is true: the "who" among the released should not merely be secondary to the "how many", but totally irrelevant to it. All political prisoners should be released as soon as possible.
Note that this point is distinct from being particularly concerned, in the event of an only partial release of political prisoners, with certain groups and individuals: Amnesty International was able to identify only five political prisoners among the 239 released last month as being from ethnic minorities. Many such political prisoners - some of whom are members of armed opposition groups - may be wrongly classified as common criminals in the country's extensive prison system.
If political prisoners have committed an internationally recognized offence, authorities should give them a prompt, fair and public trial, or release them. Of course, prisoners of conscience, having clearly committed no such offense in their entirely peaceful political expression, should be released immediately and unconditionally. And as evidenced by Amnesty International's dissemination of two Urgent Actions (about Buddhist monk U Gambira and a hunger strike) just last week, both on account of torture or other ill-treatment, conditions for the remaining prisoners have not improved.
This speaks to the final ugly reality in Myanmar, namely that the release of prisoners of conscience in Myanmar is being staggered in a seemingly calculated way by the government. Whether to win similarly staggered concessions from the international community (including a relaxation of economic sanctions), curry domestic favor in stages in the run-up to national by-elections within the next few months, or merely keep at bay both domestic and international criticism, there is no room for a "process" in the release of prisoners of conscience.
Does Amnesty International really expect, as per the proverbial and rhetorical words, that this should literally "happen overnight"? Yes, we do. By their definition, prisoners of conscience should never have been detained in the first place; they should be released - every last one of them - immediately and unconditionally.
That 316 political prisoners have been released by the post-election Myanmar government marks a modest improvement of the country's human rights record, but until and unless all are freed it will not be improvement enough. In that sense, the situation of political prisoners in Myanmar is a microcosm of the human rights situation there generally one year after the elections. For the sake of further human rights progress in Myanmar - a country, not a cause - both pessimists and optimists would do well to keep this in mind.
Benjamin Zawacki is Amnesty International's Myanmar researcher and a member of the US Council on Foreign Relations.
Credit : Asia Times Online
က်မ မွာ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ အသိ တေယာက္မွ မရွိပါဘူး။ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ ေတြ ေန တဲ့ ေဒသ လည္း တခါ မွ မေရာက္ဖူးပါဘူး။ အဲဒါေၾကာင့္..ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ ေတြ အေၾကာင္း လည္း ေကာင္းေကာင္း မသိ နိုင္ပါဘူး။
ဒါေပမဲ့.. ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ ေတြ ကို အသဲအသန္ ခုခံ မုန္းတီး ေန တဲ့.. ရခိုင္ မိတ္ေဆြ.. ျမန္မာ မိတ္ေဆြ ေတြ ေတာ့ ၊ အမ်ား ၾကီး ရွိ ပါတယ္။ သူတို႕ ေျပာျပ တဲ့.. မုန္းစရာ ေကာင္း လွ တဲ့..ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ ေတြ ရဲ႕.. ဇတ္လမ္း ေတြ ကို လည္း ..အမ်ားၾကီး ၾကားဖူး ပါတယ္။ အမ်ားၾကီး ဖတ္ေန ရ ပါတယ္။ အခု ကိုပဲ.. face book ဆို တဲ့.. လြတ္လပ္ တဲ့..လမ္းမ ၾကီး ေပၚ မွာ.. ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ ဆႏၵျပ ေန ၾကတဲ့.. မိတ္ေဆြ ေတြ ကို .. မိုးလင္း တာ နဲ႕.. လမ္းတခု လံုး ျပည့္ က်ပ္ေန ေအာင္ ခဲခဲ လွဳပ္ ျမင္ ေန ရ ပါတယ္။ ဘီဘီစီ ကို သပိတ္ေမွာက္ ၾက .. ၃ ရက္ အတြင္း ေတာင္းပန္ ပါ ဆို တဲ့.. .. စကားလံုး ၾကီး ေတြ က လည္း.. မ်က္စိ ထဲကို အေတာင့္ လိုက္ .. ၀င္၀င္ လာ ေန ပါတယ္။ ဒုတိယ ဧရာ၀တီ လို႕ ေတာင္ ေၾကြးေၾကာ္ သံ ေတြ ၾကားရ ပါတယ္။ Occupy face book မ်ား ျဖစ္ ေန ျပီ လား မသိ၊ ဆႏၵျပ ေနတဲ့ သူ ေတြ ဆိုတာ..ဘယ္လို မွ ကို တိုး မေပါက္ပါဘူး။ အဲဒါေၾကာင့္.. ကိုယ့္ ဘေလာ့ ေလးပဲ ကိုယ္ တိတ္တိတ္ ကေလး ျပန္ လာျပီး.. ဒီစာ ေလးကို..တိတ္တိတ္ ကေလး ေရး လိုက္ပါတယ္။
ကိုယ့္လို ဂဂ်ိဳးဂေဂ်ာင္..ဘေလာ့ ေလာက္ပဲ ေရး တတ္ တဲ့..သူ တေယာက္က.. ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ သမိုင္း ေၾကာင္း ေတြ ကို..အထူးျပဳ ေလ့လာ ဖို႕..က်မ္းၾကီး က်မ္းငယ္ ေတြ လည္း လိုက္ မဖတ္ ဖူး ပါဘူး။ စိတ္လည္း မ၀င္စား လွ ပါဘူး။
ဒါေပမဲ့.. ပ်မ္းမွ် ေယဘုယ် အတိုင္း အတာ ေလာက္ ေတာ့.. ဦးနု က.. ပါလီမန္ မွာ.. မဲေပးပိုင္ခြင့္ ရွိတဲ့ လူမ်ိဳးစု အျဖစ္ ေၾကျငာ ထဲ့သြင္း ေပး ခဲ့ တာ (ဘာေၾကာင့္ ညာေၾကာင့္..ထင္ျမင္ သံုးသပ္ခ်က္ ေတြ အသာထား )၊ အၾကမ္းဖက္ ကြန္ယက္ ေတြ နဲ႕ စပ္ဆက္ ေန နိုင္ တယ္ လို႕ ၀ီကီလိ က ေျပာတာ.. ၊ တပ္မေတာ္ ကာကြယ္ေရး ဦးစီးခ်ဳပ္ ေဟာင္း ဦးတင္ဦးက.. ေလာေလာ လတ္လတ္ ဘယ္လို ေျပာ လိုက္ လို႕.. ျပည္ပေရာက္ .. ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ လွဳပ္ရွား သူ ေတြ က.. ေရဒီယို သတင္း ဌါန ေတြကို ဘယ္လို လာ ေခ်ပတာ ၊ စသျဖင့္.. သာမာန္္ လူ ျပိန္း အဆင့္ ေလာက္ ေတာ့..သတင္းေတြ နဲ႕ အဆက္မျပတ္ ရွိ ေန ခဲ့ ပါတယ္။
ဒါေပမဲ့.. ခု လို.. အလွည့္ အေျပာင္း ျမန္ ေနတဲ့..ေန႕စဥ္ နဲ႕ အမွ် ထူးျခား ေန တဲ့.. လက္ရွိ နိုင္ငံ ေရး အေျခအေန ေတြ ကို လူေတြ သိပ္စိတ္၀င္ တစား ရွိ ေန တဲ့...အခ်ိန္ မွာ.. ဒီလို ဘယ္ေတာ့မွ အဆံုးသပ္ မရ တဲ့.. လူမ်ိဳးေရး လွံဳ႕ေဆာ္မူ .. ဆိုင္းဘုဒ္ ၾကီး ေတြ တကားကား ျဖစ္ေနတာကို.. နားမလည္ နိုင္ ေအာင္ ျဖစ္ ရ ပါတယ္။ ေကာက္ရိုးမီး တမွ် ဟုမ္းကနဲ မ်ား ထ ၾက တာ ေပ ပဲ လား ။ ေန အံုး.... အဲဒီေတာ့.. ဒီ .. သိန္း နဲ႕ သန္း နဲ႕.. ဗမာျပည္ ထဲ မွာ ရွိ ေန တဲ့..လူမ်ိဳးစု ေတြကို.. ပင္လယ္ ထဲ တြန္းခ် ရ မွာ လား..၊ တေယာက္မက်န္ သတ္ျပစ္ ခ်င္ ၾက သ လား...၊ ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ရွ္ ကို လည္ပင္းညွစ္ ျပီး.. မင္းတို႕ လူ ေတြ မင္းတို႕ ျပန္ မယူ ဘူးလား..ယူမလား လို႕.. စစ္သြား တိုက္ ခ်င္သလား..၊။ ဘယ္သူ႕ကို ေမးရ မွန္း မသိ ေအာင္ပါပဲ..။
ဘာျဖစ္ လို႕ ဆို.. ေဖ့စ္ဘြတ္ မွာ.. ခင္သမွ်.. သိသမွ် ..ရင္းနွီးသမွ်..လူ အကုန္ နီးပါး ကလည္း..အဲဒီ ဆိုင္းဘုဒ္ ၾကီး ေတြ နဲ႕ ဗ်...။ အဲဒါ နဲ႕..အသာေလး ျငိမ္ျပီး.. ကုပ္ေခ်ာင္းေခ်ာင္း ျဖစ္ေနတာ.. တရက္ ႏွစ္ ရက္ ရွိျပီ။ ေဟာ..ျဗဳန္းကနဲ ဆို.. ေဒါက္တာဇာနည္က.. ထံုးစံ အတိုင္း..ေမာင္းကြဲ ၾကီး ထ ထု လိုက္တာ.. ပုရိသ ႏြယ္၀င္ သူေတာ္စင္ ေတြ တေယာက္ မက်န္ အေျပး အလႊား.. နင္ ငါ ကေလာ္ တုတ္ ၾက ေတာ့ တာပဲ..။ ကိုယ္ လည္း အဲဒီ ေမာင္းကြဲ ေၾကးနန္းစာ ၾကီး ကို.. ကုပ္ေခ်ာင္းေခ်ာင္းေလး သြားဖတ္ ၾကည့္ ပါ တယ္။ ခပ္ရြတ္ရြတ္..ခပ္ရင့္ရင့္ ေရး ထား တဲ့..သူ႕စတိုင္ ကို ဖတ္ ျပီး.. ေခါင္းခါ လိုက္..ေခါင္းညိတ္ လိုက္ ေပါ့...။ ေနာက္ဆံုး.. long live Rohingha လို႕.. အဆံုးသပ္ ထား တာ ကို ေတာ့.. အေသ အခ်ာ ကို.. ျပံဳးမိ လိုက္ ပါတယ္။
ကိုယ္က ေတာ့.. ရြတ္လည္း မရြတ္ တတ္.. ရင့္လည္း မရင့္ ရဲ ေပ မဲ့.. မရဲ တရဲ ေလး ေတာ့.. ဆုေတာင္း ေပး ခ်င္ ပါတယ္။
ဆယ္စုနွစ္ ေပါင္း မ်ား စြာ.. ေခြးေနရာ မရ သလို ျဖစ္ ေန ရ တဲ့.. ဒီ လူ မ်ိဳးစု ေတြ အတြက္..၊ ေျဖရွင္း လို႕ မရ နိုင္ ျဖစ္ ေနတဲ့.. နယ္စပ္ ျပသာနာ ေတြ ကို ၊ သက္ဆိုင္ရာ နွစ္ဖက္ အစိုးရ ျခင္း ၊ တာ၀န္သိသိ၊ သိကၡာရွိရွိ နဲ႕ ေအာင္ေအာင္ျမင္ျမင္ ေျပေျပ လည္လည္..ညွိနွိုင္း အေျဖ ရွာ နိုင္ ပါေစ... ။
ကိုယ့္ တိုင္းျပည္ ကိုယ့္လူမ်ိဳး ခ်စ္စိတ္ ..ကာကြယ္ စိတ္ ဆိုတာ ကို၊ ..သူမ်ား တိုင္းျပည္..သူမ်ား လူ မ်ိဳး ကို..မုန္းတီး ရြံရွာ စိတ္၊ နွိပ္ကြပ္ ခ်င္ စိတ္ အျဖစ္ နဲ႕ .. မရွင္သန္ ပါေစ နဲ႕..။
ေခြးေတြ ေၾကာင္ ေတြ ကို ခ်စ္တတ္ တဲ့ ... ႏြားေတြ ငါး ေတြ ကို ေတာင္ .. ညွာတာ တတ္ တဲ့..သက္သက္လြတ္ စား နိုင္ တဲ့.. လူ သား ေတြ ဟာ..အမ်ိဳးတူ လူသားျခင္း က်မွ.. အသားမဲ လို႕...သြားက်ဲ လို႕.. ဘာသာမတူ လို႕.. စာမတတ္ လို႕ ဆို ျပီး.. မုန္းတီး စက္ဆုပ္ မူ ေတြ.. အလြန္အကၽြံ မျဖစ္ ၾက ပါ ေစ နဲ႕...။
တကမၻာလံုး အနွံ႕ .. ေရၾကည္ရာ မ်က္နု ရာ .. ထြက္ျပီး ေန ေန ၾက တဲ့.. ျမန္မာ ျပည္ အနွံ႕က.. ျမန္မာလူမ်ိဳး ေတြ.... သူမ်ား နိုင္ငံ မွာ ..နိုင္ငံသား စေတတပ္စ္ တခု ရဖို႕..ဒါမွ မဟုတ္.. အသိအမွတ္ ျပဳ ခံ ရ ဖို႕... မက္မက္ ေမာေမာ ဆုေတာင္း ပဌနာ ျပဳ တတ္ ၾက သလို.. ..သူတပါးကို လည္း ကိုယ္ခ်င္း စာတတ္ ၾက ပါေစ..။
ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ ေျပာသလို.. ဒီမိုကေရစီ ဆိုတာ..လူသား တေယာက္ျခင္း ရဲ႕ ေမြးရာပါ လူ႕ဂုဏ္သိကၡာကို အသိအမွတ္ ျပဳ ျခင္း ပဲ ဆို တဲ့.. အဓိပၸါယ္ ဖြင့္ ဆို ခ်က္ အတိုင္း.. ဒီမိုကေရစီ ကို တန္ဖိုးထား ေလးစား တတ္ ၾက ပါေစ...
လို႕ သာ...။
( XXXX )
နာမည္ မခံ ရဲ လို႕.. း)
Credit : here
The Burmese military has clearly embarked on a policy of ridding the country of ethnic Rohingyasby any possible means. Official claims that the refugees are "illegal immigrants"-Asia WatchAn enclave is part of a country geographically separated from the main part by thesurrounding foreign territory. A great deal of works has been done by the military’scivilian collaborators on the province of Arakan (Rakhine province) claiming that there isthe existence of an enclave in Burma. Most prominent of the authors is Aye Chan. AyeChan, a native of Burma’s Arakan (Rakhine) province, says there is an enclave inArakan. (1) His work even outlines the common issues of dispute surrounding theRohingyas with the Rakhines. This doesn’t seem to be an ordinary enclave. This enclaveis Aye Chan’s portrayal of Burma's Rohingya people in the Mayu frontier of the Arakanstate. Aye Chan identifies the Rohingyas as thenon-nativ es of Burma who, he claims,illegally settled in this region of Burma’s North-Western province. This paper is adetailed review of the claims.
Aye Chan[1]
ျမန္မာ စစ္အစိုးရေခါင္းေဆာင္ ဗုိလ္ခ်ဳပ္မႉးႀကီး သန္းေရႊႏွင့္ အေပါင္းအပါမ်ား က်ဴးလြန္ထားသည့္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မႈ မ်ားအတြက္ အျပည္ျပည္ဆိုင္ရာ ရာဇ၀တ္မႈခံု႐ုံးတြင္ တရားစြဲဆိုႏုိင္ေရးကုိ ဦးတည္၍ ကုလသမဂၢ စံုစမ္းစစ္ေဆးေရး ေကာ္မရွင္ (COI) ဖြဲ႔စည္းရန္ အမ်ိဳးသမီးမ်ား အဖြဲ႔ခ်ဳပ္(ျမန္မာႏုိင္ငံ) (WLB)က ယေန႔ ေတာင္းဆိုလုိက္သည္။
“အမ်ိဳးသမီးမ်ားအတြက္ တရားမွ်တမႈကို ေဆာင္ၾကဥ္းပါ” အမည္ရသည့္ မွတ္တမ္း ဗီဒီယိုWLB က ထုိင္းႏုိင္ငံ ခ်င္းမိုင္ တကၠသိုလ္ International Center – IC ခန္းမ၌ “အမ်ိဳးသမီးမ်ားအတြက္ တရားမွ်တမႈကို ေဆာင္ၾကဥ္းပါ” အမည္ရသည့္ မွတ္တမ္း ဗီဒီယို အေခြ ထုတ္ေ၀ ျဖန္႔ခ်ိေရးႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္၍ သတင္းစာ ရွင္းလင္းပြဲ တရပ္ ျပဳလုပ္ၿပီး ယခုကဲ့သို႔ ေတာင္းဆိုလိုက္ျခင္း ျဖစ္သည္။
ယင္း ဗီဒီယိုေခြ၌ အစိုးရ စစ္တပ္က ကခ်င္၊ ကရင္ႏွင့္ရွမ္းျပည္နယ္မ်ားတြင္ ျဖစ္ပြားေနေသာ စစ္ပြဲမ်ားအတြင္း ေဒသခံအမ်ိဳးသမီးမ်ားကုိ လိင္ပုိင္းဆုိင္ရာ အဓမၼျပဳ က်င့္မႈမ်ား၊ ရာဇ၀တ္မႈ က်ဴးလြန္မႈမ်ားႏွင့္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ခ်ိဳးေဖာက္မႈမ်ားကုိ အဓိက မွတ္ တမ္းတင္ထားသည္။
“၂၀၁၀ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ ၿပီးတဲ့ ေနာက္ပိုင္းမွာ အခု အသစ္တက္လာတဲ့ အစိုးရက ဒီမိုကေရစီ ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲမႈ လုပ္ေနပါတယ္ လို႔ ေျပာေနတဲ့ အခိ်န္မွာ တဖက္မွာ ထိုးစစ္ေတြ ဆင္ေနတယ္၊ စစ္ပြဲေတြ ပိုၿပီးေတာ့ ျပင္းျပင္ထန္ထန္ ျဖစ္လာတဲ့ ေနရာ ေဒသ မွာ အမ်ဳိးသမီးေတြ အဓမၼျပဳက်င့္ခံရမႈေတြ ပိုမ်ားလာတယ္”ဟု WLBမွ သဘာပတိ အဖြဲ႔၀င္ ဂ်န္မြန္းေနလီ က ဧရာ၀တီသို႔ေျပာသည္။
WLB ၏ ထုတ္ျပန္ခ်က္တြင္လည္း ယင္းမွတ္တမ္းဗီဒီယိုသည္ အစိုးရ စစ္တပ္၏ စစ္ရာဇ၀တ္မႈ က်ဴးလြန္မႈမ်ား၊ လူသားမ်ိဳးႏြယ္ အေပၚ က်ဴးလြန္သည့္ ရာဇ၀တ္မႈမ်ားႏွင့္ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ကိုယ္တိုင္ႀကံဳေတြ႕ရသူမ်ား၏ အင္တာဗ်ဴးမ်ား အပါအ၀င္ အေထာက္ အထား ခိုင္လုံစြာျဖင့္ ႐ိုက္ကူးထားျခင္း ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ေဖာ္ျပထားသည္။
“ျမန္မာစစ္အစိုးရ အေနနဲ႔ အမ်ဳိးသမီးေတြအေပၚမွာ အတင္းအဓမၼျပဳက်င့္ မႈေတြအပါအ၀င္ အျခားလိင္ပုိင္းဆုိင္ရာအၾကမ္းဖက္ မႈေတြ အစီအစဥ္ခ် က်ဴးလြန္ ခြင့္ျပဳထားတယ္ဆိုတာကုိ ဒီမွတ္တမ္းေခြက ပိုၿပီးသက္ေသျပ ေနပါတယ္”ဟု WLB အေထြေထြ အတြင္းေရးမႉး ေဒၚတင္တင္ညိဳက ေျပာသည္။
ၿပီးခဲ့သည့္ ဇြန္လဆန္းပုိင္းကလည္း ကခ်င္ေဒသခံ အမ်ဳိးသမီး ၁၈ ဦး မုဒိန္းက်င့္ခံရၿပီး ၄ ဦး အသတ္ခံခဲ့ရေၾကာင္း၊ အစိုးရ၏ ေျချမန္တပ္ရင္း အမွတ္ ၄၃၇၊ ေျခလ်င္တပ္ရင္း အမွတ္၂၃၇ ရွိ စစ္သားမ်ားက က်ဴးလြန္ခဲ့ျခင္း ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ထိုင္းႏိုင္ငံရွိ ကခ်င္ အမ်ဳိးသမီး အစည္းအ႐ုံး (KWAT) က ထုတ္ျပန္ခဲ့သည္။
မတရားက်င့္ခံရသူတုိ႔မွာ မိုးေမာက္၊ မိုးညႇင္း၊ မန္စီ၊ ေဒါဖံုးယမ္ၿမိဳ႕နယ္မ်ားမွ ေဒသခံမ်ား ျဖစ္သည္ဟု KWAT ထုတ္ျပန္ခ်က္က ဆုိသည္။
ထိုသို႔ေသာ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ခ်ိဳးေဖာက္မႈမ်ားအတြက္ COI ဖြဲ႔စည္းေရးကို ျမန္မာ့ ဒီမုိကေရစီေခါင္းေဆာင္ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ ကလည္း ေထာက္ခံေၾကာင္း ေျပာၾကားထားသည္။
ဇြန္လ၂၂ ရက္က က်င္းပသည့္ အေမရိကန္ ေအာက္လႊတ္ေတာ္ အာရွႏွင့္ ပစိဖိတ္ေရးရာ ေကာ္မတီ၏ ျမန္မာ့အေရး ၾကားနာ ပြဲသုိ႔ေပးပို႔ေသာ ႀကိဳတင္အသံသြင္းထားသည့္ ဗီဒီယိုမိန္႔ခြန္းတြင္ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္က ယင္းသို႔ ေျပာၾကားျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္း လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးခ်ဳိးေဖာက္မႈ မည္ကဲ့သို႔ အေျခအေနရွိသည္ကုိ မွန္ကန္စြာ ေဖာ္ထုတ္ႏိုင္ေရး အတြက္ လူ႔အခြင့္ အေရး အထူးကိုယ္စားလွယ္ မစၥတာ ကင္တာနာ ေတာင္းဆုိထားသည့္ COI ဖြဲ႕စည္းေရးကို အေမရိကန္၊ ကေနဒါ အပါအ၀င္ ႏိုင္ငံေပါင္း ၁၆ ႏိုင္ငံက ေထာက္ခံထားသည္။
Credit : Irrawaddy News
ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ ျပည္သူ႔သမၼတႏိုင္ငံ၏ ၀န္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္ ရွိတ္ဟာဆီနာသည္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ သမၼတဦးသိန္းစိန္၏ ဖိတ္ၾကားခ်က္အရ ျမန္မာ ႏိုင္ငံသို႔ ဒီဇင္ဘာလအတြင္း လားေရာက္မည္ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ရန္ကုန္ၿမိဳ႕ရွိ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံဆိုင္ရာ ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ ႏိုင္ငံသံ႐ံုးမွ သိရသည္။
"၀န္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံကို လာေရာက္ပါမယ္။ ခရီးစဥ္က ဒီဇင္ဘာလ (၅) ရက္ကေန (၇) ရက္လို႔ စီစဥ္ထားပါတယ္" ဟု ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ ႏိုင္ငံသံ႐ံုးမွ တာ၀န္ရွိသူတစ္ဦးက ေအာက္တိုဘာလ (၂၈) ရက္တြင္ ေျပာသည္။
ခရီးစဥ္၏ အေသးစိတ္ အစီအစဥ္ကို ေရးဆြဲဆဲျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း ၎က ေျပာသည္။
ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ရွ္ႏိုင္ငံ ၀န္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္၏ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံခရီးစဥ္သတင္းသည္ International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLS) တြင္ျမန္မာ-ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံ ေရပိုင္နက္အျငင္းပြားမႈ အၿပီးသတ္ ၾကားနာအၿပီး တစ္လအၾကာတြင္ ထြက္ေပၚလာျခင္းျဖစ္ၿပီး ၂၀၁၂ ခုႏွစ္ အေစာပိုင္းတြင္ ခ်မွတ္မည့္ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံ ေရပိုင္နက္အျငင္းပြားမႈ စီရင္ခ်က္ ခ်မွတ္မႈမတိုင္မီ လအနည္းငယ္သာ လိုအပ္ေတာ့သည့္ အခ်ိန္တြင္ထြက္ေပၚလာျခင္းလည္း ျဖစ္သည္။
၀န္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္၏ ယခုခရီးစဥ္သည္ ျမန္မာ-ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံ ဆက္ဆံေရးတြင္ မ်က္ႏွာစာသစ္ ဖြင့္လွစ္လိမ့္မည္ဟု ေမွ်ာ္လင့္ ေၾကာင္း၀န္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္၏ ျပန္ၾကားေရးအတြင္း၀န္ကို ကိုးကား၍ ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ႏိုင္ငံ၏ မီဒီယာ The Financial Express ၀က္ဘ္ဆိုက္တြင္ ေဖာ္ျပထားသည္။
"၀န္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္ရွိတ္ဟာဆီနာရဲ႕ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ ခရီးစဥ္အၿပီးမွာ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံဆက္ဆံေရး မ်က္ႏွာစာသစ္တစ္ရပ္ ေပၚေပါက္လာမယ္လို႔ေမွ်ာ္လင့္တယ္"ဟု ျပန္ၾကားေရးအတြင္း၀န္ အဗၺဒူကာလမ္အာဇက္ က The Financial Express ကို ေျပာသည္။
အိမ္နီးခ်င္းႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံၾကား ဆက္ဆံေရး ခိုင္မာေစသည္ႏွင့္အမွ် ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံ၏ စီးပြားေရးအခြင့္အလမ္းမ်ား အျပန္အလွန္ ေဖာ္ထုတ္လုပ္ကိုင္ေရး ပိုမို အားေကာင္းလာမည္ဟု ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ ကုန္သည္မ်ားကယူဆေၾကာင္းလည္း အဆိုပါ၀က္ဘ္ဆိုက္တြင္ ေဖာ္ျပသည္။
ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ႏိုင္ငံသည္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ အဓိက ဆန္ကုန္သြယ္ဖက္ႏိုင္ငံျဖစ္ၿပီး ၀န္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္၏ခရီးစဥ္သည္ ဆန္ကုန္သြယ္ေရးအတြက္ အလားအလာ ေကာင္းျဖစ္သည္ဟု ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ ဆန္ကုန္သည္မ်ားအသင္းမွ အမႈေဆာင္ ဦးမ်ဳိးေအာင္က ေျပာသည္။
"ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္က ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံရဲ႕ အဓိက ဆန္၀ယ္ႏိုင္ငံပဲ။ ဒါေၾကာင့္ ၀န္ႀကီးခ်ဳပ္ရဲ႕ ခရီးစဥ္က ဆန္ကုန္သြယ္မႈအတြက္ အလားအလာ ေကာင္းလို႔ယူဆပါတယ္"ဟု ၎က ေျပာသည္။(စႏၵာလြင္ အတြဲ ၂၈ ၊ အမွတ္ ၅၄၂ ( ၄ - ၁၀ ၊ ၁၁ ၊ ၂၀၁၁)ျမန္မာတိုင္းမွ ကူယူေဖၚျပသည္)
ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္-ျမန္မာ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံ ထိပ္တန္းအဆင့္ တာ၀န္ရွိသူမ်ား၏ ခရီးစဥ္အေနျဖင့္ ၂၀၀၂ ခုႏွစ္၊ ဒီဇင္ဘာလအတြင္းက ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ေအးခ်မ္းသာယာေရးႏွင့္ ဖြံ႕ၿဖိဳးေရးေကာင္စီ ဥကၠ႒ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မႉးႀကီးသန္းေရႊ ေနာက္ဆံုး သြားေရာက္ခဲ့သည္။နအဖ စစ္အစိုးရ၏ ဒုတိယ အႀကီးအကဲ ဒုတိယဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မႉးႀကီး ေမာင္ေအးသည္ ၂၀၀၈ ခုႏွစ္၊ ေအာက္တိုဘာလတြင္ ဘဂၤလားေဒ့ခ်္ႏိုင္ငံသို႔ သြားေရာက္ကာ ႏွစ္ႏိုင္ငံ အေရးကိစၥမ်ားကိုေဆြးေႏြး ေျဖရွင္းခဲ့ၿပီးေနာက္ပိုင္း ဒုတိယဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီး ျမတ္ဟိန္းသည္ စစ္တပ္၏ ထိပ္တန္းေခါင္းေဆာင္ တဦးအျဖစ္ သြားေရာက္ျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။
Credit : Myanmar Times
Arakanese: Buddhist and Muslim communities of Burma
Physical Features: Relations between Buddhists and Muslims in this area had grown hostile under British rule, for the same economic and social reasons to which we referred above with regard to the whole of Burma, and the tension led to an explosion upon the evacuation of the British troops before the advancing Japanese forces. Gangs of Buddhist Arakanis in the southern part of the province, where Buddhist constitute a majority, raided Muslim villages and slaughtered part of the population.
Download Book here
Credit : Kaladan Press
Dr. Habib Siddiqui
From the responses we have seen thus far, it is quite obvious that the extreme racists and bigots within the Rakhine Buddhist community are running out of wits after my recent posting of the Rohingya Identity and Demography in the British Era. There I showed that the Rohingya people, far from the Rakhine unsubstantiated claims, are an indigenous group of the Arakan State of Burma who had settled there from time immemorial, and hundreds of years before the ancestors of today's Rakhines settled. Having analyzed the demographic data of the English colonial period, I also pointed out that the so-called influx to Arakan during the British era actually had more to do with the Rakhine population than any other ethnic/religious group, and that the growth within the Rohingya Muslim community was a natural one.
Unfortunately, as we have noticed time and again, the racists within the Burmese and Arakanese Rakhine communities are uncomfortable to consider any other possibility beyond their own myths which challenge such absurd chauvinism. Prejudice truly dies hard!
Consider, e.g., the case of racist Aye Chan who says he is 'tired of arguing' with us. His entire thesis is built around showing that nowhere within the British records the name Rohingya appeared, and as such, by default, Rohingya is a dead horse. He is unwilling to accept the characterization of Rohingyas under Muslim/Mohamadan/Musulman categories. Were the Rakhines categorized as Rakhines by the British? Are Aye Chan and his ilk aware of the two books written by British army officers: (i) BURMESE OUTPOST by Anthony Irwin, published by Collins in 1945, and (ii) DEFEAT INTO VICTORY by Field Marshal Viscount Slim (considered one of the best books written by a military general on World War II) published in 1956? In these two books the authors mentioned Muslims of Arakan as ‘Musulman Arakanese’ and the Buddhists as ‘Maughs’. (As can be seen even the name Rakhine did not appear in those books to describe the Maghs of Arakan.)
Unless, one is willing to accept that colonizers had their own ways of and rationalization for categorizing people, which may not totally agree with those of the colonized, there is little one can do to educate that moron. Look at the Spanish Conquistadors that came to colonize the Philippines where they came across indigenous Muslims who practiced Islam, similar to the practice of the Spanish (Moor) Muslims. To these new invaders, thus, the Filipino Muslims came to be named as Moors and later Moro Muslims. In the Dutch colonization of South Africa, the Indian community was put under the category of 'colored' people. They were not called Indian South Africans. Here in the USA, while there is no record of African-American heritage (as to where they were plucked out of), we may know a White person with his precise European heritage. Thus, governors Cuomo (father and son) of New York State of the USA are known as Italian-Americans. Within the conquered people in the USA and Canada, the natives were called Red Indians and later Native Indians, while those people never called themselves as such and were actually divided on many matters, language, religion, etc. Does such categorization by the English/French colonizers change the mere fact that Cherokees lived in the Americas before the Europeans subdued them? If today, the Cherokees would rather like to self-identify by their heritage - the Cherokee name - who can deny that right to them? Only an utterly extreme racist with no brains, and full of hatred and chauvinism, would deny that right.
And there are plenty of such examples in our world that we can cite about the Rohingya case. Will that educate a half-educated person when he refuses to grow up as a thinking man?
And still within many good hearted and well-meaning Rohingya Diaspora there is a call for having a debate with such obscene racists within the Rakhine commmunity. Here below I share my views on the question of a debate:
1. I prefer dialogue or discussion than a debate unless the latter can be held under a neutral venue and moderated/administered by an unbiased person. Still, since debate has everything to do with winning, even by ridiculing the other side's shallow (?) views, at the end it leaves behind a bad taste amongst the participants and their respective adherents, further widening the gap between the opposing parties. Hardly, debate has brought differing peoples together for a common cause. As such, if the objective is to let the other party know where each party stands, a discussion/sharing of info/dialogue is often a more prudent approach. In these days of information superhighway we can achieve this without a confrontational debate by sharing our writings/postings, and asking/answering probing or poignant questions/points for elaboration. So, e.g., when Aye Chan says "we are lying about Rohingya", we want to ask "show us where we lied" (just as Dr Bahar had done in his note to Aye Chan). Such a dialogue with an opposing side can be more fruitful than wasting people's time and money to organize a debate with a racist. If still money and time are no problems a better way to spend such would be to hold our own seminars to educate folks on the either side to learn/share without allowing racists like Aye Chan to get a free ride at our cost. As I stated before, if he is all serious about a debate with us, let him organize it (without spending our money), and we shall be glad to take him up anywhere in the globe (of course, outside Burma). He cannot have a free ride at our cost!
2. A frame of reference is very important for any such info sharing including a debate. Without such, the exercise may become a mindless one. If, e.g., demography in the post-1826 era is the issue, let's make it clear in the beginning and that way the history of who came earlier to Arakan is not a debating issue to bite upon. As the tens of articles and books have been written, including those by Syed Ashraf Alam, AFK Jilani, BaShin, Nurul Islam - UK and Ctg., Abid Bahar and many others - if anyone is interested to learn the truth on the Rohingya issues of our time there are plenty to educate oneself with. On the other hand, if one is close-minded, no words of mouth in a debate/discussion/dialogue would do any good as it has failed to even educate one from written words. At the most they can create doubt and that too, only under non-threatening environment possible outside a debate.
3. The more important question, therefore, is - what we gain and what we lose from such an interaction with a known racist like Aye Chan? If it is a zero-sum activity, we should shun any such temptation. Do we really expect Aye Chan to all on a sudden change his mind by participating in a debate with us, something that he could have been enlightened on his own through our writings? I seriously doubt that possibility.
4. What is value-adding for our purpose? Can we find moderate elements within the Rakhaing to accept or consider our side of the history, and share our findings so that he/she can start the groundwork within his/her community for a paradigm shift away from racism and hatred toward inclusion and acceptance? If we don't have any moderate Rakhine intellectual or politician or opinion maker, we would better serve the cause of the Rohingya by reaching out to moderate Burmans who can start that process of reconciliation or paradigm shift. If that also looks rather bleak, we may have to do what other such threatened minorities in the world have done, which would include knocking on the doors of power brokers in the global scene. For that we can study the history of newly emerged countries like East Timor and South Sudan, as a starting point. How lucky we shall be there, given the fact that what was possible for those territories may not excite xian overlords of our time when it comes to Arakan, that is closer to the Chinese domain of influence? Allah knows the best! But it is the last option we shall be left with minus the two earlier options.
Our best approach, IMHO, is to reach out to democratic minded Burmese that are open-minded and are willing to giving it a try towards federalism and democracy, which are based on universal values and laws. The inclusion of Rohingya in Burma would be a win-win formula for the divided country, while the exclusion can only make it worse - not only morally but also economically. Our time served there to promote the Rohingya cause would be more fruitful than wasting time with Aye Chan. Who is Aye Chan anyway? He is a dishonest academic, a provocateur and a charlatan trying to masquerade as an intellectual for his racist extremist section of the people. Even if he were to accept Rohingya citizenship does he have any influence to repeal the racist 1982 Citizenship Law of Burma? I don't think so. Guys like him are used as pimps and prostitutes by illiberal undemocratic regimes to further their draconian measures, and then left to their repulsive, evil, pitiful selves.
5. What we truly need from our leadership is a strategy to repeal that Citizenship Law that is hemmed with short-term tactical moves that would allow the Rohingya people of Burma to live as a free people that is equal with other citizens of Burma. Inclusion not rejection. May God help us all in that endeavor!
ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္သမၼတက ထုတ္ျပန္လိုက္တဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံေရးပါတီမွတ္ပံုတင္ျခင္း ဥပေဒျပင္ဆင္ခ်က္ဟာ ထူးထူးျခားျခား မရွိဘူးလို႔ အမ်ိဳးသားဒီမိုကေရစီအင္အားစု (NDF) ပါတီက ေျပာပါတယ္။ ၂၀၁၀ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ မတိုင္ခင္တုန္းက ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ပုန္ကန္မႈနဲ႔ ျပစ္ဒဏ္က်ခံထားရသူေတြဟာ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ၀င္ဖို႔ အသနားခံစာ တင္ရမယ္ဆိုတဲ့အခ်က္ ထုတ္ျပန္ထားတာမို႔ အခုျပင္ဆင္ခ်က္ထဲမွာ အက်ံဳး၀င္မႈရွိမရွိ ရွင္းရွင္းလင္းလင္း မရွိေသးဘူးလို႔လည္း NDF ပါတီက ဦးခင္ေမာင္ေဆြက ေျပာပါတယ္။ ဒီအေျခအေန အျပည့္အစံုကို မသင္းသီရိက တင္ျပထားပါတယ္။
ႏို၀င္ဘာ ၄ ရက္ေန႔စြဲနဲ႔ ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္သမၼတ ဦးသိန္းစိန္က ႏိုင္ငံေရးပါတီမွတ္ပံုတင္ျခင္း ဥပေဒျပင္ဆင္ခ်က္ဟာ ႏိုင္ငံပါတီေတြအဖို႔ လႈပ္သာလူးသာအေျခအေနတစ္ခု ရွိလာတာကလြဲရင္ ထူးျခားတဲ့အခ်က္ေတြ မပါဘူးလို႔ အမ်ိဳးသားဒီမိုကေရစီအင္အားစု (NDF) ပါတီက ဦးခင္ေမာင္ေဆြက ေျပာပါတယ္။
By Zin Linn>>
Burma’s President Thein Sein has signed an amendment law on political parties in a noticeable effort to persuade National League for Democracy party led by democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi to reregister as a party recognizing the new political structure.
President Thein Sein signed the amendments to the Political Party Registration Law on Friday as senior US diplomats and a special UN envoy were ending their visits pushing his government to drive forward with democratic reforms.
Burma’s state-run TV and newspaper publicized on Friday that President Thein Sein has signed a law that amends three key areas of the Political Party Registration Law. Both houses of the Burmese Parliament had earlier endorsed the amendments.
In the previous law the wording said that all political parties must “protect” the State’s Constitution. In the amendment law the word “safeguard” was changed to “respect and abide” the Constitution.
According to the new law, previous two clauses were also changed. One clause said that serving prisoners are restricted from being a member of a political party and another clause said that a political party needs to contest in three parliamentary seats at least in an election.
Many analysts believe that the aim of amending the law is to pave a way for the National League for Democracy reregistering as a legal party. If so, the NLD may take part in the upcoming by-elections that would be the first electoral contest of its public reputation within a two-decade time.
Thein Sein government seems to take advantage of bringing Suu Kyi’s party back into the current parliamentary structure which would make the government healthier authenticity at home and overseas.
At the same time, Burma is expected to release at least 600 political prisoners in the coming days, government and opposition sources said, as part of an amnesty program by President Thein Sein’s nominally civilian government. A top government official, who asked to remain anonymous told Radio Free Asia (Burmese Service) in an interview Thursday that the release would likely come next week.
“I expect the release date will be Nov. 10, which is the important Buddhist Full Moon holiday,” he said.
“Student leaders Min Ko Naing and Ko Ko Gyi, and Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD) leader Kun Htun Oo are on the list. The list of those to be released has been submitted to the National Defense and Security Council by the president,” the source said.
Another official, also speaking anonymously, said he believed the release would “benefit national reconciliation.”
The opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) claims that several hundred political prisoners are yet to be freed. Suu Kyi and Labor Minister Aung Kyi have met several times to talk about the political prisoner situation.
Tin Oo, vice chairman of the NLD, told RFA that the two sides had been making considerable steps forward in resolving their differences, indicating that releases were expected the coming week.
The government visible moves – amending the party registration law, planning to free more political prisoners and some soft stances on media freedom – are believed to be a step ahead toward change. But, there are many unconvinced dissident groups inside and outside of the country.
According to those groups, Burmese government eagerly wants lifting of Western sanctions, financial assistance from monetary institutions and supporting of ASEAN Chairmanship in 2014. So, to fulfill its needs in a short period, there is no other way except to persuade Suu Kyi joining on its boat.
Sources close to the NLD also predicted that Suu Kyi and some of her party members are expected to take part in the upcoming by-election with full strength.
The NLD spokesman Nyan Win said the party was likely to get re-registered under an amended party registration law that removed clauses the NLD had pointed out as inappropriate and undemocratic.
In an interview with Radio Free Asia (Burmese Service), Nyan Win said that he considers she may stand in a by-election if the law was amended. “I personally want her to do so,” he added.
Even though, if she would decide to stand in the by-election after the law was amended, she may need to have the consent of the NLD Central Executive Committee. The next by-elections seem to be held belatedly this year.
According to some analysts, the government’s reforms, including a rare meeting between Aung San Suu Kyi and President Thein Sein and the recent release of over 200 political prisoners, are intended for shedding Burma’s friendless situation and giving it some consistency with the international community.
However, there are many democracy-supporters who dare not believe the Thein Sein government’s current steps forward as real change. Because, the civil war in Kachin State has been going on under full-scaled offensives and government’s soldiers are still abusing basic human rights widely. Besides, there are more than 20,000 war-refugees and IDPs along Sino-Burma border without having any humanitarian assistance due to brutal attacks by government’s soldiers.
Credit: Zin Linn
ဒီတပတ္ ျမန္မာ့အေရး မ်က္ေမွာက္ေရးရာ သံုးသပ္ခ်က္အစီအစဥ္မွာ သမၼတဦးသိန္းစိန္ အစိုးရဟာ တိုင္းရင္းသားျပႆနာ ေျပလည္ေရးအတြက္ တိုင္းရင္းသားလက္နက္ကိုင္ အင္အားစုေတြနဲ႔ ေတြ႔ဆံုေဆြးေႏြးေရး၊ ကမ္းလွမ္းတာေတြ ၾကားေနရပါတယ္။ ဒါေပမဲ့ တုိင္းရင္းသားအင္အားစုေတြက တဖြဲ႔ခ်င္း မေဆြးေႏြးႏိုင္ဘဲ တိုင္းရင္းသားအင္အားစုအားလံုးကို ကိုယ္စားျပဳတဲ့အဖြဲ႔အေနနဲ႔သာ ေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ ေတာင္းဆိုေနၾကပါတယ္။ ဒီလိုမ်ဳိး အစိုးရရဲ ႔ ကမ္းလွမ္းခ်က္နဲ႔ တိုင္းရင္းသားေတြရဲ ႔ ေတာင္းဆိုခ်က္ ကြာဟေနတာကို ေျပလည္ေအာင္ညိႇႏိႈင္းလို႔ရမယ့္ အလားအလာ ရွိပါသလား။ ေကအန္ယူ - ကရင္အမ်ဳိးသားအစည္းအရံုးအဖြဲ႔ အတြင္းေရးမွဴး ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြနဲ႔ စစ္အစိုးရကိုယ္စား တုိင္းရင္းသားအင္အားစုေတြနဲ႔ ေတြ႔ဆံုေစ့စပ္ေဆြးေႏြးခဲ့ဘူးသူ ဗိုလ္မွဴးေဟာင္းေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္တို႔ကို ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ က ဆက္သြယ္ေမးျမန္း ေဆြးေႏြးသံုးသပ္ တင္ျပထားပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ေကအန္ယူ က ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ကို အရင္ေမးခ်င္ပါတယ္။ တိုင္းရင္းသားေတြကို အခု သမၼတဦးသိန္းစိန္ အစိုးရက ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ ေစ့စပ္တယ္၊ ဘာညာဆိုတဲ့ သတင္းေတြ ၾကားရပါတယ္။ အဲဒီလို ကမ္းလွမ္းတဲ့အခါတိုင္းမွာ တုိင္းရင္းသားေတြဘက္က တဦးခ်င္း တပါတီခ်င္း ေဆြးေႏြးတာကို လက္မခံႏိုင္ဘူး။ အဖြဲ႔အစည္းေတြအားလံုး စုေပါင္းဖြဲ႔စည္းထားတဲ့ အဖြဲ႔အစည္းရွိတယ္။ အဲဒီ အဖြဲ႔အစည္းက ကိုယ္စားျပဳၿပီး ေဆြးေႏြးခ်င္တယ္လို႔ ေျပာၾကားပါတယ္။ အဲဒါ ဟုတ္ပါသလား။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ ဟုတ္ပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ဘာေၾကာင့္ ဒီ ခံယူခ်က္ကို ဆရာတို႔ ထားရတယ္ဆိုတာကို အက်ဥ္းခ်ဳံးေျပာျပပါ။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ က်ေနာ္တို႔ တုိင္းျပည္ကို က်ေနာ္တို႔လူမ်ဳိးကို တည္ေဆာက္တုန္းက ပင္လံုစာခ်ဳပ္မွာ တုိင္ပင္ၿပီး တည္ေဆာက္ခဲ့ၾကတာပါ။ ၆၂၊ ၆၃ တုန္းကလည္း သံုးပါတီ ေဆြးေႏြးပြဲတို႔၊ မဒညတ နဲ႔ ေဆြးေႏြးပြဲတုိ႔ကို ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ႀကီးေနဝင္း လက္ထက္မွာ လက္ခံေဆြးေႏြးခဲ့တာ ရွိပါတယ္။ အဲဒီလို ေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔အတြက္ ပိုၿပီးေကာင္းတာက အားလံုးကို အပစ္ရပ္ထားဖို႔အတြက္ အဲဒီအေျခအေနကို ဖန္တီးဖို႔ နံပတ္တစ္က အလိုအေလ်ာက္ၿပီးသြားမယ္။ ေနာက္တခုက က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ မ်က္နာစံုညီ စည္းေဝးတဲ့အခါ အဓိက ေဆြးေႏြးမွာက ႏိုင္ငံေရးကို ေဆြးေႏြးမွာျဖစ္တဲ့အတြက္ေၾကာင့္ တူညီတဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံေရးအျမင္ေတြ အဲဒီမွာ မ်က္နာစံုညီတိုင္ပင္ၿပီး ေဆြးေႏြးႏိုင္မယ္ဆိုတဲ့ ရည္မွန္းခ်က္ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ဒီကိစၥနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ရဲ ႔ သေဘာထားကို သိခ်င္ပါတယ္။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ တိုင္းရင္းသားေတြအကုန္လံုး UNFA ဆိုတဲ့ အေနနဲ႔ ပထမဦးဆံုး ေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ကေတာ့ က်ေနာ္အေနနဲ႔ သိပ္မျဖစ္ႏိုင္ဘူးလို႔ ျမင္ပါတယ္။ က်ေနာ့္အေတြ႔အႀကံဳအရ ၁၉၉၀ ေနာက္ပိုင္း ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးေဆြးေႏြးပြဲေတြမွာ အလားတူပါပဲ ေကအန္ယူ ဘက္ကေန ဒီေအဘီ ဆိုၿပီး တင္းခံၿပီး ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးေဆြးေႏြးမႈေတြ လုပ္ခဲ့တာ ရွိပါတယ္။ သို႔ေသာ္ ပထမဦးဆံုး ေကအိုင္ေအ ပဲထြက္လာတယ္။ ဦးႏိုင္ေရႊက်င္ရဲ ႔ မြန္အုပ္စု ပဲထြက္လာတယ္။ ေနာက္ပိုင္းမွာ ေကအန္ယူ ကိုယ္တိုင္လည္း တဖြဲ႔ခ်င္းလာၿပီး ေဆြးေႏြးရတဲ့ အေနအထားေတြ ရွိခဲ့ဘူးတဲ့ အေနအထားေတြရွိခဲ့ပါတယ္။ က်ေနာ္ ေျပာခ်င္တာက ပထမပိုင္းအေနနဲ႔ တိုင္းရင္းသားလက္နက္ကိုင္ အဖြဲ႔ေတြအားလံုးအေနနဲ႔ မိမိလက္နက္ကို မိမိကိုင္ၿပီး အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရးကို အရင္ဆံုး ရယူသင့္ပါတယ္။ ဒုတိယအပိုင္းေနၾကမွ အားလံုးေျမေပၚ ေရာက္လာၾကၿပီဆိုတဲ့အခါၾကမွ တူညီတဲ့ ဘံုလမ္းစဥ္တခုကို ခ်မွတ္ၿပီးေတာ့ အစိုးရကို ႏိုင္ငံေရးအရ ေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ကို တြန္းအားေပးသြားဖို႔ လုိပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ ေျပာတဲ့အထဲမွာ အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရးအဆင့္ကိုေတာ့ တဖြဲ႔ခ်င္းအေနနဲ႔ ေဆြးေႏြးသင့္တယ္။ အကုန္လံုး အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္ၿပီး ေျမေပၚကို တရားဝင္ေရာက္လာတဲ့အခါမွ ႏိုင္ငံေရးကိစၥကို အားလံုးစုၿပီး ေဆြးေႏြးပါလို႔ ဆိုပါတယ္။ ဒီကိစၥကို ဘာေျပာလုိပါသလဲ ဆရာေစာလွေငြ တုိ႔က။ အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရးအဆင့္ကို ႏွစ္ဖြဲ႔ခ်င္း လုပ္လို႔မရဘူးလား။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရးနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္လို႔ရွိရင္ တဖြဲ႔ခ်င္းကို လုပ္ခဲ့ၿပီးပါၿပီ။ အဲဒီ လုပ္ခဲ့ၿပီးတဲ့အေပၚမွာလည္း က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ ႏိုင္ငံေရးေဆြးေႏြးပဲြကို မေရာက္ခဲ့ပါဘူး။ အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရး တဖြဲ႔ခ်င္းလုပ္ၿပီး က်န္တဲ့အဖြဲ႔ေတြကို သူတုိ႔က ဆက္တိုက္ၿပီးေတာ့ အဲဒီကတပ္ကို တျခားေနရာမွာ တိုက္ေနတာပဲ။ အခုလည္းပဲ ဝ နဲ႔ မိုင္းလဘက္မွာ ရပ္ထားၿပီး အဲဒီကတပ္ကို ကခ်င္ကို တိုက္ေနတာပဲ။ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ ရပ္ယူခဲ့တုန္းကလည္း ေကအန္ယူတဖြဲ႔တည္းက်န္ခဲ့တဲ့ေနာက္မွာ တဖြဲ႔တည္းေဆြးေႏြးစရာအေၾကာင္းရွိလို႔ ေဆြးေႏြးခဲ့တာ ျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ အဲဒီေနာက္မွ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔က တဖြဲ႔တည္းလည္း ေဆြးေႏြးလို႔ရတယ္။ စုေပါင္းၿပီးေတာ့လည္း ေဆြးေႏြးလို႔ရတယ္။ စုေပါင္းၿပီး ေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ အမ်ားက ဆႏၵရွိမယ္မယ္ဆိုရင္လည္း စုေပါင္းေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ကို ပထမဦးစားေပးမယ္။ အဲဒီလုိမွ မေဆြးေႏြးဘဲ မယံုၾကည္လို႔ တဖြဲ႔တဖြဲ႔ထြက္သြားလို႔ရွိရင္ ခါတိုင္းလို႔လုပ္ရင္ က်ေနာ္တို႔က ေနာက္ဆံုးအေနနဲ႔ ေဆြးေႏြးမႈဆိုတာ ဘယ္နည္းနဲ႔မဆို ေဆြးေႏြးတာပဲ။ အဓိကကေတာ့ ျပႆနာရွင္းဖို႔ပါ။ ဒီလိုျပႆနာ ေျဖရွင္းတဲ့ေနရာမွာ အင္အားရွိတဲ့လူ။ ဥပမာ သေဘာေကာင္းမႈနဲ႔ ရက္ေရာမႈကို ျပသရမယ္။ သေဘာထားႀကီးသူေတြအေနနဲ႔ အဲဒီလို မျပသဘဲ ေတာက္ေလွ်ာက္ ဒီလုိပဲ တုိက္ပြဲေတြ တိုတိုတဖံု က်ယ္က်ယ္တမ်ဳိးနဲ႔ လုပ္ေန၊ လုပ္လာခဲ့တာေတြက မ်ားလာေတာ့ ဒီသင္ခန္းစာေတြအေနကေန က်ေနာ္တို႔က စုေပါင္းေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ကို ျပန္တိုင္တာျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ပထမဦးဆံုးကေတာ့ အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရးကို အရင္ေၾကညာရမွာေပါ့။ တည္တည္ေျပာရမယ္ဆိုရင္ အစိုးရဘက္က။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ ဟုတ္တယ္။ တခုတည္းတၿပိဳင္တည္း အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရးကို ေၾကညာရမွာျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ၿပီးေတာ့မွ ေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ကိစၥေျပာမယ္။ ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ … အဲဒါေကာ အာဏာပိုင္ေတြအေနနဲ႔ အခက္အခဲ ရွိပါသလား။
ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ ။ ။ အခက္အခဲ မရွိပါဘူး။ အလားတူပဲ ေကအန္ယူ၊ ေကအိုင္အို တို႔နဲ႔ ယခင္လုပ္စဥ္တုန္းကလည္း အစိုးရဘက္က အရင္ဆံုး အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲခဲ့ပါတယ္။ ရပ္စဲတယ္ဆိုတာ တရားဝင္ထုတ္ျပန္တာလည္း ရွိတယ္။ မထုတ္ျပန္တာလည္း ရွိတယ္။ ရပ္စဲပါတယ္။ က်ေနာ္ တခု သတိေပးခ်င္တာက အရင္အေျခအေနနဲ႔ အခုအေျခအေနနဲ႔ကေတာ့ နည္းနည္းေတာ့ ကြာသြားပါၿပီ။ အဲဒါက အျခားမဟုတ္ဘူး။ အရင္အေျခအေနတုန္းက ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္နဲ႔ အန္အယ္လ္ဒီ တို႔က အခုလို လြတ္လြတ္လပ္လပ္ လႈပ္ရွားခြင့္အေနအထားမ်ဳိးမရွိခဲ့ပါဘူး။ ေနာက္တခုက က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ ေခတ္အခါတုန္းက ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ နဲ႔ အန္အယ္လ္ဒီ ကို လက္ရွိ အရင္တုန္းက ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးရယူထားတဲ့ လက္နက္ကိုင္အဖြဲ႔ေတြ မေတြ႔ရဘူးဆိုတဲ့ ႏႈတ္မိန္႔နဲ႔ ကန္႔သတ္ခဲ့ဘူးတာေတြ ရွိခဲ့ဘူးပါတယ္။ အခုအခ်ိန္မွာေတာ့ တိုင္းရင္းသားလက္နက္ကိုင္ေတြ အဖြဲ႔ေတြ ေျမေပၚတက္လာရင္ေတာ့ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္တို႔အဖြဲ႔နဲ႔ ပူးေပါင္းၿပီးမွ ႏိုင္ငံေရးအရ ေတာင္းဆိုမယ္ဆိုရင္ေတာ့ အလားအလာေကာင္းေတြ အမ်ားႀကီးရွိလိမ့္မယ္လုိ႔ ျမင္ပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ရဲ ႔ အခန္းက႑ကို အာဏာပိုင္ေတြက ဒီကိစၥမွာ ခြင့္ျပဳမယ္ ထင္ပါသလား။
ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ ။ ။ သူတုိ႔အေနနဲ႔ ခြင့္ျပဳရမယ္ ထင္ပါတယ္။ ဒီေလာက္ေတာင္မွ လိုက္လိုက္ေလ်ာေလ်ာ လုပ္ထားၿပီးရင္ေတာ့ ဒီဥစၥာေတြကို ခြင့္ျပဳရလိမ့္မယ္လို႔ ျမင္ပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ အဲဒီေတာ့ ဆရာေစာလွေငြ … ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္တုိ႔ကိုယ္တုိင္ ပါဝင္ၿပီး ေစ့စပ္ေပးမယ္ဆိုရင္ေကာ ဘယ္လိုေနပါသလဲ။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ က်ေနာ္ထင္ပါတယ္။ အခုေလာေလာဆယ္ ျပည္သူ႔လႊတ္ေတာ္ထဲမွာ တုိင္းရင္းသားေရးရာနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္ၿပီး ေစ့စပ္ေဆြးေႏြးဖို႔ကိစၥနဲ႔ ေကာ္မတီဖြဲ႔တဲ့ေနရာမွာေတာင္မွ ပါသင့္ပါထိုက္တဲ့ လူရိုေသ၊ ရွင္ရိုေသ ပုဂၢိဳလ္ေတြပါဖို႔ ေတာင္းတာကိုေတာင္မွ မေပးဘဲနဲ႔။ က်ေနာ္ထင္တယ္ ဒီကိစၥက စိတ္ကူးယဥ္ပဲ ျဖစ္တယ္လို႔ ထင္ပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ဟုတ္ကဲ့ … ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္။
ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ ။ ။ မွန္ပါတယ္။ ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ေျပာတာကို ေထာက္ခံပါတယ္။ အခုလုပ္ေနတဲ့ ဦးေအာင္ေသာင္းတို႔၊ ကိုသိန္းေဇာ္တို႔ဆိုတာက ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးႀကီးသန္းေရႊရဲ ႔ လက္ရင္းတပည္ေတြပါ။ ဒီလို ပုဂၢိဳလ္မ်ဳိးေတြဟာ အရိပ္အေငြ႔ေတြအားလံုး အခုထိ ရွိေနတုန္းပါ။ ဒီလူေတြေပၚမွာေတာ့ က်ေနာ္လည္း မေထာက္ခံပါဘူး။ တျခား ရွင္ရိုေသ၊ လူရိုေသ ပုဂၢိဳလ္မ်ားကို ပါဖို႔ေတာ့ တိုင္းရင္းသားလက္နက္ကိုင္အဖြဲ႔ေတြအေနနဲ႔ ေတြ႔တဲ့အခါမွာ ေတာင္းဆိုဖို႔ လိုပါမယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ တခုလံုးကို ၿခံဳေျပာမယ္ဆိုရင္ေတာ့ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးကို အမွန္တကယ္ လိုလားတဲ့စိတ္ဆႏၵ political will လို႔ ေခၚတဲ့ဟာ အာဏာပိုင္ေတြအားလံုးကို လႊမ္ၿခံဳေျပာမယ္ဆိုရင္ ရွိလာၿပီလို႔ ယူဆလို႔ရမလား။ ယူဆႏိုင္သလား။
ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ ။ ။ အဲဒီလိုေတာ့ ယူဆႏိုင္ပါတယ္။ တိုင္းရင္းသားလက္နက္ကိုင္အဖြဲ႔ေတြ ရွိေနသမွ်ေတာ့ ျမန္မာျပည္ႀကီးဟာ ဘယ္လိုမွ ဒီမုိကေရစီႏိုင္ငံပဲျဖစ္ျဖစ္ တုိးတက္ဖြံ႔ၿဖိဳးဖို႔ပဲျဖစ္ျဖစ္ မျဖစ္ႏိုင္ဘူးဆိုတဲ့ အျမင္မ်ဳိးက လြန္ခဲ့တဲ့ ႏွစ္ (၂၀) ေလာက္ကတည္းက ရွိခဲ့တဲ့အျမင္မ်ဳိးပါ။ အခုထိလည္း ရွိေနတုန္းပါ။ အလားတူပဲ လက္ရွိေခါင္းေဆာင္ပိုင္းမွာလည္း တုိင္းရင္းသားလက္နက္ကိုင္အဖြဲ႔ေတြနဲ႔ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးလိုလားတဲ့လူေတြ အမ်ားအျပားရွိပါတယ္။ မလုပ္ခ်င္တဲ့လူေတြလည္း အမ်ားအျပားရွိပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ဆရာေစာလွေငြ တုိ႔ကလည္း ဒီအာဏာပိုင္ေတြထဲမွာ ေတာ္ေတာ္မ်ားမ်ားဟာ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးအမွန္တကယ္ တည္ေဆာက္လိုၾကတယ့္ စိတ္ဆႏၵရွိတယ္ဆိုတာကို လက္ခံပါသလား။ အဲဒီအဆင့္အထိကို လက္မခံႏိုင္ဘူးလား။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ အာဏာပိုင္ေတြထဲမွာ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးလိုလားတဲ့လူေတြက အခုမွ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။ အစဥ္အဆက္မွာလည္း ရွိပါလိမ့္မယ္။ အနည္းနဲ႔အမ်ားကေတာ့။ ဒါေပမဲ့ အဲဒါက ျပႆနာ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။ တကယ္ စြဲၿမဲ၊ သံမိႈစြဲထားတဲ့ ခ်ဳပ္ကိုင္ထားတဲ့ စနစ္က ျပႆနာပါ။ အဲဒီ စနစ္နဲ႔ ဖြဲ႔စည္းပံုအေျခခံ ဥပေဒမ်ဳိးဆိုတာေတြက legal ဆိုးေတြက ျပႆနာပါ။ ဒီ legal ဆိုးေတြေပၚမွာ က်ေနာ္တို႔က ဝင္လိုက္တာနဲ႔ တၿပိဳင္တည္း national interest, national security တို႔နဲ႔ အခ်ဳပ္အျခာ တည္ၿမဲေရးဆိုတာေတြနဲ႔ ဝင္လိုက္တာနဲ႔တၿပိဳင္တည္း ဒီဘက္က သြားတဲ့လူေတြက ေခါင္းငံုၿပီးေတာ့၊ ဟုိဘက္က ျပဳသမွ် ႏုၿပီး လုိက္ဖို႔ တေၾကာင္းတည္းရွိတဲ့ကိစၥကို က်ေနာ္က အဲဒါမ်ဳိးကို သိပ္စိတ္မဝင္စားပါဘူး။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ဆိုလိုတဲ့သေဘာက ဘာေတြျပင္သင့္သလဲ။ ပထမဦးဆံုးအေနနဲ႔ ဦးေစာလွေငြတုိ႔က ဒီလူေတြအကုန္လံုး ဖယ္ပစ္လိုက္တာဆိုတာကေတာ့ ျဖစ္ခ်င္မွျဖစ္မွာေပါ့။ ဒါေပမဲ့လည္း ၂၀၀၈ ဥပေဒကို မလိုခ်င္ဘူးဆိုတဲ့ သေဘာလား။ တုိင္းရင္းသားေတြအေပၚ ေပးထားတဲ့ အခြင့္အေရးက ဘယ္လုိပါေသာ ဥပေဒျဖစ္ရမယ္။ အဲဒီလို လိုခ်င္တဲ့ အခ်က္ေတြ နည္းနည္းရွိရင္ အရွင္းဆံုးေျပာပါ။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔က ေျပာထားၿပီးပါၿပီ ၂၀၀၈ ဖြဲ႔စည္းပံု ဥပေဒကို မလိုခ်င္ပါဘူး။ အထူးသျဖင့္ ၂၀၀၈ ဥပေဒဖြဲ႔စည္းပံုထဲမွာ အခ်ိန္မေရြး တပ္မေတာ္က အာဏာျပန္သိမ္းႏိုင္တဲ့ လံုၿခံဳေရးနဲ႔ ကာကြယ္ေရးအဖြဲ႔အစည္းကေန သမၼတနဲ႔ လႊတ္ေတာ္အေပၚ အၿမဲတမ္းရွိေနတယ္အရာမ်ဳိးေတြ ရွိေနၿပီး တျခားအပိုင္းေတြမွာလည္း လူ႔အခြင့္အေရးေတြ၊ တုိင္းရင္းသား အခြင့္အေရးေတြနဲ႔ ပတ္သက္တဲ့ အာမခံခ်က္ေတြ ဒီမိုကေရစီ ရပိုင္ခြင့္ေတြက ခိုင္ခိုင္မာမာ မရွိတဲ့အခ်က္ေတြ ။ အဲဒီအပိုင္းေတြ ရွိေနသမွ် ကာလပတ္လံုး အဲဒီေဘာင္အတြင္းကို ဝင္သြားၿပီး အဲဒီေဘာင္အတြင္းမွာ လုပ္ရမယ္ဆိုရင္ ဟိုတုန္းကနဲ႔ ဘာမွမထူးပါဘူး။ ဒါက အပစ္ရပ္ေရး၊ အပစ္ရပ္ၿပီး ဖြ႔ံၿဖိဳးေရးလုပ္၊ ဖြံ႔ၿဖိဳးေရးလုပ္ၿပီးေတာ့ ဥပေဒအတြင္းကို လိုက္တယ္ဆိုရင္။ ဟိုအရင္တုန္းကတည္းက ေတာ္လွန္ေရးမလုပ္လည္း ရတာပဲ။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ အဲဒီေတာ့ ၂၀၀၈ ဥပေဒထဲက အခုနေျပာတဲ့ အခ်က္အလက္ေတြကို တရားဥပေဒေဘာင္အတြင္းက ဝင္ၿပီး ေဆာင္ရြက္စရာ၊ အေျဖရွာစရာ။ အမ်ဳိးသားဒီမုိကေရစီအဖြဲ႔ခ်ဳပ္နဲ႔ ပူးေပါင္းၿပီးေတာ့ တျခားတုိင္းရင္းသားအဖြဲ႔အစည္းေတြနဲ႔ ပူးေပါင္းၿပီးေတာ့ လုပ္ႏိုင္စရာအေၾကာင္းမရွိဘူးလို႔ ဦးေစာလွေငြတို႔ ထင္တယ္ေပါ့။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ ဟုတ္တယ္ က်ေနာ္တို႔က အဲဒီလုိပဲ legal fold အတြင္းမွာ ဝင္လုပ္မယ္ဆိုရင္ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔အတြက္ လုပ္ႏိုင္စရာ မရွိပါဘူး။ အခုေတာင္မွာ ေထာင္တြင္းမွာရွိတဲ့ ႏိုင္ငံေရးအက်ဥ္းသမားေတြကိုေတာင္မွ … တစတစနဲ႔ ကစားၿပီး လႊတ္ေနတဲ့အေပၚမွာ သူတုိ႔လက္ထဲမွာ ဆုပ္လည္းဆုပ္ရတယ္။ ေျဖလည္းေျဖလို႔ရတဲ့ လူေတြ။ အၿငိဳးအာဂတမရွိဘဲနဲ႔ ရက္ရက္ေရာေရာနဲ႔ က်က်နန သေဘာထားႀကီး ျပသမယ္ဆိုၿပီး မျပသဘဲနဲ႔ လက္နက္ကိုင္တိုက္ေနတဲ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔အေနအထားက legal fold ထဲေရာက္သြားရင္ ဘာျဖစ္မလဲဆိုတာ စဥ္းစားလို႔ရပါတယ္။ ေရာက္ခဲ့ဘူးတဲ့လူေတြလည္း မေရာက္ခင္ကတမ်ဳိး ေရာက္တဲ့အခါတမ်ဳိး ခံလိုက္ရတာကို လက္ေတြ႔ျပသေနၿပီပဲ။ တခ်ိန္လံုးျဖစ္တဲ့ ျပႆနာက ဒီျပႆနာပါ။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ဟုတ္ကဲ့ခင္မ်ား။ ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ … ၾကားတဲ့အတုိင္းပါပဲ။ သူတို႔ဘက္က သံသယရွိတာကိုလည္း အျပစ္တင္စရာလည္း မဟုတ္ဘူး။ မေျပးေသာ္လည္း ကန္ရာရွိ … အစိုးရဘက္ကလည္း ဒါေတြရွိေနေတာ့။ အဲဒါကို ေျပလည္ေအာင္ ဘယ္လိုလုပ္လာႏိုင္တဲ့ အေၾကာင္းအရာ အလားအလာ ရွိပါသလဲ။ ဘာမ်ားလုပ္ႏိုင္ၾကမလဲ။
ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ ။ ။ ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြရဲ ႔ ခံစားခ်က္ကိုလည္း က်ေနာ္နားလည္းပါတယ္။ ဟိုယခင္ အန္ကယ္ျမႀကီး ရွိတုန္းကလည္း က်ေနာ္တို႔ကို ေျပာခဲဘူးပါတယ္။ ဗမာအစိုးရေတြက ေခတ္အဆက္ဆက္ သူတို႔ တုိင္းရင္းသားေတြအေပၚမွာ လိမ္ခဲ့တယ္ဆုိၿပီး ေျပာခဲ့ပါတယ္။ အင္မတန္မွ စိတ္မေကာင္းစရာေကာင္းတဲ့ အေနအထားမ်ဳိးပါ။ ေခတ္အခါ အေျခအေနေပါ့။ ၂၀၀၀ ခုႏွစ္ မေရာက္ခင္တုန္းကဆိုရင္ ႏိုင္ငံတကာက ဗမာႏိုင္ငံကို စိတ္ဝင္စားတဲ့ အေနအထားမ်ဳိး မရွိဘူး။ ၂၀၀၀ ခုႏွစ္ေက်ာ္တဲ့အခ်ိန္ၾကမွ ႏိုင္ငံတကာက ေဆြးေႏြးလာတဲ့အခါမွာ ႏိုင္ငံတကာရဲ ႔ ဖိအားေတြ၊ ေပးလာတဲ့အေနအထားမ်ဳိးေတြ ရွိလာပါလိမ့္မယ္။ ဒါကိုလည္း ထည့္တြက္ေပးဖို႔ လိုပါတယ္။ က်ေနာ္အေနနဲ႔ အပစ္အခတ္ အရင္ရပ္စဲဖို႔ကို ေတာင္းဆိုပါ။ ၿပီးရင္ေတာ့ ႏိုင္ငံေရး ေဆြးေႏြးပြဲကိုေတာ့ ၂၀၀၈ ဖြဲ႔စည္းပံုကို ႀကိဳက္သည္ျဖစ္ေစ၊ မႀကိဳက္သည္ျဖစ္ေစ အားလံုး တတုိင္းျပည္လံုး တျပည္ေထာင္စုအားလံုး စစ္တပ္ထဲကလူေတြ လုပ္ခ်င္တဲ့လူေတြ ေပါင္းၿပီးေတာ့ လုပ္ျပလိုက္စမ္းပါ။
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ ေျပာခ်င္တာကေတာ့ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မွဴးႀကီးသန္းေရႊ နဲ႔ ဗမာအမ်ဳိးသား ထိပ္တန္းေခါင္းေဆာင္ႀကီးေတြ၊ စစ္တပ္က ေခါင္းေဆာင္ႀကီးေတြက တကယ္ကို သူတုိ႔ေတာက္ေလွ်ာက္မွာ ေျဖရွင္းႏိုင္တဲ့ဟာကို စစ္မွန္တဲ့ သေဘာထားႀကီးႀကီးနဲ႔ ပြင့္ပြင့္လင္းလင္း၊ ရက္ရက္ေရာေရာ နဲ႔ ေဆာင္ရြက္မယ္ဆိုရင္ေတာ့ ဒီကိစၥက ေပါင္းၿပီးေဆြးေႏြးေႏြး၊ တဖြဲ႔ခ်င္းေဆြးေႏြးေႏြး ဒီကိစၥက ျပႆနာမဟုတ္ဘူး။ ေကအန္ယူအေပၚမွာလည္း မူတည္တာ မဟုတ္ပါဘူး။ အဓိက က စိတ္ရင္းေစတနာပါ။ တဖက္ကေန ပိုၿပီး အားႀကီးတဲ့လူမ်ဳိး၊ ပိုၿပီးအားႀကီးတဲ့အဖြဲ႔၊ ပိုၿပီးေရွ ႔ေရာက္တဲ့အဖြဲ႔ကေန ေနာက္က်တဲ့လူကို handicap မေပးဘဲနဲ႔ အၿမဲတမ္း က်ေနာ္တို႔က စစ္တပ္ေတြက ဘယ္ေလာက္အထိ အကုန္အက်ခံ၊ အဆံုးအရႈံးခံ တုိက္ရလို႔ ငါတုိ႔က အဲဒီက ေလွ်ာ့မေပးႏိုင္ဘူးဆိုရင္ အဲဒီက စစ္တပ္က ဆံုးရႈံးတာကလည္း က်ေနာ္တို႔ ဆံုးရႈံးတာပါပဲ။ က်ေနာ္တို႔ ဆံုးရႈံးတာကလည္း သူတုိ႔ ဆံုးရံႈးတာပါပဲလုိ႔ ခံယူႏိုင္မယ္ဆိုလို႔ရွိရင္ မဆုတ္ေပးႏိုင္စရာ ယံုၾကည္မႈ တည္ေဆာက္မႈ မေဆာင္ရြက္ႏိုင္စရာ မရွိပါဘူး။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ႏွစ္ေယာက္စလံုးရဲ ႔ ေစတနာကိုလည္း က်ေနာ္နားလည္းပါတယ္။ ေနာက္ဆံုး တခြန္းဆီ ေမးခ်င္တာက အခု ကြဲလြဲခ်က္ေတြကို က်ေနာ္တုိ႔ ေတြ႔ရတယ္။ ဘယ္လို ျဖစ္ႏိုင္တယ္ဆိုတာ လူထု နားေထာင္တဲ့ ပရိတ္သတ္ကို အားတက္စရာသတင္းတခု ဘာမ်ားေပးႏိုင္မလဲ။ ဒီလုိ အလားအလာေကာင္းဟာ ဘယ္အခ်ိန္မွာ ျဖစ္လာႏိုင္မလဲ …
ဗိုလ္မွဴးေစာလွေငြ ။ ။ အခုလက္ရွိ အေျခအေနကေတာ့ ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ တို႔ ေျပာသလိုေပါ့ က်ေနာ္တို႔ လူထုကို ၾကည့္တဲ့အခါမွာ အရာရာအားလံုးကို တဦးတေယာက္၊ တဖြဲ႔တစည္းကိစၥ မဟုတ္ဘဲနဲ႔ ျပည္တြင္းစစ္ကိုပဲ ျဖစ္ေစ၊ အမ်ဳိးသားကိစၥကိုပဲျဖစ္ေစ၊ ဒီမုိကေရစီ လႈပ္ရွားမႈကိုပဲျဖစ္ေစ အားလံုး ကိုယ့္ကိစၥလို႔ စဥ္းစားတဲ့အတြက္ေၾကာင့္ ဒီကိစၥေတြအေပၚ ျပည္သူလူထုတရပ္လံုးကလည္း စိတ္ဝင္စားလာၿပီးေတာ့ သူတို႔ရဲ ႔ ဆႏၵအျမင္ေတြနဲ႔ ေတာင္းဆိုခ်က္ေတြ ပူးေပါင္းမယ္ဆိုရင္ေတာ့ ဘာပဲျဖစ္ျဖစ္ အခုေလာေလာဆယ္မွာ ေပ်ာ့ေပ်ာင္းတဲ့ပုဂၢိဳလ္ေတြ ျပည္တြင္းစစ္ကို ရပ္စဲၿပီးေတာ့ အစစ္အမွန္ကို ရွာလိုတဲ့ အတြင္းဝိုင္းကလူေတြနဲ႔ စစ္တပ္ထဲက ပုဂၢိဳလ္ေတြ သေဘာထားႀကီးမႈ ပိုျမင့္တင္လာမယ္လို႔ ေမွ်ာ္လင့္ပါတယ္။
ဦးေက်ာ္ဇံသာ ။ ။ ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ အေနနဲ႔ ဘာမ်ား အားတက္စရာ ျဖစ္လာႏိုင္သလဲ။ အနာဂတ္ကို အားတက္စရာ ရႈေထာင့္ကၾကည့္ၿပီး ေျပာေပးပါ။
ဦးေအာင္လင္းထြဋ္ ။ ။ ပထမဦးဆံုး က်ေနာ္ေျပာခ်င္တာက သမၼတႀကီးဦးသိန္းစိန္ အေနနဲ႔ အရင္ကထက္ ေပ်ာ့ခဲ့ၿပီးပါၿပီ။ ထပ္မံၿပီးေတာ့ သူ႔ရဲ ႔ ရိုသားမႈ။ သူ႔ရဲ ႔ ကတိတည္မႈ။ တုိင္းရင္းသားလက္နက္ကိုင္ေတြအေပၚမွာ အျပန္အလွန္ ေလးစားမႈအေနနဲ႔ တခုခုကို ျပသင့္တယ္လို႔ က်ေနာ္ျမင္ပါတယ္။ ဒီအေပၚမွာ မူတည္ၿပီးမွ ဒီလို ျပလာရင္ေတာ့ တုိင္းရင္းသားလက္နက္ကိုင္အဖြဲ႔ေတြအေနနဲ႔ တဖြဲ႔ခ်င္း အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲၿပီးမွ ႏိုင္ငံေရးကိုေတာ့ အဖြဲ႔အစည္း အားလံုးစုေပါင္းၿပီး ေတာင္းဆိုၾကပါ။
Credit:Voa Burmese
Protesters make their pleas behind detention centre fences in Darwin in July this year.
By The Citizen Correspondent
What do Albert Einstein, the Nobel Prize winning physicist, cellist/conductor Mstislav Rostropovich, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Elie Wiesel, both Nobel laureates in literature, have in common?
All had been stateless during part of their lives.
What do Albert Einstein, the Nobel Prize winning physicist, cellist/conductor Mstislav Rostropovich, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Elie Wiesel, both Nobel laureates in literature, have in common?
All had been stateless during part of their lives.
Up to 12 million people in the world are stateless. While their families may have lived for generations in a particular country, on paper they don’t exist anywhere. They are people without a nationality.
Stateless people are often denied basic rights and access to employment, housing, education, health care and pensions. They may not be able to own property, open a bank account, get married legally or register the birth of a child. Some face long periods of detention, because they cannot prove who they are or where they are from.
က်ြန္ေတာ္ရဲ ႔ ေလ႔လာေတြ႔ရွိခ်က္ေတြကို ခ်မေရးခင္ ဦးစြာပထမ စာဖတ္သူေတြသိေအာင္ ကြ်န္ေတာ္အေနနဲ႔ ေျပာစရားေလးအနည္းငယ္ရွိေနလို႔ ေျပာခြင္႔ျပဳပါလို႔ ခြင္႔ပန္ပါရေစ။
ကြ်န္ေတာ္ဟာ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးစုေတြကို ေထာက္ခံေနသူလံုးဝမဟုတ္ပါဘူး၊ ကန္႔ကြက္ ဆန္႔က်င္ေနသူ တစ္ဦးလည္းမဟုတ္ေၾကာင္းဆိုတာ စာဖတ္သူမ်ားအေနနဲ႔ သိေစခ်င္ပါတယ္။ အမွန္တရားကို ျမတ္နိဳးသူ ပီပီ ရွာေတြ႔ သမွ်ကို အမွန္အတိုင္း ေဖါက္သည္ ခ်ေပးျခင္းသာျဖစ္ပါေၾကာင္း ရိုးသားစြာ ဝန္ခံပါတယ္။
ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးအေၾကာင္း၊၎တို႔၏ သမိုင္းဆိုင္ရာအေၾကာင္းအရာမ်ားႏွင္႔ ယင္းလူမ်ိဳးတို႔၏ ဇစ္ျမစ္ကို မေလ႔လာဘဲ မေနနိုင္ေလာက္ေအာင္ တြန္းအားေပးနိုင္ခဲ႔တဲ႔ အဓိကအခ်က္ကေတာ႔ အင္တာနက္ စာမ်က္ႏွာကို ဖြင္႔ၾကည္႔တိုင္း ဖြင္႔ၾကည္႔တိုင္း ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာေတြကို ဆန္႔က်င္ေနသူ လူတစ္စုနဲ႔တျခားတဖက္မွာ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာေတြကို ေထာက္ခံေနသူလူတစ္စု ယင္းလူႏွစ္စုတို႔၏ အျငင္းအခံုေၾကာင္း ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးဆိုတာ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံမွာ တကယ္ရွိေနသလား ရွိခဲ႔ဖူးသလား ဆိုတာကို ေလ႔လာျဖစ္သြားေအာင္ တြန္းအားေပးခဲ႔ေသာေၾကာင္႔ (လ)ေပါင္း မ်ားစြာ အခ်ိန္ေပးကာ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးနဲ႔ဆက္ႏြယ္ပက္သက္ေနသမွ်စာအုပ္စာေပ တိုင္းကို အလြတ္မေပးဘဲ ေလ႔လာ မွတ္သားခဲ႔မိပါတယ္။
ထို႔သို႔ရွာေဖြေလ႔လာရာတြင္ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာဆန္႔က်င္သူေတြက ထုတ္ေဝထားေသာစာအုပ္ စာေပတိုင္းကို ဖတ္ခဲ႔ရျပီ၊ တဖန္ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာေထာက္ခံသူေတြက ထုတ္ေဝေသာ စာအုပ္ စာေပေတြကိုလည္ ဖတ္ကာေလ႔လာ မွတ္သားမိပါတယ္။ ျပီေတာ႔ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာဆန္႔က်င္သူ ႏွင္႔ ေထာက္ခံသူ ႏွစ္ဖက္စလံုးနဲ႔ မသက္ဆိုင္ေသာ ၾကားလူ ၊ၾကားအဖြဲ႔အစည္း ၊ရင္းႏွီးေသာ မိတ္ေဆြ သူငယ္ခ်င္းမ်ား၊လြတ္လပ္ေရးမတိုင္မီ ႏွင္႔ လြတ္လပ္ေရးေနာက္ပိုင္း တက္လာတဲ႔ အစိုးရအဖြဲ႔အစည္းတို႔မွ ေရးသားထုတ္ေဝခဲ႔ေသာ စာအုပ္စာေပ စသည္႔ စသည္႔ စာအုပ္ေပါင္းမ်ားစြာကို ၾကိဳးစား ရွာေဖြျပီးမွ ရရွိခဲ႔ေသာ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးတို႔၏ မွတ္တမ္း မွတ္ရာမ်ားကို စာဖတ္သူမ်ားသိရွိရန္ ေရးသားခ်ျပျခင္းျဖစ္ပါတယ္။
လူတတ္ၾကီးလုပ္ကာ ေရးျခင္းမဟုတ္ဘဲ ကြ်န္ေတာ္႔ရဲ ၾကိဳးစားအားထုတ္မွုေၾကာင္႔ ရရွိခဲ႔ေသာ ရလဒ္အခ်ိဳ႔ကို အမွန္အတိုင္းေရးသားျခင္းသာျဖစ္ပါတယ္။ အမွန္တရားဘက္ကရပ္တည္ ေပးဖို႔လူတိုင္းမွာ တာဝန္ရွိ လွတယ္မဟုတ္ပါလား။ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးနဲ႔ပက္သက္ျပီ ျငင္းေနခုန္ေနၾကရတဲ႔ အဓိကက်ေသာ အခ်က္ေတြကို ေအာက္ပါအတိုင္း ကြ်န္ေတာ္႔ရဲ ႔ ရွာေဖြေတြ႔ရွိခ်က္ေတြျဖင္႔ႏွိဳင္းယွဥ္ေရးသားထားတာေတြကို ေတြ႔ရမွာပါ။ အဲဒါေတြကို ဖတ္ျပီးသြားရင္စာဖတ္သူတို႔ရဲ ႔ ေလ႔လာေတြ႔ရွိခ်က္ေတြကို ရဲဝံ႔စြာ ေရးသားေပးၾကပါ။
(၁) ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးဆိုတာ ျမန္မာတိုင္းရင္းသား မဟုတ္ဘူးလို႔ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာဆန္႔က်င္းေရး လွဳပ္ရွားသူေတြက စြပ္စြဲထားသည္။ (ကြ်န္ေတာ႔္၏ေလ႔လာေတြ႔ရွိခ်က္) ၁၉၅၄ ခုႏွစ္ စက္တင္ဘာလ ၂၅ ရက္ေန႔ ည၈နာရီးျမန္မာနိုင္ငံ အသံလႊင္႔ဦးစီးဌာနမွ နိုင္ငံေတာ္ဝန္ၾကီးခ်ဳပ္ ဦးနဳရဲ ႔ မိန္႔ခြန္းေျပာရာတြင္ ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္တြင္ ေနထိုင္ေနေသာ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးမ်ားသည္ အျခားေဒသမ်ားတြင္ေနထိုင္ေနတဲ႔ျမန္မာ႔တိုင္းရင္းသားမ်ားကဲ႔သို႔ တိုင္းရင္းသားမ်ိဳးႏြယ္တစ္စု ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း အတိအလင္း မိန္႔ၾကားခဲ႔ျခင္းကို ၾကည္႔ျခင္းျဖင္႔ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးဆိုတာ ျမန္မာ႔တိုင္းရင္းသား စစ္စစ္ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း အတိအက်ေျပာလိုနိုင္တယ္။
(၂) ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးမ်ားသည္ အဂၤလိပ္ကိုလိုနီေခတ္တြင္ ဘဂၤလာေဒ႔ရွ္မွ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံသို႔ခိုးဝင္ အေျခခ်ေနထိုင္ လာေၾကာင္း ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာဆန္႔က်င္သူေတြက စြပ္စြဲထားသည္။ ( ကြ်န္ေတာ္႔ရဲ ႔ ေလ႔လာေတြ႔ရွိခ်က္ ) ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးမ်ားသည္ အဂၤလိပ္ကိုလိုနီေခတ္ မတိုင္ခင္ ေရွးရခိုင္ဘုရင္မ်ား ရွိစဥ္ကတည္းက ရခိုင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားႏွင္႔ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာတို႔သည္ ရာထူးအမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳးျဖင္႔ရခိုင္ဘုရင္မ်ားထံတြင္ အမွဴးထမ္းမ်ား လုပ္လာခဲ႔ေၾကာင္း သမိုင္းအေထာက္ထားမ်ားအရေတြ႔ရေလ၏။ ရခိုင္တိုင္းျပည္သည္ ဗမာအမ်ိဳးသားတို႔၏ လက္ေအာက္ခံ ကိုလိုနီမေရာက္ခင္ကတည္းကရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးဆိုတာ ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္မွာ ရွိခဲ႔ေၾကာင္းေတြ႔ရ၏။
တဖန္အဂၤလိပ္ကိုလိုနီေခတ္ကရိုဟင္ဂ်ာတို႔ကအဂၤလိပ္တပ္ကိုေထာက္ခံ၊ရခိုင္အမ်ိဳးသားတို႔က ဂ်ပန္ကို ေထာက္ခံခဲ႔ မွုေၾကာင္႔ ၁၉၄၂ ခုႏွစ္မွာ အဂၤလိပ္ႏွင္႔ဂ်ပန္တို႔၏ ပေယာဂေၾကာင္႔ ရခိုင္အမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားႏွင္႔ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာအမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားၾကားလူမ်ိဳးေရးအဓိကရုဏ္းၾကီးျဖစ္ကာ အျပန္အလွန္ သတ္ျဖတ္မွုၾကီးျဖစ္ပြားခ႔ဲသည္။ ယင္းအခ်က္အလက္ေတြကို ၾကည္႔ျခင္းျဖင္႔ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးေတြဟာ ၎တို႔ကို ဆန္႔က်င္ေနေသာ လူတစ္စုကေျပာေနသကဲ႔သို႔ အဂၤလိပ္ကိုလိုနီေခတ္မွာ ဝင္လာတယ္ဆိုတာလံုးဝ မျဖစ္နိုင္ပါ။ ယုတၱိ မရွိတဲ႔ ေျပာဆိုမွုသာျဖစ္သည္။
( ၃ ) ဘူးသီးေတာင္ႏွင္႔ေမာင္းေတာျမိဳ့ မ်ားတြင္ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳး အဆမတန္တိုးပြား လာျခင္းသည္ ဘဂၤလာေဒ႔ရွ္ဖက္မွ ခိုးဝင္လာျခင္းေၾကာင္းဟု ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာဆန္႔က်င္ေရးလွဳပ္ရွားသူေတြက စြပ္စြဲထားသည္။ (ကြ်န္ေတာ္႔ရဲ့ ေလ႔လာေတြ႔ရွိခ်က္ ) ဘူးသီးေတာင္၊ေမာင္းေတာေဒသမ်ားတြင္ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးမ်ား မ်ားလာရျခင္းက အခ်က္ ၂ ခ်က္ေၾကာင္႔ျဖစ္တယ္။ နံပါတ္(၁) ၁၉၄၂ ခုႏွစ္ ရခိုင္ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ လူမ်ိဳးေရး အဓိကရုဏ္း ျဖစ္တုန္းက ေက်ာက္ေတာ၊ေျမပံု၊ရမ္းျဗဲး၊ ရေသ႔ေတာင္ စသည္႔ ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္၏ အျခားအျခားေသာ ျမိဳ႔မ်ားတြင္ေနထိုင္ေနတဲ႔ လူနည္းစု ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာအိမ္ေထာင္စုေတြဟာ ရခိုင္တို႔၏ သတ္ျဖတ္ျခင္းကို မခံရေလေအာင္ ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္ အႏွံ႔အျပားမွ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူနည္းစုတို႔သည္ ထြက္ေျပးကာ ဘူးသီးေတာင္ႏွင္႔ ေမာင္းေတာျမိဳ႔မ်ားတြင္ေနထိုင္ေနေသာ ၎တို႔၏လူမ်ိဳးစုရိုဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားႏွင္႔ေပါင္းစည္းကာ ရခိုင္အမ်ိဳးသားတို႔၏ ရန္ကို ပူးေပါင္းကာကြယ္ခဲ႔ၾကသည္။ သတ္ျဖတ္မွုေတြ အဆံုးသတ္သြားေသာ္လည္း ၎တို႔စြန္႔ခြါခဲ႔ေသာျမိဳ႔မ်ားသို႔ မျပန္ရဲေတာ႔သျဖင္႔ သူတို႔ေရာင္းရင္းမ်ားျဖစ္ေသာ ဘူးသီးေတာင္၊ ေမာင္းေတာက ရိုဟင္္ဂ်ာအမ်ိဳးသားမ်ားနဲ႔အတူ ထို႔ေဒသ မ်ားတြင္အေျခခ်ေနထိုင္လာခဲ႔ေသာေၾကာင္႔ ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္၏ နယ္စပ္ေဒသ တစ္ေလွ်ာက္ လူဦးေရးမ်ားသည္ဟုထင္ေနျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။ ၁၉၄၂ ခုႏွစ္တုန္းက ေက်ာက္ေတာျမိဳ႔မွ ထြက္ေျပးလႊတ္ေျမာက္လာသူ အဘိုးအို တစ္ဦး၏ ျပန္ေျပာင္ေျပာျပခ်က္ကိုကိုးကားျပီး ဘူးသီးေတာင္ျမိဳ NGO တစ္ခုတြင္ အလုပ္ဝင္ လုပ္ေနေသာ ကြ်န္ေတာ္၏ ငယ္သူငယ္ခ်င္းျဖစ္သူ တစ္ဦးထံမွသိရွိခဲ႔ရပါသည္။
နံပါတ္ (၂) ၁၉၇၈ ခုႏွစ္ နဂါးမင္းစီစစ္ေရး အတြင္း ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္ အရပ္ရပ္မွဘဂၤလာေဒ႔ရွ္နိုင္ငံသို႔ ဒုကၡသည္အျဖစ္ ထြက္ေျပးတိန္ေရွာင္သူရိုဟင္ဂ်ာေတြကို ျမန္မာအစိုးရကျပန္လည္ေခၚယူကာဘူးသီးေတာင္ႏွင္႔ ေမာင္ေတာျမိဳ ႔မ်ားတြင္ ေနရာခ်ထားေပးခဲ႔သျဖင္႔ ေနာက္ထက္ မ်ားျပားလာျခင္းျဖစ္တယ္။ ၁၉၇၈ ခုႏွစ္တုန္းက ဒုကၡသည္အျဖစ္ ဘဂၤလာသို႔ ထြက္ေျပးတိန္းေရွာင္ေနသူအခ်ိဳ ႔ဟာ ၎တို႔၏ ဇာတိေျမ ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္ကို အခုခ်ိန္ထိ မျပန္ေသးဘဲ နယ္စပ္ဒုကၡသည္ စခန္းမ်ားတြင္ေနထိုင္ေနတဲ႔ အေၾကာင္းဒုကၡသည္ စခန္းမွ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံအစိုးရ၏ ျပန္လည္ေခၚယူျခင္းကို ခံရသူတခ်ိဳ႔၏ေျပာျပျခင္းျဖင္႔ ကြ်န္ေတာ္သူငယ္ခ်င္းက သိရွိခဲ႔ရတယ္ဆိုတဲ႔ အေၾကာင္း ကြ်န္ေတာ္ကိုျပန္ေျပာျပခဲ႔တယ္။
နံပါတ္ (၃) ၁၉၈၈ ခုႏွစ္ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံလံုးဆိုင္ရာ သပိတ္ၾကီး ေပၚေပါက္လာျပီးေနာက္ပိုင္း ယေန႔အခ်ိန္ထိ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံတြင္းကျပည္သူေတြဟာစားဝတ္ေနေရးအၾကပ္အတည္းေၾကာင္႔ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္ထဲကလူေတြအပါ အ ဝင္ တစ္နိုင္ငံလံုးက ျပည္သူေတြ နိုင္ငံရပ္ျခားသြားျပီရရာ အလုပ္ကိုလုပ္ကာဝမ္းေရးအတြက္ ေျဖးရွင္းေနရတဲ႔ ကာလေတြမွာေတာင္ ဘဂၤလာေဒ႔ရွ္က လူေတြခိုးဝင္ ေနထိုင္ေနတယ္ဆိုတာ ျဖစ္နိုင္ပါမလား ဒါဟာလံုးဝကို မွာယြင္းတဲ႔ စြပ္စြဲခ်က္လို႔ကြ်န္ေတာ္ျမင္တယ္။ ၁၉၆၂ ခုႏွစ္ စစ္တပ္က နိုင္ငံေတာ္အာဏာကို သိမ္းကတည္းက ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံရဲ ႔ လူဦးေရးစစ္တမ္းကို တရားဝင္ထုတ္ျပန္ျခင္းမရွိဘဲ လွ်ိဳ ႔ဝွက္ထားခဲ႔တယ္။ ကြ်န္ေတာ္္အေဖက အဘိုးကို ေမးခဲ႔တယ္ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံမွာလူဦးေရး ဘယ္ေလာက္ရွိသလဲတဲ႔။ အဘိုးကျပန္ေျဖခဲ႔တယ္(သန္း ၆၀ ) တဲ႔။လြန္ခဲ႔တဲ႔ တပတ္ေလာက္က အေဖကို ဒီေမးခြန္းဘဲကြ်န္ေတာ္ျပန္ေမးခဲ႔တယ္ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံမွာလူဦးေရး ဘယ္ေလာက္ရွိသလဲ အေဖျပန္ေျဖးခဲ႔တာလဲ (သန္း၆၀)ပါပဲ။ ေနာက္လာမည္ ႏွစ္ေပါင္းေျမာက္မ်ားစြာထိ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံရဲ ႔ လူဦးေရးဟာ သန္း၆၀မွာဘဲ ရွိေနအံုးမွာပါ။ သိပ္မၾကာေတာ႔တဲ႔ ကာလ တစ္ခုမွာကြ်န္ေတာ္တို႔ရဲ ႔ သားသမီးေတြကလည္း ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံ လူဦးေရ အေၾကာင္း ေမးလာရင္သန္း၆၀လိုဘဲ ျပန္ေျဖမိၾကမွာပါ။ ကမၻာ႔နိုင္ငံ အသီးသီးမွာ ႏွစ္စဥ္ လူဦးေရးတိုးပြားေနတာကို အစိုးရႏွင္႔ျပည္သူက သိၾကေပမဲ႔ ကြ်ႏု္ပ္တို႔ နိုင္ငံမွာေတာ႔ျဖင္႔ သန္း၆၀ကေန မတိုးနိုင္ေတာ႔ဘူး။ လူဦးေရးျပႆနာ ဆိုတာ အစိုးရ လ ဝ က ဌာနနဲ႔ တိုက္ရိုက္ ပတ္သက္ေနတဲ႔အတြက္ ယင္းအဖြဲ႔အစည္းကို ဦးေဆာင္သူေတြမွာ လူဦးေရးစာရင္းမွန္ျပဳစုကာ ျပည္သူကိုခ်ျပသင္႔တယ္ ထို႔သို႔မျပဳလုပ္ဘဲလႊတ္ေတာ္ အခန္းဝမွေန၍ထိုေဒသမွာလူဦးေရးမ်ားေနတယ္ ဘာျဖစ္ေနတယ္ ညာျဖစ္ေနတယ္လို႔ ေျပာခ်င္တိုင္းေျပာကာ အဆံုးသတ္လိုက္ျခင္းကို ၾကည္႔ျခင္းျဖင္႔ လူဦးေရးကိစၥဆိုတာ တမင္အေၾကာင္းျပခ်က္သာ ျဖစ္ေနေၾကာင္းကြ်န္ေတာ္သံုးသပ္မိတယ္။
နံပါတ္ ( ၄ )ဦးနဳအစိုးရက ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာေတြရဲ ႔ ေထာက္ခံမွုကိုရရန္ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာကို တိုင္းရင္းသားအျဖစ္ အသိအမွတ္ျပဳခဲ႔ေၾကာင္းဟု ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ ဆန္႔က်င္းေရးလွဳပ္ရွားသူလူတစ္စုက စြပ္စြဲထားသည္။( ကြ်န္ေတာ္႔ရဲ ႔ ေလ႔လာေတြ႔ရွိခ်က္ ) ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံသည္ အေႏွာင္းအဖြဲကင္း၍ သီးျခားလြတ္လပ္ျပီးေနာက္ပိုင္း ျပည္သူလူထုရဲ ႔ သေဘာဆႏၵအတိုင္း ျပည္သူလူထုက ေရြးခ်ယ္တင္ေျမွာက္ထားေသာ အစိုးရတစ္ရပ္ကရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးဆိုတာ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံတြင္းက အျခားတိုင္းရင္းသားလူမ်ိဳးမ်ားကဲ႔သို႔လူနည္းစုတိုင္းရင္းသားတစ္စုျဖစ္ေၾကာင္းတိုင္းသိ ျပည္သိ ေရဒီယိုမွ မိန္႔ၾကားျခင္းျဖင္႔လည္းေကာင္း ၊ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ လူမ်ိဳးႏြယ္စုတို႔၏ ဓေလ႔ ရိုးရာ၊ယဥ္ေက်းမွုမ်ားကို အျခားတိုင္းရင္းသားမ်ားႏွင္႔တန္းတူ ေရဒီယိုမွ တရားဝင္ထုတ္လႊင္႔ခြင္႔ေပးျခင္းျဖင္႔ေသာ္လည္းေကာင္း၊ ၁၉၇၈ ခုႏွစ္တြင္ ျပည္ေထာင္စုဆိုရွယ္လစ္သမၼတ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံေတာ္ ပညာေရးဝန္ၾကီးဌာနမွ ပံုႏွိပ္ထုတ္ေဝေသာ အထက္တန္း ေက်ာင္းသံုး ပထဝီစာအုပ္ စာမ်က္ႏွာ (၈၆)တြင္ေဖၚျပထားေသာ တိုင္းရင္းသား လူမ်ိဳးမ်ား ျပန္႔ႏွံ႔ေနထိုင္ေျမပံုတြင္ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးႏြယ္စုတို႔၏ ေနထိုင္ရာ ေဒသမ်ားကို ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္ရွိျမ့ိဳ အမည္ မ်ားျဖင္႔တကြ ယွဥ္တြဲေဖၚျပေပးျခင္းတို႔ကို ၾကည္႔ျခင္းျဖင္႔ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးႏြယ္စုေတြဟာ ျမန္မာႏြယ္ဖြား တိုင္းရင္းသား စစ္စစ္ျဖစ္ေနတာကိုေတြ႔ေနရသည္။ ဝန္ၾကီးခ်ဳပ္ဦးနဳက ရိုဟင္ဟင္ဂ်ာေတြရဲ ႔ ေထာက္ခံမွုရရန္ တိုင္းရင္းသား အျဖစ္သက္မွတ္သည္ဟု ယူဆရရင္ ဦးနဳ ဝန္ၾကီးခ်ဳပ္ျဖစ္လာျပီး တိုင္းရင္းသားအျဖစ္ သက္မွတ္ ေပးတာကိုခံရတာ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးတစ္စုတည္း မဟုတ္ပါဘူး အျခားလူနည္းစုေတြ အမ်ားၾကီးရွိပါေသးတယ္။
ယင္းလူမ်ိဳးစုေတြကိုက်ေတာ႔ တိုင္းရင္းသားမဟုတ္ဟု ျငင္းဆို ကန္႔ကြက္ေပး ေနသူေတြ မရွိၾကတာကို ေတြ႔ေနရတယ္။ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးေတြဟာ အီစၥလန္ဘာသာကို ကိုးကြယ္ ယံုၾကည္ျခင္းက သူတို႔ရဲ ႔မဟာ အမွားၾကီးျဖစ္ေနတယ္ဟုျမန္မာအစိုးရႏွင္႔ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ ဆန္႔က်င္သူေတြက ထင္ျမင္ယူဆေနၾကတယ္လို႔ကြ်န္ေတာ္ ျမင္မိတယ္။
ရခိုင္ျပည္နယ္မွာ အျခား တိုင္းရင္းသား လူနည္းစု တစ္စုအျဖစ္ ရွိေနတဲ႔ လူမ်ိဳးတစ္စုရွိေသးတယ္ ၎လူမ်ိဳးအမည္မွာ ( မာရမာၾကီး)ဟုေခၚသည္၊ ထိုလူမ်ိဳးသည္လည္း ရုိဟင္ဂ်ာမ်ားေျပာဆိုေသာ ဘာသာစကားႏွင္႔ တထက္တည္းေျပာျပီး ဟိႏၵဴဘာသာကို ကိုးကြယ္ယံုၾကည္႔ၾကတယ္။
မရမာၾကီးလူမ်ိဳးတို႔၏ ရုပ္အသြင္သဏၰာသည္လည္း ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလူမ်ိဳးမ်ားကဲ႔သို႔တူညီျပီး မရမာၾကီးလား ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာလားဆိုတာခြဲျခားဖို႔ အလြန္ခတ္ခဲလွပါတယ္။ စစ္အစိုးရက သူတို႔ေတြကိုက်ေတာ႔ တိုင္းရင္းသား ဟုသတ္မွတ္ကာ တူညီတဲ႔ လူမ်ိဳး၂ စုကို ကိုယ္ကြယ္သည္႔ဘာသာေပၚအေျခခံျပီး တိုင္းရင္းသားနဲ႔ နိုင္ငံျခားသားဟုေခၚေနျခင္းဟာ၊ ျမန္မာအစိုးရရ့ဲ လုပ္ရပ္ေတြက လူမ်ိဳးစု တစ္စုကို သမိုင္း အေျခခံေလ်ာ႔နည္းမွဳေၾကာင္႔ တိုက္ခိုက္ေနတာ မဟုတ္ဘဲ ကိုးကြယ္သည္႔ ဘာသာကိုသာ အေျခခံျပီးတိုက္ခိုက္ ေနျခင္းဆိုတာလူတိုင္းေတြ႔ ျမင္ရမွာပါ။
ကြ်န္ေတာ္အေနနဲ႔ ျမန္မာအစိုးရကို ေျပာခ်င္းေနတဲ႔ စကားခြန္းပါးလိုက္ပါေစ အစိုးရရဲ ႔လုပ္ရပ္ေတြဟာ ကိုယ္႔ျပည္သူေတြေပၚအစြန္းေရာက္လြန္ေနပါတယ္။ ဦးနဳအစိုးရက ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာေတြရဲ ႔ ေထာက္ခံမွဳကို ရရန္ တိုင္းရင္းသားဟု သက္မွတ္ခဲ႔တယ္ဆိုရင္ စစ္အစိုးရက ရခိုင္အမ်ိဳးသားေတြရဲ ႔ေထာက္ခံမွဳကိုရရန္ ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာကို နိုင္ငံျခားသားစြပ္စြဲ ေနတာမျဖစ္နိုင္ဘူးလို႔ မည္သူက အားမခံေျပာနိုင္သလဲ။
မရမာၾကီးလူမ်ိဳးအေၾကာင္းေျပာလို မရမာၾကီးလူမ်ိဳးမ်ားအေနနဲ႔ စိတ္မရွိၾကပါႏွင္႔လို႔ ေျပာပါရေစ။ အေၾကာင္း ကိစၥခ်င္း တိုက္ဆိုင္သြားလို႔သာ ႏွဳင္းယွဥ္ေျပာျပျခင္းသာျဖစ္ေၾကာင္းနာလည္ေပးၾကပါ။
ရန္ကုန္မွာေနတဲ႔ မရမာၾကီးလူမ်ိဳးေတြ ဆံပင္ညွပ္ဆိုင္လုပ္ငန္းကို လုပ္ကိုင္ေနသူ အမ်ားအျပား ကြ်န္ေတာ္နဲ႔ ရင္းႏွွီးၾကပါတယ္။
အထက္က ေဖၚျပလာခဲ႔တဲ႔ အေၾကာင္းအရာတိုင္းကို ေစ႔စပ္ႏွိဳင္းယွဥ္ၾကည္႔ပါက ရိုဟင္ဂ်ာ လူမ်ိဳးစုဟာ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံသား၊ျမန္မာတိုင္းရင္းသား၊ျမန္မာလူမ်ိဳးဆိုတာကို ယံုမွားသံသယ မရွိနိုင္ပါ။ ကြ်ႏ္ုပ္တို႔ နိုင္ငံ လြတ္လပ္ေရးမရခင္ကလည္း သူမ်ားကြ်န္ျပဳတာကိုခံခဲ႔ျပီျပီး လြတ္လပ္ေရးရျပန္ေတာ႔လည္ ေအးခ်မ္းစြာ အတူတကြ ေနထိုင္နိုင္ေအာင္ မၾကိဳးစားၾကဘဲ တစ္စုနဲ႔တစ္စု အျပန္အလွန္ ကိုယ္႔အခ်င္းခ်င္း သတ္ျဖတ္ေနၾကတယ္။ ကမၻာေပၚမွာ ဖြံ႔ျဖိဳးတိုးတက္ေနတဲ႔ အျခားနိုင္ငံမ်ားနဲ႔အတူ ေအးခ်မ္းစြာေနထိုင္နိုင္တဲ႔ ဘဝကို လိုခ်င္ရင္ သူတို႔လို စိတ္ထားေမြးရမည္။ လူသားအခ်င္းခ်င္းနစ္နာနိုင္ေစတဲ႔ လုပ္ရပ္ လူမ်ဳိးေရး မုန္းတီးျခင္းေတြကို စြန္႔လႊတ္မွသာလွ်င္ စစ္မွန္တဲ႔ ေအးခ်မ္းမွုကိုရၾကမွာပါ။
(ကိုယ္ျပဳသည္႔ ကံ ပဲ႔တင္းသံ ကိုယ္႔စီျပန္လာမည္တဲ႔ ) လူတိုင္းလူတိုင္းဟာ ကိုယ္ျပဳလိုက္တဲ႔ အက်ိဳးဆက္ကိုဘဲ ကိုယ္ျပန္ခံစားခြင္႔ရၾကမွာပါ။ ျမန္မာနိုင္ငံသူ နိုင္ငံသားအားလံုး အမွန္တရားကို ျမတ္နိုးကာအမွန္တရားအေပၚအေျခခံတဲ႔ စိတ္ႏွလံုးေေတြ ပိုင္ဆိုင္ၾကပါေစ။
ကိုမင္းထြန္း ရန္ကုန္။
By Jay Fletcher
Rooftop protest by Rohingya refuges at Darwin detention centre in March.
An eight-day protest on the rooftop at the Northern Immigration Detention Centre in Darwin ended shortly before five refugees “locked themselves in a room … where one man took an overdose of sleeping pills while the other four began cutting themselves,” the Darwin Asylum Seeker Support and Advocacy Network (DASSAN) said on November 2.
Serco guards broke down the door and one man was taken to hospital. Two other refugee later tried to hang themselves.
Rohan Thwaites from DASSAN told Green Left Weekly the hospitalised man’s condition was unknown.
“It’s hard to know exactly what’s happening because the media is not allowed in. The department strictly controls what everyone sees,” he said.
The latest protests and incidents of self-harm followed months of similar actions, including hunger strikes and several cases of grave-digging.
Thwaites said the situation in NIDC is now escalating. “As more reports of self-harm and suicide attempts come out, the situation is reaching boiling point. These incidents do feed on each other.
“It is very distressing for everyone when these kinds of things happen. Often other asylum seekers bear witness or are involved in trying to prevent it. Many suffer vicarious trauma and distress of having to be involved.”
Two refugees staged an eight-day protest on the roof of the Darwin detention centre. The Rohingya men were both found to be refugees in May last year, but have remained in detention for “security checks”. They have been in detention now for more than two years.
Thwaites said the protest showed their desperation. “It’s over 30°C everyday here [in Darwin]. It’s incredible that they were up there in these conditions.
“But getting up on a roof and holding a banner is really the last and only option they have to show how distressed they are.”
The men were pleading with the immigration department to have them moved into community accommodation while their security status is assessed by ASIO. But their calls appear to be going unheard.
“They ended their protest but they are still in detention. However this shows that their general release — the release of all asylum seekers — is something that needs to happen,” Thwaites said.
“The picture there is just one of regular, if not daily self-harm — it’s a humanitarian dictator and it’s getting worse.”
Despite frequent similar incidents taking place in the Darwin detention centre, the immigration department plans to soon open a second NT detention centre at Wickham Point, 35 kilometres from Darwin.
“DASSAN is very concerned about the opening of the Wickham detention centre. We’ve repeatedly called on the department to scrap its opening. It goes against all the evidence and even the statement by the department that they would hold more people in community detention,” Thwaites said.
The new planned centre is remotely located and too far from the services and support needed by refugees in detention.
DASSAN said the site was swamp-like with a high mosquito and midge infestation, and had previously been deemed too dangerous for human habitation.
Thwaites said: “If this centre does open — if it gets filled with 150 people — it will make NIDC look like a holiday camp. It’s going to be really horrendous out there.
“Unfortunately the government won’t yet listen to us and the multitude of parties out there saying that detention must end. We’ll keep advocating until the government starts to listen.”
Link: :http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/49320
-
Announcement of New Website: Rohingya Today (RohingyaToday.Com) Dear Readers, From 1st January 2019 onward, the Rohingya N...
-
RB News May 15, 2013 BRCNL was invited by Miss Sophie BUSSON, Sub-Directorate of Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs & Sub-...
-
By Tasnim News Agency December 14, 2016 TEHRAN – Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and his Indonesian counterpart Joko Widodo...
-
Rohingyas travel in a rickshaw north of Sittwe, in Myanmar's Rakhine state, on June 26. (Photo: AP) By Associated Press Novemb...
-
(Photo: Reuters) Aung San Suu Kyi is legitimising genocide in Myanmar and has entrenched the persecution of Rohingya Muslisms, warn s...
-
88 Generation Group : Photo (Irrawaddy News) By:August 12, 2012 An open letter written in Burmese by little Ma Hla Myaing to the 8888 ...
-
During recent years we have read series of depraved propagandas by a group of fanatics, who are restless to tarnish the image of the Rohing...
-
By Kayleigh Long and Nyan Lynn Aung Myanmar Times May 17, 2016 Around 30 residents of Sittwe’s only remaining Muslim quarter ...
-
Student protesters look out from a prison vehicle as they are transported to a Letpadan court in March 2015. © 2015 Reuters By Huma...
-
By Dr. Azeem Ibrahim Al Arabiya November 7, 2016 Often quoted as “ the most oppressed people in the world ,” the Rohingya Muslim...