Genocide
Continues in Burma/Myanmar under Nobel Peace Prize Winner Aung San Suu Kyi
There is a growing
dissonance between the international outcry over the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar
and the muted actions of the Myanmar Government. While international voices,
from Myanmar’s neighbours to the UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide,
have expressed dire warnings, the government’s reactions have ranged from
silence to outright denial.
Despite
heavy restrictions on access to the crisis area, numerous independent reports
have emerged citing the burning of villages, rapes, the indiscriminate use of
helicopter gunships and torture. These reports have been gathered from journalists and human rights groups by interviewing
Rohingya who have fled the country to Bangladesh, from satellite images analysed by Human Rights
Watch, from accounts collected by the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in
Myanmar and video evidence.
Although
the Rohingya crisis has been highlighted by some in the international community
for many years, the escalation and direct involvement of the Myanmar army since
October 2016 has led to unprecedented criticism being voiced, even from among
Myanmar’s allies in the region. The Prime Minister of Malaysia has been
particularly vocal and, under increasing regional pressure, in December last
year, Aung San Suu Kyi convened a meeting of ASEAN foreign ministers in Yangon
to discuss the crisis. A group of Nobel Laureates sent a letter to the UN Security Council urging
intervention in Myanmar and criticising fellow laureate Aung San Suu Kyi for
not doing more to stop abuses against the Rohingya. Most recently, on 19
January this year, the Organization of the Islamic Conference held an
Extraordinary Session on the Rohingya crisis with its Foreign Ministers and expressed
“grave concern”, calling for Myanmar to address the
humanitarian crisis, hold perpetrators of abuses accountable and ultimately
address the root causes by granting citizenship to the Rohingya.
The
reaction from the Myanmar government has been to deny or ignore these reports. Official
statements have blamed the burning of villages on the Rohingya themselves, accused
lightly armed Rohingya with instigating the helicopter gunship attacks and
claimed there was no basis for the alleged abuses. A state investigatory
commission, led by a former general, denied that abuses were taking place,
found no cases of malnutrition and said in an interim report that “there were no cases of
genocide and religious persecution”.
The
Myanmar Government rightly points out that the latest attacks were instigated
by an attack on police border stations, reportedly by Rohingya militants, which
killed nine officers. But the response has been far from proportional, doling
out a form of collective punishment marked not only by indiscriminate attacks
and mass arrests but also by blocking access to aid which has affected the most
vulnerable in Rakhine State. The UN has said 160,000 people dependent on life-saving aid
have been cut off from receiving it and (in sharp contrast to the commission’s
findings) reported spiking rates of malnutrition.
The
government’s denial and underplaying of the situation stems from complex
domestic dynamics including the ongoing influence of the military and the
widely shared prejudices held against the Rohingya. The military, which
dominated Myanmar’s government for decades before reforms in recent years, is
employing familiar tactics against ethnic minority groups in the country. It
retains power over the Border, Home Affairs, and Defence ministries and holds
an effective veto over any constitutional change with its 25 per cent of
guaranteed parliamentary seats.
In
addition to these power constraints, Suu Kyi also faces the political obstacle
of public opinion being largely against the Rohingya, who are viewed by many in
Myanmar as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. Prevailing prejudices developed
over decades have been stoked by influential nationalist Buddhist monks
in recent years who continue to paint the Rohingya as an existential threat to
the majority Burman Buddhist culture.
But Suu
Kyi, and even many within the army’s ranks, also care about the country’s
international standing, and the international outcry has not been completely
ignored by the Myanmar Government. Suu Kyi continues to refuse to use the term
“Rohingya” or address their lack of citizenship, but has shown a willingness to
engage partners on the issue in more general terms. Before the latest crisis,
she appointed an international advisory committee chaired by former UN
Secretary-General Kofi Annan, to advise on solutions in Rakhine State. Suu Kyi
invited a group of ASEAN foreign ministers to Myanmar to discuss the crisis and
sent a high-level special envoy to Bangladesh to begin a dialogue on the 65,000
Rohingya who have fled from Myanmar into the country since October. The police
officers caught abusing Rohingya on video have been detained with Suu Kyi
saying they would be held accountable. And in recent weeks, the UN Special
Rapporteur on Human Rights in Myanmar was allowed to visit parts of Rakhine
State and the World Food Program reported increased humanitarian access,
though still far below pre-crisis levels.
Suu Kyi
is caught in a tough place, between growing international criticism and
domestic limitations bolstered by widely-shared prejudices against the
Rohingya. In her own words, she has shed her human rights icon image, believing
she can do more as a politician. If Suu Kyi is to be the successful politician
she purports to be, she should use the leverage created by the international
outcry to effect domestic change. Holding accountable those caught blatantly
committing abuses on video is a start, but much more can and should be done.
Suu Kyi could welcome the increasing calls, including from within her own country, for an independent
international investigation and, at the very least, do all she can to ensure
access by independent journalists and humanitarians.
Dan Sullivan is the Senior Advocate for Human
Rights at Refugees International (RI) focusing on Myanmar, Central America, and
other areas affected by mass displacement.
This piece is published in partnership with Policy Forum – Asia and the Pacific’s platform for public policy analysis, opinion, debate, and discussion.
This piece is published in partnership with Policy Forum – Asia and the Pacific’s platform for public policy analysis, opinion, debate, and discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment