Rohingya And The Burmese Generals: How To Forge A
Democracy And Get Away With It
By Dr Ramzy Baroud
November 21, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" - "MEM"
- Writing in the New York Times in an article entitled, "Myanmar
Generals Set the State for Their Own Exit", Thomas Fuller
expressed his and the media's failure to recognise the total fraud
that is Burmese democracy.“The official
results are still being tabulated,” he wrote, “but all signs, so
far, point to that rarest of things: an authoritarian government
peacefully giving up power after what outside election monitors have
deemed a credible vote.”
Fuller, who said nothing about the persecuted
Rohingya minority and little about the other millions of Burmese who
were denied the chance to vote, only managed to contribute to the
seemingly baffling media euphoria about the country’s alleged
democracy.
Reporting from Burma - also known as Myanmar -
Timothy McLaughlin dealt with the Rohingya subject directly;
however, he offered a misleading sentiment that the oppressed
minority, which was excluded from the vote, can see a ‘glimmer of
hope’ in the outcome of the elections.
According to results, the National League for
Democracy (NLD), under the leadership of Aung San Suu Kyi, has won a
stunning victory over its rivals in the ruling party, by garnering
348 seats, in contrast with only 40 seats obtained by the
military-controlled party that has ruled Burma since 1962.
There is no real basis for that supposed ‘glimmer
of hope’, aside from a non-binding statement made by an NLD
official, Win Htein, that the Citizenship Act of 1982 “must be
reviewed” – an Act which served as the basis for discrimination
against the Rohingya.
Win Htein’s comments are disingenuous, let alone
non-committal, at best. The Citizenship Act “must be reviewed
because it is too extreme... review that law and make necessary
amendments so that we consider those people who are already in our
country, maybe second generation, so they will be considered as
citizens," he told Reuters. His comments promote the myth that the
well over one million Rohingya are ‘Bengalis”, who came to his Burma
only recently as hapless immigrants.
While Burma, like any other ASEAN country has its
fair share of immigrants, the fact is that most Rohingya Muslims are
native to the state of "Rohang" (originally a kingdom in itself),
officially known as Rakhine or Arakan. Over the years, especially in
the late 19th century and early 20th century, the original
inhabitants of Arakan were joined by cheap or forced labour from
Bengal and India, who permanently settled there.
For decades, tension has brewed between Buddhists
and Muslims in the region. Eventually, the majority, backed by a
military junta, prevailed over the minority which had no serious
regional or international backers. A rising tide of Buddhist
nationalism has reached genocidal levels in recent years and is
targeting not only Rohingya Muslims, but also
Christian and other minority groups in the country.
The Rohingya population of Arakan, estimated at
nearly 800,000, subsist between the nightmare of having no legal
status (as they are still denied citizenship), little or no rights
and the occasional ethnic purges carried out by their neighbours.
While Buddhists also paid a price for the clashes,
the stateless Rohingya, being isolated and defenceless, were the
ones to carry the heaviest death toll and destruction.
Writing in the Ecologist,
Nafeez Ahmed cited alarming new findings conducted last October
by the International State Crime Initiative (ISCI) at Queen Mary
University in London, which “found that the Rohingya ..face ‘the
final stages of a genocidal process’.” “Leaked government documents
show that plans to inflict ‘mass annihilation’ have been prepared at
the highest levels,” he wrote.
Not only did the elections disempower and further
alienate the Rohingya, but it also empowered political groups that
have openly sought the ‘mass annihilation’ of the defenceless
minority, most of whom are living in abject poverty within closed
refugee camps, while thousands have perished at sea in a bid to
escape the violence.
One of these nationalist groups is the Arakan
National Party (ANP), which has incited and enacted violent pogroms
against the Rohingya for years. In fact, ethnically cleansing the
Rohingya is a main rally cry for a group which now has a
democratically elected 29 national level representatives in Rakhine,
and is also in “decisive control of the state's regional assembly,”
according to Reuters.
The sad fact is that much of the reporting on the
Burmese elections stoked false hope that a democracy has finally
prevailed in that country, and either brushed over or completely
ignored the plight of the Rohingya altogether.
But how could anyone with a reasonable degree of
knowledge in the political, constitutional and historical context of
the November elections ignore the major discrepancies of the
army-championed style of “Discipline
Flourishing Democracy” program announced in August 2003 by
General Khin Nyunt?
Burma’s generals have organized every facet of
their
sham democratic campaign since the early 1990s so that they give
an illusion of democracy, while retaining power.
When the outcome of the 1990 elections did not
work in their favour, they crushed their opponents and placed the
leaders of the NLD under house-arrests or prison. This action,
however, cost them international isolation outside the domain of
China and a few ASEAN countries.
For years, the generals learned how to craft a
system that would allow them to rule the country, while making
symbolic gestures to meet the west’s half-hearted condition of
democratization and pluralism.
The most recent elections have been, by far, the
most successful of the generals’ democracy schemes in recent years.
This clever scheme is rooted partly in the
2008 Constitution, “which elevates core interests of the
military (such as the military budget, appointments, business
conglomerates and security matters) above the law and parliamentary
oversight,” wrote
Maung Zarni in the Guardian.
According to the controversial constitution, “the
military serves as the ultimate custodian with the power to
discipline any elected government or MP who dares to stray from
the military’s chosen path and its definition of parliamentary
democracy,” Zarni wrote.
In fact, just last June, the military,
defeated an attempt by parliamentarians to rescind its veto power.
This is why the military remains the upper hand in the country,
regardless of who wins or loses the elections. By reserving for
itself a quarter of the seats in parliament, the military will
continue to enjoy a veto power.
Then, why is there all this excitement about
Burmese democracy? Simple - the rivalry between China and the United
States, and their respective allies have reached a point where the
massive amount of untapped wealth of oil and natural gas in Burma
can no longer be ignored.
The US, UK and other countries are salivating at
the limitless potential of economic opportunities in that country,
estimated at “3.2 billion barrels of oil and 18 trillion cubic feet
of natural gas reserves.” According to a
UK government report, under the theme, a ‘hotspot for
exploration,” Burma’s “unproven resources may be vastly greater.”
With Burma climbing to the world top five
countries in terms of proven oil and gas reserves, terms such as
genocides, military juntas and human rights are abruptly and largely
omitted from the new discourse.
Indeed, a whole new narrative is being
conveniently drafted, written jointly by the Burmese army,
nationalist parties, Aung San Suu Kyi’s NLD, western investors and
anyone else who stands to benefit from the treasures of one of the
world’s worst human rights violators.
Dr. Ramzy Baroud has been writing about the
Middle East for over 20 years. He is an internationally-syndicated
columnist, a media consultant, an author of several books and the
founder of PalestineChronicle.com. His books include ‘Searching
Jenin’, ‘The Second Palestinian Intifada’ and his latest ‘My Father
Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story’. His website is:
www.ramzybaroud.net.