Latest Highlight

RB Channel

တိုင္းရင္းသား လက္နက္ကိုင္ အဖြဲ့အစည္းေတြနဲ့ တိုက္ပြဲေတြ ျဖစ္ေနေသးေပမယ့္ အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲေရးေတြလည္း ရွိေနပါတယ္။ ျပီးခဲ့တဲ့ နိုဝင္ဘာလကုန္ပိုင္းက မီးရထားဝန္ၾကီး ဦးေအာင္မင္းကိုယ္တိုင္ ထိုင္း-ျမန္မာ နယ္စပ္ကိုလာျပီးေတာ့ တိုင္းရင္းသားအဖြဲ့ေတြ ေကအန္ယူ၊ အက္စ္အက္စ္ေအ၊ ေကအန္ပီပီ စတဲ့ အဖြဲ့ ၄၊ ၅ ဖြဲ့နဲ့ ေတြ႕ပါတယ္။

အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရးအတြက္ ေတြ႕ဆံုေဆြးေနြးရာမွာ လိုက္ပါ ကူညီေဆာင္ရြက္ေပးခဲ့သူ ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊကို ေမးျမန္းထားပါတယ္။


ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊ

နိုဝင္ဘာလ ၁၉ ရက္ေန့က ထိုင္းျမန္မာ နယ္စပ္မွာ ေတြ႕ၾကတဲ့အဖြဲ့ေတြေပါ့၊ အက္စ္အက္စ္ေအ၊ ေကအိုင္ေအ လည္းပါမယ္။ ဒီလိုမ်ိဳး ေတြ႕ဆံုပြဲကို ဝင္ေရာက္ျပီး ၾကားဝင္ေျပာေပးဖို့က အစိုးရဘက္က ေခၚတာလား၊ ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊအေနနဲ့ သြားတာလား။

“ပထမဆံုးကေတာ့ က်ေနာ္နဲ့ ဦးေအာင္မင္း(မီးရထားဝန္ၾကီး) နဲ့ေတြ႕ၾကရာမွာ သူက က်ေနာ့္ကို အၾကံဉာဏ္ေတာင္းတယ္။ တိုင္းရင္းသား အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲဖို့ကိစၥကို ဘယ္လိုလုပ္သင့္တယ္ဆိုတာ သူကေမးတာေပါ့။ က်ေနာ္ကေတာ့ ဒီျပႆနာေတြက ျဖစ္လာတာၾကာျပီ၊ ယံုၾကည္မႈတည္ေဆာက္ရမယ္၊ တျဖည္းျဖည္းနဲ့ ေတြ႕ဆံုေဆြးေနြးပြဲေတြ လုပ္ရမယ္။ အဲလိုမ်ိဳး ျဖစ္လာမွျဖစ္မယ္လို့ က်ေနာ္က အၾကံေပးလိုက္တယ္။ ေနာက္ပိုင္း သူနဲ့ရန္ကုန္မွာ ျပန္ေတြ႕ေတာ့ သူက အက္စ္အက္စ္ေအ (ေတာင္ပိုင္း) ဗိုလ္မႉးရြက္ဆစ္တို့အဖြဲ့နဲ့ ညွိေပးလို့ရမလားလို့ ေမးတယ္။ က်ေနာ္က ဘယ္လိုေျဖလည္းဆိုေတာ့ ညွိေပးလို့ ရတယ္။ ဒါေပမယ့္ က်ေနာ္လုပ္လာတဲ့ တကာလလံုးမွာ နိုင္ငံေရးပါလာတဲ့ ေနရာမွာ ရွမ္းအတြက္ပဲလုပ္ေနတာ မဟုတ္ဘူး။ တိုင္းျပည္အတြက္ လုပ္ေနတယ္။ ျပီးေတာ့မွ တိုင္းရင္းသားအကုန္လံုးအတြက္ ကူထားတာရွိတယ္။ ဆိုေတာ့ ဝန္ၾကီးကေန ရွမ္းအဖြဲ့နဲ့ေတြ႕မယ္ဆိုရင္ တျခားအဖြဲ့ေတြနဲ့လည္း ေတြ႕သင့္တယ္လို့ အၾကံေပးလိုက္တယ္။ အစတုန္းကေတာ့ သူလက္ခံတယ္။ ေနာက္ပိုင္းမွာ သူက အဲဒါဆိုရင္ လုပ္ေပးပါဆိုျပီးေတာ့ ေျပာလာတယ္။”

ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊအေနနဲ့ ရွမ္းအက္စ္အက္စ္ေအ တဖြဲ့တည္းနဲ့ ေစ့စပ္ညွိႏွိ္ဳင္းေပးတာထက္ က်န္တဲ့ အဖြဲ့ေတြကိုလည္း ဝင္ညွိႏွိဳင္းေပးခ်င္တယ္ဆိုျပီး ျဖစ္တာေပါ့။ အခုေတြ႕ဆံုေဆြးေနြးခဲ့ၾကျပီ။ သတင္းလည္း သံုးပတ္ေလာက္ရွိျပီဆိုေတာ့ ဒီတိုက္ပြဲေတြ ရပ္စဲမႈမွာ၊ ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးရလဒ္ေတြမွာ ဘယ္လိုရခဲ့လဲ။

“ဒီဇင္ဘာ ၂ ရက္ေန့က ေတာင္ၾကီးျမို့မွာ အက္စ္အက္စ္ေအ (ေတာင္ပိုင္း) အဖြဲ့ကေတာ့ အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲေရး လက္မွတ္ထိုးလိုက္ပါျပီ။ ေနာက္တဖြဲ့ကေတာ့ ခ်င္း (စီအန္အက္ဖ္) အဖြဲ့ကေတာ့ ဇန္နဝါရီထဲမွာ သူတို့က ခ်င္းျပည္ကို သြားျပီးေတာ့မွ လက္မွတ္သြားထိုးပါမယ္။ ေကအန္ယူနဲ့ ေကအန္ပီပီ ကရင္နီအဖြဲ့ကေတာ့ သူတို့ရဲ့ ဗဟိုကို ျပန္တင္ျပျပီးေတာ့မွ ဆံုးျဖတ္ခ်က္ယူမယ္။ ေတြ႕ဆံုေဆြးေနြးပြဲလုပ္ဖို့ အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲဖို့ကေတာ့ မူအရလက္ခံတယ္ေပါ့။”

ေကအန္ယူတို့ ေကအန္ပီပီတို့ အက္စ္အက္စ္ေအတို့ ေကအိုင္အိုတို့ ပါဝင္တဲ့ ယူအန္အက္ဖ္စီ (ညီညြတ္ေသာ တိုင္းရင္းသားလူမ်ိဳးမ်ား ဖက္ဒရယ္ေကာင္စီ) အဖြဲ့ကေန တစ္ရက္၊ ႏွစ္ရက္အတြင္းမွာ ေတြ႕ဆံုေဆြးေနြးခဲ့တာကို ျပန္သံုးသပ္တဲ့ အစည္းအေဝးလုပ္တယ္။ ေတြ႕ဆံုမႈကို ဦးေအာင္မင္းလည္း လာတယ္။ ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊ ၾကားဝင္ေဆာင္ရြက္ေပးတဲ့ ေတြ႕ဆံုေဆြးေနြးေရးက မမွန္ကန္တဲ့ ေတြ႕ဆံုေဆြးေနြးမႈလို့ သံုးသပ္ထားတာရွိတယ္။ အဲဒီအေပၚမွာေကာ ဘာေျပာခ်င္လဲ။

“ဒါကေတာ့ သူတို့ဘယ္လိုသံုးသပ္လည္း က်ေနာ္တို့မသိဘူး။ အခ်က္အလက္ေတြ သူတို့ျပည့္ျပည့္စံုစံု ရွိသလားဆိုတာ က်ေနာ္တို့မသိဘူး။ ဒါေပမယ့္ က်ေနာ့္အေနနဲ့ ျမင္တာက သူတို့သံုးသပ္ေနတာက မွားေနလားလို့ ျမင္တယ္။ ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲဆိုရင္ ယူအန္အက္ဖ္စီ မူအရက အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲေရးအဆင့္က တဖြဲ့ခ်င္းေတြ႕လို့ရတယ္။ အခု တဖြဲ့ခ်င္း ေတြ႕ေနတာက အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲလုပ္ဖို့ပဲ ေတြ႕ေနၾကတယ္။ ေနာက္တဆင့္ နိုင္ငံေရးေဆြးေနြးပြဲ ျဖစ္လာရင္ အကုန္ပါရမယ္ေလ။ ဝန္ၾကီးဦးေအာင္မင္းလည္း ေျပာတယ္။ သူတို့တင္ျပတဲ့ အခ်က္အလက္ေတြကလည္း အဲဒီအတိုင္းေျပာတယ္။ ဆိုေတာ့ ဒီဟာက ယူအန္အက္ဖ္စီက ခ်ထားတဲ့မူနဲ့လည္း မလြဲဘူးလို့ျမင္တယ္။ ျပီးေတာ့မွ ဒီအပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲလုပ္သြားတဲ့အဖြဲ့ အက္စ္အက္စ္ေအ ေတာင္ပိ္ဳင္းကလည္း ေျပာတာကေတာ့ အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲတာနဲ့မလံုေလာက္ဘူး။ နိ္ဳင္ငံေရးေဆြးေနြးပြဲ ျဖစ္ရမယ္။ တျပည္လံုးေဆြးေနြးပြဲ ျဖစ္ရမယ္။ သူတို့ကေျပာတယ္။ ဆိုေတာ့ အမွန္ကလည္း ယူအန္အက္ဖ္စီ မူနဲ့ ကိုက္တယ္လို့ က်ေနာ္ျမင္တယ္ေလ။”



ယူအန္အက္ဖ္စီ ဒီလိုေဆြးေနြးတဲ့အေပၚမွာေတာ့ ဦးဟန္သေဘာထားကို က်ေနာ္တို့ သိရျပီ။ ဘာပဲေျပာေျပာ နိ္ဳဝင္ဘာလ ၁၉ ရက္ေန့ထဲက ေဆြးေနြးလာခဲ့ၾကျပီးေတာ့ အခ်ိဳ့လည္း လက္မွတ္ထိုးတာေတြ ရွိတယ္။ ဒီေကဘီေအတို့နဲ့ သီးသန့္လက္မွတ္ထိုးတာေတာ့ ဦးေအာင္ေသာင္းတို့နဲ့။ ဆိုေတာ့ အစိုးရဘက္က ဦးေအာင္ေသာင္းတို့ လႊတ္တာလည္း ရွိတယ္။ ဦးေမာင္ေမာင္သိန္းတို့ လႊတ္တာလည္း ရွိတယ္။ ဒီဘက္္မွာလည္း ဦးထြန္းရီနဲ့လည္း ေတြ႕တယ္။ သူတို့က တိုင္းရင္းသားအားလံုးကို တဖြဲ့တည္းနဲ့ မလုပ္ဘဲနဲ့ ဟိုလူနဲ့ ဒီဘက္မွာလုပ္။ ဒီလူနဲ့ဒီဘက္မွာလုပ္။ သူတို့မွာေကာ တိတိက်က် မရွိဘဲနဲ့ ၾကံုသလို လုပ္ေနတာမ်ိဳး အစိုးရဘက္ကေကာ ျဖစ္နိ္ဳင္လား။

“အဲဒီဟာလည္း တခ်ိဳ့ေနရာမွာ ျဖစ္ေတာ့ျဖစ္တယ္။ အခုေတြ႕တဲ့ အဖြဲ့ေတြလည္း သူတို့ အစိုးရကို ေတာင္းဆိုတယ္။ အဲဒါမ်ိဳး မလုပ္ပါနဲ့၊ တကယ္ မွန္ကန္တဲ့ နည္းလမ္းနဲ့ပဲ လုပ္ပါ၊ ဥပမာ ျပည္နယ္က လာမယ္ဆိုရင္လည္း ျပည္နယ္က တဖြဲ့လာ၊ ျပႆနာမရွိဘူး။ ျပည္ေထာင္စုအေနနဲ့ လာမယ္ဆိုရင္လည္း ျပည္ေထာင္စုအေနနဲ့လာ၊ ျပႆနာမရွိဘူး။ ဒါေပမယ့္ ဒီလူလာလိုက္၊ ေနာက္တဖြဲ့လာလိုက္ တမ်ိဳးေျပာလိုက္၊ အဲလိုမ်ိဳးေတာ့ မလုပ္ပါနဲ့ဆိုေတာ့ ဒီအဖြဲ့ေတြက ေျပာတာျဖစ္တယ္။”

တခ်ိန္တည္းမွာပဲ တိုက္ပြဲေတြလည္း ျပန္ျဖစ္ေနတယ္ဆိုေတာ့ ေကအန္ယူနဲ့ျဖစ္ေနတာ။ ကခ်င္မွာဆိုလည္း မေန့ကဆို တိုက္ပြဲေတာ္ေတာ္ ၾကီးၾကီးမားမား ျဖစ္ေနတယ္။ ဒီအေပၚေတြေကာ ဘာေျပာခ်င္လဲ။

“ဥပမာ ကရင္မွာ တိုက္ပြဲျဖစ္တယ္ ဆိုတာေတာ့ သဘာဝက်တယ္။ ဘာျဖစ္လို့လည္းဆိုေတာ့ အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲမႈ မရမခ်င္းေတာ့ တိုက္ရမွာပဲ။ ရွမ္းျပည္မွာလည္း အက္စ္အက္စ္ေအ ေတာင္ပိ္ဳင္းကလည္း တိုက္တာပဲ။ ဒီဇင္ဘာ ၂ ရက္ေန့မွာ သူတို့က အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲေရး လက္မွတ္ထိုးၾကတယ္။ အဲဒီေနာက္ပိ္ဳင္းမွာ တိုက္ပြဲေတြ ဆက္ျဖစ္ရင္ေတာ့ ျပႆနာရွိမယ္။ အဲဒီလက္မွတ္မထိုးခင္မွာ တိုက္ပြဲျဖစ္တာ သဘာဝက်တယ္။ ကခ်င္မွာေတာ့ သူ့ျပႆနာက ေတာ္ေတာ္ၾကီးတယ္။ ဒီေနရာမွာ က်ေနာ္ထင္တာကေတာ့ တမ်ိဳးမွားေနတယ္လို့ ျမင္တယ္။ ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲဆိုရင္ ကခ်င္ေလာက္ အစိုးရကို ကူထားတဲ့အဖြဲ့မရွိဘူး။ အမ်ိဳးသားညီလာခံလည္း သူကပါခဲ့တယ္။ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲဝင္ဖို့လည္း သူတို့က ၾကိုးစားခဲ့တယ္။ သူတို့က အစိုးရသစ္တက္လာတာကိုလည္း ၾကိုဆိုတယ္။ သမၼတၾကီး လုပ္ေနတဲ့ အေျပာင္းအလဲကိုလည္း ေထာက္ခံတယ္။ ဒါေပမယ့္ ဘာေၾကာင့္ တိုက္ပြဲေတြ ျပင္းထန္လာသလဲ။ ဘာေၾကာင့္ ဒီထက္ဆိုးလာသလဲ။ အဲဒါကေတာ့ က်ေနာ့္အျမင္ဆိုရင္ တမ်ိဳးေတာ့မွားေနျပီ။ အဲဒါကို ျပင္ဖို့လိုမယ္။”

မွားေနတယ္ဆိုတာ ဘယ္အရာမွာမွားေနလဲ။ ကခ်င္မွာေတာ့ တိုက္ပြဲေတြမ်ားေနတယ္။ ကရင္မွာလည္း ရွိေနေသးတယ္။ တိုင္းရင္းသားေတြဘက္က ေျပာေနၾကတာ အစိုးရတပ္ေတြက ထိုးစစ္ေတြလုပ္ေနလို့ေျပာတယ္။ အစိုးရဘက္က ထိုးစစ္မလုပ္ဘဲနဲ့ ေလ်ွာ့ေပးလိုက္ရင္ေကာ အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲေရးက အလိုလို ျဖစ္မသြားနိုင္ဘူးလား။

“အဲဒါပါပဲ။ က်ေနာ္ေျပာေနတဲ့ မွားေနတယ္ဆိုတာ တကယ္ေတာ့ သြားညွိႏွိဳင္းတယ္ဆိုရင္ သူက အဆင္ေျပသင့္တယ္။ ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲဆိုေတာ့ ကခ်င္ဘက္ကလည္း က်ေနာ္သိတာက သူတို့မတိုက္ခ်င္ဘူး။ ဇူလိုင္လကုန္ အထိေတာင္မွ က်ေနာ္သူတို့နဲ့ေဆြးေနြးတယ္။ သူတို့က လက္မွတ္ထိုးဖို့ အဆင္သင့္ပဲ။ ဒါေပမယ့္ ဘာေၾကာင့္ ဒီထက္ဆိုးသြားတာလဲ။ စစ္တပ္ဘက္က ပိုျပီးေတာ့ ဝင္တိုက္လို့ျဖစ္မယ္။ အေျခအေနၾကည့္လိုက္ရင္ အခုတိုက္ပြဲေတြ ကခ်င္ျပည္နယ္မွာ ျဖစ္ေနတာက အရင္တုန္းက အစိုးရသတ္မွတ္ထားတဲ့ ေကအိုင္အို နယ္ေျမထဲမွာျဖစ္ေနတယ္။ ေျပာခ်င္တာကေတာ့ အစိုးရတပ္ေတြက က်ူးေက်ာ္ေနတယ္။ သူတို့နယ္ေျမထဲေရာက္ေနတယ္။ အဲဒါသူတို့က တိုက္ရမွာပဲ။ သဘာဝက်တယ္။ အစိုးရတပ္က ဆုတ္ေပးတယ္ဆိုရင္ အလိုလို အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲေရး ျဖစ္သြားနိ္ဳင္တယ္။”



ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊအေနနဲ့က အစိုးရဝန္ၾကီး ဦးေအာင္မင္းက ေခၚယူတယ္။ ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရးျဖစ္ေစခ်င္တယ္။ တိုက္ပြဲေတြ ျဖစ္ေနတယ္ဆိုတာ မေကာင္းဘူးဆိုျပီး ၾကားဝင္ေဆာင္ရြက္ေပးတယ္။ တခ်ိဳ့ေျပာေနတာက ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊက အစိုးရနဲ့ ေပါင္းတယ္၊ အစိုးရခိုင္းတာ လုပ္ေနတယ္ဆိုျပီး ေျပာေနတာေတြ ရွိတယ္။ ဒီေပၚမွာေကာ ကိုယ္က ၾကားဝင္ေဆာင္ရြက္ေပးထားတဲ့ ကိစၥေတြမွာ ဘယ္လိုခံစားရလဲ။

“က်ေနာ္ ဒီမိုကေရစီ တိုက္ပြဲထဲဝင္လာတဲ့ ကာလပတ္လံုးက က်ေနာ္က တိုင္းျပည္ေကာင္းဖို့ လုပ္ခဲ့တယ္။ ဘာမွ ဒီဘက္ ဟိုဘက္ မဝင္ဘဲနဲ့ တတ္နိ္ဳင္သမ်ွ အကုန္လံုးေကာင္းေအာင္ ၾကိုးစားခဲ့တယ္။ က်ေနာ္နဲ့တြဲျပီး လုပ္လာတဲ့လူတိုင္းက သိပါတယ္။ ဆိုေတာ့ က်ေနာ္က ေျပာစရာမလိုဘူး။ က်ေနာ္က ဘာရခ်င္လို့၊ အစိုးရနဲ့ သြားေပါင္းတယ္။ သူတို့ခိုင္းလို့ လုပ္တယ္။ ဒါေတြကေတာ့ က်ေနာ့္ကို မသိတဲ့လူေတြျဖစ္မယ္။ မဟုတ္ဘဲနဲ့ တမင္တကာ ေျပာခ်င္တဲ့လူေတြျဖစ္မယ္။ ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲဆိုေတာ့ က်ေနာ္နဲ့သိလာတဲ့ လူတိုင္းကေတာ့ ဘယ္သူလာခိ္ဳင္းခိ္ဳင္း အမွန္မဟုတ္ရင္ က်ေနာ္မလုပ္ပါဘူး။ အမွန္တရားထဲမပါရင္ က်ေနာ္မလုပ္ပါဘူး။ အခုနေျပာတဲ့အတိုင္းပဲ ဒီေနရာမွာက အပစ္အခတ္ ရပ္စဲမလုပ္ဘူး။ ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး နည္းလမ္းမရွာဘူးဆိုရင္ က်ေနာ္တို့က ဆက္တိုက္သြားဖို့ပဲ ရွိတယ္။ ႏွစ္ေပါင္း ငါးဆယ္၊ ေျခာက္ဆယ္ တိုက္သြားမယ္။ ဒီဟာက အက်ိဳးမျဖစ္ဘူး။ ဆိုေတာ့ က်ေနာ့္အေနနဲ့က အခုအေနနဲ့ အစိုးရကလည္း ကမ္းလွမ္းလာတယ္။ အစိုးရကလည္း တကယ္လုပ္ပါမယ္လို့ ေျပာေတာ့ က်ေနာ္ကေတာ့ ျဖစ္ေစခ်င္တယ္။”

ေစာေစာကေျပာသလို အစိုးရတပ္ေတြက ထိုးစစ္ေတြလုပ္ေနတယ္။ သူတို့ နည္းနည္းျဖစ္ျဖစ္ ဆုတ္ျပီးေတာ့မွ ဆက္လက္ ထိုးစစ္မလုပ္ဘဲနဲ့ စကားေျပာရင္ ပိုေကာင္းမယ္လို့။ တကယ္တမ္းေတာ့ အခုရက္ပိုင္းမွာကို ရွမ္းျပည္နယ္ထဲမွာ ရွိတဲ့ ကခ်င္စခန္းေတြကို အစိုးရက ထပ္သိမ္းတာတို့၊ ဒါမ်ိဳးေတြလည္း ျဖစ္ေနတာ။ တကယ္လို့ စကားေျပာတယ္ဆိုရင္ေတာ့ သူတို့အေနနဲ့ ထိုးစစ္ေတြ မလုပ္သင့္ဘူးေပါ့။ ဆိုေတာ့ ေနာက္ဆံုး ဦးဟန္ေညာင္ေရႊကိုယ္တိုင္ ၾကားဝင္ေဆာင္ရြက္ေပးတာရယ္။ ေရွ့အလားအလာကို ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး တကယ္ျဖစ္သြားမယ္လို့ ထင္သလား။ အဟန့္အတားေတြက ရွိေနေတာ့။ အဲဒါေနာက္ဆံုး အေနနဲ့ရွင္းျပပါလား။

“က်ေနာ္ထင္တာ ျဖစ္နိုင္တယ္။ ဒါေပမယ့္ အစိုးရအေနနဲ့ သူတို့ယံုၾကည္မႈ တည္ေဆာက္တဲ့သေဘာနဲ့ ဒီစစ္တပ္ကို ဆုတ္ေပးဖို့ လိုမယ္လို့ က်ေနာ္ျမင္တယ္။ ဘာလို့လဲဆိုေတာ့ အခုက မယံုၾကဘူး။ တကယ္လုပ္ခ်င္တယ္ဆိုတာ။ ဘာေၾကာင့္လဲဆိုရင္ အရင္က အေတြ႕အၾကံုအရ ကခ်င္က အပစ္အခတ္ရပ္စဲလုပ္တယ္။ ႏွစ္ေပါင္း ၁၇ ႏွစ္ေစာင့္ခဲ့တယ္။ ေတြ႕ဆံုေဆြးေနြးပြဲ မျဖစ္ဘဲနဲ့ တိုက္ပြဲေတြျဖစ္လာတယ္။ ဆိုေတာ့ သူတို့အေနနဲ့ စိုးရိမ္မႈရွိတယ္။ တကယ္ပဲ ျငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး လိုခ်င္ရင္ေတာ့ အစိုးရဘက္က စိတ္ရင္း ေစတနာရင္းရွိတယ္ဆိုတာ ျပရမယ္။ အေကာင္းဆံုးက တပ္ရုပ္သိမ္းတာ အေကာင္းဆံုးပဲလို့ အဲဒီလိုပဲ က်ေနာ္ျမင္ပါတယ္။”
1. In Burma, people’s right to public assemblies and processions has already been enacted in the Police Act, 1945. Under Chapter 5 of that law, with the title ‘Maintenance of Law and Order,’ section 31 provides as follows: 

(1) The District Superintendent or any Assistant or Deputy Superintendent of Police, may, as occasion requires, direct the conduct of all assemblies and processions on the public roads, or in the public streets or thoroughfares, and prescribe the routes by which, and the times at which, such processions may pass. 

(2) The District Superintendent or any Assistant or Deputy Superintendent may also, on being satisfied that it is intended by any persons or class of persons to convene or collect an assembly in any such road, street or thoroughfare, or to form a procession, which would, in his opinion, be likely to cause a breach of the peace if uncontrolled, require by general or special notice that the persons convening or collecting such assembly or directing or promoting such procession shall apply for an obtain a license. 

(3) On such application being made, he may issue a license specifying the names of the licensees and defining the conditions on which alone such assembly or such procession is to be permitted to take place and otherwise giving effect to this section. 

2. The question of Burma is the question of the rule of law, that is, the successive military regimes, including the one led by Thein Sein, did not activate the existing laws, inter alia, including Chapter 5 of the Police Act 1945, by which people could exercise their basic rights with minimum restrictions. Rather, the regime provides more draconian laws. During the period between 1948 and 1962, with the background of the 1947 Constitution and under the Police Act 1945, people were able to enjoy their rights to assemblies and processions peacefully and effectively. 

3. Unfortunately, the Law on the Right to Peaceful Assemblies and Processions provided for by the regime on December 2, 2011, reaffirmed the unreasonable exceptions mentioned in the 2008 Constitution; and, contrary to the Police Act 1945, it has also extended restrictions enormously. As such, under the newly enacted law, people will never be able to exercise their basic rights with minimum restrictions and democracy will never be achieved. 


The Burma Lawyers’ Council December 5, 2011




Download PDF here


By Zin Linn 

Ongoing civil war in Kachin State has been on the rise in various fronts. Burmese government armed forces expanded their offensive without listening the people’s voices for peace talks in Kachin State. 

There was a skirmish between Burmese government soldiers and Kachin Independence Army’s (KIA) last week. Burma Army’s Light Infantry Battalion No. 386 based in Namma was attacked by KIA troops in two separate locations according to local eyewitnesses’ report. Three government soldiers were killed in action in northern Kachin state, where in recent months the worst hostilities has been taken place and damage the country’s peace and stability within almost two decades. 

On 3 November, one government soldier was killed and three others injured after an assault on a convoy roaming near Lagawng Kahtawng village located between the Mogaung ferry station and Lawa. The attack was made by the Kachin Independence Army’s battalion No. 14 under the command of the Hugawng valley-based KIA’s 2nd Brigade and fighters from the People’s Army. The People’s Army is separate from the KIA and instead led by a civilian command under the Kachin Independence Organization’s Department of General Administration, as said by the Kachin News Group (KNG). 

On 4 November, two more government soldiers from the same military column were killed and many more injured after a mine planted by the KIA’s Battalion 14 exploded as a Burmese convoy travelled the well-known Stillwell Road (also known as Ledo Road). According to local witnesses, the explosion took place on the Lawa to Dumbung section of the road near the Sai Lin Hka stream. 

The bodies of two government soldiers were buried near the stream whereas other injured soldiers were transported to Mogaung for treatment. In accordance with eyewitnesses’ report, before wounded soldiers were moved their uniforms were changed with civilians clothes, the local witnesses said. 

A source close to the Burmese army said that the convoy under attack had been on its way to help 5 wounded government soldiers who had survived an attack on 2 December at Dai Kri. At some point in the Dai Kri attack, which occurred between Ma-U Pyin and Nam Ya in the Hpakant jade mining area, the Kachin resistance guerrillas killed five soldiers and seized a variety of guns and ammunition, KNG said. 

Moreover, a surprise attack by the Kachin Independence Army in Mongkoe in Shan state killed at least 18 Burmese army personnel early Monday morning, as said by eyewitnesses’ report. The attack was occurred in downtown Mongkoe where the Government’s Military Strategic Office stationed and a police station at its next-door. 

Among the dead was Major Maung Maung Myo, the commander of the Infantry Battalion No. 129 based in Chin-shwe-hawy (Nyan-kun), the KIA confirmed. Although most of the slain were soldiers, two of the dead were members of the local police force, the KIA officers said. 

Several housings and offices in the military compound of the Strategic Bureau were also destroyed during the raid, a local resident said. The battle of Mongkoe near the Sino-Burma border was the most recent clash between the KIA and the government forces in an increasingly violent conflict that began in June this year. 

In keeping with the Kachin News Group referring a KIA official, the raid was lasted just about 45-minute and done by KIA Battalions 36 and 38 under the 4th Brigade based in Northern Shan State. In addition, Corporal Sumlut Gam Seng of the KIA’s Battalion 36 died in action during the raid, the KIA official said. 

During a military offensive against the KIA, Burmese armed forces shattered electricity power supply cables using artillery fire in Ga Ra Yang village on Nov. 1, referring KIO officials the Kachin News Group reported. 

Since then on, residents of Myitkyina, the capital city of Kachin state, have been living without electricity at present. The Burmese Army knowingly destroyed the power supply lines to the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO) controlled area, said KIO officials. 

While fighting between the KIO and the Burmese army continues, preliminary talks between the two sides stay behind lacking any hopeful result. Late last month representatives from the KIO met with Burmese government representatives in both Thailand and China to thrash out ending the war which began in last June. 

Some analysts believe armed conflicts in Kachin State possibly will become wider since the Kachin resistance groups refuse to accept the junta’s new constitution which says Burma Army is the only military institution in the country. 

The Kachin rebels also consider the nominally civilian government which steadfast in the 2008 constitution will not let their basic rights or self-determination in accordance with the 1947 Panglong Agreement. 

The KIO leadership has constantly declared that it will not make an armistice without facts that a truce will be pursued by crucial political dialogue.

Credit here   
By Laurinda Luffman for SOS children

The media is full of news about the recent visit to Myanmar (formerly Burma) made by the US secretary of state, Hilary Clinton. Mrs Clinton’s time with Aung San Suu Kyi and her meeting with the Burmese government are seen as hopeful signs that Burma’s rulers may finally be open to reform. But as these stirrings of optimism grow, there seems little hope for a change in the situation of Myanmar’s most persecuted people – the Rohingya.


The Rohingya are a Muslim ethnic minority who were persecuted by the military junta in Myanmar. In 1991, to flee persecution, a large number crossed the border into Bangladesh from the Arakan state of western Myanmar. Some estimates put the number of Rohingya in Bangladesh as high as 300,000. Around 35,000 of the displaced live in registered refugee camps and receive some aid from non-governmental organisations (NGOs). But over a quarter of a million live around towns and villages along the Bangladesh-Myanmar border, where most live in miserable conditions.

Bangladesh is not a signatory to the International Refugee Convention, where countries agree to give refugees favorable treatment and access to services. Therefore, there is no official recognition of the Rohingya and their needs. Any assistance is provided by outside agencies. So for example, 21 primary schools are operated by the UN Children’s Fund alongside other NGOs.

Without any rights, the Rohingya face widespread discrimination in Bangladesh and NGOs have expressed regular concerns about intimidation and abuse of the refugees. In a recent article on the plight of the Rohingya, the Guardian highlights just one example, the case of a badly-burned young girl. The family who took her in as a servant tried to burn the orphan girl to death in order to hide their crimes against her. Doctors at the Lada refugee camp in southern Bangladesh have been trying to care for her, though she has only a slim chance of survival. Staff at the camp do not have access to the kind of advanced treatments which might save her.

Because of the pitiful conditions in which many Rohingya refugees live and the daily struggle of families simply to survive, the BBC has dubbed these people “one of the world’s most persecuted minority groups”. Even if Myanmar’s rulers do now decide to relax their iron grip over the Burmese people, it is unlikely they will restore the rights of the Muslim Rohingya people to own land or receive state services. (In Myanmar, the Rohingya are even forbidden to marry and have children without government permission.) But until their citizenship is reinstated, these desperate people have nowhere to go and will continue to suffer abuse and the life of the unwanted.



Credit here



Taung Pyu (Taungbro), Maungdaw 
Dec 01-06, 2011 

From the beginning of 1st December, there are many onslaught conspiracies to extort money from the Rohingya with the help of Na Sa Ka Collaborators named Sajedullah (Ex-Chairman of Ra Ya Ka), Hafez Mohammed Tayub and Din Mohammed ( Ex-WFP Interpreter from Mee Thait). 

According to our correspondent of Taung Pyu, Major Than Thait Aung (Sector 3 Commander in Chief) charged the following villagers of Kyunthi Pin with false allegation of possession of Bangla mobile phones as the collaborators' information. The villagers were compelled to pay 150,000 (One lac fifty thousand Kyats) each as bribe to relieve from false allegation. The victims are- 

1. Hafez Muztafiz s/o Muzaffar 

2. Fayazul Islam s/o Basa Meah 

3. Yousoff s/o Noor Bashar 

4. Khaled s/o Noorul Amin 

5. Birahman s/o Osiur Rahman 

6. Zafar Alam s/o Bashir 

7. Kalim Ullah s/o Rahmatullah 

8. Moulvi Ejaz s/o Jamal 

9. Salim Ullah s/o Fakir Ahmed 

10. Mohammed Islam s/o Noorul Haque 

All the villagers of Kyunthi Pin and its surroundings are now passing their days in terrified situation and it is the worst election after-math situation. The Sector Commander Than Thait Aung has taken 10,00000 (One Million Kyat) as bribe from Mosque Committee of Sanmakara village (Quarter 3) for allegation of repairing of a toilet of the mosque. The Major Than Thait Aung also has charged 10,000 (Ten Thousand Kyat) from each sacrificial animal at the time of Eid-ul-Adha (Kurbani Eid). 

At this moment, International interfere is most crucial and inevitable. 


Source : Arakan Rohingya Union (ARU)




Rohingya have successfully submitted a memorandum to the British Government, appealing British intervention to the cause of Rohingya in Burma.

About 200 Rohingyas from Kuala Lumpur city took part in the event in time of the memorandum submission. Memorandum was handed over to the British High Commission in Jalan Ampang, Kuala Lumpur at 10:40am.

British High Commission welcomed 3 members delegation to enter High Commission premise, where Admin Officer Ms. Helen Paterson has received the Memorandum on behalf of British High Commissioner to Malaysia. During this time, both the High Commission Representative and Rohingya delegates exchanged views and opinions.
High Commissioner Representative advised the Rohingya delegates to approach to other diplomatic missions in order to focus the Rohingya issues and assured the Rohingya delegates that she and her High Commissioner would pass the memorandum to the concerned authorities of the British Government for due consideration.
At the event, Rohingya placed various kinds of posters including showing strong support to authentic media groups like BBC, VOA and RFA which always interested to broadcast Rohingya news and information.

3 Members of Rohingya delegates are Mr. Mohammad Sadek, Mr. Mohammed Rafique and Mr. Mohammed Amin who are the active members of the Rohingya organization in Malaysia, the National Democratic Party for Human Rights (NDPHR) exile, which is one of the elected parties in 1990s multi-party general election in Burma.

For further information, please feel free to contact:

Mohammad Sadek




















December 2, 2011 
H.E. Sheikh Hasina Wajed 
The Prime Minister People’s Republic of Bangladesh 
Old Sangsad Bhaban
Tejgaon, Dhaka 1215 


Your Excellency Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed,

On Behalf of Arakan Rohingya Union and the Burmese Rohingya Association of North
America, I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude to the Government of Bangladesh for
addressing the Rohingya refugee issue with the government of Myanmar on many occasions in the past. We warmly welcome your visit to Myanmar which potentially could yield significant results in bilateral relations, including the Rohingya refugee issues and a number of human right problems that the Rohingya ethnic minority is facing in Myanmar.

There has not been any progress in Rohingya human rights and political issues in Myanmar although many promises were made by the Myanmar government before the 2010 election. In fact, situations have deteriorated in the Rohingya areas in Arakan after the new government in Myanmar assumed power. Currently, serious human rights violations against
the Rohingya by the government of Myanmar have reached a new level.

We, the Rohingya people, strongly believe that the future of Rohingya, as citizens of 
Myanmar, greatly depends on support from the people and the government of Bangladesh. We also believe that in order for the Rohingya people to regain their rights in Myanmar, the
government of Bangladesh could be instrumental by using its good relations with Myanmar as leverage.

We call upon your Excellency to exercise your good office to address the following Rohingya issues during your upcoming visit to Myanmar and thereafter:

1. Recognition of Rohingya by Myanmar government as an indigenous ethnic minority of
Myanmar and reinstate their citizenship.

2. Repeal the 1982 Citizenship Law of Myanmar adopted by the former military regime.

3. Cease the ethnic cleansing and all the human rights violations against Rohingya by the
government of Myanmar, and reinstate their rights to travel freely, seek education, maintain
their properties, get married without fear, renovate and rebuild their places of worship,
and several other rights.

4. Repatriation of all the Rohingya refugees with guarantee by the government of Myanmar
for their full protection, resettlement in their respective villages, return their properties
that were confiscated.

We are indebted to the people and the Government of Bangladesh for their historic support
and sympathy that Rohingya people have received. May Allah bless the Peoples’ Republic of
Bangladesh.


Thank you very much.


Sincerely, 




Prof. Dr. Wakar Uddin 
Director General 
Arakan Rohingya Union 



Download PDF here
၂၀၁၁ ခုႏွစ္ ဒီဇင္ဘာလ ၅ ရက္ေန ့ရက္စြဲၿဖင္ ့၈၈ မ်ဳိးဆက္ေက်ာင္းသားမ်ား မွ လက္ရွိၿမန္မာ့ႏုိင္ငံေရး အခင္းအက်င္း အေပၚကုိ သေဘာထားအၿမင္ ထုတ္ၿပန္ေၾကၿငာလုိက္ပါတယ္။

The ice-breaking visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Naypyidaw ended 50 years of US-Burma estrangement. The Obama administration has signaled desire for US engagement with the pariah regime since 2009, and since March, Burma’s Thein Sein has strived to widen the military regime’s legitimacy both at home and abroad. Hope for reforms is in the air – and this YaleGlobal series analyzes the history, the domestic momentum and big power ramifications of the reforms. Burma’s fiercely nationalistic armed forces, known as the Tatmadaw, have been in charge since the nation gained independence from Britain in 1948. The Tatmadaw seems intent on attempting to improve its image, writes Burma specialist David I. Steinberg in the first article of this two-part series, while the Obama administration seeks to reaffirm US strategic interests in Southeast Asia. The long-term outlook may be uncertain, but after 50 long years, the relationship has been abruptly and amazingly transformed. – YaleGlobal



Burma in the US-China Great Game – Part I

The US nudges Burma’s nationalistic military toward reform and diversified regional ties
David I. Steinberg

Ice-breaker: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton shakes hands with Burmese President Thein Sein (top); Clinton greets opposition leader and Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi

WASHINGTON: Eighteen months ago, no one would have anticipated that two of the world’s most eminent women, each arch critics of the Myanmar government from opposite sides of the world, could have reached supportive conclusions about changes in one of the world’s previously most repressive states.

The Western world’s icon of democracy Aung San Suu Kyi, after being held under house arrest for some 15 years since 1989, spoke positively about the reforms instituted by the new president of Myanmar, Thein Sein, a former military man who was prime minister under a junta anathema to the internal opposition and external Western powers: He is "committed to reform... I am sufficiently confident that I will be able to work together with him. I think the way is open for positive change." During the first week of December 2011, Hillary Clinton, on the first visit of a US secretary of state in half a century, spoke of the progress that had been made under the new government: “The United States is prepared to walk the path of reform with you if you keep moving in the right direction.” Both women want continued reforms and progress, but even their guarded optimism could not diminish what has been a startling and welcome set of changes. Whether they are ephemeral or sustainable is one critical issue.

The world is witnessing, with some incredulity, significant changes within a state that the United States, under both the Clinton and Bush administrations, had expected could only be reformed and relieved of its “pariah” status through “regime change,” a policy both assiduously pursued. Some believe that democracy, however defined, is just around the corner, while others consider these reforms are simply window dressing for continuing military control and the denial of democracy and a better life for the diverse Burmese peoples.

The world is witnessing, with incredulity, significant changes within a state regarded as a pariah by the US.

Neither are correct. A half century ago, after the coup of 1962, the military formed the Burma Socialist Programme Party under military domination and stipulated that once one joined the party, one could never resign, thus indicating its attempt to hold perpetual control. The motto over the gate of the Myanmar Military Academy sums up the attitude of the Tatmadaw, or armed forces, “The Triumphant Elites of the Future.”

The military has ruled directly and indirectly throughout most of Burma/Myanmar’s independent history since 1948. Under the new government headed by Thein Sein, inaugurated in the spring of 2011, that control continues through a number of constitutional provisions. These constitutional controls are supplemented by a pervasive government party that swept 80 percent of the legislative seats and is military dominated.

The Tatmadaw has continuously articulated its core concerns. Primary is that the military is the only institution that can hold the multiethnic state together, and thus its continuing role is essential. National unity and state sovereignty are vital, and the military’s responsibility in maintaining them have been pursued with a bombastic vigor that is not simply propaganda, but reflects deeply held nationalistic sentiments. If these elements and military autonomy within the state structure are maintained, for the military are highly patriotic, then reforms are possible in economic, political and social fields. The Tatmadaw is aware of its poor reputation both internally and abroad, and seems intent on attempting to improve its image.

But if the reformers are sincere, and it seems that at least at the apex of administrative power this is evident, then why now? Cynics point to the desire of Myanmar to host the 2014 ASEAN summit, which they did not do in 2006 when their first turn was scheduled, assigned through alphabetic order, as a prime motivating factor. The critics maintain that these reforms should be discounted as superficial changes, likely to be reversed after that date.


Since Obama came into office, both Myanmar and the US have sent signals calling for improved relations.


The reasons are likely more complex. There seems little doubt that receiving approval from ASEAN to hold the 2014 chair was a factor. But Myanmar may also have wanted to ensure that it would not become overly dependent, or perceived so, on China, the source of much of its economic aid, investment, infrastructure development and military assistance. Myanmar has also been inundated with illegal Chinese immigrants – by some estimates 2 million. Myanmar thus sought improved relations with the US and relaxation of the sanctions regimen to achieve a balance-neutralism that’s been its policy since independence.

Since the Obama administration came into office, it’s evident that both Myanmar and the United States have sent signals calling for improved relations. The US wanted Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners freed, and Myanmar wanted relief from sanctions. In July 2009, the US signed the treaty of Amity and Cooperation with ASEAN, which it had not done before because of Myanmar’s membership, and the Obama administration also quietly dropped the cry for “regime change” and opted for “pragmatic engagement” – keeping the sanctions that Congress in bipartisan manner had approved, but adding high-level engagement. 

Other possible causes may have prompted the current reforms. Power is now somewhat diversified, without arbitrary top-down leadership. Until 2011, Myanmar had a singular source of power – Senior General Than Shwe. No one seemed willing to disagree on any policy or challenge him. His arbitrary rule was law, and he is said to have a dislike for Aung San Suu Kyi. He is supposedly aged and retired, caring only for protecting the core military concerns and influence, as well as the safety of his family. 

The highly nationalistic military is also concerned for its historic reputation. They have rewritten Burmese history to stress their role. Refurbishing the Tatmadaw’s reputation through improving the previously inept economic performance of the military to date, and allowing a significantly expanded space between the state and the citizens, are elements of this attempt to restore the military’s luster and good reputation earned by its success in securing independence from the British in 1948.

By responding positively to Burmese reforms and reformers, the US is strengthening the likely continuity of those changes.

So diverse motivations and circumstances are likely responsible for the unexpected change in attitudes. Sending Clinton to Naypyidaw was both strategically and tactically influential in improving relations with Myanmar.

Strategically, it was the most vital signal the Obama administration could send that did not require intense negotiations with the US Congress and using up valuable political capital for no ostensible domestic benefits. Myanmar is not high on any political list of US priorities. Yet the visit has strengthened Myanmar’s reformers, who can attest that the reforms are having a positive effect. If there had been no substantive response from the US, the strong anti-reform elements within the Tatmadaw could claim that the reforms were ineffective and should be rescinded. By responding positively to the reforms and reformers, the US is strengthening the likely continuity of those changes.

Tactically, the manner of the effort was also significant. President Barack Obama’s personal call to Aung San Suu Kyi and her endorsement of Clinton’s visit have preempted the congressional critics, and those in the anti-military human rights and expatriate groups, challenging their condemnation of the visit; all they can do is call for caution.

The game is afoot and the outcome uncertain, but we have witnessed progress unanticipated, at a pace unheralded, and in fields hitherto unrecognized by the Burmese administration. It has taken 50 years to reach this far. We can only hope that the engagement and reforms will continue.

David I. Steinberg is Distinguished Professor of Asian Studies, School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University. His latest volumes are Burma/Myanmar: What Everyone Needs to Know (2010) and, with Fan Hongwei, Modern China-Myanmar Relations: Dilemmas of Mutual Dependence (2012).

Credit :  Yale Center
An Urgent Letter to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina regarding her upcoming visit to Myanmar


To:
Her Excellency Sheikh Hasina Wazed,
Prime Minister 
Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh
Dhaka, Bangladesh

Dear Prime Minister,
Assalamu Alaykum. It gives me great pleasure to learn that you are going to visit Myanmar (Burma) soon. I pray and hope that your trip is a productive and safe one.

Burma, as you well know, has potential to become a good neighbor of Bangladesh and can learn a thing or two from your vast experience as a respectable democratic leader that has shown prudent leadership in dealing with minority issues. At the heart of Bangladesh-Myanmar problem is the Rohingya issue, which needs a viable solution that would allow the Diaspora Rohingya community, living a life of uncertainty in Bangladesh and elsewhere, to return to their ancestral homes in the Arakan (Rakhine) state of Myanmar. That can only happen with the revocation of the 1982 Citizenship Law, an universally condemned and illegal racist/xenophobic law that unduly de-legitimized more than a million Muslims of Arakan whose ancestors had lived there from time immemorial, much like their coreligionists living in Chittagong and other coastal parts of Bangladesh. (The attachment below has the necessary information on the Rohingya problem.)

As a well-wisher of Bangladesh, I would like to beseech your kind indulgence on the Rohingya issue during your visit to Burma so that an amicable solution can be found guaranteeing the safe return of the Rohingya people to Arakan. 

Sincerely yours,

Dr. Habib Siddiqui



(author of 3 books on Rohingyas of Burma, and international peace activist and scholar)
Philadelphia, USA
====================================================

The Rohingya Refugee Problem


1. Background

Recently, bilateral talk has been taken placed in between the government of Burma and Bangladesh regarding refugee repatriation. However, the situation in Arakan, after the election, becomes worst than ever. The persecution and the human rights violation accelerated than before. It is too early to repatriate refugees to Arakan without changing any situations in Arakan. Premature repatriation will repeat mass refugee exodus again as we have witnessed the second mass refugee exodus in 1992, after 14 years time from the first mass refugee exodus in 1978. In order to gain long lasting solution, hosting countries and international bodies need to find out the root causes of the problems. 

2. Root Causes of the Rohingya Refugees 

The Rohingya, who have been living with distinct socio-cultural entity, are not tolerated in Burma, and they have long been oppressed and persecuted in a planned way in order to transform the Arakan into a purely Burmanized Buddhist Arakan. Apparently, the successive military government of Burma with the aid of ultra racist Rakhine (Magh) have been pursuing the policies of de-Muslimization and Burmanization in Arakan applying various kind of inhuman polices to drive them out from the soil of Arakan. Indeed it is a problem of religious intolerance and political persecution and is a systematic eradication of an ethnic Muslim minority from their ancestral land; periodically, armed operations were conducted against unarmed Rohingya civilians since her independence on Jan 4, 1948. 


2.1 The armed operations against Rohingyas 

01. Military Operation (5th Burma Regiment) November 1948 
02. Burma Territorial Force (BTF) Operation 1949-50 
03. Military Operation (2nd Emergency Chin regiment) March 1951-52 
04. Mayu Operation October 1952-53 
05. Mone-thone Operation October 1954 
06. Combined Immigration and Army Operation January 1955 
07. Union Military Police (UMP) Operation 1955-58 
08. Captain Htin Kyaw Operation 1959 
09. Shwe Kyi Operation October 1966 
10. Kyi Gan Operation October-December 1966 
11. Ngazinka Operation 1967-69 
12. Myat Mon Operation February 1969-71 
13. Major Aung Than Operation 1973 
14. Sabe Operation February 1974-78 
15. Nagamin Operation February 1978-79 
16. Shwe Hintha Operation August 1978-80 
17. Galone Operation 1979 
18. Pyi Thaya Operation 1991-92 
19. Na-Sa-Ka Operation (presently going on) 1992 
Out of 19 operations, 18 were carried out within 43 (1948-1991) years time, it means every 2 ½ years there was one operation for Rohingya. Obviously, Rohingyas are constantly and gradually migrated to Bangladesh, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, United Arabs Emirate, Thailand and Malaysia to escape from the persecution. However, the junta and the racist Rakhine (Magh) are still not satisfied and the Na-Sa-Ka operation was started in 1992. 

2.2 The Na-Sa-Ka Operation (1992-presently going on) 
It was the longest and the worst ever operation in the history of Rohingya. It was a new extermination design, with long-term plans and programmes under the command of ex- Lt. Gen. Khin Nyunt, the Chief of the Directorate of the Defence Service Intelligence (DDSI) and the Secretary No. 1 of the SPDC then. Through this operation, the Rohingyas are made educationally backward, economically crippled, socially and culturally de-generated. Many mosques have been destroyed and closed down. Arbitrary killing, confiscation of land, forced labours, forced relocation, forced ration collection for army, extortion of money and raping of women are the tactics used in this operation. 

2.3 The Citizenship Law of 1982 
1982 Burma citizenship law (Pyithu Hluttaw law No.1982-87) supersedes the 1948 Constitution Nationality Laws. According to the 982 law, there are citizens, associate citizens, and naturalized citizens. Under this law, citizens by birth are Kachin, Kayah, Karen, Chin, Burman, Mon, Rakhine and Shan ethnic groups. 
The new citizenship law was purposely formulated to target the Rohingya Muslims and denying their rights to nationality and thus rendered them to the status of stateless people. 
This particular law will continue to create outflow of refugees which overburden other countries and create threats to peace and tranquillity within the region. 
The Rohingya problem is a man-made tragedy recurring in cycle. The neighbouring countries, particularly Bangladesh, are over burdened with the Rohingya influxes. It creates regional instability posing serious threat to the world peace. 

2.4 Racial and religious intolerance 
The present situation of the Rohingyas are the result of join oppressions by the ultra-racist Rakhine and Burmese military government through forcible expulsion from their homeland by means of persecution, genocidalmassacres, torture and harassment in the most inhuman manner. 
Therefore, prior to any refugee repatriation process, the government of Burma (Myanmar) should accept the following pre-requisites and fully implement them in Arakan. 
3. Pre-requisites for repatriation 

1. Recognition of Rohingyas as an indigenous ethnic minority of Burma (Myanmar). 
2. Issuance of national securitization cards to all Rohingyas. 
3. To lift all form of restrictions and harassments such as travel ban, marriage restriction, land and property confiscation, extortion, arbitrary arrest, forced ration collection for army etc. 
4. To stop building model villages and sent back all model villagers to their origin. 
5. To return all confiscated lands and properties to the original owner. 
6. To give assurance for religious freedom. 
7. To give access for higher education and to provide enough hospitals and medical facilities in northern Arakan 

As all above-mentioned factors are the main elements that directly contribute to uproot and displaced hundreds of thousands of Rohingyas from Arakan, unless and until developing the situation in Arakan, the repatriation of refugee will not fulfill its primary objective that is the durable solution. 

4. Creating conducive environment for returnees 

Instead of passively waiting for conditions to be changed Burma, refugee agencies, must work actively to create conditions conducive to their safe return. It should emphasize on: 

The right of all persons to return to their country 
The prime responsibility of countries of origin to establish conditions for safe and dignified return 
The obligation of Burma to accept the return of their nationals 
Calls on Burma to promote conditions conducive to the return of refugees and to support their sustainable reintegration 

5. Welfare of voluntary returnees 

It is essential to maintain an image of truly voluntary repatriation. Voluntary repatriation requires asylum, it respects the refugees, and allows them to make unpressured decisions. The returnees should have the following: 

1. Overall peace and security 
2. Provision of agricultural settlement land or creating job opportunities 
3. Improving infrastructures 
4. Strong funding support from donors 
6. The repatriation dialogues 
Apart from UNHCR, the hosting country (Bangladesh) and the country of origin (Burma) there should have representatives of the refugees or community leaders in the repatriation dialogues.


7. Conclusion 
Rohingyas had become refugees to two times, portions of them had been repatriated to Arakan, through bilateral repatriation agreement between Rangoon and Dhak in 1978 and 1992, but it does not provide adequate safeguards to the refugees upon their return and yet their problem still remains unsolved. 

Sad to mentioned, in both agreements (1978 and 1992), the refugees were not accepted as citizens of Burma, instead, the technical word Myanmar residents was used. Apparently, the Rohingyas were fallen prey again and again to the atrocities of the junta. 
After the election, there are no changes at all in Arakan, and rather the situation is further deteriorating. 

Therefore, we would like to the government of Bangladesh, UNHCR, US, EU, OIC, and ASEAN to give pressure to the government of Burma to accept Rohingya as an ethnic minority and to grant full citizenship rights before any refugee repatriation process. 
Diplomatic Correspondent,


Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina leaves for Myanmar today on a three-day official visit with officials saying that repatriation of Rohingya refugees, energy cooperation, maritime dispute, trade and connectivity is high on the agenda.

During the visit the two countries are expected to sign several deals aimed at boosting economic cooperation and improving bilateral relations, foreign ministry sources in Dhaka said.

The Bangladesh cabinet has given go ahead for signing an agreement on capital investment, development and its preservation in both the countries.

Relations between Bangladesh and Myanmar are considered warm in spite of disputes over maritime boundary and the influx of ethnic Rohingya refugees from Myanmar's eastern state of Arakan.

Bangladesh wants Myanmar to speed up the repatriation of about 28,000 Rohingya refugees who have been living in government-registered camps in the border region of Tekhnaf.

Official sources in Bangladesh said another about 300,000 Rohingyas have fled Myanmar over the years alleging persecution. These unregistered refugees live outside the camps, many of them mingling with the local people.

Bangladesh and Myanmar are also trying to resolve their dispute over the maritime boundary in the resource-rich Bay of Bengal.

The prime minister's trip takes place at a time when the long-isolated Southeast Asian nation's first civilian government in decades are opening up with promises to carry out reforms.

Her trip follows two high profile separate visits to Myanmar by Chinese Vice-president Xi Jinping and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The premier will leave Dhaka for Nay Pyi Taw, the new capital of Myanmar, at 2:00pm today on a special flight of Biman Bangladesh Airlines, according to foreign ministry officials.

Myanmar's Union Minister for Foreign Affairs U Wunna Maung Lwin will receive Sheikh Hasina at Nay Pyi Taw Airport at around 4:00pm local time. Foreign Minister Dipu Moni will accompany the PM, among others.

She will meet Myanmar President Thein Sein and hold talks aimed at boosting bilateral cooperation and removing irritants between the two neighbours.

A host of issues including import of natural gas and electricity, taking lease of land in Arakan for cultivation, building a direct road link, opening direct air and shipping links, easing procedures for issuing business visas and introduction of facilities for banking and financial transactions will be discussed.

From Myanmar the prime minister will fly to Bali, the Indonesian goddess island, on Wednesday to attend an international democracy conference on December 7-9.

Credit : Daily News
By Chutima Sidasathian and Alan Morison ,

PHUKET: A boatload of Rohingya were spotted by coastal residents north of Phuket today, quickly apprehended by Marine Police and immediately turned over to the Thai Army.

Local authorities confirmed that 54 would-be refugees were in the vessel that was intercepted near Ra island, close to the fishing port of Kuraburi, north of Phuket. 

A group of 92 boatpeople, apprehended nearby on November 24, was trucked north to the Thai-Burma border in police vehicles to be handed over at some point in unconventional circumstances to the Thai Army.

Today, the Thai Army picked up the 54 would-be refugees in an Army vehicle before carrying them off to an unknown destination. 

Local authorities said that the Army's Internal Security Operations Command was involved in today's operation. An Isoc officer had given orders not to talk to the media or send on photographs, one official said by telephone. 

As with the 92 men and boys apprehended on November 24, the likely destination and fate of the 54 boatpeople captured today is not known and unlikely to be revealed by Isoc. 

Thailand's policy towards the Rohingya boatpeople has again become covert and increasingly of concern to United Nations organisations and international aid groups. 

Four days after the first 92 boatpeople vanished, Human Rights Watch called on the Government of Thailand to disclose their whereabouts and explain the Army's role in the unconventional apprehension and detention of the group. 

After January 2009, when the South China Morning Post newspaper in Hong Kong and Phuketwan revealed that large numbers of boatpeople were being towed out to international waters and cut adrift by the military and paramilitary, the detention of unwanted arrivals by sea on Thailand's coast reverted to Immigration officials. 

More boatloads of Rohingya are reported to have sailed from northern Burma or Bangladesh in recent days, disenchanted at the lack of change in the ''new'' Burma, where they remain deprived of citizenship and controlled by repressive measures. 

The US was previously one of the Rohingya's strongest public and private advocates. 

However, official calls for a change in attitude towards the Rohingya in Burma and Thailand have not been made for some time. 

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met with government leaders and opposition democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi in Burma this week. 

Human Rights Watch deputy Asia director Phil Robertson said today that Thailand's ''apparently discriminatory'' policy in dealing with the Rohingya gave comfort to the Burmese Government.

Credit here

  U Shwe Man Press Conference 

သူရဲ ့အင္တာဗ်ဳးကို ေသခ်ာစြာနားေထာင္ရင္
၁- ေျမာက္ကိုးရီးယား နဲ ့ျမန္မာ နယူးကလီးယား လ်ိဳလ္၀ွက္ ဆက္ဆံေရးမွာသူမွာတာ၀န္မရိွဘူး။ နယူးကလီးယား အဆင့္မရိွဘူးလို ့ဆိုတယ္။

၂- ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲမႈေတြကို သူလုပ္ျခင္တယ္။ဒါေပမဲ့ အစိုးရထဲမွာ မေျပာင္းလဲျခင္တဲ့သူေတြရိွတယ္။ အဲဒီလူေတြက တင္ေအာင္ျမင့္ဦး တို ့အဖြဲ ့ျဖစ္တယ္ ဆိုတာကို သြယ္၀ိုက္ေျပာသြားတယ္။

သူရဲ ့ အေျခအေနက ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ခင္ညြန္ ့ အာဏာရိွစဥ္က လို သန္းေရြ၊ေမာင္ေအး ေခါင္းမာဂိုဏ္းၾကားမွာ အားျပိဳင္ေနရတဲ့အေျခအေန မ်ိဳးျဖစ္ေနပါတယ္။ အဲ့ဒီကာလက ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ခင္ညြန္ ့က သူရဲ ့အခက္ခဲေတြကို
လူထုကို ခုလို ေျပာင္မေျပာျပခဲ့ဘူး။ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ေရြမန္းက သူရဲ ့ အေျခအေနေတြကို ခုထက္ပို ျပီး ပြင့္ပြင့္လင္းလင္း ေျပာ သင့္တယ္။ သူဟာ လူထု ဖက္ကို ရပ္တည္သင့္တယ္။ သန္းေရြ၊ တင္ေအာင္ျမင့္ဦး
ေခါင္းမာဂုိဏ္းနဲ ့လမ္းခြဲ ေၾကင္းကို အတိအလင္း ထုတ္ေဖၚလုိက္သင့္တယ္။ ဘာပဲျဖစ္ျဖစ္ သူရဲ ့ေဆြးေႏြး
တင္ျပခ်က္ ေတြကို ဟီလာရီကလင္တန္ ကလည္း သေဘာက်တယ္။ ေရြမန္းမွာ Human Sense ကို ေတြ ့ရတယ္ လို ့ ဟီလာရီကလင္တန္ က ဆိုတယ္လို ့သိရတယ္။




Credit : WFWW
By AFP


Troops from the SSA parade in the headquarters of Loi Taileng on the Thailand-Burma border (Francis Wade)

Burma has reached a ceasefire deal with one of the war-torn country’s major ethnic guerilla groups, a mediator said Saturday, in the latest sign the new army-backed regime is reaching out to its opponents.

The pact was signed Friday by representatives of the Shan State Army South and the local government in the northeastern state, Hla Maung Shwe, founder of the civil society group Myanmar Egress, who witnessed the agreement, told AFP.

The was no immediate confirmation from the Burmese government or the Shan State Army, but the Irrawaddy news website, run by journalists in exile, said the agreement in the Shan State capital of Taunggyi also included government assurances of economic development and joint efforts against drugs.

It said the next step would be negotiations with the central government.

Burma has made a series of reformist moves in the past year — releasing democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest, holding dialogue with the opposition and freeing some political prisoners.

Elections last year brought a nominally civilian government to power, but it retains close links with the army.

Civil war has wrecked parts of the country since its independence in 1948, and an end to the conflicts, as well as alleged human rights abuses involving government troops, is a key demand of the international community.

The Shan State Army South has been one of the biggest rebel forces still battling the government, with thousands of guerilla fighters mostly stationed near the border with Thailand.

Burma’s leaders last month held peace talks near the Thai-Burma border with several ethnic groups fighting a long-running struggle for autonomy and rights, according to people involved.

“They [the Shan State Army South] are the first group who signed the peace agreement among the five groups that we have met,” Hla Maung Shwe said.

He said Burma’s Railways Minister Aung Min was present as a witness while the Shan rebel delegation was headed by Brigadier General Sai Luu.

Mediators were also trying to reach peace agreements with the Karen National Union, the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), the Chin National Front and the Karenni National Progressive Party, he added.

In eastern Karen state, armed rebels have been waging Burma’s longest-running insurgency, battling the government since 1949, while fighting has also raged since June in northern Kachin state near the Chinese border.

Burma state media reported on Thursday that peace talks had been held between the government and Kachin rebels, and the two sides had agreed to continue dialogue.

“The KIA is the most difficult to reach a peace agreement with,” Hla Maung Shwe said.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton welcomed what she said were efforts by the regime to resolve ethnic conflicts after historic talks with the country’s rulers in the capital Naypyidaw on Thursday.

“But as long as the terrible violence continues in some of the world’s longest-running internal conflicts, it will be difficult to begin a new chapter,” she added.

The mainly Buddhist Shan are the country’s second-biggest ethnic group, accounting for about nine percent of the population, and Shan state covers a vast area of northeastern Burma.





ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ေအာင္ဆန္း အတၱဳပတၱိရိုက္ကူးေရးအတြက္ ရုပ္ရွင္အႏုပညာရွင္မ်ားႏွင့္ လူထုေခါင္းေဆာင္ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ ေတြ႔ဆံုေဆြးေႏြးပြဲ.. (Burma VJ Media)(ရုပ္သံ)

ဒီဇင္ဘာ ၃ ရက္ေန႔က ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္အေနနဲ႔ ထင္ရွားသည့္ ရုပ္ရွင္အႏုပညာရွင္မ်ားႏွင့္ေတြ႕ဆံုခဲ့သည္။ လြတ္လပ္ေရးဖခင္ႀကီး ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္ေအာင္ဆန္း၏ အတၳဳပၸတၱိအား ရုပ္ရွင္ရိုက္ရန္ေဆြးေႏြးျခင္းဟု ဆိုေသာ္လည္း NLD ပါတီမဲဆြယ္ပြဲေတြအတြက္ အႏုပညာရွင္ေတြ အားကိုပါ သံုးခ်င္ျခင္းျဖစ္သည္ဟု ဆိုၾကသည္။ NLD လည္း ထိုသို႔လုပ္ေဆာင္ရန္ အဆင္သင့္ျဖစ္ေနခဲ့သည္။



ျမန္မာျပည္သူျပည္သားမ်ား ႏိုင္ငံေရးနဲ႔ မစိမ္းၾက။ အနားကပ္ခြင့္မရေအာင္ ပိတ္ဆို႔ထားလြန္း၍သာ အနားမကပ္ရဲၾကျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။
ျပည္သူတခ်ိဳ႕သာမဟုတ္ အႏုပညာရွင္တစ္ခ်ိဳ႕သည္ပင္ ႏိုင္ငံေရးနဲ႔မကင္း ။ စစ္အစိုးရေခတ္က စစ္အစိုးရအတြက္ ဝါဒျဖန္႔သီခ်င္းေတြ ဆိုဖူးၾကသူေတြရွိသည္။ ဝါဒျဖန္႔ရုပ္ရွင္ကားေတြ ရိုက္ဖူးခဲ့သူေတြရွိသည္။ ဝါဒျဖန္႔စာေတြ ေရးခဲ့ၾကသူေတြရွိခဲ့သည္။ ထို႔ေၾကာင့္ မစိမ္း ဟု ေယ်ဘူယ် ဆိုခ်င္သည္။




လက္ရွိ ျမင္မိ၊ သံုးသပ္မိတာ တစ္ခုရွိသည္။ ႏွစ္ေပါင္းမ်ားစြာ တိတ္ဆိတ္ဆြံ႕အေနၾကေသာ ၊ ပုန္းကြယ္ေနၾကေသာအႏုပညာရွင္မ်ား အခုမွ အေမစု အေမစု ျဖစ္ေနသည္ကို တစ္ခ်ိဳ႕ မ်က္မုန္းက်ိဳးသည္ဟု ထင္ရသည္။ မႏွစ္ၿမိဳ႕ဟု ထင္ရသည္။ သာမွေပါင္းခ်င္၍ ေခါင္းျပဴ ထြက္လာၾကသည္ဟု ေျပာခ်င္ၾကသည္။ ထိုသို႔ ထင္ပိုင္ခြင့္ရွိသည္။ ဒါကအျမင္ပိုင္းျဖစ္သည္။




သို႔ေသာ္ တိုင္းျပည္၏ က႑အသီသီး၌ လူ႔အသက္ေမြးဝမ္းေက်ာင္းအျဖစ္ က႑စံုအလိုက္ အလုပ္ကိုယ္စီရွိၾကသည္။ တာဝန္ဝတၱရားအသီး သီး ထမ္းေဆာင္ေနၾကသည္ခ်ည္း။ အႏုပညာရွင္မ်ားသည္လည္း သူ႔သေဘာအရ ႏိုင္ငံေရး စိတ္မဝင္စားပိုင္ခြင့္ရွိသည္။ မည္သည့္က႑မွ မဆို စိတ္မဝင္စားခြင့္ရွိသည္။

ဒါအျပစ္မဟုတ္။ ႏိုင္ငံေရးကိုယ္၌က အားလံုးစိတ္ဝင္စားရမည္ဟု မဟုတ္။ သို႔ေသာ္ ေဘာလံုးစိတ္မဝင္စားေသာ္လည္း မန္ခ်က္စတာ၌ေမြး သူသည္ မန္ခ်က္စတာအသင္းအား အားေပးပါလိမ့္မည္။ ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲေရး လိုလားသူမ်ားသည္ ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲေရး လုပ္သည့္သူ သို႔မဟုတ္ အဖြဲ႕အစည္းအား အားေပးျခင္းက သဘာဝက်သည္။ ယခုပြင့္လင္းခြင့္ ရလာ ေသာအခါ ပြင့္လင္းျပလာၾကျခင္းသည္ လြန္သည္မဟုတ္။ ႀကိဳဆိုရမည္ဟု ထင္သည္။






အႏုပညာရွင္မ်ားအတြက္လည္း မိမိခ်စ္သည့္ပါတီအတြက္ အသည္းၾကားက မဲတစ္တစ္ျပားစီအတြက္ ျပည္သူေက်နပ္ေအာင္ လံႈ႕ေဆာ္ခြင့္ ရသည့္ အတြက္ ဂုဏ္ယူစရာသာျဖစ္သည္။ ထိုအလုပ္သည္လည္း အႏုပညာအလုပ္အျဖစ္ အခေၾကးေငြခံစားရမည္မို႔ အားလံုးေကာင္းရန္သာျဖစ္သည္ဟု ဆိုခ်င္သည္။ဒီေလာက္ေတာ့ လူတိုင္းရွိၾကသည္။ ထိုရွိျခင္းေလးကို ျပတတ္ဖို႔လိုမည္။ အနည္းဆံုး ကိုယ့္အတြက္သာသည့္ အသင္းအားအားေပးရဲရမည္ျဖစ္သည္။





သို႔ေသာ္ ယခင္ စစ္အစိုးရ၏ ဝါဒျဖန္႔ျခင္းႏွင့္ NLD ၏ မဲဆြယ္ပြဲတို႔ အျပတ္အသတ္ ကြာပါသည္။ ျပဒါးတစ္လမ္း သံတစ္လမ္းျဖစ္မည္။ မဲဆြယ္ျခင္းနည္းသရည္းတို႔အား တစ္ခ်ိဳ႔ အထူးအဆန္းသဖြယ္ အံ့ၾသေကာင္း အံ့ၾသႏိုင္ၾကမည္ ျဖစ္ေသာ္လည္း အမ်ားစုကား အံ့ၾသ မည္မဟုတ္။ ဒါမ်ိဳးသည္ ဒီမိုကေရစီစနစ္၏ လြဲဖယ္ေရွာင္သြား၍မရသည့္ လုပ္ရိုးလုပ္စဥ္ျဖစ္သည္။ အေရးလည္းပါသည္။ လုပ္ရန္လည္း လိုအပ္သည့္အရာျဖစ္သည္။




စစ္အစိုးရလက္ထက္ ကလည္း လုပ္ခဲ့ၾကသည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ ၿပိဳင္ဘက္မရွိသည့္ တစ္ခုတည္းေသာအစိုးရအတြက္ လုပ္ေပးရသည့္ တစ္ဖက္ သတ္ အလုပ္မ်ိဳးျဖစ္သည္။ လုပ္ေပးရျခင္းျဖစ္သည္။ အခု ထိုသို႔မဟုတ္။ လက္ရွိအာဏာရ ႀကံ့ခိုင္ေရအဖြဲ႕ သို႔မဟုတ္ ပါတီမ်ားထဲမွ ဝင္ၿပိဳင္မည့္ပါတီမ်ားႏွင့္ ယွဥ္ၿပိဳင္ရမည္ျဖစ္သည္။ လြတ္လပ္မည္။ ပြင့္လင္းမည္။ အထူးသျဖင့္ စစ္အစိုးရ အေေရခြံလွဲထားသည့္ ႀကံ့ခိုင္ေရး ပါတီႏွင့္ အႀကိတ္အနယ္ၿပိဳင္ျခင္းျဖစ္မည္။ သည့္အတြက္ လုပ္ေပးရသည့္ အႏုပညာရွင္မ်ားမွာ တစ္စံုတစ္ရာ အျပစ္ရဖြယ္မရွိပါ။ လူထုမုန္း ခံရဖြယ္လည္း မျမင္ပါ။ လူထုသည္ ေဒၚစုႏွင့္တစ္သားတည္းက်သလို အႏုပညာရွင္မ်ားအားလည္း လုထုကိုသို႔ပင္ ျမင္ပါလိမ့္မည္။ ဒါေသ ခ်ာသည္။



သည္သို႔ မဲဆြယ္မႈမ်ိဳးအား အိုဘားမား လုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ ဘုရွ္ လုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ ကလင္တန္ဇနီးေမာင္ႏွံ လုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ တိုနီဘလဲ လုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ ေဒးဗစ္ကင္မရြန္း လုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ မဟာသီယာ လုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ ဂ်ိဳးဆက္အက္ဆရာဒါ လုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ နီကိုလာ့ ဆာကိုဇီ လုပ္ခဲ့သည္။ ဘာလူစကိုနီ လုပ္ခဲ႔သည္။ အားလံုးလုပ္ခဲ့ၾကသည္။ ထပ္မံလုပ္ၾကေပဦးမည္။ လြတ္လပ္သည့္ ဒီမိုကေရစီႏိုင္ငံဆိုလ်ွင္ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ လုပ္သည္၌ ဘာမွားသနည္း။ မမွားပါ။ လုပ္သင့္လုပ္ထိုက္သကဲ့သို႔ လုပ္ရန္လည္းဝန္မေလးသင့္ ဟုထင္သည္။




တစ္ခုသတိခ်ပ္ၾကေစလိုသည္မွာ ဇာနယ္ဇင္းသမားမ်ားႏွင့္ျဖစ္ေစ ၊ ရုပ္ရွင္ႏွင့္အႏုပညာသမားေတြနွင့္ျဖစ္ေစ NLD အေနျဖင့္ဆက္စပ္လုပ္ ကိုင္ျခင္းအား အျပစ္တင္ မေစာရန္ျဖစ္သည္။ ယခုအခင္းအက်င္းသည္ လူထုႏွင့္တသားတည္းက်ရန္ အလြန္ေကာင္းသည့္ သမယျဖစ္သည္။



အျမင္မ်ိဳးစံု ျဖစ္ႏိုင္သည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ ဦးတည္ခ်က္တစ္ခုသာ အာရံုထားသင့္သည္။ ေဘးထြက္ဆိုးက်ိဳးအား ေျပာဆိုပုတ္ခတ္ျခင္းထက္ ထိုဆိုးက်ိဳးအား ဖာေထးျပဳျပင္ရန္ပို၍ လိုအပ္ပါမည္။


အႏုပညာရွင္မ်ားသာမက အသိပညာရွင္၊အတတ္ပညာရွင္မ်ား ႏွင့္ ကြ်မ္းက်င္ရာဆိုင္ရာပညာရွင္မ်ားပါပါဝင္ႏိုင္ခဲ့လ်ွင္ လူထုကိုယ္စားျပဳ မည့္ တိုင္းျပဳျပည္ျပဳ လုပ္ေဆာင္ခ်က္မ်ား ပို၍ျမန္ဆန္လာမည္။ ပြင့္လင္းျခင္း၊ ပူးေပါင္းေဆာင္ရြက္ျခင္းတို႔ ေပါင္းစုလ်ွက္ လွပသည့္ အနာဂတ္အား အုတ္တစ္ခ်ပ္သဲတစ္ပြင့္စီျဖင့္ တည္ေဆာက္ၾကရမည္ျဖစ္သည္။ အေတြးရွင္းလ်ွင္ အလုပ္ရွင္းမည္ျဖစ္သည္။






ဓာတ္ပံု -ဒီမိုဖက္တီး။

Platon/Trunk Archive
By AUNG SAN SUU KYI

Why does change seem so desirable and so exhilarating in our times? Barack Obama’s presidential campaign was fueled by the promise of change. In Burma today there is continuous debate on whether the new government means real change or whether it is no more than the old army dictatorship in new civilian garb. Almost every day I am asked if I believe that measures taken by the new administration should be seen as mere window dressing or as signs of genuine change in the right direction. After 23 years under authoritarian rule, impatience to see and to experience change is understandable. It has been sharpened by events in other parts of the world during 2011.

The political upheavals of the Arab Spring have been of such proportions that fundamental and irreversible changes are expected throughout the Mideast and Arab Africa in 2012, with possible copycat effects elsewhere. Whether such expectations will be fulfilled will depend on many factors, not least the degree of commitment by those who wish to create a brave new future. I’m thinking of commitment here as passion, in the social theorist Max Weber’s sense of passionate dedication to a cause.

Were the peoples of Tunisia, Egypt and Libya led to topple seemingly indestructible regimes by such passion, or were they merely moved by what Weber denigrated as “sterile excitement?” It would surely be sophistry to label as sterile an outcry that led to such convulsive results. It might be argued, though, that the emotion fueling the Arab Spring was the kind that burns itself out speedily, after setting off the first sparks of defiance.

If the original impulse needed some help to turn those first sparks into a full-scale conflagration, another more effective catalyst must have been at work. Could that have been power? People power, or IT power or the power of global democratic solidarity or, simply, in the end, military power, either the use of it or the decision to refrain from using it?

Power is by nature latent until a force sets it in motion. What starts up the engines of power, whether they be tanks and fighter jets and nuclear weapons or diverse individuals linked by a shared cause and modern technology? The means to unleash power that could change frontiers or crush men and their aspirations can become active only when an initial force sweeps away irresolution and inhibitions. The power of defiance, too, needs that first impulse to encourage passive individuals to put aside the inaction fostered by decades of fear or by natural human caution.

So then, is it “passion vs. power?” Does it have to be versus? Are passion and power natural opposites, or mutually exclusive in promoting political change, either of the ordinary variety brought about through constitutional processes in established democracies, or of the revolutionary brand that reshapes the destinies of peoples and nations?

There is also the kind of change that defeats easy categorization. The U.S. presidential election of 2008 was certainly not ordinary, but whether the election of Barack Obama should be regarded as a seismic event in the history of the United States or just a political landmark is a matter of opinion. There can, however, be no controversy about the outcome of the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa; it changed the political landscape of the nation, and it changed perceptions with regard to race and color the world over.

What prevented the now toppled regimes of Tunisia and Egypt from using all their administrative and military might? What convinced the despots of Libya and Syria to make war on their own people? And what made the anti-government forces of Libya and Syria persist even after it was clear the fight would be prolonged and brutal?

Is there not, behind the iron mask of autocracy, the flesh and blood of human will, just as there is a steely, collective will behind a motley, unarmed crowd determined to exercise its right to cry out its woes and perhaps even to take up arms to assert that right? And is not will — which is, after all, deliberate, controlled purpose — closely joined to passion? It may be joined either as an intense, transitory emotion, which may well be no more than “sterile excitement,” or as a long-term, firmly rooted dedication to principles or a cause — something as broad as freedom or as limited as self-preservation.

As a member of a movement that has been engaged in a long struggle to effect change through nonviolent means, I have learned to value above all other attributes in colleagues and supporters disinterested, active commitment. Such commitment is seldom given to pyrotechnic display, but it is always there, and it provides constant assurance that the essential flame that keeps our cause vibrant will not die out. It is passion, not of the sterile breed, but passion that moves hearts and minds and makes history. It is passion that translates into power. When such passion is brought to bear on public issues, it is a potent instrument for political and social change.

In Burma, again and again, the most active members of our party and other forces committed to the struggle have been placed under detention, their voices silenced, their faces almost forgotten by the public. Again and again they have emerged, arousing the world to their cries. In 2002, after I was released from my second term of house arrest, I toured the country, and the commitment of our supporters translated into large, enthusiastic rallies that made the authorities feel the power of our passion. Quite recently, concern over the fate of our Irrawaddy River united peoples from all walks of life. Our passionate appeal for a reappraisal of the dam project was so powerful that the president announced the suspension of the project for the duration of his term.

Can the process be reversed, can power become passion? Power that effects political change cannot be defined as an isolated, unique brand different from all other powers. Party power, money power, media power, pressure group power and many other powers strongly influence political evolution and revolution. Power as the authority of the ruler(s) backed by the machinery of state might, however, be considered a contrast to passion. The distinction between despotic power and democratically invested power is relevant here.

When do those in authority wish to work for political change? The impulse of those who hold the powers of state is generally toward conservation, not transformation. Only when problems arise, and not always then, do rulers begin to consider the need for change. Intelligent rulers are quick to grasp when change becomes unavoidable. But realizing the need for change is not the same as having the means to make it possible.

In pluralistic societies, government alone cannot bring about change. Many other players are involved. The bipartisan negotiations to push through the U.S. debt deal that did not seem to please anybody demonstrated that the president of the United States does not have sufficient means to effect the change that not only he but many of his countrymen consider necessary.

If presidential power can be considered an impetus toward change, it is one that is easily dissipated by other powers. Commitment, perseverance, persuasion, the ability to win hearts and minds can be counterweights to these opposing powers. Passion can fill in the gaps when power alone is not enough.

It is easier for an authoritarian government untroubled by counteracting powers or passions to act in accordance with its own will. A ruthless despot allowed to proceed unchecked can change not just the political scene but the very psyche of a nation. For a time. Under Stalin’s brutal absolutism, terror seeped into the very bones of citizens and made them unrecognizable to themselves. For a time. Then the despot died, and the country woke from its nightmare. People began to ask what had happened and why. Did power alone transform a whole society? What enabled Stalin to exercise power with such single-minded brutality?

Whether Stalin was fired by dedication to a cause or whether personal ambition motivated him, it could be said the element that initially fueled his ruthless machine was passion, albeit of the worst kind. As his iron rule continued, an all-consuming preoccupation with the preservation of his inviolability, obsession rather than passion, moved him to commit some of the greatest political crimes in history.

Stalin was not alone in establishing his reign of terror. Vast numbers collaborated, and some of those who did so consciously and willingly were fired by passion: as commitment to the political and social changes they believed Stalin would achieve for their country or as dedication to the man himself. Power can generate passion; and power needs passion as its agent.

In all its might, power is less self-sufficient than passion; passion generates its own power. Passion is in itself a kind of power that is by its very nature a kinetic force.

Power, on the other hand, tends naturally toward entrenchment. When power moves in the direction of political change, it usually does so because external forces — from popular uprisings to poll predictions — have become irresistible.

Passion is more effective than power as an impetus for political change. Meaningful political change, however, needs to be sustainable. For that, passion and power must work together as mutually supportive partners.

We all wish for change, but there is no guarantee that change will take place or that it will live up to expectations. There is always an element of risk when we step out into the unknown. The greatest challenge for Burma and the countries of the Arab Spring, as well as all peoples who hope to enjoy the flowers and fruits of their endeavors in 2012, will be to bring wisdom to bear on passion and power, to create a blend of the two that is both effective and wholesome.


Aung San Suu Kyi was born in 1945 in Burma, now called Myanmar. Her father, the nation’s independence hero, was assassinated when she was 2. She left the country as a teenager when her mother was named an ambassador, then returned from Britain in 1988 and became a pro-democracy leader. She won the Nobel Peace Price in 1991, one of 15 years she spent under house arrest.

Credit : NYtimes


ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္သည္ လာမည့္ၾကားျဖတ္ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ ေကာ့မွဴးမဲဆႏၵနယ္၌ ဝင္ေရာက္အေရြးခ်ယ္ ခံမည္ဟု အမ်ိဳးသားဒီမိုကေရစီ အဖြဲ႕ခ်ဳပ္ (NLD) မွ ဗဟိုအလုပ္မႈေဆာင္တစ္ဦးက ေျပာၾကားသည္။

“ေဒၚစုက တရားဝင္ မေၾကျငာေသးေပမဲ့ ေကာ့မွဴးမွာ ဝင္ၿပိဳင္မယ္ဆိုတာကေတာ့ ေသခ်ာသြားၿပီ” ဟု ၎ကဆိုသည္။

ေကာ့မွဴးၿမိဳ႕နယ္ ျပည္သူ႔လႊတ္ေတာ္တြင္ ဝင္ေရာက္အေရြးခ်ယ္ခံၿပီး အႏိုင္ရသြားေသာ ႀကံ႕ခိုင္ေရးႏွင့္ ဖြံ႕ၿဖိဳးေရးပါတီအမတ္ ဦးစိုးတင့္သည္ ေဆာက္လုပ္ေရးဝန္ႀကီးဌာနမွ ဒုဝန္ႀကီးရာထူး တာဝန္ထမ္းေဆာင္ရသည့္အတြက္ ေကာ့မွဴးမဲဆႏၵနယ္သည္ လစ္လပ္ေနရာျဖစ္သြားေၾကာင္း သိရသည္။

ႏိုင္ငံေရးအင္အားစုမ်ားထဲတြင္ တခ်ိဳ႕က ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ကို လာမည့္ၾကားျဖတ္ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲတြင္ မဝင္သင့္ေသးေၾကာင္း ေျပာဆိုၾက ေသာ္လည္း တခ်ိဳ႕ကမူ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္သည္ လႊတ္ေတာ္ထဲသို႔ သြားေရာက္ရန္ ေနာက္က်ေနၿပီဟု သံုးသပ္ေျပာဆိုလ်က္ရွိသည္။

လစ္လပ္ေနရာတစ္ခုျဖစ္သည့္ မရမ္းကုန္းၿမိဳ႕နယ္တြင္ ႏိုင္ငံေရးအင္အားစုမ်ားက ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ ဝင္ေရာက္ အေရြးခ်ယ္ခံႏိုင္သည္ဟု သံုးသပ္ၾကေသာ္လည္း မရမ္းကုန္းၿမိဳ႕နယ္တြင္ ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ လံုးဝဝင္ၿပိဳင္မည္မဟုတ္ေၾကာင္း အထက္ပါပုဂၢိဳလ္က အတည္ျပဳေျပာၾကား လိုက္သည္။

ေဒၚေအာင္ဆန္းစုၾကည္ ဝင္ၿပိဳင္မည့္မဲဆႏၵနယ္တြင္ တိုင္းရင္းသားစည္းလံုးညီညႊတ္ေရးပါတီ(တစည) က လံုးဝဝင္ေရာက္ယွဥ္ၿပိဳင္မည္ မဟုတ္ ေၾကာင္း တစညပါတီမွ တာဝန္ရွိသူတစ္ဦးက ေျပာၾကားသည္။

၎အျပင္ NLD ပါတီက လစ္လပ္ေနရာ ၄၈ေနရာစလံုးတြင္ ဝင္ေရာက္အေရြးခ်ယ္ခံမည္ျဖစ္သည္အတြက္ အတိုက္အခံပါတီမ်ားက ၾကားျဖတ္ ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲတြင္ ဝင္ေရာက္ယွဥ္ၿပိဳင္ေရးႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္၍ ျပန္လည္သံုးသပ္ေနၾကေၾကာင္း ႏိုင္ငံေရးအသိုင္းအဝိုင္းမွစံုစမ္းသိရသည္။

“တကယ္ေတာ့ ေဒၚစုအဆင့္က ေရြးေကာက္ပြဲ ဝင္ၿပိဳင္ရမယ့္အဆင့္ေတာ့ မဟုတ္ဘူးဗ်” ဟု NLDမွ ဗဟိုအလုပ္အမႈေဆာင္ ဦးဝင္းထိန္က ေျပာၾကားသည္။

တရားဝင္ေၾကျငာထားေသာ လစ္လပ္ေနရာ ၄၈ေနရာတြင္ ျပည္သူ႔လႊတ္ေတာ္၌ ၄၀ေနရာ၊ အမ်ိဳးသားလႊတ္ေတာ္၌ ၆ေနရာႏွင့္ တိုင္းေဒသႀကီး လႊတ္ေတာ္တြင္ ၂ေနရာ ျဖစ္သည္။

NLD ပါတီသည္ လာမည့္သတင္းအပတ္အတြင္း ပါတီမွတ္ပံုတင္ခြင့္ရမည္ ျဖစ္သည့္အတြက္ လစ္လပ္မဲဆႏၵနယ္မ်ားတြင္ ေအာင္ႏိုင္ေရး အဖြဲ႕မ်ား ဖြဲ႕စည္းေတာ့မည္ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္း၊ လစ္လပ္ေနရာမဟုတ္သည့္ ၿမိဳ႕နယ္မ်ားတြင္မူ ဝန္းရံေရးအဖြဲ႕မ်ားကို ဖြဲ႕စည္းသြားမည္ျဖစ္ေၾကာင္းသိရသည္။

Credit here

    • Rohingya Exodus