March 17, 2014

By Lawi Weng

The Irrawaddy

March 17, 2014

RANGOON — Nationalist Buddhist monk U Wirathu visited strife-torn Arakan State and joined large protests against the upcoming census over the weekend. Local Arakanese Buddhists oppose the census because it will allow the stateless Rohingya minority to register their ethnic identity as they wish.

On Sunday, protests against the UN-supported census where held in nine townships in Arakan State.

U Wirathu, who heads the controversial 969 movement, which is accused of spreading hate speech against Muslims, told The Irrawaddy he participated in order to voice support for the protests.

“I joined the protest in Myebon [Township] and encouraged protesters because there is no such Rohingya name in our country,” he claimed. “But they are trying to create and have this this name—it is not fair.”

Arakanese politicians and many among the Buddhist community have expressed anger over the fact that the census offers the Muslim minority the opportunity to choose an ethnicity as they wish, in accordance with international census standards.

Arakanese MPs said they opposed these standards for collecting census data as it seems to contradict the government position that there is no Rohingya group in Burma.

“It’s time they make a clear statement about whether this government will use the Rohingya name or not in the census list, because otherwise there will be more protest in our region,” said Pe Than, a MP with the recently formed Arakan National Party.

He said the Arakanese community would decide to boycott the census if their grievances are not addressed, adding that the Muslim minority should only be registered under the name “Bengalis.”

Nyo Aye, an Arakanese women’s activist who helped organize Sunday’s protest, also said the Arakanese community would reject the census unless its data collection methodology is changed. “If there is no response from the government … we are ready to boycott the census,” she said.

The census, organized with the help of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), will start at the end of March and requires respondents to select their ethnicity and religion. They can choose an ethnicity from a classification list of 135 minorities drawn up in the 1982 Citizenship Law by the then-military government.

The Rohingya are omitted from the list and set apart as a group without citizenship called “Bengalis,” to suggest most are illegal immigrants from neighboring Bangladesh. Rohingya Muslims claim nonetheless, that they have lived in northern Arakan State for generations.

The UNFPA has said that respondents who do not identify with one of the 135 ethnicities can describe themselves as “other” and orally report their desired ethnic affiliations to the enumerator. These responses would later be sub-coded during data processing. This option would allow Rohingyas to register their ethnic identity as they wish.

Minister of Immigration and Population Khin Ye reportedly told the Arakanese MPs that he could not change the census procedures, but assured them that it would not change the government’s position regarding the Rohingyas.

Government data from 2010 put Arakan State’s population at about 3.34 million people, of which the Muslim population accounts for 29 percent.

Many local Arakanese Buddhists worry that government recognition of the Rohingya population would precede an eventual shift in demographics in Arakan State, and with that a loss of political power and cultural identity.

U Wirathu said he first arrived in the state capital Sittwe on March 10 and has since held a number of sermons for the Arakanese Buddhists in Kyauktaw and Pauktaw, Ponnagyun townships. The monk said he would give another sermon in Thandwe town in southern Arakan on Monday night.

Thandwe was the scene of the most recent outbreak of anti-Muslim violence, in October. At the time, the local Kaman Muslims—who, unlike the Rohingyas, are citizens of Burma—have complained that the violence was whipped up by visiting 969 monks.

U Wirathu said he had been welcomed by the Arakanese Buddhist community, adding that he instructed them during his sermons to become more media-savvy when expressing their views on the inter-communal conflict with the Rohingyas.

“I told them they need more media training, so, they will know how to handle the media. I even told them how media plays an important role,” the Mandalay-based monk said. Asked if his anti-Muslim sermons risks inflaming tensions in the volatile region, Wirathu said, “Where ever I go, there has been no problem. I tell people to solve conflict within the rule of law.”

By Gabrielle Paluch

The Myanmar Times

March 17, 2014

When the Du Chee Yar Tan Investigation Commission presented its final report last week into the alleged killings in Maungdaw township, the group’s leader appeared genuinely offended at having to answer probing questions from the media on the investigation. “I’m not biased, I’m not incompetent,” U Tha Hla Shwe said. “Why don’t you trust us?”

U Tha Hla Shwe was asking the wrong question. It’s not a matter of trust. The media are there to ask questions about the report and the commission is expected to give reasonable, rational answers.

The commission occupies the most unenviable of positions, caught between the government and all the groups that don’t trust it. Maintaining independence is key to walking such a tightrope.

Yet the commission is not independent. One example is the manner in which the commission stood by the government’s refusal to even acknowledge that the Muslims of northern Rakhine State self-identify as “Rohingya”. Their insistence on the use of “Bengali” – and hostility to those who disagree – is perceived as disrespectful by the very people with whom the commission says it wants to build trust. While previous investigation commissions at least tried to justify this by saying it was done to “avoid problems”, no such effort was made last week.

A number of the report’s findings suggest that the commission was dismissive of testimonies given by Muslims. The commission said it saw “no evidence of the deaths” of Muslims in Du Chee Yar Tan because witnesses failed to produce evidence in the form of corpses. Although 88 percent of Muslims interviewed confirmed there had been killings, and 26pc could state the precise number of deaths, this was deemed insufficient evidence. The the testimony of Daw Mahanayatu, who said her three-month-old child was taken from her while they were sleeping side by side and killed, was disregarded. The question of the where-abouts of other missing Muslims was never addressed.

However, the death of Police Sergeant Aung Kyaw Thein is not questioned, despite the fact that his body has yet to be recovered. Full credence was given to one witness in police custody who claimed he heard Pol Sgt Aung Kyaw Thein cry out in pain. The commission appears to have shown a bias toward testimonies that support the government’s version of events.

The collection of testimonies that the United Nations presented to the government was published in the Myanmar-language version of the report, despite being labelled confidential. The commission nevertheless blames the UN and international NGOs for inflaming tensions by reporting unconfirmed information.

Gaps in the report, beyond the aforementioned, are glaring. Whether these are the result of bias or incompetence is irrelevant: They should be pointed out openly.

Among the commission’s recommendations for building trust is to prioritise Rakhine State in the citizenship verification process. Should the 1982 citizenship law be applied, the citizenship status of Muslims who identify as Rohingya would rest on the evaluation of a government body relying on village elders.

Ideally, a transparent verification process will lead to genuinely eligible Muslims, regardless of how they describe their ethnicity, being awarded citizenship – a key step toward reconciliation. In the best-case scenario, this recommendation from the investigation team demonstrates true courage and the right balance of political verve. In the worst-case scenario, the recommendation condemns the Rohingya to a future without access to the rights associated with citizenship.

It appears that the commission is trying its best to work from within the system to change it, and in this sense they should be commended. They have the power to create the political will needed to resolve the conflict. But its job was to uncover the truth about what happened in Du Chee Yar Tan. While the commission might win favour for publishing a report that downplays a crisis, it won’t build the trust needed to start moving down the path of reconciliation.

Gabrielle Paluch is a journalist based in Southeast Asia. She worked for The Myanmar Times in 2009.

By FIDH

March 17, 2014

Paris, Bangkok -- The UN Human Rights Council must renew the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Burma with full monitoring and reporting powers, FIDH and its member organization, the Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (ALTSEAN-Burma), said today.

“The situation in Burma calls for more human rights monitoring, not less,” said FIDH President Karim Lahidji. “The Human Rights Council needs a UN Special Rapporteur who can regularly monitor and report on the situation of human rights in Burma if it wants to play a positive role in the country’s fragile transition to democracy,” he added. 

FIDH and ALTSEAN-Burma regret that Burma has ignored many of the recommendations that UN Special Rapporteur Tomás Ojea Quintana made over the course of his mandate. The government and military-dominated Parliament have disregarded key recommendations to amend or repeal draconian laws not in line with international standards; reform the country’s judiciary and armed forces; and establish accountability for widespread and systematic human rights violations. 

“At the start of his mandate, Mr. Ojea Quintana set very specific benchmarks to measure Burma’s human rights performance. Despite the new civilian government’s hype about the reform process, the overwhelming majority of those benchmarks have not been met,” said ALTSEAN-Burma Coordinator and FIDH Secretary-General Debbie Stothard. 

Since first convening in January 2011, Parliament has repealed only one of the numerous laws identified by the Special Rapporteur as not in line with international standards. Burma’s military, which has enjoyed an 88% budget increase over the past three years, continues to carry out military offensives and abuses against civilians in many ethnic minority areas. The country’s judiciary remains a tool of the executive branch to repress dissent. Despite President Thein Sein’s promise to release all political prisoners by the end of 2013, the government has failed to do so. At least 30 political prisoners remain behind bars. To compound the situation, authorities have arbitrarily arrested or detained at least 26 people since 1 January. Those arrested or detained include journalists, human rights defenders, peaceful protestors, and farmers. Scores of activists still face criminal charges under the very laws that the UN Special Rapporteur identified as not in conformity with international standards. 

“Since President Thein Sein took office in February 2011, the government has consistently refused to take effective legislative and judicial measures to address impunity,” said Ms. Stothard. “Despite the establishment of a National Human Rights Commission and the appointment of various investigative commissions, no state actor been has been held accountable for committing serious human rights violations, be it abuses against civilians in ethnic areas, the crackdown against anti-Letpadaung protestors, or the serious crimes committed against Kachin and Rohingya,” added Ms. Stothard. 

The Burmese government’s unwillingness to undertake a genuine investigation of the most recent allegations of the killing of 48 Rohingya in early January in Du Chee Yar Tan Village, Maungdaw Township, Arakan State, is the most recent in a series of failures to investigate human rights violations perpetrated against Rohingya. 

“In the absence of an effective international monitoring mechanism such as the Special Rapporteur, the Human Rights Council risks giving the government and its armed forces free rein to commit human rights abuses with total impunity,” concluded Ms. Stothard. 

Press contacts 

Debbie Stothard (English) - Tel: +66 81 6861652 (Bangkok)

Arthur Manet (French, English, Spanish) - Tel: +33 6 72 28 42 94 (Paris)

Audrey Couprie (French, English, Spanish) - Tel: +33 6 48 05 91 57 (Paris)

By U Kyaw Min

RB Opinion

March 16, 2014

17th century Rakhine court bard shah Alaol’s works say: revering to the sword of Justice (of the king) the lamb and the tiger meet peacefully and drink water together at the same (ghat) water. That is Muslim and Rakhine were at peace. But today Rakhine are furiously hostile to Muslims.

On 3rd March 2014, RNDP declaration on Rohingya and census process is very ridiculous and in contrast to legal points. 

First: RNDP said Rohingya should not be enumerated because they are illegal immigrants. But census law says every one found in the country on census processing days must be counted, no matter they are citizen or not. 

Second: RNDP said they will not accept the term Rohingya. Instead Bangali must be their identity. But census law and immigration minister say it is every one’s Legal right and Human Right to claim his or her own ethnicity. 

Thirdly: RNDP is threatening that more possible violence in Rakhine state will occur. That means Rohingya and the Gov must surrender to their intimidation. In fact a community has no right to deny the other’s ethnicity and other basic rights. 

Let me send the message that Rohingya’s historicity is as old as the Rakhine history itself. In no way they are illegal immigrants. What history says: 

1. Many official historical records say there were Muslims is Rakhine since Wethali period, i.e. before 11th century. (See BSPP. Publication: ethnic people and culture, Rakhine, 1982, P.149-150) 

2. Prominent Rakhine politician Bon Pauk Tha Kyaw analyzed three categories of Muslims in the time of Bodaw Pya’s rule (Burmese period 1785-1825), in his anti Rohingya treatise: “The danger of Rohingya in the Union, 1990”. 

He classified; 

First group who remained in Rakhine. 

Second group who fled to British Bengal. 

Third group who were taken away to Burma by the conquering army. 

(This is the proof of Muslim presence in 18th century.

3. The most revered monk: Rakhine Sayadaw in his “Danyawaddy Arey Daw Bon” writes: In the time of AnuLunMin, Loungkyat period, (a captive Kala (Muslim) ) prince from Maukthuza (Bengal) was made lord of Sittwe and his followers were employed in various hard labor ; altogether they were 42000 (forty two thousand). 

Again that treatise says, there were thousands of Mussalman Kalas brought as war captives from Begal in the time of king Minn Htee (13th century) 

In the reign of Mark-U kings Minn Phlaung, Minn Khamaung and Minn Raza Gyi there were thousands of Kala (Muslim) armed force personnel in the Rakhine army. 

4. Dr. Jacques Leider, an expert on Rakhine history who tries to protect Rakhine version of history recently mentioned 30000 deportees from Bengal during Sirsudhammaraja’s (1622-38) rule and another 30000 craft men were brought from Chattagramma and settled in Rakhine plains in the time of king Nara Patti (1645-52).These are undeniable evidences of Muslim settlement before colonial period. 

It is J. Leider in his research papers mentioned: 

1. The Bengal Patan army of ten thousand who came to enthrone deposed Rakhine king Nara meikla in 1428 were settled around Mrauk-U for its defence. 

2. There was a special Muslim provincial administrator besides, four others during Myanmar rule.(1785-1824) 

3. It is he who brought into light the records of Bengali and Persian as official languages (the writing languages of Rohingya) in Rakhine court. He also said Rakhine court milieu studied and practised above languages 

4. It is he who said there were Muslim combatant leaders like Zanu who fought agianst the early British occupation along with other Rakhine compatriots. 

That all Muslims (Rohingya) are illegal Immigrants as in RNDP’s statement is an illusion and racist’s exposure of RNDP .Myanmar Gov should stop this sort of racial incitement in the country. The study of census reports from Rakhine reign up to today shows there is no increase but decrease in Muslim population in Rakhine .So the accusation of illegal immigrants is false and baseless. 

Let us not fight amongst our selves, but find ways to live peacefully together as we did in Rakhine king’s period.

U Kyaw Min is chairman of Democracy and Human Rights Party based in Yangon, Myanmar.

By CR Abrar

New Age BD

March 16, 2014

IF PRESS reports are anything to go by, then it may be reasonably construed that the recent efforts of the Bangladesh prime minister to engage the Burmese authorities on Rohingya refugees in this country have fallen on deaf ears. The Burmese reaction has been consistent with the regime’s general approach to the Rohingya issue. 

There has been little change in the overall situation in the Arakan state. The communities remain largely segregated, the internally displaced Rohingyas are housed in atrocious camp conditions with a plethora of restrictions on movement of people and goods in and out of such camps, anti-Muslim feelings are rife with Buddhist monks whipping up such sentiments, the administrative and judicial structures of the state do not even pretend to be neutral, the members of law enforcement agencies continue to hunt and target Muslim ‘terrorists’, forcible relocation of Rohingyas continue unabated, the leading voices of opposition are yet to take on board the demand for the restoration of citizenship rights of the Rohingyas and the like. 

Eyewitness accounts provide a gloomy picture of the situation prevailing in Sittwe. The Muslim quarter of Aung Mingalar has now become a virtual ghost town. Total restrictions have been imposed on the freedom of movements of a few thousand of its residents who are still hanging on to their ancestral homes. This part of the town, once known for the bustling activism of Muslim entrepreneurs, has become practically dead. The lively markets have been replaced by rickety tabletop sale of noodle packets and stale vegetables. Only one primary school is in operation. The Muslim identity of the residents of this quarter acts as legal bar on them to do grocery shopping in a municipal market located just at a stone’s throw. Lack of food and nutrition is taking toll on the population, particularly the children and the elderly. Since early 2013 the population of Aung Mingalar has experienced almost total incarceration. 

As conditions deteriorated with successive waves of violence meted out against the Muslims, the overwhelming bulk of the residents had little option but to move to the state-sponsored camps, just outside Sittwe. Stark contrast is obvious between the camps that are set up for the Buddhist victims of violence, and the camps that house about 130,000 Muslims. While the Buddhist camps are provided with basic utility services and inmates are catered with regular supplies of food and daily necessities, those in the Muslim camps are living in sub-human conditions. The option of moving out of the camp is not open for the Muslims. Government regulations bar them to undertake such a venture. Many families continue to remain split since the days of violence in 2012. 

There is a dearth of information on the situation prevailing in Muslim majority Mangdaw and Buthidaung districts. Sporadic reports of independent observers and international human rights organisations suggest that very little change has occurred for the Rohingyas. The recent measure to expel the Nobel Prize winning Doctors without Frontiers (MSF) from the Arakan state has only exposed the sensitivity of the Burmese state of the presence of outsiders in the Arakan state. The government accusations that the MSF appointed more foreign staff than authorised and was biased towards the Muslims in the delivery of services were not convincing. Observers believe that the organisation’s confirmation of treating a certain number of the injured in Du Chee Yar Tan village during the January 13 massacre in the region triggered the retaliatory government action. Earlier, the authorities denied occurrence of any such massacre.

The forcible relocation of the Muslims from their own homes and districts is being accompanied by active encouragement to Buddhists to migrate to the erstwhile Muslim living quarters. Reports are also rife that the Burmese government is inducing the Rakhine Buddhists of the Bangladeshi side to move and settle on the Burmese side. All these actions would facilitate the Burmese authorities’ agenda of ethnic cleansing of the Muslims on the one hand, and instituting a pure Buddhist population in the Arakan state on the other. 

It is worrisome that there is little resistance to this government plan. The democratic movement in Burma continues to view the Rohingya question through the same lens that the regime does. In that sense there is hardly any difference between the government and so-called democratic opposition, including Aung San Su Kyi’s National League for Democracy. The Rohingya question has exposed the hypocrisy of the so-called liberal democrats in Burma, the 88 Generation (88G) who earned national fame as heroes of resistance to the military dictatorship. Instead of standing up for the rights and dignity of the oppressed Rohingyas, the leading figures of the 88G have also joined the anti-Rohingya chorus. Their actions supplement the agenda of chauvinist monks who have become the most vocal proponents for expulsion of the Rohingyas. Under the pretext of national security the government has been empowering the Buddhist gangs. 

There are reports of merger of Rakhine armed groups to protect ‘the Fatherland’ from twin threats of Burmanisation and Islamisation. The Arakan Army based in the Kachin state is also actively engaged in anti-Muslim campaign. All these armed groups have earned notoriety for planning and orchestrating anti-Muslim violence.

The anti-Muslim agenda of the Burmese state and its cohorts find its obvious manifestation in the recommendation of the Rakhine Truth Finding Committee set up to investigate into the communal violence that flared up in 2012. One of its reprehensible recommendations has been a two-child policy for Muslims of Mangdaw and Buthingdaung. The recommendation has found many takers in positions of authority in Burma and may soon be turned into a law. 

The recent leaked Burmese official documents reveal that the policies of restrictions on movement, marriage, childbirth, home repairs and construction of houses of worship, and other aspects of everyday life of the Rohingyas are the result of formulation and implementation of coordinated policies of the Rakhine state and central government authorities. One may therefore surmise that for all practical purposes the Burmese state’s ethnic cleansing is being supplemented by a policy of apartheid for the Muslims who refuse to flee the country.

In responding to the international concern and criticism, the Burmese leaders promised to bring about change. However, despite making such promise, the regime has not given any indication of creating necessary enabling condition so that those displaced within the country and those who fled overseas to escape persecution could consider returning home and getting rehabilitated in dignity. On the contrary, there is every reason to believe that the Burmese state remains firmly committed to expelling and marginalising the Muslims. 

Under such conditions one can safely argue life and liberty of the Rohingyas could be at stake if they return to Burma and those fleeing the country deserve to be accorded with refugee status. Any departure from this would be tantamount to abdicating international humanitarianism and violating the long-cherished principle of non-refoulement. 

CR Abrar teaches international relations and coordinates the Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit at the University of Dhaka.

RB News
March 16, 2014 

Maungdaw, Arakan – Some Rakhine extremists entered into villages in northern Maungdaw Township of Arakan State and were caught by the villagers. 

Today at 7:30 pm local time four Rakhine extremists entered into Doe Dan village tract, East hamlet in northern Maungdaw Township while holding swords. The Rohingya villagers in the hamlet caught two of them, but the other two ran into the nipa plam field and escaped. The men caught by the villagers are under custody of village administrator and will be handed over to police soon. 

Similarly, yesterday morning at 1:15 am a group of five Rakhine extremists entered into Sabai Gone village tract. The members of village administration saw them and caught two of the extremists. The other three managed to escape from the village. The two extremists who were apprehended were handed over the police outpost in Longdon by the village administrator. 

The police confiscated the swords and mobile phones from the two Rakhine extremists caught in Sabai Gone.

(Photo: One of the extremists caught in Doe Dan village tract)

March 15, 2014

By Feliz Solomon

March 15, 2014

Burma’s nascent democracy faces immense challenges in coming years, some with the capacity to “jeopardise” progress made since the country’s transition from military dictatorship to quasi-civilian leadership in 2011, a UN official concluded.

Tomás Ojea Quintana, UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Burma, will present the findings of his final mission to Burma to the Human Rights Council on Monday in Geneva.

“In assessing the reforms that have been initiated so far,” reads his report, released in advance of submission to the council, “the Special Rapporteur stresses that this can only be viewed as the start of a long process of reform that will be required to address the deep seated human rights issues in Myanmar [Burma].”

The Special Rapporteur made stern recommendations to the Burmese government in order to keep the transition on track, including support for an independent investigation into an alleged massacre in Duchira Dan [also written Du Char Yar Tan], on 13 and 14 January this year.

“The Special Rapporteur believes that investigations conducted with the involvement and support of the international community, including in relation to technical assistance, represents an opportunity to turn the tide of impunity in Rakhine [Arakan] State,” the report read. Quintana identified tackling the country’s history of impunity as “one of the most important challenges that Myanmar is facing”.

Rights groups have welcomed Quintana’s appraisal. In a statement on Friday, Mark Farmaner, director of Burma Campaign UK, said that since ”The United Nations have confirmed what human rights organisations have been saying, that crimes against humanity have taken place against the Rohingya,” the British government must now support an international investigation.

“This report highlights very serious ongoing human rights abuses which violate international law, and contrasts significantly with the rosy picture that the British government and others try to present about Burma,” he said.

On Tuesday a government investigative commission presented their findings to the public, maintaining that no massacre occurred in Duchira Dan. Quintana’s assessment, made public on Wednesday, stated that “domestic investigations have so far failed” to identify and hold perpetrators of atrocities accountable.

Quintana has served as the Special Rapporteur to Burma for six years, a tenure that will end in May. From 14 to 19 February, he made his ninth and final visit to the country, making stops in Kachin State, Sagaing Division and Arakan State. His final report stresses that he saw “no improvements” in Arakan, where over the course of five visits he has reported severe, targeted, policy-enshrined discrimination against Rohingya and other Muslim groups.

Systematic mistreatment of Muslims in Burma, the report said, may amount to crimes against humanity that could be punishable by the International Criminal Court and, “if left unaddressed, could jeopardise the entire reform process.”

In the three years since Burma’s reforms began, the Special Rapporteur has noted several commendable improvements. The release of more than 1,100 political prisoners, a marked effort to rid the Burmese military of child soldiers and ongoing progress towards a nationwide ceasefire — which negotiators are trying to secure in April this year — are among the government’s “significant improvements”, though none of these efforts have yet been carried to completion.

Political prisoners remain in jail, many of those pardoned were not released unconditionally, and Burma has retained prohibitive legislation that the Rapporteur believes has been selectively enforced to hinder activism. These laws should be reviewed and amended, the report said.

Burma’s government has not ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Quintana has urged them to do.

While ceasefires have been secured with 14 of Burma’s ethnic armed groups, fighting continues in Kachin and northern Shan State, which has led to the displacement of an estimated 100,000 people since the reform process began.

Other items of serious concern include acute tenure insecurity and limits to press freedom. Both of these problems will need to be addressed through improved legislation, the report said.

Among Quintana’s 60 recommendations are changes to the Constitution, the 1982 Citizenship Law and judicial procedures. Burma would also “benefit greatly” from an in-country Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, it said.

While Burma evidently has a long way to go and remains in a “fragile” phase, the report concludes that there is “limited space for backtracking.”

By Michel Gabaudan

Huffington Post

March 15, 2014

Eighteen months have passed since sectarian violence pushed some 140,000 stateless Rohingyas into a series of camps around Sittwe, the capital of Rakhine State in Myanmar. And yet the scars of the violence they suffered remain all too evident.

My colleague and I saw and heard the anguish as we met with displaced families during our recent mission. I especially remember the mask of fear worn by one woman, Noor, as she received us in her modest shelter.

"When we left, Rakhines burnt down our houses," she said. "Some from our village were killed by Rakhines when they were in boats trying to get here." Noor worries about how her family will get by, but she also despairs that the violence against her community could recur with scarcely any warning. "I am afraid of another Rakhine attack, as they attacked us before," she added. "It could happen again."

Noor's fears are not unfounded. While some things have improved in Rakhine State since Refugees International's last visit in May 2013, the root causes of displacement here have not been addressed.

To be sure, the United Nations and non-governmental organizations have done a good job raising the Rohingyas' living standards in the camps, which were appalling just a year ago. Long houses have been built, replacing the improvised shacks which were then the norm. Food distributions are quite regular, and water and sanitation services have markedly improved. There are even "temporary schools" in which children can spend their time, even if they are not following a normal curriculum.

These improvements should not be taken lightly. Indeed, they were achieved against great odds. The longstanding opposition of local Rakhine Buddhists to aiding the Rohingyas has been exacerbated by ultra-nationalist political parties. They regularly stage protests and threaten the work of agencies, rendering humanitarian access irregular and often unsecure.

But these modest changes in daily life do not make for acceptable treatment. The Myanmar government still imposes an absolute ban on Rohingyas' freedom of movement, slowly converting their camps into de facto ghettos. This ban is also causing new displacement: Rohingyas who were not expelled from their homes by violence, but are subject to the same movement restrictions, have no way to support their families, so many are dismantling their houses to sell the wood. They either move into the camps in order to receive assistance, or try to reach Thailand and Malaysia using unsafe boats controlled by abusive people smugglers. An estimated 80,000 have left Myanmar by sea just in the past year, and dozens have died in the process.

The Rohingyas are increasingly left without any sense of what the future holds for them, and the government's current policies are rapidly pushing them from poverty into absolute misery. Furthermore, many humanitarians are tormented by the fact that their work is practically underwriting segregation and playing into the hands of the authorities.

The international community has expressed concern about the Rohingyas, but it has been careful not to let this crisis poison their broader relationship with Myanmar at a time of major reforms. Western countries are rightly concerned that hard-won changes (including economic liberalization, the release of some political prisoners, and the acceptance of political opposition) could be challenged in the years to come. The elections planned for 2015 could be difficult, and the ongoing review of Myanmar's constitution will pitch political groups against each other in an atmosphere of growing civil society pressure, demands for federalism from the ethnic states, and defensive posturing by the powerful military and its allies.

In this context, it is hard to imagine that the government will fully address the roots of the Rohingya crisis - namely, the Rohingyas' legal status and their acceptance within society - during the next few years. But refusing to propose any initiatives or ducking the problem entirely (as the government did recently after a massacre of Rohingyas in northern Rakhine State) is not an option and cannot be tolerated by Myanmar's international partners. The world should therefore seek concrete, step-by-step improvements in the Rohingyas' situation, in the hope that they will lead to bigger changes over the long term.

First and most important, the ban on freedom of movement for Rohingyas must end. If the ban cannot be lifted immediately in all areas, then it should be removed now in the less tense parts of Rakhine State, with the Rohingyas in those areas given clear security guarantees.

Second, Myanmar should start prioritizing and pushing reconciliation between the Rohingya and Rakhine communities. So far this has been an arduous process because there are no clear and authoritative voices advocating for rapprochement. That is why the government should make its position clear and offer practical initiatives to move things forward.

Third, the government must hold accountable all perpetrators of violence against Rohingyas. So long as these abuses are tolerated, the government will rightly be seen as an accomplice. And as long as hate speech goes unanswered, the government will be seen as complicit.

Fourth and finally, the government should set out a clear pathway to citizenship for Rohingyas. A plan for reforming Myanmar's citizenship laws should be approved, and the work of identifying eligible persons should begin. Here too, the work can begin immediately through pilot projects in less restive areas. As the donor community sets the conditions for its support to Myanmar, it must include clear benchmarks in these four areas.

Myanmar cannot break from its brutal history while Rohingyas are being forced into ghettos or fleeing the country out of desperation. The Myanmar government and its international partners have to recognize this, and they must strive for improvements in the lives of Rohingyas at the same time as they pursue political and economic liberalization.

Michel Gabaudan is Presdient of Refugees International.

By Mark Tran

The Guardian

March 15, 2014

MPs recommend 40% aid increase to drive through reforms that could 'improve living standards for thousands of people'

Britain should seize the opportunity to improve the lives of people in Burma by increasing aid from £60m to £100m, MPs said on Wednesday.

As Burma sheds its pariah status after decades of military dictatorship, the international development committee (IDC) urged the Department for International Development (DfID) to step up its involvement in a country that, once among the richest in south-east Asia, is now among the poorest.

"We are persuaded that a window of opportunity has recently opened in Burma for considerable reform to make the country a more democratic and free society," said an IDC report, Democracy and Development in Burma. "Although some organisations are sceptical about the reforms, we believe that there are opportunities to fundamentally improve the living standards of thousands of people."

Burma has released more than 1,000 political prisoners. The Nobel peace prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi has been freed from house arrest, censorship has been lifted, and trade unions have been formed. But after years of conflict and isolation, Burma remains one of Asia's poorest countries, with GDP per capita of about $800 (£482). Thailand, which was once poorer, now has a GDP per capita of $4,800.

A third of Burma's population of nearly 50 million people does not have enough money to meet basic food and living needs, and more than 75% of the country lacks access to electricity. But with its considerable natural riches – including arable land, forests, minerals, natural gas, fresh water and marine resources – Burma has enormous potential.

The country's commitment to democratic change has been questioned, however, notably by Burma Campaign UK, which believes that the republic is heading in the direction of an authoritarian regime along the lines of China or Russia and has not done enough in terms of reforms to persuade countries to drop sanctions.

Nonetheless, Sir Malcolm Bruce, chair of the committee, was upbeat. "We must seize the moment," he said. "We therefore support the UK government's approach to support reformers in the Burmese government to raise the country out of poverty, develop the economy and build a society that moves towards democracy. Progress will be unpredictable and uneven, but supporting the reform process by working to deliver public services and develop livelihoods offers unprecedented potential … We do not believe that progress will happen by standing back or adopting an unduly sceptical approach."

The committee has identified governance – including assisting the peace, helping to reduce inter-communal religious violence and strengthening Burma's parliament – and education as areas that it feels could benefit from increased spending. The committee considered DfID's education budget in Burma too small to be effective, and said it should increase, with a major focus on teacher training.

But DfID's Burma programme should not go ahead whatever the situation, MPs cautioned.

"If reform does start to falter and things start moving backwards, DfID and the UK government should be strong to act, reducing or diverting funding and projects," said the report.

DfID has already doubled aid to Burma – from £32m in 2013 to £63m – and increased the number of staff in Rangoon, the capital, from 12 to 26. About half of UK aid goes on health. The committee recommended thatgreater emphasis be given to addressing drug-resistant malaria, which threatens to spread from Burma to the rest of the world.

"The UK could spend a lot more than £100m – especially in helping to develop government capacity, particularly in the provinces – but spending less than that would not make much difference," said Bruce, adding that DfID can be an important catalyst for change.

The UK provides most of its aid through UN organisations and local NGOs, with no money going directly to the government. In 2012, the most recent available figures, Burma received $504m in official development assistance, with Japan, Britain and Australia among the top three donors. As Burma moves away from military rule, donors are lining up, potentially posing problems of co-ordination, a familiar bugbear for aid recipients. ActionAid told the committee that China, Japan and India do not want to attend co-ordination meetings at all.

"The UK, working with multilaterals which it can influence, in particular the World Bank, should seek to prevent a proliferation of donors who do not intend to spend significant sums of money taking up Burmese ministers' time," said the report.

Inter-communal conflict between the Buddhist Rakhine and Muslim Rohingya populations – particularly in Rakhine state, bordering Bangladesh – poses the biggest challenge to Burma, witnesses told the committe when it gathered evidence for its report. The committee urged the UK to take a stronger position with the Burmese government to address the Rohingya's plight.

"We recommend that DfID do more to encourage interfaith dialogue and to ensure that the Rohingya have access to education and health services," said the report.

"We are pleased the IDC supports our approach," said Alan Duncan, minister of state for international development. "Without doubt, we have an opportunity to deliver further transformational change and we will be working across government to make the most of this. We will give full consideration to the IDC's recommendations, while ensuring we deliver value for taxpayers' money in Burma and elsewhere."

By Amelia Woodside

The Phnom Penh Post

March 15, 2014

It took three illegal border crossings, several bribed officials and six months in an overcrowded detention centre before Mohammed Ibrahim* finally arrived in Cambodia.

Four years later, the ethnic Rohingya, a victim of violence and oppression in strife-torn Rakhine state in Myanmar’s west, is one of the Kingdom’s few recognised refugees.

While the turmoil of his homeland is behind him, his struggle for basic rights is not. He remains a citizen of no country and it is this statelessness that is proving a barrier to him finding formal employment and discovering a sense of belonging.

“This life in Cambodia is not enduring for Rohingya. This life is not enduring for me,” the 32-year-old told the Post.

Concerns over the treatment of refugees in Cambodia surfaced again last month when Foreign Minister Hor Namhong announced that his Australian counterpart, Julie Bishop, had asked his government to consider resettling refugees seeking asylum in Australia.

According to Sister Denise Coghlan, whose organisation Jesuit Refugee Services (JRS) has been assisting Rohingya asylum seekers in the Kingdom since 2009, being granted refugee status in Cambodia doesn’t assure someone a life worth living.

“What many don’t understand is that while becoming a recognised refugee is the first step of the process that will allow you to stay here – it’s not necessarily the beginning of a process that guarantees access to basic human rights,” she said.

According to JRS briefing papers from 2013, statelessness can lead to a number of rights restrictions, including limited access to healthcare and education.

Asylum seekers are not legally allowed to work while their case is being processed, while for recognised refugees, employment is a more complicated matter.

“Refugees who acquire status have the same rights as ‘legal foreign immigrants’ which allows them to work. However, most refugees are unable to meet the requirements of the Labor Law (such as a valid passport or residency card) to obtain a work permit or employment card,” one paper says.

“This means it is extremely difficult for asylum seekers and refugees to find employment in Cambodia outside of self-employment.”

It took three years before Ibrahim was recognised as a refugee. Even now, he still confronts daily barriers, including when it comes to finding formal employment or supporting his family back home.

“[My refugee card is] not a residence card or passport, so I’m still not even allowed to send money to my family.”

So Ibrahim survives by selling rotis – a type of flatbread popular on the capital’s sun-soaked streets – from a cart.

“How can I think about the future when I have to think about where my food will come from next? I want to find a better life,” he said.

Strangers in their own land

The Rohingya people, a predominantly Muslim minority, are concentrated mainly in Rakhine state.

Although they have called the state home for generations, Myanmar’s government considers them illegal immigrants from neighbouring Bangladesh. Escalating violence has led to the displacement of thousands.

For Ibrahim, his life back home was lived under constant hardship and fear of death; ultimately, these realities drove him out.

“If I had stayed in Rakhine, I would have been killed. I was worked like a slave by government soldiers before I ran away,” he said, explaining that his village was forced to supply a monthly quota of labourers to the Nasaka border security police.

When a Nasaka soldier beat him after he became too sick to work, Ibrahim fled with the help of his uncle, who arranged a spot for him on a boat to Thailand for about $15.

“That night, the Nasaka came to my home and beat my family because I had escaped,” he said.

After six months in an immigration detention centre, a forced deportation back to Myanmar and a second illegal border crossing, Ibrahim snuck into Cambodia a year later – an act, he said, that was driven by desperation.

The few, the desperate

According to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees’ (UNHCR) latest tally, made in December, there are 68 recognised refugees and 12 asylum seekers living in Cambodia.

While there is no breakdown by nationality or ethnicity, 21 of the 68 refugees are Rohingya, said Coghlan from JRS.

Asylum seekers are not allowed to work in organised sectors such as the garment industry – and refugees often lack the documents that enable them to do so – but some find a way.

Moen Tola, head of the labour program at the Community Legal Education Center, said he had been told of instances of Rohingya refugees working in factories since 2012.

“What we don’t know is if [these] refugees or migrant workers have access to labour law protections or are experiencing forced labour,” Tola said. For that reason, he added, the government must ensure that asylum seekers and refugees are better protected.

“It doesn’t matter what country these people are coming from, because they are undertaking all the risks. They deserve and need protection under our labour laws.”

After entering Cambodia, asylum seekers are expected to file their cases with the Ministry of Interior’s Refugee Office for assessment.

The first two required steps to becoming a recognised refugee are a counselling session with the Refugee Office and the filling out of an application form.

During a recent visit to the Ministry of Interior, Post reporters found that such applications were available only in Khmer. Staff were willing to provide a copy, but said each costs $2.50.

After the Refugee Office accepts a case, the asylum seeker is then issued a “preliminary stay permit” that requires renewal each month until a decision about their application is reached.

The application process is long and confusing for asylum seekers, who are provided little information along the way, said Phil Robertson, deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s Asia division.

“It’s really a mystery why the Cambodian government’s basic procedures for receiving, assessing and making a determination of refugee status takes so long,” he wrote in an email.

“The process is not readily transparent to the asylum seekers, or their advocates who are on the outside looking in.”

Without the support of these advocates, such as JRS, Ibrahim believes he would not have survived the three years it took the Refugee Office to grant him status.

JRS, he added, provided him a microfinance loan that enabled him to set up his roti business.

“How without JRS? We cannot work as asylum seekers, so others [asylum seekers] have to find jobs that aren’t good for them,” he said.

Refugee Office director Teang Sokheng and his deputy, Mom Sophanarith, declined to comment for this story.

Hurdles remain high

Being granted a refugee certificate last year was a big moment for Ibrahim, but he still remains stateless.

Without being a citizen, his movements are restricted and bureaucratic processes are much more arduous. He also lacks a sense of belonging.

Under Cambodia’s Law on Nationality, to gain citizenship through naturalisation a person must be able to “speak Khmer, know Khmer scripts and [have] some knowledge of Khmer history, and prove clear evidence that he/she can … get used to good Khmer custom[s] and tradition[s].”

Citizenship is something that can then only be considered once a person has held a residence card and lived continuously in the Kingdom for seven years.

Several minority rights groups told the Post that they were yet to come across a single case of a refugee gaining citizenship.

“Rohingya refugees are … stateless in Cambodia, because they are not granted Khmer citizenship, even though they have a refugee certificate issued by the Cambodian Refugee Office, said Ang Chanrith, executive director of the Minority Rights Organization.

“All of them now remain in limbo and uncertainty, and Cambodia looks like a prison for them.”

For now, this looks unlikely to change.

In an interview just days before Namhong revealed Australia’s refugee request, government spokesman Phay Siphan told the Post that Cambodia simply didn’t have the money or manpower to deal with refugees.

“Cambodia doesn’t have the resources or experience or finances to take in refugees,” he said.

But diplomatic interests also help form the government’s position.

“We don’t want anyone who will potentially disturb this country’s political climate or relationships with other countries,” Siphan said.

“Cambodia is committed to staying a neutral country, and we won’t take anyone that will potentially disturb that.”

Cambodia’s treatment of asylum seekers and refugees has earned the government criticism in the past.

In December 2009, a group of Muslim Uighurs, including a woman and two children, were deported back to China – at the request of that country’s government.

The group had sought political asylum through the UNHCR, fearing retaliation from Chinese authorities after they witnessed clashes between government security forces and Uighur demonstrators months earlier.

The World Uyghur Congress lists 17 of those deported as still in prison, with sentences ranging from 14 years to life.

According to the UN, Cambodia passed a sub-decree related to refugees the day before the deportations and has handled all matters internally since.

Two days after the deportation, China granted Cambodia a $1.2 billion aid package.

“The problem is the Cambodian government has proven willing to bend rules or look the other way when governments who Cambodia is friendly with pursue their nationals into Cambodia,” HRW’s Robertson said.

“Connected to that, Cambodia’s refugee protection procedures and sub-decree do not comply with international human rights standards, which in turn, gives Cambodia wide discretion to do what it likes with asylum seekers from countries like Vietnam and China,” he added.

The situation may seem bleak for people like Ibrahim, but he is not without hope.

He dreams of travelling to Canada to study and eventually working to raise awareness of his people’s plight.

“I want to go where I can,” he said.

For now, he will continue waiting like the other stateless refugees, living an in-between life shaped by a system that may never deliver.

ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY CHEANG SOKHA AND LAIGNEE BARRON

*Real name changed to protect the identity of Ibrahim’s family members in western Myanmar.

RB News 

March 15, 2014

Cox's Bazaar, Bangladesh - The mistreatment of the Rohingya refugees continues in the refugee camps of Bangladesh. Around 5.20am on March 13, 2014, a family of four have been mercilessly beaten, publicly embarrassed and forcibly transferred out of Nayapara refugee camp to Kutapalong.

MV Mohammad Zaber is a general refugee who is both a molouvi and and acedemic teacher within the camp. He had a private educational institution in Block H, near where he lived in Nayapara refugee camp. He taught about 30 students there as a means to support his family. On February 28, 2014 his school was burnt down by locals from Bangladesh. He complained to the proper channels of the UNHCR and CIC (camp-in-charge) regarding the arson. No action was taken.

During last week's visit by the Norweigan Ambassador to the Nayapara camp, Mohammed Zaber's father had spoken to the Delegates in front of the CIC. The CIC questioned him after the delegation left.

On the 13th of March, the newly appointed CIC, Shorob Hossain, with a group of BGB (Border Guard Bangladesh) and members of the Police Battalion entered block H and to Zaber's home. They did so unannounced and without the presence of UNCHR representatives. The group took Zaber and his family members forcefully and by gunpoint to a truck at the main gate where they were then transferred to Kutupalong camp. The transfer was described by local refugees to be done "Forcefully like the repatriation of Myanmar."

Zaber's 80 year old father received the worst of the persecution. He was severely beaten by the authorities and was forced to climb a tree. The old man was also made to drink his own Urine when he had asked for a glass of water to drink.

A refugee living in Nayapara told RB News that Mohammad Zaber is a kind hearted man who always thinks for the welfare of the Rohingya people.

When asked why the locals in Bangladesh would burn down the private education centre, one of the refugees said that the locals dislike him because he had prevented and tried to stop the activities of the local gamblers and robbers and doing so by advising them through quotes and teachings of the Islamic rules.

Another hit to Rohingya refugee education

In Nayapara approximately 5000 students are attending schools within the camp. There are 12 schools in total, 7 of which are the larger Madrasahs (Islamic schools) with some offering academic programs as well as religious studies which include memorizing and reciting the Holy Quran. There are also 5 additional private centres like the one belonging to Molouvi Zaber.

The Refugee education system is based on Formal Primary Education (FPE), grades 1-5. A Non Formal Primary Education (NFPE), grades 6-8. Courses offered as standard have mostly slipped to English, Bangla and Math.

Education levels in Nayapara are grim, seeing figures from reports that 76% of the camps population have had no formal education whatsoever. 20% with FPE (primary) level and just only 4% with any education above five years.

Persecution of the educated refugees and Restrictions on international communication

UNICEF plays the largest role funding the 7 main refugee schools but the project is overseen by UNCHR locals. WFP would provide biscuit ration to some students. Many though were left in a stalled process and have received none. Due to inadequate salaries many teachers have resigned over the past few years. They have turned to other means to support their families, for example, by collecting firewood to sell.

Although the teachers of Nayapara are registered and approved by the CIC, Some have received no support and face persecution and harassment, as in the case of the arson burning the school in Block H.

A common statement to Rohingya refugees by local authorities is "This is not your country. You cannot do as you wish." There is no interest by the authorities or locals from Bangladesh to see the a Rohingya refugees to become educated or see a better life within the country.

In addition to a ban on mobile phones within the camp, the risk of arbitrary arrest and persecution is very high if they are caught making contact with the outside world. It is quite normal for educated refugees to be corralled and kept at a far distance from any international delegates when they visit the camps. The visit from the Norweigan Ambassador was an intimate one. She managed to speak with many people during her visit to both Nayapara and Kutupalong. Ones who could speak clear English and who could properly express the sorrowful conditions they face as stateless refugees within Bangladesh. So, coupling the arson complaint to authorities by Molouvi Zaber and the conversation between his father and the Ambassador, their families fate was sealed.

Cramped conditions

Kutupalong and Nayapara camps have an estimated combined total of 30000 refugees living there, registered by UNCHR. The camps though are are small. Many families are living in small sheds.

One of the main issues faced in order to be able to expand the educational availability to the population on the camps besides the lack of funding, is space constraints. Schools are at maximum capacity as it is and there is no room to expand.

RB News asked one refugee in Nayapara what the fate of Molouvi Zaber and his family once transferred to Kutapalong. We were told that they were transferred out and given cramped lodgings with just space only fit for two people for Molouvi Zaber's family of four. It's a shared space in a hut. 6 rooms per structure. "For example, 8 hands length and 8 hands length wide sized rooms and 8 people have to pass the night together in that room."