By Christopher Woody

Business Insider

March 22, 2018

• Workers at Facebook reportedly "lose sleep" over the use of their platform to spread hate speech.
• The Facebook executive who oversees the newsfeed algorithm said addressing such content was one of his team's biggest challenges.
• Facebook's CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, has expressed reservations about cracking down on speech.
• Adam Mosseri, Facebook's vice president of product management, said that Facebook's contribution to ongoing violence against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar caused his team distress and was something they struggled to address.

Mosseri said the situation in Myanmar, from where more than 650,000 Rohingya Muslims fled since August, was "deeply concerning in a lot of different ways" during a recent interview on Slate's technology podcast, If Then.

Mosseri manages the team that oversees the algorithm that controls what people see in their Facebook news feeds. He said real-world violence could be one of the "most concerning and severe negative consequences of any platform."

"Connecting the world isn't always going to be a good thing," he said on the podcast. "We're trying to take the issue seriously, but we lose some sleep over this."

"It's important for us to remember that technology isn't naturally a good or a bad thing. It's sort of agnostic and it's how technology's used that can be either good or bad," Mosseri said.

Facebook typically works with third-party fact-checkers, but that approach doesn't work in Myanmar because, as far as the company is aware, there are no groups to fill that role in the country, Mosseri said. The company has instead focused on identifying "bad actors" and enforcing its community standards and terms of service to "address the proliferation of some problematic content."

"Real-world harm and what’s happening on the ground in that part of the world is actually one of the most concerning things for us and something that we talk about on a regular basis," Mosseri said.

Mosseri's comments came in response to a question about UN investigators saying Facebook played a role in spreading hate speech in Myanmar.

Marzuki Darusman, chairman of the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar, said social media has "substantively contributed to the level of acrimony and dissension and conflict, if you will, within the public. Hate speech is certainly of course a part of that. As far as the Myanmar situation is concerned, social media is Facebook, and Facebook is social media."

Medical charity Medicins Sans Frontieres estimated at the end of last year that at least 9,000 Rohingya Muslims had been killed in the Myanmar military's "clearance operations."

Many of those who fled Myanmar have reported rapes and executions carried out by Myanmar security forces.

The Myanmar government has denied all charges, though in January the military admitted involvement in the killing of 10 Rohingya.

"Everything is done through Facebook in Myanmar," said UN Myanmar investigator Yanghee Lee, adding that while Facebook had helped the impoverished country, it had also been used to spread hate speech.

"We know that the ultra-nationalist Buddhists have their own Facebooks and are really inciting a lot of violence and a lot of hatred against the Rohingya or other ethnic minorities," she said.

The information Facebook gathers on its users and how the company uses that information has garnered increased attention in recent days, in the wake of revelations that British data company Cambridge Analytica illicitly obtained information from as many as 50 million Facebook profiles by abusing Facebook's data-sharing features.

On Wednesday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told Recode he felt "fundamentally uncomfortable sitting here in California at an office, making content policy decisions for people around the world."

"A lot of the most sensitive issues that we faced today are conflicts between our real values, right? Freedom of speech and hate speech and offensive content," Zuckerberg said. "Where is the line, right? And the reality is that different people are drawn to different places, we serve people in a lot of countries around the world, a lot of different opinions on that."

By Thu Thu Aung, Antoni Slodkowski 

Reuters

March 21, 2018

YANGON - Myanmar’s civilian president Htin Kyaw resigned due to ill health on Wednesday and is expected to be replaced by a close ally of de-facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi, a move unlikely to affect power in a country where the army remains influential.

Htin Kyaw’s office said he was retiring “in order to take rest from the current duties and responsibilities”. Win Myint, a Suu Kyi loyalist who has served as the speaker of the lower house, was likely to replace him, said NLD spokesman Aung Shin. 

Win Myint has had a tight grip on the parliament and his critics accuse him of stifling democratic debate, including from within the caucus of Suu Kyi’s ruling National League for Democracy (NLD) party. He resigned from that post on Wednesday. 

“He is loyal and has been a member of the NLD since the party was founded,” said Aung Shin, who lauded Win Myint’s performance as the lower house speaker and said he has “worked very well with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi during the whole period”. 

Suu Kyi is known for keeping her cards close to her chest and operating only with a very narrow group of trusted acolytes. Local media, citing confidential sources, have also reported Win Myint has been tipped to become the next president. 

Analysts said the move was forced by the 71-year-old Htin Kyaw’s deteriorating health, and was unrelated to the crisis sparked by the brutal military crackdown that has pushed out hundreds of thousands of Rohingya Muslims to neighboring Bangladesh. 

Speculation over Htin Kyaw’s ill health mounted in recent months over his rapid and visible loss of weight.

“The discussion about the replacement has been around for a while so this was well expected,” said Liu Yun, political analyst from China-based Han Yue Consultancy. “It should have a fairly limited impact on the political equation in Myanmar.” 

He said the role of the president “isn’t that influential as Suu Kyi makes the final call, so the impact will be limited.”

INTERREGNUM 

According to the country’s constitution, the more senior of two vice presidents will stand in as president until a new leader is elected by parliament within seven working days. 

“There’s no doubt as to what the outcome of this will be,” said Richard Horsey, a former United Nations official and Yangon-based analyst. 

“The NLD has a strong bloc and a supermajority so whoever is selected as the lower-house candidate will become the next president,” Horsey said. 

In the meantime, Myint Swe, who was the military’s appointment for vice-president, will stand in as the acting president.

The president is the head of state and government in Myanmar, and under the constitution has far-reaching powers. However, Htin Kyaw’s role was more ceremonial because Suu Kyi has been Myanmar’s de facto leader since April 2016. 

A constitution drafted by the former junta bars Nobel Peace Prize laureate Suu Kyi from the top office and so she hand-picked Htin Kyaw, a close ally of hers, to become president following a historic landslide victory in 2015. 

The charter also reserves for the army one quarter of the seats in parliament and several major cabinet posts, including defense, interior and border affairs, giving it an effective veto over constitutional change and control of security affairs. 

One of the key questions facing Myanmar now, according to Horsey, is, “what will the acting president Myint Swe do during the interregnum because he has the power to do many things.” 

Horsey said that while Myint Swe will be the top executive for no more than a week, “it may worry some in the NLD that you have the military vice-president in charge of the country.” 

Yangon-based diplomats say the relationship between Suu Kyi and the military chief, Min Aung Hlaing, is marked by mistrust and lack of frequent, open communication, highlighting a risk even in the smallest changes to the leadership structure. 

Myint Swe is a retired general who headed the feared military intelligence agency under former junta leader Than Shwe. When Than Shwe ordered a crackdown on anti-junta protests led by Buddhist monks in 2007, known as the Saffron Revolution, Myint Swe was the head of special operations in Yangon. 

Reporting by Thu Thu Aung and Antoni Slodkowski; Additional reporting by Yimou Lee and Simon Lewis; Writing by John Chalmers; Editing by Bill Tarrant

By Dhaka Tribune

March 19, 2018

Criticism of the United Nations and aid groups is particularly pronounced in Rakhine state, where ethnic Rakhine Buddhists have long accused them of favoritism toward the Rohingya

Myanmar government, struggling to handle accusations of ethnic cleansing over its treatment of Rohingyas, is contemplating new legislation that would seek greater oversight of the work of international non-governmental organizations, including the United Nations, prompting concerns of a crackdown on their activities, The Washington Post reports.

The Draft Law on International Non-Governmental Organizations, a copy of which was recently obtained by The Washington Post, contains a vague definition of the groups it would regulate, proposes monitoring of aid groups’ work by Myanmar staff and provides the affected organizations with few safeguards against the government suspending their work. This has led some groups to fear it could be used to restrict their work in Burma.

The proposed law comes at a time of a wider crackdown on democratic freedoms under Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi and her government, as they struggle to deal with the fallout of military operations that have sent nearly 700,000 Rohingya fleeing over the border to Bangladesh since August.

“The stated purpose of the law allows government to suppress activities they do not favour and undermines the efforts in advancing democracy and human rights,” according to a February presentation reviewed by The Washington Post from the INGO Forum, a coalition of dozens of aid groups operating in Myanmar.

Representatives from international aid groups and diplomats are lobbying members of the parliamentary committee reviewing the draft to change the wording or to have it withdrawn. It was unclear whether the law would move past the commission or what provisions the final version would include, according to The Washington Post.

It was also unclear who wrote the draft or if it was done at direction of the president or state counsellor’s office. Zaw Htay, a spokesperson for the government, directed questions on the draft law to the Ministry of Planning and Finance.

Tin Maung Oo, a member of the commission that is working on the legislation, said the group was consulting with ministries, representatives from non-governmental groups and experts. He said that international aid groups were doing important work and that the government would like them to “flourish” but that a law was needed to oversee their work.

Critics warn that such laws are part of a disturbing trend in the region.

According to Tin Maung Oo, the draft law would apply to the work of the United Nations in Myanmar. The government has blocked a UN fact-finding mission from entering Myanmar, barred its human rights investigator and denounced the United Nations’ statements on Myanmar’s treatment of Rohingyas, which it has labelled a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing.”

Criticism of the United Nations and aid groups is particularly pronounced in Rakhine state, where ethnic Rakhine Buddhists have long accused them of favoritism toward the Rohingya.

It is unclear whether the government would be able to apply the law to the United Nations and its work in Myanmar. Stanislav Saling, spokesman for the Office of the UN Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator in Myanmar, said the country is already a signatory to “international conventions and agreements” that govern the United Nations’ work in the country.

But UN agencies implement many of their programs through nongovernmental groups, which could be affected by the law.

“The UN and other development cooperation partners have expressed concern that some of the provisions in the current draft of the law are arbitrary and excessive, and could restrict the ability of INGOs to play their important humanitarian and development role,” Saling said.

“We believe it will neither help government to regulate and manage INGOs, nor help INGOs to operate effectively, efficiently, transparently or accountably,” he added.

By Trevor Marshallsea 

Associated Press 

March 18, 2018

SYDNEY — Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said Saturday that the displacement of Rohingya Muslims was no longer solely a domestic issue for Myanmar, as Southeast Asian nations signed a counterterrorism cooperation agreement at a regional leaders’ conference.

Najib made his comments at a meeting of the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, being hosted by Australia. The summit has been marked by protests against the regimes of Myanmar and Cambodia.

In a pointed and rare departure from the grouping’s policy of non-interference in the affairs of fellow member nations, Najib said Rohingya refugees fleeing from alleged persecution by Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s government were a prime target for radicalization from the Islamic State group.

“Because of the suffering of the Rohingya people and their displacement around the region, the situation in Rakhine state in Myanmar can no longer be considered to be a purely domestic matter,” Najib said in closing comments before the signing of the counterterrorism agreement. “In addition, the problem should not be looked at through the humanitarian prism only, because it has the potential of developing into a serious security threat to the region.”

“Rakhine, with thousands of despairing and dejected people who see no hope in the future, will be a fertile ground for radicalization and recruitment” by the Islamic State and affiliated groups, he added.

Before resuming his seat on a leaders’ panel beside Suu Kyi, Najib said Malaysia was “ready to assist and find a just and durable solution,” as it had with fellow ASEAN nations Thailand and the Philippines on terrorism-related issues.

Myanmar staunchly denies that its security forces have targeted civilians in its “clearance operations” in Rakhine state on Myanmar’s west coast. Suu Kyi, a Nobel Peace laureate, has bristled at the international criticism. But Myanmar’s denials have appeared increasingly tenuous as horrific accounts from refugees have accumulated.

The Associated Press last month documented through video and witness accounts at least five mass graves of Rohingya civilians. Witnesses reported that the military used acid to erase the identity of victims. The government denied it, maintaining that only “terrorists” were killed and then “carefully buried.”

Malaysia has a large Rohingya population who are considered by the government to be illegal immigrants rather than refugees.

A few hundred meters (yards) from the conference, around 1,000 protesters demonstrated against alleged human rights abuses against Rohingya people, brandishing anti-Suu Kyi placards. More than 600,000 Rohingya refugees have fled Myanmar in recent years. A second, smaller protest was held to condemn human rights abuses in Cambodia attributed to its leader, Prime Minister Hun Sen.

Protesters also targeted Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull for hosting the conference. Australia is not a full member of ASEAN, but is an active dialogue partner.

“We would very much like to remind the prime minister that many of the hands he’s shaking yesterday, today and tomorrow are hands full of blood,” protest leader Hong Lim, a member of Victoria state’s parliament, said outside Sydney’s Town Hall.

Turnbull hailed as a major breakthrough the signing of the memorandum of understanding on counterterrorism, at a time of increased risk to the region due to militants fleeing Islamic State losses in the Middle East.

The measures include cracking down on the movement of terrorists between ASEAN nations, tightening policing on the cross-border movement of money to fund terrorism, and targeting on-line methods of radicalization and instruction on how to commit terrorist acts.

“We know that ISIL’s operational and ideological influence in our region is growing,” Turnbull said, referring to the Islamic State group. “More fighters will seek to return to our region, and they will return battle-hardened and trained.”

“Our ASEAN friends and neighbors share our interest in regional peace and they share our commitment to respecting international law and that rules-based order which underpins our way of live, secures our prosperity and safety,” he added.

Turnbull said the memorandum of understanding addressed more innovative methods being used to support and fund terrorism, such as moving money through digital currencies and crowd-funding platforms that made it harder to detect terrorism funding.

Internet-based communications, such as encrypted online messaging systems, also make it easier for extremists to instruct converts abroad.

“Those who seek to do us harm use technology as innovatively as any of us can,” Turnbull said. “And they are able to adapt and move in a very agile way. We have to be as fast and as quick as them.”

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib called on ASEAN members to “step up and intensify cooperation in preventing the spread of terrorist ideologies and to hone even more effective approaches to counter the threats of radicalization and violent extremism in the Asia-Pacific area.”

___

Associated Press writer Rod McGuirk in Canberra, Australia, contributed to this report.

An Open letter to Suu

From Aunty Riri Win

Dear Suu,

Our acquaintance started way back as far as the 60's. We got connected through Aunty Dora who  adored you like a daughter she never had. Zali went to school in Worcester and was invited to visit  her. He became a regular visitor at your home, a hospitality he appreciated because you provided him a home away from home. After you left Oxford, Zali went to see Aunty Dora several times before she died. At Aunty Dora's funeral service at Oxford we got to meet the Free Burma group, as well as Alexander, Kim and family. 

In addition to Zali you treated us like a family. I still cherish the memory when we celebrated Christmas at your home in Oxford when you served the traditional Christmas fruit cake your mother in law prepared. You looked lovely and sweet surrounded by your family. Upon parting Michael  mentioned in passing, “Uncle, we are not involved in the movement against Ne Win.” Neither did we  ask him to join us. He was aware that we were actively involved against the atrocities that the Ne Win regime unleashed that caused a lot of suffering and pain amongst the Burmese. In 1988, you  eventually came home to take care of your ailing mother and was swept in the upheaval of that time  when thousands of people rose up against the oppressive military regime. 

You were detained by the military for not less than 15 years for speaking up for justice and peace,  separated from Michael and the boys. Over and over again you were maligned as being influenced by foreign forces as you had married a “foreigner”, a dirty word to the xenophobic military regime. Even your brother became estranged from you. 

You were held incommunicado, Michael's contact with you was severely curtailed. I remember vividly how at one time Michael had to leave Rangoon because his visa had expired. He had no place to go and no funds to sustain himself. We arranged for him to stay at a safe place in Bangkok before he was allowed to go back to see you, even for a short tome. 

We often called upon Michael to inquire about your safety and health. I mentioned that the democratic movement should heed the demands of the various ethnic groups for more autonomy. Michael's answer was: “Aunty, right now the army must return to the barracks.”

In the United States and all over the world, pressure was borne upon the military regime to release you. Amnesty International made it a priority to have you unconditionally released. With thousands of US residents we organized rallies as well demonstrations in front of the Burmese Embassy, the White House, and lobbied Congressional representatives. Congressman Bill Richardson was allowed to see you in Rangoon. We prayed for you in churches throughout the US. Chapman College, Bucknell University, and American University were amongst those institutions that championed and honored your cause. 

In the meantime we kept close contact with Michael. We joined him at the Nobel Peace Prize Award in 1991. I shed tears when they played Johann Pachelbel's “Canon in D”. According to Michael you used to play that piece on the piano. At the the ceremony, Alexander stood tall and dignified when he made the acceptance speech. “Today,” he said,” the people in Burma could stand a bit taller....” Michael proudly said that Alexander wrote the speech himself, he was only sixteen then. 

You were very generous in donating the Nobel Prize reward to establish scholarships for Burmese students for their education abroad. Zali and your friends in England still keep the funds alive and the young people were grateful for your financial support. 

Your children suffered a lot, separated from you for many years because of the Burmese political upheaval which was beyond their control. One wonders how this separation affects them emotionally.  We admire your family's sacrifice for the sake of freedom, justice and peace for the Burmese people.

We had the chance to visit Michael several times at Oxford as well as in the United States. In the middle of his apartment was a big picture of you. We were stricken with sorrow when Michael suffered from prostate cancer. He was not allowed to see you for the last time. You stayed in Rangoon for fear that the regime would not allow you back. Michael died. Was it an ultimate sacrifice? The xenophobic military regime stated that you were not a true patriot since you were married to a foreigner, a dirty word for the xenophobic military regime. Did Michael take the ultimate sacrifice to forever eliminate this curse brought upon you by the regime? One only wondered why so many men survived the battle against prostate cancer, but not Michael. 

We met you clandestinely in Rangoon . I cried when I saw you and you chastised me for crying, “you have struggle so much and suffered for such a long time,” I said. You stoically said: “the longer the struggle the sooner it will end.” The Military Intelligence Service got hold of our meeting and the Burmese Ambassador in Washington DC told Uncle that no more visa would be issued to him. 

The next time we met in Rangoon you were already released and you were busy meeting dignitaries, foreign and domestic. You were kind enough to present us with a lacquer tray, “For a remembrance.” you said. We will treasure the gift. In exchange we brought you some chocolates, your favorite comfort food. We asked whether you feel safe now. “Yes,” you said, “ I am safe behind these tall walls. And I have my dog that Kim gave me. He is very protective.” 

How time has changed. Today you don't have to fear the military regime since you are part of it. You have become the Prima Donna of the military and oblivious to the suffering of the people; the Kachins that were slaughtered as well as the Rohingyas. You have declared the accusations of genocide of the Rohingyas as fake news. You stated that you are for law and order, obviously regardless of justice. 

The military stated that the Rohingyas are not Burmese but Bengalis who settled in Burma for a better life. Is this not unlike your forefathers who came from Central Asia/Mongolia to seek a better life in Burma; not unlike the Portuguese, the English and the Indians who seek a greener pasture. They make up for what we now call Burmese The denial of the genocide committed by the military is reinforced by your stance and statements in agreement of this atrocities. The Stockholm Syndrome apparently hits you when the victim eventually become part of the oppressor. Remember Patricia Hearst? She joined her kidnappers and robbed a bank. 

It is a shame that you disregard the Buddhist tenet of ahimsa, thou shall not kill. Instead, you support the narrow-minded Buddhists that consider killing Muslims not a sin. Do you not heed The Dalai Lama's pronouncement that Buddhist monks do not kill? Bishop Tutu, the Dalai Lama, Malala, as well as the Pope urged you to work against discrimination and justice. Yet you remain unmoved. 

Your esteemed father spent his life to establish the military for the good of the nation. On the other hand, the present military regime work for their personal coffers. They have plundered the nation's natural resources for their power and wealth while the rest of the nation suffers. 

Like so many observers, Uncle witnessed the suffering of the Rohingyas at Cox's Bazaar in Bangladesh. They lost their homes and saw their family members killed by the military. There are factual accounts how the military used rape as a weapon of destruction. That is factual and that is the truth. 

You cannot be blind to the truth. Justice will prevail. The international institutions will bring “the perpetrators of crime against humanity, including murder, forcible transfer, deportation and persecution on political, racial or religious grounds” to justice. Remember Pol Pot in Cambodia? The Serb leaders in Kosovo? 

I fear for the destiny of Aung San Suu Kyi, the former icon of democracy. For being unmoved and unconcerned you are being complicit in the atrocities perpetrated by the military. Is Michael's sacrifice for nothing? Is the suffering of Alexander and Kim for naught? Will you be the Marie Antoinette of Burma? Stand up for law and order with justice and redeem yourself, Suu. 

Uncle and I are at the sunset of our life, God willing we will always strife for justice . As John Wesley said: 

Do all the good you can,

By all the means you can,

In all the ways you can,

In all the places you can,

At all the times you can,

To all the people you can,

As long as ever you can.

Amen. 

Reuters

March 16, 2018

Myanmar’s Permanent Secretary of Foreign Affairs Ministry Myint Thu speaks to journalists during a press conference about the situation of Rakhine State at Information Ministry in Naypyitaw, Myanmar, Wednesday, March 14, 2018. Myanmar’s authorities on Tuesday said it is an appropriate time to invite the United Nations refugee and the development agencies to involve in the repatriation of Rohingya refugees who had fled to Bangladesh from violence in Myanmar. (Aung Shine Oo/Associated Press)

By Associated Press

March 13, 2018

NAYPYITAW, Myanmar — Senior officials in Myanmar announced Wednesday that they have begun talks with U.N. agencies to see how they could assist with the repatriation of Rohingya refugees who fled to Bangladesh to escape violence against them.

Foreign Ministry Permanent Secretary Myint Thu said the offices of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and the U.N. Development Program responded last week with a proposal and concept paper to the government’s invitation for U.N. involvement, which the government is now studying.

“We considered that the time is now appropriate to invite UNHCR and UNDP to be involved in the repatriation and resettlement process, as well as in carrying out activities supporting the livelihoods and development for all communities in Rakhine state,” Myint Thu said.

Human rights experts believe safety cannot yet be guaranteed for about 700,000 Rohingya Muslims who fled the western state of Rakhine to Bangladesh after security forces carried out brutal crackdowns in response to attacks by Rohingya insurgents last August.

Antagonism between Rakhine’s Buddhist community and Rohingya Muslims led to communal violence in 2012, forcing at least 140,000 Rohingya from their homes into squalid camps for internally displaced people. Most Rohingya are treated as stateless persons with limited rights, and the insurgents drew support from the discontented as prejudice against their community grew in overwhelming Buddhist Myanmar.

Stanislav Saling, a U.N. spokesman in Myanmar, confirmed that in response to Myanmar’s initiative, the U.N. agencies submitted a note proposing how they could help create conditions “for the safe, dignified and voluntary return for refugees, in line with international principles.”

Neither the U.N. nor the government made public details of the proposal.

The international community has accused Myanmar’s military of atrocities against the Rohingya that could amount to ethnic cleansing, but the government and military deny any organized human rights violations.

Myanmar’s civilian government led by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has pledged to start the gradual repatriation of the Rohingya refugees from Bangladesh.

Myanmar’s government says 374 refugees out of more than 8,000 whom Bangladesh has verified as qualified to return are free to return at their convenience.

“We have handed the list of 374 people to the Bangladesh Embassy so that they can immediately start their repatriation,” Myint Thu said. “These 374 people can be the first repatriation batch.”

By Al Jazeera

March 13, 2018

'I’m afraid that Facebook has now turned into a beast.'

UN human rights experts investigating a possible genocide in Myanmar have said that Facebook had played a role in spreading hate speech against the majority-Muslim Rohingya minority.

The UN's Special Rapporteur on Myanmar also said that the Rohingya crisis in the Rakhine State "bears the hallmarks of genocide". 

More than 650,000 Rohingya have fled Myanmar's Rakhine State into Bangladesh since a military crackdown last August. Many have provided harrowing testimonies of executions and rapes by Myanmar forces, but Myanmar's national security adviser demanded "clear evidence" for the potential acts of genocide.

Facebook role 

Marzuki Darusman, chairman of the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar, told reporters that social media had played a "determining role" in Myanmar.

"It has ... substantively contributed to the level of acrimony and dissension and conflict, if you will, within the public. Hate speech is certainly, of course, a part of that. As far as the Myanmar situation is concerned, social media is Facebook, and Facebook is social media," he said.

UN Myanmar investigator Yanghee Lee said Facebook was a huge part of public, civil and private life, and the government used it to disseminate information to the public.

"Everything is done through Facebook in Myanmar," she told reporters, adding that Facebook had helped the impoverished country but had also been used to spread hate speech.

"It was used to convey public messages but we know that the ultranationalist Buddhists have their own Facebooks and are really inciting a lot of violence and a lot of hatred against the Rohingya or other ethnic minorities," she said.

"I'm afraid that Facebook has now turned into a beast, and not what it originally intended."

Yeehang Lee's comments follow the release of images by the human rights group Amnesty International.

Facebook response

Facebook said there is "no place for hate speech" on its platform.

"We take this incredibly seriously and have worked with experts in Myanmar for several years to develop safety resources and counter-speech campaigns," a Facebook spokesperson told the BBC.

"Of course, there is always more we can do and we will continue to work with local experts to help keep our community safe," Facebook spokesperson has said. 

RB News

March 12, 2018

Buthidaung, Arakan state -- The Myanmar government is planning to build new Buddhist settlements on the emptied Rohingya homelands in Buthidaung Township, reliable sources say.

On March 10, U Hla Shwe, the deputy township administrator of Buthidaung, and officials from other departments visited 'Thin Gana' and 'Meechaung Zay' villages in northern Buthidaung. The officials conducted map surveys of the places where the Buddhist settlements will be built, it has been learnt.

100 Buddhist Settlements will be built nearby the mountain of 'Kudufaar' at 'Bogyi Chaung' hamlet of 'Meechaung Zay' village, and other 100 settlements nearby 'Old Cemetry' and 'Gufi Road' at 'Thin Gana' village in northern Buthidaung.

"The government is saying that they will bring back all the Rohingya people fled to Bangladesh and resettle them in their original places. But these are blatant lies.

"In fact, they are confiscating all the Rohingya homelands remaining abandoned as their owners had to flee to Bangladesh. The planned two Buddhist settlements are also on the Rohingya lands," said a local Rohingya to RB News in Buthidaung.

Meanwhile, there is another settlement being planned out for the Rakhine Buddhists on the Rohingya homelands at 'Maung Nama' hamlet of 'Nan Ya Gone' village in Buthidaung, where the Rohingya houses were destroyed by the Rakhine Buddhists last year.

About 0.7 Million Rohingya people from Myanmar have fled to Bangladesh since August 2017 as the Myammar military along with the active participations of some Rakhine extremists began to carry out Genocide against them (Rohingya).

[Edited by M.S. Anwar]

Please email to: editor@rohingyablogger.com to send your reports and feedback.

By CR Abrar

The Daily Star

March 11, 2018

As hopes for an early, voluntary, safe and dignified repatriation of the Rohingya refugees to a protected homeland in Arakan fade, as Myanmar authorities persist in a “systematic,” lower-intensity persecution and violence in northern Arakan, and as new batches of expelled Rohingyas continue to cross the border into Bangladesh, the demand for bringing the perpetrators of the heinous crime to justice, including State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi and her military cohorts, gains traction.

On Friday, Zeid Ra'ad al-Hussein, the United Nations human rights chief, called for allegations of atrocities committed against the Rohingyas to be referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for prosecution. Earlier, he informed the Human Rights Council that he strongly suspected that “acts of genocide” might have taken place against Rohingyas in Rakhine since August last year. He construed reports of bulldozing of alleged mass graves as a “deliberate attempt by the authorities to destroy evidence of potential international crimes, including possible crimes against humanity.” The rights chief urged UN General Assembly to establish a new independent mechanism to expedite criminal proceedings in courts against those responsible.

Earlier, Prof Yanghee Lee, the UN's human rights envoy to Myanmar, expressed the view that there were grounds for bringing the country's de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, before an international tribunal for failing to intervene in the “clearance operation” the military had launched in Arakan following alleged militant attacks on several police posts and army base on August 25.

In another move, three female Nobel peace laureates urged Bangladesh, the UN and other state parties to refer Myanmar military and other perpetrators to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for the “genocide” against the Rohingyas. “Alternatively, the ICC prosecutor should open an independent investigation into the crimes against humanity and genocide perpetrated in Rakhine state,” they observed, after visiting Rohingya refugee sites in Bangladesh. One of the three laureates and an eminent legal expert, Shirin Ebadi, stated that as Myanmar was not a state party to the Rome Statute, the UN Security Council can recognise Myanmar's crimes against humanity and then refer that to the ICC. “We want this case to be discussed at the UN Security Council and there is sufficient evidence for this to take place,” she asserted.

Denouncing the Myanmar army's “bald-faced lie” against the “mountains of evidence,” Phil Robertson of the Human Rights Watch noted that “they've been covering up their human rights atrocities for decades.” Referring to absurd claims of the Myanmar military leadership, Robertson observed, “Statements like these indicate why the international community must prioritise hauling Senior General Min Aung Hlaing and other Burmese military commanders up in the international criminal court to stand trial for the crimes against humanity they've ordered or committed.”

Addressing the Berlin conference on Myanmar Genocide on February 27, 2018, Ambassador David Scheffer, who played a critical role in establishing the ICC, reminded the audience that “the age of impunity is over.” He stated that one cannot commit crimes on people and assume that he could get away doing so with impunity, as one could twenty-five years ago. When a state thrusts a million people on a neighbouring state, the argument of non-interference in domestic affairs becomes irrelevant. Such a context demands international actions, and judicial option remains one among those.

Scheffer argues that ideally justice for Rohingya against Myanmar military and political leadership needs to be pursued in the national court as jurisdiction resides there. That option is improbable in the short term, though under a changed political dispensation in Myanmar, perhaps in 15-20 years' time, it could be a likely scenario. After weighing in several options including those of the International Court of Justice, universal jurisdiction of other national courts, and hybrid war crimes tribunals such as those set up in Cambodia, Sierra Leone, East Timor and Kosovo, Schaffer informs that a referral under the Rome Statute is perhaps the best option. If such a reference is made, then the ICC will enjoy the full jurisdiction.

Invoking the Rome Statute by the Security Council to bring perpetrators of the Myanmar genocide to justice may not be an easy task. Thus far, states such as China and Russia remain committed to the wrong doer. The challenge remains two-fold. On the one hand, engage in diplomatic efforts to make those countries abstain from voting when such a resolution is passed. On the other hand, exert moral pressure by building international public opinion against the Myanmar genocide demanding accountability of the perpetrators and shaming their supporters by putting them on record.

It is true that Myanmar, the site of crimes, is not a state party to the Rome Statute, and the perpetrators, the country's civil and military leadership, are not nationals of a state party. But that does not absolve them from facing justice. This is because, as Scheffer persuasively argues, “the crime scene does not stop at the border; it very purposively and intentionally flows over into Bangladesh in a massive way.” In their act of “ethnic cleansing,” the Myanmar leadership removed Rohingya population from one part of their territory. Its intent was not to move them to another part, but to banish them to Bangladesh. Thus, its intent, purpose and strategy were very clear. It made Bangladesh experience the impact of commission of all sorts of crimes of mass murder, gang rape, rampant torture, and destruction of livelihoods, dwellings, villages and townships. Thus, as an affected party, Bangladesh can self-refer to the ICC. The question is whether Bangladesh has the political will.

Any other state party can refer as well. The state concerned does not have to be an affected party. The other recourse lies with the ICC prosecutor. Her office can also make the argument of the crime scene and move the ICC.

So far, states appear unwilling to move in that direction. This necessitates a concerted engagement of the global civil society with the issue as it engaged to end the American occupation of Vietnam or in dismantling the apartheid regime in South Africa. Thus, building international solidarity through mobilising various quarters including poets, artists and singers is crucial in moulding international public opinion. Care must be taken so that such a campaign remains victim-driven. The Rohingya voices remain absolutely crucial. Appropriate training in documentation must be imparted so that along with capturing the survivors' testimonies, evidence on how the command structures operated is collected.

Those engaged in the campaign must have the unflinching faith that “the bubble of security and impunity is now getting tighter and tighter, and therefore, demanding justice; documenting cases certainly are not exercises in futility.”

At a time when the world community celebrates the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the framing of the Genocide Convention, the Rohingyas' call for justice go unheeded. The international community must ensure that they are delivered on that account.

CR Abrar teaches international relations at the University of Dhaka. He acknowledges the rich contributions of the panelists at the Conference on Myanmar Genocide held at the Holocaust Museum, Berlin on February 27, 2018.

By Clare Baldwin and Andrew R.C. Marshall 

Reuters

March 11, 2018

CHAKMAKUL REFUGEE CAMP, Bangladesh -- The Rohingya refugees who live in shacks clinging to these steep, denuded hills in southern Bangladesh pray that the sandbags fortifying the slopes will survive the upcoming monsoon. 

“They make it safer, but they won’t hold if the rain is really heavy,” said Mohammed Hares, 18. Cracks have already formed in the packed mud on which his shack is built.

Nearly 700,000 Rohingya Muslims have fled to Bangladesh since last August to escape a military crackdown in neighbouring Myanmar. Most now live in flimsy, bamboo-and-plastic structures perched on what were once forested hills. 

Bangladesh is lashed by typhoons, and the Rohingya camps are clustered in a part of the country that records the highest rainfall. Computer modelling by the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) shows that more than 100,000 refugees will be threatened by landslides and floods in the coming monsoon. 

The rains typically begin in April and peak in July, according to the Bangladesh Meteorological Department. 

In Kutupalong-Balukhali, the biggest of the makeshift camps, up to a third of the land could be flooded, leaving more than 85,000 refugees homeless, according to the UNHCR. Another 23,000 refugees live on slopes at risk of landslide. 

The UNHCR, International Organization for Migration (IOM) and World Food Programme are using bulldozers to level 123 acres in northern Kutupalong-Balukhali camp in an effort to make the area safer, said UNHCR spokeswoman Caroline Gluck. 

IOM is putting debris-removal equipment and work crews throughout the camps, it said, and trying to improve roads and stabilise slopes. It is also setting up emergency diarrhoea treatment centres and providing search and rescue and first aid training. 

Bangladesh Disaster Management Secretary Shah Kamal said the government was working with the UN to relocate 133,000 people living in high-risk areas. It is also launching a Rohingya-language radio station that will act as a natural disaster warning system, he said. 

Bangladesh government officials have also previously told Reuters they are pushing ahead with a controversial plan to turn an uninhabited island in the Bay of Bengal into a temporary home for the Rohingya and move 100,000 refugees there ahead of the monsoon. 

Flooding increases the risk of disease outbreaks. It could also threaten access to medical facilities, making them difficult to reach and restock, the modelling shows. Latrines, washrooms and tube wells may also be flooded. 

The risk of landslides has been exacerbated by refugee families needing firewood to cook. Trees were cut down to make way for the refugees, who also dug up the roots for firewood, making the slopes even weaker and prone to collapse. 

“This was a forest when I first arrived,” said Arafa Begum, 40, who lives with her three children in a shack on a barren, vertiginous slope in Chakmakul camp. She said she wanted to move before the monsoon but must await the instructions of the majhi, or block leader. 

The majhi’s name is Jahid Hussain. “I don’t know what I’ll do when the rain comes,” he told Reuters. “It depends on Allah.” 

Reporting by Clare Baldwin and Andrew R.C. Marshall in CHAKMAKUL REFUGEE CAMP Additional reporting by Ruma Paul in DHAKA Editing by Alex Richardson

By Mike Lillis 

The Hill

March 11, 2018

Some Democrats are wondering whether Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese human rights advocate and Nobel laureate, should be stripped of her Congressional Gold Medal, the nation's highest civilian honor.

Congress voted unanimously in 2008 to present Suu Kyi with the award. A decade later, lawmakers are questioning whether the honor should be revoked over Suu Kyi's reticent response to Myanmar's brutal campaign against the Rohingya, a minority Muslim group targeted by the country's military.

Suu Kyi, now Myanmar's democratically elected civilian leader, has faced intense international backlash over the violence, which the United Nations has deemed “acts of genocide.” Just this week the Smithsonian’s Holocaust Museum in Washington rescinded a prestigious award named after another Nobel Peace laureate, Elie Wiesel. 

“Whether it’s that she’s been complicit, or that she’s just been silent, what she hasn’t done is be vocal enough. So it’s been very, very disappointing, because I had great admiration for her,” said Rep. Ro Khanna, a liberal California Democrat who said he’s hearing concerns from a number of constituents with roots in the region. 

The Myanmar leader's silence in the face of the violence runs in stark contrast to the persona she built over the course of decades as a pro-democracy advocate and human rights champion who spent 15 years under house arrest at the hands of the nation’s repressive military junta.

It’s also led some lawmakers on Capitol Hill to weigh the merits of rescinding Suu Kyi’s Gold Medal award, presented just over five years ago, in an effort to compel her to voice an aggressive public rebuke of the military attacks against the Rohingya.

Khanna said he’s “open” to the notion of revoking Suu Kyi’s Congressional Gold Medal, suggesting the issue should be explored by a bipartisan caucus founded by the late Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.). 

“Maybe that’s something to explored to the Lantos Human Rights Commission, and to have a hearing on it, and to have a hearing on her role,” Khanna said.

Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.), a physician and member of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, said he’s also amenable to stripping Suu Kyi of the congressional award if she doesn’t take a stand.

“If that’s what it takes to get there,” Bera said. “As a Nobel Peace Prize winner, she should be speaking out much more against the atrocities that are taking place right now. I mean, she does have the bully pulpit."

“We’ve got to send her the message that she ought to be speaking out and trying to moderate the government and military response here.”

To be sure, there seems to be no concerted push in Congress to revoke Suu Kyi’s Gold Medal. And a number of lawmakers were quick to note the difficult political position she’s in, straddling efforts to manage a civilian government and steer the country toward a more robust democracy without sparking a revolt from the formidable military elite who still yield outsized authority over public policy — and who could potentially knock her from power.

“There’s great tension — that could easily break into something else — between the military and the civilian government she’s trying to shepherd, so this is a very delicate balance. None of that excuses silence. But it does put it in context,” said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), who has visited the region. “It’s a very, very tenuous and delicate balance. And she’s at the heart of it.”

Still, the frustration in Suu Kyi’s diffident reaction to the Rohingya crisis, even among her most ardent congressional supporters, is mounting to a point of exasperation.

Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.), who sponsored the 2008 bill granting Suu Kyi the Gold Medal, said he’s “desperately sad” about the Rohingya’s plight, urging Suu Kyi to find her critical voice in the name of “moral clarity.” Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) — wondering aloud “what happened to our hero?” — said the Suu Kyi’s failure to confront the violence has eroded her revered reputation around the globe. 

“That can take power from you, too,” Eshoo warned.

And Connolly emphasized that even the tough political constraints on Suu Kyi have their limits in the face of systemic dislocation and mass killings. 

“You’ve got to call out genocide. If you’re a human rights activist, you can’t have carve-outs,” said Connolly. “There hasn’t been talk of revoking [the Gold Medal], but it would be very useful to remind her of how she got it.”

The comments are a far cry from the ones coming from lawmakers just a few years ago. In 2012, when Suu Kyi was officially awarded the Gold Medal in a moving ceremony beneath the Capitol Rotunda, congressional leaders from both parties turned out with words of glowing admiration. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), now the majority leader, praised her "hidden, luminous heroism.” House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi(Calif.) hailed the Nobel laureate’s “unwavering commitment to peace.” And Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who was imprisoned himself during the Vietnam War, lauded Suu Kyi’s "implacable resistance" during her lengthy house arrest.

“Aung San Suu Kyi didn't scare worth a damn,” he said at the time.

The Rohingya crisis has changed the tone of the debate and the views of her prestige. In October, as hundreds of thousands of Rohingya refugees were streaming into Bangladesh, Suu Kyi addressed the crisis by condemning the “unlawful violence,” but also downplaying her government’s culpability. Myanmar, she said, “does not fear international scrutiny.”

The global outcry was far-reaching, and a number of institutions around the globe have already penalized Suu Kyi’s reaction by rescinding humanitarian honors they’ve granted her in years past.

Irish lawmakers, for instance, pressured by the rock bank U2, voted in December to revoke Suu Kyi’s Freedom of the City of Dublin award. And this week, the Holocaust Museum followed suit, rescinding its Elie Wiesel Award.

While Congress may not be at the point of publicly rebuking her by revoking the congressional medal, a growing number of lawmakers appear sympathetic to the gesture.

“I’m not unmindful of the challenge for her, but you’ve got 700,000 or 800,000 Rohingya who are at enormous risk,” said Connolly. “And you cannot be silent given your profile internationally.”